Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1997/01/08 - Agenda PacketCITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA WEDNESDAY JANUARY 8, 1997 Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Council Chamber 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California 7:00 PM I. CALL TO ORDER Pledge of Allegiance Roll Call Chairman Barker Commissioner Bethel__ Vice Chairman McNiel Commissioner Macias__ Commissioner Tolstoy __ II. ANNOUNCEMENTS III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Adjourned Meeting of December 11, 1996 IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS The following items are public hearings in which concerned individuals may voice their opinion of the related project. Please wait to be recognized by the Chairman and address the Commission by stating your name and address. All such opinions shall be limited to 5 minutes per individual for each project. Please sign in after speaking. Bo ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT 15766 MARK TAYLOR - A request to develop 264 apartments, with a condominium subdivision map, on 22.2 acres of land in the Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) zone in the Victoria Planned Community and consideration of a request to vacate Railroad Avenue South and the east collector street known as Hanley Avenue, located on the north side of Base Line Road, approximately 800 feet west of Victoria Park Lane. APN: 227-091-14, 15, and 227-111-12 and 13. Related file: Tree Removal Permit 96-13. Staff has prepared a mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. (Continued from November 13, 1996) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 96-03A - RANCON REALTY FUND III - A request for a land use change from Industrial Park to Community Commercial for 7.8 acres generally located on the south side of Foothill Boulevard between Aspen and Spruce Avenues and at the northwest corner of Red Oak Street and Spruce Avenue. The City will also consider changing the remaining 1.4 acres of land at the southeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Aspen Avenue, 2.25 acres at the southwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Spruce Avenue, and 1.2 acres at the northeast corner of Red Oak Street and Laurel Street to Community Commercial - APN: 208-352-10, 11, 12, 79, and 80. Staff has prepared a mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND INDUSTRIAL AREA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 96-03 - RANCON REALTY FUND III - A request to amend the Industrial Area Specific Plan land use designation from Industrial Park to Community Commercial for 7.8 acres generally located on the south side of Foothill Boulevard between Aspen and Spruce Avenues and at the northwest corner of Red Oak Street and Spruce Avenue. The City will also consider changing the remaining 1.4 acres of land at the southeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Aspen Avenue, 2.25 acres at the southwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Spruce Avenue, and 1.2 acres at the northeast corner of Red Oak Street and Laurel Street to Community Commercial - APN: 208-352-10, 11, 12, 79, and 80. Staff has prepared a mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. Page 2 V. DIRECTOR'S REPORTS USE DETERMINATION 96-04 - HUGHES INVESTMENTS - A request to determine if marital arts studios are permitted in the Village Commercial designation of the Victoria Community Plan. Vl. PUBLIC COMMENTS This is the time and place for the general public to address the Commission. Items to be discussed here are those which do not already appear on this agenda. VII. COMMISSION BUSINESS E. TRAILS ADVISORY COMMITTEE VIII. ADJOURNMENT The Planning Commission has adopted Administrative Regulations that set an 11:00 p.m. adjournment time. If items go beyond that time, they shall be heard only with the consent of the Commission. I, Gall Sanchez, Planning Commission Secretary of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or my designee, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on January 2, 1997, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54964.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. Page 3 VICINITY MAP I · I A.,T. & S.F. CITY HALL CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Mark II Taylor January 2, 1997 RECEIVED JAN 6 REC'D Planning Commissioners City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 City 01 Rancho, Ouoamonga Planning Div' sion Dear Planning Commissioners: In response to the Planning Commission's request, a meeting was held on December 10th with the Victoria neighbors. The City performed the task of preparing and sending the invitations to everyone who attended the hearing. The objective of the meeting was to inform the residents of all aspects of our proposed development and answer their questions. The presentation did not go well as the residents were not interested in learning about the proposed community or asking questions, instead their objective was only to voice opposition. In response to the hearing and meeting, Mark-Taylor diligently researched and prepared information regarding school children generation, crime prevention and off-site improvements. We also met with the Etiwanda and Chaffey School District's to determine our legal obligation, which we are fulfilling, and the District's needs and plans. The City Traffic Engineer also confirmed the proposed design of the community and offsite improvements are sufficient for proper circulation. Enclosed is a copy of a letter and informative material sent to all 33 persons in attendance at the neighborhood meeting. Similar information was also distributed at the meeting. Also enclosed is a follow-up letter to Etiwanda School District Superintendent, Gene Newton, clarifying our legal obligations. I look forward to our hearing on January 8, 1997. Sincerely, Michael Coghlin Vice President Development MC:dg Encl. Mark-Ta)4or, Inc. 662.~ N. Scottsdale Road, Scottsdale, AZ 85250 602/991-9111 · FAX 602/991o9138 Mark liltTaylor December 30, 1996 Mr. Gene Newton Superintendent Etiwanda School District P.O. Box 248 Eftwanda, California 91739 Dear Gene: This letter is in response to our meeting of December 9, 1996 with both John Golden, Assistant Superintendent and yourself. We have made numerous attempts to contact you and John regarding the reassessment of building fees based on the district's legal council opinion. As discussed in our meeting, Mark Taylor, Inc. is seeking site plan approval only. We are not seeking a zoning change. The district's letter to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Commtmity Development Department dated July 23, 1996 was in error as its fees anticipated the rezoning of the subject property. As outlined in our meeting and in compliance with Califomia Government Code § 65995(b)(1)the appropriate fees are as follows: A. $ 2,034.05 x 264 units = $ 536,989 B. $1.27/sf x 249,600 sf-- $ 313,387 Total Fees = $ 850,376 Since we have not received a reply from the district as promised regarding a reassessment of fees, we must assume that the fees discussed and continned in our meeting with you are correct. If this is not accurate, please contact us as soon as possible with any changes. Sincerely, Scott J. Laten John Golden Michael Coghlin Mark-Taylor, Inc. 6623 N. Scottsdale R~ad, Scottsdale, AZ 85250 602/991-9111 · FAX 602/991-9138 December 30, 1996 Mark a Taylor Mr. Jerry Collins 12321 Mint Ct. Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739 Dear Mr. Jerry Collins: Thank you for attending our neighborhood meeting on December I0th. It was extremely valuable for us to understand your concerns. Our desire is to work with the Victoria community. to resolve the concerns which Mark-Taylor can control. Our offer of an irrevocable deed restriction to prevent low income housing still stands. Also, the offer to a representative ~oup of residents to visit our communities in Arizona is open to all interested. Hopefully the preceding demonstrates our sincerity towards the community's concerns. The proposed development will be funded by Security Capital Pacific Trust (SCPT), a Southern California entity.. SCPT currently owns and operates two other multifamily communities in Rancho Cucamonga. This demonstrates their commitment to the community. In response to the Planning Commission Hearing, we have spent considerable time with the City Traffic Engineer, SherifFs Department and the School Districts. Attached is a dia~am of the Baseline Road improvements, proposed security stipulations and an updated comparative community analysis regarding school children. The Sheriff Department reports per dwelling unit for single family and multifamily are equal. Our projected school children generation is .25 per unit or 64 children. based on 1,204 comparable units. We will pay approximately $ I, 150,000 in fees to the schools. which is our legal obligation. We look forward to discussing our proposed community with you at any time in the near future. Please feel free to call me at (602)991-9111. Sincerely, Michael Coghlin Vice President Development MC:dg Encl. Mark-Taylor, Inc. 6623 N. Scottsdale Road, Scottsdale, AZ 85250 602/9gl-9111 · FAX 602/991-9138 Mr. Jerry Collins 12321 Mint Ct. Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739 Mr. Jason Painter 6577 Twinspur Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739 Ms. Mary Salonzer 6567 Twinspur Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739 Ms. Nancy Wehner 12368 Dove Tree Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739 Mr. Andy Alcarez 6597 Twinspur Place Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739 Ms. Angeletta Clay 14560 Blazing Star Ct. Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739 Mr. Mike Simon 12833 Carissa Ct. Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739 Ms. Colleen Sundberg 6798 Plum Way Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739 Mr. Day Viles 6612 Orchid Ct. Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739 Mr. Bill Borgrebe 12781 Kalmia Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739 Mr. & Mrs. Ken Riel 12415 Buttercup Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739 Ms. Cindy Wagner 6615 Poppy Ct. Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739 Mr. & Mrs. Ralph Minttione 12344 Thistle Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739 Mr. Carlos Salazar 6567 Twinspur Place Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739 Mr. Gabriel Alcarez 6597 Twinspur Place Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739 Ms. Griselda Ross 12365 Blazing Star Ct. Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739 Ms. Linda Dalton 6810 Plum Way Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739 Mr. & Mrs. Jesse Luna 6587 Twinspur P1. Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739 Ms. Laura Cantrell 12514 Lantana Dr. Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739 Mr. Rex Gutierrez 11021 Carlow Ct. Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739 Mr. Alan Grild 12775 Kalmia St. Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739 Ms. Karen Poleskor 6630 Sevilla Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739 Mr. & Mrs. Bill Ludlow 6508 Dogwood Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739 Mr. LeonardRivas 6558 Twinspur Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739 Ms. CarmenAngelo 12774 Basil Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739 Mr. Clarence Conwell 6632 Mimosa PI. Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739 Mr. Bill Lair 12375 Dove Tree Dr. Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739 Ms. Millie Glenny 6580 Etiwanda Ave. Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739 Mr. Randy Waterman 12502 Cantana Dr. Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739 Ms. Candice Fowler 13205 Catalpa St. Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739 Ms. Andrea Zonanno 13285 Pear Ct. Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739 Mr. & Mrs. Unizava 7041 Columbine Ct. Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739 Mr. David Hiver 6585 Egglestone P1. Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739 San Carmela A Proposed Multifamily Development Northwest Corner of Hanley and Baseline Rancho Cucamonga, California December 31, 1996 MARK-TAYLOR, INC. 6623 North Scottsdale Road Scottsdale, AZ 85250 December 31, 1996 SAN CARMELA WEST OF THE CORNER OF VICTORIA & BASELINE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA PROPOSED COMMUNITY: Acreage: Present Land Use: Proposed Units: Density: Specific Plan Designation: Open Space Provided: Open Space Required: Recreational Amenities: 22.2 Acres Vacant 264 11.9 Units Per Acre (Cresent Heights 15.9) Medium 8-14 Units Per Acre 58% 40% Exceeds City Standards FEES AND IMPROVEMENTS: Park Fees: City Fees: School Fees -Based on legal obligation: - Chaffey - Etiwanda $502,000 $1,422,000 $ 333,864 (Approximately $17,572/Student Contributed to the Capital Improvement Fund) $850,376 (Approximately $18,897/Smdent Contributed to the Capital Improvement Fund) TAXES: Annual Property Taxes: Baseline Improvements: Approximately $200,000 In excess of $700,000 COMPARATIVE COMMUNITIES: Projected School Children: Residents Per Unit: 64 / .25 Per Dwelling Unit 1.4 UNIT MIX AND RENTS: Net Bedroom/Bath Livable S.F. Units Rent % 1/1 689 48 735 18 1/1 708 48 750 18 2/2 1,000 30 885 11 2/2 1,019 60 900 24 2/2 1,037 30 915 11 3/2 1,188 24 1,045 9 3/2 1,206 24 1,055 9 Weighted Average 935 264 $870 100 COMMUNITY UNITS City TelephonelMgr. BUILT Montecito 265 Rancho Cucamonga (909) 941-0408 Debra Martinez 1989 Miramonte 290 Ranch Cucamonga (909) 944-8494 Julia Devereaux 1989 Sierra Heights 265 Ranch Cucamonga (909) 466-5500 Angela Tkocs 1991 Del Mar 384 Ranch Cucamonga (909) 980-7368 Jay Stoddard 1989 Crescent Heights 124 Ranch Cucamonga (909) 899-4747 Heidi Wyile 1991 AVERAGE 301 Mark&Taylor HIGH END MULTI-FAMILY COMPARISON DECEMBER 20, 1996 TOTAL UNDER SCHOOL AGE CHILDREN RESIDENTS 5 YEARS FACTOR K-6 ! 7-8 9-12 345 25 36 10 20 1.3 42O 9.4% 13.6% 3.8% 7.5% 28 38 11 22 TOTAL CHILDREN 91 1.4 397 34.3% 99 9.7% 13.1% 3.8% 7.6% 34.1% 27 38 12 20 97 1.5 962 10.2% 14.3% 4.5% 7.5% 36.6% 23 , 48 13 26 110 2.5 wnd 6.0% 12.5% 3.4% 6.8% 28.6% wnd wnd wnd wnd 0 0.0 531 1.8 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 26 4O 12 22 99 8.6% 13.3% 3.8% 7.3% 33.0% PROJECTED Mark Taylor, Inc. 264 371 23 35 10 19 Ranch Cucamonga Base Line Road 1.4 8.6% 13.3% 3.8% 7.3% Notes; 87 33.0% The above communities were selected based on size, demographics and amenities as a comparison for rents and to determine the probable number of residents and children the new community will generate. The projected figures for the Mark Taylor development were created by applying the above averages towards the anticipated number of units. Crescent Heights would not disclose (wnd) information. UNIT TYPE BDR/BTH 1/1 2/2 3/2 1/1 2/2 3/2 1/1 2/2 3/2 1/1 2/2 3/2 1/1 2/2 3/2 AVERAGE RENTS $715 $855 $885 $605 $735 $925 $625 $855 $1,025 $700 $887 $985 $695 $935 na $816 1/1 2/2 3/2 AVERAGE $740 $9oo $1,o5o $87o SCHOOL2.WK4 SAN CARMELA Rancho Cucamonga Law Enforcement On two separate occasions we meet with members of the Rancho Cucamonga Police Department (San Bernardino Sheriffs Department). We expressed to them concerns which neighborhood individuals had expressed in regards to the proposed development. Crime- There were available statistics which concluded that multi-family does not produce more calls or reports than single family. Their opinion was that single family and multi-family are equal for calls and reports per dwelling unit. They also conclude that single family has more incidents of burglary than multi-family. However, multi-family has a greater number of auto thefts than single family, which should be deterred by the community's 156 garages. The police department reviewed the site plan for a third time. The objective was to understand the site plan and elevations as it pertains to response and officer safety. Crime Mitigation Factors (Voluntary Stipulations) A. Gated Community - Reduction in auto theft and trespassing. B. Garages 156 (60%) - Reduction in auto theft. Co North Boundary Fencing - Masonry and wrought iron to enhance safety by increasing visibility of the rail-road track area. Do Unit Security - Prewired for alarms, Charlie bars and latch locks on sliding glass doors, pin locks in all windows and dead bolts on front doors. E. Building/Unit Identification 1 .) Each building will be identified by an elevated 16" illuminated number on several sides as officer approaches (foot or vehicular) will vary. 2.) Each unit shall be identified by an illuminated number as part of the light fixture. F. 180 Degree Peepholes. Go Photometric Study- Analysis of the lighting plan to determine a one foot candle average on all common, storage and parking areas. Crime Free Multi-Housing Program - Training and certification of on-site staff and management. The program began in Mesa, Arizona and Mark- Taylor has been a member since inception. ~lST. R/W ,\ DAY CREEK BOULEVARD (Future) L EXIST. E.P. ~ EXIST. E.P. ~ / ULTIMATE R/W . SCALE 1"=200' EXIST. E.P. ~ EXIST. E.P. j EXIST. R/W ? ULTIMATE R/W DAY CREEK BOULEVARD (FUTURE) I TRANSITION AT 20:1 TRANSITION AT 20:1 BASELINE ROAD IMPROVEMENT EXHIBIT VICTORIA R.V. STORAGE ULTIMATE IMPROVEMENT VICTORIA R.V. STORAGE ULTIMATE R/W ELLENA PARCEL EXIST. E.P. ~ / ULTIMATE R/W BASELI~ ROAD EXISTIdG B,'Fq:IOVENF:NT HANLEY AVENUE  EXIST. CURB ~~:[~ EXIST. R/W VICTORIA CURB PARK LANE (FUTURE) EL.LENA PARCEL ULTIMATE R/W = BUS BaY '~ i %. BASELIdE ROAD PROPOSED IVI~OVEhENT HANLEY =iAVENUE EXIST. CURB AND GUTTER -. EXIST. R/W VICTORIA PARK LANE EXIST. CURB (FUTURE) i I I I:/39900/IMPROVE 12-9-96 PROJECT SUMMARY tJl~r At*,N.Y~I~ ABANDONED METROLINK CORRIDOR S.P.R.R. R/W RAILROAD AVENUE SOUTH ~ ........ ~.~ SITE PLAN RANCHO CUCAMONGA APTS. At The Corner of Baseline Road and Street "A" north RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA O :'.-,,---,. .. KEYED NOTES: ARCZ-g'~CTLTRAL DESIGN GROUP 602-991-9111 9508 Lo~ No. CIT~ OF RANCHO CUC~M~{ONGA MEMORANDUM DATE: January 8, 1996 / ~ TO: Chairman and Members of the P!~nn, ng iCommission FROM: Rex Gutierrez, Councilmember / ~ t SUBJECT: MARK TAYLOR PROJECT I received a call this date from Brian and Karen Bass of the Victoria Windrows area. They asked that I inform you they would not be able to be present at the Planning Commission meeting tonight, but wanted to express their opposition to the Mark Taylor project. They asked that the Planning Commission vote "NO" on this issue. RG/dja CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: TO: FROM: BY: SUBJECT: January 7, 1997 Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission Brad Buller, City Planner Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer ~,,'~-~ Jerry Dyer, Associate Engineer ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT - 15766 - MARK TAYLOR INC. - Agenda Item 'A' Please add the following to the Standard Conditions, Standard Condition K "Dedication and Vehicular Access", as item number 6: The Developer shall make a good faith effort to acquire 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 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 the Developer's cost. The appraiser shall have been approved by the City prior to commencement of the appraisal. DJ:jd CC: Dan Coleman, Principal Planner Date: From: To: INTEROFFICE MEMO January 6, 1997 Dan Watters, Crime Analyst Rancho Cucamonga Police Department Candice Fowler Subject: Crime Stats in Selected Area's As you requested here are the Crime stats for 3 selected area's The Criteria was as follows: Only Part 1 and Part 2 Crimes are considered for the 12 months of 1996. Part I Crimes are: Homicide, Rape, Robbery, Attempt with Deadly Weapon, Burglary, Grand Theft, and Auto Theft. Part 2 Crimes are: Forgery, Fraud, Sex Crimes, Narcotics, Alcohol Violations, Drunk in Public, DUI, Vandalism, Arson, Receiving Stolen Property, and Theft. Area 1: The area bounded by Banyan, Deer Creek, Highland, and Mayberry. Residential only. 568 Single Family Parcels. 43 Part 1 Crimes. 36 Part 2 Crimes. 79 Total Crimes. 0.139 Total Crimes per Parcel. Area 2: The area bounded by Banyan, Rochester, Lark, Kenyon, and Milliken. Residential only. 1062 Single Family Parcels. 54 Part 1 Crimes. 33 Part 2 Crimes. 87 Total Crimes. 0.082 Total Crimes per Parcel. Area 3: The Area bounded by Highland, Eftwanda, Baseline, and Day Creek. Residential only. 1373 Single Family Parcels. 74 Part 1 Crimes. 56 Part 2 Crimes. 130 Total Crimes. 0.095 Total Crimes per Parcel. Lemon and Haven Apts. & Shopping Center: 57 Part 1 Crimes. 42 Part 2 Crimes. Albertson's Shopping Center on Highland. 9 Part 1 Crimes. 15 Part 2 Crimes. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: TO: FROM: BY: SUBJECT: January 8,1997 Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission Brad Buller, City Planner Dan Coleman, Principal Planner ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT 15766 - MARK TAYLOR INC. - A request to develop 264 apartments, with a condominium subdivision map, on 22.2 acres of land in the Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) zone in the Victoria Planned Community and consideration of a request to vacate Railroad Avenue South and the east collector street known as Hanley Avenue, located on the north side of Base Line Road, approximately 800 feet west of Victoria Park Lane. APN: 227-091-14 and 15, and 227-11'1-12 and 13. Staff has prepared a mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. Related file: Tree Removal Permit 96-13. BACKGROUND: This item was continued from November 13, 1996, by the Planning Commission in order for the developer to meet with area residents and explain the proposed project. LAND USE HISTORY: The 1981 General Plan Land Use Plan designated the property for Medium- High Residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre). The Victoria Community Plan, also adopted in 1981, designated the property Medium-High Residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre) consistent with its stated goal to provide a wide variety of housing types at various densities "that local employees, present and future, will be able to afford and will want to buy." In 1991, the City Council conducted a city-wide review of land planned for multi-family housing. At the conclusion of their review, the Council changed the land use on this property to Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre). The applicant is proposing a density of 11.9 dwelling units per acre consistent with the General Plan and the Victoria Community Plan. NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING: A second meeting with area residents was conducted by the developer on December 10, 1996. A total of 187 invitations were mailed, including all persons who testified at the first Planning Commission public hearing. Approximately 50 residents attended the neighborhood meeting. Residents stated their opposition to apartments based upon concerns for school impacts, traffic, and crime. The developer provided a handout (Exhibit "C") which included a project summary of the crime-mitigating design features and an analysis of student generation as compared to three existing apartment projects. Staff distributed copies of the Victoria Community Plan Land Use Plan. See attached copy of article from Inland Valley Daily Bulletin (Exhibit "B"). ITEM A PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT VTT15766- MARK TAYLOR, INC. Januaw 8,1997 Page 2 CORRESPONDENCE: This item was readvertised as a public hearing in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper, the property was posted, and notices were mailed to all property owners in an expanded area beyond the usual 300 foot radius of the project site, plus those residents who attended either neighborhood meeting and those who testified at the November 13, 1996, public hearing. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the project, and related Tree Removal Permit, through adoption of the attached Resolutions of Approval with conditions and issuance of a mitigated Negative Declaration. Respec~ully submitted, er BB:DC/jfs Attachments: Exhibit "A" o Staff Report dated November 13, 1996 Exhibit "B" - Article from Inland Valley Daily Bulletin Exhibit "C" - Handout from Neighborhood Meeting Resolution of Approval for VTT 15576 Resolution of Approval for the DR of VTT 15576 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: TO: FROM: BY: SUBJECT: November 13, 1996 Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission Brad Buller, City Planner Dan Coleman, Principal Planner ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT 15766 - MARK TAYLOR INC - A request to develop 264 apartments, with a condominium subdivision map, on 22.2 acres of land in the Medium residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) zone in the Victoria Planned Community and consideration of a request to vacate Railroad Avenue South and the east collector street known as Hanley Avenue, located on the north side of Base Line Road, approximately 800 feet west of Victoria Park Lane. APN: 227-091-14, 15, and 227-111-12, 13. Related File: Tree Removal Permit 96-13 PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Project Density: 11.9 dwelling units per acre. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North Former rail line and single family residential; Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) South Winery; High Residential (24-30 dwelling units per acre) East Apartments and shopping center; Medium High Residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre) and Village Commercial West Mini-storage; Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) General Plan Designations: Project Site - Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) North - Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) South - High Residential (24-30 dwelling units per acre) East - Medium High Residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre) West - Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) Site Characteristics: The site is an abandoned vineyard. The row of trees along the northerly boundary is primarily a Eucalyptus windrow. The land slopes from north to south at a 3-4 percent grade. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT v-r-r 15766 - MARK TAYLOR November 13, 1996 Page 2 E. Parking Calculations: Number of Type , Square Parking Spaces of Use Footage Ratio Required Number of Spaces Provided 96 Apartments 1 bedroom 1.5/unit 144 120 Apartments 2 bedroom 1.8/unit 216 48 Apartments 3 bedroom 2.0/unit 96 Guest Parking N/A .25/unit 66 TOTAL 522 647 RV Parking NA .20/unit 53 53 BACKGROUND: The applicant first appeared before the Planning Commission on January 24, 1996, for a use determination (see minutes attached as Exhibit "J"). The issue was whether the Victoria Community Plan allows apartments. The Plan allows "single family dwellings - attached or detached, including, but not limited to townhouses, triplexes, fourplexes, and condominiums." The consensus of the Commission was that the applicant could proceed by filing a condominium map. The Planning Commission conducted a Pre-Application Review of the initial design concepts on February 14, 1996. Commissioners expressed design concerns with architecture, density, size of open space areas, and the use of a single trash compactor in lieu of individual trash enclosures conveniently located throughout the project. The minutes of this meeting are attached (see Exhibit "K"). ANALYSIS: General: The applicant is proposing to build 1, 2, and 3 bedroom apartments surrounding a central open space system featuring an exercise building, large open lawn areas, tot lots, and barbeque facilities. The project will be secured with a gated entry system and architecturally designed guardhouses and porte cocheres, as well as the Victoria theme walls. Access to the project will be provided from Base Line Road and Hanley Avenue (a new cuPde-sac street). Design Review Committee: The Committee (Macias, Tolstoy, Fong) reviewed the project on October 15, 1996, and recommended changes. The applicant submitted revised plans addressing the Committee's recommendations, including architectural enhancements and providing eight trash enclosures throughout the project. The revised project was reviewed by the Committee (Macias, McNiel, Fong) on November 5, 1996, and recommended for approval subject to minor revisions. The recommendations are listed in the attached Design Review Committee minutes (see Exhibit "H"). All of the Committee's November 5 recommendations have been included as conditions of approval. During the Pre-Application Review, sqme Commissioners expressed the desire for a Victorian style of architecture to blend with the style used on the two projects on either side along Base Line Road. The Design Review Committee felt that the proposed Mediterranean style of PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT VTT 15766 - MARK TAYLOR November 13, 1996 Page 3 architecture (stucco with tile roofs) was consistent with the neighborhood. The Committee noted that the adjoining Crescent Heights apartments were Mediterranean style, as were many of the single family homes to the north. Technical Review & Grading Committee: The Technical Review and Grading Committees reviewed the project on October 16 and October 22, 1996, respectively. The Committees determined that the project design, together with the recommended conditions of approval, is consistent with all applicable standards and ordinances. Environmental Assessment: Staff has completed the Initial Study Part II (see Exhibit "1"). Staff relied, in part, upon earlier analyses, including the Victoria Planned Community Environmental Impact Report (EIR), the City's General Plan EIR, and the Master Environmental Assessment for the 1989 Update of the General Plan. In addition, traffic impact analysis, acoustical analysis, and arborist reports were prepared for the project. Staff identified the following potential impacts: Schools - The project will generate students at all grade levels. Both affected school districts have indicated current impaction problems and have asked the developer to participate in the Chaffey Joint Union High School District's Mello-Roos District and pay school fees to the Etiwanda School District to fund needed school facilities. Therefore, the impact is considered to be reduced to a level of not significant. Water- The project will reduce absorption rate and increase the amount of surface water runoff due to buildings and paving. As a mitigation, the developer will construct a private drainage system to connect with an extension to the existing storm drain across the entire Base Line Road frontage and remove the existing interim storm drains across Base Line Road. Plant Life - The project will remove a row of 18 trees along the northerly boundary. As a mitigation, the developer will replant the row of trees with a more appropriate Eucalyptus variety to maintain the windrow character. Noise - The project is exposed to traffic noise levels along Base Line Road which are estimated to exceed City standards. The project design includes 7-foot high sound walls. As a mitigation, the developer will also construct 6-foot sound barriers for second floor balconies. In addition, special glazing and construction techniques will be required to attain acceptable interior noise levels. Traffic - The project will increase traffic on Base Line Road. The project design includes construction of full street improvements on the northerly side of Base Line Road. As a mitigation, the developer will be required to incorporate specific design features into the street improvements and pay transportation development fees as their fair share contribution for area-wide "backbone" street improvements. Public Services - The project will increase demands for fire and emergency medical services. As a mitigation, the developer will be .subject to the Mello-Roos Community Facilities District for fire protection. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT VTT 15766 - MARK TAYLOR November 13, 1996 Page 4 These mitigation measures have been incorporated into the conditions of approval. The developer has agreed to these mitigations. If the Planning Commission concurs with staff's recommendations, then issuance of a mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts would be in order. CORRESPONDENCE: The public hearing was advertised in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper, the property was posted, and notices were mailed to all property owners in an expanded area beyond the usual 300-foot radius (see attached Exhibit "A°'), including those residents who attended the neighborhood meeting on October 1, 1996. Ten residents participated in the meeting and expressed concerns with traffic impacts, school impacts, environmental impacts, and the impact upon views for existing residents. