HomeMy WebLinkAbout1978/11/22 - Agenda Packeti
s.
r�
t
tiai
c:}
+Y
cl
RANCHO CUCAMONGA
PLANNING COMMISSION
AGENDA
Wednesday, November 22, 1978, 7;00 p.m:
Community Services Building
9161 Baseline, Rancho Cucamonga, Ca.
I. Pledge of Alleeiance
I1. P.ull Call
Commissioner Dahl.
Commissioner Garcia
Commissioner Jones
III. Approval of Minutes
Commissioner Rempel
Commissioner Tolatoy
IV. Public Hearings
A. ZONE CHANGE NO. 78 -03 - 14ALT SIFGL - Request to change the zone V - -_y.-
from R -1 to A -P on property located on the northeast corner of
Hermosa and lfth Street.
B• Land Use, Circulation and Public Facilities Elements and Map of
the Rancho Cucamonga General Plan including the Draft Environmental
Impact Report.
V. Old Business
C. Access p011!q for Major and Secondary Highways - Initiated by Rancho
Cucamonga Planning Commission.
D. Request for revisions to TRACT NO 9589 - Request submitted by Mr.
B ,;
Bres
1, E. DIRECTOR REVIEW NO. 78 -32 -'GSR DEVELOPMENT - Request for approval of a
multi- tenant industrial complex located at
and Ninth Streets in the M -R the southwest corner of Helms
(Restricted Manufacturing) Zone.
VI. New Business
F. APPEAL OF MINOR SUBDIVISION NO. 77 -0689I - RANCHO CUCAMONCA DEVELOPMENT
COMPANY - Appeal of a Community Development Department decision to deny
a minor subdivision to create thirteen (13) industrial lots on property
i generally located on the northeast corner of Turner Avenue and San Bernar-
dino Road (4th Street).
,t
i
V t
PLANNING COMMISSION AGEN*
November 22, 1978
'Page 2
VII. Consent Calendar
G. NEGATIVE DECLARATIOI
- MILLS - Request to
divide 9+ acres into 2 lots at the southeast corner of Church and
Archibald Avenue in the R -3T and R -2 zone.
11. NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR PARCEL MAP NO 4749 - SELLO r Request to
divide 105 acres into 17 industrial lots for development located
east of the Devore Freeway on the north side of San Bernardino
Road (4th Street) In Ehe M -2 zone.
VIII. Communications
IX. Adjournment
g 5
�y4,
The emergence of laws dealing with the preservation of air, land and
and water resources have classically been directed toward the independent
management of specific environmental elements.. As a consequence, conven-
tional practices in environmental management, particularly within the
land -use planning function, have failed to address the interrelations
existing among these elements. This has often lcd to the familiar issue
of solving one environmental crisis, at the expense of creating another.
By the end of the last decade, environmental planners began to suggest
that somehow, the previously unrelated efforts of various agencies in
"single- purpose" planning should be integrated into a more comprehensive
plan. In this way, land -use decisions could be made collectively in the
light of all environmental concerns. In response, the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) and the California Environmental Quality Act of
1970 (CEQA) firmly established an "interdisciplinary approach" to environ-
mental planning. Today, this approach is perhaps best known for leading to
the development of environmental impact reports (EIRs).
The documentation requirements of both NEPA and CEQA were developed in
an effort to formalize the methods by which land -use decisions are made. .•In
general terms, a report is prepared which describes the characteristics of a
given project (or land -use proposal) and its potential impact upon various
elements of the environment. The final report thus reflects the collective
effort of an interdisciplinary team of experts. As a result, this process
provides for environmental decision - making in an informed atmosphere.
3' The objective_:of,any,.,lnnd -use plan
decision making. The land -use planning
phases: (1) identification of problems
'(2 data collection and interpretation;
adoption of plans; and (S) plan implemei
ia,to.'present'a' framework for
process consists of five distinct
and definition of goals and objectives;
(3) plan• formulation; (4) review and
station.
The level of detail of planning needs to b& related to the size of the
jurisdiction and the phase of the planning process. The HUD and Geological
Survey.Circular 721 guidelines suggest that a general plan scale for a city
be 1 :24,000 or l" =2000' or less. More detailed information is needed to
review a specific development- proposal where scales of 1 :600 or 1 " =60' or a
scale of 1 :480 or 1 "-40'should be used.
TO:
Planning Commission, Rancho Cucamonga
FROM:
Marlin Dickey, Professor Geology,Chaffey
College
Rod Parcel, Assoc. Professor Geology, Chaffey College
DATE:
November 22, 1978
SUBJECT%
Evaluation of Draft Environmental Impact
Report on the Proposed
Land Use Plan For Rancho Cucamonga
The emergence of laws dealing with the preservation of air, land and
and water resources have classically been directed toward the independent
management of specific environmental elements.. As a consequence, conven-
tional practices in environmental management, particularly within the
land -use planning function, have failed to address the interrelations
existing among these elements. This has often lcd to the familiar issue
of solving one environmental crisis, at the expense of creating another.
By the end of the last decade, environmental planners began to suggest
that somehow, the previously unrelated efforts of various agencies in
"single- purpose" planning should be integrated into a more comprehensive
plan. In this way, land -use decisions could be made collectively in the
light of all environmental concerns. In response, the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) and the California Environmental Quality Act of
1970 (CEQA) firmly established an "interdisciplinary approach" to environ-
mental planning. Today, this approach is perhaps best known for leading to
the development of environmental impact reports (EIRs).
The documentation requirements of both NEPA and CEQA were developed in
an effort to formalize the methods by which land -use decisions are made. .•In
general terms, a report is prepared which describes the characteristics of a
given project (or land -use proposal) and its potential impact upon various
elements of the environment. The final report thus reflects the collective
effort of an interdisciplinary team of experts. As a result, this process
provides for environmental decision - making in an informed atmosphere.
3' The objective_:of,any,.,lnnd -use plan
decision making. The land -use planning
phases: (1) identification of problems
'(2 data collection and interpretation;
adoption of plans; and (S) plan implemei
ia,to.'present'a' framework for
process consists of five distinct
and definition of goals and objectives;
(3) plan• formulation; (4) review and
station.
The level of detail of planning needs to b& related to the size of the
jurisdiction and the phase of the planning process. The HUD and Geological
Survey.Circular 721 guidelines suggest that a general plan scale for a city
be 1 :24,000 or l" =2000' or less. More detailed information is needed to
review a specific development- proposal where scales of 1 :600 or 1 " =60' or a
scale of 1 :480 or 1 "-40'should be used.
X
r}
-2- Evaluation 4*11EIR Rancho Cucamonga
Earth science information must be available to planners as early as
possible in the planning process.
1) To influence the formulation of plans.
2) To be timely to prevent development in areas of severe natural
constraint.
3) It may tyke years to develop detailed information - basic, genera
info. must be taken into account at the outset.
4) If not used now, later information developed may be useless (if
development occurs in hazardous areas).
5) essential collection and information is
pressure
indicate the follow-
Land capability maps must be prepared and used to
ink' problems.:.
1) Flooding.
2) Mass movements.
3) Faults
G) Foundation problems
5) Erosion and deposition
6) Groundwater problems.
W to disposal problems.
t
7) as
The DEIR should state the .philosophy and objectives clearly and concisely.
Examples of creditable goals from our standpoint are control ible from inatural iand
development. The community will be made as safe as p
artificial hazards such as:
1) Development will not occur on known faults.
2) Development will not occur in areas subject to mass movements.
3) Development will not occur in areas of flood danger or fire danger.
4)' Groundwater resources will be managed. laced on proper foundation
5) New structures will be safe and should be p
materials and built rigid to provide sufficient lateral strength to
reduce shaking hazard. sn
Problems that have not been the DEIR
things as
geological impacts en earthquake , liquifaction; dams,-= debris basins or
shaking; mass move and loss of mineral resources. Other problems that have not been
'in: natural drainage, natural flora and fauna,
adequately discussed are changes
q..�,[4"&6ww=__and pollution. _
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
October 25, 1978
Regular Meeting
CALL TO ORDER
The regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the.City of Rancho Cucamonga
waR held at the Community Services Building, 9161 Baseline Read, Rancho Cuca-
monga. on Wednesday, October 25, 1978.
Meeting was called to order at 7:05 p.m. by Chairman Herman Rempel, who led
the meeting with the Pledge of Allegiance.
* * * * k
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: Commissioners: Richard Dahl, Jorge Garcia, Laura Jones, Peter Tolstoy
Herman Rempel
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Upon MOTION by Commissioner Garcia, seconded by Commissioner Tolstoy, and unani-
mously carried, it was voted to approve the Planning Commission minutes of
October 11, 1978 as submitted.
* * * * *
PUBLIC HEARING
Conditional Use Permit No. 78 -01 - The development• of a Neighborhood Commercial
Shopping Center to be located on the northwest corner of 19th and Archibald -
Request submitted by Janir Research Company.
Conditional Use Permit No. 78 -02 - The development of a Neighborhood Commercial
�'. Shopping Center on the southeast corner of 19th and Archibald - Request submitted
by Robinson - Jensen Development Company.
Jack Lam, Director of Community Development stated the rlanning Division Staff
recommends the continuance of public hearings for both of these projects to the
November 8, 1978 Planning Commission meeting. Both of these projects are
involved In a major general plan issue that must be resolved by the Commission
prior to consideration of the site development plans. Staff has contacted each
of the applicants and has discussed the necessity for resolving the General Plan
issues prior to considering the site development plans for each of the centers.
Both of the applicants have agrr:ed to the continuance to the first meeting in
November. Since the Commission has mace their decisions on this matter, Staff
Will contact the applicant and ask them if they want to' withdraw their applica-
tions at this time or continue their review.
r
Planning Commission Stes -2- October 25, 1978
A MOTION was made by Commissioner Tolstoy,'seconded by Commissioner Dahl,
and unanimously carried to postpone review of Conditional Use Permit No.
78 -01 and Conditional Use Permit No. 78 -02 to November 8, 1978.
AYES: COMMISSIONERS TOLSTOY, DAHL. GARCIA, JONES, REMPEL
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: NONE
PUBLIC HEARING
Zone Change No. 78 -01 - To change the zone from R -1 (Single Family Residential)
to A -P (Administration - Professional) for 1.629 acres located on the south side
of Baseline between Garnet and Beryl Avenue - Request submitted by Coral Invest-
ment, Inc.
Michael Vairin, Planning Assistant, = eviewed the staff report in detail, this
being on file in the ?Tanning Division. He reported that the proposed change
is in conformance with the proposed General Plan and compatible to surrounding
uses. Staff recommends approval of this zone change.
Chairman Rempel opened the aublic hearing.
Joe Panas ?ti, applicant, stated he has been more than s:•tisfied by the way in
which he was treated by staff. He asked that the Commission consider approval
of the zone change.
4
Thera being no further comments from the audience, Chairman Rempel closed the
public hearing.
Commissioner Jones stated this area, in her opinion, would be a good area for'
professional offices. She indicated she has talked to a few people living in
the area who seem to be in favor of such a development.
There being no further comments, a MOTION was made by Commissioner Tolstoy,
seconded by Commissioner Jones, and unanimously carried to approve Resolution
No. 78 -18 subject to the findings and conditions as listed therein.
AYES: CCPPIISSIONERS TOLSTOY, JONES, DAHL, GARCIA, REMPEL
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: NONE
PUBLIC HEARING
Variance No. 78 -01 - A request to vary from the requirement of a 70' wide corner
lot to 60' for prop.rty located on the southeast corner of Arrow Route and Comet -
E' R -1 zone - Request submitted by Merle Bauer.
.`. Michael Vairin, Planning Assistant, reviewed the staff report in detail, this
being on file in the Planning Division.. He reported this Variance request is a
unique circumstance because.of the placement of the.existing dwelling and that
the immediate area is developed at•similar densities, Staff feels that the neces
Planning Commission �tes -3- October 25, 1978 '
t;
sary findings can be made If the conditions as listed in the Resolution are
adopted. He recommended approval of Resolution No. 78 -24 based on the
findings and conditions listed therein.
Chairman Reseal opened the public hearing.
Mr. Merle Bauer., applicant, stated he has nothing more to .add to the report
given by staff. He requested that the Commission consider approval of the
Variance.
There being no further comments from the audience, Chairman Rempel closed
the public hearing.
Commissioner Jones stated with access onto Comet Street rather than Arrow,
she would see no problem with this request.
After general discussion, a motion was made by Commissioner Dahl, seconded by
Commissioner Tolstoy, and unanimously carried to approve Resolution No. 78 -24
based on the findings and conditions listed therein.
AYES: COMMISSIONERS DAHL, TOLSTOY, GARCIA. JONES, REMPEL
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: NONE
Chairman Rempel stated the General Plan public hearing will be heard after
the remaining Agenda items.
i.
NEW BUSINESS
Director Review No. 78 -21 - The development of a re:-ail hardware and wholesale
lumber stort to be located on the south side of Foothill Blvd. just west of
Rochester Avenue - C -2 and M -1 zones - Request submitted by Richard DeWitt.
Jack Lam reviewed the staff report in detail, this being on file in the Planning
Division. Fe stated the site development plan as proposed is in conformance with
the Zoning Ordinance and the proposed General Plan. The site is adequate in size
and shape to accommodate the proposed use and all yards, spaces, walls, fences,
and landscaped areas. Street improvements, widening and dedication, will be'ob-
tained according to the Master Plan of Highways for Foothill Blvd. Staff recom-
mends that the Planning Commissioa approve and adopt Resolution No. 78 -22 based
on the findings and conditions listed therein.
Chairman Rempel asked for questions from the Commission to the Staff.
•
r,
Commissioner Garcia asked Staff to elaborate on the nursery sales area that will
be facing Foothill Blvd.
Jack Lam stated the site is sloped down in this area and with the inclusion
of the landscaped berm for proper flood protection and the 25' setback, it is ,..
very unlikely that anyone would view that particular area. Storage material can'
:•
not be maintained in the'nursery area..
, ,
Ig fi"
Planning Commission
utes
-4-• October 25, 1978
Mr. Steve Perryman, representing Mr. DeWitt, stated regarding the nursery :•.
sales, it will be an open area with a fen =e around it. He stated the applicant ..
is questioning condition number 15 in the Resolution which stated that the roof
facade be carried around the entire east elevation of the front building. The
driveway to the east of the building is a service driveway for loading and'
unloading trucks only. If the roof is carried around into this area it might
cause a problem to the trucks. They have carried the roof overhang 25' back
from.the corner of the building for the area visible from the street.
Commissioner Garcia stated the Commission is very concerned about the type of
structures to be constructed along Foothill Blvd. At the present. time, we do
not know what will be developed to the east of this property and his opinion
is that as much that can be done to enhance the structure should be done, as
he would not like to set a bad precedent for any development along Foothill
in the future.
