The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1979/04/25 - Agenda PacketAe Af Y� • if r ii `.., 1 RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA Wednesday, April 25, 1979, 7,00 p.m. Community Services Building 9161 Baseline, Rancho Cucamonga, Ca. I_ Pledge of Allegiance II. Roll Call Commissioner Dahl Commissioner Garcia Commissioner Jones Commissioner Rempel Commissioner Tolstuy III. Approval of Minutes - April 12 Special Study Session IV. Announcements V. Consent Calendar A. PARCEL MAP - VAN ANTWERP - Request for a two lot division creating one buildable lot in the R -1 zone located on the west side of Hellman Avenue between Hillside Road and Banyan Street (5820 Hellman Avenue). VI. Public Hearings B. SITE APPROVAL NO. 79 -09 - CABLE TV OF ALTA LOMA - The development of a receiving site and trailer on property located at 8387 E. 19th Street in the A -1 zone. Assessor's Parcel Nos. 202 -02 -36 and 37 C. NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND SITE AFYKUVAL nv. /V--LW - -- CHURCH OF THE NAZARENE - The development of a church and educational building at 9900 Arrow Route within the R -3 zone - Assessor's Parcel No. 206- 321 -17 VII. Old Business D. DIRECTOR REVIEW NO. 79 -26 - LONG LEY - Request for _ development of a retail and wholesale building materials and supply center located on the south side of Foothill Blvd., 1,0001+ west of the Devore Freeway in the C -2 zone and M -1 zone. xr E., DIRECTOR REVIEW 240. 79 -16 ALTA LOPiA PROPERTIES - �1 / Request for requirements regarding density and site development revisions requested by the Planning cow- mission at ite previous meeting. yy'i M1 l 7 { 1 I .wi�C� 7..1i nom.. c,.='J. �A .'dJ �i ..,..�': .+yam... .. t. ... .. .. �`i( t"�Y•_ 7iK Planning Commission Agenda �. 'April 25,.1979 VIII. New Business t F. REVISIONS TO rIRECTOR REVIEW NO. 78-06 - WRY S. %� , RINKER- Revisions to the industrial- business k1 center located on the southwest corner of Archibald and Arrow. G. ZONING DETERMINATION NO. 79 -02 - .LEONA DANNA - Request for determination as to whether or not recreational vehicle storage, yards are allowable ' � ` in the A -1 zone for property located on the south C side of Baseline, east of Hermosa. IY. Council Referral X. Directors Reports H. DEER CREEK DESIGN STANDARDS-- Presentation by City Engluecr regarding bridges and street improve - ments over Deer Creek XI. Public Comment - Anyone wishing to comment on any items not listed on the Agenda may do so at this time. XII. Commission Comment XIII. Upcoming Agenda for May 9, 1979 1. Zone Change No. 79 -04 - Breshears 2. Director Review No. 79 -16 -- Alta Loma Properties 3. Director Review No. 79 -29 - Jensen 4. Site Approval No. 79 -05 - Wyckoff XIV. Adjournment - The Planning Commission has adopted Admin- istrative Reguleticns that set an .11:00 p.m. adjournment time. If-items go beyond that time, it shall be heard only with the consent of the Commission. i r., P.ANCHU CUCAMONGA FLANKING COMMISSION AGE0A Wednesday, April 25, 1979, 7:00 p.m. Community Services Building 9161 Baseline, Rancho Cucamonga, Ca. I. Pledge of Allegiance ACTION II. Roll Call Commissioner Dahl X Commissioner R®pel x Commissioner Garcia X Commissioner Tolstoy X Commissioner Jones Excuse Apprcred 4 -0 111• Approval of Minutes - April 12 Special Study Session IV. Announcements V. Consent Calendar NEGATIVE DECLAitATION FOR Approved 4 -0 A. PARCEL MAP - VAN ANTWERP - Request for a two lot division creating one buildable lot in the R -1 zone located on the west side of Hellman Avenue between Hillside Road and Bar;,an Street (5820 Hellman Avenue). VI. Public Hearings Approved 4 -0 with correction to Condition #2 Approved 4-0 VII. '.,-Approved 4 -0 - Ci:ange - :'in condition 41 & addition of condition B. SITE APPROVAL NO. 79 -09 - CABLE TV OF ALTA LOMA - The development of a receiving site and trailer on propercy located at 8387 E. 19th Street in the A -1 zone. Assessor's Parcel Nos. 202 -02 -36 and 37 C. NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND SITE APPROVAL N0. 79 -10 - CHURCH OF THE NA7.ARENE - The development of a church and educational building at 9900 Arrow Route within the R -3 zone - Assessor's Parcel No. 206- 321 -17 Old Business D. DIRICTOR REVIEW NO. 79 -26 - LONGLEY - Request for development cf a retail and wholesale building ointed Committee E. comment on revisions 6 Garcia appointed materialn and supply center located on the south side of Foothill Blvd., 1,0001+ west of the Devore Freeway in the C -2 zone and M -1 zone. DIRECTOR REVIEW N0. 79 -16 - ALTA LOMA PROPERTIES - Request for requirements regarding density and site development revisions requested by the Planning Com- mission at its previous meeting. ',i y Page 2 ' =;•`. Planning Commission Agenda April 25, 1979 VIII. New Business Denied 4-0 F. REVISIONS TO DIRECTOR REVIEW N0. 78 -06 - HARRY S. RINKER - Revisions to the industrial business center located on the southwest corner of Archibald and Arrow. Refer to Staff for G. ZONING DETERMINATION N0. 74 -02 - LEONA DANNA - ordinance amendment with Request for determination as to whether or not consultation with CAC. recreational vehicle storage yards are allowable Action on Zone Determination in the A -1 zone for property located on the south deferred side of Baseline, east of Hermosa. IX. Council Referral X. Director's Reports To be presented at a F. DEER CREEK DESIGN STANDARDS - Presentation by leter date with addi - City Engineer regarding bridges and street improve - tional information on ments over Deer Creek. sidewalks 6 slides +'- of bridges XI. Public Comment - Anyone wishing to comment on any items not listed on the Agenda may do so at this time. XII. Commission Comment XIII. upcoming Agenda for May'9, 1979 1. Zone Change No. 79 -04 - Bresbears 2. Director Review No. 79 -16 - Alta Loma Properties 3. Director Review No. 79 -29 - Jensen 4. Site Approval No. 79-05. - Wyckoff XIV. Adjournment - The Planning Commission has adopted Admin- istrative Regulations that set an 11:00 P.m. adjournment time. If items go beyond that time, it shall be heard only with the consent of the Commission. L�A,N.:t w.a yY t CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES APRIL 12, 1979 Special Study Session Meeting was called to order at 5:46 p.m. by Chairman Rappel at the Rancho Cucamonga Library Conference Room. Persons Present: Commissioners Rempel, Garcia, Tolstoy, Dahl Absent: Commissioner .zones (excused) Staff Present: Jack Lem, Director of Community Development; Barry Hogan, Senior Planner; Bill Hofman, Assistant Planner; Lloyd Hubbs, City Engineer; John Blayney of John Blayney b Associates The meeting is a joint session with the Chamber of Commerce industrial Committee and the Planning Commission. The purpose is to disruss; the specific plan for the industrial area, its status and the desires of the Planning Commission and Industrial Committee. Introduction and summary of what has proceeded was given by Mr. Lam. He listed the advantages of specific planning and the formulation of the study. John Blayney explained the status of this study specifically listing the questions that were asked to be tackled. Number one was the Pluess- Staufer request on traffic circulation and the alternatives for circulation. Number two, the traffic model for the entire city, specifically for the industrial community; number three the sketch plan or concept plan for the industrial community; number four the impact analysis relative to thk traffic model and sketch plan; number five the General Plan Amendment initiation and number six the environmental assessment and possible impacts. CAttached to the minutes is the industrial area specific plan stage one work program with the approxi- mate dates of completion for each item.) David Humphrey of the Chamber of Commerce asked about the extension of the traffic study to include the alternatives for the Foothill Freeway. Mr. Hubbs, City Engineer, responded that DeLeuw,Cather and Company is looking into expanding the traffic study to determine what ramifications the elimination or modification of the Foothill Freeway corridor would have upon the traffic model that they are preparing. Mr. Humphrey asked whether or not DeLeuw, Cather and' Co. had included the alter- native traffic patterns relative to the Ontario International Airport study and that if they had not, that Mr. Blayney should inform DeLeuw, Cather and Co. that this study is not complete and available for input into the traffic model. Mr. I.am raised the question as to expand participation in this groups within the city. to whether or not the Planning Commission wished specific plan preparation to other areas and ! Planning Commission Astes Special Study Session April 12, 1979 Page 2 After some discussion by the members of the Planning. Commission and the 7mdus- trial Committee it was generally agreed that the representatives of the Citizens Advisory Co=ittees should be used as the input group for the specific plan. Mr. Lam wishes to emphasize; that there should be strong lines of communica- tion created between the Planning Commission and the Industrial Committee and perhaps one way of enforcing these lines of communication would be the appoint- ment of a steering committee of the Industrial Committee and a subcommittee of the Planning Commission. Mr. Humphrey of the Chamber concurred that perhaps two Planning Commissioners could be appointed as a subcommittee. The Commission concurred that this should be a subject of discussion at our future Planning Commission study session on April 26, 1979. Meeting was adjourned to the April 25, 1979 regular Planning Commission meeting at 6.51 p.m. i .. nr' ` , M John Blayncy Associates Urban and Regional Planners John A. Blaynev. A.1. P. Robert W. G lm er. A.1. P. April 12, 1979 Michael V.pyett,A.LP. RANCHO CUCAMONGA INDUSTRIAL AREAS SPECIFIC PLAN: STAGE 1 John Blayney Associates = JBA DeLeuw, Cather do Company = DCCO L.D. King = LDK IVORK PROGRAM Completion Date 1.0 DATA COLLECTION 1.1 Base map definition (JBA) 4/4 1.2 Prescribe mapping procedures (JBA) 4/16 Factors, variables, sources Non - reproducible art Final report art 1.3 Collect map data and prepare Basic Data Map (JBA, LDK on draingage ways and flood hazards) 4/16 1.4 Letter and survey form to industries (JBA) 4/18 1.5 Conduct interviews with owners, agents and occupants (JBA) 4/12 -2/27 1.6 Establish detail needed for traffic model (categories of employment and trip generation factors) (JBA, DCCO) 4/18 1.7 Determine existing and anticipated employment densities by category (JBA) 4/20 1.8 Evaluate traffic modeling resources; determine basic n.odel design (DCCO) 4/18 1.9 Collect data on development proposals and prepare working map (JBA) 4/20 1.10 Review existing Compre:iensive Storm Drain Plan and flood hazards data; summarize relevant infor- mation in memo (related to Task 21 Priority Traffic ways) and compatibility of sketch plans with drainage and flood control requirements (LDK) 4/18 i 1 " Pnct Strect. Suite 7_u ! San Francisco. CA Q4103 —1— t�lit- t�1a135 4.3 Quantify employment and trip generation (10 year and build -out) 4or use in traffic model alternatives analysis - 5/4 5.0 IMPACT ANALYSIS 5.1 Define evaluation criteria and measures needed for impact analysis (JBA) 4/27 5.2 Review impact assessment procedures with team and CIty staft (JBA) . week of 4/30 5.3 Complete impact analysis (JBA, DCCO, LDK) 7/2 5.4 Summarize conclusions and present to Industrial Committee, Planning Commission and Council week of 7/2 6.0 GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 6.1 Review comments received on alternatives (JBA) 7/11 6.2 Prepare General Plan Amendment — text and map (JBA); review with team 7/13 (This tasb: is subject to change if work on Stage Il has been authorized) 7.