No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1981/12/09 - Agenda Packetm m C15 n z � ACTION APPROVED 4-0 -1 APPROVED 4-0 -1 CITY OF R.ANUiO CUCAb10i%4GA 'FLAN. N1.2% CONLMISrJION, - AGENDA WEDNESDAY DECEMBER 9, 1981 7:CO P.M. LION'S PARK COMMUNITY CENTER 5161 BASE LINE,.RANCHO CL'CAMON:A, CALIF02NIA I. II IIi IV. V. ITEMS A & B of Consent Calendar APPROVED 3 -0 -1 -1 Fledge of Allegiance Roll Call (arrived at 7:45) Commissioner Dahl _X ^ Commissioner Rempel X Commissioner King X Commissioner Tolstoy X Commissioner Sceranka X Approval of Minutes Nivember 10, 1981 November 25, 1981 Announcements Consent Calendar The following consent calendar items are expected to be routine and non - controversial. They wi.il bJ acted upon by the coamission at one time without discussion. Zf angone has concern over any item, tiles it should be remcvP6 for discussion. . EM %IV. 01 -or - ricauw - ine ueveiopmenz OT a i4,UUU souare root industrial bjilding on 2.12 acres of land in the General Industrial zone located at 8613 Helms - APN 209 - 021 -31. B. REVISION TO TRACT MAP 10762 - ACACIA - located at the southwest corner of Raker and Foothill. A change from an 84 unit condominium deveiop- ment of 2 lots to an 84 unit tovmhouse develop- ment on 86 lots. _ _ _ WITHDRAWN at request of Applicant VI. CONTINUED to undertermined time at request of Applicant APPROVED 4 -0-0 -1 VII. VIII. ri. Planning Commission'*nda December 9, 1981 Page Two WULrr. H1au maaul.imir.> — n Ju uillb division located at the northeast and Carnelian requesting a change private interior streets. Public Hearings ULJ I - Dmnl'WNlml\ single family su' corner of Almond from public to are following items are public bearings in which con- cerned individuals may voice their opinion of the related project. Please wait to be recognized by the Chairman and address the Commission from the public micropbol:e by giving your name and address. A11 such opinions zhall be limited to 5 minutes per individual for each project. D. E. M0. 81 -71 TT 11969) - KLK - A Grange o: zone from R -3 Multiple Family Residential) to R -3 /PD (Multiple Family Residential /Planned Development) and the development of 67 townhouse /condominium units on 5.24 acres of land located on the north side of 19th Street, east of Hellman Avenue - APN 201- 232 -34 and 54. MV. 251- 13 f l IL N - UZA rnur�nl icZ - n t.uauyc of zone from R -1 Single Family Residential) to R -3, /PD Multiple Family Residential/Planned Devel- opment) and the development of 128 condominiums on 9.2 acres of land located on the northeast corner of .Archibald and Feron Boulevard - APN 209 - 051 -01. Old Business New Business CONTINUED to 1 -13-81 F. with recommendation that examples of front slope grading be presented. GRADING I Planning Commission Agenda Decemt*r 9, 1981 Page Three APPROVED 5 -0 -0 with with the condition that G. ENVIROPuMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT RVIEW this return to Design Review NO. 81 - 35 - JENKINS - The development of two for landscaping and building industrial buildings totaling 36,240 square feet changes. in size on 2.14 acres of land located at the northeast cerner of 6th Street and Turner Avenue - APN 209- 261 -19. IX. Council Referrals H. ENVIRONM APPROVED 3 -1 -0 -1 to recommend LAWLOR - one Change to R- 1- 30,000 to City Council P.C. voted 4-1 -0 not to affirms' .ROBERTS GROUP AND WESTLAND VEWURE /SHAFFER Council's action in changing zoning from R -3-PD to R -2 -PD. X. Director's Reports 10:50 XI. XII. XIII. Public Coamnents this is the time and place for the general public to address the Commission. Items to be disc -used here are those which do not already appear on this agenda. Upcoming Agenda Adjournment The Planning Commission has adopted Administrative Regulations that set an 12:00 p.m. adjournment time. If items go— heyond that time, they sha11 be heard only with the consesat of the Commission. Adjourned to December 17, 1982 Special Study Session on Terra Vista Planned Ccemunity to be held at 7:00 p.m. ir. the Cucaxonga Neighborhood Facility located at 9792 Az-ow Highway, Rancho Cucamonga, California. I Ay e/E li cTINRemn EJE Aq 9 = N s E •^ r G �) Ti. y CWrmiv WE 2 A z a 3Q1� a a r r H �•CP.ON<[ LI i.N 1 CUCUD P A C N 6 O z u . ,qi D I A a ! �a n R r v v a Q Gl r 's o 1 a Ay e/E li cTINRemn EJE Aq 9 = N s E •^ r G �) Ti. y CWrmiv WE 2 A z a 3Q1� a a r r H �•CP.ON<[ LI i.N 1 D ` �.� u . REQUEST TO ADDRESS �-= � THE PLANNING COMMISSION (6:L 1977 % Name Y/V Telephone . 4 5-Z 4p Address . Relationship to Agenda Item : Name of Item : 4 pi S G 1'P., 77 of Comments �� elf L .crr el.,-m 0. rA ZF4677 Y-h I° ,Z REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE PLA_VNING COMMISSION Date 12 -2 -81 Name : ACNACL A. poR.To Telephone : 2!3) Qs�3 3311 Address : _/30/ P11 S.(iW BLVD. SUitE A- SAAVX /JAwCA CA 3 _ Relationship Ito Agenda Item : APPUG,GhT Name of Item USA OQoPEreTlCS FUND- ARcmA460 E Ate/ 99n2 6 A OVW5 Summary of Comments Aeler D/SC& -SS /ON BLVD RES40.vo TD 00AIXI"rS KL.K DEVEL-OPME gT COMPANY December 9, 1981 City of Rancho Cucamonga P. 0. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, California Attention: Members of the Planning Commission Subject: Planned Development 81 -11 (TT- 11964) Gentlemen: We have just achieved an acceptable agreement with the Cucamonga County Water District for the acquisition of the adjacent, 100' x 1501, parcel to the Northwest Corner of our property. This acquisition will make possible the ability to meet the desires of the Engineering Department to align the Hellman Avenue ingress /egress drive with Garden Street, to the West, for better traffic control. We must now proceed to redesign our project to include the added parcel. We, therefore, beg of the Commission a continuance of the scheduled hearings, December 9, 1981, to remap the site and proceed with the normal reviews, to move to a Planning Commission Hearing at a later date. It is our feeling that there will be less confusion by proceeding in