Commissioner Tolstoy stated the plan supplied to us does not show the character
of the sales area for the nursery. Is there to be a structure in this area?
How do they plan to display?
Mr. Perryman stated at the time the plans were submitted, the nursery was going
to be done in the future. The nursery will be in an outside area with a low
fence and-there may be a sales counter.
Commissioner Tolstoy stated he would like to see a better plot plan of what is
proposed for this area.
Mr. Perryman_ stated they would like to go ahead with the development of the
retail hardware and wholesale lumber store as soon as possible. He stated if
I' the Commission desires they could develop the nursery sales in the future
and at the time they develop they will come back to the Commission for review.
Commissioner Garcia asked Mr. Perryman if they would landscape this area in
the meantime.
'K
1
1
Mr. Perryman stated yes, this area would be landscaped.
Chairman Rempel stated the Commission has been quite concerned that proper
buffering is developed between the industrial to the south and what would be
developed on the north side of Foothill.
Commissioner Garcia stated he is not receptive to a chain link fence and would
like to see something else. A chain link fence does not give the appearance
we are looking for. He asked that the applicant reconsider the chain link
fence.
Chairman Rempel stated there should be no.development in the front 100' at this
time except for landscaping. At such time as the applicant wishes to develop
this area, development plans will be required for review and approval.
Y, 1t•
Planning Commission eutes -5- October 25, 1978
Jack Lam stated an alternative would be to adopt the Re6o lution with an addi-
tional condition that any area within 100' must have a development plan sub-
mitted for approval prior to development. In the meantime, if no development
is proposed, the.area should be landscaped. He stated an additional Engineering
condition should also be added as follows: An encroachment permit shall be
obtained from Cal -Trans prior to doing any work in the right of way.
Chairman Rempel asked if the 6' high gate could be moved back to the building.
Mr. Perryman stated yes, that could be moved back to the building.
Joe Deiorio asked if it is correct that the customer traffic comes in and out
of the same entrance onto Foothill Blvd. and there is one additional service
entrance. It appears there is no other access on any other roads then Foothill.
He stated the industrial committee is concerned with circulation and they would
want to insure that there is proper view out onto the street so that people will
not have to make a wide turn out on to Foothill as this is a fairly high speed
area.
Mr. Perryman asked if the Commission has made a decision as to the roof overhang.
Commissioner Garcia stated we have expressed our concerns. He personally feels
the staff recommendation should be supported at this particular point. He does
not want to set a precedent for future development.
Lloyd Hubbs,• City Engineer, stated-in regard to Mr. DeIorio's comment, the
driveway for this development will be widened. Traffic in that area at
this time is rot as great as in more congested areas closer -to the City. As
traffic increases probably development will also increase which will slow traffic
down; and possibly signals will be installed at Rochester in the future. As
far as site distance, this will be reviewed.to insure clear site distance a
long way in each direction.
There being no further discussion, a motion was made by Commissioner Garcia,
seconded by Commissioner Jones and unanimously carried to approve Resolution
No. 78 -22 subject to the findings and conditions as listed and subject to the
y following additions:
1. That any area within 100' of the front property line must. have a
development plan submitted for approval prior to development. In
the meantime, if no development is proposed, the area should be
a landscaped.
2.' An encroachment permit shall be obtained from Cal -Trans prior to
doing any work in the right of way.
AYES: COMMISSIONERS GARCIA, JONES, DAHL. REMPEL
NOES: TOLSTOY
ABSENT: NONE
Commissioner Tolstoy stated he has nothing against this project; however, he
objects to the plut plan. He doesn't think it has been planned well .enough for
him to make a -decision.
f
Planning Coy ®lssion mis
NEW BUSINESS
-6- October 25, 1978
Director Review No. 78 -24 - Request to develop an air conditioning repair
and storage facility in an M -1 zone on property generally located on the
east side of Layton Street, south of LaMesa Drive and adjacent to the
Southern Pacific Railroad - Request submitted by Ruben T. Luna.
Michael Vairin, Planning Assistant, reviewed the staff report in detail,
this being on file in the Planning Division. He reported the General Plan
envisions commercial uses on the site. An air conditioner storage and repair
facility would be allowable in a C -2 zone. Staff feels that the use would not
create a significant impact to the area in that no manufacturing would take
place on the site. Staff recommends approval and adoption of Resolution No.
78 -21 based on the findings and conditions contained therein.
Chaxeman Rempcl asked for questions from the Commission to the staff.
Chairman Rempel stated in the report, Staff recommended that 3 1/2" A.C. paving
be provided for the drive and parking areas on the site to replace the proposed
slag. He stated this is considerably more than normally required.
Lloyd Hubbs, City Engineer, stated that is correct. This should be changed to
2 1 /21'A.C. paving.
Chairman Rempel asked for comments from the applicant.
Mr. Luna, applicant, stated there is no ttaff is on Layton Street and he asked
that the City consider abandoning that street and that a knuckle be installed.
He and his neighbor would perhaps agree to pave this to keep dust down. The
neighbor to the south could still have use of it. He stated at the present time
they will have one tenant. After five years, maybe someone else might want to
come in as there is a lot of one man businesses. He asked if additional tenants
would be allowed in the future.
Lloyd Hubha, stated in regard to the abandonment of Layton Street, that is a 40'
dedicated right of way at this time. It would require the vacation of that right
of way. This would require public hearings, and the ap;.roval of all property
owners that shut that street. The reason the Engineering Division has recom-
mended continuation of the street is that it will provide public access to the
area. Too often private easements create more problems than they solve. There
is a potential of Bennett Industries, located to the south of this street, bringing
trucks up this read and causing a continuous maintenance problem. If the street is
reasonably improved, the City would have to maintain it. It would eliminate con -
' flict of access.
k ` Jack Lam stated in regard to Mr. Luna's request of additional tenants in the future,
• the problem with this request is that the ordinance requires a certain amount of
r'.
parking on the site. He would have to meet these parking requirements.
Chairman Rmnpel stated since this building is leased for five years to one tenant,
if Mr. Luna knows at some future date that another tenant is interested, Mr. Luna
could then come back for review at that time.
. i
-planning Commission Motes
-7- October 25, 1978
I
commissioner Jones stated she would like to see a nice project for this area.
There are many developments in the area that have not been maintained. She
would hope that Mr. Luna will put a development in which will improve the area.
There being no further discussion, a motion was made by Commissioner Carcias
se-'ended by Commissioner Tolstoy and unanimously carried to approve Resolution
No. 78 -21 based on the findings and conditions listed therein.
AYES: COMMISSIONER GARCIA; TOLSTOT, DAHL, JONES, REMPEL
HOES: NONE
ABSENT: NONE
Commissioner Tolseoy stated he would like to comment that Commissioner Jones
statement about the fact that this development could upgrade the area should
be taken into consideration by Mr. Luna. This is a very good opportunity to
set a good example for future development in the area.
NEW BUSINESS
Director Review No. 78 -3_ - Request for the addition of an Industrial Food Factory
and Warehouse to the existing Frito Lay Plant in an M -2 zone generally located on
the northeast corner of Archibald Avenue and 4th Street. Request submitted by,
Frito Lay, Inc.
Jack Lam, Director of Community Development, reviewed the staff report in detail,
this being on file in the Planning Division. He reported the factory will be
used for new processing and packaging ana the storage building will be for finished
products. The project also includes a detached truck repair facility and a new
waste processor. The Frito Lay Plant faces onto Archibald Avenue which is desig-
nated as a special boulevard on the proposed General Plan; therefore, special land-
scaping treatment. is desirable at this location. Staff is recommending the sub-
mission of a detailed landscape and irrigation plan for the proposed and existing"
lawn areas fronting Archibald prior to the issuance of building permits. He recom-
mended approval and adoption of Resolution No. 78 -16 based on the findings and
conditions contained therein.
Chairman Renpel asked for questions from the Commission to the staff.
Mr. Arthur Parr, representing Frito Lay, sta'Zed they are in agreement with the
Staff Report as presented.
Commissioner Dahl asked if the new drive on Archibald Avenue is going to be a
one way entrance only.
Mr. Parr stated this drive will be for ingress as.well as egress.
Commissioner Garcia asked if the applicant has considered some landscaped
buffering regarding the area for parking of the trucks in the southern portion
of the property.
Mr. Parr stated at this time, they have no plans on development to the southern
portion of the property with landscaping or any other proposal at this time.
However, if the Commission made a requirement for this landscaping, they would comply.
Planning Commission 10tes -8- 0 October 25, 1978
Commissioner Tolstoy stated he would agree with Commissioner Garcia that a condi-
tion for landscaping on the southern po=tion of the property be required.
Chairman Rempel stated until such time as the area south of the driveway is
improved, he would also like to see landscaping.
There being no further discussion, a MOTION was made by Commissioner Garcia,
seconded by Commissioner Tolstoy,.and unanimously carried to approve Resolution
No. 78 -16 based on the findings and conditions as listed therein, with the added
condition to state as follows: That the south portion of the development be
provided with an adequate landscaped strip.
AYES: CaIMISSIONERS GARCIA, TOLSTGY, DAHL, JONES, REMPEL
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: NONE
NEW BUSINESS
Director Review No. 78--34 - The development of a professional office building
to be located on the south side of Baseline Avenue between Garnet and Beryl
Avenue - R -1 zone (A -P pending) - Request submitted by Coral Investment, Inc.
Michael Vairin, Planning Assistant, reviewed the staff report in detail,: this
being on file in the Planning Division. He reported the site development plan
as proposed by the applicant is consistent with the Zoning ordinance and the
proposed General Plan. The Environmental Analysis Staff reviewed the project
and has found no significant adverse environmental impacts as a result of this
project. Therefore, a Draft Negative Declaration was published in the newspaper.
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve and adopt Resolution No.
78 -20 based on the conditions and findings listed therein.
Chairman Rempel asked for questions from the Commission to the staff.
Chairman. Rempel asked 41 the first group of parking spaces behind the building
will be accessible for parking.
Michael Vairin stated it will probably be very difficult to make the turning
radius.
Chairman Rempel stated he feels it would be better to put a landscape island
in this location as it is really inaccessible as a parking space.
Mr. Joe Panaseti, applicant, stated parking spaces such as this are usually
utilized by employees that come to work early. They do have 6 of 7 more parking
e" spaces then required.
9.
Chairman Rempel stated an island would probably give a little better accessibility
into the area. He stated he is not adding this as a condition but asked that the
applicant consider it from a practical standpoint.
y. ..
Planning Comm isriodpautea
-9- *October 25, 1978
Michael Vairin stated he would like to add a condition as there is a.poten-
tial for residential development on the south side of the property: That
approximately six tree planter wells be installed along the south property
line.
Mr. Panaseti stated they would be agreeable to this added condition. He
stated he would like to indicate in regard to Engineering Division recommenda-
tion number 1 which states an offer of dedication consisting of 30 feet will
be required along Baseline Avenue, this dedication has already been made on
Parcel Map No. 4345.
Mr. Walker, owner of property directly across the street from this property,
stated he objects to this development. He objects to the spot zoning which
is taking place as most of the property adjacent to this development is
zoned R -1. Also, with the high school near this area, there is already too.
much traffic and this development will not help that situation.
Commissioner Garcia stated in regard to the traffic problem, we are facing
this problem throughout all our collector streets.
A MOTION was made by Commissioner Garcia, seconded by Commissioner Tolstoy
and unanimously carried to adopt Resolution No. 78-20 based on the conditions
and findings as listed in the Resolution.
A MOTION was then made by Commissioner Dahl, seconded by Commissir,ar Tolstoy,
and unanimously carried to amend the motion by adding the followit , condition:
That approximately six tree planter wells be installed along the south property
line.
AYES:. C%WISSIONERS DAHL, TOLSTOY, CARCIA, JONES, REMPEL
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: NONE
a
Chairman Rempel called a recess at 8:45 p.m.
Meeting reconvened at 9:00 p.m.
NEW BUSINESS
Director Review No. 78 -36 - Construction of a 19,200 square foot industrial
building located on the northwest corner of Feron and industrial Lane - M -R
zone - Request submitted by S. "Buster" Filpi.
Michael Vairin, Planning Assistant, reviewed the staff report in detail, this
being on file in the Planning Division. He reported the site as indicated on
the development plan is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the proposed
use. Improvements will be required that will properly relate to existing and
proposed streets. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve and
adopt Resolution No. 78 -23 based on the findings and conditions listed therein.
�
Planning Commission elutes -1D- *October 25, 1478
r
Chairman Rempel asked for questions from the Ca:amission to the staff.
Commissioner Garcia asked if Staff is recommending Exhibit "B" as a condition
of approval.
Jack Lam stated staff has offered Exhibit "B" as a possible solution to the
proposed building location which will provide the landscaping along the street
frontages and additional park{.-,g to comply with the parking requirements of the
ordinance.
Michael Vairin stated this condition does appear as a condition in the Resolu-
tion; however, if the applicant has another alternative this condition could
be amended.
Mr. Filpi, applicant, stated he was very upset after.receiving the Staff Report
for this development. The City is telling him that he will have to set the
building back 55` from the street and he does not understand the reason for
this. He stated the Engineering Division is requiring full street improvements
along the frontage of the subject property at the time of construction of this
building, and are requiring that the full street improvements be installed along
Industrial Lane within 5 years of the date of this approval or when additional
buildings are developed within this complex. He stated he is more than happy
to give the City the street as it is now, without any improvement. The str -et
has been like this for years. Ile has a.tenaht waiting for this building and
they have been very patient. The existing buildings are all in line with each
other and he can not understand the recommendation that the new building be
built further back and not in line with the others. He wants this building to
be like the rest of them already developed.
Michael Vairin stated that Exhibit "B" was merely an alternative to help provide
the applicant with additional landscaping and parking. if parking can be provided
in some other nonner, this condition can be amended.
Commissioner Dahl. asked Mr. Filpi if he has another alternative to the parking
problem.
Mr. Filpi stated they are only k parking spaces short of the required parking.
Any additional parking the Commission desires can be provided in the back
portion.
i
Commissioner Garcia asked Mr. Filpi if he would be receptive to restudy the
landscaping portion of the south. portion of the building facing Feron.
Filpi stated yes, he would be very happy to do whatever the Commission
desires for the landscaping of this area. Feron Street is a new street and
he would be very happy to do what the Commission desires.
Commissioner Garcia asked the City Engineer to elaborate on Engineering Division
recommendation 114 regarding the complet'on of Industrial Lane within a five
"j,
year period.
Planning Commission Outes -ll October 25, 1978
Lloyd Hubbs, City Engineer, stated Staff wants to work with the applicant in
tevery
way possible so that there will be no hardship placed on him. The
Engineering Division is very concerned with Industrial Lane being developed
as a conventional city street and developed to city standards. There is
considerable industrial development currently in the area and the character
has changed from an individual ownership industrial complex into more of a
public access type of development. As development occurs, Industrial Lane
will become more of a public street requiring normal public improvements.