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 7.1 Review impact analysis in terms of comments received and recommendations formulated in Task 6 (JBA) 7/11 7.2 Prepare environmental assessment (JBA) '2/16 (If an EIR is judged necessary, define scope of study and supplemental budget requirements.) 8.0 FINAL REPORT 8.1 Prepare preliminary final report outline specifying graphics and text (JBA) 4/20 z- 8.2 Design final report layout and map graphics needed (JBA) 4/27 8.3 Prepare final report text (JBA, DCCO, LDK) 7/20 8.4 Prepare final report graphics (JBA, DCCO) 7/20 -3— John BlayneyAssociates Urban and Region d Planets 3.0 4.0 0 V- 2.0 . PRIORITY TRAFFICWeIYS STUDY (Pleuss Staufer) 2.1 (if able) trip generation and current schematic layout (JBA) (if avail 2 -2 Rough cut assumption build -out trig generation for North$outh and E.:st -jjr,, corridors affect Haven- Devore and Foothill affecting ,I - Fourth area (JBA, ing 2 -3 List known and Probable rail service needs (parcel access) (BA) 2.4 Establish test alternatives, Probably; 7th and Sth closed, Milliken north to 6th only 7th and 8tt�M� north to 6th only 7th closed ' Milliken north to Foothill ML1liken north to Foothill (,IBA, DCCO) 2.5 Manually allocated peak hour volumes to key inter- ns (DCCO) 2.6 Compare each feasible alternative as it affects rail service (cost, safety, ease of approvaD (DCCO) 2.7 Evaluate adequacy of each alternative, recommend solution, prepare memo report d (DCCO) TRAFFIC MODEL 3.1 Define (DCCO) traffic zones and input data requirements 3.2 Define networks and treatment of shopping center and freeway alternatives (DCCO, MA) 3.3 Complete traffic :Model tests of alternatives SKETCH PLAN DEFINITION 4.1 Prepare preliminary sk teh plus for use in network definition. Priority Traffieways Study (JBA) 4.2 Review results of interviews and Prepare sketch present alternatives to .ndustrial Corl0nittee (JBA) Plans; -2- 4/12 4/16 4/16 4/16 4/16 4/17 4/20 4/20 4/27 6/29 4/16 week of 4/30 Iohn Blayneygssoclates Urban and Regional Planners ••. DATE: TO: FROM: 0 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT April 25, 1979 Planning Commission .Tack Lam, Director of Community Development 0 SUBJECT: Environmental Review of a Tentative Parcel Map for Jim Van Antwerp - The division of 1 acre of land into two parcles located at 5820 Hellman. BACKGROUND: Mr. Van Antwerp is requesting approval to divide 1 acre of land into two parcels (Exhibit 'A')_ The site is presently zoned R - -1- 20,000 and the General Plan indicates residential uses at 1 -2 dwelling units per acre. This subdivision will create only one buildable lot. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING: The site presently contains three (3) structures; a single dwelling, a garage and a small storage building. The site contains a significant amount of fruit and citrus trees. There are no known cultural, historical or scenic aspects of the site. The site slopes in a southerly direction of about 5%. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT: Part I of the Initial Study is attached for your review. Staff has visited the site and has completed Fart II of the Ins.Lal Study, the environmental checklist. Staff has found no significant adverse i,npacts on the environment as a result of this project. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Division recommends that the Planning Commission issue a Negative Declaration for this project based on review of the Initial Study. Respectf 11 submitted, 01 Jack Lam, Director of Community Development JL:MV:cc Attachments: I'M "A" a yn -ENTAT I V E SAW PARCEL A 4Ap Np �-W T.rE el" OF &Wepe C.'C/I.bON4/1 /fE /NG A Q /V /S /o.V OF R1Re" ! OF Fi i[[fG H./P /337 AS f /CFD /N iARCEC MAP 6e0,: /1, ggGE 9L /M rpm CO. ry ReCo ROfRf oFa••� �•OHyry pF SqN Bff'NAIIC�.vo f T7 TF dF G.+G/FORN /I: APRIL PARCEL Y77 . �.� _ i � 7. •( •3 t 4 PARCEL 2'- . IL a J Y war.w l� ar, Vruny /vr M.n o�ra Y.r..bs�'�.w•L .� � Owr.. • .Y' W r. ^ • tom.. ..•..,« .,_ „- Ow.wg. a r.. 0 0 I• I /rrdS�....• iur'ic r,•.. f•u•�.. �...... Tw..r.r G f � r' � N rc5 .. w ,T rr�. ryw .`...•...• 0 0 I• I r .. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA INITIAL STUDY PAFCT I — PROJECT 1%,FORMATION SHEET — 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 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 meet and take action no later than ten (10) days before the public meeting at which time the project is to be heard. The Co=ittee will make one of threw determinations:. 1) The project *.till have no environmental impact.and a Negative Declaration will be tiled, 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 I the applicant giving further information concerning the proposed project. PARCEL MAP rRO_TFCT TITLE- APPLICANT'S NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE: ,11M VAN ANTWERP N — ALTA LOMA, CAL. 0 r NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE OF PERSON TO.SE CONTACTED CONCERNING THIS PROJECT: SAyE AS ABOVE LOCATION OF PROJECT (STREET ADDRESS AND ASSESSOR PARCEL NO.) CS11n Urf I ueu 1062- 111 -10 LIST OTHER PERMITS NECESSARY FROM LOCAL, REGIONAL, STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES AND THE AGENCY ISSUING SUCH PERMITS: NONE - `-I PRQSrCT DESCRIPTION DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: SUB - DIVISION OF 1.05 ACRES INTO TWO LOTS- LOT 1 .45 NET LOT 2 .60 NET SUBDIVISION WILL CREATE ONE BUILDABLC LOT ACREAGE OT' PROJECT AREA AND SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED BUILDINGS, IF ANY: TOTAL 1.25 GROSS ACRES f1.05 NET 2000 SQ FT HOUSE AND 200 SQ FT DETACHED BUILDING EXIST ON LOT 2. A 500 SO FT GARAGE EXISTS ON LOT I. DESCRIBE THE ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING OF THE PROJECT SITE INCLUDING INFORMATION ON TnPOGRAPHY, 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): PROJECT AREA HAS APPROXIMATELY 90 VARIOUS KINDS OF FRUIT AND CITRUS TREE! VARYING IN SIZE FROM MATURE TO RECENTLY PLANTED AND TWO LARGE EUCALYPTUS ING ZONES SEE ATTACHED TENTATIVE MAP Is the project, part* of a larger project, one of a series' Of cumulative actions, which although individually small, may as a whole have significant environmental impact? NO • _� 2 is n WILL THIS PROXECT: YES NO X 1. Create a substantial change in ground contours? X 2. Create a substantial change in existing noise or vibration? X 3. Create a substantial change in demand for municipal services (police, fire,- water, sewage, etc.): X 4. Create changes in the existing zoning or general plan designations? X s: Remove any existing trees? Iiow many ?,_ X 6. Create the need for use or disposal o': potentially hazardous materials such as toxic substanceE, flammables or explosives? Explanation of any YES answers above: IMPORTANT: If the project involves tine construction of residential units, complete the form on the next page. CERTIFICATION: 1 hereby certify that the statements furnishe above and in the attached exhibits present the data 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. I further understand that additional information may be required to be submitted before an adequate evaulation can be made by the Development Review Committee. Date APRIL 13. 1979 Y3 F.• '*77 signature Title OWNER DATE: TO: FROM: 0 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT April 25, 1979 Planning Commission Jack Lam, Director of Community Development SUBJECT: Site Approval No. 79 -09 - Cable TV of Alta Loma - The request for development of a receiving site and trailer on property located at 8387 East 19th Street in the A -1 zone known as Assessor's Parcel Nos. 202 -02 -36 and 37. BACKGROUND: Presently, the applicant has an antenna at the subject site. In addition, there are other antennas from other cable TV companies located in the- general proximity of the proposed site. The applicant proposes to locate a trailer, approximately 8' wide by 17' long as a station to house the electronic equipment. West of the trailer he wishes to locate two 42' poles. Attached to those poles would be a number of antennas, approximately four UHF antennas, one low band antenna and one high band antenna. Additionally, there would be two 14' - 2" X 10" cross arms that these antennas would be attached to. The applicant also proposes to enclose the area by a six foot chain link fence with three strands of barb wire. The total enclosed area would be 20' X 301. ANALYSIS: Staff has reviewed the proposed application. Because of the location 115' south of 19th Street, and adjacent to the existing water tanks to the west, we do not feel that the proposed use will be detrimental to the area. There are, however, some problems with the application as proposed. 1. The request for the permanent siting of the trailers cannot be approved under code requirements. The maximum amount of time the Commission could approve the use of the trailer would be two years. 2. The height of the antenna proposed is 42'. The maximum height of the zone is 35'; therefore, if the Commission desires to approve this application, you would, in effect, be allowing a minor deviation for the applicant to exceed the height of the zone. It is staff's opinion that the proposed use is necessary in order to service the customers of the Alta Loma area. The height of the proposed antenna and a time limit on the location of the trailer not to exceed two years would be acceptable. It would be our suggestion that after a two year period the trailer be replaced with a permanent structure or removed entirely. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission sdopt Revolution No. 79 -38 approving Site Approval No. 79 -09. ITEM "B" i �, a +-- mss• --t; �. rbarp � C n 6` o � X6 n, r 7s tCD �, a +-- mss• --t; i x tCD At 'EXHif3�i"� -1 NZ ' DESIGN SPACE INTERNATIONAL � bkr o� n- n -n it II I I II I I I I u U ry S 820 W T S PLEMENT • I er I II 11 S 823 1 n n n n II II II II �o• I I I 1 II II tl II u u u u i/Je4 ClLL7OK4L S 1025 w \i COrCn,waR • Wwe,W Wn n II II II II 0 oil oil oil ®II u u u II t a u „u U u S 1035 4z NL uwP�Tr�� C M[ATINO N j n n n v n n w n i II II call 110 11 ® ii oil 11 J 8u 5 1045 w�Maew� ooeR �~ t' L•cT�u+ •i..aL S" Back Im Add,tnmul MOd" Is F . a I 2014r I - 4-Cr -� T []PLAN TABLE WITH STORAGE CABINET k in 1 PLAN RACK 5 -824 (8' -0" x 20' -0" box size) Single 6000x axle with electric brakes on all wheels 7.00 x 14.5 8 -ply lire 6" jr. I -beam frame Non - demountable hitch assembly with 2- 5/16" coupler .040 Simp:ex Asphalt Bottom Board R -7 (214) fiberglass floor insulation 2 x 4 joists @ 16" O.C. Y* CD -PTBS fir underlayment 1/16" vinyl asbestos 12" x 12" block Armstrong Tile 2 x 3 exterior wall studs @ 16" 0. C. 7' -0" ceiling height 5/32" woodgrain pane'ing R -7 (2',") fiberglass wa,l insulation .019 vertical aluminum with baked on Colonial lynry finish and dark brown trim' le" prefinished sheet rock ceiling R -14 (5 ") fiberglass roof ceiling Z n OVERHEAD SHELF FILE CABINET Pre - stressed rafters @ 16" O.C. (30411.1.) Hurricane tie down straps i" toil core roof sheathing 30 GA galvanized steel roof (3) -46 x 27 slider windows (1) -36" x 80" exterior door w /lock set 8 wire glass window 12" x 12" (3) -4' -0" double tube fluorescent lights strips Equipment (1) -8' -0" desktop w/1 -two drawer files (1) -8' -0" overhead shelf assembly (1) -36 x 72 plan table with storage below (1) -metal plan rack with slats (1) AJC -09 AB GE A/C 8500 Btu 220 V. elect baseboard heat - 3000 watts Option ' v G (1) A/C with heat strips! CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA INITIAL STUDY PART I - PROJECT INFORMATION SHEET - To be completed by applicant Environmental Assessment Review Fee: $70.00 For all projects requiring environmental review, this e d form must b 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 meet 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 enviroianental 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: Receiving Site 0 APPLICANT'S NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE: CABLE TV OF ALTA LCMA - 987 -7122 9225 Archibald Avenue, Cucamonga, Ca 91730 NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE OF PERSON TO BE CONTACTED CONCERNING THIS PROJECT: Flilliam T. Larsen C ner 1 Manager 9225 Archibald Avenue, Cucamonga, Ca 91730 987 -7122 LOCATION OF PROJECT (STREET ADDRESS AND ASSESSOR PARCEL NO,) _Sapphire & 19th Street, Parcel No. 202 -02 -36 & 37 LIST OTHER PERMITS NECESSARY FROM LOCAL, REGIONAL, STATE AND .::• FEDERAL AGENCIES AND THE AGENCY ISSUING SUCH PERMITS: None 6t: ➢ 6 PROJECT DESCRIPTION DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: sirmal.s and to transmit vi 6 site to televis to provide television reception which they cannot receive otherwise. ,i ACREAGE OF PROJECT AREA AND SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED BUILDINGS r IF ANY: pee--r DESCIZI13E THE •ENVIRONMENPAL SETTING OF THE PROJECT SITE INCWDII4G INFOPIATION 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) : - APproximately 50 feet S/N 806 pole small building and fence owned by Is the project, part of a larger project, one of a series - of cumulative actions, which although individually small, may as a whole have significant environTMental impact? No Y^ 2 I WILL THIS PRO.TLCT: YES No X 1. create a substantial change in �,• ground contours? X 2. Create a substantial change in existing noise or vibration? ` X 3. Create a substantial change in demand for municipal services (police, fire, water, sewage, etc.)? x 4. Create changes in the existing zoning or general plan designations? X 5: Remove any existing trees? How many? X 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: IMPORTAhPl': 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 to the best of my ability, and that the facts, statements, and presented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. I further understand that additional inforrnation may be required to be submitted before an adequate evaulation can be made by the Devel Review epmcnt committee. Date^ March 27, 1979 Z--?� Signature William T. Larsen Title General Mana er RESOLUTION NO. 79 -38 A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING SITE APPROVAL NO. 79 -09 LOCATED AT VE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAPPHIRE AND 19TH STREET IN THE R -1 ZONE. WHEREAS, on March 27, 1979, a formal application was submitted requesting review of :'�e above described project; and WHEREAS, on April 25, 1979 the Planning Commission held a duly advertised public hearing for the above described project. NOW, THEREFORE, THE RANCHO CUCA!`fONGA PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: That the following findings have been made: 1. That the site is adequate in size and shape. 2. That the site has adequate access. 3. That the proposed use will have no adverse effect In abutting property. 4. That the proposed use is consistent with the proposed General Plan. 5. That the conditions listed in this report are necessary to protect the public health, safety, comfort, convenience, and general welfare. SECTION 2: That this project will not create significant adverse c; impacts on the environment_ and a Negative Declaration is issued on M April 25, 1979. SECTION 3: That Site Approval No. 79 -09 is approved subject to the following conditions: 1. Any signs proposed for this development shnll be designed in conformance with Comprehensive Sign Ordinance and shall require review and approval by the Planning Division y,- prior to installation of such signR. 2. A detailed landscape and irrigation plan shall be submitte� a approved by the Planning Division (within 60 days) Y+! -4 the issuance of building permits* 3. All landscaped areas shall be maintained in a healthy and thriving condition, free from weeds, trash, and debris. 4. Site shall be developed In accordance with the approved site plaa on file in the Planning Division and the conditions contained herein. 5. Approval, of this request shall not excuse compliance with all sections of the Zoning Ordinance and all other "f applicable City Ordinances in effect at time of building permit issuance. 6. Trailer shall be removed two years after the com- pletion of the site. 7. Plans for permanent structure shall be submitted at least six months prior to required removal of the trailer. Applicant shall contact the Building Division for compliance with the following conditions: 8. The applicant shall comply with the latest adopted Uai- form Building Code, Uniform Mechanical Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, National Electrical Code, and all other applicable codes and ordinances in effect at the time of approval of this project. 9. This approval shall become null and void if building permits are not issued for this project within. one year from the date of project approval. 10. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the Grading Ordinance and to the satisfaction of the Building Official. Applicant shall contact the Foothill Fire District for com- pliance with the following conditions: 11. An approved new 6 "x4 "x2" fire hydrant (James Jones Number 3701 or equivalent) shall 'ae installed. The location of said hydrant shall be determined by this department. 12. An approved 24 -foot fire lane, with an approved turn- around, shall be provided. 13. An approved minimum 20 -foot gate shall be provided. The location of said gate shall be determined by this department. 14. An approved supervised fire detection system shall be installed aed maintained until such rime as the required fire flow can be met. NOTE: At present, the fire flow. is less than 500 gallons per minute. The required, fire' flow for this development shall be not less than 1500 gallons per minute. The Cucamonga County Water District will be upgrading this area within one or two years. At that time, the required fire flow will be available. APPROVED AND AFFROVED THIS 25Th DAY OF APRIL, 1979. PLANNING CM41SSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Herman Rmpel. Chairman ATTEST: SpeY-.tary of the Planning Commission I, JACK LAM, 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 25th day of April, 1979, by the following vote to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ASSENT: COMMISSIONERS: s El 0 r; J f 0 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: April 25, 1979 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Jack Lam, Director of Community Development SUBJECT: Site Approval No. 79 -10 - Church of the Nazarene - The development of a church and related facilities on two acres of land located at 9900 Arrow Route. BACKGROUND : The Church of the Nazarene is requesting approval to construct a two phased church project on two acres of land located on the north side of Arrow Route between Archibald and Turner (Exhibit W). The site is presently unimproved with the exception of an existing church parsonage located on the northwest corner of the property. The applicants propose to develop the church in a two phased program. The first phase shall consist of the construction of a fellowship chapel and educational building with 61 parking spaces and related aisle ways and landscaping. The fellowship chapel will have a seating capacity of 180. This first phase cocstruction will total 9,505 square feet of building area. The second phase construction will entail the construction of a 5,000 square foot main sanctuary and an additional 25 parking spaces. Property to the east and north have been developed as one story apartments. Property to the west is presently used as single family residence. Property to the south across Arrow Route is developed with single family residences. The subject site is presently zoned R -3 (multiple family residential) and the General Plan designates this site and surrounding area as high density residential; 15 to 30 units Der acre. The Zoning Ordinance permits churches in residential zones contingent upon site approval being granted by the Planning Commission. ANALYSIS: The development plan, Exhibit W , indicates that the site is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the proposed uses. The site fronts on a highway that is properly designed as to width and improvement type to carry the quantity and traffic that will be generated by the proposed use. Access to the proposed development is provided by one 30 foot wide drive from Arrow Route. The location of the driveway is close enough to the west property line that would allow future development to the west the possibility of having shared access. The Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum of 24 fcot wide aisles for two way traffic. The most easterly north /south aisle on the site is shown at only 18 feet wide. Staff recommends that this aisle be widened to a minimum of 24 feet wide in order to meet Zoning Ordinance provisions. The first phase of this development is proposing to provide 61 parking stalls. Seating capacity of the fellowship chapel that will be constructed in the first phase is 180 seats. The Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum of one space for every four seats within the main meeting hall. The 61 spaces proposed is well in excess of this standard for the first phase. The second phase, which will complete the project, will entail the construction of the main sanctuary which, ITEM 11Cn according to the applicant, will accommodate approximately 350 to 375 seats. The second phase also will include the addition