HomeMy WebLinkAbout1978/05/10 - Agenda Packetl r
,•,
1
e
\
ar r
)A
s
,Y.
CITY COUNCIT, HEARIN[ J'ATE2 May 10, 1978
• RANCHO CUCAMONGA
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA ITEM NO.-J.
ROUTINE ITEM
NON - ROUTINE ITEM
TIME OF ITEM
AREA: Rancho Cucamonga
FILE/INDEX NO: Zone Change Index No. W93 -73
PROPOSAL: Zone Change from R -1 to AP
LOCATION: SE corner of Baseline Rd. and Hellman
Ave.
APPLICANt: Douglas Hone
-
ENGINEER/ARCHITECT:
26• PUBLIC HEARING NOTICES SEND ON 4 -26 -78
,
REPORT PREPARED BY: Douglas Payne
FIELD INSPECTION TEAM:
DATE OF INSPECTION:
PARCEL SIZE: 2.3 acres '
EXISTING LAND USE: one residence and vacant land
EXISTING ZONING: R -1
SURROUNIDING LAND USE AND ZONING
;
n y.pf
NORTH: Commercial and Warehousing
.�._ 1
Zoned AP and M -1 -
.k•
- ii
_�r�,o�:
`�^:• ,�
EAST: Railroad and Residential
Zoned R -1
,
!
SOUTH; Railroad and Residential
Zoned R -1
WEST: Residential and Vacant
Zone R -1
3?�
d-
GENERAL PLAN AND DESIGNATICN:
None
THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON APRIL
26, 1978 DETERMINED
THAT THIS PROJECT WOULD KAVE A - IGN
EFFECT ON THE
ENVIRONMENT.
City
Water
Sewer
STAFF REL'[(1*7MTICN:
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
Staff Analysis:
The applicant is requesting a zone change from R -1 to AP on
the triangular shaped parcel located on the southeast corner
of Baseline and Hillman. According to the applicant, he would
like to develop the site with an office complex.
As mentioned, the site is triangular in shape. On the north
and east, it fronts onto two arterial highways. Baseline
on the north, a proposed divided major, and Hellman on the
east, a proposed secondary highway. Along the remaining side
of the site is the Southern Pacific Railroad lines. The loca-
tion of the site is in an area that is transitioning into com-
mercial uses. To the north are new commercial and light ware-
housing operations. Approximately 500 feet to the west is the
library and Park and Recreation Building. On the northwest
is a church.
The site is appropriate for both commercial or residential use.
Should commercial uses be permitted on the site, the residential
uses to the east would be buffered by the railroad line that
defines the easterly side of the project.
Findings:
Based upon the analysis, staff reccsmnends the following findings:
1. Since the area is developing with commercial uses, there is
reasonable probability that the AP zone district will be
consistent with the General Plan proposal being consider -d.
2. There is little or no probability of substaintial detriment
to or interference with the future adopted general plan if
the AP zone district is ultimately inconsistent with the
general plan.
3. No development plan has been filed concurrently with this
zone change request.
4. The zone change will be in the interest of furtherance of
public health, safety and general welfare.
Recommendation:
Based upon the findings and analysis, Staff recommends that the
AP zone change be approved.
'`CITY COUNCIL HEARIN�- -'?ATE: May 10, 1978
1
RANCHO CUCAMONGA
CITY COUNCIL
`- ,,GENDA ITEM NO. 2
ROUTINE ITEM
NON- ROUTINE ITEM
TIME OF ITEM
AREA: Rancho Cucamonga
FILE /INDEX NO: Zonis change Index # W94 -72
PROPOSAL: Change zone classification from R -3 to AP
LOCATION: Northwest corner of Has3line and Amethyst Street
APPLicp&: James A. Van Antwerp
ENGIfEEP/ARCHITECr:
26 PUBLIC H0- -.RzNG NOTICES SENT ON April 26, 1978
REPORT PREPARED BY: John Porevuznik
FTFT INSPECTION TEAM: DATE OF INSPECTION:
PARCEL SIZE: .37 acres .
•ZCISTING LAND USE: Undeveloped, vineyard
&. TSTTNG ZONING: R -3
SIR2ROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING
NORTH: Residential
Zoned R -3
EAST: Veterinary office &'residential
Zoned C -2 -T and R -3
SO{: Residential
Zoned R -1
WEST: 7 -11 Store
Zoned M -1
GENERAL PLAN AND DESIGNATION:
None
.: .,
7
THE PLANNING COMMISSION_- ON APRIL 26, 1978 DETERMINED
THAT THIS PROJECT WOULD E.AVE A N -SIGNF CANT EFFECT ON THE
ENVIRONMENT.
City Sphere o.