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the project, and related tree removal permit, through adoption of the attached Resolutions of Approval with conditions and issuance of a mitigated Negative Declaration. City Planner BB: DC/jfs Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Exhibit "B" - Exhibit "C" - Exhibit "D" - Exhibit "E" - Exhibit "F" Exhibit "G" - Exhibit "H" - Exhibit "1" Exhibit "J" Exhibit "K" - Resolutions of Location Map & Notification Boundary Site Utilization Map Tentative Tract Map Site Plan Landscaping Plan Grading Plan Elevations Design Review Committee Minutes Initial Study Part II Minutes of January 24, 1996, Use Determination 96-01 Minutes of February 14, 1996, Pre-Application Review 96-13 Approval with Conditions ! T£NTA TIIIE TRACY NO. 15766 UTILIZATION MAP 'TRACT 13873 MB 227/15- lg PM 11838 PMB 144/80-61 Mark ~ 'lA¥1or TENTATIVE TRA C T NO. 157'86 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP --PRu'-J1;_-C:.F UMMARY ------~X~mTFN~~_~__~_~. ~;%{-~ED UM DENSI~ RESIDENTIAL) 1 BEDROOM " 2 BEDROOM TOTAL UNITS THIS ~ROJ ,~T: .'-~ TOTAL # OF UNITS: 96 120 48 254- PARKING ANALYSIS: UNIT TYPE: PARKING REQUIRED: TOTAL/TYPE REQ'D: 1 BEDROOM UNITS 1.5 SPACES/UNIT 14.4 2 BEDROOM UNITS 1.8 SPACES/UNIT 216 5 BEDROOM UNITS 2 SPACES/UNIT 96 GUEST PARKING 25% of UNITS 66 TOTAL PARKING REQUIRED: 522 of thor, GARAGES REQUIRED: of thor, CARPORTS REQUIRED: TOTAL PARKING PROVIDED: of thor, GARAGES PROVIDED: of thor, CARPORTS PROVIDED: of thor. RV PARKING PROVIDED: ACCESSIBLE SPACES: LOT DENSITY: ', tGROSS LOT AREA: NET LOT DENSITY: OPEN SPACE CALCULATION: ACRES/SQ.FT. BUILDING COVERAGE: ..3.0 LANDSCAPE COVERAGE: 11.9 VEHICULAR AREA: 5.8 COMMON OPEN SPACE: 17.7 PRIVATE OPEN SPACE: 0.2 USABLE OPEN SPACE: 17.9 (COMMON AND PRIVATE.) 156 156 156 156 55 647 8 22.2 ACRES 11.9 DU/ACRES OF NET AREA 14.3% 56.9% 27.7% 84.7% 1.0% 85.6% PEnlMETER SCREEN WALL ~:.:'-;~..¥;~, - SCREEN WALL PILASTER PLANT PALETTE ..............~L-~7'" ~:,.:.':-::''i-.-ii-_-": TENTATIVE TFI,4 C r NO. 15766 ,~r,,,,~ ~cr CONCEPTUAL ~ LANDSCAPE PLAN 1'0()1~ FACIIATY PRIMARY (;AT!,:I) ENTI{Y TYI'ICAL BL!)G. CLUST!,]I( TY!'ICAL TOT LOT TEN TA T~ VE TRACT NO. 15766 ,~,~ ,,~ SITE AMENITY 3 ENLARGEMENTS FRONT & REAR ELEVATION Exlerlor EleYallon$ - Uldg 2A DIIS|GN GROUP 602-991-9111 · Lo~ No. FRONT & REAR ELEVATION Exterior Elevations - Bldg 2B ~ Ra IITBC'llJIIA~. DBSIGN GROUP 602-991-911] 9508 Lo~ No. SIDE ELEVATION sc~t: ...... ~ .....,:-~.~:~ 7,.~~ ~,~'.-~.~,,.~,,~_~ FRONT & REAR ELEVATIONS Exterior Elevations-Btdg 2C DBSIGN GROUP 602-991-9111 9508 Lo8 No. REAR ELEVATION - 8 BAY GARAGE SIDE ELEVATION (typ) CARPOR T ~~~~', ~:-:. ,-, 8 Bay GataBe Elevation A Carport ~R¢I IIT!iCTURA~ DC~SIGN 'GROUP 602-991-9111 9508 Lo~ No. FRONT & REAR ELEVATION - 6 BAY GARAGE ............................................................. '~,~:-3~i.":' ~'-o' '- 12 Bay Garage Elevation DIISIGN GROUP 602-991-9111 9508 No. REAR RIGHT SIDE ELEVATION KEY PLAN REAR ELEVATION ........ _.._ ......;~..~.~ h ,"11I' FRONT ELEVATION Reception Buildin§ Elevations DI~IGN GROUP 602-991-9111 9508 Lnl~ No. LEFT 51DE ELEVATION Receplion Buildin§ Elevations ,~ RCHITECTURA[ DRSIGN GROUP 602-991-9111 9508 Lo~ No. FRONT REAR ELEVATION sc~z~ '~1~ - ~'-o' ~'-~~', :.~,~::--'~-i i':;'" """""-'""'"'""'"" '"'~~~ '~ "~ :-~--'--' '- '" '~. 'L~~"'~.'.-~~-~ KEY PLAN LEFT SIDE ELEVATION FRONT ELEVATION Exercise Building Elevations ~RClIITI1CTURA~. DESIGN GROUP 602-991-9111 9508 ~..._'-.,-; Lo~ No. RIGHT SIDE ELEVATION Exercise Buildin§ Elevations D!ISIGN GROUP 602-991-911! 9508 LoJ~ No. RIGHT ELEVATION ENTRANCE PORTE COCHERE Porte Cochere Elevations ,~ilCI IITIJCI1JIIA[ DESIGN GROUP 602-991-91!1 9500 # Lo~ No. ~ * ,., , !~1 ,,~.., I ...... , ~ .....] TYPICAL SCREEN WALL TYPICAL RAMADA ELEVATION CABANA - FRONT ELEVATION sc~ ~J - ¢-o' CABANA - RIGHT SIDE ELEVATION SCAtt: ~ CABANA - LEFT SIDE ELEVATION SC.q.[: ~,,." - ~'-0" CABANA - REAR ELEVATION Cabana, Ramada, Fence Elevations DESIGN GROUP 602-991-9111 Lo~ No. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 5:30 p.m. Dan Coleman October 15, 1996 VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT 15766 - MARK TAYLOR - A request to develop 264 apartments, with a condominium subdivision map, on 22.2 acres of land in the Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) zone, located in the Victoria Planned Community on the north side of Base Line Road, approximately 800 feet west of Victoria Park Lane - APN: 227-091-14 and 15 and 227-111-12 and 13. Design Parameters: The site is an abandoned vineyard and slopes from north to south at a 3 percent grade. There is row of trees along the northerly boundary, primarily Eucalyptus. There are no known cultural resources on the site. To the west is a mini-storage facility, to the east is an apartment project and an undeveloped phase of the Victoria Village shopping center site, to the north is an abandoned railroad line, and to the south is a winery. The project is proposed as a gated community. ' Pre-A~plication Review: This project was the subject of a Pre-Application Review by the Planning Commission on February 14, 1996. Commissioners expressed design concerns with architecture, density, size of open space areas, and lack of trash enclosures conveniently located throughout the project. Minutes of the meeting are attached. Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion. Maior Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this project. Density - The project has been designed at 11.9 dwelling units per acre. The Commission has traditionally required exceptional design quality for projects desiring to build at the upper end of the density range. During the Pre-Application Review, density was raised as an issue as it relates to the design of open space areas and the space between buildings. The project has been redesigned to meet or exceed all City standards for open space and building separations. The project density is lower than the density of the apartment project to the east (15.9 dwelling units per acre). Architectural Style - Commissioners expressed concern that the proposed style was out of character with the surrounding neighborhood, most notably the Victorian architecture of the adjoining shopping center. The project's contemporary stucco scheme is similar to the existing apartments to the east; however, the primary concern is the context along Base Line Road. Garages - The long garage buildings should be revised to break-up the long roof line. Suggestions would include varying the roof height or adding intersecting gables. Also, garage door patterns should be varied. Carports - Their basic "stick-like" appearance is contrary to the City's design guidelines for multi-family projects. Substantial design elements should be incorporated, such as tile roof treatment similar to garage buildings and solid end walls. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the ~. ~mmi;t~l~Wil~ discuss the following secondary design issues. DRC COMMENTS VTT 15766 - MARK TAYLOR October 15, 1996 Page 3 Balconies - For the five buildings along Base Line Road, the acoustical study recommends a 6-foot high sound wall for all balconies facing the street. Suggest this be accomplished by using Lexan panel extensions above the normal patio wall height to achieve the necessary sound attenuation. .. Open Space - Staff believes the open space layout is superior to most multi-family projects in terms of size and relationship to units. A total of 58 percent of the site is in common and private open space compared to the City's standard of 40 percent. The open space has been arranged as a large 'X' shaped greenbelt which allows 30 out of 35 buildings to orient directly onto the central common areas. Recreational Am_enities - The recreational amenities exceed City standards. Colors - Provide color variation between buildings to avoid monotony. All buildings are proposed with the same color scheme: same roof tile, a single wall color (off white) and two accent colors (teal and rust). Landscaping - Should existing windrow be preserved or replaced? The Victoria Community Plan states that windrow style plantings are "crucial to the Plan" to provide a strong visual unifying element. The applicant proposes to remove the existing row of trees along the north boundary. Most of the trees are in good health; however, preservation in place would require that the grading plan would have to be revised to maintain the natural grades underneath the drip line of the trees. Staff recommends replanting a Eucalyptus windrow along the north project boundary. Suggest Eucalyptus Maculata (Spotted Gum) spaced 8-10 feet on center. o Trash Compactor- The project features a single point of collection for all trash at the north project boundary. During the Pre-Application Review, one Commissioner expressed concern that this was inconvenient and required tenants to walk too far carrying their trash or to drive to the compactor. Only 6 out of 35 buildings are within 300 feet of the compactor. Stairways - The open stairways lack any architectural treatment. Stairs should be integrated into the building by enclosing them with walls. Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion. None Staff Recommendation' Staff recommends that the project be redesigned and returned for review by the Design Review Committee. DRC COMMENTS V-TT 15766 - MARK TAYLOR October 15, 1996 Page 4 Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Rich Macias, Peter Tolstoy, Nancy Fong Staff Planner: Dan Coleman The Committee recommended that the applicant's architect work with staff to revise the project to address the design issues and return to Design Review Committee on November 5, 1996. 1. Architectural Style The Committee supported the Mediterranean style subject to refinements: a. Provide ~findow surrounds. Provide architectural treatment to blank wall areas such as the Bldg. 2A side elevation. Stairways - Study alternative designs with solid decorative walls. Areas beneath stairs may be enclosed for storage. Colors - Study alternative color schemes to provide color variations. Suggested that a subtle color change be used as accents on popout elements or between buildings. Garages - Break-up long roof line with intersecting gables or varying roof height. Vary garage door patterns. Carports - Completely redesign to match quality of apartment buildings and garages by incorporating tile roof elements and end walls. The Committee supported the concept of enclosing the ends with storage units. Recreational Amenities - One of the three tot lots may be converted to open space. One possibility is to provide a smaller tot lot adjoining the pool area. Landscaping - Remove and replace existing windrow with more appropriate tree species. Trash Compactor- Provide at least four trash enclosure locations throughout the project for the convenience of residents. The Committee also requested floor plans. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 5:00 p.m. Dan Coleman November 5, 1996 VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT 15766 - MARK TAYLOR - A request to develop 264 apartments, with a condominium subdivision map, on 22.2 acres of land in the Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) zone located in the Victoria Planned Community. on the north side of Base Line Road, approximately 800 feet west of Victoria Park Lane. APN: 227-091-14, 15, and 227-111-12, 13. The Committee recommended that the applicant's architect work with staff to revise the project to address the design issues and return to Design Review Committee on November 5, 1996. Architectural Style - The Committee supported the Mediterranean style subject to refinements: a. Provide window surrounds. b. Provide architectural treatment to blank wall areas such as the Bldg. 2A side elevation. c. Stairways - Study alternative designs with solid decorative walls. Areas beneath stairs may be enclosed for storage. d. Colors - Study alternative color schemes to provide color variations. Suggested that a subtle color change be used as accents on popout elements or between buildings. Garages - Break-up long roof line with intersecting gables or varying roof height. Vary garage door panems. Carports - Completely redesign to match quality of apartment buildings and garages by incorporating tile roof elements and end walls. The Committee supported the concept of enclosing the ends with storage units. Recreational Amenities - One of the three tot lots may be converted to open space. One possibility is to provide a smaller tot lot adjoining the pool area. 5. Landscaping - Remove and replace existing windrow with more appropriate tree species. 6. Trash Compactor - Provide at least four trash enclosure locations throughout the project for the convenience of residents. The Committee also requested floor plans. Staff Recommendation' Staff recommends approval subject to: 1. Provide decorative cap (i.e., stucco over) on the stairways. Use hea~,w duty wood lattice, instead of vinyl lattice panels, at the ends of carports or enclose with solid walls. Provide layered wood fascia detail, instead of fiat metal, on carports to match apartments and garage structures. 4. Project will be conditioned to provide at least four trash enclosure locations throughout the site. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Rich Macias, Larry, McNiel, Nancy Fong Staff Planner: _ Dan Coleman// DRC AGENDA VTT 15766-MARK TAYLOR November 5, 1996 Page 2 The Committee recommended approval subject to the following revisions: 1. Provide decorative cap (i.e., stucco over) on stairways to match patio wall cap. 2. Replace vinyl lattice on carport ends with 2"-3" metal tubing espalier. 3. Carport fascia profile and texture to match apartments. 4. Vary garage door pattern. 5. Replace wood lattice on Building 2A with 2"-3" metal tubing espalier. 6. Add window on right-hand side of first floor of Building 2B. 7. The alternative color samples were accepted. The applicant should revise the plans accordingly prior to the Planning Commission hearing. City of Rancho Cucamonga NEGATIVE DECLARATION The following Negative Declaration is being circulated for public review in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act Section 21091 and 21092 of the Public Resources Code. Project File No.: Vesting Tentataive Tract Map 15766 Public Review Period Closes: November13,1996 Project Name: San Vineyard Project Applicant: Mark-Taylor, Inc. Project Location (also see attached map): North side of Base Line Road, approximately 800 feet west of Victoria Park Lane - APN: 227-091-14, 15, and 227-111-12, 13. Project Description: A request to develop 264 apartments, with a condominium subdivision map, on 22.2 acres of land in the Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) zone in the Victoria Planned Community and consideration of a request to vacate Railroad Avenue South and the east collector street known as Hanley Avenue. FINDING This is to advise that the City of Rancho Cucamonga, acting as the lead agency, has conducted an Initial Study to determine if the project may have a significant effect on the environment and is proposing this Negative Declaration based upon the following finding: The Initial Study shows that there is no substantial evidence that the project may have a significant effect on the environment. [] The Initial Study identified potentially significant effects but: (1) Revisions in the project plans or proposals made or agreed to by the applicant before this proposed Negate Declara~on was released for public review would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur, and (2) There is no substantial evidence before the agency that the project as revised may have a significant effect on the environment. If adopted, the Negative Declaration means that an Environmental Impact Report will not be required. Reasons to support this finding are included in the attached Initial Study. The project file and all related documents are available for review at the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Division at 10500 Civic Center Drive (909) 477-2750 or Fax (909) 477-2847. NOTICE The public is invited to comment on the proposed Negative Declaration during the review period. Date of Determination Adopted By 'h\FINAL\CEQA\INSTUDY.PT2 (July 17, 1996) CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM INITIAL STUDY PART II BACKGROUND 1) 2) 3) Project File #/Name: 4) 5) Related Files: TT~.,p ':~'~'-f~ Applicant: /~~ Telephone #: L/~d ~-.)~?/"' ~'/// Project Description: ¢(~'4 dat~~-,~ Project Accepted as Complete ( e): ~'//~ .~' ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Pursuant to Section 15063 of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines, an explanation is required for all "Yes" and "Maybe" answers on attached sheets, including a discussion of ways to mitigate the significant effects identified. Yes Maybe N__~o e) f) g) EARTH - Will the proposal result in.' a) Unstable earth conditions or changes in the geologic structure? ( ) ( ) b) Disruptions, displacement, compaction, or over covering of the soil? ( ) ( ) c) Change in the topography or ground surface relief features? ( ) ( ) d) The destruction, covering, or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? ( ) ( ) (~' Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site? ( ) ( Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sand, or changes in siltation, deposition, or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet, or lake? ( ) ( ) (/¥ Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards, such as earthquakes, landslides, mudslides, ground failure, or similar hazards? ( ) ( ) II. AIR - Will the proposa/ resu/t in: a) Substantial air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? b) The creation of objectionable odors? . () () ()' () c) Alteration of air movement moisture, or temperature, or any change in climate, either locally or regionally? Ill. WATER - Will the proposal result in: a) b) c) d) e) 0 g) h) i) Changes in currents, or the course of direction of water movements, in either marine or fresh waters? Changes in the absorption rate, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff? Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? Changes in the amount of surface water in any body? Discharge into surface waters, or in alteration of surface water quality, including, but not limited to, temperature, dissolved oxygen, or turbidity? Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters? Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? Substantial reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding or tidal waves? () () () () () () () () () () () () () PLANT LIFE - Will the proposal result in: a) Change in the diversity of species, or number of any species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, and aquatic plants)? b) Reduction in the number of any unique, rare, or endangered species of plants? c) Introduction of new species of plants into an area or in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? d) Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? () () () () ( ) () ( ) ANIMAL LIFE - Will the proposal result in: a) Change in the diversity of species, or number of any species of animals (birds, land animals, including reptiles, fish, and shellfish benthic organisms or insects)? b) Reduction of the number of any unique, rare, or endangered species of animals? c) d) Introduction of any new species of animals into the area or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? ( ) () () () ( ) () () ( ) Vl. NOISE - Will the proposal result in: a) Increase in existing noise levels? b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? () () ( ) VII. LIGHT AND GLARE - Will the proposal.' a) Produce new light and glare? () () VIII. LAND USE - Will the proposal result in.' a) Substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? () ( ) IX. NATURAL RESOURCES - Will the proposal result in: a) Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? () () Xo RISK OF UPSET - Will the proposal involve: a) A risk of explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions? b) Possible interference with an emergency response plan or an emergency evacuation plan? () () () () Xl. POPULATION - Will the proposal: a) Alter the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the human population of an area? () ( ) XlI. HOUSING - Will the proposal: a) Affect existing housing or create a demand for additional housing? () ( ) TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION - Will the proposal result in.' a) Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? b) Effects on existing parking facilities or demand for new parking? c) Substantial impact upon existing transportation systems? d) Alterations to the present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? e) Alterations to waterborne, rail, or air traffic? f) Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists, or pedestrians? () 3 PUBLIC SERVICES - Will the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for, new or altered government services in any of the following areas: a) Fire protection? ~ b) Police protection? c) Schools? d) Parks and other recreational facilities? e) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? f) Other governmental services? ( ) () () () () () () () () () XV. ENERGY - Will the proposal result in: a) Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? b) Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy or require the development of new sources of energy? ( ) () () () XVl. UTILITIES and SERVICE SYSTEMS - VVill the proposal result in a need for new systems or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a) b) c) d) e) f) Power or natural gas? Communications systems? Water? Sewer or septic tanks? Storm water drainage? Solid waste disposal? () () ( ~" () () ( ,,,)'" () () () () () (,,,)'" () () HUMAN HEALTH - Will the proposal result in.' a) Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mental health)? b) Exposure of people to potential health hazards? () () ( ) () XVlII. AESTHETICS - Will the proposal result in.' a) The obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public? b) Creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? () () () ( ) RECREATION - Will the proposal result in.' a) Impact upon the quality of existing recreational opportunities? 4 () () b) Restrict the religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? XX. CULTURAL RESOURCES - Willthe proposal.' a) Result in the alteration of or the destruction of a prehistoric or historic archeological site? b) Result in adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or historic building, structure, or object? c) Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? ( ) () (/~ () () () () (,,,~' XXl. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE - a) b) c) d) Potential to degrade: Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of major periods of California history or prehistory? Short term: Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? (A short-term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of time. Long-term impacts will endure well into the future.) Cumulative: Does the project have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (A project may impact on two or more separate resources where the impact on each resource is relatively small, but where the effect on the total of those impacts on the environment is significant.) Substantial adverse: Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? () () () () () ( ) XXIV. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION (Narrative description of environmental impacts) - DISCUSSION OF LAND USE IMPACTS (Examine whether the project would be consistent with existing zoning, plans~~ther ap licable land use controls) - EARLIER ANALYSES - Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration per Section 15063(c)(3)(D). The effects identified above for this project were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in the following earlier document(s) pursuant to applicable legal standards, and such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. The following earlier analyses were utilized in completing this Initial Study and are available for review in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, Planning Division offices, 10500 Civic Center Drive (check all that apply): ~¥General Plan EIR 5 10,'18/96 T~'E i1:$1 FA-% 602 ~91 9125 ~3d~K-TAYLOR INC. MARK.TAYL0~ INC.; ~.'003 X Master Environmental Assessment for the t989 LIDdate of the General Plan ~ I~dus[rial Area Specific Plan EIR ,~Victoria Planned Community E1R ~ Te~a ~eta Planm~ C~muni~ __ Foo~ill Boulevard 8~Cffic Plan ~ Eti~nda Noah G~cifiO Plan ~ ~heK ~ ~he~ _ ~v. DET~MI~TION - On ~e basis of this ~nitfal evalua~cn; a) I ~nd that the propo~ proje~ could not have a significan~ effe~ on t~e environment. A NEGAT3VE OEC~TION wil~ De prepared ........................................................................... b) I ~ that ~h ~e proposed prc~ ~uld h~e a significmn~ nmt ~ a sign~nt e~ in ~is case ~e ~at~ mea~s deadbed on ~e a~ch~ sheet~ h~Je been added to ~e pmje~. A NEGA~VE OEC~TION ~11 ~ prepared ....................................................... c) I ~nd that [he propos~ projam may have a sign[fi~nt e~ec[ on the envlrenment ~~ENVIRON~TAL IMPACT REPORT is ~uirea ............................................................. Pdnt Name and Title Date XXVI. APFLICANT CERTIFICATION (To be completed by applicant) - [ ced!fy t,"~t t am the applicant for the proje~ described in this Initial $~dy. I acknowledge ~,hat I have read this Ini~al Study and the proposed mitigation measures. Further I have revised ~e pn3ject plans or proposals and/or hereby aoree to the proposed mitigation measures to avoi~ the effects or mitigate the effects to a poin[ where cleaHy n~ significant environmental effe,,pt~/~'ould occur. PrintNameandTitle: [~..A.,c_~,~ L_ (.~.OC~ '-J.L. ! ~ XJ~'_~. ~P.,~..~ : ~,,4'? t,~l ^ ¢,. v. - 'q'. /t'I L- O $ ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Initial Study - Part II Discussion of Environmental Evaluation Project Description: VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT 15766 - MARK TAYLOR - A request to develop 264 apartments, with a condominium subdivision map, on 22.2 acres of land in the Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units/acre) zone located in the Victoria Planned Community on the north side of Baseline Road, approximately 800 feet west of Victoria Park Lane. APN: 227-091-14, 15 and 227-111-12, 13. XXII. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION I. Earth: a) ~) c) d) e) f) g) The site is not within any known unstable earth condition area. The site will be graded to accommodate the building pads for the proposed use. The impact is not significant. The topography of the site will be altered slightly to accommodate the building pads. The grading will be supervised by a licensed soils engineer or registered geologist to ensure compliance with Building Code requirements. The impact is not significant. No known or unique geologic or physical features exist on this site. Upon completion, the site will be landscaped and/or paved to prevent soil erosion. The facility will not affect any river, channel, ocean, lake, or bay. The majority of California is susceptible to earthquakes. The project is not within any known special study zone that will require additional studies or that poses a unique hazard. The impact is not significant. II. Air: a) b) c) The proposed project will generate air emissions from vehicles; however, the proposed use is consistent with the land use designation for the site. The impact is not significant. The proposed project will not create any objectionable odors. The proposed project will not result in alteration to the climate or air movement. III. Water: a) The development of the project will not affect the currents or course of water movement. b) The absorption rate will be altered because of the paving and hardscape proposed. All waters will be conveyed to approved drainage facilities. The project is designed to collect all surface water runoff into catch basins that will feed into underground pipes to the public storm drain system. As mitigation, the conditions of approval will require the developer to extend the existing public storm drain west of Hanley Avenue (at east project boundary) to connect with catch basins at the Victoria mini storage facility (at west project boundary). c) The project will not alter the course or flow of flood waters. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT INITIAL STUDY - PART II VTT 15766 Page 2 IV. Vo d) e) g) h) i) The project proposes to collect surface water runoff into a storm drain which will discharge into existing interim basins south of Baseline Road. As mitigation, the conditions of approval will require an alternative drainage solution in which the developer extends the existing public storm drain west of Hanley Avenue (at east project boundary) to connect with eater basins at the Victoria mini storage facility (at west project boundary) and eliminate the discharge into the existing interim basins. The project proposes to collect surface water runoff into a storm drain which will discharge into existing interim basins south of Baseline Road. As mitigation, the conditions of approval will require an alternative drainage solution in which the developer extends the existing public storm drain west of Hanley Avenue (at east project boundary) to connect with earth basins at the Victoria mini storage facility (at west project boundary) and eliminate the discharge into the existing interim basins. No alteration of groundwater is expected to occur with this project. No direct additions or withdrawals of ground water are proposed. The project is anticipated to use only that amount of water necessary to handle sanitary conditions of the bathrooms and a single residence. The amount of water usage is not significant. The project is outside of the established flood plain and is protected by existing development and storm drain facilities to the north (upstream). Plant Life: a) Vegetation on site consists of an abandoned vineyard and a row of 18 trees along the northerly boundary. The trees were planted to provide windbreaks for the vineyard. An arborist report (Roth, August 1, 1996) has been prepared which indicates that 16 of the trees are in physiologically good condition. The arborist concluded that the proposed grading cut of 3 to 5 feet in the vicinity of the trees is not consistent with preservation in place. Further, the arborist concluded that the predominant tree species (Eucalyptus) and very sandy soil are not suitable for transplanting. As mitigation, the Conditions of approval will require the developer to remove the trees and replace them with another species of Eucalyptus to maintain the windrow character. There are no known rare, unique, or endangered species on-site. Landscaping introduced to the site will be compatible with existing landscaping material. Similar materials have been used throughout the area with no impact to native species. The existing vineyard on the site has been abandoned for years and is proposed to be removed in its entirety. The impact is not significant. b) c) d) Animal Life: a) There are no known animal~ that currently occupy the site on a regular basis. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT INITIAL STUDY - PART II VTT 15766 Page 3 VI. II. VIII. IX. b) c) d) There are no known rare, unique, or endangered species on-site. No new species will be introduced as a result of the project. The project is surrounded by development on all sides. In that no animals currently use the site on a regular basis, the development of the project will have no impact on fish or wildlife habitat. Noise: a) b) The project will not significantly increase existing noise levels. The project is located along Baseline Road, a major arterial street, and is subject to exposure to traffic noise in excess of the General Plan standard of 65 CNEL. An acoustical analysis (Bricken, August 22, 1996) confirms that noise levels will exceed the allowable noise levels for this zone based upon existing or projected traffic volumes. The acoustical engineer concluded that the project will require exterior noise mitigation to achieve 65 CNEL at all exterior living spaces and common open space areas. The project design includes the orientation of building mass along Baseline Road and the construction ofa 7 foot high sound wall along the entire south property line next to Baseline Road; therefore there will not be a significant effect for first floor level. As mitigation for noise levels for the second floor levels, the Conditions of approval will require developer to construct 6 foot high sound walls on all south facing private balconies of the five buildings along Baseline Road. Additional mitigation to achieve an interior noise level of 45 CNEL maximum, special glazing is required for certain windows and sliding glass doors for those units identified by the acoustical analysis. Light and Glare: a) New light and glare will be created because the property is currently vacant. City codes require lighting fixtures to be directed away from or shielded from adjoining properties. The project design includes a minimum 20 foot landscape buffer, including a 6 foot high wall, around the project perimeter. A condition of approval requires the applicant to submit a lighting plan for review and approval to ensure the light does not spill over onto adjacent properties. The impact is not significant. Land Use: a) The project would substantially alter the present vacant land use (an abandoned vineyard). The proposed construction of 264 apartments is consistent with the Medium Residential zone of the Victoria Community Plan. The impact is not significant. Natural Resources: a) The project will not significantly increase the rate of use of natural resources. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT INITIAL STUDY - PART II VTT 15766 Page 4 Xo Risk of Upset: a) The project will not be storing any hazardous or explosive material. b) The project construction will not interfere with emergency response. Population: a) The project will generate an increase in population of 816 persons using 3.09 persons per dwelling unit per State Department of Finance estimates. The impact is not considered significant because the same increase in population would result if the site were developed as single family residences according to the State Department of Finance. Housing: a) The project will reduce apartments. the need for additional housing by constructing 264 Transportation: a) The project will generate additional trips because of the new construction. A traffic impact analysis (RKJK, July 2, 1996) prepared for this project which analyzed the existing, Opening Year and the Year 2015 with and without the proposed project. The report concluded that the project will generate 1,740 trip-ends per day with 125 vehicles per hour during the AM peak hour and 155 vehicles per hour during the PM peak hour. The report presents several recommendations for on-site and off-site improvements. As mitigation, the Conditions of approval will require the developer to do the following: 1. Install a stop sign for egress at the project's main entry to Baseline Road. Provide minimum 25 foot radius curb returns to baseline Road at its intersections with project's main entry and with Hanley Street (Street "A"). o Provide a 150 foot inbound left turn lane for eastbound left turn traffic at the intersection of Baseline Road and Hanley Street (Street "A"). e Construct Baseline Road full width from Hanley Street (Street "A") westerly to future Day Creek Boulevard. Developer shall pay transportation development fees upon issuance of building permits, at the rate adopted by City, as fair share contribution for area wide improvements. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT INITIAL STUDY - PART II VTT 15766 Page 5 b) c) d) e) f) Public a) b) c) Additional parking will be necessary to accomodate the apartment tenants. The project has been designed with adequate parking spaces to meet the parking requirements. The project will generate additional traffic which will impact existing transportation systems (See XIII.(a) above). The proposal is consistent with the Victoria Community Plan and General Plan for which the street widths were evaluated at a build-out condition. The project will maintain the existing circulation patterns for the movement of goods. The project will not affect air, water or rail traffic. The application is expected to increase the risk of traffic hazards due to vehicles entering and exiting the site. The project has been designed consistent with City standards and policies for public improvements and driveways spacing to provide maximum safety available. Pedestrian amenities (sidewalks) will be installed as part of the project. Baseline Road is ultimately planned for a Class II Bike Lane; however, completion of the bicycle trail will occur in the future when sufficient pavement width exists to accommodate the lane. The impact is not significant. Services: The project will increase demands for fire protection and emergency medical services provided by the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District. The District receives revenue from property taxes and from Mello-Roos Community Facilities District 85- I for this area. As mitigation, the Mello Roos CFD requirements shall apply to this project. No substantial new services are expected with the project. The Chaffey Joint Union High School District and the Eftwanda School District serve the project. The project will generate 115 K-5 students and 51 students in grades 6-8 (Newton, 1996). The project will generate 53 high school students (Sundell, 1996). Both districts have notified the City of the current impaction problems. Adequate school facilities will not exist to serve this development. School funding sources for new development include school impact fees, tax increment revenues from the City Redevelopment Agency, and Mello-Roos Community Facilities fees. School impact fees are regulated by the State of California Government Code Section 65995. Under GC Section 65996, the City is prohibited from denying the project based on the adequacy of school facilities. The Chaffey Joint Union High School District has formed a Mello-Roos District. The number of students generated by this project alone are not sufficient to require the creation of new elementary, middle or high schools (i.e., schools are normally designed for at least 500 students). However, there would be the need for additional and/or renovated classrooms, more teachers, transportation services, curriculum and equipment. Project will be conditioned to join the Mello-Roos District for the Chaffey Joint Union High School District and pay school impact fees to Etiwanda School District; therefore, the impact is con§idered to be reduced to a level not significant. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT INITIAL STUDY - PART II VTT 15766 Page 6 d) e) f) The project will have an insignificant effect on existing park facilities or result in the need for additional facilities. The existing Windrows Neighborhood Park, located 1800 feet away, is the nearest public park which serves the project. Phase I of the Etiwanda Creek Community Park was recently completed and also serves the project. The site abuts a road that is being maintained by the City. No additional impacts on public facilities are expected. No other government services are expected to be affected by this proposal. XV. Energy a) The project is not expected to use substantial amounts of fuel or energy. b) The development is not expected to result in substantial increase on the demand of existing energy sources or the need for new energy sources. XVI. Utilities and Service Systems: a) The project will not result in the need for new power or natural gas systems. b) The project will not result in the need for new communication systems. c) The project will use water readily available from existing water lines in Baseline Road. The discharge from the site will be handled by the existing sewer facilities. The project proposes to collect surface water runoff into a storm drain which will discharge into existing interim basins south of Baseline Road. As mitigation, the conditions of approval will require an alternative drainage solution in which the developer extends the existing public storm drain west of Hanley Avenue (at east project boundary) to connect with catch basins at the Victoria mini storage facility (at west project boundary) and eliminate the discharge into the existing interim basins. The project design includes a common trash compactor and source recycling facilities to reduce the volume of solid waste. No significant solid waste disposal will be necessary to serve the site. d) e) XVII. Human Health: a) The development is not expected to create any health hazard. b) No exposure of people to potential health hazards is expected. XVIII. a) Aesthetics: The project will construct 2 story "8 plex" apartment buildings. The existing single family homes to the north are 1 story, except for one home northeast of the subject site which has a second floor window facing south. The apartment buildings are approximately 200 feet away from the nearest single family residence. The proposed project has been designed with pad grades 11-12 feet lower than these homes. These private homes have limited views to the south over the subject site due to the pad grade differential and existihg 5'6" high block wall along their south property line. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT INITIAL STUDY - PART II VTT 15766 Page 7 b) The City's General plan identifies no public scenic view corridors or vistas for this site. The project will not obstruct any scenic vista or view open to the public. The impact is not significant. The project site is exposed to public views from Baseline Road. The project design includes a 7 foot high decorative wall along Baseline within a minimum 44 feet landscape setback. Views into the site will be further limited by the five buildings along Baseline Road. The project design includes a major landscape statement at both project entrances, including covered entry gates, enhanced paving, and focal trees. The project will conform to the strict design guidelines of the City thereby eliminating any offensive site open to public view. The impact is not significant. Recreation: a) The b) project will not impact the quality of existing recreational opportunities. Adequate facilities exist within the area, most notably Windrows Park and Etiwanda Creek park. The City's Recreation Department also offers various recreation classes and programs at nearby Windrows Elementary. No known religious or sacred uses are presently conducted on-site. XXo Cultural Resources: a) There are no known prehistoric or historic archaeological sites on the property.. b) There are no known prehistoric or historic buildings, structures or objects on the property. c) The project should not impact any unique ethnic cultural values. XXIII. DISCUSSION OF LAND USE IMPACTS The project density of 11.9 dwelling units per acre is consistent with the Medium Residential zone (8-14 dw'ac) of the Victoria Community Plan. he also ~r Melcher stated that he agreed with Commissioner McNiet regarding the signage an the applicant should be cautioned that making automobile dealerships a condit e in this Subarea would not necessarily assure approval of any specific said e questions that need to be answered regarding access. Mr. Plies asked wi- concern was regarding access. Chairman Barker said he understand how it will wo~ Commissioner Lumpp asked if Mr. property. Mr. Plies responded affirmatively. Commissioner Lumpp be looking at a large text amendment shou such as an auto mall. nitiated. He felt the City should also It was the allow s of the Commission to support initiation of of text changes to Sales and Leases as a conditionally permitted use to ~ acent to the y in Subarea 8 upon submission of an application and payment of the led fees. ..F- USE DETERMINATION 96-01 - A request to determine if apartments are a permitted or y conditionally permitted use in the Medium Residential zone of the Victoria Community Plan. Dan Coleman, Principal Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman Barker asked if Mr. Coleman had worked on the Victoria Community Plan. Mr. Coleman replied he worked for the City at the time but he did not work on the plan. Chairman Barker recalled that the Victoria Plan was not particularly pro-apartments after a period of time. He also thought that when the City Council rezoned various properties several years ago, one of the objectives was to decrease the number of apartments in the community. He stated that at one time he had a responsibility of trying to devise a formula to determine how many children reside in various types of housing. He said the community where he worked had a number of apartments, condominiums, town houses, and single family dwellings. He reported a survey was conducted and it was concluded that an apartment house has an immediate impact on schools because a fairly high percentage of apartment dwellers have children when they move in. He said they discovered that only one out of five condominium units have resident children because condominium owners are quite often downsizing after children have left home or just entering the housing market with no children or just starting a family. He was concerned that adding apartments would produce a major immediate impact on the schools. He also questioned if the City needs more apartments and felt that enough have already been provided for the population. He thought that apartment dwellers are generally short-termed. He did not feel that density is a question, so much as the population, the age of the youngsters, and the impact on schools. He invited public comment. Keith Lamparter, Mark-Taylor, Inc., 6623 North Scottsdale Road, Phoenix, Arizona, gave a brief background of the company and stated their development partners are the largest apartment real estate investment trust in the United States traded on the New York stock exchange. He stated they understand the concerns about apartments. He said they build very high-end apartments with square footages substantially above other apartments in the communities where they locate. He said they would provide attached and detached garages, covered porte-cocheres, private security entrance gates, and security systems arid laundry facilities within the units. He observed the City has strict guidelines for apartments and reported they had submitted a conceptual plan which would January 24, 1996 require no variances while providing just under 14 unites per acre. He said their plan exceeds the recreational amenities requirements and provides more open space than necessary. He noted their rental fees are generally higher than owning a house and they do not get many families with children in their developments because of the higher rents. He reported that he had contacted the school districts and was told they are not operating at capacity and could accommodate their development. He noted they would have to pay school fees of over a million dollars. He pointed out that the Victoria Community Plan states that Medium Residential can have attached and detached residential of 8-14 dwelling units per acre. He said the definitions indicate an apartment is an attached residential unit. He acknowledged that the text does not specifically list apartments as a permitted use but felt that it does not specifically prohibit apartments and states that uses include, but are not necessarily limited to, those which are listed. Commissioner Melcher asked why the applicant does not build a condominium project and rent it out. Mr. Lamparter replied he was told he should not do that because he had already told the City it will be an apartment project. Commissioner Melcher stated accessibility requirements are different for apartments versus condominiums. Mr. Lamparter agreed. C~mmissioner Melcher noted there are a lot of condominium projects in the City which. are operated as apartments. He said the developers built them that way so that they would not have to meet the accessibility requirements and also so they could sell off the units as condominiums if the economy should change. He questioned why the developer was not taking that approach. Mr. Lamparter said they had considered that but his company philosophically does not like to condo- map any projects at present because of liability problems. He said if he could get direction that it would be permissible to build it under a condo-map, he would do so. Commissioner Melcher noted that Lewis Homes has been doing that for years. Mr. Lamparter did not think it would be wise business to advise a neighborhood they are going to do condominiums and then advise them after the project is built, that it is really an apartment project. Commissioner Lumpp asked for a definition of condominium. Mr. Coleman replied that the Victoria Community Plan refers to the State Subdivision Map Act. Ralph Hanson, Deputy City Attorney, stated it refers to a type of property ownership, not in fee, but a right to air space or a portion of property and a deed in common for the common area. Commissioner Lumpp stated that as the definition of condominium is ownership of air space, it means that single family detached, town homes, tri-plexes, four-ptexes, etc. could be condominiums. He said it has nothing to do with the type of product, but rather the type of ownership. Mr. Lampafter said the text of the plan defines a four-plex as a multi-family use but it was his understanding that multi-family uses are precluded from the zone. Mr. Coleman observed that the Victoria Community Plan defines Multiple Family Use as "The use of a site for two or more dwelling units, which may be in the same building or in separate buildings on the same site." Planning Commission Minutes -16-~43~.,,~,/~. January 24, 199(5 Commissioner Melcher asked if the applicant could proceed with a condominium project. Brad Buller, City Planner, confirmed that he could. Commissioner McNiel thought Mr. Lamparter had indicated he would have trouble getting a condominium financed. Mr. Lampafter felt they could get financing if they stipulated that the units could not be sold for a certain number of years. Commissioner Melcher felt that the applicant should let the residents in Victoria know that they are planning to construct apartments. He noted those residents had been some of the most vocal opponents to apartments when the City was considering land use changes. He did not think the Planning Commission should determine that apartments are a permitted or conditionally permitted use without informing those residents. Mr. Buller indicated that staff felt the applicant had made some good arguments that the omission of the word "apartments" does not necessarily mean that the use is prohibited so staff brought the matter to the Commission to make a determination. He acknowledged there has been opposition to apartments in Victoria but he noted there is a successful apartment project immediately adjacent to this property which was well received by the community and there have been no issues. He observed that the property immediately to the south is zoned for High density. He noted the applicant had committed to hosting a neighborhood meeting to introduce their project. He stated the Commission could make a finding that apartments are not prohibited merely because ~[hey have been omitted from the definitions or it could direct that the applicant could file for an amendment to the plan to add apartments to the definition. Commissioner Lumpp asked why condominium was being considered a product rather than a type of ownership. Mr. Buller replied that staff thought the intent of the writers of the Victoria Community Plan was that they did not envision apartments in the Medium Residential area but they envisioned single family. Commissioner McNiel stated he was on the Commission when the plan was proposed. He recalled that when the William Lyon Company approached the City, they did not intend to have any apartments at all. He said that condominiums were in vogue at the time, so that use was included in the text. Chairman Barker recalled that the William Lyon Company wanted only single family housing, not condominiums, but certain members of the community and Commission had pushed to have a wider selection of housing available. He noted that condominiums were thought of as a product type and they were considered an alternative to single family homes. Mr. Buller reported that this parcel was envisioned as being a higher density and was originally specified as Medium High (14-24 dwelling units per acre) but it had been rezoned during the last cycle of zoning considerations. Commissioner Melcher remarked that in 1991 the Ci~ Council decided the City would have too many apartments at build-out. Mr. Lampafter said they focused on this property because it is near the entrance to the planned community but is not truly within it. He observed it is bounded on the north by railroad tracks and a 200-foot buffer with two-stoW homes and they propose two-stow apartments. He noted there is Commercial and Medium-High Residential to the east, a mini-storage facility to the west, and Planning Commission Minutes Janua~ 24,1996 30 units per acre planned across the street on Base Line Road. He said they felt this would bea good transition for that area. Commissioner Lumpp stated he would suppod a determination that apartments are not a permitted use. He thought the Commission would be making a grave mistake by defining apartments as a permitted use because he felt it would be disrespectful to the residents to make such a determination without allowing community input. Chairman Barker wondered if Victoria has changed and the community attitude has changed. He agreed with Commissioners Melcher and Lumpp that the community should be advised before the Commission made a decision that apartments are an acceptable use. Commissioner Lumpp observed that if the Commission were to allow apartments, another applicant may not provide an upscale project such as what this applicant proposes. Commissioner Melcher noted that the staff report indicated there are nine sites in Victoria which could be affected. Commissioner McNiel remarked that the Commission would still have authority to deny an application if apartments were a conditionally permitted use. Chairman Barker felt such a determination would still bypass the direction from the City Council and b.e contrary to previous community input. Commissioner McNiel said he understood the potential for criticism if the Commission were to make that determination but he saw the project as a potential opportunity. He thought that if the applicant were to construct in an upscale apartment building, it could be used as leverage to upgrade apadment projects to be built elsewhere in the City. He thought the location is adjacent to Victoria in the eyes of many residents. He felt the City might have any opportunity to bring in higher end apartments. Chairman Barker agreed it may be an opportunity but he questioned if allowing the use would not be bypassing the desires of the residents. Commissioner McNiel did not think so because the applicant had committed to holding neighborhood meetings. Commissioner Melcher agreed with Commissioner McNiel that it may be an opportunity. He said he could support apartments if the action would apply only to the applicant's site, but he observed that the determination will affect nine sites. Moved by McNiel, seconded by Barker, carried 3-1ol (Melcher no, Tolstoy absent) to continue the meeting beyond 11:00 p.m. Chairman Barker agreed with Commissioner Melcher that allowing apartments at this site would open Pandora's Box as the other sites had not been analyzed. He thought the public has a right to comment. In response to a question, Mr. Bullet stated the Commission could send out notices and have a public hearing on a Use Determination. Planning Commission Minutes January 24, 1996 Commissioner Melcher suggested that if the applicant wanted to pursue apartments, that staff contact the newspaper to write a story, have an article published in the Active Bulletin, and contact known community activists and bring the matter back in four weeks. He suggested the applicant could also pursue a condominium map. Commissioner McNiel felt that the City is missing an opportunity to do better. Chairman Barker suggested contacting the neighbors. He asked where the application is in the process. Mr. Lampafter replied they submitted a fairly well detailed concept site plan today. Chairman Barker asked if it is detailed enough to bring to a neighborhood meeting. Mr. Lampafter responded that it is. He said they would also like to get initial input on the concept site plan. He thought they could produce detailed colored renderings within the next three to four weeks. Chairman Barker said he was uncomfortable making a decision that affects all nine locations. Commissioner Lumpp felt the Commission should not make such a determination that will affect the parcels. Commissioner McNiel asked if a decision could be made on a site specific basis.. Mr. Buller thought the Commission could find that the plan does not preclude the concept of apartments, but is subject to Planning Commission review on a case-by-case basis to determine if apartments fit into an area. He felt that would give the Commission the opportunity to determine on a neighborhood-by-neighborhood basis if apartments are acceptable. He said the project could be presented to the community. He observed the applicant could also change the proposal to a condominium because the plan does specify that condominiums are allowed. He said if another applicant then indicates that apartments are a matter of right in the Medium designation, the Commission could still interpret the Plan to say that is not the case. Commissioner Lumpp felt it is not possible to tell which building is a condominiums and which is an apartment unless you know how an operation is run. He noted that staff has indicated you can build a condominium, but not an apartment. He said he would not support making apartments a permitted or conditionally permitted use in the Medium district in the Victoria Community Plan. Commissioner Melcher noted that the staff report states that a use determination would affect more than the applicant's site; however, he understood Mr. Bullet to now say the Commission could make a determination that it would be acceptable on this site, while not on other sites. Mr. Buller responded that a determination on this site would affect other sites only in that a developer on the next site may claim that a precedent had been set if apadments are permitted on this site. He said the cleanest way to approach the question would be to indicate that all Medium sites can have the same types of development. Chairman Barker indicated he was not willing to accept apadments on the other sites without specifically studying them. He asked what else the applicant could do. Mr. Hanson stated it would be necessary to rezone the parcel if the Commission wanted to create a special zone. Planning Commission Minutes -19-~C4...~--"~ January 24, 1996 Chairman Barker felt it would be best to rezone the property to Medium High, which would allow apartments. Commissioner Melcher noted that a zone change is expensive and time consuming. Mr. Buller sensed that the Commission wanted to say that apartments are not permitted in the Medium Residential zone. He suggested the applicant could submit a Pre-Application review for the Commission to look at the design and concurrently introduce the project to the community. He stated the applicant should advise the community that he is filing a condominium plan, which is a permitted use; however, he intends to rent the project. It was the general consensus of the Commission that, in light of the text of the Victoria Community Plan, they could not determine that apartments are a permitted use in the Medium Residential zone. However, the Commission indicated that Mr. Lamparter could proceed with the project using a condominium map and that he should meet with the neighbors and explain what he plans to do. G. COMMERCIAL LAND STUDY DISCUSSION Commissioner Melcher asked if there was any crucial reason that the matter needed to be discussed this evening. He noted that it was 11:40 p.m. and he suggested that the discussion be deferred until the next meeting if possible. Brad Bullet, City Planner, indicated that the item is also included on the February 14 agenda. He observed that the Commission had previously received a letter from Peter Desforges raising a question about the study and staff had incJuded the matter on tonight's agenda at the Commission's direction. Commissioner Melcher suggested that a meeting be held on January 31 if there is urgency regarding the matter. Motion: Moved by McNiel, seconded by Lumpp, to continue the Commercial Land Study Discussion to January 31 at 7:00 p.m. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: BARKER, LUMPP, MCNIEL, MELCHER NONE TOLSTOY - carried PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments at this time. COMMISSION BUSINESS Brad Bullet, City Planner, noted that the Commission had a memorandum from staff regarding the McDonalds site at Base Line Road and Carnelian Avenue. Commissioner Lumpp asked when McDonalds expects to be in compliance with the conditions. Mr. Bullet responded that McDonalds has indicated they plan to have the work done within 14 days. Planning Commission Minutes -20- (~ .I:~"'/ January 24, 1996 H~ thought a plan should drive land use changes and not a single tenant with sales tax rev,~l'ue Chairman )raised the GIS colored map of Foothill Boulevard between DeC'reek Channel and Day Creek ~1 and looked forward to seeing the rest of · Commissioner Lumpp said ~ld be helpful to post updated aen.akffnaps and General Plan maps for Commission meetings. Mr. Bullet indicated updated aerials and ma avaiia 'b~e, just not posted in the Council chamber· Chairman Barker invited public comment· Greg Hoxworth, Lewis Homes, 11 Mountain Aver 4and, said it has been difficult to attract tenants to their current because of the land along Foothill Boulevard being rezoned fi development, for example Vestar is the availability of 300,000 square feet space on the southwest corner of Haw venue and Foothill Boulevard. He Co~_n_ted that a zone change without a project could make a a landowner. He also state,'hat, if the City is to entertain rezoning the south side of !~4~evard for Commer.=~tail, the remainder of the north side should be considered at the same .Th.~ .mmission c0nc_luded that as more data and updated maps and plans are generated, .i .~,~r. am tion should be forwarded to the Planning Commission in a workshop setting. D. PRE-APPLICATION REVIEW 96-01 - Mark/Taylor- The review of 264 condominiums on 19  acres of land in the Medium Residential zone (8-14 dwelling units per acre), located in the Victoria Planned Community, on the north side of Baseline, one block west of Victoria Park Lane. Keith Lampafter, Mark-Taylor, Inc., 6623 North Scottsdale Road, Phoenix, Arizona, introduced himself. Michael Coghlin, Mark-Taylor, Inc., 6623 North Scottsdale Road, Phoenix, Arizona, gave a brief presentation of their company's experience. Wade Felkins, architect for Mark-Taylor, briefly presented their proposed project. He showed the Planning Commission a revised conceptual site plan prepared in response to staff comments and colored elevations of the proposed product. Dan Coleman, Principal Planner, presented the staff issues and concerns which included the following: 1. Is the project design so outstanding as to merit a density at the top of the Medium range? 2. Vacation of Railroad Avenue South and incorporate into project. 3. Acquisition of Redevelopment Agency property to the east. 4. Site Plan a. Extend decorative paving inside entry gate. __ b. Stronger connections from parking courts into project interior. P)anning Commission Minutes -10- ~:~ February 14, 1996 c. Add decorative paving at entrance to parking courls. d. Add tot lot in south half of project. 