of 25 parking stalls for a total overall parking of 86 stalls. In accordance with the Zoning Ordinance, 86.parking stalls would allow a 344 seat sanctuary. If the applicants wish to have a larger seating capacity, then an additional parking space must be provided for every four additional seats within the sanctuary. There is some additional room on the north end of the site to provide additional spaces. Staff recommends that the applicant submit a revised site plan showing how the additional parking can be provided wit %in the second phase development of the project to accommodate the seating capacity as proposed. If not, then the main sanctuary most be limited to a maximum of 344 seats. Exhibit 'C' displays the proposed exterior building elevations for the first phase of construction. The materials indicated are concrete tile roof and an ivory stucco finish on the arches and walls. Exhibit 'D' displays the building as completed with the second phase development showing the sanctuary. Exhibit 'E' displays the detailed landscape plan. The landscape plan indicates mounded turf in front of the property with several different kinds of trees and two specimen size trees. Additional landsedping is being provided throughout the site with bushes and trees. Six foot block walls exist on the east and north lines and the applicant is proposing to install a six foot block wall on the east property line up to the front of the fellowship chapel. Part I of the Initial Study is attached for review. Staff has completed Part II, the environmental checklist, and has visited the site and can find no significant adverse impacts on the environment as a result of this project. Therefore, staff is recommending issuance of a Negative Declaration. CORRESPONDENCE: A notice of public hearing was published in the Daily Report on April 16, 1979. In addition, notices of public h ^_aring were mailed to property owners within 300 feet of the subject property. To date, no correspondence has been received in regard to this project. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Division recommends, after the public hearing, that the Planning Commission approve Site Approval No. 79 -10 based upon the findings and conditions listed in Resolution No. 79 -39. Re pectf ly submit ad, Jack Lam, Director of Community Development Attachments: Exhibit A Illustrative Site Plan /Vicinity Map Exhibit B Detailed Site Plan Exhibit_ C Building Elevations Exhibit D Building Elevations Exhibit E. Detailed Landscape Plan Part I Initial Study Resolution No. 79 -39 k�x� 1-- Ak Nipp r r R � ;•1;�vJ�` rbJ1r i� �f I r ---- 0'Q r rl J �S "XI x J— ; \4 Fs p � .JIB I flif X a r � 3 i .. L a 8 a�3 � r it Y a.SC T� F r �`3 Y Ln� � t Fl 0 e�! "1 ^y ly,WW i 3amp: ` WE fe lau SHE I r �5 c CAF;. r c CAF;. •S e'.1 1 Ill II 1 3 . . \� � ■ [! e � Lo E51 - - - -- ti 2 ■ ! § CITY OF RANCHO CUC:NONGA INITIAL STUDY PART I - PROJECT INFORMATION SHEET - 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 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 meet 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. A Sanctuary, Fellowship & Educational Bldgs. PROJECT TITLE: Cucamonga Church of the Nazarene _ APPLICANT'S NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE: Western Latin American District - Church o Att: Rev. Juan E. Madrid, 1570 N. Hollist Pasadena, CA 91104 Ph. 213 794 6862 NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE OF PERSON TO BE CONTACTED CONCERNING THIS PROJECT: Howard �auncr2rtP,n 332 Stanford Dritie, Claremont, CA 91711 Ph 714 62 LOCATION OF PROJECT (STREET ADDRESS AND ASSESSOR PARCEL NO.) 9900 Arrow Route _ LIST OTHER PERMITS NECESSARY FROM LOCAL, REGIONAL, STATE AND'. FEDERAL AGENCIES AND THE AGENCY ISSUING SUCH PERMITS: PROJECT DESCRIPTION DESCRIPTION OF PROJECTc First Phase: Construct Fellowshio- chapel and educational p ag. w to site provemeats incl. ar. ng. Second _ a e. Consrructivaln :additional narking and site improvements. ACREAGE OF PROJECT AREA AND SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED BUILDINGS, IF ANY: Site: 2 acres Existing church parsonage: 1935 Sq. Ft. First phase construction 9505.0 So. Ft. Second Dhase construction 5000 Sq. Ft. DESCRIBE THE ENVIRON?AENTAL SETTING_ OF THE PROJECT SITE INC.'LUDING INFORMATION ON TOPOGRAPHY, PLANTS (TREES), ANIRALS, ANY CULTURAL, HISTORICAL OR SCENIC ASPECTS, USE OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES, AND THE DESCRIPTION OF ANY EXISTING STRUCTURES AND THEIR USE (ATTACH NECESSARY SHE.3TS): no existing trees. Pronert to tho East has exist one story apartment houses. ' e ortn property s a continuation of the one story apartment development. The lest aioining orooerty has a single family resid yPrQPArtj_is VOCant. Arrow Route fronts o of this property with a 1001 right of wag single family. resi enge bag%, 110 to Arr� side of street. Is the project, part of a larger project, one of a series - of cumulative actions, which although individually small, may as a whole have significant environmental impact? 4-1- v WILL THIS PROJECT: YES NO o x 1. Create a substantial change in ground contours? 1 X 2. Create a substantial change in existing noise or vibration? x 3. Create a substantial change in demand for municipal services (police, fire, water, sewage, etc.)'. x 4. Create changes in the existing zoning or general plan designations? 5: Remove any existing trees? Flow many? X 6. Create the need for use or disposal of potentially hazardous materials such as toxic substances, flammables or explosives? 1 Explanation of any YES answers above: ak 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 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. I further understand that additional information may be required to be submitted before an adequate evaulation can be made by the .Development Review Committee. Date ��" / _ Signatur a1r-'0 0 0 AD RESOLUTION NO. 79 -39 A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING SITE APPROVAL NO. 79 -10 LOCATED AT 9900 ARROW ROUTE IN TKE R -3 ZONE. WHEREAS, on March 27, 1979, a formal application was submitted requesting review of the above described project; and WHEREAS, on April 25, 1979, the Planning Commission held a duly advertised public hearing for the above described project. NOW, THEREFORE, THE RANCHO C'.cTCL—.i.gGA PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: That the following findings have been made: 1. That the site is adequate in size and shape. 2. That the site has adequate access. 3. That the proposed use will have no adverse effect on abutting property. 4. That the proposed use is consistent with the proposed General Plan. 5. That the conditions listed in this report are necessary to protect the public health, safety, comfort, convenience, and general welfare. r_A SECTION 2: That this project will not create significant adverse impacts on the environment and a Negative Declaration is issued on April 25, 1979. SECTION 3: That Site Approval No. 79-3-0 is approved subject to the following conditions: Applicant shall contact the Planning Division for compliance with the following conditions: 1. Parking lot lights shall be a maximum height of 12' and directed away from all property lines, adjacent streets and residences. 2. Parking lot trees shall be a minimum 15 gallon size. 3. All two -way widths shall be a minimum of 24 feet wide. 4. Any signs proposed for this development shall be designed in conformance with Comprehensive Sign Ordinance and shall require review and approval by the Planning Division prior to installation of such S:.'. signs. w� =r 0 5. All landscaped areas shall be maintained in a healthy and thriving condition, free from weeds, trash. and debris. �. Street trees, a minimum of 15 gallon size or larger, shall be installed in accordance with the Master Plan of street trees for the City of Rancho Cucamonga. 7. Site shall be developed in accordance with the approved site plan on file in the Planning Division and the conditions contained herein. B. high masonry aWall awith gates purauantsto City standards. Location to ?.he satisfaction of the Planning Division. g. All roof appurtenances, including air unnditioners, shall be architecturally integrated and shielded from view and the sound buffered from adjacent properties and streets to the satisfaction of the Planning Division and Building Official. 10. additionalaseating is desired then limited then aorevi ed seats plan must be submitted to the Planning Division showing additional parking. 11. siteCity grantea reciprocal right accessrequire easementthe towthes this west property for seared access in the event it is needed to meet the City'd'access policy. Applicant shall Contact the Building Division for compliance with the following conditions: 12. The applicant shall comply with the latest adopted Uniform Building, Code„ Uniform Mechanical Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, NE ;tirnal Electric Code, and all other applicable codes and ordinances in effect at the time of approval of this project. 13. The appi:oval shall become null and void if building permits are not issued for this project within one year from the date of project approval. 14. with the Grading Ordinanc(; and to shall tothe satisfaction of h the Building Official. Applicant shall contact the Engineering Divisior for compliance with the fol.lowing conditions: 0 i 15. Prior to any work being performed in the public right -of -`w way, an encroachment permit shall be obtained from the City Engineer's Office, in addition to any other permits required. 16. Approved street improvement plans prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer shall be required, for all Street improvements, prior to issuance of encroachment permit. 17. All street improvements shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, prior to occupancy. 18. Surety shall be posted and an agreement executed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the City Attorney, guaranteeing completion of the public improvements, prior to issuance of building permits. 19. Construct the following missing improvements on the following streets: Arrow Route — curb and gutter, A.C. pavement, sidewalk, drive approach, street trees, and street lights. 20. Pavement striping and marking plan shall be required. 21. An approved grading plan and soils report in accordance with the City grading standards will be required. 22. All proposed utilities within the project shall be installed underground. 23. Utility easements shall be provided to the specification of the appropriate utility companies and the City Engineer. 24. Developer shall be responsible for the relocation of existing public utilities, as required. .c Applicant shall contact the Foothill Fire District and the Cucamonga County Water District for compliance with the following conditions: 25. Water supply and sanitary sewer facilities shall be provided to the specifications of the Cucamonga County Water District and the City Engineer with all incidental fees paid by the developer. 