Water Service
Sewer Service
7 STAFF RDCCINDATION: Approval
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
Staff Analysis:
The applicant is requesting a zone change from R -3, multiple-
family residential to AP, administrative and professional dis-
trict. Applicant states that he wishes to construct a cement
block office building with slump stone facing. The adminis-
trative and professional office district, AP, is designed to
provide areas where these type of offices may be located with
• functional and related group of uses. it is also useful as
• buffer` district between highways and adjacent residential
uses.
Findings:
Based upon the analysis, Staff recommends the following findings:
1. Since the area has developed with commercial uses across the
street to the east, there is reasonable probability that the
AP zone district will be consistent with the General Plan
proposal being considered.
2. There is little or no probability of substaintial detriment
to or interference with the future adopted general plan if
the AP zone district is ultimately inconsistent with the
general plan.
3. No development plan has been filed concurrently with this
zone change request, although one submitted for information
only.
4. The zone change will be in the interest of furtherance of
public health, safety and general welfare by providing buf-
fer between Baseline and residential uses to the north of
subject site.
Recommendation:
Based upon the findings and analysis, Staff recommends that the
AP zone change be approved.
r
Southern California Edison Company
1351 E. FRANCIS S7REE1
OWAR1O. CALIFORNIA 91761
R. R. VERRVE
311114IC. r.w.nan March 30, 1978
Honorabie Planning Commission
City of Rancho Cucamonga
P. 0. Box 793
Cucamonga, California 91730
Gentlemen:
SUBJECT: Proposed Subdivision Ordinance
The Southern California Edison Company appreciates the opportunity
you have given us to review the proposed Rancho Cucamonga Subdivision
Ordinance and to present recommendations for changes and additions.
Our suggestions are based upon the experience of this Company in
complying with similar ordinances in over 165 cities and counties
and are ones the Company feels are necessary to allow it, as a public
utility, to continue to provide satisfactory service to the community
of Rancho Cucamonga. We feel these suggested changes are consistent.
with the intent and purpose of good subdivision principles.
II. Parcel Maps
Section 9 Dedications
Change (a) to read: "Dedications or irrevocable offers
of dedication of rights of way and easements, intended
for public use, shall be required as a condition of the
approval of a parcel map, or the waiver thereof, in the
following cases:. ."
Reason:
There is no longer a need for delineation of public
utility easementu on record maps. The inclusion of
the phrase "intended for public use" makes the intent
very clear.
,1
n �
4
Honorable Planning Commission
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Page 2
March 30, 1978
III, Tentative Tract Maos
(k) Delete "and proposed"
Reason:
Proposed public utility easements if shown on the map
would clutter it; also, the exact locations are not
determined until the final lot lines are approved.
Further, all public utilities which are located in
dedicated road rights of way are in franchise position.
Section 4. Development Advisory Board
Investigation and Reports
Add (i) "A statement from the serving public utilities
that the design of the subdivision does /does not unrea-
sonably interfere with public utility rights."
Reason:
Insurance will be provided against the event of lot
design and utility rights being in conflict.
IV. Hillside Development Regulations
Section 3
(k) Delete "and proposed"
Reason;
Same as for Tentative Tract Maps above.
Section 7 Public Improvements
Second line, delete "and public utility"
Reason:
Standards and specifications for public utility improve-
ments are approved by ::he California Public Utilities
Commission.
t
Honorable Planning Commission
City of Ranebo Cucamonga
Page 3
March 30, 1978
1X. Underground Utilities
Section 1
Change to read:
"General requirements.
a) Electric distribution lines of 16,000 volts
or less, telephone or other communications,
street lighting and cable television lines
shall be placed underground.
b) The owner or land divider is responsible
for complying with the requirements of
this section and shall make the necessary
arrangements with the serving utilities
for the installation of such facilities."
Section 3
Add "and provided that approval has been obtained from
the California Public Utilities Commission."
R. Final Maps
Section 1
Add "At the time the subdivider presents the final
tract map to the Planning Commission, there shall. be
presented certificates executed respectively by the
various public utility companies authorized to serve in
the area of the subdivision, certifying that satisfactory
provisions have been made with each of the said public
utility companies as to the location of the facilities
and that satisfactory easement, when required by such
companies, have been executed and delivered to the
certifying companies for recording."
Should you have any questions regarding the above suggested changes,
please do not hesitate to contact me or Randy Bond, City /Area Manager,
at 983 -1746.
Yours truly,
J '
R. R. Verrue
RRV:mb
a.;i.
0 r
:.. : r.
66.021 — 66.022 LAND USE, BUILDING REGULATIONS
Chapter 2
TREE PRESERVATION
Sections:
66.021 purpose and Intent.