5. Architecture a. Single white color and stucco over details. b. Blank walls c. Garage roof heights/form along Baseline. Mr. Felkins indicated that the colored elevations represented a Prairie style architectural theme. Commissioner McNiel asked about the tot lot locations and their potential locations in the southerly half of project.. Commissioner Tolstoy asked about parking provided. He stated that the main entry porte cochere must meet fire access standards. Commissioner Lumpp stated that a condominium is not a product, rather it is a form of ownership. He commented that the applicant had previously stated their intent to market these units as rental . ap. artments which, in his opinion, is not allowed by the Victoria Community Plan Medium Residential designation. He expressed concern with the applicant's intent to offer garage space rental and asked for clarification of this concept. He stated that he was opposed to the exclusive use of a trash compactor because of the inconvenience for tenants to have to take their trash to a single collection point. Commissioner Tolstoy inquired whether the Base Line Road access point will be used all the time or just for emergencies? He indicated a concern with traffic on Base Line Road. Mr. Coleman replied that the code requires two points of ingress and egress for tenants. Commissioner Tolstoy liked the conceptual site plan layout. He expressed a desire to see recycling facilities in conjunction with the trash compactor. He felt that Railroad Avenue South and the Redevelopment Agency property should be incorporated into the project. He disliked the concept of renting garage spaces to tenants. Commissioner McNiel stated that he liked the conceptual site plan. He felt that the proposed architecture was not acceptable. He suggested neighborhood meetings be held to obtain input from Victoria residents. Commissioner Melcher expressed concern with the site plan in relation to proposed density. He noted a lack of substantial open spaces. He cited Tract 13273(southeast corner of Milliken and Mountain View Drive) as an example of the kind of open space desired. He expressed concern with the design of the perimeter drive aisle, in particular, the 90 degree turns and parking along sides. He thought that the architecture seemed "plunked down" and did not successfully address the surrounding context of Victorian architectural theme. He felt the proposed elevations were hum drum. He said that he liked that a tenant would be able to walk from one unit to another unit without crossing a driveway. Commissioner Barker expressed concern with the proposed density being at the highest end of the range. He suggested that the applicant address how the project would feel to pedestrians. He indicated a desire to avoid creating a tunnel-like feeling between buildings. He stated that Base Line Road is also a.primary entrance and should receive the same level of design treatment as the Planning Commission Minutes -11-~Q~,~':~::, February 14, 1996 Street "A" entrance. He suggested larger open spaces. He said that the architecture must blend with the surrounding context. He expressed concern that he saw nothing special about the project design. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments at this time. COMMISSION BUSINESS There was no additional Commission business. ADJOURNMENT 10:50 p.m. - The Planning Commission adjourned to a workshop immediately following in the Rains Room regarding Modification No. 2 to Conditional Use Permit 93-49. Tt~e workshop adjourned at 12:00 midnight and those minutes appear separately. Respectfully submitted, Brad Bul e~ Secretary Planning Commission Minutes February 14, 1996 '" Apa tmefit 'i r dwell i s ;' i not 'typical , .., ... /~/1~, : t .Th~ letter is in.tepouse to the Dec. article,- ~Etiwanda residents _ protest-. ~ development.?. As s nearby hbmeowner, ~ I a~ree that 'the construction of the 264- unit apartment. ~complex will --cause greater traffic and crowding in~ our schools. My family. and I chose this'&rea specifically because it less crowded than other planned commul~Jties, so we will_ also be disappointed to see the.apart-,,. ments built so close by. -. :.i ~'~:: % - :'~"'-~' .. However, I c~nnot believe the arro- gance and prejudice shown by some local. residents: One woman commented in the'. article that she ~knows apartments' and. the typical garbage' who live in Almost everyoue I know, including~ myself, has lived in an apartment at one ~ time or another. With t~dafs economy and high cost of living, apartments are · often the ouly option for some people. The typical people who rent apart- ments range from single adults to young , families to seniors living on Social Seou- l rity. They are not 'garbage' and should not be labled as such. In my opinion, it was poor judgment ~for the Daily Bulletin to use this woman's comment in the article. Her jattitude only serves to reinforce the j class discrimination that already exists . 'so widely in our communities today. CINDY ASHI.EY NAVAROLI Rancho CucAmonga San Carmela A Proposed Multifamily Development Northwest Corner of Hanley and Baseline Rancho Cucamonga, California December 10, 1996 MARK-TAYLOR, INC. 6623 North Scottsdale Road Scottsdale, AZ 85250 PROJECT SUMMARY APPLICANT: MARK-TAYLOR INC. 6623 NORTH SCOTTSDALE ROAD SCOTTSDALE, ARIZONA 85250 (602) 991-9111 (602) 991-9138 fax ZONING: EXISTING: PROPOSED: UNIT ANALYSIS: UNIT TYPE: 1 BEDROOM 2 BEDROOM 3 BEDROOM TOTAL UNITS THIS PROJECT: M (MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL) NO PROPOSED CHANGE TOTAL # OF UNITS: 96 120 48 264 NOTE: THIS PROJECT SHALL BE DEVELOPED IN ONE PHASE PARKING ANALYSIS: UNIT TYPE: 1 BEDROOM UNITS 2 BEDROOM UNITS BEDROOM UNITS GUEST PARKING PARKING REQUIRED: 1.5 SPACES/UNIT 1.8 SPACES/UNIT 2 SPACES/UNIT 25% of UNITS TOTAL PARKING REQUIRED: of that, GARAGES REQUIRED: of that, CARPORTS REQUIRED: TOTAL PARKING PROVIDED: of that, GARAGES PROVIDED: of that, CARPORTS PROVIDED: of that, RV PARKING PROVIDED: ACCESSIBLE SPACES: LOT DENSITY: GROSS LOT AREA: NET LOT AREA: NET LOT DENSITY: OPEN SPACE CALCULATION: REQUIRED: PROPOSED: TOTAL/TYPE REQ'D: 156 156 156 156 53 144 216 96 66 S22 647 8 22.2 21.507 11.9 ACRES ACRES DU/ACRES - ACRES 5.8 ACRES PROJECT SUMMARY F= AI~ANDONED METROLINK CORRIDOR SITE PLAN RANCHO At lJ)u (' RANC~, ~I(CI I I'I'I~.CTU RA~ DF~IGN GROUP 602-991-9111 SP1 SAN CARMELA Rancho Cucamonga Law Enforcement On two separate occasions we meet with members of the Rancho Cucamonga Police Department (San Bernardino Sheriffs Department). We expressed to them concerns which neighborhood individuals had expressed in regards to the proposed development. Crime- There were no available statistics or opinions which concluded that multi-family produces more calls or reports than single family. The opinion was that single family and multi- family are equal for calls and reports per dwelling unit. They also conclude, that single family has more incidents of burglary than multi-family. However, multi-family has a greater number of auto thefts than single family. The police department reviewed the site plan for a third time. The objective was to understand the site plan and elevations as it pertains to response and officer safety. Crime Mitigation Factors (Voluntary Stipulations) A. Gated Community- Reduction in auto theft and trespassing. B. Garages 156 (60%) - Reduction in auto theft. C. North Boundary Fencing - Masonry and wrought iron to enhance safety by increasing visibility of the rail-road track area. D. Unit Security - Prewired for alarms, Charlie bars and latch locks on sliding glass doors, pin locks in all windows and dead bolts on front doors. E. Building/Unit Identification 1 .) Each building will be identified by an elevated 16" illuminated number on several sides as officer approaches (foot or vehicular) will vary. 2.) Each unit shall be identified by an illuxninated number as part of the light fixture. F. 180 Degree Peepholes. G. Photometric Study- Analysis of the lighting plan to determine a one foot candle average on pathways, sidewalks and parking lot. H. Crime Free Multi-Housing Program - Training and certification of on-site staff and managemeht. MARK-TAYLOR HIGH END MULTI-FAMILY COMPARISON NOVEMBER 20, 1996 COMMUNITY UNITS TOTAL UNDER SCHOOL AGE CHILDREN City RESIDENTS 5 YEARS FACTOR Telephone/Mgr. BUILT K-6 7-8 9-12 Montecito 265 345 25 36 10 Rancho Cucamonga (909) 941-0408 Debra Martinez 1989 1.3 9.4% 13.6% 3.8% TOTAL CHILDREN 20 91 7.5% 34.3% UNIT TYPE BDRIBTH 1/1 2/2 3/2 RENTS $715 $855 $885 Miramonte 290 420 28 38 11 Ranch Cucamonga (909) 944-8494 _J_u_!!a__D__e_y_e[~a__u_x . . 1989~ .............~:4 ......._9.7%_ ..1~.!°?_o ....3.8% 22 99 1 / 1 2/2 3/2 7.6% 34.1% Sierra Heights 265 397 27 38 12 20 Ranch Cucamonga (909) 466-5500 Angela Tkocs 1991 1.5 10.2% 14.3% 4.5% 7.5% AVERAGE 273 387 27 37 11 21 1,4 9.8% 13.7% 4.0% 7.6% 97 36.6% 96 35,0% 1/1 2/2 3/2 $605 $735 $925 $625 $855 $1,025 $803 PROJECTED Mark Taylor, Inc. 264 371 26 36 11 20 92 Ranch Cucamonga Base Line Road 1.4 9.8% 13.7% 4.0% 7.6% 35.0% Netes; The above communities were selected based on size, demographics and amenities as a comparison for rents and to determine the probable number of residents and children the new community will generate. The projected figures for the Mark Taylor development were created by applying the above averages towards the anticipated number of units. 1/1 2/2 ~'/2 AVERAGE $73O $875 $1,025 $877 MTMSCt .WK4 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 15766, A CONDOMINIUM SUBDIVISION OF ONE LOT FOR 264 APARTMENTS ON 22.2 ACRES OF LAND IN THE MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (8-14 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE), APPROVING THE VACATION OF RAILROAD AVENUE SOUTH AND THE EAST COLLECTOR STREET KNOWN AS HANLEY AVENUE, AND APPROVING TREE REMOVAL PERMIT 96-13, LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF BASE LINE ROAD, APPROXIMATELY 800 FEET WEST OF VICTORIA PARK LANE, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 227-091-14 AND 15 AND 227-111-12 AND 13. A. Recitals. 1. Mark Taylor Inc. has filed an application for the approval of Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 15766, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Vesting Tentative Tract Map request is referred to as "the application." 2. On the October 1 and December 10, 1996, neighborhood meetings were, conducted by the applicant to explain the proposed project to area residents and solicit their input. All property owners within the public hearing notification area were invited to attend. 3. On November 13, 1996, and continued to January 8, 1997, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted duly noticed public hearings on the application and concluded said hearings on that date. 4. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced public hearings on November 13, 1996, and January 8, 1997, 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 Base Line Road, approximately 800 feet west of Victoria Park Lane, with a street frontage of 800 feet and lot depth of 1,100 feet and presently contains an abandoned vineyard; and b. The property to the north of the subject site is a 40-foot wide strip of vacant land known as "Railroad Avenue South" proposed to be vacated, an unused rail corridor, and single family homes; the property to the south consists of a winery; the property to the east is apartments and a shopping center; and the property to the west is a mini-storage facility; and c. The project is proposed to include a vacant parcel owned by the City's Redevelopment Agency along the easterly boundary, which includes an easement for a rail spur proposed to be vacated; and PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. VTT 15766 - MARK TAYLOR January 8, 1997 Page 2 d. The project design includes a 7-foot high sound attenuation wall along Base Line Road consistent with the acoustical analysis (Bricken, August 22, 1996); and e. The project design is consistent with the Victoria Community Plan, including, but not limited to, the use of the Victoria Community Plan's theme wall treatment along Base Line Road; and f. The project design includes 57 percent common open space and 58 percent usable open space; and g. The proposed density of 11.9 dwelling units per acre is consistent with the Medium Residential District (8-14 dwelling units per acre) of the Victoria Community Plan; and h. The vacation of Railroad Avenue South and the east collector street, known as Hanley Avenue, is consistent with the General Plan; and I. The project design includes a private drainage system to collect all surface water runoff into catch basins that will connect with the public storm drain system; and j. The project design includes a minimum 20-foot landscape buffer and 6-foot high decorative wall around the perimeter; and k. The affected school districts have submitted written comments consistent with the recommended conditions of approval requiring the developer to participate in the high school Mello-Roos District and payment of school fees to the elementary school district; and I. The project has been designed with a minimum 200-foot setback from the nearest single family residence and pad grades 11-12 feet lower than the single family residences to the north. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced public hearings and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. The tentative tract is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, and Victoria Community Plan; and b. The design or improvements of the tentative tract is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, and Victoria Community Plan; and c. The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed; and d. The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage and avoidable injury to humans and wildlife or their habitat; and e. The tentative tract is not likely to cause serious public health problems; and f. The design of the tentative tract will not conflict with any easement acquired by the public at large, now of record, for access through or use of the property within the proposed subdivision. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. VTT 15766 - MARK TAYLOR January 8, 1997 Page 3 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Negative Declaration, together with all wdtten 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 mitigated 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 hearings, 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. Planning Division 1) Approval of Vesting Tentative Tract No. 15766 is granted subject to the applicant's obtaining ownership of Railroad Avenue South and the property to the east, Assessor's Parcel No. 227-111-12, and the vacation of the rail spur easement located thereon. Engineering Division 1) Railroad Avenue South and the east collector street, Hanley Avenue, shall be vacated and incorporated as part of the project. 2) Verification of ownership change or letter of intent from the City of Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency stating approval and pending ownership change for the property to the east, Assessor's Parcel No. 227-111-12, under current ownership by the City of Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency, as shown within the project boundary. 3) Construct Base Line Road full width from Day Creek Boulevard (future) to the existing limit of full-width improvements at Hanley Avenue, including, but not limited to, curb, gutter, asphalt paving, sidewalk, street lights, street trees, median island, bike trail (Class II), and all necessary transitions both east and west of the project limits, pursuant PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. VTT15766- MARK TAYLOR JanuaW 8,1997 Page 4 4) 5) 6) 7) 8) to City standards and to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Also, provide the following: a) Median island construction shall also include full landscaping in accordance with the Base Line Road Master Plan. b) Traffic Signal Improvements - install conduits (with pull rope), including interconnect conduit, pull boxes, and poles for future traffic signal at Base Line Road and Hanley Avenue. 9) Construct Hanley Avenue full width including, but not limited to, curb, gutter, asphalt paving, sidewalk, street lights, and street trees, pursuant to City standards and to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Parkway improvements may be deferred on the easterly side with the exception of street lights. The existing secondary access to Base Line Road shall be abandoned and the access realigned and constructed to Hanley Avenue as shown on the tentative tract map. Right-of-way dedication of 66 feet, including the cul-de-sac, as shown on the tentative tract map, shall be provided. The Developer shall make a good faith effort to acquire off-site property interests necessary to construct the required public improvements along Hanley Avenue, as shown on the tentative tract map, 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 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 the Developer's cost. The appraiser shall have been approved by the City prior to commencement of the appraisal. A non-refundable deposit shall be paid to the City, covering the estimated cost of operating all new street lights during the first six months of operation, pdor to building permit issuance or approval of the Final Map, whichever occurs first. No median breaks will be allowed between Victoria Park Lane and Day Creek Boulevard (future), except at Hanley Avenue. Gated driveways are to be in accordance with the City's gated driveway entrance design guide for turnaround area. Base Line Road and Hanley Avenue to be posted with R 26(s) "NO STOPPING ANY TIME" signs. The sidewalk along the Hanley Avenue cul-de-sac shall be property-line adjacent. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. VTT15766- MARK TAYLOR Januaw 8,1997 Page 5 lO) On-site drainage shall be collected by a private drainage facility to the satisfaction of the Building Official. Connection to a public drainage facility or outletting into the public right-of-way shall be to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Building & Safety Division 1) 2) Provide private drainage easement at the north property line. No drainage over slope is allowed (see Section A-A); collect and discharge. Submit final hydrology report prior to issuance of any permits. Proof of right-of-entry to do work, if there is any work on surrounding properties, shall be provided prior to issuance of grading permit. 3) Positive drainage away from buildings shall be provided. Environmental Mitigation 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 7) Extend the existing storm drain in Base Line Road west of Hanley Avenue to connect with the catch basins at Victoria Station and remove the existing interim storm drains across Base Line Road. 8) Tree Removal Permit No. 96-13 is hereby approved and shall be valid for a period of 90 days starting from the date of final map recordation or issuance of any grading or building permits, whichever comes first, subject to extension by the Planning Division. Developer shall replace removed trees with Eucalyptus Maculata (Spotted Gum), minimum 15-gallon size, and spaced at 8 feet on center to maintain the windrow character along the northerly boundary. Developer shall follow all recommendations of the acoustical analysis (Bricken, August 22, 1996), including, but not limited to, constructing 6-foot high sound barriers on all south facing private balconies of the five buildings along Base Line Road and special glazing for windows and sliding glass doors in certain units. Install a stop sign for egress at the project's main entry to Base Line Road prior to occupancy. Provide minimum 25-foot radius curb returns to Base Line Road at its intersection with project's main entry and with Hanley Avenue (Street "A"). Provide a minimum 150-foot inbound left turn lane for eastbound left turn traffic at the intersection of Base Line Road and Hanley Avenue. Construct Base Line Road full width on the northerly side from Hanley Avenue to the westerly tract boundary. Developer shall contribute a fair share towards area-wide improvements. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. VTT15766- MARK TAYLOR Januaw 8,1997 Page 6 Project shall be subject to Mello-Roos Community Facilities District requirements for fire services. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 8TH DAY OF JANUARY 1997. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: E. David Barker, Chairman ATTEST: Brad Buller, Secretary 1, Brad Buller, Secretary for 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 8th day of January 1997, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STANDARD CON DITIONS PROJECT#: SUBJECT: APPLICANT: LOCATION: VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT 15766 DEVELOPMENT OF 264 APARTMENTS W/CONDOMINIUM SUBDIVISION MAP MARK TAYLOR, INC. NORTH SIDE OF BASE LINE ROAD, WEST OF VICTORIA PARK LANE ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DIVISION, (909) 477-2750, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: A. Time Limits completion Date 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. / / / / 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 finance 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 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. Pdor 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 Distdct for 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 of building permits, whichever comes first. Further, if the affected school district has not formed a Mello-Roos Community Facilities Distdct within twelve months from the date of approval of the project and prior to the recordation of the final map or issuance of building permits for said project, this condition shall be deemed null and void. / / This condition shall be waived if 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. SC - 10/96 Project No. VTT 15766 Completion Date Prior to recordation of the final map or prior to the 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 the issuance of permits in the case of all other residential projects. / / B. Site Development The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the approved plans which include site plans, architectural elevations, exterior materials and colors, landscaping, sign program, and grading on file in the Planning Division, the conditions contained herein, Development Code regulations, and the Victoria Community Plan. / / 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 facilities shall not commence until such time as all Uniform Building Code and State Fire Marshal 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 buildings 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 the 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 prier 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 or Specific Plans in effect at the time of building permit issuance. / / A detailed on-site lighting plan, including a photometric diagram, shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planner and Police Department (477-2800) prior 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. / / 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 of the City Planner. / / All building numbers and individual units shall be identified in a clear and concise manner, including proper illumination. / / / / 10. All parkways, open areas, and landscaping shall be permanently maintained by the property owner, homeowners' association, or other means acceptable to the City. Building Design SC - 10/96 An alternative energy system is required to provide domestic hot water 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 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. / / Project No. VTT 15766 Coml~letion Date 4o Pdor to recordation of the final map or prior to the 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 the issuance of permits in the case of all other residential projects. / / B. Site Development The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the approved plans which include site plans, architectural elevations, exterior materials and colors, landscaping, sign program, and grading on file in the Planning Division, the conditions contained herein, Development Code regulations, and the Victoria Community Plan. / / Pdor 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 facilities shall not commence until such time as all Uniform Building Code and State Fire Marshal 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 buildings 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 the 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 or Specific Plans in effect at the time of building permit issuance. A detailed on-site lighting plan, including a photometric diagram, shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planner and Police Department (477-2800) prior 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. / / / / 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 of the City Planner. / / All building numbers and individual units shall be identified in a clear and concise manner, including proper illumination. / / 10. SC - 10/96 All parkways, open areas, and landscaping shall be permanently maintained by the property owner, homeowners' association, or other means acceptable to the City. The Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&R's) 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 2 Eo ---~ City Engineer. The Homeowners' Association shall submit to the Planning Division a list of the name and address of their officers on or before January 1 of each and every year and whenever said information changes. Building Design Project No. VTT 15766 - ~-~,_ Completion Date An alternative energy system is required to provide domestic hot water 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 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 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 (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. The Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions shall prohibit recreational vehicle parking on interior circulation aisles other than in designated recreational vehicle 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. Bicycle storage spaces shall be provided in all commercial, office, industrial, and multifamily residential projects or more than 10 units. Minimum spaces equal to five percent of the required automobile parking spaces or three bicycle storage spaces, whichever is greater. After the first 50 bicycle storage spaces are provided, additional storage spaces required are 2.5 percent of the required automobile parking spaces. Warehouse distribution uses shall provide bicycle storage spaces at a rate of 2.5 percent on the required automobile parking spaces with a minimum of a 3-bike rack. In no case shall the total number of bicycle parking spaces required exceed 100. Where this results in a fraction of 0.5 or greater, the number shall be rounded off to the higher whole number. Landscaping A detailed landscape and irrigation plan, including slope planting and model home landscaping in this case of residential development, shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect and / / SC - 10/96 3 Project No. 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 (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. The Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions shall prohibit recreational vehicle parking on interior circulation aisles other than in designated recreational vehicle 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. Bicycle storage spaces shall be provided in all commercial, office, industrial, and multifamily residential projects or more than 10 units. Minimum spaces equal to five percent of the required automobile parking spaces or three bicycle storage spaces, whichever is greater. After the first 50 bicycle storage spaces are provided, additional storage spaces required are 2.5 percent of the required automobile parking spaces. Warehouse distribution uses shall provide bicycle storage spaces at a rate of 2.5 percent on the required automobile parking spaces with a minimum of a 3-bike rack. In no case shall the total number of bicycle parking spaces required exceed 100. Where this results in a fraction of 0.5 or greater, the number shall be rounded off to the higher whole number. Landscaping A detailed landscape and irrigation plan, including slope planting and model home landscaping in this 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. A minimum of 45 trees per gross acre, comprised of the following sizes, shall be provided within the project: 10% - 36-inch box or larger, 10% - 24- inch box or larger, and 80% - 15-gallon. Within 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. All private slopes in 5 feet 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. VTT 15766 Coml~letion Date / / / / / / / I / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / Fo Project No. 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 per each 150 sq. ft. 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 2:1 or greater slope shall also include one 5-gallon or larger size tree per each 250 sq. if. 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 multi-family residential and non-residential development, property owners are responsible for the continual maintenance of all landscaped areas on-site, as well as contiguous planted areas within the public fight-of-way. All landscaped areas shall be kept free from weeds and debris and maintained in healthy and thriving condition, and shall receive regular pruning, fertilizing, mowing, and trimming. Any damaged, dead, diseased, or decaying plant matedal shall be replaced within 30 days from the date of damage. The final 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 for consistency with any parkway landscaping plan which may be required by the Engineering Division. Special landscape features such as mounding, alluvial rock, specimen size trees, meandering sidewalks (with horizontal change), and intensified landscaping, is required along Base Line Road. Landscaping and irrigation systems required to be installed within the public right-of-way on the perimeter of this project area shall be continuously maintained by the developer. 10. All walls shall be provided with decorative treatment. If located in public maintenance areas, the design shall be coordinated with the Engineering Division. 11. 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. 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. Directory monument sign(s) shall be provided for apartment, condominium, or town homes prior to occupancy and shall require separate application and approval by the Planning Division prior to issuance of building permits. VTT 15766 Coml~letion Date / / / / / / / / I / / / / / / / / / SC- 10/96 G. Environmental Project No, 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 mitigation measures contained in the final report. Other Agencies 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. VTT 15766 Completion Date / / / / APPLICANTS SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION, (909) 477-2710, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: I. Site Development The applicant shall comply with the latest adopted Uniform Building Code, Uniform Mechanical 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 exislJng 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, Transportation Development Fee, Permit and Plan Checking Fees, and School Fees. Street addresses shall be provided by the Building Official, after tract/parcel map recordation and pdor to issuance of building permits. 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 perform such work. 3. The final grading plans shall be completed and approved prior to issuance of building permits. / / / / / / / / / / / / SC - 10/96 $ Project No. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE ENGINEERING DIVISION, (909) 477-2740, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: K. Dedication and Vehicular Access 1. Dedication shall be made of the following rights-of-way on the perimeter streets (measured from Lo o street centerline): 60 total feet on 66 total feet on Base Line Road for Right Turn Lane Hanle¥ Avenue includinq cul-de-sac Vehicular access rights shall be dedicated to the City for the following streets, except for approved openings: Base Line Road. All existing easements lying within future rights-of-way shall be quitclaimed or delineated on the final map. Easements for public sidewalks and/or street trees placed outside the public right-of-way shall be dedicated to the City. 