this manner, rather than having a map approved and then an ammended map with the duplication of multiple sets of conditions and statements. if any further information is required please feel free.to call upon me. Sincerely, KLK DEVELOPMENT COMPANY Edward P. Becker Executive Vice President cc: Planning Department (2) Planning Commission (5) MAILING ADDRESS: POST OFFICE BOX 4645 • THOUSAND OAKS. CALIFORNIA 91359 31320 VIA COLINAS. SUITE I IC • WESTLAKE VILLAGE. CALIFORNIA 91361 • (213) 889-6735 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNINr COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting November 10, 1981 CALL TO ORDER Chairman Jeff King called the Regular City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission meeting to order at 7 p.m. The meeting was held at the Lion's Park Community Center, 9161 Base Line Road, Rancho Cucamonga. Following the call to order, Chairman King led in the pledge of allegiance. ROLL CALL PRESENT: COMMISSIONERS: Richard Dahl, Herman Rempel, Jeff Sceranka, Peter Tolstoy, Jeffrey King ABSEI\rT: COMMISSIONERS: None STAFF PRESENT: William Holley, Community Services Director; Edward 'Hopson, Assistant City Attorney; Joan Kruse, Administrative Secretary; Jack Lam, Community Development Director; Paul Rougeau, Senior Civil Engineer; Michael Fairin, Senior Planner ANNOUNCLMENTS Mr. Lam announced that there would be a Special. City Council Meeting on December 3, 1981 to review the newly revised Drainzge Master Plan. He indicated that this review would also include the Alta Loma Charnel Assessment District. He invited the Planning Commission to attend this meeting which would be held at the Lion's Park facility. Mr. Lam reminded the Commission that on November 19 there would be a presentation of the Terra Vista Planned Community proposal by the Lewis Company. He indicated that there bad been wide distribution of the announcement of this proposal for presentation. Mr. Lam stated that the Etiwanda Specific Plan Advisory Committee would meet on November 17. He invited tl:e Commission and public to attend. Commissioner Sceranka advised of the Founders Day activities that would take place during the upcoming weekend and which would include a w4—ue C estival, selection of a beauty queen and parade. CONSENT CALENDAR A. The development of a 10,000 square foot industrial building addit. on 1.37 acres of land, located in the General Industrial Zone. at 8780 Archibald (APN 209 - 031 -49). Motion: Moved by Sceranka, seconded by Rempel, carried unanimously, to adopt the Coasent Calendar. PUBLIC HEARING B. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 81 -05 - EDISON - The development of an electrical distribution substation on 4.78 acres of land in the R- 1-2 zone, located on the northwest corner of Archibald and Wilson Avenues (APN 1061 - 571 -04). jack Lam, Director of Community Development, reviewed the staff report. He indicated tbat several meetings had been held on the requested con- ditional use permit. Further, that after the August 13 meeting, Edison was requested by the Planning Commission to return with more information on the issues raised to include user impacts, site feasibility and location, and aesthetics of the proposal. Mr. Lam stated that additional information has been provided by the Edison Company and had been included in the Commission's agenda packets. Chairman King opened the public hearing. Mr. Dick Verrue, District Manager of the Southern California Edison Company, reviewed the information which was contained in the Commission's packets. Mrs. Kath•, Thrasher, 534L Jadeite, indicated that the number of persons surveyed by the Edison Company at other substation locations was inadequate. Further, the value of the surrounding homes at other substation sites was not comparable to the proposed site in Rancho Cucamonga. She opposed the location of this site because of an anticipated decrease in property value. Commissioner Scr_ranka asked lass. Thrasher why she was concerned that there would be a decrease in property value. Mrs. Thrasher replied that her home had increased in value by approximately 40-50% over the past two years. She indicated that the placement of a substation in this residential area would detract from the aesthetics and would therefore devalue property. Planning Commission Minutes -2- November 10, 1981 Mrs. Gail Tyke, 9717 Peachtree Lane, Rancho Cucamonga, cited an article in the Scientiii: News linking cancer with overhead electrical transmission lines. She stated her opposition to this project because of health hazards, especially to chilaren. Commissioner Sceranka asked if she knew what voltages were cited in the article she read. Mrs. Dyke replied that she was unsure but thought they were in the range of 50,000 - 200,000 KVA. Mrs. Dyke also felt that the landscaping proposed was inadequate. Mr. Ted Thrasher, 5844 Jadeite, stated his concern with noise pollution and asked what the noise range of the completed plant would be and what it could be compared to. Mr. Lan: replied that when a person is riding in a vehicle with its windows up the dBa is zpproximateiy 50 -60. A motorcycle, he stated, is about 80dBa. Mr. Thrasher asked if there would be additional street noise resulting from this project. Mr. Lam replied that the substation would not add to the noise level of the street. Commissioner Tolstoy stated that he had done some research into noise levels and found that the average noise emanating from a TV is 30- 35dBa; the range of speech is 35-50, dependine whether there is a heated argument and he felt that the noise generated from this protect would fall far beneath these ranges. Mr. Thrasher asked what the height of the towers are. Mr. Verrue explained that Edison is planniry on using existing poles and would add another approximately 7 feet to them for the additional line Load. 14r. Thrasher stated his opposition to this project on the basis that it is unsafe. Commissioner Sceranka asked for an explanation. Mr. Thrasher