Mr. Filpi stated this is a private road at the present time and he doesn't
-
feel. it would have to be made .a public utreet.
!
!`
Commissioner Garcia stated this is an unusual case as the street does not
belong to the City now.
Commissioner Dahl asked how many. Goodyear employees are using this road.
Mr. Filpi'stated there are approximately 50 to 75,people aaployed at that
{
plant.
Mr. Jeff Scerenka, Lucas Development, stated Mr. Filpi has already given
something to the City and is bringing in more industry. He feels since Mr.
Filpi has agreed to develop Peron to an acceptable standard, the City should
accept that. One man should not have to pay for. the entire_ dedication and
cost for the street.
J
Lloyd Hubbs stated if the City wants to improve Industrial Lane with the
cost by the City, there are two options available which are through gas tax
general fund money, or through an assessment district.
Commissioner Garcia asked how vital the City Engineer feels improvement.gf
Industrial Lane should be completed within ine next five years.'
Lloyd Hubbs stated under increased traffic likely to be coming in from the
Goodyear Plant, that road will start breaking up within two years and *require
new surfacing.
Commissioner Jones as.,ed why this street can not be left a private street.
a.
..loyd Ilubbs stated this street will provide continuity aa.Feron goes through
and will pass through industrial development in the area. Induatrial Lane
is designed as a water carrying street to handle drainage problems. His
opinion is that if Industrial Lane is not developed it will be a burden to
the tax payers.
Commissioner Garcia stated this is a private non - dedicated street now and
based on the costs involved in terms of improving this street,. it is really
i
difficult to justify at this time.
c_
Planning Commission utes -12- �ctober 25, 1978
A MOTION was made by Commissioner Garcia, seconded by Commissioner-Jones
and unanimously carried to approve Resolution No. 78 -23 based on the findings
and conditions listed with the following changes:
1. Add a condition as follows: The south portion of the proposed building -
be totally landscaped and additional parking be provided to comply with
parking requirements under present ordinance.
2. The intersection where Feron and Industrial Lane would join shall have
proper engineering tie -ins for a future street and proper street improve
mcnts ca:tsictcnt xith City standsrd� be p'iaced along the building frontages.
3. Delete Engineering Division recommendation #4.
AYES: U M4ISSIONERS GARCIA, JONES, DAHL, TOLSTOY,.REMPEL
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: NONE
NEW BUSINESS
Director Review No. 78 -37 - Request to develop an industrial building in
an M -2 zone generally located on the north aide of Jersey Avenue one half
mile east of Haven Avenue. Request submitted by Crowell /Leventhal, inc.
Jack Lam. Director of Community Development, reviewed the staff report in
detail, this being on file in the Planning Division. He reportod the
proposed use is in conformance with the Zoning Ordinance and campatible
with the proposed General Man which designates this site as major indus-
trial. Staff recommends approval of Resolution No. 78 -17 based on the
findings and conditions contained therein.
Chairman Rempel asked for comments from the Applicant.
Mr. Jim Crowell stated they are in agreement with Staff recommendations.
Their only comment is about the block wall and the chain link gates with wood
slats between. The intention of the buyer is to have wool slats across the
entire structure. They feel wood slats would be more appropriate.
Commissioner Garcia stated he personally does not like chain link fences
and slats. They do not last long and in the long run a block wall is more
appropriate.
Mr. Crowell asked if the Commission would be receptive instead of a block
wall if the developer could bring back some type of fence design for staff
review. There is a possibility the developer would like to have a block
wall with a stucco face on it.
Commissioner Garcia stated this could perhaps be worked out with staff prior
to the issuance of building permits. He would not see any probleb with this.
t:`
i
Planning Commissionoutes
Jack Lam stated Staff would concur.
should be worded to state the wall.to
the Planning Division.'
-13- Otober 25, 1978
If the Commission desires, the condition
be developed subject to approval of
A MOTION was made by. Commissioner Garcia, seconded by Commissioner Dahl and
unanimously carried to approve Resolution No. 78 -17 based on the findings
and conditions as listed with the following amendment to Condition #4 to
read as follows:. Treatment of the buffering subject to Planning Staff
approval.
AYES: CWHIS5I0NER GARCIA,
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: NONE
NEW BUSINESS
DAHL, JONES, TOLSTOY, REMPEL
Parcel Mat No. 4744 - 12.5 acres of land located at 7789 Sierra Vista into two
parcels - R -1- 12,000 zone - Map submitted by K & B Development Company.
Jack Lam, Director of Community Development, reviewed the staff report in detail,
this being on file in the Planning Division. He reported the subject property
is proposed to be divided in a manner consistent with the Zoning Ordinance and
the General Plan. The map as proposed meets the standards of the State Subdivision
Map Act and the City's Subdivision Ordinance, The Map as submitted does not vio-
late the City residential moratorium as there is only one buildable lot being
created as a result of this Parcel Map. Staff recommends approval of Resolution
No. 78 -19 based on the findings and conditions listed therein.
Mr. Bates, applicant, stated he is in favor of the staff report as presented.
After general discussion, a motion was made by Commissioner Jones, seconded
by Commissioner Garcia, and unanimously carried to approve Resolution No.
78 -19 based on the findings and conditions listed therein.
AYES: COMMISSIONERS JONES, GARCIA, DAHL, TOLSTOY, REMPEL
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: NONE
COMMUNICATIONS
Modifications to a proposed neighborhood shopping center located on the
southeast corner of Carnelian and 19th Street - Request submitted by T & S
Development.
Jack Lam reviewed a letter received from T & S Development Company and stated
a representative is present and may wish to speak regarding this request.
t
Planning Commission outes -14- 0 October 25, 1978
Mr. Ed Oremen, representing T S S Development Company stated they have
worked on this center with the County and now the City for a little over
a year. In developing the design for these shop buildings, they have
made certain changes from the originally approved design as follows:
1. Delete 45 degree corners and wrap tile canopy around corners.
2. Change plan configuration of Building "G" so that southerly half
of east wall is moved 25 feet west, increasing separation between
this wall and boundary of adjoining residential property.
3. Change main exterior walls fro, c! stud and stucco to colored
concrete block and slump block.
4.. Delete tile roof. on east side of Building "G ".
Mr. Oremen indicated their reasons for each of the above changes and asked
that the Commission consider approval of them as submitted.
Commissioner Garcia stated he doesn't feel the changes mentioned would cause
any problems and he could be in favor of them as submitted.
A MOTION was made by Commissioner Garcia, seconded by Commissioner Jones and
unanimously carried to approve the changes as proposed above.
AYES: COMMISSIONERS GARCIA, JONES, DAHL, TOLSTOY, REMPEL
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: NONE
Chairman Remoel called a recess at 10:30.p.m.
Meeting reconvened at 10:45 p.m.
GENERAL PLAN HEARING
Jack Lam stated the Chamber of Commerce Industrial Committee has been talking
about a number of issues, one was the proper planning for certain given industrial
areas in the City and future marketability within these areas. This committee
has discussed the possibility of developing a scope of work which can be submitted
to the Planning Consultant for the development of a specific plan package relating
3 to industrial development standards to include landscaping, access design standards,
etc., depending on areas in question. The Industrial Committee, r •.e the City
can not fund such a specific plan study in the industrial areas an. ,i.nce the
specific plan can benefit overall marketing for the properties that i.hc: private
individual proposes to provide private financing for such a study. .fhe City would
M select the consultant and the
private funds would pay for the coat of such a study.'
October 25, 11919
Planning CommissionOutes -15-
Mr. Paul Mindrum., Chairman of the Industrial Committee, stated they have been
working on this program proposal for presentation to the Commission. Unless
the Commission has any further questions he would have nothing more to add at
this time.
Commissioner Garcia asked what is the basic concept of Zone A, B and C in.pro-
posing these type of study areas. How is this particular concept more advantageous•
than the conventional method of zoning the industrial areas?
Mr. Mindrmn stated these .zones were primarily designated because these indicate
various stages of development. Each zone would have different problems ur
different areas of problems of development to be concerned with.
Jeff Sceranka stated the motivation for adopting a specific plan rather than
accepting classifications of major impact and minor impact was that.it would
take specific solutions for the three areas of concern. Resources umuld then
be available to make a decision about zoning for the areas that would meet the
needs of the industrial developer. If the studies can be done through working
together with the City,' Consultant, and the Industrial Committee, it is felt
that we could come up with a fantastic industrial area within the City.
i
Commissioner Garcia asked what time frame the committee is.loo ing at.
Jeff Sceranka stated the Committee would like to meet as soon as possible.
Jack Lam stated the Committee has been working diligently over the last three
months on putting together a specific plan program. We don't have a proposal
for a specific plan at this time although there is a lot of interest'and support
for doing this. The City would be very happy to work with the Committee in
1
developing a.specific plan.'
Commissioner Garcia stated his concern is that if we deviate from the basic
approach of planning, if we eliminate the classifications of industrial areas
in terms of medium, heavy and light industry, provisions should be made within
the policies of the general plan to Indicate Study areas A, B and C. tic does
not think it is a wise move to strictly address ourselves to industry zoning.
Jack Lam stated he would.like to suggest that the major and minimum impact
designations remain at this time but the text be changed to recognize specific
planning.
Chairman Rempel stated in the text something should be written to the effect
that each industry coming in would have to indicate the impact on adjoining
areas.
Commissioner Garcia stated assuming the General Plan is adopted, he would
like to see industrial classifications assigned to the entire area but sub-
classified with.the study areas and the text should indicate the basic concept "
of what the study area should accomplish.
'n
Planning Commission 0utes -16- ctober 25, 1978
Commissioner Tolstoy asked if the Planning Commission will select the Consul-
tant for this project.
Joe DeIorio of the Chamber of Commerce Industrial Committee, stated the Com
mittee has discussed various planning consultants, and their general opinion
is that unless the City felt strongly against it, John Blayney would do this
study. The Industrial Committee is not trying to influence the choice of the
consultant.
After further discussion, a motion was made by Commissioner Garcia, seconded
by Commissioner Tolstoy and unanimously- carried that language in the land use
element should recognize the Chamber Industrial Committee's efforts and encourage
specific planning for City industrial areas. Further, that Study lreas A. B and
C as indicated by the Industrial Committee be delineated on the General Plan.
AYES: COMMISSIONERS GARCIA,
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: NONE
PUBLIC HEARING
TOLSTOY, DAHL, JONES, REMPEL
General Plan - Industrial Issues
Area - Lewis Property north of Foothill; east of Haven
Jack Lam reviewed the staff report in detail, this being on file in the.Plan-
ning Division. He reported the principal Lewis objection to the land use
element is residential land use designations north of Foothill. Since the
Lewis land holdings are large, more rpecific land use planning can be achieved
with a specific plan which can address development issues at a more critical
level and more precise design control. If a time frame and specific proposal
can be offered. Staff would support a "study area" description under each
alternate regional site to recognize private efforts to achieve specific
planning, but the General Plan designations should remain until a. specific
plan can be accomplished. He recommended that the General Plan designation
be retained until a specific plan is submitted.
Ralph Lewis of Lewis Homes, stated they own property on the north side of
Foothill between Haven and Rochester. The Commission and the Consultant
have proposed it with respect to a regional center alternative. They have
no objection to showing 3 alternatives but each of the alternatives should
be'changed where low density residential is not shown along Foothill Blvd.
It is not consistent with the proposed plan or good planning. It is not
good to put residential on a major thoroughfare.
Mr. John Shurb of Lewis Homes reviewed the slides of how Foothill could be
developed for the Commission.
Commissioner Garcia asked if Mr. Lewis is requesting mixed commercial uses along
Foothill Blvd. in this location.
Planning Commissioneutes
-17 -. .October 25, 1978
Mr. Lewis stated they are requesting service commercial or mixed use. The
plan at the present time indicates low density residential.
Commissioner Dahl stated he would agree with Mr. Lewis that low density resi-
dential development should not be allowed on Foothill Blvd. He would not, like
to live along a major thoroughfare such as Foothill.
Ralph Lewis stated on baseline, east of Haven, they would like to develop a
mobile home park in that area. Right now thr.re is no designation on the
General Plan for a mobile home park. They would like to develop a mobile
home park from Baseline to the railroad tracks. They are willing to submit
a plan for this area to include the necessary traffic studies, etc.
Jack Lam stated in regard to the area requested for a mobile home park, he
would suggest that the Commission maintain the concept in the General Plan and
allow the flexibility in the text for the Commission to recognize other land
uses that may be appropriate given proper controls.
Commissioner Garcia stated he would go along with the recomKandation of staff.
Commissioner. Tolstoy stated he would like to suggest that a Study Area be indi-
cated along Foothill including Mr. Lewis' property. Any plans should include
the study of the specific area as well as the area immediately surrounding it.
Jack Lam stated if the General Plan designation is retained until a specific
plan is submitted for the area, this would encourage alternative uses.which
may be appropriate for the area in the future.
A MOTION was made by Commissioner Dahl., seconded by Commissioner Garcia and
unanimously carried to retain the General Plan designation with a statement
in the test under each alternative indicating these are study areas and the
' Commission would encourage specific plans to explore the possibility of alter-
native land uses.
AYES: COMMISSIONERS DAHL, GARCIA, JONES, TOLSTOY, REMPEL
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: NONE
Jack Lam reviewed the staff report in detail, this being on file in the Planning
Division. He reported the general plan indicates high density residential and
the property owner desires commercial designation. lie stated in reviewing this
area, the site in question lacks adequate depth for proper placement of multi-
family development. Access to the site is also very critical since any addi-
tional access off of Foothill is very dangerous and highly impractical given the
nature of Foothill Blvd. It is conveivable that some type of low trip generating
use can be developed on the site. Access would have to be carefully controlled
and ideally, a joint access with Sycamore Inn should be developed. He recom-
mended a continuation of service commercial for this area.
t,
1
Planning Commissio *nutes
-.18- October 25, 1978
Commissioner Tolstoy stated he would agree that high density residential
would not be appropriate for this area.
Commissioner Garcia stated the Staff recommendation to continue service
commercial should be implemented in the general plan.
A MOTION was made by Commissioner Garcia: seconded by Commissioner Tolato
and unanimously carried to change the General'PILn designation from high
density residential to service commercial for subject property.
AYES: CO!MISSIONERS GA_RCIA, TOLSTOY, PAHT.y JONES, REMPEL
NOES: NONE
ASSENT: NONE
Area: Southwest corner of Arrow Route and Vineyard
Jack Lam reviewed the staff report in detail, thir being on file in the Plan-
ning Division. He reported the general plan designates this area as au
alternate park site. The property owner desires clarification of a proper
base land use designation. The Commission has discussed numerous times the
issue of park location and alternate sites. This area represents one of the
few areas where a park may be 'developed. He stat.'d residential development on
a site of this small scale is not appropriate given this location in relation-
ship to secondary streets and its relationship to the minimum impact industrial.