66.022 Definitions.
66.023 Scope.
66.024 Permit Required.'
66.025 Permit Application.
66.026 Issuance.
66.027 Enforcement.
66.028 Appeal.
66.029 Separability.
66.021 Purpose and Intent.
The provisions of this chapter are enacted to regulate the large - scale .ra
removal of living. native trees in the unincorporated arras of San Bernardino
County on property or combinations of property under single ownership,
greater than twenty thousand (20.0001 square feet; and specifically to
complement the 1973 State Forest Practices Act in providing for the
conservation and wise use of our forest resources.
66.022 Definitions.
"Approved Structure:" A stiacture or paved area. of impervious
substance which has been approved by the Building Department as an
improvement of the site and which complies with all codes, ordinances and
regulations of San Bernardino County.
"Damaged Tree:" Any tree certified by a tree expert, as defined in this
chapter. which is damaged by insects, smog, fire, disease or other natural or
man -made causes.
"Native:" Trees which grow or live naturally in San Bernardino
County. including smog- resistant trees introduced as part of a reforestation
program. This shall not be construed to mean fruit or nut - bearing trees, 1
orchatds. planted landscaping, or commercial nursery stock.
"Person:" Any person, firm, partnership, association, corporation,
company, or organization of any kind.
"Remove:" To cut down. fell. push over, dig tip, burn, poison, severely
prune such that death of the tree is caused. or destroy a tree in any manner.
"Specimen Tree:" Any tree with a root ball greater than a 20- gallon 1
container, as defined by a commercial nurseryman. 1
-Tree, Any woody plant having one well- defined stem and a more or ! -V
less definitely formed crown (but not excluding unbranched cactuses,
yucCas, and palms) and attaining somewhere in its natural or planted range a 4
height of at least eight (8) feet and a diameter of not less than two (2)
inches.
I12-2-741 484 -2
,to,
a
Inal Poor Quaky
TREE PRESERVATION 66.023 — 66.024
"Tree Expert:" For the purposes of this chapter, a Registered
Professional Forester. a licensed L udseape Architect, or a Professional
Botanist shall be considered a tree expert.
"Violation:" llne removal of each separate tree shall be considered a
separate violation.
66.023 Scope. j
(a) The provisions or this chapter shall apply to trees growing on
private land within Ihr unincorporated areas of San Bernardino County and
—.
to trees growing on public land owned by the County of San Bernardino,
except as noted.
(h) The provisions of this chapter are not applicable to: r.
�
(I ) Any timber operations conducted under the Forest Practice
Act of 1973 (Division 4, Chapter 8, Public Resources Cede) unless a
timberland conversion permit application is filed with the State Forester, t
('_) Any tree removed on lands owned by the United States
Government or the State of California: or any tree removed by the County
of San Bernardino which is part of a project that has been reviewed for
environmental impact:
(3) Any public utility subject to jurisdiction of the Public
Utilities Commission or any other constituted public agency. where to
maintain safe uperation of facilities under theirjurisdiction, trees are pruned,
topped, or braced:
(4) Insect - damaged trees and trees removed in firebreaks, by
'
the California Division of Forestry: `
(S) All planted trees which are not native to the particular f
parcel in question. unless the tree is part of a reforestation program:
(6) Any tree required to be removed by other codes, ordinances
or laws of San Bernardino County, the State of California or afar United
States:
(7) Tree's which are an immediate threat to till' public health, I
safety or welfare and require emergency removal:
(8) Any private property or combination of private properties
under single ownership, of 20,000 square feet or less.
1
66.024 Permit Required.
Any person who shall wilfully room w a living, native tree with I ) a six
(6) inch or greater stem diameter or ninewtn (19) inches in circumference
measured at four and one -half (41/2) feet ahuve the average ground level of
the base of the plant, or '_) it stela twenty (20) r_ct or greater in height, as
herein provided. shall first obtain it permit to do so in accord with the
procedures set forth in this chapter. In the desert portions of Sim Bernardino
County, as defined by the San Bernardino County General flan, this chapter
?• }�', :.'
shall apply to living. native trees with sterns four (4) inches or greater in.t.�
diameter or twelve and two - thirds (12 -2/3) inches in circumference or eight
484-3 112.2-741
1Y.
1
t
dt
66.025 66.027 LAND USE, BUILDING REGULATIONS
(8) 1'ect or greater in height. A fee, as established by the Board of
Supervisors, shall be paid to the Environmental Improvement Agency for the
purpose of defraying the costs of processing an on -site inspection. An
approved subdivision, site approval, or building permit shall substitute for a
permit to remove living, native trees in areas shown to be covered by
proposed structures and paved areas, and no fee shall be charged in this case.
66425 Permit Application.
Application for a permit to rep -ove a living, native tree shall be made in
writing at any office of the Environmental Improvement Agency, on
provided forms. Said application shall contain a map showing the number
and location of trees to lx cut down or removed and a brief statement of the
applicant's intent regarding the future use of the property and the reason for
removal.