explained that if the power lines would be knocked down in a high wind, he would be surrounded by the lines and felt that this would be hazardous. Mrs. Denise Hansen, 5861 Jadeite, asked how many volts these lines would carry. Planning Commission Minutes -3- November 10, 1981 Mr. Verrue - -esponded that they would carry between 12,000- 66,000 volts. Mrs. Hansen, stated her o^postion due to health reasons_ Mr- H. C. Busch,!, 5605 Archibald, Alta Loma, stated that he did not feel the analysis on the economic impacts is sound and that the Edison Campany did not furnish proof_ Mr. Glen Shaw, 5525 Klusman, indicated that the site proposed is a poor location and asked where the central load will be. Mr. Verrue pointed to the area of the central loan on the aerial map in the chambers. Mr. Shaw indicated that he thought it unfair to locate the site in an already developed residential area. Mr. Shaw questioned the requirement of an EIR, stating that he had contacted the EPA and was told that if an EIR is requested, it must be completed. Mr. Lam explained to Mr. Shaw the environmental process that takes place at the Planning Commission_ M-. Lam also indicated that If Mr. Shaw wished to he could request that an EIR be made on this project. Mr. Shaw stated that he would make his formal request at this rime. Mr. Lam stated that the Planning Commission would have to determine that an EIR is needed. Mr. Shaw asked what he could do if be did not like their decision. Mr. Lam explained the apneai procedure to Mr. Shaw. Mrs. Elaine Burch, 9781 Peachtree Lane, took exception to the n Edison report_ which indicated that there would not be an economic imp act. He stated that her sister was going to buy one of the homes i this area prior to learning that an electrical substation would be located there. Mr. Jay Dyke, 9717 Peachtree Lane, indicated that another site was available to the northeast of this site and asked if the Edison Company had explored this site. Mr. John Street, 6025 Jadeite, stated his opposition because of the high winds this are receives. He indicated his concern with downed power lines_ There being no further comments, the public hearing was closed. 7.50 p.m. The Planning Commission recessed. 7 -58 p-m. The Planning Commission reconvened. Planning Commission Minutes -4- Novi der 10, 1981 Commissioner Rempel stated that for 25 years he has lived beneath a 65,007 MTA power line and has raised four children there with no ill effects. He indicated that the Edison Company had made a diligent effort to locate another facility where it was feasible to do so without the installation of additional high voltage lines in areas where there were none. He stated that for this reason he felt that the proposea location is adecuate and will best serve the area and community. Further, that any place that Edison might propose a substation would meet similar opposition. Commissioner Dahl stated that he had several problems with the entire proposal. Further, that he was not entirely convinced that t'r..ere had been a good solid 'look into other sites within the community as evidenced by the gentlemen who stated that another site was available below this proposed site. He indicated that he was not sure if the decibel and noise levels indicated in the Edison report were fact or fiction. Commissioner Dahl expressed concern over this location and the hig`. winds, and for these, and other reasons, did not feel that the Edison Compar;; had done what had been requested by the Commission. Commissioner Dahl stated that he did not see any new alternative sites brought forward by the Edison Company and for that reason the only way that he could vote on this would be if an EIP, were prepared which would focus on noise, health and an alternative site. Commissioner Tolstoy stated that this had been heard on June 24 are, August 12 and that this is the third time. He felt that this was ample time for the Commission to look into this. He indicated that the City confi- uration is such that utilLties would be unable to place substations- in a commercial or industrial area. Further, that because of the particu- lar constraints, a substation must be located in a residential area. He stated that the problem is where does it go. He indicated that he had taken a tour of the City and 'bad rejected some of the sites proposed by the Edison Company and had determined that this is the best site for the substation's location. He stated that he did not feel that the dBa levels emanating from this site would substantially contribute to noise pollution and felt that the Commission should make a `: egative Declaration. Commissioner Tolstoy stated that he did not feel that either a focused or full blown EIP, would be appropriate. Commissioner Tolstov stated that he had spoken with several individuals at the college having brokers licenses and did not feel that there would be economic hardship on existing residences due to the location of a substation in the area. He further stated that he had been told that the only serious negative impacts to a residential area would be if a City yard were located within the neighborhood where garbage trucks and the like, or a sewage treatment plant were to be located. Commissioner Tolstoy stated that after listening and sitting through two nuhlic hearings and the staff reports, he must support this proposal. Planning Commission Xinutes -5- November 10, 1981 Further, that no matter where this goes in the City, it will be in a residential neighborhood. Within the subdivision, he stated, the people will know it is there. Commissioner Tclstoy stated that he will support this conditional use permit if: 1. The site, after approval, will be developed immediately with landscaping, all padding, walls, trees, grass. 