The Planning Consultant concurs and recommends that the base designation should
be a continuation of mixed use. He recommended that the Commission delete low
density residential and replace with mixed use.
Mr. Charles Phister, owner of property, stated the property to the east is the
Otis Elevator property which is a major industrial development. They purchased
this property for industrial use. He asked that the Commission consider indup-
trial for this area.
Jack Lam stated our motive for showing mixed use for this land is that it is
felt there is much industrial property already in the area. He feels mixed
use would be compatible in the area.
Commissioner Garcia stated
he feels the recommendation of
staff is more appro-
priate than industrial for
this property.
Commissioner Dahl stated under the Chambers specific plan
proposal for the
industrial area submitted
earlier this evening, this area
is shown under
Zone A, industrial.
Jeff Sceranka, Chamber of
Commerce Industrial Committee, stated the purpose
of segregating the Zone A
as a Study Area does not say the whole area should
be classified industrial.
Commissioner Garcia asked
the property owner what type of
industrial development
he is proposing.
e`
Planning Commissiot nutes -19- October 25, 1978
Mr. Phister owner and operator of CP Construction, stated they originally
purchased this property for the purpose of moving their construction company
to this location
Commissioner Tolatop stated he would agree that perhaps the owner of this
property has �_ valid point and that industrial should be considered.
Chairman Rempel stated he would agree that getting some.type of office com-
plex there at this time is pretty remote.
Commissioner Tolstoy stated he would like to urge the Commission to consider
industrial. This is a small piece of land and with the channel as a buffer to
the back he would not see any problem with industrial designation.
There bein;; no further discussion, a motion was made by Commissioner Tolstoy,
seconded b-1 Commissioner Dahl, and unanimously carried to change the general
plan designation for subject property to minimum impact industrial.
AYES: CQVISSIONERS TOLSTOY, DAHL, JONES, CARCIA, REMPEL
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: NONE
Area: Wholesale Lumbers Ind. - Rochester Avenue
Jack Lam reviewed the staff report in detail, this being on file in the
Planning Division. He reported the General Plan designates low density
residential and the property owner opposes this designation. He stated
that there is an existing lumber sales yard on the site with vacant land
surrounding it. The site is basically isolated. He ittated a nonconforming
use can be continued provided the City does not adopt an amortization schedule
and the use dces not expand. He recommended that the General Plan designation
of low density residential be retained.
Chairman Rempel asked for co=ents from the audience.
Mr. Wayne Soles, half owner of the property and part owner of the businese,
stated they purchased this land as industrial two years ago. They have
invested much money in their development. He stated if they decide to sell
this property in five or ten years they will not be able to do this.
Commissioner Tolstoy stated this is not correct. :,gat piece of property when
sold could remain in its present use. However, this use can not be expanded
in the future.
Bob Dougherty, City Attorney, stated it is correct that this use could not be
expanded in the future. The use could continue as non - conforming use as long
as no amortization period is set. The use.could continue indefinitely regard-
less of the ownership.
Planning Coimnissi i.nutes -20- Obctober 25, 1978
Mr. Soles stated they will not be able to add any more buildings or make any
further improvements. to the site.. This development is not presently the size
they want and in the future they would like to expand. This could put them
out of business eventually. This will present a financial burden to them in
the long run.
Commissioner Garcia stated he feels the recommendation made by staff is appro-
priate. We are here to address properties in basic terms of planning on behalf
of the community.
Chairman ReMel stated he would also be in favor of the staff recommendation.
A MOT10N was made by Commissioner Garcia, seconded by Chairman Rempel and
unanimously carried to recommend that the low density residential designation
on the General Plan be designated for subject property.
AYES: COMM- ..SSIONERS GARCIA, REMPEL, JONES
NOES: COMMISSIONERS TOLSTOY, DAHL
ABSENT: NONE
Jack Lam reviewed the staff report in detail, this being on file in the Planning
Division. He reported the General Plan designates this area for low density
residential. The property owner desires industrial. He stated it is generally
recognized that residential uses adjacent tc industry generally cause incom-
patibility that of ten results in .conflicts that are detrimental to. industry
as well as residential uses. That is why industry near residential uses
generally desire a division with a right of way as a minimum buffer between
the two land uses. This area is directly adjacent to an area of predominately
residential uses. The site b.,.iuld logically be the continuation of existing
land uses on the Ontario side of the City limits and intrusion of industrial
land uses into a residential area is undesirable and should not be fostered.
He recommended that the low. density residential designation be retained on the
General Plan.
Chairman Rempel asked for com-nents from the audience.
Mr. Arthur Warren, owner of this property, stated they acquired this property
the first of the year and the property was zoned manufacturing. They have
spent a considerable amount of money in developing their plans.
Commissioner Garcia asked what is located in the City of Ontario adjacent to
this property.
Jack Lam• stated this property would back right into residential development
in the City of Ontario.
Mr. Warren stated they are willing to create a landscape buffer between their
development and the residential adjoining them.
I
} Planning Commisciinutes -21- October 25, 1978
Mr. Jeff Sceranka stated his opinion is that there is no way that residen-
tial use would be compatible on that corner.
Commisnioner Garcia states: z would seem to him if this piece of property
is retained on the General Plan there would be another problem of buffering
the residential property from the railroad tracks.. Industry irk this area
would conform with that area.
A MOTION was made by Commissioner Tolstoy, seconded by Commissioner Dahl and
unanimously carried to change the General Plan for subject,aree to industrial.
AYES: COMMISSIONERS TOLSTCR, DAML, CARCIA, JONES, REMPEL
NOES: NONE
ASSENT: NONE
ADJOURNMENT
Upon MOTION by Commissioner Tolstoy, seconded by Commissioner Garcia, and
unanimously carried it was votr_d to adjourn the Planning Commission meeting
of October 25, 1978 at 2:00 a.p. to a Special Meeting on October 31, 1978
in the Library Conference Room to discuss Growth Management.
Resp ..c ":fully ubmitted,
J &
JACK LAM, Director of
Community Development
1i
,..;.
1® !
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Planning Commission Minutes
September 27, 1978
-Regular Meeting
CALL TO The regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho
ORDER Cucamonga was held at the Community Services Building, 9161 Baseline Road,
Rancho Cucamonga, on Wednesday, September 27,1978.
Meeting was called to order at 7:03 p.m. by Chairman Herman Remnel, who lead
the meeting with the Pledge of Allegiance.
ROLL Present: Commissioners .Richard Dahl, Laura Jones, Jorge Garcia, Peter Tolstoy,
CALL and Herman Rempel.
APPROVAL Community Development Director, Jack Lam, reported that due to the opening
OF of the Building and Safety Divisio' n office, the minutes were not ready at the
MINUTES time and they would be prepared for the October 25; 1978 Planning Commission
agenda.
PUBLIC SITE APPROVAL NO. 78 -01 The development of a public equestrian boarding fac-
HEARING ility on approximately 5 acres of land located at S394 Hermosa Avenue - A -1 -5
zone - Request submitted by James McHann.
Staff report was presented by Michael Vairin, which is on file in the Planning
Division. The facility will be located north of Hillside Road, and will house
70 horses. It will include a training ring, a horse exerciser, and feed hop-
pers. The site is presently a grove with one residence. Thrae- fourths of that
grove will be retained. Staff recommended that the Planning Commission approve
Resolution 78 -09 with the following change: Section 3, condition 6. "That
the applicant submit complete plans to the County Health Department and obtain
the necessary permits. That such permits shall be filed by the applicant with
the Commission prior to issuance of permits."
The public hearing segment was opened by Chairman Rempel.
Mr. McHann. the applicant, responded to the question of a potential fly prob-
lem. lie indicated that fly tight bins would be used, and that the waste woul.i
be removed on a daily basis.
Mr. Steve Marlow, property owner to the north of the proposed equestrian fac-
ility stated that his wife opposed the facility. They are primarily concerned
with the north driveway and potential dust problems.
Commissioner Rempel indicated that the applicant is being required to lay
o� slag rock on all driveways.
Mr. Vick Cherbak, indicated that he was in favor of a project like this one,
but that he was concerned about flies, lie was also concerned that people from
this facility ride in.
�. P.C. Minutes
September 27, 1978 Page 2
i
Mr. Ron Nottingham, of Vanguard indicated that he was concerned about the
possible noise and dirt, and the concentration of horses.
staff indicated that there was a condition in the Resolution that if no
permits were obtained within two years than this approval wouid be null and
void.
The public hearing portion of this item was closed.
Co=dssiancr Talstay asked if the applicant bas researched the availability
of public train in the immediate area other than the use of the streets.
Mr. McHann responded Oct there were forest service trails just up the street.
Commissioner Tolstoy indicated that to gain access to these forest service
trails, riders would have to cross private property and that some owners had
already had problems with vandalism to their water gathering systems. Com-
missioner Tolstoy then requested that some kind of provision be made to in-
sure compliance with the condition concerning the flies. Ile wanted recourse
in case the County Health Department failed to correct the situation.
Jack Lam indciated that the resolution could be amended to include a condition
that would allow for a review period and that if the facility were not in com-
pliance then approval could ba revoked.
Commisioner Tolstoy then requested information on how a figure of 70 horses
was arriveT at.
Jack Lam indicated that the County had no ordinanance pertaining to the number
of horses on any one site.
City Attorney, Hobson, indicated that an annual review period rather than a
specific date was a much better provision to use in citing violations if the
need ever arose to do such.
Jack Lam recommended that this item be postponed until the subsequent Planning
Commission meeting to allow time to contact the County Health Department and
to have the applicant supply further information to the use of the facility
and to allow staff time to check other similar locations and their density of
horses.
MOTION: Commissioner Tolstoy made a motion to continue this item to the next
Plnnning Coomission meeting. Seconded by Dahl, carried unanimously by the l
Commission.
1
>' PUBLIC Zone Change No. 87 -73 Changing the zone from R••1 -T to C -1 for 10 acres of
HEARING land located on the southeast corner of Baseline and Carnelian Avenue. Re-
quest submitted by Ontario Savings and Loan.
Jack Lam gave the staff report which is u.. ciie in the Planning Division.
t The applicant has agreed to a restrictive covenant that will keep the uses
2,q
Vii.
� y '
P.C. Minutes
d September.2• /, 1978 Page 3
along the lines of an A -P type zoning. Also the following insertion is to be
included in Section A. Number 5, "Therefore, there will be Planning Commission'
review if there should be any request for alteration of this agreement."
Mr. Lam indicated that under Section.A, item 3, only 20% can be used for com-
mercial use. The applicant has requested that this be applied only to the
main building.
Mr. Jim Crowa ell, of Corwell /Leventhal, indicated that the layout would be
condL•rivo to 20% limit on the main building only.
' Mr. itobson, made corrections to the "Declaration of Restricitons" as follows
under "General Provisions," item 3, Sth line down, starting with "the fore-
go4ng restrictions and covenants shall... should read as follows, " the
foregoing restrictions and covenants will be in full force and effect until
January 1, 1988 and will..."
Discussion then returned to the issue of the cap of 20% commercial usage.
Jack Lam indicated t:ia the following could be changed, under section A, item
2 to read as follows: "Of the total square footage of all structures con-
tained on said tract no more than 20% of the total square footage of said
i structures may be used for a retail commercial establishment conforming to the
uses specified above exempting a sit -down restaurant,"
Chairman �Rem cal then requested that any opponents to this project should come
forward or r proponents. There were none.
MOTION: Unrn motion by Commissioner Dahl, and seconded by Commissioner
Tolstoy, it was moved to approve the Zone Change No. 87 -73 with the attached
amendments on the conditions of the restrictive covenant. Motion was Lnani-
mously carried by the Commission.
RECESS A short recess was declared at 8:15 p.m. by Chairman Rempel.
The Commission reconvened at 8:30 p.m. with all members still present.
NEW Parcel Map no. 4683 - Dividing 2.78 acres of land located on the west .side
BUSINESS of Sapphire Street, approximately 330' north of 19th St. into 4 parcels -
R -18500 zoning - Map submitted by Vanguard Builders.
Jack Lam presented the staff report on this project which is on file in the
Planning Division. - Mr. Lam indicated that this parcel map was in compliance
with the "Moratorium" ordinance as there were already three existing residences
on the property and only one new residence could be created. Staff recommended
that the Commission adopt a "Negative Declaration" and staff further recom-
mended that the Commission approvl Parcel Map No. 4693.
The public segment of this hearing was opened. There appeared no opponents.
Ron Nottin ham of Vanguard Homes, appeared and indicated that they were not
n epposxt on to this resolution.
X11
r,
P.C. Minutes
September 27, 1978 Page 4
MOTION: Upon motion by Commissioner Garcia, and seconded'by Commissioner
Tolstoy, it was moved to adopt the re'solt:tion approving the Parcel Map
No. 4693 and the issuance of a Negative Declaration. Motion was carried
unanimously by the Commission.
NEW Director Review No. 78 -20 An industrial development on 19 acres. of land
BUSINESS located on the east side of Archibald, north and adjacent to the Frito -Lay
plant. M -1 and M -2 Zone. Request submitted by Vanguard Builders.
Michael Vairin presented the. staff report on this project which is on file
in th� a Plann g Division. Staff recommends that only two access points be
allowed and that the applicant has agreed to this recommendation. Staff
recommends no parallel parking on the site and the center parking aisle as
there is not adequate room for backing up.
Chuck Beck, of Vanguard Builders, indicated that there will. be extensive land -
scap g n the project and thrt thoy did not object to the recommendations of
staff.
Chairman Rempel then requested that any opponents to this project should
come forward or any proponents. There were none.
MOTION: Upon motion by Commissioner Jones, and seconded by Commissioner
Dahl, it was moved to adopt Resolution no. 78 -08 with all the findings and
conditions as set forth by -hat document, and upon request by Dahl to attach
an amendment to this motion that this project come back for Director Review
approval of their M -2 buildings, to assure its compatibility with the General
plan. Rempel made the motion to adopt the. resolution with the subsequent
approval requirements, seconded by Commissioner Dahl, and carried unanimously
by the Commission.
NEW Director Review No. 78 -19 - Proposal for an office - retail building on the
BUSINESS northeast corner of Amethyst and 19th St.
Jack Lam presented the staff report on this project which is on file in the
Planning Division. Ile indicated that the applicant has agreed to a "Restric-
tive'Covenant" on this property as set forth in Resolution 78 -06 with one
correction to item 414, of the Engineering Division as follows: . eliminate
69' curb separation and replace it with 64' curb separation. Also on item B23
of this same section should read as follows: eliminate "All roof material,"
and substitute with "all roof mounted equipment shall be...."
D rvid S�trin cr� of Vanir Development stated thntthey would like to have it
zono C�1 pursuant to an agreement similar to that of the Ontario Savings and
Loan agreement that was on the agenda earlier.