66.026 Issuance.
Upon receipt of all application for a permit, the Environmental
Improvement Agency Administrator or his authorized agent will inspect the
premises and determine whether or not said trees meet the criteria fcr
removal. The application may be referred to another department or to an
appropriate committee of the Planning Commission for a report and
recommendation or. to the Planning Commission for a public hearing. A
living. native tree or trees may be removed when one of the following
findings is made:
(it) The condition of the tree with respect. to damage. danger of
falling: its proximit, to existing or proposed structures: or overstocked stand
density. which is impairing the health and vigor of the forest stand, is suds
that it is in the furtherance of the public health, safety or welfare to permit
its removal.
(b) The location of the tree occupies the site of an proposed
approved structure or paved area. In mountain areas, flue applicant shall
design his project such that twenty percent (2010 of commercial,
administrative / professional, and multiple residential projects remain in
their natural. undeveloped condition. Fifty percent (50%) of this area shall
be located in the front yard area or visible from the public thoroughfare.
66.027 Enforcement.
(a) The provisions of This chapter shall be. enforced by any
authorized number of the Environmental Improvement Agency, and may be
enforced by the California Division of Forestry.
(b) Any person violating any of the provisions of this chapter shall be
guilty of a misdemeanor, upon conviction thereof, punishable by a fine of
not more than rive hundred dollars ($500.00) or by imprisonment in the
112-2.741 484-4
n
E
Vay
4 s rFV
i
TREE PRESERVATION
66.028 — 66.029
County Jail fora period of not more than six (u) months or by both such
fine and imprisonment.
(c) In addition, for every tree illegally removed, a specimen tree of
the same species from commercial nursery stock shall be planted in the
location of the removed tree within six (6) months. If, in the opinion of a
tree expert, a replacement tree of the came species would not be in the
interest of the public health, safety and welfare, another species may be
substituted, if approved by a tree expert. All replacement trees, which are
certified as dead by a tree expert, shall be immediately replaced by the
misdemeanant, until a replacement tree has bean growing in place for five (5)
years. Should the misdemeanant fail to replace a (lead replacement tree
within six (6) months after notification by the County, the County shall
contract to have such tree replaced and place a lien upon the subject
property to cover the replacement costs.
66.028 Appeal.
Any person aggrieved by an act or determination of the Environmental
Improvement Agency Administrator in the exercise of the authority granted
herein shall have the right to appeal to the Planning Commission.. An appeal
shall be riled on forms provided, within thirty (30) days of the
Environmental Improvement Agency Administrator's decision.
66.029 Separability.
If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase of this chapter is
for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of a
court of competent jurisdiction, it shall not affect the remaining portions of
the chapter.
I
r
i..
i
484-5 !12.2-741
66.021 — 66.022 LAND USE, BUILDING REGULATIONS
Sections:
66.021
66.022
66.023
66.024
66.025
66.026
66.027
6,6.0'_8
66.029
Chapter
TREE PRESERVA
Purpose and InterA.
Definitions.
Scope.
Permit Required.'
Permit Application.
Issuance.
Enforcement.
Appeal.
Separability.
66.021 Purpose and Intent.
The provisions of this chapter are enacted to regulate the large - scale
removal of living, native trees in the unincorporated areas of San Bernardino
County on property or combinations of property under single ownership,
greater than twenty thousand (20.000) square feet; and specifically to
complement the 1973 State Forest Practices Act in providing for the
conservation and wise use of our forest resources.
66.022 Definitions.
"Approved Structure:" A structure or paved area of impervious
substance which has been approved by ►lie Building Department as an
improvement of the site and which complies with all codes, ordinances and
regulations of San Bernardino County.
"Damaged Tree:" Any tree certified by a tree expert, as defined in this
chapter, which is damaged by insects, smog, fire, disease or other natural or
man -made causes.
"Native:" Trees which Erow or live naturally in San Bernardino
County, including smog - resistant trees introduced as part of a reforestation
program. This shall not be construed to mean fruit or nut - bearing trees,
orchards, planted landscaping, or commercial nursery stock.
"Person:" Any person, firm. partnership, association, corporation,
company, or organization of any kind.
"Remove:" To cut down. fell, push over, dig up, burn, poison, severely
prune such that death of the tree is caused, or destroy a tree in any manner.
"Specimen Tree:" Any tree with a root ball greater than a 20- gallon
container. as defined by a commercial nurseryman.
"Tree: " Any woody plant having one well - defined stem and a more or
less definitely formed crown (but not excluding unbranched cactuses.
yuccas, and palms) and attaining somewhere in its natural or planted range a
height of at least eight (8) feet and a diameter of not less than two (2)
inches.