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. Street Improvements 1. Construct the following perimeter street improvements including, but not limited to: Curb & A.C. Side- Drive Street Street Comm Median Bike Other Street Name Gutter Pvmt w-elk Appr. Lights Trees Trail Island Trail Base Line Road X X,b X,c X X X X,a X X Hanley Avenue X X X X X X X VTT 15766 Coml~letion Dal:e / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / Notes: (a) Median island includes landscaping and irrigation on meter. (b) Pavement reconstruction and overlays will be determined during plan check. (c) If so marked, sidewalk shall be curvilinear per STD. 114. (d) If so marked, an in-lieu of construction fee shall be provided for this item. See Special Conditions. Improvement Plans and Construction: Street improvement plans, including street trees, street lights, and intersection safety lights on future signal poles, and traffic signal plans shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and 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 private street improvements, prior to final map approval or the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. Prior to any work being performed 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. / / / / SC. 10/96 Project No. V'rT 15766 Coml~letion Date Pavement striping, marking, traffic signing, street name signing, traffic signal conduit, and interconnect conduit shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Signal conduit with pull boxes shall be installed with any new construction or reconstruction project along major or secondary streets and at intersections for future traffic signals and interconnect wiring. Pull boxes shall be placed on both sides of the street at 3 feet outside of BCR, ECR or any other locations approved by the City Engineer. / / / / Notes: (1) Pull boxes shall be No. 6 at intersections and No. 5 along streets, a maximum of 200 feet apart, unless otherwise specified by the City Engineer. (2) Conduit shall be 3-inch (at intersections) or 2-inch (along streets) galvanized steel with pull rope or as specified. Handicapped access ramps shall be installed on all corners of intersections per City Standards or as directed by the City Engineer. / / t / Existing City roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times with adequate detours during construction. Street or lane closure permits are 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 satisfaction of the City Engineer. Concentrated drainage flows shall not cross sidewalks. Under sidewalk drains shall be installed to City Standards, except for single family residential lots. / / / / / / / / h. Street names shall be approved by the City Planner prior to submittal for first plan check. Street trees, a minimum of 15-gallon size or larger, shall be installed per City Standards in accordance with the City's street tree program. Intersection line of sight designs shall be reviewed by the City Engineer for conformance with adopted policy. On collector or larger streets, lines of sight shall be plotted for all project intersections, including driveways. Local residential street intersections and commercial or industrial driveways may have lines of sight plotted as required. M. Public Maintenance Areas 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 landscaped parkways, medians, paseos, easements, trails or other areas shall be annexed into the Landscape Maintenance District: Median island on Base Line Road. / / 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. / / All required public landscaping and irrigation systems shall be continuously maintained by the developer until accepted by the City. Median island and parkway landscaping on the following street(s) shall conform to the results of the respective Beautification Master Plan: Base Line Road. / / / / N. Drainage and Flood Control SC - 10/96 Project No. VTT 15766 Completion Date 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. / / O. Utilities 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. Water and sewer plans shall be designed and constructed to meet the requirements of the Cucamonga County Water Distdct (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 permits, whichever occurs first. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE FIRE PREVENTION/NEW CONSTRUCTION UNIT, (909) 477-2730, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: / / / / / / P. General Fire Protection Conditions 1. Mello Roos Community Facilities District requirements shall apply to this project. / / / / I / / / / / / / Fire flow requirement shall be 2,500 gallons per minute. a. A fire flow shall be conducted by the buildeddeveloper and witnessed by fire department personnel pdor to water plan approval. For the purpose of final acceptance, an additional fire flow test of the on-site hydrants shall be conducted by the builder/developer and witnessed by the fire department personnel after construction and prior to occupancy. Fire hydrants are required. All required public or on-site fire hydrants shall be installed, flushed and operable prior to delivery of any combustible building materials on site (i.e., lumber, roofing materials, etc.). Hydrants flushing shall be witnessed by fire department personnel. Existing fire hydrant locations shall be provided prior to water plan approval. Required hydrants, if any, will be determined by the Fire District. Fire District standards require a 6" riser with a 4" and a 2-1/2" outlet. Substandard hydrants shall be upgraded to meet this standard. Contact the Fire Safety Division for specifications on approved brands and model numbers. Prior to the issuance of building permits for combustible construction, evidence shall be submitted to the Fire Distdct that an approved temporary water supply for fire protection is available, pending completion of required fire protection system. Hydrant reflective markers (blue dots) shall be required for all hydrants and installed prior to final inspection. An automatic fire extinguishing system(s) will be required as noted below: X Per Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District Ordinance 15. X Other: 1994 Uniform Buildinc~ Code. / / / / / / / / SC - 10/96 Note: Special sprinkler densities are required for such hazardous operations as woodworking, plastics manufacturing, spray painting, flammable liquids storage, high piled Project No. stock, etc. Contact the Fire Safety Division to determine if sprinkler system is adequate for proposed operations. 8. Sprinkler system monitoring shall be installed and operational immediately upon completion of sprinkler system. 9. A fire alarm system(s) shall be required as noted below: X Per Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District Ordinance 15. 10. Roadways within project shall comply with the Fire District's fire lane standards, as noted: X All roadways. X Other: See attached Ordinance No. 22 for access/width requirements. 11. Fire department access shall be amended to facilitate emergency apparatus. 12. Emergency access, a minimum of 26 feet wide, shall be provided, and maintained free and clear of obstructions at all times, during construction in accordance with Fire District requirements. 13. All trees and shrubs planted in any median shall be kept trimmed a minimum of 14'6" from ground up so as not to impede fire apparatus. 14. A building directory shall be required, as noted below: X Lighted directory within 20 feet of main entrance(s). 15. Gated/restricted entry(s) require installation of a Knox rapid entry key system. Contact the Fire Safety Division for specific details and ordering information. 16. Plan check fees in the amount of $0 have been paid. An additional $. 125.00 shall be paid: Prior to final plan approval. Note: Separate plan check fees for fire protection systems (sprinklers, hood systems, alarms, etc.) and/or any consultant reviews will be assessed upon submittal of plans. 17. Plans shall be submitted and approved prior to construction in accordance with 1994 UBC, UFC, UPC, UMC, NEC, and RCFD Standards 22 and 15. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, (909) 477-2800, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: Q. Security Lighting 1. All parking, common, and storage areas shall have minimum maintained 1-foot candle power. These areas should be lighted from sunset to sunrise and on photo sensored cell. 2. All buildings shall have minimal security lighting to eliminate dark areas around the buildings, with direct lighting to be provided by all entryways. Lighting shall be consistent around the entire development. Lighting in exterior areas shall be in vandal-resistant fixtures. Ro Security Hardware SC - 10/96 VTT 15766 Coml~tetion Date / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / So To Project No. 1. A secondary locking device shall be installed on all sliding glass doors. One-inch single cylinder dead bolts shall be installed on all entrance doors. If windows are within 40 inches of any locking device, tempered glass or a double cylinder dead bolt shall be used. All garage or rolling doors shall have slide bolts or some type of secondary locking devices. Security Fencing 1. When utilizing security gates, a Knox box sub-master system security device shall be used since fire and law enforcement can access these devices. Windows All sliding glass windows shall have secondary locking devices and should not be able to be lifted from frame or track in any manner. Building Numbering Numbers and the backgrounds shall be of contrasting color and shall be reflective for nighttime visibility. At the entrances of complex, an illuminated map or directory of project shall be erected with vandal-resistant cover. The directory shall not contain names of tenants, but only address numbers, street names, and their locations in the complex. North shall be at the top and so indicated. Sign shall be in compliance with Sign Ordinance, including an application for a Sign Permit and approval by the Planning Division. All developments shall submit a 8 1/2" x 11" sheet with the numbering pattern of all multi-tenant developments to the Police Department. VTT 15766 Comoletion Date / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / SC - 10/96 10 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DESIGN REVIEW FOR VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 15766, LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF BASE LINE ROAD, APPROXIMATELY 800 FEET WEST OF VICTORIA PARK LANE IN THE MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (8-14 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE), AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 227-091-14 AND 15 AND 227-111-12 AND 13. A. Recitals. 1. Mark Taylor Inc. has filed an application for the Design Review of Vesting Tentative Tract No. 15766, 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 November 13, 1996, and January 8, 1997, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga held meetings to consider the application. 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced meetings on November 13, 1996, and January 8, 1997, including written and oral staff reports, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to property located on the north side of Base Line Road, approximately 800 feet west of Victoria Park Lane, with a street frontage of approximately 800 feet, a lot depth of approximately 1,100 feet, and presently contains an abandoned vineyard; and b. The property to the north of the subject site is a 40-foot wide strip of vacant land known as "Railroad Avenue South" proposed to be vacated, an unused rail corridor, and single family homes; the property to the south consists of a winery; the property to the east is apartments and a shopping center; and the property to the west is a mini-storage facility; and c. The project is proposed to include a vacant parcel owned by the City's Redevelopment Agency along the easterly boundary, which includes an easement for a rail spur proposed to be vacated; and d. The project design includes a 7-foot high sound attenuation wall along Base Line Road consistent with the acoustical analysis (Bricken, August 22, 1996); and e. The project design is consistent with the Victoria Community Plan, including, but not limited to, the use of the Victoda Comm.unity Plan's theme wall treatment along Base Line Road; and f. The project design includes 57 percent common open space and 58 percent usable openspace;and ~L 77 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. DR FOR VTT15766- MARK TAYLOR January 8,1997 Page 2 g. The proposed density of 11.9 dwelling units per acre is consistent with the Medium Residential District (8-14 dwelling units per acre) of the Victoria Community Plan; and h. The vacation of Railroad Avenue South and the east collector street, known as Hanley Avenue, is consistent with the General Plan; and i. The project design includes a private drainage system to collect all surface water runoff into catch basins that will connect with the public storm drain system; and j. The project design includes a minimum 20-foot landscape buffer and 6-foot high decorative wall around the perimeter. k. The affected school districts have submitted written comments consistent with the recommended conditions of approval requiring the developer to participate in the high school Mello-Roos District and payment of school fees to the elementary school district. I. The project has been designed with a minimum 200-foot setback from the nearest single family residence and pad grades 11-12 feet lower than the single family residences to the north. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced meetings on November 13, 1996, and January 8, 1997, and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. The proposed project is consistent with the objectives of the General Plan; and b. 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. The proposed design is in compliance with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code; and d. 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 and a mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared for Vesting Tentative Tract 15766 and adopted by separate Resolution of this Commission. 4. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, and 3 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. Planning Division 1) Approval of Design Review for Vesting Tentative Tract No. 15766 is granted subject to the applicant's obtaining ownership of Railroad Avenue South and the property to the east, Assessor's Parcel No. 227-111-12 and the vacation of the rail spur easement located thereon. 2) Provide 225 square feet of private open space within patios for ground floor units and 150 square feet for upper story units (RCMC 17.08.040.C.). ..~ ~ PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. DR FOR VTT15766- MARK TAYLOR January 8,1997 Page $ 3) Provide 125 cubic feet of exterior lockable storage space off patio area or within garage/carports (RCMC 17.08.040. R. 1 .). 4) Provide washeddryer hookups inside all units (RCMC 17.08.040.R.2.). 5) 6) 7) 8) 9) 10) 11) 12) 13) 14) Within garages, each car space shall be separated with a solid wall except where two or more spaces are designated to a single dwelling unit. For single garage car spaces, the inside dimension shall be increased to a minimum of 10 feet by 20 feet for convenience of use (RCMC 17.08.090.C.4.b.). 15) 16) 17) All appliances and fixtures shall be energy conserving (RCMC 17.08.040.1.2). 18) All required visitor parking spaces shall be clearly marked with signs, such as pavement markings and freestanding signs. A minimum of 66 visitor parking spaces shall be provided. Visitor parking shall be provided within 150 feet of all units (RCMC 17.08.040. L.). RV parking spaces shall be clearly marked with signs, such ,as pavement markings and freestanding signs. Provide a site directory monument sign at both project entrances to direct visitors and emergency vehicles to buildings. The signs can be up to 12 square feet in area, with a maximum of 8 feet high and must be illuminated for legibility 24 hours a day. Contents shall include building locations, ddveway locations, address of each building, and fire hydrant locations (RCMC 14.20.080). Any common mailbox structures shall be designed to architecturally match buildings. Provide climbing vines along northerly wall with small openings in base of wall to encourage vines to grow on north side of wall to discourage graffiti. Construct sidewalk connection, with lockable gate, for access to future Community Trail planned along the adjoining rail corridor to the north. Provide decorative cap (i.e., stucco over) on stairways to match patio wall cap. Replace vinyl lattice on carport ends with 2- to 3-inch metal tubing espalier. Carport fascia profile and texture shall match apartments. Garage door pattern shall be varied. Replace wood lattice on Building 2A with 2- to 3-inch metal tubing espalier. Add window on right-hand side of first floor of Building 2B. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. DR FOR VTT 15766 - MARK TAYLOR January 8, 1997 Page 4 19) Provide subtle stucco color variations, such as varying between buildings or using as accent on pop-out elements. Engineering Division 1) Railroad Avenue South and the east collector street, Hanley Avenue, shall be vacated and incorporated as part of the project. 2) Verification of ownership change or letter of intent from the City of Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency stating approval and pending ownership change for the property to the east, Assessor's Parcel No. 227-111-12, under current ownership by the City of Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency, as shown within the project boundary. 3) Construct Base Line Road full width from Day Creek Boulevard (future) to the existing limit of full-width improvements at Hanley Avenue, including, but not limited to, curb, gutter, asphalt paving, sidewalk, street lights, street trees, median island, bike trail (Class II), and all necessary transitions both east and west of the project limits, except .as otherwise modified by the City Engineer, pursuant to City standards. Also, provide the following: a) Median island construction shall also include full landscaping in accordance with the Base Line Road Master Plan. b) Traffic Signal Improvements - install conduits (with pull rope), including interconnect conduit, pull boxes, and poles for future traffic signal at Base Line Road and Hanley Avenue. 4) Construct Hanley Avenue full width including, but not limited to, curb, gutter, asphalt paving, sidewalk, street lights, and street trees, pursuant to City standards and to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Parkway improvements may be deferred on the easterly side with the exception of street lights. The existing secondary access to Base Line Road shall be abandoned and the access realigned and constructed to Hanley Avenue as shown on the tentative tract map. Right-of-way dedication of 66 feet, including the cul-de-sac, as shown on the tentative tract map, shall be provided. The Developer shall make a good faith effort to acquire off-site property interests necessary to construct the required public improvements along Hanley Avenue, as shown on the tentative tract map, 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 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 the Developer's cost. The appraiser shall have been approved by the City pdor to commencement of the appraisal. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. DR FOR VTT 15766 - MARK TAYLOR January 8, 1997 Page 6 o 4) Install a stop sign for egress at the project's main entry to Base Line Road prior to occupancy. 5) Provide minimum 25-foot radius curb returns to Base Line Road at its intersection with project's main entry and with Hanley Avenue (Street "A"). 6) Provide a minimum 150-foot inbound left turn lane for eastbound left turn traffic at the intersection of Base Line Road and Hanley Avenue. 7) Construct Base Line Road full width on the northerly side from Hanley Avenue to the westerly tract boundary. 8) Developer shall contribute a fair share towards area-wide improvements. 9) Project shall be subject to Mello-Roos Community Facilities District requirements for fire services. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 8TH DAY OF JANUARY 1997. 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 8th day of January 1997 by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. DR FOR VTT15766- MARK TAYLOR Janua~ 8,1997 Page 5 5) A non-refundable deposit shall be paid to the City, covering the estimated cost of operating all new street lights during the first six months of operation, pdor to building permit issuance or approval of the Final Map, whichever occurs first. 6) No median breaks will be allowed between Victoria Park Lane and Day Creek Boulevard (future), except at Hanley Avenue. 7) Gated driveways are to be in accordance with the City's gated driveway entrance design guide for turnaround area. 8) Base Line Road and Hanley Avenue to be posted with R 26(s) "NO STOPPING ANY TIME" signs. 9) The sidewalk along the Hanley Avenue cul-de-sac shall be property-line adjacent. lO) On-site drainage shall be collected by a private drainage facility to the satisfaction of the Building Official. Connection to a public drainage facility or outletting into the public right-of-way shall be to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Building & Safety Division 1) Provide private drainage easement at the north property line. No drainage over slope is allowed (see Section A-A); collect and discharge. Submit final hydrology report prior to issuance of any permits. 2) Proof of right-of-entry to do work, if there is any work on surrounding properties, shall be provided prior to issuance of grading permit. 3) Positive drainage away from buildings shall be provided. Environmental Mitigation 1) Extend the existing storm drain in Base Line Road west of Hanley Avenue to connect with the catch basins at Victoria Station and remove the existing interim storm drains across Base Line Road. 2) Tree Removal Permit No. 96-13 is hereby approved and shall be valid for a period of 90 days starting from the date of final map recordation or issuance of any grading or building permits, whichever comes first, subject to extension by the Planning Division. Developer shall replace removed trees with Eucalyptus Maculata (Spotted Gum), minimum 15-gallon size, and spaced at 8 feet on center to maintain the windrow character along the northerly boundary. 3) Developer shall follow all recommendations of the acoustical analysis (Bricken, August 22, 1996), including, but not limited to, constructing 6-foot high sound barriers on all south facing private balconies of the five buildings along Base Line Road and special glazing for windows and sliding glass doors in certain units. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STANDARD CON DITIONS PROJECT#: SUBJECT: APPLICANT: LOCATION: VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT 15766 DEVELOPMENT OF 264 APARTMENTS W/CONDOMINIUM SUBDIVISION MAP MARK TAYLOR, INC. NORTH SIDE OF BASE LINE ROAD, VVEST OF VICTORIA PARK LANE ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT, APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DIVISION, (909) 477-2750, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: Ao Time Limits Completion Date 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. 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 finance 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 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. 3. 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 for 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 of building permits, whichever comes first. Further, if the affected school district has not formed a Mello-Roos Community Facilities District within twelve months from the date of approval of the project and prior to the recordation of the final map or issuance of building permits for said project, this condition shall be deemed null and void. SC - 10/96 This condition shall be waived if 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. Project No. v-l-r 15766 Completion Date Prior to recordation of the final map or prior to the 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 the issuance of permits in the case of all other residential projects. / / B. Site Development The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the approved plans which include site plans, architectural elevations, exterior materials and colors, landscaping, sign program, and grading on file in the Planning Division, the conditions contained herein, Development Code regulations, and the Victoria Community Plan. / / 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 facilities shall not commence until such time as all Uniform Building Code and State Fire Marshal 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 buildings 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 the 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 or Specific Plans in effect at the time of building permit issuance. / / A detailed on-site lighting plan, including a photometric diagram, shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planner and Police Department (477-2800) prior 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. / / 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 of the City Planner. / / All building numbers and individual units shall be identified in a clear and concise manner, including proper illumination. / / 10. SC - 10/96 All parkways, open areas, and landscaping shall be permanently maintained by the property __/ owner, homeowners' association, or other means acceptable to the City. The Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&R's) 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 2 City Engineer. The Homeowners' Association shall submit to the Planning Division a list of the name and address of their officers on or before January I of each and every year and whenever said information changes. C. Building Design Project No. VTT 15766 ' ~ -~ .-~ompletlon Date An alternative energy system is required to provide domestic hot water 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 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 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 (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. I / 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. The Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions shall prohibit recreational vehicle parking on interior circulation aisles other than in designated recreational vehicle 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. Bicycle storage spaces shall be provided in all commercial, office, industrial, and multifamily residential projects or more than 10 units. Minimum spaces equal to five percent of the required automobile parking spaces or three bicycle storage spaces, whichever is greater. After the first 50 bicycle storage spaces are provided, additional storage spaces required are 2.5 percent of the required automobile parking spaces. Warehouse distribution uses shall provide bicycle storage spaces at a rate of 2.5 percent on the required automobile parking spaces with a minimum of a 3-bike rack. In no case shall the total number of bicycle parking spaces required exceed 100. Where this results in a fraction of 0.5 or greater, the number shall be rounded off to the higher whole number. Landscaping A detailed landscape and irrigation plan, including slope planting and model home landscaping in this case of residential development, shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect and / / SC - 10196 3 Project No. Prior to recordation of the final map or prior to the 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 the issuance of permits in the case of all other residential projects. Site Development The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the approved plans which include site plans, architectural elevations, exterior materials and colors, landscaping, sign program, and grading on file in the Planning Division, the conditions contained herein, Development Code regulations, and the Victoda Community Plan. 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 facilities shall not commence until such time as all Uniform Building Code and State Fire Marshal regulations have been complied with. Prior to occupancy, plans shall be submitted to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection Distdct and the Building and Safety Division to show compliance. The buildings 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 the 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 or Specific Plans in effect at the time of building permit issuance. A detailed on-site lighting plan, including a photometric diagram, shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planner and Police Department (477-2800) prior 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. 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, herming, and/or landscaping to the satisfaction of the City Planner. All building numbers and individual units shall be identified in a clear and concise manner, including proper illumination. 10. All parkways, open areas, and landscaping shall be permanently maintained by the property owner, homeowners' association, or other means acceptable to the City. Building Design An alternative energy system is required to provide domestic hot water for heating any swimming pool or spa, unless other alternative enei'gy systems are demonstrated to be of equivalent VTT 15766 Coml~letion Date / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / Project No, capacity and efficiency. All swimming pools installed at the time of 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 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 (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. The Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions shall prohibit recreational vehicle parking on interior circulation aisles other than in designated recreational vehicle parking areas. Plans for any secudty 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. Bicycle storage spaces shall be provided in all commercial, office, industrial, and multifamily residential projects or more than 10 units. Minimum spaces equal to five percent of the required automobile parking spaces or three bicycle storage spaces, whichever is greater. After the first 50 bicycle storage spaces are provided, additional storage spaces required are 2.5 percent of the required automobile parking spaces. Warehouse distribution uses shall provide bicycle storage spaces at a rate of 2.5 percent on the required automobile parking spaces with a minimum of a 3-bike rack. In no case shall the total number of bicycle parking spaces required exceed 100. Where this results in a fraction of 0.5 or greater, the number shall be rounded off to the higher whole number. Landscaping A detailed landscape and irrigation plan, including slope planting and model home landscaping in this 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. A minimum of 45 trees per gross acre, comprised of the following sizes, shall be provided within the project: 10% - 36-inch box or larger, 10% - 24- inch box or larger, and 80% - 15-gallon. Within 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 parkidg area at solar noon on August 21. VTT 15766 Com131etlon Date / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / SC - 10/96 Fo Project No. o All pdvate slopes in 5 feet 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. o All pdvate 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 per each 150 sq. if. of slope area, 1-cjallon 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 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 pdor to occupancy. For multi-family residential and non-residential development, property owners are responsible 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 debds and maintained in healthy and thriving condition, and shall receive regular pruning, fertilizing, mowing, and trimming. Any damaged, dead, diseased, or decaying plant matedal shall be replaced within 30 days from the date of damage. The final 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 for consistency with any parkway landscaping plan which may be required by the Engineering Division. Special landscape features such as mounding, alluvial rock, specimen size trees, meandering sidewalks (with horizontal change), and intensified landscaping, is required along Base Line Road. Landscaping and irrigation systems required to be installed within the public right-of-way on the perimeter of this project area shall be continuously maintained by the developer. 10. All walls shall be provided with decorative treatment. If located in public maintenance areas, the design shall be coordinated with the Engineering Division. 11. 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. 