Jack Lam responded that so long as the first two items were agreeable with
Foothill Fire District, staff could concur in their modification.
y.
J P.C. Minutes
September 27, 1978 Page 5
MOTION: Upon moti ,)n by Commissioner Garcia, seconded. by Commissioner Dahl,
it was moved to adoF. Resolution No. 78 -06 subject to.the amending of the
conditions as indicated. Motion was carrica unanimously by the Commission.
GENERAL Kesidential Issues.
PLAN
1. North side of Foothill Blvd, between Vineyard and Hellman.
Staff reportedthat this area is presently. designated as multi - family res-
idential and recommended that it be. changed to service commercial.
Public segment was opened. There were no opr;,nents. Ralph Lewis, of Lewis
Homes, spoke in favor of the proposed change from residential to commercial.
MOTION: Upon motion by Commissioner Garria, and seconded by Commissioner
Tolstoy, it was moved to change the designation of this area on the General
Plan to service commercial. Motion carried unanimously by the Commission.
2. East side of Chaffey College.
Mr, Jim Catazano, President of Chaffcy College, stated that Chaffey has not
yet reached its potential student, enrollment. The traffic situation on haven
and 19th St. is already a problem. There is also a problem with noise gen-
crated from the use of the college facilities (football games, .etc.). In
addition, with all the housing going up, already a number of people are
using the college for recreational purposes on the weekends, and very quickly
the college will be required to hire additional security guards and possibly
fence the college.
'k"
Mr. Robert Owen, of Landmark Consultants, stated that a project is in the
works for t at area. lie indicted that the Chaffey Regional Park would pro-
vide a location for recreational use and that high density projects require
that recreation 1 facilities be provided on the site.
Mr. Doug llone,..of 7333 Hellman Avenue, indicated that there were other traffic
problems with Wilson and 19th St. and that the freeway would alleviate some
of these problems.
Lloyd Hubbs, City Engineer, indicated that in reality single- family homes
generate more trips per day than do multi - family dwellings in high density
locations.
f'.
Mr. Lowell .Jones, indicated that there was a need for some type of high
}
density around the college and that the traffic generation question has not
really been discussed.
MOTION: Upon motion by Commissioner Jones, and seconded by Commissioner
,,.
Dahl, it was moved to change the designation around Chaffey College
g 8 Y a on not
. S
f, ..
only the cast, but the south and west as well, to medium density rather than
high density.
�x
r
r�
r
A
P.C. Minutes
September 27, 1978
3. East bank of Cucamonga Channel, northeast corner of the City above
Hillside Road.
Staff stated that there has been concern that this area would allow too
high of a density. The present designation allows 1 to 2 units per acre.
Staff recommended that the General Plan remain as shown.
MOTION: Upon motion by Commissioner Garcia, seconded by Commissioner Jones,
it was moved to accept staff's recommendation to leave this location as very
low density.
MOTION: Upon motion by Commissioner Tolstoy, seconded by Commissioner
Garcia, it was moved to continue the discussion of the General. Plan items
to the next regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting. Motion was
unanimously carried by the Commission.
NEW
BUSINESS Resn'lition for establishing access policy for major and scondary thorough-
fares.
Lloyd Hubbs, C4.ty Engineer made the staff presentation. This resolution will
allow the City to establish policies. The resolution recommends five points
that are design considerations that will be the guidelines for any development.
It was recommended that Commission give the resolutics: a reading at this time
so that interested parties could have an idea of what mas covered by the
proposed resolution. Indicated that public hearings woesld be held prior
to adoption and to allow for the coordination with Caterans on requirements
they will want on 19th St. and Foothill Blvd.
MOTION: Upon motion by Commissioner Tolstoy, and seconded by Commissioner
Dahl, it was moved to read the resolution and continue discussion to the
next regularly scheduled meeting. Motion carried unanimously by Commission.
CONSENT
CALENDAR MOTION: Upon motion by Commissioner Jones, seconded by Tolstoy, it was
moved to accept and adopt the Consent Calendar as•submitted. Motion carried
unanimously by Commission.
ADJOURN- MOTION: Upon motion by Commissioner Tolstoy, seconded by Commissioner Dahl,
ME-NT it was moved to adjourn the September 27, 1978, Planning Commission meeting.
Carried unaimously. Adjourned at 11 :27 p.m.
Re pectf ly ubmitted,
JACK LAM, Director of
Community Development
Zreo
a ,
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
STAFF REPORT
TO: Planning Commission November 22, 1978
FROM: Jack Lam, Director of Community Development
SUBJECT: ZONE CHANGE NO. 78 -63 - WALT SIEGL - Request to change the zone
from R -1 to AP on property located on the northeast corner of
Hermosa and 19th Street.
BACKGROUND: Mr. Siegl is requesting approval to change the zone from R -1
(single family residential) to AP (administrative - professional) on 4.2 acres
of land on the northeast corner of Hermosa Avenue and 19th Street (Exhibit
"A"). The applicant wished'to develop a professional office complex at this
site and has submitted a conceptual site plan for the project (Exhibit "B ").
It should be noted, this plan is for illustrative purposes only and will be
given a more thorough review at the Site Approval stage.
The Proposed General Plan designates this site as mixed use. The site is
presently vacant and zoned R -1. Surrounding land use and zoning is as follows:
LAND USE ZONING
North Single Family Residential R -1
South Single Family Residential A -1 -5
East Vacant R -1 -8500
West Vacant R -1
ANAYLSIS: The zone change'is consistent with the Proposed General Plan and
the site is suitable in size and shape to accommodate-,the uses permitted in
the zone requested. The use of this land as a professional office complex
would be compatible to the existing and future land uses on adjacent properties.
The Environmental Anaylsia Staff has reviewed this project for significant adverse
impacts on the environment. Staff has.found no significant adverse impacts as a
result of this project. Therefore, a draft Negative Declaration was published in
y the newspaper for public review. The applicant should be aware, however, that
Hermosa Avenue is subject to floodfng and that mitigating measures would be
required to be incorporated into the design of the professional office complex.
Staff feels that the issue of flooding can be addressed at the site approval
stage.
CORRESPONDENCE: A notice of public hearing was published in the Cucamonga Times
on November 9, 1978. In addition, a notice of said hearing was mailed to property
owners within 300' of the subject property. No correspondence has been received
in regards to this notice.
J
ZONE CHANCE N0. 78 -03
Page '2
November 22, 1978
RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Division recommends adoption of Resolution No.
78 -32 recommending approval of.the zone change from R -1 to AP and forward it
to the City Council.
Respectful y submitt d,
JACK LAM', Director
Community Development
JL:BH:deb
attachments: Exhibit "A" - Zoning Hap
Exhibit "B" - Conceptual Site Plan
(VNr OT�
f
R•I
L
•
�VRGAt•a'r�,
-
R-�
R -� To �
CvPC 4•. T�
J
—j
-
l9'F
ST.•
5.r p1 rnnc -')
A -1- 5 !
R -1
x
ZC 78.03
SIEGL
c
z;
r1loolowtVO4
Aj, L,
ONIM018 '111N018 MOUd
YONOMIVWO oHoNra
W p
J }�
a
^R' - 3
^7.
Y-
tl W
8
R
6
00
Lit _,Lt,
. �djH.�. A
} E -U r:::m
1 —..PAY YSOnH3H i l`��p ✓I
m
RESOLUTION NO. 78 -32
A RESOLUTION 07 THE RANCHO CUCANONGA PLANNING
COMMISSION FOR THE ADOPTION OF ZONE CHANCE NO.
78 -03 TO ORDINANCE NO. 17 BY CHANGING THE ZONE
FROM R -1 TO AP FOR 4.2 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED
ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF HERMOSA AVENUE AND
19 STREET - ASSESSOR PARCEL NO. 202- 191 -13.
WHEREAS, on the 29th day of October, 1978, acomplete application was filed for review on the above described property; and
WHEREAS, on the 22nd day of November, 1978, the Rancho Cucamonga
Planning Commission held a meeting to consider.the above described project.
NOW, THEREFORE,, the Rancho. Cucamonga Planning Commission resolved
as follows:
SECTION 1: That the following findings have been made:
a
1. Tht the subject property. is suitable for the uses
permitted in the proposed zone in terms of access,
size,-and compatibility with existing and future
land use in the surrounding area; and
2. The proposed zone change would not have significant
impact on the environment nor the surrounding pro -
pertieac and
3. That there is reasonable probability that the land use
proposed will be consistent with the general plan pro -
posal being considered.
A.
4. There is little or no probability of 'substantial
detriment to or interference with the future adopted
general plan if the use proposed is ultimately in-
consistent with the general plan.
SECTION 2: That this project will not create significant adverse
impacts on the environment and &-Negative Declaration is issued on November
22, 1978.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED.THIS 22ND DAY OF NO'MMER, 1979.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA .
By:
Herman Rempel, Chairman
ATTEST:
Secretary of* the Planning Commission
1, , Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City
of Rancho Cucamonga, du hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was duly
and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission held
on the day ,of 1478, by the following vote
to -wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
STAFF REPORT
TO: Planning Commission November 22, 1978
FROM: Jack Lam, Director of Community Development
Subject: PLANNING CM1MISSION RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL
REGARDING THE PROPOSED LAND USE ELEMENT, CIRCULATION
ELEMENT, PUBLIC FACILITIES ELEMENT OF TILE GENERAL PLAN
The Planning Commission has concurred that the November 22, 1978 meeting
of the Planning Commission- will be the final meeting in which the Planning
Commission would make a formal recommendatioa to the City Council regarding
the City's master plan.
The City Council has been given a copy of all correspondence received
regarding the proposed General Plan Elements as well as a copy of all
the modifications which the Planning Comission has made to the proposed
Master Plan via its numerous public hearings. Furthermore, the Council
has received copies of status reports that I had -prepared for the Plan-
ning Commission in the past and copies of all responses received pertaining
to the draft Environmental Impact Report. Therefore, the City Council now
has all the information which the Planning Commission has received and it
copy of all the actions which the Planning Commission has taken in regard
to the Master Plan. The Council has been informed that the 22nd of November
would be the dat. 1-.. .�hich the Planning Commission would make a formal recom-
mendation and that interested Council members are welcome to attend that
meeting and provide any individual input before the Commission makes a final
recommendation.
The Commission has conducted numerous public hearings and public sessions
for the development of the Genersl Plan. It has discussed major concerts
as well as focused upon individual issues and it now seems appropriate for
the Commission to ecosider making a final recommendation to the City Council.
If the Planning Commission agrees it is ready to make a recommendation to the
City Council, Staff recommends adoption of Resolution No. .78-33 with the
findings and recommendations contained therein in regard t•-+ the draft Environ-
mental Impact Report and the proposed land use circulation and public facili-
ties element of the Master Plan and forward said recommendations to the City
Council.
Res ect ly submitted,
- JAC L f, c or of
Community Development
Resolution No. 78 -33
ITEM +�
,,
RESOLUTION NO. 78 -15
A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING
CCMMISSION APPROVING DIRECTOR REVIEW NO. 78 -32;
THE DEVELOPMENT OF AN INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX LOCATED .
ON THE SOTMTWEST CORNER OF HELMS AVENUE AND
NINTH STREET
WHEREAS, o„ the 19th day of September, 1978, a complete application
was filed for review of the above described project; and
WHEREAS, on the 11th day of October, 1978, the Rancho Cucamonga
Planniag Commission held a meeting to consider the above' described project
and subsequently continued a decision on said project to the 22nd day of
November, 1978.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLVED
AS FOLLOWS:
i
SECTION 1: That the following findings have been made;
1. That the site indicated by the development,plan is
adequate in size and shape to accommodate the proposed
use, and all yards, spaces, walls, fences, parking,
landscaping, 3oading and other features required by
this section.
2. That the improvements as indicated on the development
plan are located in such a manner an to be properly
related to existing and proposed streets and highways.
3. That the improvements as shown on the development plan
are consistent with all adopted standards and policies
as set forth in this section.
SECTION 2: That this project will nut create adverse impacts on the
environment and that a Negztive Declaration is issued on November 22, 1978.
SECTION 3: That Director Review No. 78 -32 is approved subject to the
fallowing conditions:
Foothill Fire District:
In accordance with ,Ordinance No. 1, Foothill Fire District,
i the following items will En required by this agency prior
to commencing construction of any buildings) or structure(s).
Two (2)• seta of building and plot plans shall be sub-
mitted to this department,
{ 2. The required fire flow will be 3500 gallons per minute
for a duration of 3 hours.
3. Calculations indicating that the fire flow require -
ment will be met shall be submitted to this depart-
ment prior to plan approval.
4. Water mains and appurtenances shall be installed in
accordance with the requirements of the Cucamonga
County Water District.
5. This department shall be notified to wl.tneas an accep-
tance teat of the water system.
6. Fire protection water systems and fire hydrants shall
be provided and installed in accordance with require -
ments.of this district.
7. A minimum 24 foot access shall be provided around the
proposed building.
a. In lieu of the 24 foot access on the west property
line, this department will accept an approved auto-
matic fire sprinkler system'in all buildings.
8. -Fire department connections for fire sprinkler system
shall be located within 500 feet of a public fire
hydrant.
9. All streets and cul -de -sacs shall meet the minimum require-
menta:of the City of Rancho Cucamonga,
10. Street leading to cil -de -sacs or dead ends shall not
exceed 600 feet in length.
11. The proposed development will require the installation
of two or three public fire hydrants.
The foliing requirements are necessary prior to completion or
occupancy of the aforementioned development.
12. Fire extinguishers will be required. The size, type,and
number will be determined by this department prior to
occupancy.
13. Street address numbering shall be in accordance with local
ordinance.
Engineering Division:
14. At the time of development, grading and drainage plans
prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer shall be,sub-
mitted for review and approval of the City Engineer.
Hydraulic calculations and a topographic map'will be ;
.required to support the sizing and location of drainage
structures shown on the plans.
15.
At the time of development, curb, gutter, drier approaches,';
sidewalk, street trees, and A.C. match -up paving shall
be provided along Helms Street.
16.
Street lights are required along 9th Street. The developer
shall submit all necessary plans for installation to the
Southern California Edison Company.
17.
All drainage shall be to public right of way or with'`
prior approval of. abutting property owners with proper
drainage facilities.
18.
Drainage from the site shall be by way of sidewalk drains
through the curb face and not over drive approaches.
Planning Division:
19.
That all provisions of the Zonng Ordinance be complied
with.
20.
That the site be developed in accordance with the.approved
plans on file in the Planning Division.
21.
That precise landscape and irrigation plans be submitted
to and approved by the Planning.Division prior to the
issuance of building permits.
22.
That directional arrows be painted in the parking areas.
23.
That the two trash areas circled on the development )lan
V
be relocated to the satisfaction of the Planning Division.