2. That the north and west sides of the facility be heavily landscaped with trees and shrubs and that the portion under the trees be screened. Since the equipm-ent in the field is not sufficiently high, they install the white type poles instead of the brown poles. Commissioner Sceranka stated to the City Attorney that one of his major concerns was the possibility of economic impact. He asked if it would be 7� =gaily _justifiable to do an economic impact study to see if the residences within a given number of feet of the project would be ad- versely af:ected from an economic standpoint. Mr. Hopson replied that the general body of law is not specific in this regard and that he did not know if there is anything to study. Usually, he indicated, studies are made to see what the effact is or. the environ- ment but felt that they could study the economic impacts of the project but that it would be outside the scope of the normal EZR and living con- dition problems that are studied and that State and City guidelines deal with. Commissioner Sceranka stated that he had a number of concerns with the project that he wished to discuss. He then asked if another site were chosen what its impacts would be. Commissioner Scerankv *.aced that he did not think there is a possibility of locating this project in an area that :s not residential in Rancho Cucamonga. Further, that he had looked at the impacts in various neighbor- hoods should the substation be located within those areas. He stated that he is a real estate broker and did not feel that it would affect this area .2conomically. He indicated that to some degree, this prcject will block the view of the mountains. Commissioner Sceranka stated that in regard to the health impacts that are of concerr his studies have indicated that there is not a problem unless the KirAs are in the area of 250,000. 1nasmuch.as the KVAs associ- ated with this project are 66,000, he did not feel there is cause for concern. Planning Commission Minutes -6- November 10, 1931 Commissioner Sceranka stated that an EIR will not do anything more than prolong a decision. He further stated that he would endorse 100 percent what Commissioner Tolstcy had added to the conditions Of approval and would add one more condition that the study as shown on page 12 of the Edison report that deals with TVI and RFT_ ambient measurements be com- pleted and that any differences in the - eadings corrected. Mr. Lam asked what the defirition of immediately me.:.nt_ Commissioner Sceranka replied that it would be the appropriate time through plan check to coincide with staff's recommendation. Yz. Vairin, Senior Planner, stated that if the Commission approves the Conditional Use Permit for 1S months, before the plans are approved, they would 'nave to do the gracing. Commissioner Sceranxa stated that he was thinking in terms of six months. Mr. Vairin replied that this might be rather quick because of the site plan, street plans and other approvals. Mr_ _am stated that the Commission is probably looking at about one year from approval. Chairman Ding stated that he did not have much to add. Further, that at prior meetings he had expressed concerns about the site and safety of children. He felt that in view of the information that he bad received regarding the fencing he does not now have significant concerns about the substation being an attractive nuisance. Relative to the aestheti =s, Chairman Xing agreed •.-ith Commissioners Tolstoy and Sceranka on landscaping and stepped up grading before the facility is installed_ He felt that relative to high voltage lines and their effect on health there has been nothing constructive that flows one way or another. He felt that there will be no greater health hazards than those cne would get in a car. He felt that no matter where a new substation was located, the same adverse reactior would be received from the public. Further, that it was his feeling tha: there would not be an impediment to the surrounding land with the development of &is substation. Commissioner Sceranka explained the studies that had been done through the General Plan process and that adverse impacts were not found_ ?Motion: Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Re.mpel, carried to adopt Resolu- tio:t No. 81 -132 approving Conditional Use Permit Ne. 81 -05 with the con- ditions mentioned by Commissi-ners Tolstoy and Sceranka and that this project be brought before the Design Review Committee for review. Commissioner Dahl voted no because he did not feel that the Edison Company had done sufficient research in looking for alternative sites. Planning Commission Minutes -7- November 10, 1981 AYES: DOES: ABSENT: x x x x x COMMISSIONERS: C'jWWTSSIr.'_ Ms: TOLSTOY, REY2E',.. SCI:EANVA., K7YG COIL sSIOYEELv-, NONE - carried- C. TE%'TATIVE TACT 110. 11934 - Vie'rORIA iZNDRVkS Vl- i u,c LYON CO.P.'NY - A tract subdilisicr consSsting o£ 756 lots on 192 + :.ores of land in the :Tanned Cocrmunity zone, a portion of ad. the �.'irtoria Planned Community, located north of Base Line Ro south of Highland Avenue, and Uest of Etiwanda Avenue. Senior Planner, Michael Vairin reviMied the staff. report. He brought up a mechanism than. had previously oeen discussed for the protection of street trees as most of them within the planned community will be on private property. Mr. Vairin stated that a condition would be u-ritten into the CC &Rs or that a landszape and planting easement be developed for each lot within the subd ?vision to set forth restrictions for the removal 4n% maintenance of otreet trees on individual Farcels. Whethe it be CC&R's or easements, they must be recorded with the final map of each subdivision. If the uechanism is CC &R, this should be reviewed by the City Attorney prior to the final map approval. Mr. Vairin stated that the Engineering Division had been working on the refinement of engineering conditions and further stated that Mr. Rougeau would distribute these new conditions to the Commission at thi: time for their review and discussion. Chairman Ring asked, relative to the private drives and asements and the cutting out of some units, how many were actually b.i,% removed. Mr. Vairin replied that there are 3 units. Commissioner Rempel asked for clarification on Condition No. 13 of the Engineering Division ara whether it would be straight curb or standard curb. Mr. Rougeau replied that the curb would be straight but would be t lted so that the water could drain away. Commissioner Rempel. asked for clarification on Engineering Condition No 32 and whether the determination should be left to the Design Review Committee. Mr. Vairin replied that the determination should be left to the Design Review Commit_ ee. Planning commission Minutes -8- November 10, 1981 8:40 p.m. The Planning Commission recessed. 