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. Directory monument sign(s) shall be provided for apartment, condominium, or town homes prior to occupancy and shall require separate application and approval by the Planning Division prior to issuance of building permits. VTT 15766 Completion Date / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / SC - 10/96 Project No. G. Environmental 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, vedfy 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 Agencies 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. V'FT' 15766 Completion Date / / / / APPLICANTS SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION, (909) 477-2710, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: I. Site Development The applicant shall comply with the latest adopted Uniform Building Code, Uniform Mechanical Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, National Electdc 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, Transportation Development Fee, Permit and Plan Checking Fees, and School Fees. Street addresses shall be provided by the Building Official, after tract/pamel map recordation and prior to issuance of building permits. J. Grading 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 perform such work. 3. The final grading plans shall be completed and approved prior to issuance of building permits. / / / / / / / / / / / / 5 '~ 4~/,,o Proiect No. ~PPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE ENGINEERING DIVISION, (909) 477-2740, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH i'HE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: K. Dedication and Vehicular Access Dedication shall be made of the following rights-of-way on the perimeter streets (measured from street centerline): 60 total feet on Base Line Road for Right Turn Lane 66 total feet on Hanlev Avenue including cul-de-sac Vehicular access rights shall be dedicated to the City for the following streets, except for approved openings: Base Line Road. All existing easements lying within future rights-of-way shall be quitclaimed or delineated on the final map. Easements for public sidewalks and/or street trees placed outside the public right-of-way shall be dedicated to the City. Additional street right-of-way shall be dedicated along dght tum 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. Street Improvements 1. Construct the following perimeter street improvements including, but not limited to: Cur'o & A.C. Side- Drive Street Street Comm Median Bike Other Street Name Gutter Pvmt walk Appr. Lights Trees Trail Island Trail Base Line Road X X,b X,c X X X X,a X X Hanley Avenue X X X X X X X VTT 15766 Coml}letion Date / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / SC - 10~96 Notes: (a) Median island includes landscaping and irrigation on meter. (b) Pavement reconstruction and overlays will be determined during plan check. (c) If so marked, sidewalk shall be curvilinear per STD. 114. (d) If so marked, an in-lieu of construction fee shall be provided for this item. See Special Conditions. Improvement Plans and Construction: Street improvement plans, including street trees, street lights, and intersection safety lights on future signal poles, and traffic signal plans shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and 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 private street improvements, prior to final map approval or the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. Prior to any work being performed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and a construction permit shall be obtaine.d from the City Engineer's Office in addition to any other permits required. / / / / Project No. VTT 15766 Completion Date Pavement striping, marking, traffic signing, street name signing, traffic signal conduit, and interconnect conduit shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. / / Signal conduit with pull boxes shall be installed with any new construction or reconstruction project along major or secondary streets and at intersections for future traffic signals and interconnect wiring. Pull boxes shall be placed on both sides of the street at 3 feet outside of BCR, ECR or any other locations approved by the City Engineer. / / Notes: (1) Pull boxes shall be No, 6 at intersections and No. 5 along streets, a maximum of 200 feet apart, unless otherwise specified by the City Engineer. (2) Conduit shall be 3-inch (at intersections) or 2-inch (along streets) galvanized steel with pull rope or as specified. e. Handicapped access ramps shall be installed on all corners of intersections per City __1__1__ Standards or as directed by the City Engineer. f. Existing City roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times with __1__1__ adequate detours during construction. Street or lane closure permits are 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 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 residential lots. h. Street names shall be approved by the City Planner prior to submittal for first plan check. __1__1__ Street trees, a minimum of 15-gallon size or larger, shall be installed per City Standards in accordance with the City's street tree program. / / Intersection line of sight designs shall be reviewed by the City Engineer for conformance with adopted policy. On collector or larger streets, lines of sight shall be plotted for all project intersections, including driveways. Local residential street intersections and commercial or industrial driveways may have lines of sight plotted as required. / / M. Public Maintenance Areas 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 landscaped parkways, medians, paseos, easements, trails or other areas shall be annexed into the Landscape Maintenance District: Median island on Base Line Road. / / A signed consent and waiver form to join and/or form the appropriate Landscape and Lighting Districts shall be filed with the City Engineer pdor to final map approval or issuance of building permits whichever occurs first. Formation costs shall be borne by the developer. / / All required public landscaping and irrigation systems shall be continuously maintained by the developer until accepted by the City. / / SC - 10/96 Median island and parkway landscaping on the following street(s) shall conform to the results of the respective Beautification Master Plan: Base Line Road. Project No. N. Drainage and Flood Control 1. 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. O. 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 (CCVVD), 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 permits, whichever occurs first. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE FIRE PREVENTION/NEW CONSTRUCTION UNIT, {909) 477-2730, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: P, General Fire Protection Conditions 1. Mello Roos Community Facilities District requirements shall apply to this project. 2. Fire flow requirement shall be 2,500 gallons per minute. a. A fire flow shall be conducted by the builder/developer and witnessed by fire department personnel prior to water plan approval. b. For the purpose of final acceptance, an additional fire flow test of the on-site hydrants shall be conducted by the builder/developer and witnessed by the fire department personnel after construction and prior to occupancy. 3. Fire hydrants are required. All required public or on-site fire hydrants shall be installed, flushed and operable prior to delivery of any combustible building materials on site (i.e., lumber, roofing materials, etc.). Hydrants flushing shall be witnessed by fire department personnel. 4. Existing fire hydrant locations shall be provided pdor to water plan approval. Required hydrants, if any, will be determined by the Fire District. Fire District standards require a 6" riser with a 4" and a 2-1/2" outlet. Substandard hydrants shall be upgraded to meet this standard. Contact the Fire Safety Division for specifications on approved brands and model numbers. 5. Prior to the issuance of building permits for combustible construction, evidence shall be submitted to the Fire District that an approved temporary water supply for fire protection is available, pending completion of required fire protection system. 6. Hydrant reflective markers (blue dots) shall be required for all hydrants and installed prior to final inspection. 7. An automatic fire extinguishing system(s) will be required as noted below: X Per Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protedtion District Ordinance 15. VTT 15766 Completion Date / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / P ro~'t No. X Other: 1994 Uniform Building Code. Note: Special sprinkler densities are required for such hazardous operations as woodworking, plastics manufacturing, spray painting, flammable liquids storage, high piled stock, etc. Contact the Fire Safety Division to determine if sprinkler system is adequate for proposed operations. 8. Sprinkler system monitoring shall be installed and operational immediately upon completion of sprinkler system. 9. A fire alarm system(s) shall be required as noted below: X Per Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District Ordinance 15. 10. Roadways within project shall comply with the Fire Distdct's fire lane standards, as noted: X All roadways. X Other: See attached Ordinance No. 22 for access/width requirements. 11. Fire department access shall be amended to facilitate emergency apparatus. 12. Emergency access, a minimum of 26 feet wide, shall be provided, and maintained free and clear of obstructions at all times, during construction in accordance with Fire District requirements. 13. All trees and shrubs planted in any median shall be kept trimmed a minimum of 14'6" from ground up so as not to impede fire apparatus. 14. A building directory shall be required, as noted below: X Lighted directory within 20 feet of main entrance(s). 15. Gated/restdcted entry(s) require installation of a Knox rapid entry key system. Contact the Fire Safety Division for specific details and ordering information. 16. Plan check fees in the amount of $0 have been paid. An additional $125.00 shall be paid: X Prior to final plan approval. Note: Separate plan check fees for fire protection systems (sprinklers, hood systems, alarms, etc.) and/or any consultant reviews will be assessed upon submittal of plans. 17. Plans shall be submitted and approved prior to construction in accordance with 1994 UBC, UFC, UPC, UMC, NEC, and RCFD Standards 22 and 15. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, (909) 477-2800, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: Q. Security Lighting 1. All parking, common, and storage areas shall have minimum maintained 1-foot candle power. These areas should be lighted from sunset to sunrise and on photo sensored cell. V'rT 15766 Comi)leUon Date / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / SC - 10FJ6 Project No. 2. All buildings shall have minimal security lighting to eliminate dark areas around the buildings, with direct lighting to be provided by all entryways. Lighting shall be consistent around the entire development. 3. Lighting in exterior areas shall be in vandal-resistant fixtures. R. Security Hardware 1. A secondary locking device shall be installed on all sliding glass doors. 2. One-inch single cylinder dead bolts shall be installed on all entrance doore. If windows are within 40 inches of any locking device, tempered glass or a double cylinder dead bolt shall be used. 3. All garage or rolling doors shall have slide bolts or some type of secondary locking devices. S. Security Fencing 1. When utilizing secudty gates, a Knox box sub-master system secudty device shall be used since fire and law enforcement can access these devices. T. Windows 1. All sliding glass windows shall have secondary locking devices and should not be able to be lifted from frame or track in any manner. Building Numbering 1. Numbers and the backgrounds shall be of contrasting color and shall be reflective for nighttime visibility. 2. At the entrances of complex, an illuminated map or directory of project shall be erected with vandal-resistant cover. The directory shall not contain names of tenants, but only address numbers, street names, and their locations in the complex. North shall be at the top and so indicated. Sign shall be in compliance with Sign Ordinance, including an application for a Sign Permit and approval by the Planning Division. 3. All developments shall submit a 8 1/2" x 11" sheet with the numbering pattern of all multi-tenant developments to the Police Department. v3-r 15766 Completion Date / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / SC - 10/96 01/08/97 S"KI) 15:$0 F.-kX 909 981 6267 MGR SEVIC£S ~001 Michael G. Rademaker Presiclent January 8, 1997 VIA FAX: 909-47%2847 Environmmtal Assessmere ~ud Industrial Area Specific Plan Aamndmem 96-03 Rancon Reahy Fund ~ Dear Platming Commition: It has recently come to my a~c-ntion th,t tlm piopetty owners directly north of me are seeking a zone change on their prolgrty. Although I am very much in favor of growth and continued development in the City of Rancho Cucamonga. I am songwhat concerned about what will be built and its eft~c-t ~m my property considering that it is directly adjacent to tim area of the proposed zone change. I've also had conversations with Dan Richards at Stephen Daniels Commercial Brokerage who also owns property next to me and he shares my concerns about comis~cy and development along this corridor. I respectfully request that the Planning Commission hold off on making a decision with regard to zone change until such time as a formal site plan for any proposed uses be submitted simultaneously with it. By submitting these site plans with the request for a zone change, it will allow not only the City, but the adjacent property owners, to determine what effects the zone change would have on their property. I am sorry I will be unable to attend yoox meeting tonight as I have an0ttmr prior ~gagemeat. However, I am asking that the Planning Commission refrain from mat'inS a decision on any zone changes until mote fo~-xnal, detailed plans can be submitted. If you have any questions, please feel free to call and, again, thank you for giving this request your consideration. $in~rely, MGR Services, Inc. ichael G. P, aaemater President Commercial Brokerage ,, Resi~lential Real Estate o Property Managemere 1425 W, Foothill Blvd., Suite 200, Upland, California 91786 Office: 909t981-4466 ,, laX: 909/981-6267 RECEIVED JAN 8 REC'D City of RanChO Cucamonga Planning Division Stephen Daniels commercial brokerage inc. January 8, 1997 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Planning Commission 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Environmental Assessmere and IndUs~ia! .area Specific Plan Amendment 96-03-Rancon Realty Fund III Dear Planning Commissioners: I adamantly oppose the above referenced item in its current submission form. I have owned 10787 Laurel for eight years, which is the Kaiser Permanente Rancho Cucamonga office building. This facility is one of the three original buildings in the Rancho Cucamonga Business Park This office park contains Rancho Cucamonga's highest quality garden, walk-up office buildings which were originally developed by Daon Corporation. They were intended to show new developers in the area the high quality of construction that would ultimately be built in our fair city. As a Developer and Commercial Real Estate Broker, I am not opposed to development of this site or potentially changing the zoning. I am strongly opposed to changing the zoning without a development plan for the property. To unilaterally change the zoning without a specific site plan concurrently opens the door for conflict and misunderstandings that are unnecessary. I respectfully request that one of the two following choices be implemented by the Planning Commission: Delay any decision on this recommendation until a formal site plan is submitted with the request for zone change. This will ensure that, among other concerns, all driveways align properly with existing - long term buildings, no negative impact will be felt on existing property with unsightly rear elevations or unreasonable grade separations. 2. At a bare minimum, the Commission should insist that any zone change include performance standards to include, but not be limited to, the items mentioned in #1. 8311 HAVEN AVENUE SUITE 200 RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA 91730 9091980-6868 FAX 909/987-8183 Planning Commission January 8, 1997 Page 2 I believe the Planning Commission needs to know a lot more about the plans for the property BEFORE they amend the General Plan and 15 years of planning process in Rancho Cucamonga. Again, I want to be perfectly clear, I am not opposed to developing this site. I am opposed to changing the zoning and thereby giving the land owner certain developmental rights prior to knowing what, exactly, is going to happen on the site. We've got hundreds of acres of IP zoning that would like to be commercial. I think a little more detail will serve everyone's needs appropriately. Thank you for your consideration. DWR:dh Sincerely, ~ ; ~'~'c~ards~ P.S. I apologize for not being in attendance, but I have a long standing commitment that I cannot break. In the event this item comes up between 10:30 a.m. & 11:00 a.m. I may be back in time. c:dan/plann.doc/486h/97 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA -- STAFF I FPORT DATE: January 8, 1997 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Alan Warren, AICP, Associate Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 96-03A - RANCON REALTY FUND III - A request for a land use change from Industrial Park to Community Commercial for 7.8 acres generally located on the south side of Foothill Boulevard between Aspen and Spruce Avenues and at the northwest comer of Red Oak Street and Spruce Avenue. The City will also consider changing the remaining 1.4 acres of land at the southeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Aspen Avenue, 2~25 acres at the southwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Spruce Avenue, and 1.2 acres at the northeast comer of Red Oak Street and Laurel Street to Community Commercial - APN: 208-352-10, 11, 12, 79, and 80. Staff has prepared a mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND INDUSTRIAL AREA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 96-03 - RANCON REALTY FUND III - A request to amend the Industrial Area Specific Plan land use designation from Industrial Park to Community Commercial for 7.8 acres generally located on the south side of Foothill Boulevard between Aspen and Spruce Avenues and at the northwest comer of Red Oak Street and Spruce Avenue. The City will also consider changing the remaining 1.4 acres of land at the southeast comer of Foothill Boulevard and Aspen Avenue, 2.25 acres at the southwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Spruce Avenue, and 1.2 acres at the northeast comer of Red Oak Street and Laurel Street to Community Commercial- APN: 208-352-10, 11, 12, 79, and 80. Staff has prepared a mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North - South - East West Shopping Center; Terra Vista Community Plan, Community Commercial Office Park; Industrial Area Specific Plan (Subarea 7), Industrial Park Hotel; Industrial Area Specific Plan (Subarea 7), Industrial Park with Community Commercial uses Office Park; Industrial Area Specific Plan (Subarea 7), Industrial Park So General Plan Designations: Project Site - Industrial Park North Community Commercial South Industrial Park East - Community Commercial West - Industrial Park ITEMS B & C PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT GPA 96-03A & ISPA 96-03 - RANCON REALTY FUND III January 8, 1997 Page 2 Go Site Characteristics: The area requested for change by the applicant encompasses about 8 acres of underdeveloped land on the south side of Foothill Boulevard, north of Laurel Street between Aspen and Spruce Avenues. Included in the review are the remaining out-parcels within the block for a total area of approximately 12.5 acres. The site is fiat with grades sloping gently to the south. BACKGROUND & ANALYSIS: The site is designated Industrial Park in the General Plan and located in Subarea 7 of the Industrial Area Specific Plan. The Rancho Cucamonga Business Park Master Plan was approved in 1981 for the area bounded on the north by Foothill Boulevard, on the south by Arrow Highway, on the east generally by Milliken Avenue, and on the west by Haven Avenue. The original vision for the subject site was for a continuation of the high-rise office buildings to the west. To date, two restaurant buildings have been developed on the site with only one presently in use. Last year the City Council approved General Plan Amendment 96-01A that authorized Commercial land use designation for the 14.45 acres between Spruce and Elm Avenues, on the south side of Foothill Boulevard. The properties in question with this application are directly to the west of Spruce Avenue. Much of the basis for the General Plan Amendment review revolve~ around the action on GPA 96-01A as follows: Expansion of Area Review: The applicant is requesting to have 7.8 acres within the block bordered by Foothill Boulevard, Spruce Avenue, Laurel Street, and Aspen Avenue to be changed to Community Commercial. Within this block there is an additional 4.85 acres not included in the request. Staff believes that the "piecemeal" approach would cause difficulties in applying diffedng development standards to what should be a unified project area. Therefore, staff has included these out-parcels in an expanded project description for the Planning Commission's review. So Appropriateness of the existing designation: The existing Industrial Park designation includes a number of commercial uses that could contribute to a vibrant downtown area. Authorized uses included restaurants, theaters, art galleries, entertainment, athletic clubs, and indoor and outdoor commercial recreation. The site is suitable for development under the existing designation for many office and commercial combinations. The Rancho Cucamonga Business Park Master Plan, adopted in 1981 and still valid, emphasizes office development similar to the Barton Plaza to the west. In addition, many development options are available because many commercial uses are allowed under this existing zoning. Permitted or conditionally permitted retail uses include convenience sales (pharmacy, barber and beauty shop, cleaners, tailor, newspaper/magazine store, florist), food and beverage sales (delicatessen, doughnut shop, ice cream/yogurt shop, bakery), most retail automotive uses (sales, rentals, repairs, service station), business supply (business machines, photocopy, print shop), and building supply/home improvement (floor covering, glass, hardware, lighting, paint, window covering). Also a number of commercial services are permitted or conditionally permitted, including medical services, financial services, travel agencies, and real estate services. Not permitted under the existing zoning are retail commercial uses such as department store/apparel/general merchandise type retail, home electronics, music and video stores, PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT GPA 96-03A & ISPA 96-03-RANCON REALTYFUND III January 8,1997 Page 3 Go appliance sales, or furniture stores. These uses would be permitted under the proposed Community Commercial designation. The Terra Vista Town Center across the street on the north side of Foothill Boulevard is so designated. Appropriateness of the proposed ~roject: A Community Commercial site generally ranges in size from 15 to 50 acres. The 7.8 acres of the applicant's request and the 4.85 acres of the out parcels total only 12.65 acres. The anticipated leasable area of 101,407 square feet is within the General Plan's Community Commercial range. The General Plan set up the hierarchy of commercial site cdteria ranging from Neighborhood Commercial (smallest) to Regional Commercial (largest). According to the General Plan, a Neighborhood Commercial site ranges from 5 to 15 acres that will support a leasable area from 30,000 to 100, 000 square feet, and is intended to serve about 10,000 residents in the immediate vicinity. It is typically anchored by a supermarket. The site size would be typical for a Neighborhood Center. General Commercial is the next level of intensity of use. Size is not specified. The K-mart center on Haven has a General Commercial designation within the Industrial Area Specific Plan and was established as part of the Rancho Cucamonga Business Park Master Plan. The Virginia Dare Center also has a General Commercial designation. Commercial development regulated by the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan is designated General Commercial under the General Plan. It should be noted that although development standards with the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan identify varying levels of intensity including a "Community Commercial" designation, none are intended to develop to the intensity of commercial use described in the General Plan as "Community Commercial." Under the General Plan designation, the prototype is the Terra Vista Town Center. The General Plan states that Community Commercial designation is aimed at approximately 20,000 residents within a 5-mile radius. The following table lists the General Plan's intended features for Community Commercial centers and existing and planned centers along Foothill Boulevard: CENTER/LOCATION (Community Commercial-General Plan) LAND AREA- ACRES (up to 50) LEASABLE SQ. FT. (100,000 - 300,000) Town Center - Terra Vista/ Foothill between Haven and Spruce Town Center Square - Terra Vista/ Foothill between Spruce and Elm Promenade - Terra Vista/ Foothill and Rochester 62 25 45 563,184 222,600 457,800 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT GPA 96-03A & ISPA 96-03-RANCON REALTYFUND III Janua~ 8,1997 Page 4 The Regional Commercial designation is at the top of the land use hierarchy. It is expected to serve a population of at least 150,000 people. An example is the Foothill Marketplace located east of the 1-15 interchange on Foothill Boulevard. It is a 60-acre site approved for 550,000 square feet of leasable stores. The applicant has submitted a concept master plan and a justification statement. Much of the justification is identical to that provided in the Wohl General Plan Amendment application. According to the concept plan, the site will support 101,407 square feet of commercial, office, and restaurant uses, with the largest building being a 159,000 square foot commercial use. Apart from this large commercial use, all other uses identified on the plan would be allowed under the existing industrial park zoning. Compatibility with Surrounding Land Uses: The south side of Foothill Boulevard from Haven to Milliken was initially planned for professional office use mixed with Food Park uses. Haven to Aspen has developed with high-rise offices. The introduction of 14.45 acres of Community Commercial designated land between Spruce and Elm Avenues in May 1996 set a precedent for the consideration of additional Community Commercial on Foothill's south side. Commercial use authorization of that site and of this site (if approved) does not, however, mandate retail commercial development. Office development would still be an a[Jthorized use within Subarea 7 along with the new commercial activities. While retail store configurations with rear loading doors, big box scale, etc. can be a challenge to fit in with surrounding office complexes, careful design review considerations can provide methods to alleviate the conflicting activities. The Town Center and Town Center Square on the north side of Foothill Boulevard is designated Community Commercial. The proposed change would expand the Community Commercial westedy along the south side from the Wohl development at Foothill and Spruce. This change could develop additional pressure for Community Commercial uses to the west between the two existing western high-rise offices. Alternatively, this proposal could strengthen the Community Commercial presence on Foothill Boulevard's south side and perhaps make it more viable. The combined acreage of the Wohl site and this site is 27 acres, which is well within the recommended Community Commercial size. Need for additional commercial land: No market demand study was requested for this specific application. In the most recent analysis (July 1996), vacancy and undeveloped land figures for commercial land between Haven and Rochester Avenues shows about 49 percent of the potential leasable area as unoccupied or undeveloped. This figure does not indicate a need for additional commercial development in this area of Foothill Boulevard. Staff does not believe this figure has changed significantly. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: Staff has reviewed the Initial Study, Part I and completed the Environmental Checklist, Part II of the Initial Study, and has found no significant adverse environmental impacts will occur because of the proposed land use amendments. Potential impacts, determined not to be significant, include: Air Quality: The proposed land use change would increase air emissions, primarily from vehicle trips, due to the increase in intensity of retail development. However, the increase is below the thresholds of significance established by the South Coast Air Quality District. Transportation: The proposed land use change does not significantly increase traffic impacts. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT GPA 96-03A & ISPA 96-03-RANCON REALTYFUND III Janua~ 8,1997 Page 5 CONCLUSIONS: The proposed land use change may strengthen the Community Commercial presence on the south side of Foothill Boulevard by being next to the Wohl property. The eventual land use configuration (if approved) could provide a similar image Community Commercial activity center at Spruce Avenue opposite Town Center and Town Center Square. Any land use change within the block between Spruce and Aspen Avenue should affect the entire block to avoid fragmented zoning without any specific purpose. Alternatively, the commercial land use change, if developed to its full commercial potential could preclude the anticipated Foothill Boulevard office park at Aspen Avenue. FACTS FOR FINDING: Based on the facts and conclusions listed above, staff believes the Planning Commission can make the following facts for findings regarding these applications: The properties are suitable for the uses allowed in the proposed land use and development district designation in terms of access and size, as evidenced by the site's location adjacent to existing Community Commercial land to the north and east. The proposed amendments will not have significant adverse impacts on the environment as described in the Initial Study, Parts I and II. The proposed amendments are in conformance with the General Plan, Industrial Area Specific Plan, and Development Code due to the site's capacity to promote the goals and objectives for commercial and office development. CORRESPONDENCE: These items have been advertised as a public headng 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. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of General Plan Amendment 96-03A and Industrial Area Specific Plan Amendment 96-03 to change the area bordered by Foothill Boulevard, Spruce Avenue, Red Oak Street, Laurel Street, and Aspen Avenue to Community Commercial by the adoption of the attached Resolutions. BB:AW:gs Attachments: Exhibit"A" - General Plan Land Use Map Exhibit"B" - Industrial Area Specific Plan Map Exhibit"C" - Site Map Exhibit"D" - Conceptual-Master Plan Exhibit"E" - Initial Study Parts I and II Resolution Recommending Approval for GPA 96-03A Resolution Recommending Approval for ISPA 96-03 ';":: I VERY LOW <2DU's/AC · ...,.,....-..::~ ~ow ~-4,:,u,,,,,,c , ,..: :::::., ,..ow-,,,,,:,:,,u,,,, """-----"~ MEDIUM-HIGH 14-24 DU's/AC ~ HIGH 24-30 DU's/AC ® MASTER PLAN REQUIRED COMMERCIAL/OFFICE ~ COMMERCIAL ~ COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL NEIGHBORHOOD COMM. REGIONAL COMMERCIAL GPA 96-03A / ISPA 96-03 INDUSTRIAL PARK GENERAL INDUSTRIAL HEAVY INDUSTRIAL MIXED USE .COMMERCIAL RECREATION OPEN SPACE -~-"-~ HILLSIDE RESIDENTIAL · ~.,:-.'~. OPEN SPACE ~--::--:-----'---:~. FLOOD CONTROL/UTILITY '--'-- SPECIAL BOULEVARD PUBLIC FACILITIES E~F--Zh-]EXISTING SCHOOLS e/r--7~jPROPOSED SCHOOLS ~ ,.-.~,...,~PARKS ~(EXISTING PARKS SHOWN 'P CITY OF R'/'~AMONGA ' Project: Title: /"-4EUE~/IL. P/ Exhibit: A, Date: 1- B- ? 