24.
That all roof mounted equipment be screened from view with
material compatible with the architecture of the building.
25.
That a uniform sign program be submitted to and-approved
by the Planning Division prior to tenant occupancy.
26.
That the trash enclosures are provided with view obstructing
gates..
27.
That there shall be no outside storage assc..ated with
this development and that only uses permitted in the M -R
zone are permitted to occupy these buildings. _
APPROVC•D AND ADOPTED THIS 221M DAY OF NOVEMBER, 1978.
R:
PLANNING.
COMMISSION. OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
By
Herman Rempel,,Chairman
ATTEST:
Secretary of the Planning Commission
Z,
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 F, the Planning Commission of the
�,.
City of
Rancho Cucamonga at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held
on the
day of, r 1978, by .the following vote to -wit:
AYES:
C"ISSIONERS:
NOES:
COMISSIONERS: -
ABSENT:
COMMISSIONERS:
i
t
CT.TY OF-RANCHO CUCAMONGA
STAFF REPORT
T0: Planning Commission November 22, 1978
FROM,. Jack Lam, Director of Community Development
SUBJECT: APPEAL OF MINOR SUBDIVISION NO. 77 -0689I - Rancho Cucamonga
Development Company - Appeal of a.Community Development
Department decision to deny a minor subdivision to create
thirteen (13) industrial lots on property generally located
on the northeast corner of Turner Avenue and San Bernardino
Road (4th Street).
I
BACKGROUND AND DESCRIPTION: This application was originally submitted to-the
County of San Bernardino, and later, transferred to the City of Rancho Cr:camonga
after incorporation. the application was denied on.September 11, 1976, by the
Community Development Director because the subdivision was in conflict with the-
Flood Control District's proposed easement through this property. Attached to
this report is a map of the proposed subdivision with the flood control channel-
as proposed and a letter from the Flood Control District which states their
intention of acquiring a portion of this property for the flood control channel
(Exhibit "A" and "B ").
ANALYSIS: The applicant "s, intention is to keep the application open to allow for
redesign of the subdivision in the event a drainage easement is acquired. Given
acquisition 'of the easement, major revisions to the tentative parcel :cap would
require a full review by staff.
Staff feels the application should not be left open to be reprocessed at a future
date.. Instead, a new applicati n should be submitted to th_ City at the time the
drainage easement is acquired.
RECOPZtENDATION: The planning Division recommends adoption of Resoutiou No. 78-
denying the appeal of -Minor Subdivision No. 77 -06981- based on the fiudings.con-
tained therein.
Respectful l subm to ,
JACK IJ01, Director of
Community Development
JL:BH:deb
attachments: Exhibit "A" - Tentative Parcel Map
Exhibit "B" - Letter from Flood Control District
Letter of Appeal from Alan Tibbetts
Letter of Denial from the Community Development Director
12TE F
;r
. I I S83•o' __ ..
0
(� 140 N I
T I ' STAN FOR D -...0 O upm � '••,�.,�, - U" � � �
8 t� 7
p n, M , �. 3S,rz5at N 1� �.
\1 m h zz,4•.a• z'_ .: ix•-'-'r 4�•" 9 Cl
,� 9p. p' i3o•a' /v;.c' •1.70.0• �lI �
( /U.6' °_1,t3:� / /b.b' /Ig.b 116.6• � V
•33' - 3
1 0
m
fl h
Iz � to �b5r n ,Zt71tl' h ZOtb�J aC1 h Zn'ZSyJ�' Zf)cc;:)
1 1
_ L a 96.6' 116.6 " I�G.F,' 116S 1/3•z` _
F_xisr /n.F Gue^�s!_ 'VGurr.E•P_� t:
!� �.yCHI(3l� P►
W
E1'nn41• i; ;.,,,� cacenty OULIC WORKS nt I IICY
q75 ta)t Third S$w1 San e,•nb.dlnb•C• 92495 7P1,abon* (7t4) 385 -1555'
it ':1 1I 1. ` October 30, 1978
A'1 l.11
rr
City of Rancho-Cucamonga
Post Office Sox 793
Rancho Cucamonga, CaliFornia 91730
Attention: Mr. Lloyd Ilubbs
City Engineer
Gentlemen:
File No: 1- 55012.00
1 -501 /1.00
126.239
Re: 7,onv 1, Deer Creek. tilnor Suh-
divission No. 1477 -06981
City ^f Rancho Cucamonga
As you may be aware, the. proposed 11, s. Corp:: nr Enftneers Cucamonga Creck
improvement project will provide for the improvclstent of Deer Creek. The
Corps' project proposes a realignment which will traverse the subject minor
subdivision. to kccpicng with this, the Flood Control District is having the
parcel appraised for acquisition of the required right -o£ -way. We have
recently met with Mr. Alan Tibbetts of Rant :11n Cucamonga Development Corpora-
tion, and advised him of tlse appraisal and acquisition process. He has
agreed to work witl) us on this.
If we can provide any.rurther information is1 this regard, please do not
hesitate to ;ive us a call.
Very truly yours,
C. j. D1 pIETRO, Flood Control Engineer
nV \_oVV"A� �•.:'
RVM:rc
cc: Mr. .Alan 'Tibbetts
lam s L•: Kin <lig
• Asst Flood Control Engineer
an :ng - Engineering
I
: ,:
t
H
• i , ,al:
IAP
RANCO CUCAMONGA DEVE CO f } tlF a31
`Real Rotate Development & lnaestmmt" f! Z6 , �r +n� R %if1 x,l'��
,
10013 8th' STREWP <'+ ' ` r ' P. 0- BOX 607
•r Ct p +r 7* f a tt5 7 1
71 18 "
'UCAMONgA, CALIF. 91730 _ tiS c b r + �'k r • i
4-987) ,
' "• yrl'�6%•. ' ,'.r October 9'' 197884 -,s.; , c�•
' f i 41
, :J %(n 1 •.
• . 5 :T• �.r i• v'.(. ] ?. # ++.':rt f ra�jj ��11'rt i-aiR, :'. � I.n
Jack f am Y } ?4 ;,u "
�- Director of Coramunity'Deve ] opment ''r CITY OF RANCHO: CUCAMD
<sCiE of Rancho.
Cucamonga
Kc��x' tip' , CQMMUtd174;GEVE1QPtlIEHTO'Tt a`: ?fiij.g4p�
c• Y.. g
P R aOnc. Box 793 rr :r r : t: T
yy ' • r. r:r..c x7rt ho Cucamonga= y . ry�;s' .•iF , e r'S� � ,
w •
n
:r "7
3 ° 4arCel' Map Index #77- 0698i� u: ;r j! "njl$ 9 1 1 12"
�z. Your, letter of.:9 %11 /i8" ,:. �; '��•,,. - ,�r!'. �
Subject:•'Request fora minor subdivision to create thirteen
1.(13) industrial lots of the northeast comer of
Turner Avenue and San Bernardino Avenue (4th Street) •
i .r r l ,•�i, .# v 7rx �� t. w. �1
etr.: Gentlemen! 4 ry s
This letter conatitutee formal APPEAL of your,. denial -of, the, �• qt r'
S..
above — referenced request'for. minor subdivisioA. - ,Ouriresponse
rr'
+: y to the two findings listed in gour.:letter of Septembet 11, 1978
x
are' res"etively.. t
t
1. The proposed' subdivision' is in keeping with the [,r +`•
�c.. tentative General Plan which •is about to be
adopted by the, cLCy4council.. �..z (�ytrr
' � .. = .. . ,Q k ±v
x
2".'.. The issue of the specific plan drainage facility a��. f
t �;' �`,• ;through the propertyrremains'untesolved 'and'under
jr . r fY, ;appeal between Rancho Cucamonga DevelopmenE,Company �� 't
and 1thi San Bernardidn Count Flood 'Control District w 2,
7 `Thus we request that the City of Rancho Cucamonga
keep this •subdivision request active pending Final ? y +• 4LF i�4t
7 '# resolution of the flood control issue.. At the.
>f
r
.,of such resolution, we shall be happy to modifq. the 41L r
subdivision, request, if necessary, in order to confdrgi " a , t""+
to the adopted General Plan for the City ,'ol Rancho
Cucamonga..+.. �!'ri 'i+' !i, •1Y #w. {,,.,. s r M1. h't"
t
Your timel attention to and fair consideration of��t�hie,matter �
y 7rvry
J? i is appreciated �ttt 7Y 4.
..��1
11. ^41 .�it� �� !T..~..+, Sincere
@lv�,#
'r
a ,�,,,
Ylf�r y p + " 1y 3• • Alan Tibbetts, £Or
y,j F`r.1 r f , ,. `,�1iel #•'"..i�. Rancho CLLCBAlOngB.�� ,.
Development Company " --
�C'r +ll rfi,F. rJ #a..t•.r,+i"= *Y .M1i{i'�i �•: + ,R1i, # .fl:�r ,j'f I „�: •`F�(n rt n
t r,±ai�xAxleb 4 ,' •r• � �F,r� i. ,. .,..;X..�T., "r� +' a•,,�.7
r
i
C'A
UC.'A Nit C)I�ICii�
original
September 11, 1978
Ranc•hn Cltca"t'll" Dcvelnpmcnt (7,ntnpany
r. 11 t;nti cn'r
91.730
Ranchn Cucnmtmga, Cnitfnn,ia
77- OG98 -I
rARCF.L NAP Iti11GR
R
SIIRJF.CT: R1i+!l'T ' . 11I1t1A 1 1'I:hN (13)
ShRPT \IS10N TO (Rl\CI: A 1i7111'SI'lll
.14
iS A "111Pll CORNER OF TlRNIM AN
LOTS ON TllTi I
AN
(rntic•men:
Th1- nnlicr i� to alvi�+• }'an Chat y
nor rcgnr.;l frr Ll`t ;,tQinr� cnlSc,ncc
m[nnr nubd ;vi, {on has hrrn Itt:Nlhi) based rn, the Collnwini;
1, 3'hr tirslt:n or t{tr propnccd suhdivLanR. i.F noL con::L;tcnC with
aPPlicablt' Rrncrnl and Specific p pp
elf
'!
The drsi.{;n or thr �nbdivisinn will cnnClic•t with, 1
Platt drainage Cnrility Lbroull, ProPcrty•
3'h{ , art.io„ is t:uhlrrl t n tliirty (3(1) d� }•' Oils pu purl+ i
for :my ,1 :-
gricvrd rerson�. If no n1'pcnl..is riled within ehir, prri�td, then thi actirn,
will hecnmc effective Ortnhrr 1.1. 1978.
if you have any forth, r <ptc•,l irn,n regardlnr Chic ,n:Utor. plcnsc cnnLaC
c
the rlanni.ng Aivis3nn nC lh� l office.
Sinrcrely ynVt'F` .
I.M. Dtrcctt,i t'f
Community Development
I .
.Il,: Tti1L• deb
,
Y�.
RESOLUTION NO. 78 -29
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY '
OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ESTABLISHING ACCESS POLICY FOR
MAJOR AND SECONDARY THOROUGHFARES
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Rar_iho Cuca-
monga recognizes that to maintain capacity, efficiency and the safety of traffic
flow on major and secondary thoroughfares, it is necessary to limit and control
access; and
WHEREAS,'it is necessary to establish firm policy'guidelines
to allow property owners fronting on said streets to properly plan the use
cf their land.
NOW, THELEFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AND ESTABLISHED that for develop -
went of properties fronting on all major and secondary thoroughfares the following
r criteria shall be observed in relation to access control:
1. Non access to all major and secondary thoroughfares shall be
. dedicated to the City wherever suitable alternative access may be developed from
local or collector streets.
2. Where access must be granted to a major or secondary thorough-
fares said access shall be limited to.one point for 300 feet of frontage or one
point per parcel with lens than 300 feet of frontage • It is the intent of the
policy to establish a minimum 300 feet spacing between driveways.
3. Combined access to major and secondary thoroughfares between
1 adjacent properties shall be -encouraged wherever possible to reduce the.number
of encroachments.
4. Access points shall wherever possible be located a minimum
of one hundred (100) feet from the end of curb returns at intersections on
4 lane or wider highways.
5.. Where otherwise compatible with this policy access shall be
located opposite exist' -g or planned access,points on'the opposite side of
the street.
Variations from these policies will require approval of the
Community Development Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga subject to
appeals to the Planning Commission.
i
'S.3�
PT
1
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 8TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 1978.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
By:
Herman Rempel, Chairman
ATTEST:
Secretary of the Planning Commission
1, , Secretary of the Planning Coimmission 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 day of 1978, by the following vote
to -wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
F'
'rl.
ST#TJ OF CAMORNIA -- BUSINESS AHD TRAN &TION AGENCY � EDMUND G. BROWN )I, Ge.•eMW
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DISMICY B. P.O. BOX 7:1 .
- BEBNARDINO; CAUFORN1A 92401 ._ __ i �� i•; 1i qq
ION November 7: 1978 t ;IaU:a If L -!A'LI Tit Mr[IT DEPT.
110'•1 '71i 1978
IJd PM
City of Ranchc Cucamonga 17,18119i1Di1111:?11i2130AG
P. 0. Box 793
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
Attention Mr. Lloyd Hubba
Gentlemen:
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the proposed Planning
Commission Resolution establishing access control policies for
major and secondary highways throughout your City.
.1e concur with the policies proposed in the Resolution and must
note that the limitina of access is essential to maintain ac high,
a level of service as possible on the existing State highways In
your rapidly growing area.
We might also add that driveways, when necessary along the State
highways.should be well spaced and wide enough (35 to 40 feet)
to allow normally unrestricted two -way operation. Road type
connections should be considered to improve the operation of high
Volume commercial driveways.
If additional i.nformatiun is desired, please call Mr. George Boon
at (7111) 383 - 11671,
Very truly yours,
J. E. PEDDY
District Director
B..� -.Z.
R. J. Lowry
yy Project Development Services Engineer
8
i
1�ancho Cacainon
c..9 1 a Chamber o ff Co�nmerEe
9354 FOOTHILL BOULEVARD
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA 91730
TELEPHONE: 714 -987 -1012
November 14, 197
Lloyd Hubbs, City Fngincer
City of Rancho Cucamonga
P.O. Box 793
Rancho Cucamonga, CA m73o
Dear Lloyd,
Herewith is the resultant resolution from the Chamber Board which I polled
aftar our meeting today.
Without exception the Board members expressed their appreciation of the ,
courtesy and cooperation you and your department have been giving to the
Chamber. Furthermore they appreciate the tremendous task you have had set be-
fore you and the fact that you have limited fundo to accomplish it.
Lloyd, as always the Chamber and its limited staff stands willing to aid
where we can be of acsictance.