�.. 112.2 -741 484-2
r -�
f
;
i
TREE PRESERVATION
66.023 — 66.024
"Tree Experu" For the purposes of This chapter. a Registered
Professional Forester, a licensed Landscape Architect, or a Professional
Botanist shall be considered a tree expert.
"Violation' The removal of each separate tree shall be considered a
separate violation.
66.023 Scope.
(a) The provisions of this chapter shall apply to trees growing on
private land within the unincorporated areas of San Bernardino County and
to trees growing on public land owned by the County or San Bernardino,
except as noted.
(b) The provisions of this chapter are not applicable to:
(1) Any timber operations conducted under the Forest Practice
Act of 1973 (Division 4, Chapter S. Public Resources Code) unless a
timberland conversion permit application is filed with file State Forester:
(2) Any tree removed on lands owned by the United States
Government or the State of California: or any tree removed by the County
of San Bernardino which is part of a project that has been reviewed for
environmental impact:
(3) Any public utility subject to jurisdiction of the Public
Utilities Commission or any other constituted public agency, where to
maintain safe operation of facilities under their jurisdiction, trees are pruned,
topped, or braced:
(4) Insect - damaged trees and tree:: removed in Firebreaks, by
the California Division of Forestry:
(5) All planted trees which arc not native to the particular
parcel in question, unless the tree is part of a reforestation program;
(6) Any tree required to be removed by other codes, ordinances
or laws of San Bernardino County, the State of California or the United
States:
(7) Trees which are an immediate threat to the publie health,
safety or welfare and require emergency removal:
(8) Any private property or combination of private properties
under single ownership, of 20,000 square fret or less.
66.024 Permit Required.
Any person who shall wilfully remove a living, native tree with 1) a six
(6) inch or greater stem diameter or nineteen ( 19) inches in circe-rmference
measured at four and one -half WD fret above the average ground level of
the base of the plant, or_) a stenn twenty (' -0) feel or greater in height, as
herein provided, shall first obtain a permit to do so in accord with the
procedures set forth in this chapter. In the desert portions of San Bernardino
County, as defined by the San Bernardino County Gencral Plan, this chapter
shall apply to living, native trees with stems four (4) inches or greater in
diameter or twelve and two-thirds (12 -2/3) inches in circtunference or eight
484-3 112-2-741
i
1
r
.4k .
66.025 — 66.027 LAND USE, BUILDING REGULATIONS
(8) feet or greater in height. A fee, as established yy the Board of
Supervisors. shall be paid to the Environmental Improvement Agency for the
purpose of defraying the costs of processing an on -site inspection. An
approved subdivision• site approval. or building permit shall substitute for a
permit to remove living, native trees in areas shown to be covered by
proposed structures and paved areas, and no fee shall be chirged in this case.
66.025 hermit Application.
Application for a permit to remove a living. native tree shall be made in
writing at any orrice of the Environmental Improvement Agency, on
provided forms. Said application shall contain a reap showing the number
and location of trees to be cut down or removed and a brief statement of the
applicant's intent regarding the future use of the property and the reason for
Removal.
66.026 Issuance.
Upon receipt of an application for a permit. the Environmental
Improvement Agency Administrator or his authorized agent will inspect the
prendscs and determine whether or not said trees meet the criteria for
removal. The application may lie referred to another department or to an
appropriate committee of the Planning Commission for a report and
reconunc ndation or, to the Planning Commission for a public hearing. A
i
living, native tree or trees may be removed when one of the following
I
ridings is made:
(a) The condition or the tree with respect to damiget danger of
it
(ailing: its proximity to existing or proposed structures; or overstocked stand
density. which is impairing the health and vigor of the forest stand, is such
that it is in the furtherance of the public health, safety or welfare to permit
its removal.
f
(b) The location of tile tree occupies the site of an proposed
approved structure or paved area. In mountain areas, the applicant shall
design his project such that twenty percent (201/0 of commercial,
i
administrative / professional, and multiple - residential projects remain in
their natural. undeveloped condition. Fifty percent (50'/x) of this area shall
be located in the front yard area or visible from the public thoroughfare.
66.027 Enforcement.
�. `
(a) The provisions of this chapter shall be enforced by any
authorised nt niber of the Environmental Improvement Agency, and may be
enforced by the California Division or Forestry.
(b) Any person violating any of file provisions of this chapter shall be
:
guilty of a misdemeanor, upon conviction thereof, punishable by a fine of
not more than five hundred dollars ($500.00) or by imprisonment in the
112L2-741 484-4
e TREE PRESERVATION
r
66.028 — 66.029
County Jail for a period of not more than six (6) months or by both such
fine and imprisonment.