8:52 p.m. The Planning 0mmmission reconvened_ Chairman King opened the public hearing. Mr. Gary Frye, representing the William Lyon Company, advised that there were a few changes to the tentative map and were working on the design of the school, par's and church area. He indicated that they had brought a concept to the school board which had been approved for the Joint use concept of the land and felt that it would be adequate for every- one's need and was pleased that it had been worked out. Mr. Frye indicated that the Foothill Fire Protection District had asked them to r:hange a few knuckles in the streets and this was done. Commissioner Sceranka stated that he has a problem with the church site as proposed. He indicated that typically a church looks for 3 -5 acres because often it is combined as a multi- purpose structure. He felt that there was inadequate space allowed for a church as proposed in this aesign. Commissioner Tolstoy asked if the site could be enlarged if the church says they want more property. Mr. Frye indicated their first thought was that these would be compatible uses; however, in meeting with the school district it was found that this is not the case. He also stated :hat the City wished to have parking available at both ends of the park and this would optimize the City park. He stated that while he was not an expert on church planning, he felt that the site as proposed is adequate for a congregation of 100 -200. Commissioner Tolstoy stated that if that is acceptable, and he was not saving that the answer Mr. Frye gave was, would there be larger church sites within the planned community. Mr. Frye replied that they were not at a point where they can say where a church site will be. Commissioner Tolstoy stated that Mr. Frye was hedging and asked if that site can feasibly meet the need or anyone else's need. Mr. Frye replied that at that particular site it could not. There was discussion on the size of church sites and the importance of their location within the planned community. Commissioner Sceranka sked what the possibility is of a ore -acre church site using other available parking. Planning Commission Minutes -9- November 10, 1981 Mr. Hopson replied that in several cases CCSRs have provided for a way to serve private uses. He cited the trails as ?n example cnd that lcgical- ly, a mechanism would be found tfa t would work. Mr. Vairin stated that if the consensus of the Commission was that there should be an enlarged area for churches that this direction be given to the developer. Mr. Don Tomkins, representing the SWA Group, stated that he had no prob- lem with the site from a planning standpoint and was sure that it would be used. He cited some eramples that he had experienced in the Woodbridge tract in Irvine. Com--issioner Dahl requested that a directive be received on this. Mr. Frye explained that the planned community tent states that churches would be allowed in residential and commercial areas and that further, an Etiwanda congregation is interested in locating within tais village. He asked that this site be given a chance. Mr. Frye stated that they addressed this adecuately in the tentative map; however, they would be happy to look at this further for all of Victoria. Commissioner Dahl asked about the design along the top of Highland Avenue near the Polka Palace. He felt that the type of lot arcund that area might cause difficulties and he asked for an explanation of m9.tigation methods. Mr. Frye replied that through walls, grading and landscaping there were ways to mitigate this and he wished to address this specifically at Design Review. Mr. Frye then went into park phasing and his i- .terpretati.on of the condition that park would be provided on completion of 200 units. He proposed that phasing for the east Windrows Village based on 485 square feet per dwelling unit or 30C a square foot per month for maintenance per unit and that phase one park develop 5.1 acres of the linear park after the completion of 459 units. He indicated that this proposal took into account the fact that the City would not want too much park to beg -En with because of mainten- ance. He then explained what areas the park would develop in as it is divided into east -west segments. Commissioner Sceranka asked for clarification of park phasing and what the phasing of parks within the tracts would be. Mr. Frye explained that it must be on the basis cf ratio of lots to park and then he would be able to answer the question. : ?e further stated that they at: - howing phase 1, 5 acres of linear park for 459 units which will be installed prior to units being delivered. This would be done in co.. junction with their models. Plannin'v Commission Minutes -10- November 10, 1981 l` , Commissioner Tolstoy asked what amenities will be present in the lineal Park. He asked J.f Mr. Frye would be including picnic tables in this phase. Mr. Frye replied that they are still working on the park concept and were not sure. He indicated that the linear park would not be an active park but rather, a passive park. Commissioner Tols✓oy stated that that was the point he was trying to make. Mr. Frye stated that the commitment to the planned community needs to be met with the linear park because that is the core of the plan. Commissioner Sceranka asked where the lots are in phase one. Mr. Frye replied that there