4 26. Prior to issuance of building permits for combustible construction, evidence shall be submitted to the Fire Chief that water supply for fire protection is available. 27. Emergency access shall be provided and maintained free and clear at a minimum of 24 feet at all times during construction to the satisfaction of the Fire Chief. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 25TH DAY OF APRIL, 1979. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA -, BY: Berman Rempel, Chairman ATTEST: Secretary of the Planning Coumniseion I, JACK LAM, 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 Commiasion of the City of Rancho Cucamonga at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 25th day of April, 1979, by the following vote to—wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: 0 0 0 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT Date: April 25, 1979 To: Planning Commission From: Jack Lam, Director of Community Development Subject: DIRECTCR REVIEW NO. 79 -26 - LONGLEY - Request for approval of conceptual site plans for office /retail center end building materials /storage yard located on the south side of Foothill Blvd. adjacent to the Devore Freeway in the C -2 and M -1 zone BACKGROUND: As the Commission will recall, this application came before them at the last meeting of the Planning Commission on April 11, 1979. At that ti-2e, the concerns centered around the architectural design of.the structure and how the structure would blend with the future phases of the project; specifically the building to the east of the proposed phase I. Although this item vas continued for four weeks to the May 9, 197° Plannit.-t Commission meeting, the applicant has expressed an urgency for this item to be heard as quickly as possible and has worked to provide his revised building elevations pursuant to the comments by the Commission. At the Planning Com- mission mrating colored boards will be available for your review depicting the front, west side, and rear or south elevations. Additionally, a board will be.. presented showing how the phase I building will be incorporated with the building to the east of the phase structure. The building proposed is to be constructed out of various types of blocks. The front elevation displays chocolate brown slump stone pilasters accentuated by a 3 to 5 foot landscape planter and a wood planton beam running horizontally from east to west across the building facade. The flat surfaces of the building will be stucco over block tan in color. The windows a':e accentuated by padre brick as is the entrance to the building. Applicant rroposes to use variagated concrete "S" tile. The mansard roof structure will bi continued around all elevations. Additionally, the applicant has provided wrought iron work on the front elevation. We believe that the elevations proposed and the huilding materials depicted are a substantial improvement over previous submittals and w Ul be consistent with the quality and character of architecture previously approved for Foot- hill Blvd. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission adopt Resolu- tion No. 79 -40 approving Director Review No. 79 -26. submitted, JACK LAM, Director of Community Development JL:BKN:nm ITEM "D" Attachmet..:s: April 11 Staff Report b Resolution No. 79 -40 6) CITY OF RANCHO CUCA140NGA STAFF REPORT DATE: April 11, 1979 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Jack Lam, Director of Community Development SUBJECT: Director Review 79 -26 - Longley - Request for approval of c•- �eptual site plan for office /retail center and building material storage/ sales yard located on the south side of Foothill Boulevard adjacent to the Devore Freeway in the C -2 and M-1 zone. BACKGROUND: As the Commission will recall, this applicant applied for approval of the building material sales and storage yard on the subject property earlie'� this year (Director Review 78 -58), which was denied by Resolution No. 79 -01. The particular reason for denial was that the proposed use was not allowed in the C -2 zone. The applicant was advised that he should redesign and resubmit his project to conform with the current city codez so that the building materials storage and sales yard would be located entirely within the M-1 zone. There was `--cle or no discussion regarding the architecture of the proposed office building. The applicant is now proposing a retail /office center to be built at a future date with phase one being the office /retail building to be used in conjunction with the building material /sales /storage yard. All storage of building materials will be out doors and at least 3001 south of the ultimate right of way of Foothill Boulevard. Two means of access are proposed for the property, one approximately 260' west of the flood control right of way and the other proposed access approximately 6 (10' west of the flood control right of way. Constructed with phase one will be approximately 150 feet of street improvements along Foothill Boulevard from the western boundary going east with the addition of landscaping totalling 25 feet in depth from the ultimate righti of way of Foothill Boulevard and a fully improved 30 foot access road to the building material supply storage yard. Additionally, the applicant will supply 16 parking spaces north of the proposed office retail structure and approximately 160 feet south of the ultimate right of way of Foothill Bo+tlevard. The applicant proposes to use flat black sprayed chain link security fencing surrounding the building material storage yard. There will be two means of access to the yard, one on the west property line and one near the east property line. Behind the chain link fence would be a landscaped berm and retaining wall. Dense vertical landscaping is proposed al ,)ng the flood control channel. The building proposed by the applicant is a block structure, two stories in heig_it (22' - 8 ") from finished floor elevation to the top of the mansard roof. The exterior elevation is proposed to be accented by dark padre brick and use a false porch structure on the north facing elevation. ANALYSIS: Staff has reviewed the site plan and proposed building plans. We find the site plan to be a substantial improvement over previous submittals. It •!lows the Commission to see how the proposed phase one will fit in with the ultimate development of the site. The location of the building material storage yard is now in the proper zone, and the location of the office /retail building R)r Date: To; 0 CITY 01? RANCHO CUCA14ONGA STAFF REPORT April 25, 1979 Planning Commission 0 From: Jack Lam, Director of Community Development Subject: DIRECPOR REVIEW N0. 79 -26 - LONGLEY - Request for approval of conceptual site plans for office /retail center and building materials /storage yard located on the south side of Foothill Blvd. adjacent to the Devore Freeway in the C -2 and M -1 zone BACKGROUND: As the Commission will recall, this application came before them at the last meeting of the Planning Commission on April 11, 3.979. At that time, the concerns centered around the architectural design of the structure and how the structure would blend with the future phases of the project; specifically the building to the east of the proposed phase I. Although this item was continued for four weeks to the May 9, 1979 Planning Commission meeting, tho applicant has expressed an urgency for this item to be heard as quickly as possible and has worked to provide his revised building elevations pursuant to the comments by the Commission. At the Planning Com- mission meeting colored boards will be available nor your review depicting the front, west side, and rear or south elevations. Additionally, a board will be. presented showing how the phase I building will be incorporated with the building to the east of the phase structure. The building proposed is to be constructed out of various types of blocks. The front elevation displays chocolate brown slump stone pilasters accentuated by a 3 to 5 foot landscape planter and a wood planton beam running horizontally from east to west across the builds -g facade. The flat surfaces of the *wilding will be stucco over block tan in color. The windowp are accentuated by padre brick as is the entrance to the building. Applicant proposes to use variagated concrete "S" tile. The mansard roof structure will be continued around all elevations. Additionally, the applicant has provided wrought iron work on. the front elevation. We believe that the elevations proposed and the building materials depicted are a substantial improvement over previous submittals and will be r-onsistent with the quality and character of architecture previously approved for Foot- hill Blvd. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission adopt Resolu- tion No. 79 -40 approving Director Review No. 79 -26. specs 11 submitted, �4 JACK LAM, Director of Community Development JL:BKH:nm ITEM "D" Attachments:. April 11 Staff Report '& Resolution No. 79 -40 a & 6 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONCA STAFF REPORT DATE: April 11, 1979 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Jack Lam, Director of Community Development SUBJECT: Director Review 79 -26 - Longley - Request for approval of conceptual site plan for office /retail center and building material storage/ sales yard located on the south side of Foothill Boulevard adjacent to the Devore Freeway in the 0-2 and M-1 zone. BACKGROUND: As the Commission will recall, this applicant applied for approval of the building material sales and storage yard on the subject property earlier this year ( Direc:or Review 78 -58), which was denied by Resolution No. 79 -01. The particular reason for denial was that the proposed use was not allowed in the C -2 zone. The applicant was advised that he should r acaiga and resubmit his project to conform with the current city codes so that the building materials storage and sales yard would he located entirely within the M -1 zone. There was little or no discussion regarding the architecture of the proposed office building. The applicant is now proposing a retail /office center to be built at a future date with phase one being the office /retail building to be used in conjunction with the building material /sales /storage yard. All storage of building materials will be out doors and at least 3001 south of the ultimate right of way of Foothill Boulevard. Two mesas of access are proposed for the property, one approximately 260' west of the flood control right of way and the other proposed access approximately 600' west of the flood control right of way. Constructed with phase one will be approximately 150 feet of street improvements along Foothill Boulevard from the western boundary going east with the addition of landscaping totalling 25 feet in depth from the ultimate right of way of Foothill Boulevard and a fully improved 30 foot access road to the building material supply storage yard. Additionally, the applicant will supply 16 parking spaces north of the proposed office retail structure and approximately 160 feet south of the ultimate right of way of Foothill Boulevard. The applicant proposes to use flat black sprayed chain link security fencing surrounding the building material storage yard. There will be two means of access to the yard, one on the west property line and one near the east property line. Behind the chain link fence would be a landscaped berm and retaining wall. Dense vertical landscaping is proposed along the flood control channel. The building proposed by the applicant is a block structure, two stories in height (22 - 8") from finished floor elevation to the top of the mansard roof. The exterior elevation is proposed to be accented by dark padre brick and use a false porch structure on the north facing elevation. ANALYSIS: Staff has reviewed the site plan and proposed building plans. We find the site plan to be a substantial improvement over previous submittals. It allows the Commission to see how the proposed phase one will fit in with the ultimate development of the site. The location of the building material storage yard is now in the proper zone, and the location of the office /retail building ITFW"n Jrr 0 0 to be used in conjunction with the building materials storage and sales yard has now been appropriately placed an the commercial area and integrated into the master planning of the site. ?6e conceptual landscape ;tan proposed adequately indicates the concert proposed. However, we have some questisns concerning the adequacy of the architecture and design of the proposed office /retail building. 