(c) In addition, for every tree illegally removed, n specimen tree of
the same species from commercial nursery stock shall be planted in the
location of the removed tree within six (6) months. If, in the opinion of a
tree expert, a replacement tree of the same species would not be in the
interest of the public health, safety and welfare, another species may be j
substituted, if approved by a tree expert. All replacement trees, which are
certified as dead by a tree expert, shall be immediately replaced by the
misdemeanant, until a replacement tree has been growing in place for five (5)
years. Should the misdemeanant fail to replace a dead replacement tree
within six (6) months after notification by the County, the County shall
contract to have such tree replaced and place a lien upon the subject
property to cover the replacetent costs.
66.028 Appeal.
Any person ggrieved by an act or determination of the Environmental
Improvement Agency Administrator in the exercise of the authority granted
herein shall have the right to appeal to the Planning Commission. An appeal
shall be filed on forms provided, within thirty (30) days of the
Environmental Improvement Agency Administrator's decision.
66.029 Separability.
If any section, subsection, sentence, clause., or phrase of this chapter is
for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of a
court of competent jurisdiction, it shall not affect the remaining portions of i
the chapter.
4845
[12.2.741
-'t�
11 {t A A �A, try
AGENDA
RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION
Regular Meeting
May 10, 1978
1.
Pledge of Allegiance
2.
Roll Call:
Dahl _, Garcia _, Jones _, Remple
_, Tolstoy
3.
Approval of
Minuces
4.
Miscellaneous Reports
Advertised Public Hearing Items
1.
Pruposal:
Zone Change from R -1 to AP, Index No.
W93 -73
Location:
Southeast corner of Baseline Road and
Hellman Avenue
Applicant:
Douglas Hone
Staff:
Doug Payne
2.
Proposal:
Zone Change from R -3 to AP, Index No.
W94 -72
Location:
Northwest corner of Baseline Road and
Amethyst Street
Applicant:
James A. VanAntwerp
Staff:
Doug Payne
3.
Proposal:
Amend the Location and Development Plan to add
a gas station w:,th provisions to sell
food items,
Index No. W96 -73
Location:
Southeast corner of Archibald and Baseline
Applicant:
Mobile oil /Property Investment West
Staff:
Doug Payne
Policy Items
1. An ordinance to supplement the Subdivision.Map Act.
2. An ordinance establishing regulation and control of the location,
size, type and number of signs permitted within the City.
1 ��
t CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
REGULAR MEETING - PLANNING COMMISSION
APRIL 26, 1978
The Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga met in a
regular session on Wednesday, April 26, 1978 at 7:05 p.m• in the
Community Service Building. The meeting was called to order by
Chairman Rempel who opened with the pledge of allegiance.
Commissionary present: Hni -man Rempel, Richard Dahl, Jorge
Garcia, Laura Jones, Peter Tolstoy
Commissioners absent: None
Upon motion by Tolstoy, seconded by Dahl and unanimously carried,
the minutes of the April 12, 1978 meeting were approved.
t
MISCELLANEOUS REPORTS:
City Manager Lauren Wasserman reported that the oral interviews
for the position of Community Development Director would be held
on May 11, 1978- Commissioners Garcia and Tolstoy were selected
to participate on the oral board interviews.
CONTINUED ITEMS-
TENTATIVE TRACT N0. 9583 (REVISED)
E/O HAVEN, APPROX. 1000' N/O WILSON AVENUE
(Deer Creek Development Co. /Madole f, Associates, Inc.)
PHASING OF TENTATIVE TRACT 9584 INTO - TENTATIVE TRACT
NOS. 9584 -1, 9584 -2, 9584 -3, E/O HAVEN, APPROX. 1500'
N/O WILSON AVENUE (Deer Creek Development Co. /Madole
$ Associates, Inc.),
Planning staff member Mr. Stevens reported that these items were
continued from the Planning Commission Meeting of March 22, 1978.
He briefly described the projects as stated in their earlier staff
report and stated that the City Council had indicated their desire
to have tracts developed in phases rather than recording a large
number of homes at one time. He indicated staff's feeling that
it would be more desirable to grade smaller areas rather than to
grade the whole tract at once. Staff recommends that both tentative
tracts be approved subject to conditions and findings as stated
in their staff report to the Commission.
Mr. Dahl asked if a report had been received from the attorney
regarding the CCF,Rs. Mr. Wasserman reported that a letter has
been received from the Assistant City Attorney, Mr. Edward Hopson,
stating the recommendations from Attorney Donald E. Marorcy. The
proposed revision has been incorporated in the proposed CC411s.
Mr. Tony Zenz spoke on behalf of the applicant. lie gave a brief
description of the project, reviewed the planned phasing of the
traces and indicated that the applicant is willing to comply with
the attorney's revision to the CCFRs.