are 130 lots in Tract 11934 and that the phasing would move in increments of 30 lots. He then indicated how the other tracts would br-, phased. Commissioner Sceranka asked about the product lines proposed. Mr. Frye replied that there would be three product lines all at once. He also explained the grading that would take place. Mr. Frye advised how the completion of the trails would take place so that people would not move into unimproved trails. Commissioner Dahl asked hoaa the trails would come down. Mr. Frye replied that they would both come into the park. Commissioner Dahl stated that at this point in time there would only be 1.6 acres of park developed and they would be coming in�o a natural weed area. Mr. Frye replied that Commissioner Dahl was basically right as the trails initially would ¢o into a natura2,area. He indicated that what they are proposing is that they develop 1.6 acres of the central park with the completion of 700 units and that the balance of park would be completed in 4 phases of approximately 2 acre increments. Commissioner Sceranka asked where it is proposed that the people locating within the Windrows Village go for active recreation. Mr. Frye replied that they would either go to the school. sites or to the Guasti Regional Park. Commissioner Sceranka asked if Mr. Frye has asked ;be Etiwanda School District about the use of their facility and whether the 600 units pro- posed in the phasing would impact their facility. Planning Commission Minutes -I1- November 10, 1981 Mr. Bill Holley, Director of Community Scrvices, stated that the school sites are controlled by the school districts themselves. Mr. Frye stated that he had not asked if --hey could be used as a park. Further, that he felt that the school district has anticipated that with the growth that will be coming in they must be used. He explained how much linear park there would be, the fact that there would not be a central park, and the amount of parks that they are putting in up front. Commissioner Sceranka expressed his concert with 503 units being built with no active recreation facility. He indicated that he felt that there should be some place to play both soccer and baseball. Mr. Frye replied that he appreciated Commissioner Sceranka's opinion. Commissioner Dahl stated that based on tha original study, there was to have been a small lake and that it was pretty hard to phase a lake. He stated that he would personally 'like to know what is happening with the lake and what it will do. Commissioner Sceranka stated his disappointment that at this stage in the development the lake or pond as originally shown is gone from the map_ He felt that since the area is hot and smoggy, the water element is necessary to create a visual relief and would be a positive trade- off. He spoke of a recent tour of Lake Forest and the kinds of amenities that were found there, stating that this would be workable in Victoria. Commissioner Tolstoy stated that the Commission had spent a number of months on the Victoria planned community and what he saw that appealed to him was the water element. He indicated that water did not have to be huge but what he saw at Lake Forest was excellent_ He indicated that t- is is a now you see it, now you don't, z;!tuation since the first plan was submitted and he did not like seeing this in the first project. Commissioner Tolstoy stated that ie did not wish to see all parks in the City playing fields. He state--,' that what the rest of the Planning Commission is saying is that they need to have a show!rg in the first phase of this development as soon as possible that Lhere is going to be a park and he hoped the water element would be considered. Commissioner Dan]. stated that he agreed with Commissioners Tolstoy and Sceranka that the water element is needed. He felt that where the school is located there will be enough area for games like soccer. He indicated that the Commission needs to see a new and better park to be a show place and also a place where people can relax and enjoy themselves. He also stated that kids and water are compa*_ibl-a_ Assistant City Attorney Hopson stated that the City Council approved a resolution that the Planning Commission passed up to them and it stated that it approved the Victoria Planned Community subject to certain con- ditions. He quoted from page 3 of the resolution which stated that Planning Commission Minutes -12- November 10, 1981 parks will be provided subject to 200 units. He indicated that a lot of the discussion which had taken place tonight is purely academic, and, with the conditions of approval that the City Council made, he did not see a lot of room for the developer to go to 600 units before a park is developed at all. He indicated that if the Commission wanted to recommend to the City Council that they change the conditions that is all right; however, what is ir. the conditions that were approved is fairly specific and is not a suggestion, but a condition. Commissioner Sceranka asked what the definition of a park is in the Specific Plan. Mr. Hopson stated that staff could find that and read the condition. He then stated that if these parks were developed in increments of two acres and contained all the requirements of the condition, then the park could be developed in increments. Mr. L&-n stated that the way it was worded was practically verbatim from the condition of the planned community. Further, that there can be some interpretation on phasing but it is up to the decision makers. Mr- Lam stated that when the conditions were placed on the planned community, the Planning Commission and City Council stated that when the building begins there must be a park or something after 200 units are completed. Gommissioner Rempei stated that one of the problems arose when the Commission made a finding that the alternate park and passeo would be credited to the park area. Hawever, when they had originally talked of a central park concept, Cori- sionew Rempel stated