1. Is this the type of structure that displays the high quality of design desired for Foothill Boulevard? 2. Is the design of structure acceptable as a concept for the entire office /retail ceuter? 3. Is this structure consistent with the prior approval of structures along Foothill Boulevard? It is ourconcern that the structure proposed lacks the quality, thoughtful design and high standards of architectual development of projects that have been previously approved along Foothill Boulevard. We suggest that the applicant be directed to upgrade the arch1tectual quality of the proposed office retail structure. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission continue this item for four weeks (to the May 9, 1979 Planning Commission Meeting) to allow the applicant time to revise the architectual plans for the proposed office retail structure and give the applicant the direction necessary for those architectural revisions. tt�ed, 91, Jack Lam, Director of Community Development JL:BKH:cc Attachments: Site Plan Building Elevations 1 I ... zaw e • • - it (/{ ■ �s -aEYo v >< i -111. 6 .. w . Mill . GL. I ®1 — I`' Ti I. ) 0 F 61 6, III.A. ;. 72:Y 11 U, I jjjj J 1.11. 44. —17 cl! '44 I1 As -f :r I x IV f i i 1 • i 1 i ' 1 i I i I � �i to �i ;( 1 1 � � 1 n � Lij !y LUW j 3 Q V) �r. RESOLUTION NO. 79 -40 A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING DIRECTOR REVIEW NO. 79 -26 LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF FOOTHILL BLVD. ADJACENT TO THE DEVORE FREEWAY IN THE C -2 AND `L -1 ZONE WHEREAS, on the 21st day of March, 1979, a complete application was filed for review cf the above described project; and WHEREAS, on the 11th day of April, 1979, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission held a meeting to consider the above described pro - ject; and WHEREAS, this item was continued for further information and again heard on the 25th day of April, 1979. NOW, THEREFORE, THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS: 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, loading and other features required by this section. 2. That the improvements as indicated on the develop - ment plan are located in such a manner as 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 not create adverse impacts on the environment and that a Negative Declaratit•n is issued prc%:iously. SECTION 3: That Director Review No. 79 -26 is approved subject to the following conditions: Applicant shall contact the Planning Division for com- pliance with the following conditions: 1. The area 150' from the western property line to the first row of parking for the proposed phase I shall be turfed. 2. The landscape buffer proposed for the building material storage yard shall have a minimum of 20% of the treea 24" box or larger. . Want shall contact the Build, *Division for compliance with the following conditions: 16. The applicant shall comply with the latest adopted Uniform Building Code,. Uniform Mechanical Cc+de, Uniform Plumbing Code, National Electric Code, and all other applicable codes and ordinances in effe t at the time of approval of this project. 17. This approval ..hall become null and void if building permits are not issued for this project within one year from the date of project approval. 18. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the Grading Ordinance and to the satisfaction of the building Official. Applicant shall contact the Foothill Fire District and the Cucamonga County Water District for compliance with the following conditions: 14. Water supply. and sanitary sewer facilities shall be provided to the specifications of the Cucamonga County Water District and the City Engineer with all incidental fees paid by tho developer. 20. Prior to issuance of building permits for combustible construction evidence shall be submitted to the Fire Chief that water supply for fire protection is avail- able. 21. Emergency access shall be provided and maintained free and clear at a minimum of 24 feet at all times during construction to the satisfaction of the Fire Chief. Applicant shall contact the Engineering Division for com- pliance with the following conditions: 22. Street dedication and improvements shall be in conformance with the currently adopted Master Plan of Streets and Highways and to the specification of the City Engineer. 22. All exterior street improvements shall be constructed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, prior to occupancy. 23. The following missing street improvements shall be con- structed which include, but are not limited to: side- walk, driveways, 'wheel cdair ramps, curb and gutter, street paving, street trees, street lights, and drainage structures . 24. Street improvement plans prepared by a registered Civil Ingin_er shall be submitted for approval by the City ..ngineer. 25. Street striping and signing shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 3. The access areas in the storage yard shall be surfaced with dust. reducing material such as slag, gravel, paving or the like. 4. Building material storage shall'-. not exceed the top of the east /west fence for a distance of 50'. 5. Parking lot lights shall be a maximum height of 12' and directed away from s11 property lines, adjacent streets and residences. 6. Parking lot trees shall be a minimum 15 gallon' size. 7. All two -way aisle widths shall be a minimum of 24 feet wide. S. Any signs proposed for this development shall be designed in conformance with Comprehensive Sign Ordi- nance and shall require review and approval by the Planning Division prior to installation of such signs. 4. A detailed landscape and irrigation plan shall be sub- mitted to and approved by the Planning Division (within 60 days) after the issuance of building permits. 10. All landscaped areas shall be maintained in a healthy and thriving condition, free from weeds, trash and debris. 11. Street trees, a minimum of 15 gallon size or larger, shall be installed in accordance with the Master Plan of street trees for the City of Rancho Cucamonga. 12. Site shall be developed in accordance with the approved site plan on file in the Planning Division and the conditions contained herein. 13. Trash receptacle areas shall be enclosed by a 6 foot high masonry wall with gates pursuant to City standards. Location to the satisfaction of the Planning Division. 14. All roof appurtenances, including air conditioners, shall be architecturally integrated and shielded from view and the sound buffered from adjacent properties and streets to the satisfaction of the Planning Division and Building Official. 15. Approval of this request shall not excuse compliance with all sections of the Zoning Ordinance and all other applicable City Ordinances in effect at time of building permit issuance. NY. y 26. The City reserves the right to require reciprocal easemeats ensuring access to adjacent properties as required by future development. 27. All damaged off site public works facilities, including parkway trees, shall be repaired prior to occupancy to the satisfaction of the City Eng sneer . 28. All street structural sections shall be submitted to, and approved by the City Engineer. 29. Grading of subject property shall be in accordance with plans and a soils report prepared by a qualified engineer to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 30. All proposed utilities within the project shall be installed underground. 31. Utility easements shall be provided to the specifica- tion -o.' the appropriate utility companies and the City Engineer. 32. Developer shall coordinate, and pay for, the relocation of an,- power poles or other existing public utilities, as required. 33. Street lighting shall be installed by the applicant and the advance emergency charges paid. 34. Proposed development falls within those areas indi- cated as subject to flooding under the stational Flood Insurance Program and will be subject to the provisions of said program. APPROVED AIM ADOPTED THIS 25TH DAY OF APRIL, 1979 PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Herman Rempel, Chairman ATTEST Secretary of the 21anning Commission I, JACK LAM, 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 Com- mission held on the 25th day of April, 1979, by the following vote to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: i, CITr.OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT Date: April 25, 1979 i To: Planning Commission From: Jack Lam, Director of Community Development Subject: DIRECTOR REVIEW NO. 79 -16 - ALTA LOMA PROPERTIES - Request by applicant for Commission direction regarding items mentioned at the April 11th meeting for corrections to the design of the apartment project ABSTRACT: The applicant has requested that this item be scheduled for :he Planning Commission Agenda in order that he may seek guidance as to the Commissions' desires regarding the reduction in density, the delinea- t'.on of the stubbed streets and the detail work on the drainage and ele- vations of the units. Respectfully submitted, -',� i N JACK LAM, Director of Community Development JL:BKH:nm .'. 