Mr. Milt Madole described the revisions of the flood control channel
north of Tentative Tract 9583 as well as the revisions to the tract.
Discussion was field regarding the drainage from these tracts. Messrs.
Tolstoy and Garcia expressed concern as . to where all the run -off
wuuld drain from the tracts and stated that a definite drainage
Plan needs to be developed.
:- Mr. Joe Colley from the County Road Department stated that easements
will have to be obtained from property owners to the east of the,
tract to permit a portion of the drainage from these tracts to pass
through their property• Mr. Zenz stated that the applicant has been
working for months on the drainage problem and is working with the
property owners to acquire the necessary easements.
" 7
4 tit
c� Planning Commission Minutes (cont April 26, 1978 "?
9'
Mr. Dan Nicholson, Landscape Architect for the applicant, reported
on the circulation and landscaping of the tract. He stated that
the bridal trails will'run in front of the homes and described the
landscaping along the trails. Horse crossings will be kept to a
minimum for traffic control purposes and indicated that the trails
can be used to pedestrian traffic also.
Mr. Garcia expressed concern over the lack of sidewalks in the tract.
Mr. Stevens reported that on the larger lots of half -acre and 1 acre
size, sidewalks are not required by the County. It has been staff's
feeling that property owners of horse property had a different life
style and the costs for the street improvements on the large lots
would be a great financial burden on the property owner. The Asst.
City Attorney stated that the city will not be liable if a provision
for pedestrian traffic is provided.
Discussion was held regarding the school concern. Mr. Zenz stated
that the applicant is working with the school districts on this.
Mr. Nicholson stated that many of the corners throughout the tract
could be used for bus stops for school children.
Mr. Garcia stated that he would like to see some form of identifica-
tion or focal point for the development. Mr. Stevens reported that
monument sign designs have been received by the Planning staff and
that staff would be happy to review them with the Commission.
Mr. Tolstoy questioned why Tract No. 9583 was not included in the
BIA's list. Mr. Zenz stated that at that time, the tentative tract
was undergoing revisions which precluded its inclusion in the list.
Commissioners Rempel and Garcia stated that ,.hey would like to have
a verification regarding the action taken by the City Council on
this matter. Mr. Hopson stated that final approval of the final
tract map could not be taken until the provisions of Ordinance 18
are met.
ACTION: Upon motion by Garcia, seconded by Dahl and unaniTously
cawed, it was voted to approve Tentative Tract No. 9583 (revised)
and the phasing of Tentative Tract No. 9584 subject to the following
conditions:
(1) Based on the conditions and findings as recommended by the
Planning Staff.
(2) That an adequate alternative drainage system plan be developed;
(3) That an adequate pedestrian accessibility plan be developed;
(4) That an adequate design of horse trails be developed;
(5) That adequate provisions be developed for drainage through the
properties easterly or the proposed tracts;
(6) That the revision from Attorney Maroney be incorporated into
the CCF,Rs;
(7) That an adequate transportation plan be developed; and
(8) That this matter be further clarified and verified with the
previous action taken by the City Council.
NON- HEARING ITEM:
REQUEST FROM ALTA LOMA SCHOOL DISTRICT FOR
REVIEW OF PROPOSED SCHOOL SITE, IN THE AREA
OF 39TH STREET AND HERMOSA AVENUE. ;!;
.3.�� 11 �A. a 1 S •L}k�ry� NA
Planning Commission Minutes (cont'd) April 26, 1978 R
'k
Chairman Rempel requested that this item be heard next.
Superintendent Floyd Stork reported on the Alta Loma School
District s proposed site in the vicinity of Hermosa Avenue
and Victoria Street and indicated the district's desire to
locate a site south of 19th Street so that children would not
have to cross 19th Street. About 500 homes are planned to be
develonr.•d in the area and the school will serve a capacity of
800 children.
ACTIN: Upon motion by Jones, seconded by Tolstoy and unanimously
carried, it was voted to approve and endorse the purchase of the
Hermosa school site by the Alta Loma School District.
Chairman Rempel called for a short break at 9:00 p.m. The meeting
was reconvened at 9:20 p.m.
CONTINUED ITEMS:
CHANGE OF ZONE FROM A -1 to R -3, INDEX NO. 1185 -82
S/E CORNER OF FOOTHILL BLVD. &.BAKER AVENUE
(Donovan Schowalter)
Mr. Stevens reported that this item was continued from April 12,
1978. He briefly described the project stating that the applicant
is requesting a change of zone from A -1 to R -3 on 7.2 acres.
After further review of this proposed zone change, he stated that
it is staff's recommendation that the zone be changed to 5,000
R -3 -T, and that finding 05 in the staff report be deleted.