7 Figure III- 1 SUBAREAS C COMMERCIAL HAVEN OVERLAY DISTRICT INDUSTRIAL PARK GENERAL INDUSTRIAL MINIMUM IMPACT HEAVY INDUSTRIAL CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONG INDUSTRIAL AREA PLAN III- § Revised: 9/17/86 2/17/88 9107188 10/03/90 10/17/90 m GENERAL PLAN ANENOMENT S I TE PLAN TERRA VI9TA SPECIFIC PLAN ZONE 'CC' EXISTING SHOPPING CENTER FOOTHILL ~L ~lHb~ [ _. VACANT EXISTING OFFICES VACANT VACANT -- ZONE BOUNDARY LINE [~OUL VARD EXISTING RESTURANT f VACANT I ~TREET EXIST.~ HOTEL EXIST. / VACANT HOSP I TAL INDUSTRIAL PARK------'~ SUB AREA 7 I~AHGH~ GUCAIIOHfA (TOA~It~IAL PltOP~ltTl~l ~,~ ~Jr~ (909) 4T7-27~0 ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION FORM (Part ! -Initial Study) The purpose-of!'this' fo~m is'to:informthe. City..of:'fi~e. basic components: or, the-. proposed project so:thatthe. City" may:: review:the pmj'eCt: pumuar~.to~:City? policios~.;prdinances,. and'. guidelines,' the: Califomia Envimnmentai'Quality:Act;:and the. City's: Rules and: Procedures to Implement CEQA... It:is:: importanti:thatl~e information: requested': in this application be providedin fulL:' .'"::: '-.:':'-:-:. ~:::::~..::.ii~i:::?~i.::::.::::'i'.~::.~:.::~.;:--:.?:..:!:::.-. ' .............. :' · · .. GENERAL INFORMATION: INCOMP! IZT7= AI=~ [CA770NS W1! ! NOT BF PROCF$S!=D. Please note that if is the te.~;on~bllify of the applicant to ensure that ~e a~piicat/on i= corr~olete at the time of su/Jmitta/; City ~taff will not be available to perform work required to provide missing informat/on. Applicat/on Number for the project to which this form pertain&' Project T~e: RANCHO CUCAMONGA COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES Realty Fund III,. c/o. Glenborough Corp.,_ 400 S. E1 Camino Real, Suite 1100, San Mateo, CA 94402-1708. Narne&Addm~of~ve~oer~pm/ect~ Realty Fund III, c/o Glenborough Corp., 400 S. E1 Camino Real, Ste. 1100, San Mateo, CA 94402-1708. C.o~tactPetson&A~3~mss.- -Integra Engin~ering~ Tnc., 621-E;"Carnegie Drive, Suite ]?0. San Bernardino,'- C--A 92408 -(Elliott B. SSaw) ~ta3~eNum~c 90~/383-0200 FAX 909/383-0203 Narne&Addm~ ofpemoni;mf;ahngth~fotm~dfffetentfromebove]: Same as above Teleo/~one NurntJe~. Same as above e,f - 4/96 Page 1 PROJECT INFORMA 770N & DE'$CRIFrt70N, Information indicated by asterisk [°) is not required of non-construction CUP's unless otherwise requested by staff. Provide a full scale (8-1/2 x 11) copy of the USGS Quadrant Sheet(s) which includes the project site, and indicate the site boundaries. Provide a set of color photographs which show representative views int~ the site from the north, south, east and west; views into and fTr~ the site from the primary access points which serve the site,; and representative views of significant features fr~m the site. Include a map showing location of each photograph. ... 3) ProjectLocation(describe): South side of Foothill Blvd. between Alpen Street and Spruce Avenue. 4) Assessor's Parcel Numbers (attach additional sheet if necessary): 208-352-12 and 208-352-80 '5) GrossSiteAma(ac/sq. lt.): 10.1 Acres; (439,700 S.F.) Net Site Area (tota/site s/ze m/nus area of public streets & proposed dedications): 6.5 Acres; ( 283,140 S.F.) 7) Deschbe any proposed general plan amemYment or zone change which would affect the project site (a/tach additional sheet if necessary: The site is currently designated on the Geleral Plan within the Industrial Area, and is located within the ~ndustrial Specific Plan, subarea 7. This application re~ues{'s an amendment in the General Plan designation to Community Cc~nercial and an amendment to the Industrial Specific Plan to permit Co~nunity Commercial uses at this location as such uses are defined within the Foothill Specific Plan as was approved on the Wohl property. Include a description of all permits which will be necessary from the City of Rancho Cucamonga and other governmental agencies in order to fully implement the project: General Plan Amendment, I.S.P. Amendment and Standard Building permits. elf - 4F36 Page 2. Describe the physical setting of the site as it exists before the project including information on topograpt~y, soil stat~iiity, plants anct animals. rna~ure trees, fiBils and roads, drainage courses. and scenic aspects. Describe any existing struc~ums on site (including age and condiUon) and ~e use of the sEuc~ums. AEach pl?otogra~hs of significant features descnbed. In addition, site all souroes of information (i.e.. geological and/or hydrologic studies. biotic and arct~eological surveys. traffic studies): The existing site is vacant land with the surrounding street improvements previously installed in conjunction with the Rancho Cucamonga Business Parki Project. There ~is an existing Applebee's Restaurant at the northwest corner of the block and-/~n existinq vacant restaurant at the northeast corner of the block. Topography is relatively flat with drainage sloping toward Laurel and Redoak Dr~ve. A traffic study will be ~rovided ~s soon as possible. ~one known Des~ri~anyn~e~u~e~andU~eir~eve~a~n~we~ec~b`m~de(~r~m~r~dw~y~.e~)endh~w~ey~fe~t There are no major effects on this property now. The noise is normal and customary traffic on Foothill Blvd. There is minimal noise from flights in and out of Ontario Airport. These will not affect the proposed uses. ed - 4/g6 Pacje 3 12) Describe the pmlx~sed project in detail. This should provide an adequate de$c~'pbon of the site in terms of ultimate use which ~il result lh~rn Ele prosed project Indicate ff ~hem am proposed phases for deve;oprnent the extent of development to occur wi~ each phase. and the anticipated completion of each incremen£ Attach additional sheet(s) if necessary: The proposed Land Use Change will make this parcel consistent with the property to the north of Foothill Boulevard and the propoerty east of Spruce Avenue (G.P.A. 95-02 & 95-02A). (Please see enclosed "Description of Project and Subportinq Information.") 13] Deschbethe~~includk~infommaononplant=andanirnalsandanycuitural. hLstcwicai. orscenicasl~ec~ Ina~cate the ty~e of land use (residential. c~,.,~,,.ial, etc.); intensity o~ land use (one-fw~iy, a~erenent houses; si~ops, __.defm,mmm ~om~ etc.)anclscaie af devetopmmzt (Iteig~ frontage, sadace*, mar yam, etc.): All surrounding properties are part of approved Specific Plans for commercial and/or industrial develoDment. The vacant parcels will be developed in the future within the quidelines of said Specific Plans and the City of Rancho Cucamonga Standards. (This application is for G.P.A. only.) 14) Wili the prooosed pr~ect change t~e pettem, ~cate or charectar of the ~Jm~nding geneml aree of the pmject? No 15) Indicate ~he type of sl~ort-term and long-term noise to be generated, inctuciing source and amount. How wfll these noise levels affect adjacent properties and on-site uses. What methods of sound proofing are proposed? N/A for requested General Plan amendment. '1 5) Indicate proposed removals and/or replacements of malure or scenic trees: No n e 17) Indicate any bodies of water (including domeslfc water supplies) into which ~he site drains: The site drains into the existing storm drain system. None Indicate expecteel arno~ of water , __.~ge. (See A~l~,,~.nt A for ,__~ _~ es~krmtes). For furffmr clarification, please contact ~he Cucamom~ Coumy Water Di.~J~ at 987-2591. a- Re~iderl~al (gallday) Peek u~e (gab'Day) b. Commercial/Incl. (gab'dey/ac) 1,5 0 0 Peak use (gal4~n/ac) 3,0 0 0 Indicate proposed meff~d of ae~ge diaix~N. ~ Tent~ X X Sewer. If sel~c tank~ are p~oposed. attach paroolam~ ~ If ~ to e ~a.ttary sewage ~ i~ m~d ine#cate expected daily sewage generation: (See a. Residential (gel/day) b. Co, .... c.~r~L (ga6~ay/ec) 1,000 - 1,500 R~$1D~:NTIAL PROJ~:CTS: 20] NumlJer of Detectled (ir,~cate range of parcel ~ize& minimum lot size and maximum lot size: N/A Page 5 Attached (indicate whether units are rental or for sate units): N/A N/A Anticipated range of sale prices and/or rents: Sale Price(s) $ Rent (per mor~) $ ~ $ to $ 22) Sbedfy number of bedrooms by unit type: N/A 23] Indicate are~ipated household size by ur~t type: N/A COMMFRCIAL INDUSTRIAl ANrJ INSTTTUTIONA! PROJFCTS Contact M appropriate School The type of use is a community commercial (ie. restaurants and retail). 2~ To~lfioor~rea otcommen:Ml. ir~lu.~iml. orinsl~f~n~lusesby~/pe: See attached Master Plan. 27) Indicatehou~ofopem~on: The approximate hours of operation will be: Retail/Commercial - 7:00P.M. to 9:00 P.M.; Restaurants and/or Fast Food - 6:00 A.M. to 2:00 A.M. Number of employees: Total: N / A Maximum Shift: 77me of Maximum Shift: 29) Provide breakdown of anticipated job ctassi~cations, inciucling wage and salary ranges, as well as an indication of the rate of him for each ctassification (attach additional sheet if necessary): N/A 30) Estimation of Zhe number of worke[~ to be hkecl thet CUtTenth, ms/de in ~e City: N/A N/A A! ~ ~OJFCT~ Services are available to the subject property. ed - 4/o~6 Page 7 33) In the known history of this properly, has there been any use. storage, or discharge of hazamous and/or toxic materials? Examples of hazardous and/or toxic materials include, but are not limited to PCB's; radioactive substances; pesticides and herbicides: fuels, oils, sotvent& and other flammable liquids and gases. Also note underground storage of any of the above. Please list the matedais and descrfbe their use, storage, and/or discharge on the property, as well as the dates of use, if known. No 34) Will the proposed project involve the temporary or long-term use, storage or clischarge of hazardous and/or toxic matedels, including but not limited to tho.~e examples listed above? If yes, provide an inventory of all sucil mate~fals to be ~ and proposed method of disposal. The location of such uses, along with the :rtorege and shipment areas, shall be show. and lat~M~d on the application plans. Only to the extent that such materials are typically utilized in the construction and operation of a retail development. I hereby certify ~ the ~t~.,.~.,~ fu~ above and in ttte aCtached exhibita present the data and informalk~ required for before an adequate evaluation can be made by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Date: ~- /~'-- ~ Sign.re: ~~ ~-~ ~~ Vice-President, INTEGRA ENGINEERING, INC. ....... T'~e: e~f - 4/~8 Page 8 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM INITIAL STUDY - PART II BACKGROUND 1) Project File #/Name: 2) Related File(s)' 3) Applicant: ~J~ Address: ,~) C) ~, ~.. ~.,~/~//,<.~ ~'r~/'7-"~_ Telephone #: 4) Project Description: 5) Project Accepted as Complete (date): ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Pursuant to Section 15063 of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines, explanation of the potential impacts identified as "Yes" or "Maybe" answers are required on attached sheets. An explanation shall also be provided in each instance where a potentially significant effect has been determined not to be significant and is marked "No." Yes Maybe No f) g) EARTH. Will the proposal result in: a) Unstable earth conditions or in changes in the geologic structure? b) Disruptions, displacement, compaction or over covering of the soil? c) Change in the topography or ground surface relief features? d) The destruction, covering, or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? e) Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site? Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sand, or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards, such as earthquakes, landslides, mudslides, ground failure, or similar hazards? C I T ln,llal Slu~l'¢ P! II Y O F R A N C H O C U C A M O N G A II. AIR. a) b) c) Y~s Will the proposal result in.' Substantial air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? The creation of objectionable odors? Alteration of air movement, moisture, or temperature, or any change in climate, either locally or regionally? Maybe No III. WATER. Will the proposal result in: a) Changes in currents, orthe course of direction of water movements, in either marine or fresh waters? b) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff? Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? [] Changes in the amount of surface water in any body? E3 Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of surface water quality, including, but not limited to, temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? Alteration of the direction or rate of ground waters? [] Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? [] Substantial reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding or tidal pools? c) d) e) f) g) h) i) IV. PLANT LIFE. Will the proposal result in: a) Change in the diversity of species, or number of any species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, and aquatic plants)? b) Reduction of the number of any unique, rare, or endangered species of plants? Introduction of new species of plants into an area, or in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? c) d) Vo ANIMAL LIFE. Will the proposal result in: a) Change in the diversity of species, or number of any species of b) C I T Initial Study Pt I1 (2/5/96) animals (birds; land animals, including reptiles; fish and shellfish; benthic organisms or insects)? Reduction of the number of any unique, rare, or endangered species or animals? ¥ .^.CHO cuc^ G A c) d) Introduction of new species of animals into the area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? Yes Maybe No Vl. NOISE. Will the proposal result in: a) Increase in existing noise levels? b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? VII. LIGHT AND GLARE. Will the proposal.' a) Produce new light and glare? VIII. LAND USE. Will the proposal result in: a) Substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? IX. NATURAL RESOURCES. Will the proposal result in: a) Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? RISK a) b) OF UPSET. Will the proposal involve: A risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to: oil, pesticides, chemicals, or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions? Possible interference with an emergency response plan or an emergency evacuation plan? Xl. POPU a) LATION. Will the proposal.' Alter the location, distribution, density or growth rate of the human population of an area? Xll. HOUSING. Will the proposal: a) Affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? C I T Study Pt II TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Will the proposal result in: a) Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? b) Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new parking? c) Substantial impact upon existing transportation systems? d) Alterations to the present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? e) Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? f) Increase in traffic hazards to.motor vehicles, bicyclists, or oedestrians? Y O F R A N C H O C U C A M G A Yes Maybe No XlV. PUBLIC SERVICES. Will the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered government services in any of the following areas: a) b) c) d) e) f) Fire protection? Police protection? Schools? Parks and other recreational facilities? Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? Other governmental services? XV. XVI. ENERGY. Will the proposal result in: a) Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? b) Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy, or require the development of new sources of energy? XV!l. UTILITIES and SERVICE SYSTEMS. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a) Power or natural gas? b) Communications systems? c) Water? d) Sewer or septic tanks? e) Storm water drainage? f) Solid waste disposal? XVI!I. HUMAN HEALTH. Will the proposal result in: a) Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (exclud- ing mental health)? b) Exposure of people to potential health hazards? XlX. AESTHETICS. Will the proposal result in: a) The obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public? b) Creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? RECREATION. Will the proposal result in: a) Impact upon the quality of existing recreational oppodunities? b) Restrict the religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? Y O F R A N C H O C U C A 4 C I T Initial Study Pt I1 XX. XXI. Yes CULTURAL RESOURCES. Will the proposal.' a) Result in the alteration of or the destruction of a prehistoric or historic archeological site? b) Result in adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or historic building, structure, or object? c) Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. Maybe No a) b) c) d) Potential to degrade: Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? Short-term: Does the project have the potential to achieve shod- term, to the advantage of long-term, environmental goals? (A shod-term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definite period of time. Long-term impacts will endure well into the future.) Cure u lative: Does the project have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (A project may impact on two or more separate resources where the impact on each resource is relatively small, but where the effect on the total of those impacts on the environment is significant.) Substantial adverse: Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? XXli. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION. (Attach additional sheets with narrative description of the environmental impacts.) C I T Y O F R A N C H O C U C A M O N G A XXI!I. DISCUSSION OF LAND USE IMPACTS. (Attach additional sheets examining whether the project would be consistent with existing zoning, plans, and other applicable land use controls.) XXIV. EARLIER ANALYSES. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration per Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case a discussion should identify the following on attached sheets: a) Earlier analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c) Mitigation measures. For effects that are "less than Significant with Mitigation Incorpo- rated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project. XXV. DETERMINATION. (To be completed by Lead Agency.) On the basis of this initial evaluation: a) I find that the proposed project co~I~l not have a significant effect on the environment, and A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared .............................. '~ b) I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because rrzitig~ztion me~zsz~res described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared .............................. ~ c) I find the proposed project n~z..v have a significant effect on the environment, and An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required ......................... ~1 Date -- pa e~'s Signature C I T Y O F R A N C H O C U C A M O N G A 6 XXVl. APPLICANT CERTIFICATION (To be completed by appficant.) I certify that I am the applicant for the project described in this Initial Study. I acknowledge that I have read this Initial Study and proposed mitigation measures. Further, I have revised the project plans or proposals and/or hereby agree to the proposed mitigation measures to avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant environmental effects would occur. Date Signature Print Name and Title CITY OF R A Initial $tuOy Pt II (2/5/96) N C H O C U C A M O N G A ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Initial Study - Part II Discussion of Environmental Evaluation Project Description: General Plan Amendment 96-03A Industrial Specific Plan Amendment 95-02 A request for a land use change from Industrial Park to Community Commercial for 12.5 acres generally located on the south side of Foothill Boulevard between Aspen and Spruce Avenues in Subarea 7 of the Industrial Area Specific Plan The numbered responses correspond to the numbered questions in Part of the Initial Study II. AIR: The SCAQMD identifies shopping centers as generating more emissions than office parks (CEQA Handbook). A comparison of the master plan. office park with a potential shopping center indicates that the increase in potential emissions will not exceed the threshold levels for impact significance (refer to attached Air Quality Impacts analysis). III. WATER: IV. Drainage and flood control issues have been addressed in the Master Environmental Assessment for the General Plan adopted January 4, 1989, and implemented by the City's Master Plan of Drainage. These measures are triggered at the project development level. PLANT LIFE: b. The site is rough graded and periodically cleared of weeds. There are no known rare, unique, or endangered plant species on the site. Landscaping at the project level will consist of native species and generally accepted ornamental landscape species with emphasis on drought tolerant plant materials. d. No agricultural crops exist on the site. ANIMAL LIFE: b. The site is rough graded and periodically cleared of weeds. There are no known rare, unique, or endangered animal species on the site. Vl. NOISE: VII. VIII. Xl. Xll. ao The proposed land use change is not expected to increase noise levels above that of the existing land use as anticipated in the General Plan and discussed in the Master Environmental Assessment for the General Plan. b. There are no sensitive receptors in the surrounding area that is zoned for commercial and industrial use. LIGHT AND GLARE: Light levels for commercial development may be slightly more intense than levels under the industrial park designation, but not to a level of significance because the site adjoins Foothill Boulevard, a major commercial thoroughfare. Commercial development of the proposed site would be consistent with the light levels of shopping centers on the north side of Foothill Boulevard. LAND USE: ao General Plan Amendment and Industrial Area specific Plan .~mendment applications are prescribed processes for changing land use designations. The dual applications are intended to make the General Plan and Zoning consistent with the subject land area. The change from Industrial Park to Community Commercial would not result in a substantial alteration of planned land use because the subject site is adjacent to Community Commercial land use areas. POPULATION' a° The proposed land use change would not result in a change in population from that addressed in the Master Environmental Assessment for the General Plan. Industrial Park is considered a high employment generator comparable to Commercial use. Further, many commercial uses are allowed within the Industrial Park land use category. No residential uses are allowed in either zone. HOUSING: ao Based on information contained in the Housing Element and the Master Environmental Assessment for the General Plan, current and planned housing stock will be sufficient to meet the needs of employees wishing to live in the City. There will be no significant increase in employment generation from retail commercial uses over industrial park uses; therefore, no significant impact on housing needs. Xlll. TRANSPORTATION: XlV. XVI. XVIII. XIX. a. A review of anticipated development for the land use change by the Engineering Division revealed no significant traffic impacts. b. Parking will be provided consistent with the Development Code for commercial uses. Public transportation is available along Foothill Boulevard. There will be no significant change in the demand for public transportation with the proposed change in land use. The retail commercial uses authorized for future development are consistent with those permitted under the Development Code and General Plan for which the street widths were evaluated at a build-out condition. d. The proposed land use will maintain the existing circulation patterns for the movement of goods. e. The proposed land use will not affect the existing rail or air traffic in the area. PUBLIC SERVICES: a-f. The area is urbanized. Public services are existing. No substantial new services are anticipated with the project. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS: a-f. The area is urbanized. Utilities and services are existing. No substantial new utilities and services are anticipated with the project. AESTHETICS: a. The anticipated commercial development should not obstruct any view or vista currently open to the public. b. Future development will conform to the guidelines of the City, thereby eliminating any offensive site feature visible to the public. RECREATION: a. The retail commercial uses are not expected to impact existing recreational opportunities. CULTURAL RESOURCES: The site is part of a Master Plan of Development. The site has been rough graded and street improvements, including public utilities, installed. No known cultural resources exist on the site. XXI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE: The proposed land use change would not cause any substantial adverse impacts to the environment. a. No know animal life or wildlife species are expected to be substantially impacted by the land use amendment. b. There are no known long-term environmental impacts that are expected to occur as a result of the land use amendment. c. It is not anticipated that the cumulative impacts of the project will have a substantial impact because of the amendment. d. It is not anticipated that the land use amendment will have any adverse impacts on human beings. INTEGRA ENGINEERING, INC. LAI'~E) S~rRVEYORS "CI'VIL E~'~TGII'~-EERS August 28, 1996 RECEIVED City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Division TO: FROM: RE: W.O: City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department Integra Engineering, Inc. G.P.A. 96-03-A and ISPA 96-03 Air Quality Impacts 076.05 Purpose We are providing an analysis of the air quality caused by. revising the original Master Plan for the subject site. In performing the analysis, the following methodologywas used with reference to the South Coast Air Quality Management District CEQA Handbook. The thresholds provided on page 6-2 of the Handbook were used to determine the potential significance of air quality impacts related to the proposed project. Tables 9-7 and 9-8 were utilized in calculating the amount of pollutant generation for individual land uses. The level of development shown on the original Rancho Cucamonga Business Park Specific Plan was considered to be the baseline for comparison. The analysis was done to determine if the proposed project would generate substantially increased emissions such that the thresholds shown on page 6-2 of the CEQA Handbook would be exceeded. Attached is a copy of the original Master Plan together with a building square foot and parking analysis along with the revised Master Plan reflecting the proposed land uses. 621 E. Carnegie Drive. Suite ]20 * san Bernardino. CA 92408-3515 (909) 383-0200 * FA3((909) 383-0203 INTEGRA ENGINEERING, INC. LANE) SUI~VEYORS * CML ENGII~EERS GPA 96-03A & (ISPA) 96-03 AIR QUALITY SIGNIFICANCE Land Use Notes Office (SM) 1,4 Shopping Ctr. (SM) 1,4 Restaurants 1,4 REVISED MASTER PLAN Office Park 1.5 Restaurants 1.5 ORIGINAL MASTER PLAN Mobile - Ibs./day Area/1000 ROC NOX CO PM 10 30 12.60 7.20 122.10 0.90 37 48.84 9.99 381.47 4.81 34.4 88.06 38.18 797.05 7.91 149.50 55.37 1300.62 13.62 139.80 44.73 25.16 437.57 4.19 27.90 71.42 30.97 646.44 6.42 116.15 56.13 1084.01 10.61 Land Use Notes Office (SM) 2,4 Shopping Ctr. (SM) 2,4 Restaurants 2.4 REVISED MASTER PLAN Office Park 2,5 Restaurants 2,5 ORIGINAL MASTER PLAN Ene .rf3¥ - Ibs./day Area/1000 ROC NOX CO , PM 10 30.0 0.01 0.83 0.14 0.03 37.0 0.01 1.38 0.24 0.05 34.4 0.04 5.13 0.89 0.18 0.06 7.34 1.27 0.26 139.8 0.03 3.88 0.67 0.13 27.9 0.04 4.16 0.72 0.14 0.07 8.04 1.39 0.27 TOTALS: CURRENT MASTER PLAN ORIGINAL MASTER PLAN Difference Thresholds Not Exceeded 149.56 62.21 1301.89 13.88 116.22 64.17 1085.40 10.88 38.34 - 1.96 216.49 3.00 55.00 55.00 550.00 150.00 O.K. O.K. O.K. O.K. References Used: 1 Table 9-7, SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook, 1993 2 Table 9-8, SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook, 1993 3 Page 6-2, SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook, 1993 4 Areas from Revised Master Plan for Rancho Cucamonga Commercial Properties (Attached) 5 From Odginal Master Plarr (Attached) 621 1~. Carnegie Drive, Suite 120 * San !~ernardino. CA (909) 393-0200 * FA3((909) 383-0203 f q~rlG MASTER PLAN RANCHO CUCAMONGA BUSINESS PARK CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DAON INTEGRA ENGINEERING, INC. LAI~4'E) SLFI~VEYORS * CIV2[L ENGII~4~ERS August 28, 1996 W.O. 076.05 0RIGINALMASTER PLAN (7.$ Acres) Two 2-story office buildings with 69,900 S.F. each Total: 129,800 S.F. Parking Provided = Parking Required = (4/1000) 571 stalls 559 stalls O.K. (5.31 Acres) Four Restaurants 1 - 4,700 S.F. 1 - 13,300 S.F. 1 - 5,400 S.F. 1 - 4,500 S.F. Sub Total 4 - 27,900 S.F. Parkinq Required 47 stalls 133 stalls 54 stalls 45 stalls 279 stalls vs. Parkinq Provided 352 O.K. Total S.F. = 167,700 Total Parking = 923 621 E. Carnegie Drive. Suite 120 * San Bernardino, CA 92408-3515 (909) 383-0200 * FAX (909) 383-0203 i_= RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE REQUEST TO AMEND THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP FROM INDUSTRIAL PARK TO COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL FOR 12.65 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED SOUTH OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD, NORTH OF LAUREL STREET, WEST OF SPRUCE AVENUE, AND EAST OF ASPEN AVENUE, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 208-352-10, 11, 12, 79, and 80. A. Recitals. 1. Rancon Realty Fund III has filed an application for General Plan Amendment 96-03A as described in the title of this Resolution for 7.8 acres of land, to which the City of Rancho Cucamonga considered an additional 4.85 acres of adjacent land. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject General Plan Amendment of 12.65 total acres of land is referred to as "the application." 2. On January 8, 1997, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application. 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set 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 January 8, 1997, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to approximately 12.65 acres of land, within a rectangle configuration, located south of Foothill Boulevard, north of Laurel Street, west of Spruce Avenue, and east of Aspen Avenue and is presently developed with two restaurant buildings and the remaining land is vacant; and b. The property to the north of the subject site is designated Community Commercial and is developed with a community shopping center. The property to the west is designated Industrial Park and is partially developed with office buildings. The property to the east is designated Community Commercial and is partially developed with a hotel. The property to the south is designated Industrial Park and fully developed with an office park. c. This amendment does not conflict with the Land Use Policies of the General Plan and will provide for development, within the district, in a manner consistent with the General Plan and with related development; and and This amendment does promote the goals and objectives of the Land Use Element; PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. GPA 96-03A- RANCON REALTY FUND III January 8,1997 Page 2 properties. This amendment would not be materially injurious or detrimental to the adjacent 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs I and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. The subject property is suitable for the uses permitted in the proposed district in terms of access, size, and compatibility with existing land use in the surrounding area; and b. The proposed amendment would not have significant impacts on the surrounding properties; and c. The proposed amendment is not in conflict with the General Plan. 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 recommends that the City C6uncil adopt 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 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 substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced public headng and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby recommends approval of General Plan Amendment 96-03A for the land use designation change as shown on Exhibit '%" of this Resolution. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 8TH DAY OF JANUARY 1997. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY'OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. GPA 96-03A - RANCON REALTY FUND III January 8, 1997 Page 3 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 8th day of January 1997, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: RESIDENTIAL VERY LOW < 2 DU's/AC '.':'-"."