that when he first saw the plan he was very t..scb impressed by the water element. lie felt that the size of the wat,•r element in this park with its prox- imity to the school could cause conflict. He further stated that he was not saying that he did not like that concept but felt that a number of people will want to go to the lake south of this area and this is where it should be developed. Chairman King asked Mr. Frye if he had anything to add on park phasing. Mr. Frye stated tha-- he did not, but that he was hearing different voices relative to the lake. Mr. Lam stated that technica;.ly on the tentative map there is not a requirement to discuss the design of the park because it is within the purview of the Planning Commission and City Council to review park plans when they are developed. He stated that it is important to discuss phasinS and that this is a condition of the Planning Commission. Further, that specific design can be dealt with later. There was further discussion on the phasing as proposed by Mr- Frye. Planning Commission Minutes -13- November 10, 1981 Chairman King indicated that Mr. Frye had finished with the park aspect and asked if there were any individuals or public which wcald like to make co -ments on what has been discussed. Mr. Bill Holley, Director of Community Sercices, stated that it was he who had put the brakes on the proposed 1--k2 as it was his comment and not Mr. Frye's. Mr. Holley stated that Ee agreed with what would come out as far as park acreage in the total analysis but disagrees with the phasing as presented. He further stated that the City has an agressive policy on how the parks will address the needs of residents. Commissioner Sceranka asked chat the number is in order to. come up with either a soccer field or ball field and if the 1.6 acres proposed by Mr. Frye would be adequate. Mr. Holley replied that according to his calculations, 2.2 acres is what is needed for soccer and slightly more for a baseball diamond. Further, that since this is one of the first developments with the park standards, this should be a new and outstanding effort. Mr. Frye replied that their figures are somewhat different than Mr. Holley's but that they thought they could accommodate the figures. Mr. Frye then went over the conditions with staff. The Commission agreed to delete the word "all" in Planning Division Condition No. Z. The Commission agreed to change Condition No. 3 to have review of lots by the Desigr Review Committee and delete the lase sentence in Condition No. 6; and revision to the wording in Conditions No. 11 and 12. Mr. Frye asked that Condition 18b be revised so that soil conditons could be determined by the R value; and that Condition No. 22 be reviewed by Design Review. The Commission concurred. Conditions No. 30 and 31 were discussed relative to the a3intenance of street trees. After discussion, it was determined that Condition No. 31 have the words "open space are as follows ", after the words "parkways and Mr. Frye stated that he would like Condition No. 19 reviewed. Mr. Frye also asked for clarification of Condition No. 27 which imposes a 152 requirement for affordable housing in this village. Mr. Lam stated that this could be modified so long as Mr. Frye keeps count and that there is some effort to spread it cut. °lanning Commission Minutes -14- November 20, 1981 Mr. Frye replied that they would; however, not in the first tentative. Condition No. 32 was changed to ... shall be approved by the Design review Committee. On Condition. No. 22, Mr. Rougeau srated that it needs to meet the handicap requirement. Commissioner Rempel asked if the easement was going to be allowed to project into the sidewalks. Mr. Frye indicated that they would have to take a look at that. Commissioner Rempel asked if this could be acceptable to the Citv Eng{�rtr and the Developer to be finalized by Design Review. Mr. Frye stated that he would accept this. Mr. Hugh Foreman, Civil Engineer for the William Lyon Company, discussed Condition No. 43. Mr. Rou -eau explained why they did not want to have manholes in order to do repairs that were locates within a private driveway as it could present serious problems for the homeowner because it would cut off their access. He indicated that they need 20 feet for storm drain ease- ment plus whatever would be required for a driveway. Commissioner Sceranka commented that the Engineering consideration about the easement is good. Mr. Sceranka also spoke of the tot lot concept that tied into the engineering consideration relative to the easements. Chairman King asked if there were any other conditions that the Commission wished to address. Mr. Frye stated that he wished to discuss the specimen tree issue. Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded by Sceranka, carried unanimously, to continue beyond the 11 p.m. curfew - Chairman King asked the Commission to list those items on which Commission consensus was needed. The Commission indicated that discussion is needed on the phasing of parks. the issue of churches within the Victoria planned community, tot lots, and 3000 square foot area design. Mr. Don Tonkin of the SWA Croup, indicated that Item 10 relative to the minimum of 20 percent specimen trees was excessive and asked that it be removed. Planning Commission Minutes -IS- November 10, 1981 Commissioner Tolstoy stated that he would like to see the whole Planning Commissior sit and Zalk about landscaping because of its importance and he would like to be in on the discussion. Commissioner Rempel agreed and further stated that the requirement for 20 percent landscaping in specimen trees can be overdoing it. He felt that sometimes putting is a younger tree is better because it gives the tree a chance to acclimate itself. Commissioner Rempel stated that if the wording in the condition is "up to 20 percent" it would be better and he would go along with that. Commissioner Tolstoy stated that he agreed with the requirement of up to 20 