0 E Date: To: 0 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT April 25, 1979 Planning Commission u From: Jack Lam, Director of Community Development Subject: REVISIONS TO DIRECTOR REVIEi. NO. 78 -06 - RINKER - The develop- ment of an industrial business park on approximately 15.8 acres of land located on the southwest corner of Arrow Route and Archibald - M -1 zone BACKGROUND: Mr. Reiter, representing Harry Rinker the owner, is requesting a revision for the above described project which was reviewed and approved by the Planning Commissian at its meeting of August 23, 1978. Attached as Exhibit "1" is the original site plan as submitted to the Planning Ccanis- sion. The Planning Commission, at its meeting of August 23, 1978 approved the development of Area A of the site plan only. Areas B and C were viewed only as conceptual plans showing how the remainder of the parcel can be logically tied into the rest of the development. Exhibit 2 is a letter from Mr. Reiter explaining his request for the proposed revision on the site plan. Exhibit 3 displays the proposed revisions of the site plan. The applicant is requesting to decrease the amount of landscaping along Arrow Route frontage in order to provide additional parking within the project. Building setbacks, square footages and locations are not being changed. ANALYSIS: The applicant's original proposal indicated a continuous land- scaped area along the Arrow Rout frontage at a depth of 30 feet from the face of the curb. The majority of that landscaping would have been located within the subject property. The applicant is now proposing to reduce the continuous landscaped area along Arrow Route from 30 feet to 20 feet from curb face. By doing this, the applicant is able to add approximately 40 additional parking spaces to the project. The applicant proposes to put some of that landscaping back into the project in front of buildings number two, three and four. The applicant was originally proposing 230 parking stalls which was a ratio of one space for every 371 square feet of building area. Through this revision the applicant would be providing 294 parking spaces within Phase A at a ratio of 1 per 290 square feet of building area. That much parking is well in excess for industrial uses. The approved site plan which provides 1 space per 371 square feet of building area is more than sufficient for this project. Even thot -gh these revisions add additional advantages that occurs .a a result of such the landscaped area along Arrow Route to 20 landscape standards adopted by the Planning parking, there are certain 8is- a revision. The reduction in feet does not conform to the Commission. According to the ITEM "F" I /L Revisions to DirecAeFeview.No. 78 -06 L! April 25, 1979 y' Page 2 landscape standards, Arrow Route would requires A- minimum of Z5 feet of continuous landscaping across the entire street frontage as measured from the face of the curb. The applicant's revision is 5 feet short of that standard. The Planning Commission adopted this landscape standard to improve the quality of the City's major ar_d secondary highways by providing a significant amount of landscaping along the street frontages. M is stan- dard wr�° based upon landscaptng within projects previously approved by the Commission. This development was one which attributed to the development of that standard. In addition to the reducticn of landscaping along the street frontage, this revision also reduces the interior circulation dis- tances. Two rows of 90o parking with a minimum 24 foot aisle -way requires a minimum of 62 feet from the front of one stall to the !'_ront of the other stall or from curb to -:urb. The applicant's proposal inv.icates a distance of only 59 feet. This distance has been found to b= inadequate for ingress and egress to parking stalls. The existing approved site plan contains cAequate parking and meets the requested landscape and interior circulation standards. The revision as by the applicant does not meet the landscape standards nor the interior circulation standarda. Therefore, Staff feels that such revisions would be detrim• :ntal to the project and recaromends that such revision not be approved by the Planning Commission unlm- the coa can gated. RF=MMENDATION: The Planning Division recommends that. the Planning Com^ their approval mission not approve the requested revision and upho. -4 previous the adopted landscape standards and interior of the site plan based upon circulatia;a standards. Re pectfully submitted, i - JACK LAM, Director of Community Development JL:MV:nm Attachments: Exhibit 1, Approved Site Plan Exhibit 2, Letter from Applicant Exhibit 3, Proposed Revised Site Plan t `I d 1 1 K -.. t f.S ••ter ri.raarwa awranaw •� � L : . '— —�'-� M 4( � Mile V `._.. - Zu 11 all spa #QNO i lllllL� March 28, 1979 Planning Commission City of Rancho Cucamonga Ris: Cucamonga Business Park Arrow and Archibald Rancho Cucamonga Gentlemen: The variance or revised site approval is namely for up- grading the amount of parking initially proposed. The recently effected landscape requirement along Arrow is a 25 foot landscape area. However, for the purposes of providing additional parking for my new site, now under construction, 7 am requesting that you reduce the landscape area from twenty five feet to twenty feet. We are adding 3,500 square feet of additional landscaping in front of our building fronting on Arrow which is approximately the same amount we are deleting from the landscaping along Arrow with the proposed 20 feet of ". andscape area. At the present time - using the present site area, the parking ratio is one car per 271 square feet which is adequate for most complexes of this type. However, we have all seen projects finding themselves under . parked far one reason or another; therefare, I hope that yogi will understand my need for a iariance ind additional parking. Initially the approval of this project zoning was for M -1, and at the time I asked for that par• :cicular zoning, M -1 allowed varying uses such as, light industrial, office, commercial, R -1, R -2, R -3, etc. 2 also stated, during my presentation to the Planning Commission, my interests were of varying uses on this particular Page 2 Planning Commission project. At this time I am directing this letter to both the Planning Commission and the Planning Department, and re- directing you to the zoning of the site and its in- tended uses at the time of Planning Commission approval. This, -or the sake of my peace of mind and your approvals. My intentions are to develop this site, as approved, with some small che.naes and additions. Sincerely, A. H. REITER DEVELOPMENT COMPANY Al }gust H. Reiter /fj S r r `'� - -_T�' �� •" "/ ii /i/IMOa OA• /01r!!I s •. r.r • r • v 1 �7f�rfll.F Liz Fp C-11 F4 i7iji - _III• �_ _�� KII:i... !. J ... �-J w Rita�� ter" —! �iM, • � I .3' -� e•. •s`•�ll i j ,_ .I�r I Illiilt�� Viz:. li„•i I r .WY.0- x`'rirf2 r. 5r Si a 1 J`` dyid , -. � t ' �- — - r.. _. -_ _-._ _ .. _ � ... •.. 0 Date: To: 0 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT April 25, 1979 Planning Commission 0 From: Jack Lam, Director of Community Development Subject: ZONING DETERMINATION NO. 79 -02 - LE, --XtA DANNA - Request for determination as to whether or not recreational vehicle storage yard is similar to the uses in the A -1 zone for the property located on the south side of Baseline, east of Hermosa. BACKGROUND: Attached, please find a letter from Attorneys Anderson, Taves, and Reever regarding the subject zoning determination. The initiation of the zoning determination came about through a complaint process. Currently the applicant is operating a recreation vehicle storage yard on the eouth side of Baseline east of Hermosa. Thr property consists of approximately 2;1 acres of land with a rPSidence on part of the land, the balance being the storage yard. To the west of the storage yard is the Edison substation, across the street from the subject property is an existing mobile home park, to the south are existing single family tract homes and to the east are existin3 single family tract homes. As the letter indicates, Mrs. Danna has previously tried to use the property for several permitted uses of this zone, all of which were unsuccessful. She had, for several years, listed the property for sale but has had no buyers. It is her opiniun that the property is undesirable because of the location adjacent to the Edison substation and across the street from the mobilehome park in addition to being located on a major thoroughfare, Baseline Road. The applicant has currently fenced the storage lot with chain link fencing six feet in height and slag has been put down as a surface for the recreation vehicles to drive on. It is the applicant's opinion that the recreation vehicle storage yard is much less offensive than other uses that are allowable in the A -1 zone. The applicant has indicated her willingness to make any impr"ements which the Commission may feel would improve the appearance of the premises and is presently planning on planting shrubbery in front of the fence in order to hide the storage vehicles. ANALYSIS: The question before the Commission tonight is not whether or not the current use of the property can be made compatible with the surrounding existing uses and zoning, but whether or not the existing use is similar in nature to the uses listed in the A -1 and the R -1 zone. is ITEM "Gu w _ Zoning Determinat4l�o. 79 -02 Aoril 25, 1979 Page 2 The uses in the A -1 zone are single family dwellings, farms or ranches, commercial poultry ranches, commercial rabbit raising enterprises, raising, grazing, breeding, boarding or training of large animals, averies, worm farms, frog farms, fish raising, and other similar agricultural uses. Those uses listed in the R -1 zone are single family dwellings, truck gar- dening, tree farming, nurseries and greenhouses, small livestock, public and private uses such as civic or community cubs, country clubs, fire and police stations, schools, churches, cemetaries, muses, park and playgrounds, sn electrical distributing stations, social care facilities. Section 61.0219a(2) states where the term "uses similar to the above" is mentioned it shall be deemed to mean other uses which in the judgement of the Planning commission are similar, and not more objectional to the general welfare than the uses listed. After a thorough review of tha uses allowable in the R -1 and the A -1 zone we find it difficult to make the judgement that any of the allowable uses listed in the zone are similar to the applicants' request. While the use of the property is a recreation vehicle storage yard may not be a more intense use than some of the uses listed in the A -1 or R -1 zone, it is difficult to say that a storage yard for the storags and parking of recreational vehicles is similar to "museum, a civic or community club, park, playgr,n:nd, fire or police station. RECOFMMATION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission find that there is no similarity in a recreational vehicle storage yard to the uses allowable in the A -1 and R -1 zone. Respectful y submitted, JACK LAM, Director of Community Dev.'opment JL:BKH:nm Attachment: Exhibit 1 4 ' r 11 4b.. RIC MART O. ANDCRSON JOHN D. TAVC5 ROBERT W. RCCVCR 0 ANDERSON, TAVES AND REEVER ATTONNCY5 AT LAW •.O WKST •OCT --LU •OVICV.RO. }1lITE J uPLA.No, c&urORNIA 91786 March 28, 1979 ARCH COOK 714 TCI.CrNONC,, OB6 -96.2 "tY OF