....::~ LOW 2-4DU's/AC , os ,c . ® MASTER PLAN REQUIRED COMMERCIAL/OFFICE ~ NEIGHBORHOOD COMM. .... ~ REGIONAL COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL ~ INDUSTRIAL PARK ~ GENERAL INDUSTRIAL ~ HEAVY INDUSTRIAL :.'..~ MIXED USE ~ .COMMERCIAL RECREATION OPEN SPACE · ~ HILLSIDE RESIDENTIAL · ,,~..--'~. OPEN SPACE --::~ FLOOD CONTROL/UTILITY ~ SPECIAL BOULEVARD PUBLIC FACILITIES E/F--7-~,EXISTING SCHOOLS ~ PROPOSED SCHOOLS~ · '-:J~PARKS ~(EXISTING PARKS SHOWN 'P Project: ~-Pft Title' Exhibit: ~, Date: /- 8 - ? 7 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF INDUSTRIAL AREA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 96-03, A REQUEST TO AMEND THE INDUSTRIAL AREA SPECIFIC PLAN TEXT FOR 12.65 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED SOUTH OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD, NORTH OF LAUREL STREET, WEST OF SPRUCE AVENUE, AND EAST OF ASPEN AVENUE, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 208-352-10, 11, 12, 79, and 80. A. Recitals. 1. Rancon Realty Fund III has filed an application for Industrial Area Specific Plan Amendment 96-03 as described in the title of this Resolution for 7.8 acres of land, to which the City of Rancho Cucamonga considered an additional 4.85 acres of adjacent land. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Industrial Area Specific Plan Amendment of 12.65 total acres of land is referred to as "the application." 2. On January 8, 1997, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application. 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set 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 headng on January 8, 1997, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to approximately 12.65 acres of land, within a rectangle configuration, located south of Foothill Boulevard, north of Laurel Street, west of Spruce Avenue, and east of Aspen Avenue and is presently developed with two restaurant buildings and the remaining land is vacant; and b. The property to the north of the subject site is designated Community Commercial and is developed with a community shopping center. The property to the west is designated Industrial Park and is partially developed with office buildings. The property to the east is designated Community Commercial and is partially developed with a hotel. The property to the south is designated Industrial Park and is fully developed with an office park. c. This amendment does not conflict with the Land Use Policies of the General Plan and will provide for development, within the district, in a manner consistent with the General Plan and with related development; and PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. ISPA 96-03-RANCON REALTY FUND III January 8,1997 Page 2 d. This amendment does promote the goals and objectives of the Land Use Element and of the Industrial Area Specific Plan; and e. This amendment would not be materially injurious or detrimental to the adjacent properties and would not have a significant impact on the environment nor the surrounding properties. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. 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. The proposed amendment would not have significant impacts on the environment nor the surrounding properties; and c. The proposed amendment is in conformance with the General Plan and Industrial Area Specific Plan. 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 recommends that the City Council adopt a Negative Declaration based upon the findings as follows: a. That the Negative Declaration has been prepared in compliance with the Califomia Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the State CEQA guidelines promulgated thereunder; that said 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© 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 recommends approval of Industrial Area Specific Plan Amendment No. 96-03 to add text changes as set forth in Exhibit "A" of this Resolution. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. ISPA 96-03 - RANCON REALTY FUND III January 8, 1997 Page 3 APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 8TH DAY OF JANUARY 1997. 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 8th day of January 1997, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: INDUSTRIAL AREA SPECIFIC PLAN PART IV - OVERLAY DISTRICTS AND SUBAREA. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS SUBAREA 7: Special Consideration (Page IV-52) Amend the following paragraph as noted with bold additions and strikoout deletions: On the south side of Foothill Boulevard, a Community Commercial Retail Center is Conditionally Permitted subject to a Master Plan on a 14.45 acre parcel bounded by Spruce Avenue on the west, Elm Avenue on the east, and Eucalyptus Street on the south. This site is a logical extension of the Haven and Foothill Activity Center which encourages a mix of uses to function as an active people place and be lively well into the night for the residents of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Compatibility with adjacent existing and intended Industrial Park Development shall be demonstrated through site planning, building design, and landscaping. The Center shall be substantially completed with the first phase of development with a minimum of two anchor stores of not less than 24,000 square feet each and all on-site infrastructure. In-line shops should be limited. A Community Commercial Retail Center may also be permitted, subject to use permit master plan approval, on 12.65 acres bounded by Foothill Boulevard on the north, Spruce Avenue on the east, Aspen Avenue on the west, and Laurel and White Oak Streets on the south. All retail business uses permitted in the Terra Vista Community.Commercial designation are permitted within these Centers and are incorporated by reference. ~ Master Sign Programs shall be required and shall be consistent with sign code requirements for Commercial Retail Centers. (ISPA 96-01 and ISPA96-03) EXHIBIT "A" ~ '~ ~ .L..j j CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA -- STAFF REPORT DATE: TO: FROM: BY: SUBJECT: January 8, 1997 Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission Brad Buller, City Planner Alan Warren, AICP, Associate Planner USE DETERMINATION 96-04 - HUGHES INVESTMENTS - A request to determine if martial arts studios are permitted in the Village Commercial designation of the Victoria Community Plan. ABSTRACT: The purpose of this report is for the Planning Commission to consider the applicant's request in interpreting the provisions of the Victoria Community Plan regarding commercial uses in the Village Commercial-designation. BACKGROUND: Staff has received a request from the owner of the Vineyards Marketplace shopping center, for a determination that martial arts studios will be deemed a permitted use within the Village Commercial (VC) zone of the Victoria Community Plan (Exhibit "A"). ANALYSIS: Staff's analysis centers on how martial arts studios are allowed in other similar zoning designations within the City. A. Village Commercial: The Victoria Community Plan offers the following description of the Village Commercial designation at Milliken and Highland Avenues (page 50): 'q'he Groves Village includes a neighborhood commercial center at Milliken and Highland Avenues. This location assures convenient auto, pedestrian, or bicycle access for the residents. Typical uses for this kind of center would be a supermarket, drugstore, service station, and other commercial services." The authorized uses are listed on page 240 of the Community Plan (Exhibit "B"). Service businesses are a permitted use. Martial arts, dance studios, and other businesses offering personal instruction should be considered as providing services to the community. B. Neighborhood Commercial (NC): Commercial as follows: The Development Code describes Neighborhood "This district is intended to provide areas for immediate day-to-day convenience shopping and services for the residents of the immediate neighborhood. Site development regulations and performance standards are intended to make such uses compatible to and harmonious with the character of surrounding residential or less intense land use area." "Music, dance, and martial arts studios" are permitted as a matter of right in this zone. Many uses permitted in the Neighborhood Commercial zone are also authorized in the Village Commercial zone (Exhibit "C"). ITEM D PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT UD 96-04 - HUGHES INVESTMENTS January 8, 1997 Page 2 "Music and dance studios" are permitted in the Etiwanda Specific Plan Neighborhood Commercial zone. The Terra Vista Community Plan authorizes "commercial recreation facilities, including but not limited to health clubs and studios" subject to a Conditional Use Permit in its Neighborhood Commercial zone. The General Plan defines Neighborhood Commercial (in part) as follows: "Neighborhood Commercial includes shopping centers and convenience commercial clusters that provide essential retail goods and services to the residents or occupants in the immediate vicinity. "The centers shall permit the following tenants: eating and drinking establishments; food and beverage retail sales; general personal services, repair services for commonplace household appliances; and retail sales." Go Consistency: For an interpretation to be valid, it must not contradict other provisions of the Plan and should be consistent with other similarly zoned properties in the City. A~ the Victoda Community Plan identifies the land in question as a "neighborhood commercial center" it is appropriate to view Village Commercial as being similar to Neighborhood Commercial. The other Neighborhood Commercial zones permit similar uses. Therefore, staff believes that allowing for martial arts studios within the Village Commercial zone is appropriate. The Commission should determine whether discretionary review, a Conditional Use Permit, is warranted for each facility. Neighborhood commercial sites are the least intense commercial zones in the City and normally near residential development. Martial art studios generally do not exhibit activities (noise, large crowds, outdoor events, etc.) that are detrimental to the immediate area. Staff believes, therefore, that martial arts studios may be permitted as a matter of right in the Village Commercial zone. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission authorize martial arts studios in the Victoria Community Plan Village Commercial District as a permitted use by the adoption of the attached resolution. City Planner BB:AW/mlg Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Letter from owner dated December 2, 1996 Exhibit "B" - Village Commercial Uses, Victoria Community Plan Exhibit "C" - Development Code Table 17.10.030 - Use Regulations Resolution of Approval HUGHES I~'VE ST3IE-~,'TS A REAL ESTATE SE:~:~/ICE$ COMPANY December 2, 1996 Matt Everling City of Rancho Cucarnonga PlanninE Depm~auent 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cueamong, a, CA 91730 RECEIVED DECo citr off Planning Martial Arts Studio Vineyards Marketplace tI-Iighland & Milliken) Dear Mr. Everling: Please let this leller serve as our request for a Use Determination for the Vineyards Marketplace. Shopping Center located at the southeast corner of Highland and Mill~en Avenues. This project is anchored by Albertsons market and Sav-On drug store. We have entered into a lease agreement with a martial arts ~ludio for Suite 5-G (~ee encloseel site plan). The tenant ha~ been denied a business license due to the fact that the underlying zoning does not either approve nor deny this particular use. Apparently, a martial arts studio is an approved use under the Neighborhood Center or General Commercial zoning for Rancho Cueamonga. By illustration, the shopping center approximately one (1) mile to the northv,~st of us, anchored by Lucky, has space occupied by the Karate Institute. The martial arts studio proposed for Vineyards Marketplace will have hours of operation f~om approximately 4:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m., Monday through Friday and on rare occasions l 1:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. on Saturday. Classes are approximately 50 minutes long, with an average of 5-6 students per class. The students are mainly children from the ages of 5-15 )'ears old and typically the parents drop off their children and shop within the center while classes are being conducted. As such, we see no impact whatsoever to the parking for the shopping center. Matt, once you have had an oppommity to address this proposed use with other members of the Planning Commission, please get back to me with your determination, as Mr. Lee is anxious to commence business. I look forward to hearing from you. Sincerely, Vice President, Leasing AJ:ks Enclosure cc: John Potter 13 CORPORATE PLAZA - SUFTE 150 o NE~VPORT BEACH. CA 92660 P.O. BOX B7O0 - NE~/PORt BE~CH. CA 92658~700 PHONE [714) 75~9531 FACSIMILE [714) 75~8531 VINEYARDS MARKETPLACE I,'l '.;tll AN[A (12.79 ACI,~I.',;) 5~/.237 %J VILLAGE CO,."?~--RCIAL a. The foll~ing general ca:egories of uses shall be perni=-`ed: (!) Re:ai! businesses, including (3) gr o ce.--/ 's:ores mea: marke:s, delica:essens produce marke-`s drug J-`ores dry good hathate sales .De: s~ores c! o=hinE s:ores f!oris~ shops Se~ice busine=ses, in~udin barber shogs. beau=y ~arlors la~d~/ ~d d~ ~eanin~ es~ablis~en~s sel~se~ice la~drf and d~ ~e~in~ A~in~s:ra:ive and professional offices. (&) Governmen-`al offices. (~) (6) Accessory struc-`ures and uses necessary or cus-`o~arily inciden-`at -`o -.he above as provided for in the .Rancho Cucamonga Zoning Ordinance. Uses ~ezmi~ed s~jec~ to specific approval of a C~nditio~a~ Use Pez~i~: ( ) ,,,,,=.o,=i.e se=,,i=e i,,9 ,., ;.,,,' (2) C~,,v,~ emc~ --Frets. (3) FasZ foo~ restaurants. (4) ~ine ud liquor stores. (5) ~es=murants with enter~e/~--~nt and/or serving of alcoholic Beverages. (6) $hopp~n$ c~nters subjec~ to pr~isicm in Section 1 on Page 235. C~nch{ticmally ~r~i~ted ~=i~ FacUlties listed on Page 241. Rancho Cucamonga Development Code Sections ! 7.10. 020 & 17.10. 030 compatible to and harmonious with the character of surrounding residential or less intense land use area. General Commercial Distdct (GC). This district is intended for general commercial activities and services of a more intensive nature. These uses would be located primarily along major transportation routes and would include major shopping facilities, major service-oriented uses, major financial and corporate headquarters which are designed to serve the City or the region as a whole. Section 17,10.030 - Use Regulations Uses listed in Table 17.10.030 shall be allowable in one or more of the commercial districts as indicated in the columns beneath each commercial district. Where indicated with the letter "P," the use shall be a permitted use in that district. Where indicated with the letter "C," the use shall be a conditional use subject to the Conditional Use Permit process. In the event there is difficulty in categodzing a given use in one of the districts, the procedure outlined in Section 17.02.040 shall be followed. Table 17.10.030 - Use Regulations for Commercial/office Districts Use OP NC GC Offices and Related Uses 1. Administrative and executive offices. Artist and photographic studios, not including the sale of equipment or supplies. 3. Clerical and professional offices. Financial services and institutions, including ddve-through banks. Medical, dental, and related health services (non-animal related), including laboratories and clinics; only the sale of articles cteady incidental to the services provided shall be permitted. Prescription pharmacies, (also when located within a building containing the offices of 5 or more medical practitioners) Public buildings (city and county buildings, special districts, and post office). 8. Public utility service offices. P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P = Permiffed Use C = Conditional Use Parreit required 17.10-2 3/96 Rancho Cucamonga Development Code Section 17.10. 030 Use o 10. Public safety facility (police, fire, ambulance and paramedics). Related commercial uses (blueprinting, stationary, quick copy, etc.) when incidental to an office building or complex. General Commercial Uses Antique shops. Animal Care Facility (animal hospital, veterinarian, commercial kennel, grooming). a. Excluding exterior kennel, pens, or runs. b. Including exterior kennel, pens, or runs. Apparel stores. Art. music, and photographic studios and supply stores. Appliance stores and repair. Arcades (see special requirements per Section 17.10.030 F.). Athletic and Health Club, gyms, and weight reducing clinics. o Automotive sales and services (including motorcycles, boats, trailers, and campers). a. Sales. b. Rentals. Repairs (major engine work, muffler shops, painting, body work, and upholstery). d. Coin-op washing. e. Automatic washing. Service or gasoline dispensing stations (including minor repair such as tune-ups, brakes, batteries, tires, mufflers). P = Permitted Use C = Conditional Use Permit required 17.10-3 OP NC GC C C C P P P P P C P P - C P P P P P - p P - C C P P P C - C C C C C C C C C C C P 3/96 Rancho Cucamonga Development Code Use g. Parts and supplies. h. Tire sales and service (no outdoor storage). 9. Bakeries (retail only). 10. Barber and beauty shops. 11. Bicycle shops. 12. Blueprint and photocopy services. 13. Book, gift and stationary stores (other than adult related material). 14. Candy stores and confectionaries. 15. Catering establishments. 16. Cleaning and pressing establishments. 17. Carpenter shop or cabinet shop. 18. Cocktail lounge (bar, lounge, tavern)including related entertainment. a. Operated independent of a restaurant. b. Accessory to a restaurant. 19. Commercial recreation facilities. a. Indoor uses such as bowling, theaters, billiards, etc. b. Outdoor uses such as golf, tennis, basketball, baseball, trampolines, etc. 20. Dairy product stores. 21. Delicatessens. 22. Department stores. 23. Drive-in businesses, including theaters. (other than fast food restaurants). 24. Drug stores and pharmacies. Section 17.10. 030 OP NC GC - p P - p P P P P P P P P P P P P P P o _ P P P P . - P C C C C C C C P C C C - P P - P P . . p - C C P P P P = Permitted Use C = Conditional Use Permit required 17.10-4 3/96 Rancho Cucamonga Development Code Section 17. J O. 030 Use 25. Equipment rental yards. 26. Electronic goods (i.e. TV's, stereos, radios, VCR's) sales and service. 27. Fast-food restaurants. 28. Feed/Tack stores. 29. Florist shops. 30. Food stores and supermarkets. 31. Furniture stores, repair and upholstery. 32. General retail stores. 33. Hardware stores. 34. Home improvement centers. a. Material stored and sold within enclosed buildings. b. Outdoor storage of material such as lumber and building materials. 35. Hotels and Motels. 36. Ice Machines (outdoor). 37. Janitorial services and supplies. 38. Jewelry stores. 39. Laundry self-service. 40. Liquor stores. 41. Kiosks for key shops, film drops, etc. in parking lots. Locksmith shop. 43. Massage establishments. 44. Mini-storage for public use (no outdoor storage). 45. Mortuaries and cemeteries. OP NC GC - C P P C C P P P P P P o P P - P P - P P - P P P P C C P P P P P P P P P C C - P P - P P - - C - - C C C C P = Permitted Use C = Conditional Use Permit required 17.10-5 3196 Rancho Cucamonga Development Code Section 17.10. 030 Use 46. Music, dance, and martial arts studio. 47. Newspaper and magazine stores. 48. Nurseries and garden supply stores; provided, in the NC district, all equipment, supplies and material are kept within an enclosed area, and provided that fertilizer is stored in packaged form only. 49. Office and business machine stores. 50. Office supply stores. 51. Parking facilities (commercial) where fees are charged. 52. Pet shop. 53. Political or philanthropic headquarters. 54. Plumbing shop and supplies. 55. Photocopy. 56. Printing shops. 57. Recreational Vehicle Storage Yard. 58. Restaurants (other than fast food). a. With entertainment and/or cocktail lounge and bar. b. Incidental serving of beer and wine but without a cocktail lounge, bar, entertainment, or dancing. 59. Shoe stores, sales and repair. 60. Second-hand stores and pawn shops. Shopping Center subject to provisions in Section 17.10.030-F.4. 62. Spiritualist readings or astrology forecasting. 63. Sporting goods stores. 64. Stamp and coin shops. OP NC GC P P P P P P P P P C P P P P P P - P P P P P P P P P C C P C C P P P C P P P P = Permitted Use C = Conditional Use Permit required 17.10--6 3/96 Rancho Cucamonga Development Code Go Use 65. Swimming pool supplies. 66. Tailor. 67. Taxidermists. 68. Toy stores. 69. Travel agencies. 70. Transportation facilities (train and bus, taxi depots). 71. Truck and trailer rental, sales and service. 72. Variety stores. Public and semi-public uses 1. Day Care Facilities. 2. Convalescent facilities. 3. Hospitals. 4. Private and public clubs and lodges, including YMCA, YWCA, and similar youth group uses. 5. Educational institutions, parochial, private (including colleges and universities). Libraries & museums, public or private. 7. Parks and recreation facilities, public or private. 8. Public utility installations. 9. Vocational or business trade schools. 10. Churches, convents, monasteries, and other religious institutions. Accessory Uses 1. Accessory structures and uses customarily incidental to a permitted use and contained on the same site. OP P C Section 17.10.030 NC GC P P P P P P P P P C C - C P P C C, C P P C C C C C C C C P P P C C C C C C C C C C C C P P P P = Permitted Use C = Conditional Use Permit required 17.10-7 3/96 Rancho Cucamonga Development Code Section I Z 10. 030 Use OP NC GC 2. Accessory structures and uses customarily incidental to a conditional use and contained on C C C the same site. 3. Caretakers residence. P P P 4. Amusement Devices, per Section 17.10.030-F. P P P Temporary Uses 1. Temporary uses as prescribed in Section P P P 17.04.070 and subject to those provisions. Temporary office modules, subject to C C C provisions in Section 17.10.030-F.3. P = Permitted Use C = Conditional Use PerTnit required SPecial Use Regulations Amusement Devices. The use of amusement devices, as defined in Chapter 17.02, as an accessory use to a permitted use, shall be regulated based on the following criteria. No more than three devices, but not to exceed 5 percent of the public floor area, may be permitted per business without approval of a Conditional Use Permit. Each machine and playing area occupies a minimum of 10 square feet. b. The devices shall not obstruct or crowd entries, exits, or aisles. Adult supervision is required and the devices must be placed in an area which is visible to the supervisor at all times. Arcades. In consideration of a request for an arcade, as defined in Chapter 17.02, the following criteria will be considered and application material requested. The Commission shall consider, but not be limited to, the need for adult supervision, hours of operation, proximity to schools and other community uses, compatibility with the surrounding neighborhood and businesses, noise attenuation, bicycle facilities, and interior waiting areas. The applicant shall submit with his application, three sets of typed gummed labels, listing the name and address of all businesses within a shopping center and all landowners within a 300-foot radius of the shopping center or arcade. Each application shall contain a description of the types of machines, a floor plan, and hours of operation. 17.10-8 3/96 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING USE DETERMINATION NO. 96-04, DETERMINING THAT MARTIAL ARTS STUDIOS ARE PERMITTED IN THE VILLAGE COMMERCIAL DISTRICT, WITHIN THE VICTORIA COMMUNITY PLAN, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF A. Recitals. 1. Hughes Investments has filed an application on behalf of the Vineyards Marketplace Shopping Center for a Use Determination as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Use Determination request is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 8th day of January 1997, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga held a meeting to consider the application. 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced meeting on January 8, 1997, including written and oral staff reports, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The use in question is of a similar intensity to other permitted or conditionally permitted uses in similar districts within the City. proposed. The use in question meets the purpose and the intent of the district in which it Is c. The use in question meets and conforms to the applicable goals and objectives of the General Plan. 3. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs I and 2 above, this Commission hereby approves the Use Determination to include Martial Arts Studios as a permitted use in the Village Commercial district of the Victoria Community Plan. 4. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 8TH DAY OF JANUARY 1997. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. UD 96°03 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA January 8, 1997 Page 2 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 8th day of January 8, 1997, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: TO: FROM: BY: SUBJECT: January 8, 1997 Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission Brad Buller, City Planner Dan Coleman, Principal Planner TRAILS ADVISORY COMMITTEE BACKGROUND: There is a vacant seat on the Trails Advisory Committee. The Commission directed staff to advertise and seek an equestrian experienced with the City's riding trails. A total of five applications were received: Ken Douglas Ginger Lofgren Pat Morris Sue Rabone Donald Terry Copies of their completed applications are attached. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Commission have the Trails Committee members from the Planning Commission (Bethel, Tolstoy) interview all five candidates and present a recommendation to the full Commission. aad~Respectfully submitted, City Planner BB:DC/jfs Attachments: Exhibit"A"- Applications ITEM E CITY OF KANCHO CUCAMONGA CITIZEN'S APPLICATION TO SERVE ON TRAILS ADVISORY COMMITTEE The Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga invites applications for a member-at- large to represent the equestrian community. Titis Committee reviews proposed development projects to advise the Planning Commission on the location and design of equestrian trails. The Committee . meets once a month on an as needed basis. RESIDENCE ADDRESS: //Vb3 ~K.;f.X.'F~ /'~__ ZIP CODE: ~'? -70/ Briefly describe your horse riding experience (i.e., type of riding, miles per week, years experience): Why are you interested in se~ing on this Comminee? ~0 klelP What do you feel are the critical equestrian issues in Rancho Cucamonga./w~(~Jl c, id 4. List all equestrian organizations you are actively involved in: ~_~ x-r ~2xe,'x ID ~5 cO ( 5. What hours on Monday ~hrough Thursday would you be ~vailable for Commi~ee meetings? Please mail completed application by November 30, 1996 to Dan Coleman, Planning ~ivaion, lO5O0 Civic Center Drive, Rancho CucamonRa, CA 91730. ~o~ 2 o CITIZEN'S APPLICATION TO SERVE ONGlt¥ TRAILS ADVISORY COMMITTEE The Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga invites applications for a member-at- large to represent the equestrian community. This Committee reviews proposed development projects to advise the Planning Commission on the location and design of equestrian trails. The Committee meets once a month on an as needed basis. RESIDENCE ADDRESS: c~l ~t ~1%'~:210~'Je~' A-xJ~.. t4~l/6¥~kZlP CODE: c~1701 1. Briefly describe your horse riding experience (i.e., type &riding, miles per week, years experience): 2. Why are you interested in se~ing on this Coremlace7 What do you feel are the critical equestrian issues in ~ancho Cucamo~ga? List all equestrian organizations you are actively involved in: What hours on Monday through Thursday would you be available for Comminee meetings? Please mail completed application by November 30, 1996 to Dan Coleman, Planning Division, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730. ' V . Rancho cucamOO°~a CITIZEN S APPLICATION TO SERE ot .__ n A[,vIso.¥ The Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga invites applications for a member-at- large to represent the equestrian community. This Committee reviews proposed development projects to advise the Planning Commission on the location and design of equestrian trails. The Committee meets once a month on an as needed basis. NAME: Pat Morriq DAYTIME PHONE #: 909-944-9929 RESIDENCE ADDRESS: 8401 Bella Vista, Alta Loma, Ca. ZIP CODE: 91701 Briefly describe your horse riding experience (i.e., type of riding, miles per week, years experience): Been ridinq, Western & English, for over 40 yrs. Owned large stable in Riverside 10 yrs. Started 3 Disabled programs. Am now teaching both normal and disabled young riders. Whyareyouinterestedinse~ingonthisComminee? We moved here 22 vrs. aoo as it wa[ an Equestrian-community and we owned horses. We rode all the trails and helped design Heritage Park. I'm most interested in the trails and all phases of Equestrian activities and want to see them preserved. Whatdo you ~elarethecriticalequestrianissuesin Rancho Cucamonga? More trails and areas are bein~ crowded out and we want to maintain all trails we have now and kee~ them safe for all riders. 4. List all equestrian organizations you are actively involved in: A1 ta Loma Ri di ng Club. Rancho Rebels 4 H, Rising Stars Equestrian Therapy, North Amer, Riding for the Handicappe~ American Horse Show Assn., California Dressaqe Society, American Quarter Horse Assn. 5. What hours on Monday through Thursday would you be available for Committee meetings? Monday, Tuesday or Thursday 4 - 9 PM Please mail completed application by November 30, 1996 to Dan Coleman, Planning Division, ~0500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730. CITY OF RANCHO NOV 0 d 1996 CITIZEN'S APPLICATION TO SERVE ON City of Rancho TRAILS ADVISORY The Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga invites applications for a member-at- large to represent the equestrian community. Titis Committee reviews proposed development projects to advise the Planning Commission on the location and design of equestrian trails. The Committee meets once a month on an as needed basis. DAYTIME PHONE #: ~0~ /~" ~> 7 - 0,-~ ?~-~ I. Briefly describe your horse riding experience (i.e., type of riding, miles per week, years experience): 2. why ar~ou impressed i. s~i~8 ~. ~bis Co~.__.~ ¢~)~/~ 'H~ ¢~-~ : : - ,' ,, . //,' " . 3. ~hat do yo~eel are the critical equestrian issues in Rancho Cucamonga? ~qt ~.~.~.~ , ._ , I - ? - . --/" 4./ List all equestrian organi:'Qns you are actively involved in:: ~:~' :'::,~: ::: 5.' What hours on Monday through Thursa~would you be avadable for Comm~uee meetings. / ' ~. . ~ ~:/' - / Piece mail completed application by November 30, 1996 to Dan Cole~n, Plan~ing Diveion, 10500 civic O.t~r Ori~, ~n~no C~c~mo.g~, C~ 9~ 7~0~ ~/.. _ :~. ~ ~. .~ ' ~ / ~ [L~"'~~-~ /- % '7' ~ I RECEIVED CITY OF RAaNCHO CUCAMONGA OCT 1 5 1996 City ol Rancho Cucamonga Planning Division CITIZEN'S APPLICATION TO SERVE ON TRAILS ADVISORY COMMITTEE The Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga invites applications for a member-at- large to represent the equestrian community. This Committee reviews proposed development projects to advise the Planning.Commission on the location and design of equestrian trails. The Committee meets once a month on an as needed basis. NAME: Donald B. Terry DAYTIME PHONE#: 909-399-9724 RESIDENCE ADDRESS: 2709 A North Towne Ave., Pomona ZIP CODE: 91767 Briefly describe your horse riding experience (i.e., type of riding, miles per week, years experience): 17 years as horse owner, breeder, trainer and trail rider,in Alta Loma. Why are you interested in serving on this Committee? To preserve existing trails and promote new trails as the City grows. Whatdo you ~elarethecriticalequestrianissuesin Rancho Cucamonga? Preventing existing trails from being closed by homeowners & & developing new trails along flood control & other right of ways. 4. List all equestrian organizations you are actively involved in: Alta Loma Riding Club: 10 years as board member and 2 years as President and 2 years as Past President. 5. What hours on Monday through Thursday would you be available for Committee meetings? My own business allows me to be flexible, but extra hours are limited. Please mail completed application by November 30, 1996 to Dan Coleman, Planning Division, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730.