Sincerely,
< `
David Vi. Humphrey
F%ca. Director
i
i
t.
s: •
?,anchq Lucamon' a Cham6cr of
m
DATE: November 147 197°
TO: Lloyd Hubbs, City Enginey�
FRO1.1: David I1. Humphrey, Exec .�Dt ctor
SUBJECT: RESOLUTION 73
Commerce
9354 FOOTHILL BOULEVARD
RANCHO CUCAMONGA. CALIFORNIA 91730
TELEPHONE: 714-987 -1012
It is the recommendation of the Board of Directors of The Rancho Cucamonca
Chamber of Commerce that t11e following changes be made in Resolution # 78-
2. Where access must. be granted to a major or secondary thorouGhfarer,
said access shall be limited to one point for 300 feet of frontage or one
point per parcel whichever is less. It• is the in'ent,of the policy to ectablich
a minimum 300 feet spacing between driveways.
4. Access points shall wherever possible be located a minimum of Fifty
(50) feet from the end of curb returns at intersections on 4 lane or wider
highways.
5. Where othenii.c compatible with this policy access shall be located
opposite existing or planned access points on the opposite side, of the street.
Variations from these policies will require :approval of the Community
Development Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga subject to aplealcd to the
Flnnning Commission.
Furthermore it is Lhe Boards recommendation, thn� the city di.rcour.y -� alto-
further co:uitleraijen o!• frot:tca;e roads a7.011g any :-11ooLs in [lie cit.,y.
1
,.fir _:�.,� - :'- �•:..,rn""�'
r c
IE
NIGU, R MPS,
9211 ARCHIDALD AVE. • CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA 91730 • (714) 987 6376
odglnal Poor Quality October 25#, 1970 1 r
U iY cE 1z1 %NrI:0 ru(J'66F'';c1 currrncui'rra
WATONITV DEVU01140T DTPTl OPPINT DEPT.
ocr is�n ; 1576 -
Air. Lloyd Rubbs, City Engined�; PPM
City of Rancho Cucamonga 701911011111t1112131r1Ii1G > - t11�131�1a1(j
1 9320 Paseline
Rancho Cucamonga, California 94'701
S RE: Resolution on access parkways. '
on major and secondary
thoroughfares
Dear mr. Rubbs,
I'A, have reccivr-d and reviewed the prorored resolution and would
appreciate your eondiscration of our comments.
first, the Proposed is reasonable for residential development
i where nor✓ streets nrnvide lot access. For residential dnvclenment
purposes the cnly change would bt in (5) to add "or said access points
i shall be separated by a minimum of•200 feet;,.
For commercial or industrial devoloiment this )policy is very
detrimental. fie+ don't l,cli.cve it should be adopted for anything othrr
than residential subdivisions.
If arlopted for commercial and industrial wo mould requost the
followinq changes:
(a) In <^ change - 600 foot to 300 foot.
(11) In 4 chancre - 100 feet to 50 fact.
(c) For comrrol-ciallindustr -ial properCiea and thr-ir driven>ays,
this worilel create more problem.,: 1311 .ipdur- ing..cross over
traffic:. L'o suggest elimination of 5 (sec attached sketch). •
Very truly ynurs,
- Ron Kett ?nnhrr�
Director of .Vrvolopmcrtt
Vanguard Builders, Tric.
r`
�, :• RN /cs
j q•°
}y i
N r
'! y
^M�
J. O
N
pa.►' .0 W n
1 1If1I,V I I.- U-1
-- 2€3 /f f5�w
aotftgK,:✓ I I I
1 "4 %7,rir.✓
S4oar Frn� 07(/i FinO t� /in��rdQ
C
/r tnl
� A
To: Planning Cnmmission.
From: Jack Lam, Director of Community Development
Subject: REVISIONS TO.TRACT 9589
ABSTRACT: The background information was distributed in your'.packet
of November 8, 1978 ; however, the applicant has requested the -with-
drawal'of this item at this time.
Respectftdly submitted, ,
JACK LAM, Director of
Community Development
JL:nm
CITY OF :RANCHO CUCAMONGA
.STAFF REPORT
TO: Planning Commission November 22, 1978
FROM: Jack Lam, Director of 4ommunity Development
Subject: DIRECTOR REVIEW N0. 78 -32 - GSR Development.- Request for'approval
of a multi- tenant industrial c- )mplex located at the southwest 'corner
of Nelms and Ninth Streets in the'M -R (Restricted Manufacturing)
Zone. (Continued £rom 10/11/78).
BACKGROUND: The Planning Commission, at its regular meeting of October 11,
1978 continued Director Review No. 78 -32 to allow the applicant the opportunity
to redesign his plans to accommodate the Planning Commission's concerns rela-
tive to:
}. 1. Parking
2. Building design along Ninth Street
Specifically, the Commission was concerned that the -ratio of 2.5 parking spaces.
per unit was insufficient for "spec building" and the applicants proposed building
elevations depicted loading doors facing Ninth Street, a heavily traveled roadway.
ANALYSIS: The revised plans contained herein (Exhibits "A " - "C ") show a redesigned
site plan creating a new building 02 and a "reduntion in Building #1. Total square
footage has been reduced 'from 38,984 to 37,064 - almost 2,000 square feet. The
square footage reduction increases the parking ratio from 2.5 spaces /leasable unit
to 3.5 spaces /leasable unit.
Exhibits "B" and "C" indicated the applicant's revision to the building'elevations.
You will note that building 02 (Exhibit "B ") shows no loading doors facing Ninth
Street and Building 01 shows no openings at all facing Ninth Street. The architec-
ture, building materials remain the same as proposed previously, i.e. concrete
block construction accentuated by adobe brown colored stucco and tiled mansard
.4
office areas.
F Our only suggestion is to revise the location of the trash enclosure as indi-
cated on Exhibit "A" to the satisfaction of the Punning Division.
The Environmental Analysis Staff has re ared and
y' p p published a draft Negative "
c:c Declaration for this project as no significant adverse impacts were round as
}�nn a result of this project.
r ITEM
DIRECTOR IIEb1EW ND. S2
November 22, 1978
Page 2
L
REMBIEMATIM. The Planning Divir.ion recommends that the Planning Ccimmission '
approve and adopt Resolution No. 78 -15 based on the findings and conditions
listed therein.
RespectKul y submitted,
JACK LAM, Director of '
I Community, Development
JL:BKM:nm
Attachments.
Exhibit "A" - Site plan
Exhibit "B" - Main Building Elevation
Exh +.bit "C" - Building 112 Elevation'
Resolution No. 78 -15
A
J '
RESOLUTION NO. 78 -31
A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING
COMMISSION UPHOLDING.THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DIRECTOR'S DECISION TO DENY MINOR SUBDIVISIC -14
NO. 77- 0698 -I TO CREATE THIRTEEN (13) INDUSTRIAL
LOTS ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE NORTH -
EAST CORNER OF TURNER AVENUE AND SAN BERNARDINO
ROAD
WHEREAS, on the 22nd day of November, 1978, the Rancho
Cucamonga Planning Commission held a meeting to consider the above des -
cribed project.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission
resolved as follows:
SECTION 1: That the following findings have been made:
1. That the subdivision is inconsistent with
a specific plan of development of the Cuca-
monga Creek flood channel.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 22ND DAY OF NOVIU9BER, 1978.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA.
By:
Herman Rempel, Chairman
ATTEST:
Secretary of-the Planning Commission
I, Secretary of the Planning Commission o�' the City
of Rancho- Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was duly
and regulyrly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission helel
on. t1:e dny of 1.978, by the following vote
to -wit:
F.'
i•
NEGATIVE DECLAIMON
1. Briaf Description of Project:
Parcel Map.4767 to divide 9+ acres into two (2) lots
at the southeast corner of Church and Archibald.
2. Name and Address Of Applicant.:
Robert E. Mills
316 East "E" Street
Ontario, Calif. 91762
3. Pursuant to the provisions of the.California
Environmental Quality Act of 1970, the City of
Rancho Cucamonga has determined that the above
project will. not have a sigH f.icnnt effect upon
thc'envi.renment. An Environmental Impact Report
will not be required.
4. Minutes of such decision and the Initial Study
prepared by the City of Rancho Cucamonga are on
file in the Planning Division of the City of
Rancho Cucamonga.
5. This decision may be_ appealed to the City Council
of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. A wri.t•ten appeal
and Li .ling Lcc Of $100.00 must he received by the
Planning Division no water than 5:00 p.m.
6. This Negative Declaration is subject to the
implementaL-i.on of mitigating. measures (if any)
as listed on the attachments.
DATED Noveiaber 22, 1978
i
Chairman;Nanning
Comm ssion
S
ITW
CITY 01? UMICIIO C:'CnHONCA .
INITIAL STUDY
PART I - PROJECT INFORMATION SKEET - To be completed by applicant
Environmental Assessment Review Fee: $70.00
For all projects requiring environmental review, this
form must be completed and submitted to the Development
Review Committee through the departmen� where the
project application is made. Upon receipt of this
application, the Environmental Analysis staff will prepare
Part II of the Initial Study. The Development Review
Committee will meet •snd take action no later than ten
(10) days before the public meeting at which time the
project is to be heard. The Commit.tec vill make one of
three determinations: 1) The project will have no
environmental impact and a Negative Declaration will be
filed, 2) The project will have an environmental impact
and an Environmental Impact Report will be prepared, or
3) An additional nformation report should be supplied
by the applicant giving further information concerning
the proposed project.
PROJECT
APPLICA NA E, ADDRESS T LEPHONF.:
NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE OF PERSON TO BE CONTACTED
CONCF.RNIN5,�IIIIS PROJECT- _
lfir.7 �'6
TACATION OF
JP :QJECT
(
(STREET
AD ESF AND SG�7 SS R PAR —C /j:L IJO. )
l 2ZI, /7 ��Ir r. �er �C..' '
,. ..
LIST'OTHER
PERMITS
NECESSARY FROM LOCAL, REGIONAL, STATE AND .
FEDERAL AGF11CIES
AND THE AGENCY ISSUING SUCH PERMITS:
h
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
DESCRIPTION PROyTECT:
ACREAGE OF PROJECT ATEA'AND SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING AND
PROPOSED BUILDINGS, IF ANY•?
�7iirs
DRSCRIBE THE BNVIRONMEirPAL SETTING OF THE PROJECT SITE
INCLUDING INFORMATION ON TOPOGRAPHY, PLANTS (TREES) ,
ANIMALS, ANY CULTURAL, HISTORICAL OR SCENIC ASPECTS, USE
OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES, AND THE DESCRIPTION OF ANY
EXISTING STRUCTURES AND THEIR -USE (ATTACH NECESSARY SHEETS):
Is the project, part of a larger project, one of a series
of cumulative actions, which although individually small,
may as a whole }eve significant environmental impact?
F.
9f:
:r uy
i
WILL THIS PROJECT:
_ YES NO
Create a substantial change in ground
contours?
2. Create a substantial change in existing
noise or vibration?
3. Create a substantial change in demand for
municipal services (police, fire, water,
sewage, etc.)'.
4. Create changes in the existing zoning or
general plan designations?
X 5= Remove any existing trees? How many?
?� 6. Create the need for use or disposal of
potentially hazardous materials such as
toxic substances, flammables or explosives?
Explanation of any YES answers above:
IMPORTANT: If the project involves the construction of
residential units, complete the form on the
next page.
CERTIFICATION: I hereby-certify that the statements furnished
above and in the attached exhibits present the data and
information required for this initial evaluation tn•the
best ^f my ability, and that the facts, statements, and
information presented are true and correct to the best of
my knowledge and belief. I further derstand that.
additional information may be required to be submitted
before an adequate evaulation can be made by the Development
i Review Committee.
i Date /e' i7� Signatu ..�-
�.
Title
k
I 1
ff� Cf
1
t'
VIPk
'
A= '
M,
+4
•r,i •
X+ / 4.9
y� r T •T• * I1�
1 EN p �/ I� Y G SmIll i or t 31 ASTI
PARCEL MAP N49 4767 ASSOCIATI11N11NAE.r
LITT tlF 1ANrWS TUCAMON9 GWAA1P, LURDWA
Kin A'OIVISIt" to r4 1451 1,2 R T14. im1U 1.7 rr m "mIM1C5T 1/1 EF IKE SMWKSI IA 6 SECIIIN
2. TOWMIP 1 mm Rma 7 PEST. SIN RINAWUO AIX PIA7 WMIYA CMA1714A LLOS AS KV ILAt ilE[GSOFL
tN mm It IF $VS. PAR.l. KCM 6 SSID CTSPIIT. CiLI70AMIL
SE"Dw. Is /A /•C_M /..� Zan.•, /.I.
•.. .. r VT ViSH
1
Iv' TA_S+..... •.a
•ice"
o �
d
M.r 1
v �
a
a
i
r-
- rr ..ra,••1
s'
�_1:'.fAar.a rZ�O —�
�..� 1
1 TEA �,
a_•a �r•�
i
N
1
Iv' TA_S+..... •.a
•ice"
o �
d
M.r 1
v �
a
a
i
r-
- rr ..ra,••1
s'
i
N
irrc'
AM 4187
.! t
r � I••lflfM
FOOTHILL -
•IAII JL. fa4 .•. M.•.h.
W
D
Z
W
.Q
r.»rw .rr
+
M•
•f y.S,'
1 j.l
r' ., firers• BLVD.
t
..• Y•�/ A+ Mi•J• /a.
. r.•/Yr.n
^�Awrr I L..flre/� F.vTwar�a.r.l�.,.
„x • Id
rl
. r
s'
i
r' ., firers• BLVD.
t
..• Y•�/ A+ Mi•J• /a.
. r.•/Yr.n
^�Awrr I L..flre/� F.vTwar�a.r.l�.,.
„x • Id
rl
. r
is '
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Brief Description of Project:
A parcel map to divide 105 acres into 17 industrial lots
for development.'
2.
Name and Address of Applicant:
Cucamonga Land Co.
p.o. Box 696
Rancho Cucamonga, California 9_130
3.
Pursuant to the provisions of the California
Environmental Quality Act of 1970, the .City of
Rancho Cucamonga has determined that the above .
Project will not have a significant effect upon
the environment. An Environmental Impact Report
will not be required.
4.
Minutes of such decision and the Initial study
prepared by the City of Rancho Cucamonga are on
file in the Planning Division of the City of
Rancho Cucamonga.
5.
This decision may be appealed to the City Council
of the City of Rancho Cucart:anRa. A written appeal
and f.i.ling fire of $100.00 must- be received by,the
Planning Division no later than 5:00 p.m.
F.
This Negative Doclaration is subject to the
implementation of mitirlatincr measures (i£ sny)
a
cs listed on the attachments.
DATED ,flpvember 22, 1978_
tf-
Chairman, rlaiining Commission
t;..