Mr. Wayne Blanton spoke on behalf of the applicant. He stated that
7.2 acres is too small for a mobile home park development and would
hope for a zone change permitting 14 units per acre.
Mr. Garcia stated that it would be helpful to have a preliminary
proposal to review in conjunction with the zone change. Mr.
Blanton stated that they would like to have the zone change so
that they can come back to the Commission with a proposed plan.
Chairman Rempel stated that it would be asking a lot of the
applicant to have a plan prepared while not knowing whether he
would be able to obtain a zone change. Mr. Stevens stated that
a 3,000 R -3 -T zone would permit t)le development to 14 units per
acre.
ACTION: Upon motion by Dahl, seconded by Tolstoy
and unanimously
carried, it was voted to approve a change of zone
from A -1 to
3,000 R -3 -T based on the following conditions:
(1) That the change of zone be in accordance with
the findings
as recommended by the planning staff with the
deletion of
finding 05;
(2) That the enabling ordinance be withheld until
the site plan
for the development has been approved.
,,.
That the zone change be
(3) g granted for a 1 year
period.
Mr. Wasserman stated that the second reading of the ordinance
would be withheld until the project is approved.
„fir,
3 -
Planning Commission Minutes (cont'd) April 26, 1978
CONSENT ITEMS:
PRELIMINARY ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
(Environmental Impact Reports)
Mr. Wasserman reported that an Environmental Review Committee
will be established to review proposals to determine whether
an Environmental Impact Report will be required.
Consent Items 1 through 8 have been reviewed by the Environmental
Review Committee and its recommendations are listed. Mr. Wasser-
man explained that all items listed under consent are considered
to be routine and can be enacted by one motion, unless a Commissioner
wishes to pull from the consent any item which can then be discussed
separately by the Planning Commission.
Mr. Dahl stated that he would like to pull items 2, 3 and 4. Mr.
Garcia requested that item 7 be pulled off the consent items.
ACTION: Upon motion by Tolstoy, seconded by Garcia and unanimously
carried, it was voted to approve the following consent items:
(1) Conversion of an existing residence into a restaurant, s/w
corner of Foothill Blvd. & Vineyard Avenue, C -2 -T -
A negative declaration has been determined.
(5) Zone Change from 7M -R3 -T to A -1 - Expansion of an existing
nursery, n/o of 19th St., approx. 200' w/o Amethyst -
A negative declaration has been determined.
(6) Change of zone from R -1 to A -P, s/e corner of Baseline
& Hellman, approx. 2.3 acres (Douglas b Kathleen Hone)
A negative declaration has been determined.
(8) Change of zone from R -3 to A -P, .37 acre, n/w corner of
Baseline f, Amethyst (James Van Antwerp) -
A negative declaration has been determined.
Mr- Dahl stated that on items 2, 3 and 4', he would hope that the
applicants are aware that a new ordinance is being prepared
regarding minimum lot sizes.
Mr. Garcia stated in regards to item 7, that he would hope to see
the Environmental Impact Report address drainage and topographical
concerns as well as provide mitigating measures on same. He also
stated his desire to review the basic guidelines for Environmental
Impact Reports.
ACTION: Upon motion by Dahl, seconded by Garcia and unanimously
coed, it was voted to approve the following consent items:
(2) Tentative Tract 10363, 9h acres, R -1 development, n/s of
Hillside Road, approx. 1000' w/o Sapphire Street -
A negative declaration has been determined.
(3) Tentative Tract 10157 F, zone change from A -1 -5 to
R -1- 20,000, 30.8 acres, s/o Wilson, e/o Chaffey College,
n/o Banyan - Because of potential flood problems, an Environ-
mental Impact Report would be necessary.
(7) Zone change from FP -2 to R -3, s/s of Baseline, approx, 775'
W/o the intersection of Baseline f, Vineyard - Because of
Potential flood hazards, an Environmental Impact Report
will be required for this project.
yr
4
d:
21
flq,
Planning Com
mission* Minutes (cont d)
Apri 1 26A 1078
DISCUSSION:
Mr. Garcia moved'to,have a Planning Commission Task Force
assigned at a future meeting to review the "community design
standards" and the "residential growth management plan" for
the city. Mr. Dahl seconded this and it was unanimously agreed
that this needs to be undertaken in the near future.
Mr. Dahl inquiree d about the two ordinances regarding minimum
r^Sidential structure size Per lot size and the regulations on
the placement of residential air conditioning units Mr. Wasserman
str:ted that these items would be developed as resolutions during
the interim period..
ADJOURNMENT:
Upon motion by Tolstoy, seconded by Garcia
and unanimously carried,
it was voted to adjourn to-April 29, 1978 at 9:00 a.m. at the
Alta Loma Ifigh School.
respectfully submItted.,.
,Wn n eo it a
,,!!��erim Secratarv-