f'htKc�'tJ CUCkG;i'' ; C0i ii,!U'!IT D ;k%@! GPi14Li9T i)EPL HAP 0 C 1979 Planning Commission 0 r:tl City of Rancho Cucamonga 11;g ;5l17iii�1 P. O. Box 793 Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 Re: Matte- of LEONA DANNA 10191 Baseline Rancho Cucamonga, California Gentlemen: Leona Dann& presently operates a recreational vehicle storage yard on her property which is presently zoned A -1. Correspondence has been received from Community Development requesting that this operation cease. Mrs. Danna and T met with Barry Hogan and discussed her problem. Mr. Hogan suggested that this matter be brought to your department to see if an amicable solution could be reached. Mrs. Danna`s place is approximately two and one -half acres which consist partially of her residence and the balance is a storage yard. The storage yard is between her home and the Edison sub- station on the west. Across the street the area has been rezoned to permit mobile home parks. Your general plan presently anticipates that her area will in the future be zoned residential. Mrs. Danna previously tried to raise raL•b.lts, keep horses and even contemplated chickens, all of which could be per- mitted under the present zoning. However, these ventures were unsuccessful. She, for several years, listed the property for sale but had no buyers. Tha place is sorsewhat undesirable because of the noise and appearance of the adjoining Edison sub- station. The recreational vehicle yard has been nicely fenced and slag has been put down. .ie present use of the area as a recreational vehicle otorzge yard would appear to be much less offensive than what would otherwise be permitted in the zoning. Mrs. Danna would be willing to make any improvements which you may feel would improve the appearance of the premises. She is 1 a. Planning Commission City of Rancho Cucamonga Rancho Cucamonga, California Re: Matter of LEONA DANNA 10191 Baseline Rancho Cucamonga, California Page two March 28, 1979 presently planning on planting shrubbery in the front to hide the fence and the stored vehicles. The area surrounding Mrs. Danna's residence is I:eally not compatible with R -1 uses. T1..8 is mainly so because of the mobile home parks across the street and the Edison sub- station to her west and older residences and open areas to her east. By way of suggestion, it might be that if you permitted the present use the matter could be scheduled for a review at the end of a certain time period in the future. Mould you please place this matter on your agenda. ,r Thank you for any tunsideration you may be able to give. JDT:Sp cc: Mrs. .:,eons Danna very truly yours, ANDS ON, T/A//VES AND REEVER do n D. Taves CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA MEMORANDUM DATE: April 25, 1979 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Lloyd Hubbs, City Engineer SUBJECT: CUCAMONGA CREEK BRIDGE BETTERMENTS AND DEER CREEK DESIGN STANDAPDS Attached for City Council review and approval are recommended design standards for the construction of bridges over Deer Creek and Hillside Channel as a por- tion of Phase VII of the Cucamonga Creek Project. The attached letter from the Flood Control District indicates that these bridges are scheduled for con- struction in March of 1980. The estimated $210,000 could be required by that date to be taken from next fiscal years budget. Included in the program for this year will also be projects included in Phase VI of the project including the following: COST ESTIMATE Cucamonga Creek Red Hill Country Club $25,000 Demens Channel Sapphire Street 25,000 Carnelian Street 30,000 Beryl Avenue 20,000 TOTAL $100,000 The full potential budget committment of 1980 could be $310,000. The District recently indicated that due to manpower constraints, bridges above Foothill Boulevard may slip in construction to March of 1981. In this case, the 1979- 80 budget committment under the recommended program would be an estimated $150,000. The program outlined in Attachment A provides the following: 1. State minimum standard curb to curb widths for 6th, 8th, Humbolt, 24th, 25th and 26th Streets. 2. Minimal sidewalk provisions for 6th, 8th, Humbolt, 24th, 25th and 26th Streets. Minimal sidewalks being 2 3/4 foot 3. Provisions for 3 travel lanes in each direction on Haven Avenue with 5 foot sidewalks on either side. 11�- , ITEM n8n 4. Construction of half of the Plaster Planned impr ovements for Baseline Ruad with 5 foot sidewalks on south shoulder. 5. Substructure provision for Plaster Plan construction of north roadbed structure on Baseline, Inclu'ad would be footings and abutment pro - visions. 6. Construction of 5 foot = idetiralks on Haven Avenue at the Hillside Channel. 7. Deer Creek crosses the intersection of Turner and San Bernardino Avenue at a diagonal and State participation has not been detailed at this time. $20,000 is preliminary estimated maximum for these costs. PoiiCy Issues_ 1. Council may want to provide full 5 foot sidewalks in "North Town ". residential areas. Estimated cost $50,000. 2. Council could waive substructure provisions for Baseline. Cost savings estimated at $60,000. 3. Council could remove 5 foot sidewalks at all locations. Estimated savings $37,800. Reccmnendation: Staff recommenas approval of Deer Creek design critie ra as proposed on Attachment A. Respectfully su mitted, LLO HUBBS City E:n,ineer LH:deh attdchinent 0. N a H C7 W 2 �hN t� tU 0 K CD U Y he W W ZU W C7 O C Q U w M F- K CO C ro pn �t a OO 0 3 � O Ln O C O U CC) W rJ Y CL M40 0 0 a Y M I K Q F C ro F d 0 3 � 0 °i t0 Y A � 0 0 a M Ch O u V) W S v)h O 0. w N O F d Cif N O W 00 11 � FY � ' W Cl) Z a] � _ Y J I L Q F C ro F Ll7 0 3 V 0 °i N Y A � L a M Ch O u V) W S v)h O - OOM .:r� ' r N N N 11 � N u ' A Cl) Z M � _ J •u 0. od C3 oil LLJ Ot N 3 L �ro � r V a )- L L r wt :3 J W V to ro ¢w)= -o 3 U 0]N c0 :c N CD In J 6 L W r )a u C' U W Lu C-1 x o LD 0 Caw v tica -j CL. v ON ®' O C r N tT co N e� M-11 O O N to cr N to Ln N N tt7 l+7 LO tl7 M 4 a, W too 000 Q mr O O Cl) e N N N O P7 �7 N N r a r N vi w CA 44 tp d N N O tt W t") m to r U2 r N r• r D � to to t!) th C1') tr) n n n n r•. n N N N N N N •r J I C ro F r 0 °i ZD tl) C )`7 M M Ch L H ro N , W ' r N N N N N d N N Cl) M M C+') _ P') •r J I ro F r °i ZD tl) M )`7 M M Ch L H I N , W ' 4J a) � N O I� C L O • oil +) 41 �ro � r i° L r u U u to ro 7 sCL) . L In ro r )a N L - as Ln O O b Ch t+7 t`7 C'7 cn P7 01 , C a C S- S- :u N L a yy m CL � m C t0 p W to O L .y L N N a) a) M M M M M m cr tt tl0 N 0 O O O N � to t0 m H N zo 9 J I F r °i tl) ¢W E ! � H I N , W ' � N O I� C r•� O • oil +) �ro � r i° L r � u to ro sCL) . ro r )a 41 L as Ln C b •r 1 ya C a S- S- :u L a yy m CL � m C t0 p to O L .y L N N a) a) W .> a- V) C +-a Y ro a+ ++ 4 O L L d/ N L rd L a+ 4 • N .n N N N L I N r � C 7 Z C oil •O 41 a) yy m 4 w m 'U to ro 4 a) O L L L N N a) C C W .> V) C +-a Y a a+ ++ 41 a-) L L L L rd L O 4 • N .n N N N L I N 4J 4- +J aJ a) •-+ O. C ro d O V) to N 0o b C N C > +a ++ i•) E t L .G M99 9 W > . ^ .. Ca ' .. ro "L to N -it 7 ++ { 1 ++ ro a F- �-+ ro y CL, Y ' 4 N N N �G co 1l to Cn S S _ r C C OF SAN B�6, °NARDINO t �lanT C� P LIC WORKS AGENCY r• (l��r FIoOd Con trol 17is Ifict. �': µ• y��"!, -� •�` 625 Cost T.1tr0 Strut pen e..na.ai..e, CA 42415 Telephone (?14)383 -1 "5 rpt:r rrk!•f December 5, 1978 File: 1- 350/1.00 City of Rancho Cucamonga Engineering Department P. 0. Box 793 Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 Attention: Lloyd Hubbs City Engineer Re: Zone 1, Cucamonga Creek, Phase VII C/E Improvement Project Deer Creek Channel Gentlemen: Reference is made to your leter dated November 20, 1978, regarding the construction. schedule of Deer Creek Channel and its crossings. The Corps of Engineers' schedule is 'to start construction of the channel on April, 1981 to be completed on January, 1982. Huwever, the bridges will be built prior to the Corps of Engineers' channel and Flood Control District: schedule is to start construction on March, 1980 to be completed on /or before March, 1981. If you have my questions, please contact Mr. Mina S. Gha' -, Chief, Federal Claims Section, at (area code 7t4) 383 -2198. Very truly yours, C. J. Di Pietro, Flood Control Engineer 6y�_ B. C. Escobar Chief Assistant Flood Control Engineer MG:nmw (40 r1� Cr�ITY OF SAN BERNARDINO ALIC WORKS AGE�NCY Flood Control District 025 East Thud S1raa1 Sun bar..drdlna. C• 92415 TataaAana (7.41,09 -1465 City of Rancho Cucamonga Enginrering Department P. 0. Box 793 Rancho Cucamonga, Califcrnia 9170 Attention: Lloyd Hubbs City Engineer Gentlemen: November 13;. 197.817?. r�j p File: 1'ilQPaICNiDEPT. NCV 16 1978 AM -pal Re:* Q Re:• Zone 1, Cucamonga Creek, Phase VII C/E Improvement Project Deer Creek We are preparing preliminary bridge plans for the roads crossing the Deer Creek Channel to be constructed as a part of Phase VII of the Cucamonga Creek Corps of Engineers Improvement Project. Under Section 12747 of the State Water Code, the Department of Water Resources can reimburse this District for the design and construction of equivalent crossing structures for this Corps of,Cnyineers' project. These structures will be arranged for by the District and returned to ;.ire owner road agency for operation and maintenance upon completion of construction. The Department of Water Resources has provided this office with equivalent replacement bridge widths along Deer Creek Channel. Attached herewith is a list of the Department of Water Resources recottmended curb- to -ulrb bridge widths with 2.75 -foot safety curbs and railing bases on each side. Any cost in excess of this determination will he considered a "betterment" and will be the responsibility of the City. Accordingly, we would appreciate having the following additional information to proceed with the design of these crossings by November 30, 1978. yU � li�rlfii 1, _ 1. Desired betterments, including wider roadway (the City will be responsible for providing advance funds for any betterments). 2. Design speed. 3. Detour requirements during construction, if any. CITY OF RANCHO CUCA;40NGA November 13, 1978 Page Two 4. Construction permit information for possible use in the contract specifications. 5. Any additional infoniation you deem pertinpnt to the project. Your cooperation in this matter is appreciated. If you have any uuestions, please contact Mr. Mina S. Ghaly, Chief, Federal Claims Section, at (area code 7114) 383-2198. Very truly yours, C. J. Di Pietro, Flood Control Engineer 2 4 By /� B. C. Escobar Chief Assistant Flood Control Engineer MG:mmw Enc. Department of ZONE I. Water Resources CUCAMONGA CREEK, PHASE VII Recommended Curb -to -Curb Bridge Widths Street Crossing Equivalent Replacement Widths Curb -to -Curb Deer Creek Baseline Road 281 Haven Avenue East 41' West 43' Arrow Route Bridge to Remain 26th Street 30.5' 25th Street 301 24th Street 311 Humboldt Avenue 31' 8th Street 33' 20th Street or 7 Street No Evidence of Existing Facility 6th Street 28' San Bernardino and Turner Avenue No Determination Available lside Channel rrjy Haven Avenue 84. 11 -13 -78 3 ter, t L