0
- - - -- CITY OF RANCHO CUCMIONGA
INITIAL STUDY
PART I - PROJECT INFORMATION S11LET - To be completed by applicant
Enviro-nmental Assessment Review Fee: $70.00
For all projects requiring environmental review, this
form must be completed and submitted to ..the Development
Review Committee. through the department where the
project application is made. upon receipt of this
application, the Environmental Analysis staff will prepare
Part II of the Initial Study. The Development Review
committee will ms et and take action no later than ten
(10) days before the public meeting at which time the
project is to be heard. The Committee will make one of
three determinations: 1) The project will have no
environmental impact and a Negative Declaration will be
filed, 2) The, project will have an environmental impact
and an Environmental Impact Report will be prepared, or
3) An additional information report should be supplied
by the applicant giving further information concerning
the proposed project.
PROJECT TITLE: PA-Ho 4749 Cucamonga Land Co. Survey
APPLICANT'S NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE: Cucamonga Land Co.
E.Q. Box 696, Cucog%a Co. 91.730 Ph. (714) 987 -2509
NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE OF PERSON TO BE CO!.TACTEn
CONCERNING THIS PROJECT: J. Richard Wevton Inc.
626 Went 1St., Ontario, Ca. 91352 FU. 71 986-8707
LOCATION 00 PROJECT- (STREET ADDRESS AND ASSESSOR PARCEL NO.)
Santa Anita Ave.; Rancho Cucamongas Ca. '9173O Assessors Nos. 229 282 33
282 34 .229 282 35 229 282 43 229 2t2 44 22VO37-43—
LIST OTHER PERMITS NECESSARY FROM LOCAL, REGIONAL* STATE AND .
F ^nr:RAT, AGENCIES AND THE AGENCY ISSUING SUCH PERMITS.
irdlVF.
x ,:
11
PROJLCT DESCRIPT ION
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: To legalize 17 parcels for sale.
ACRLAGE OF PROJECT AREA AND SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING AND
PROPOSED BUILDINGS, IF ANY: 105 acres. Exist. Building on
62 000 e . ft. `
DESCRIBE TFIE I NVIRON�IENTAL SETTING OF THE PROJECT ,'ITE
INCLUDING INFORMATION ON TOPOGRAPHY, PLANTS . (TREES' ,
ANMALS, ANY 'CULTURAL, HISTORICAL OR SCENIC ASPECTS, USE
Or SURROUNDING PROPERTIES,, AND THE Dr•.SCRIPTION Or ANY
EXISTING STRUCTURES AND THEIR USE (ATTACH NECESSARY SHEETS):
_Phis prQperty has been used for viniculture since the early nineteen
®
-
would imn sine &M
animal life. resent could *consist of
Mich species a8'. .
rabbit -- rodentet
and reptiles. To my knowledge there
are no ncei ate`
or h2storigal featyMts
associated with this' prMity.
t
Is the project,
part of a larger ,.roject, one.of
a series
of cumulative actions, which although . individually small,
may as a whole
have significant environmental
impact?
No
CERTIFICATION: I hereby certify thatzthe statements furnished
above and in the attached exhibits present the date and
information required for this initial evaluation to the
best of my ability, and that the facts,, statements, and
information presented.are true and correct to the best of
my knowledge and belief. 1, further understand M-a t
additional information may be required to be submitted
before at! adequate evaulation can be made by the Development
Revirvv Committee.
Date JA -12-78
T__13
WILL T1119 PP.OJECT:
YES _.NO'- -:_.
XX
1.
Create a substantial change in ground
contours?
_
2.
Create a substantial change in existing.
noise or vibration?
`. 7E
3.
Create a substantial change in demand for
municipal services-(police, fire, water,
i
sewage, etc.) 1
_ 7E
4.
Create changes in the existing zoning or
general plan designations?
S.
Remove any existing trees? How many?
XX
6.
Create the need for use or disposal of
potentially hazardous materials such as
toxic substances, flammables or explosives?
Explanation of
any "YES answers above:
IMPORTANT:
If
the project involves the construction of
reside„Fial
units, complete the form on the
next page.
CERTIFICATION: I hereby certify thatzthe statements furnished
above and in the attached exhibits present the date and
information required for this initial evaluation to the
best of my ability, and that the facts,, statements, and
information presented.are true and correct to the best of
my knowledge and belief. 1, further understand M-a t
additional information may be required to be submitted
before at! adequate evaulation can be made by the Development
Revirvv Committee.
Date JA -12-78
T__13
1
i
0
- •-1. - -•T'
R9 R..i
c
C-
d
TENTATIVE MAP ®:
, nr.N 1 H 1 .bNl
PARCEL 4749.
�.._... ._ _ /N TN£
GtTY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
SEINE A DIVISION OF PORTIONS OF LOTS SI THRU NS OF rig J. RICHARD NEWTON
ROCHESTER TRACT. AS RECORDED IN SOON S. PACE 20. RECEROS Or L.9.1 U.0 S+ w
j SAN SERNANOINV COUNTY, STATE OF CAUFORNIA. w 234%
RruY• tl. Im bwlM sllr. fRbt
87"
wur>o.Ir IRRRr. IM wN.LL... rIw)
R.e .. µ
rR.. Inn IRR 1"
.wer.9m
1
1 \y yw W . HLLIN rYl...
N I /fR J I YMe r wwR .l Y.NNN q W41 NM.
Y
1pl Yw Irw1. N
VS I YWY
h � I/M 1V
� N. Y fJ../ R•0. .n. Lam.
bx r.I 46r. q }.) p44
IURCEL T
IS
A
!I
RESOLUTION No. 78 -33
A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING
COM.T.SSION REC0483ENDING ADOPTION OF THE LAND
-USE, CIRCULATION AND PUBLIC FACILITIES ELEMENT
OF THE GENERAL PLAN FOR THE CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA
WHEREAS, John Blayney and Associaten grepared a Land Use,
Circulation and Public Facilities Element of the General Plan for the
City of Rancho Cucamonga; and
WHEREAS, on the 13th <'ay of September, 1978, the Planning
Com.mission'held a duly advertised public hearing pursuant to Section
65854 of.the California Government Cod_; and .
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has considered revisions
to the Plan by the public and other interested parties at subsequent
Planning Commission meetings; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Co=iss ±.on has reviewed and con3idered
the Draft Environmental impact Report on the Land Use, Circulation and
Public Facilities Element and all testimony and comments pertaining to it
and finds the Draft Env ironment al. Impact Report to be adequate and recom-
mends certification of the Draft Environmental Impact Report by the City
Council.
r
R +c
fl ,'
routes, and local public facilities.
NOW, THLIXFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
1. That pursuant to Section 65351 and 65352 of the California
Government Crde, that the Planning Com.ission of the City
of Rancho Cucamonga hereby recommends approval of the.Land .
Use, Circulation and Public Facilities Element of the General
Plan for Rancho Cucamonga on the 22nd day of. November., 1978.
SECTION 1: The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission has made
the follociing ::ndings:
1. That the Land Use, Circulation
and
Public Facilities Element'
includes statements of development
policies including v map
and text setting forth objectives,
principles, standards and
plan proposals.
2. That the Land Use, Circulation
and
Public Facilities Element
of the General Plan designates
proposed general distribution,
genetzq location and extent of
the
uses of the land.
3. That the Land Use, Circulation
and
Public Facilities.Element
of the Genera Plan designates
the
general location and extent
- "'
of existing and proposed major
thoroughfares,
transportation
r
R +c
fl ,'
routes, and local public facilities.
NOW, THLIXFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
1. That pursuant to Section 65351 and 65352 of the California
Government Crde, that the Planning Com.ission of the City
of Rancho Cucamonga hereby recommends approval of the.Land .
Use, Circulation and Public Facilities Element of the General
Plan for Rancho Cucamonga on the 22nd day of. November., 1978.
'J
2. That a Certified Copy of this k42solution and related
material hereby adopted by the Planning Commission shall
be forwarded to the City Council.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 22ND DAY OF NOVEMBER, 1978.
PLAIINAG COMMISSION OF THE CI1Y OF RANCHO COCAYONCA
By:
Herman Rempel, Chairman
ATTEST:
Secretary of the Planning Commission
I, 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 day of , 1978
by the following vote to -wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONER&
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
1
E
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
STAFF REPORT
T0; Planning Commission
FROM: - Jack Lam, Director of Community Development
November 22 1978
Subject: DEIR for the Land Use, Circulation and Public Facilities
Element
ACKGROUNDi California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (amended) pro-
. vides the procedures and requirements for Environmental Assessment, EIR
preparation and review. Section 15160.5 states:
15160.5 PURPOSE OF REVIEW. The legally required preparation,
review and comment procedures for environmental documents pro -
vide the opportunity for citizens, all professional disciplines,
and public agencies to evaluate critically. the environmental
document and the manner in which technical data are used.
We have received and forwarded comments on the DEIR to the Planning Com-
mission from the following sources:
• Department of Housing and Community Development
• Air Quality Management District
• Muriel Zimmerman, Biology Department, Chaffey College
Inland Counties Legal Services
Rodney F. Parcel, Jr.
Joseph N. DiIorio
The DEIR has been prepared in accordance with Section 15147 of CEQA. Speci-
fically:
15147. DEGRE& OF SPECIFICITY. The degree of specificity required
in an EIR will correspond to the degree of specificity involved in
the underlying activity which is described in the EIR.
(a) An EIR on a construction project will necessarily be'more
detailed in the specific effects of the project than-will be an
EIR on the adoption of a local general plan or comprehensive zoning
ordinance because the effects of the construction can be predicted
with greater accuracy.
(b) An EIR on projects such as the adoption or amendment of a
comprehensive zoning ordinance or a local general plan should
focus on the secondary effects that can be expected to follow
from the adoption, but the EIR need not be as detailed as an EIR
on the specific construction projects that might follow.
ITEM b
DEIR FOR THE LAND UAIRCULATION &.PUBLIC FACILITIESLMENT
November 22, 1978
Page 2
Therefore,this DEIR is a general document; specific environmental assess -
ments on a project by project (site-specific) will.be submitted and deter-
mination made as to whether a Negatfve Declaration or DEIR should be pre-
pared.
You Will note in the DEIR for the Land Use, Circulation and Public Facili-
ties Element there are numerous references to other previously accepted
documents. CEQA provides for "incorporation by reference ":
15149. INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE.
(a) An EIR may incorporate by reference all or portions of another
document which is a matter of public record or is generally available
to the public. Where all or part of another document is incorporated
by reference, the incorporated language shall be considered to be set
forth in full as part of the text of the Elk.
ANALYSIS: Staff has reviewed the comments, submitted on the DEIR and amended
the document where appropriate. All comments on.the DEIR are available to
the public at the Planning Office and are part of the record.
Specifically, those sections that were amended are:
Title
Introduction
Summary of Findings
Natural Environmental Setting
Geology
Natural Environmental Impacts
Geology
Air, Quality
Flora and Fauna
Noise
Irreversible_Environmental Changes
The responsibility of the Planning Commission regarding the DEIR is the same
as it is regarding the Land Use, Circulation and Public Facilities Element,
i.e. recommendation to the City Council; in the Planning Commission review of
the DEIR please keep in mind the following section from CEQA:
15150. STANDARDS FOR ADEQUACY OF AN FIR. — An FIR should be prepared
wich a suf— ficient degree of analysis to provide decision - makers with
information which enables them to make a decision which intelligently
takes account. of environmental consequences. An evaluation of the
environmental effects of a proposed project need not be exhaustive,
but the sufficiency of an FIR is to be reviewed in the .light of what
is reasonably feasible, D LRagreement among experts does not make an FIR
3 inadequate. The courts have looked not for perfection but for adequacy,
r completeness, and a good faith effort at full disclosure.
DFAR FOR THE LAND US IRCULATION & PUBLIC FACT_LITIE466F,NT
November 22, 1978
Page 3
Once the Planning Commission has considered the DEIR, if found to be adequate,'
it will be forwarded to the City Council for certification as a final EIR.
The final EIR will consist of:
(1) The draft EIR or a revision of the draft.
(2) Comments and recommendations received on the draft EIR either
verbatim or in summary.
(3) A li3t'of persons, organizations, and public agencies commenting
on the draft EIR.
Staff has reviewed the DEIR and the comments submitted. It is our opinion that
the DEIR as amended should be recommended to the City Council for certification.
Please note that a recommendation for certification of the DEIR does not sanction,
approve or alter the Land Use, Circulation and Public Facilities Element in any
way.. The DEIR is only a full disclosure informational document.
Respectful y submitted,
JACK LAM, Director o
Community Development
JL: BKIi: nm
I�
C:TY OF- RANCHO CUCAMONGA
STAFF-REPORT
TO; Planning Commission
FROM: . Lloyd Hobbs, City Engineer
SUBJECT: ACCESS POLICY AND RESOLUTION
November 22, 1978
At the September 27, 1978 meeting of the Planning Commission an access
policy was proposed covering.major and secondary thoroughfares. At that
time, it was indicated that.the policy :could be distriSuted to interested
groups, engineers and developers. This has been accomplished and a public
hearing advertised for presentation at the November 8, 1978 meeting. Due
to additional input from the Chamber of Commerce and the Building Industry,
see attached correspondence, the hearing was continued to the November 22,
1978 meeting.
As a result of discussions with the interested parties, the access policy
has been revised to reflect the various concerns. The major change reduced
the recommended frontage control from 600 foot of frontage to 300 feet with
a notice that the intent is to 'obtain a 300 foot spacing of.driveways. A
further change authjrizes the Community Development Director to issue variances
to the policy subject to appeal to the Planning Commission. Also attached is
background information submitted prior to the most recent discussions with the
Community and the Building Industry.
It is Staffs' opinion that the access policy as now written is supported by
all concerned.parties in the community.
Respectfully submitted,
LL0 HUBBS,
City Engineer
LH:nm
I
;Plr4
IL
IL
T
4 O:C4
OISLn
4 & v & 3
fh ll
-
t %
sit-'
- rk
It
tp
F4
0A.
I
E
Ift
a
It
I
CL
ri
I
pi
le
0.0
i•Z
ro
r z
•rn
(k a
4
PP
pF V.
7j
ijz
Pm .6,
71
7
ro
r
I.lb
is
N I
N r
N S T
2 pi
*ML
IP4
. qa
1w 1 j
r
2.0
0
�
f k1i,
Ire of I
a
I
I 1'
1�
t
0
a
' � t
rn
m
•1
m
r o
� J
e
^ 0
Y Z
tV
Sr
I,l d
ttt
7
C 1
Z �
0'I
0
0
n
I
s
n
I1
4
•• w
r
0
r
I
r
1
p
1
r
I
�n M
I^
'
pppq
� �
•_ 0
a
a
I
w M
y
y
•
M
I
!^
i
�
�
I
0
1
O
� •
H
r•
!n
C I
--
w 9
i
�
0'I
0
0
n
I
1
1
1
I.
s
n
I1
4
r
0
r
I
r
1
p
1
r
1
1
1
I.
1
i.