percent. Mr. Lam stated that staff would go along with the requirement as well. He did not agree, however, with Commissioner Rempel's statement that a younger tree is better. He stated that it depends on bow the design is - established and that a lot of people make the argument that it gives the tree a better chance. He indicated it depends or, how the tree is put in, the soil conditions and the gz=lity of the tree itself. Mr.. Vairin explained that the reason for this condition is that on the major parkways like Victoria where there is high visibility, they wanted to have more landscaping at the outset. Commissioner Dahl stated that the Commission cannot be inconsistent throughout the City. He indicated that so far the Commission has required a large percentage of parkway planting in specimen size trees. He indicated further that what is done for one developer will have to be done for another and he did not think that the requirement should be lessened. Commissioner Tolsto; asked Mr. Tomkins what he was suggesting in lieu of the specimen trees. Mr. Tomkins replied that they have taken the subiect of landscaping very seriously taking into consideration the area, its wind conditions, and topography, and have worked out the concepts to do that. He felt that by stating that a given percentage of trees should be of specimen size, the Commission was being arbitrary and he invited the Commission to a presentation on what they are trying to develop in landscaping. There was considerable discussion on the size of trees and their visibility. Mr. Vairin indicated that the landscaping requirement is for the parkway areas primarily and not the interior streets. Commissioner Rempel asked that the statement be eliminated and that the Planning Commission Minutes -i6- November 10, 1981 Commission approve the design of trees on the project. Commissioner Tolstoy stated that the rationale is that the Commission is now working within a planned community which is somewhat different than what other projects have been. He felt that the Commission could go zlong with that. Mr. Lam explained that when you a -e talking about a muc ". longer and larger piece of property, it is even more imps- ta.-it to talk about initial impact and he felt that the 1 -5 gallon size tree would not be appropriate. He explained a tree experiment that had been tried in the City with its resulting successes and failure. Commissioner Rempel stated that the wind is a consideration as well. He felt that the landscaping should be determined by the final landscaping plans. Commissioner Dahl asked what the tree requirement is on Lemon and Haven. Mr. Vairin replied that it is 20 percent for specimen trees in the parkway area. Commissioner Tolstoy replied that the wind there is not like the wind in the Victoria area. Following brief discussion there was consensus among the Commission that a minimum of 20 percent of the landscaping should be specimen siza trees unless the Planning Commission determines otherwise following examination of the landscaping plan. Commissioner Dahl asked if the Commission would reach consensus on the size of church property within Victoria and whether there would be larger church sites. Chairman King stated that he did not agree on this but asked the Commission what they wished to do. Commissioner Rempel stated that this is a planned community concept and should serve that community. He stated that he had no objection to having larger church sites within the community. The Planning Commission stated its consensus Frith Commissioner Rempel's comment. Chairman King asked, in relation to the phasing of parks, at what point should the central park appear in the development process. Commissioner Sceranka stated that when the first 200 units are completed, an active recreation facility that is overlapping for baseball and Planning Commission Minutes -17- November 10, 1981 soccer should be installed. Its dimensions would be approximately 2.5 to 2.7 acres to be agreed upon between the developer and the Community Services Department. Further, that this would be approved by Design Review. He indicated that this would need to be modified for phasing on the rest of the central par's. Chairman King then went on to the tot lot requirements. He indicated that he was not sure it was appropriate here as it is usually associated with condominium development. Soemiscioner Tolstoy stated his agreement with Chairman King but indicated that he had another concern. He stated further that in his tours they saw several mini P--=-)= for pi —icc and frisbie throwing, etc., and wan impressed with these uses. He felt that in a 3000 square foot area there should be some vest pocket parks because of the distance from the central park to allow this kind of recrea�.ion. Chairman King stated that three units would be taken out of the project and utilized for the vest pocket parks. Commissioner Rempel stated that he would not say three, but rather, two units and would concur. There was consensus among the Commission on this. Mr. Frye asked if the F7.anning Commission goes that way would the maintenance be performed by a maintenance assessment district and not a homeowners association. Commissioner Tolstoy stated that it should be handled at Design Review and that further, there needed to be discussion on renter plotted houses. Commissioner Tolstoy stated that the Commission had a tough time getting the concept passed and what is happening now is an opportunity to show the community some innovative housing. He indicated that the design presented does not do it. He stated that he understood that there would be a 5 -foot side yard and this is not useful. He asked why there could not be some zero lot line homes and the elimination of the five feet which is useless. He asked that they think more positively about design. Mr. Frye replied that they were not saying that they would not do any center plotting that they are flexible in this regard. Further, that they would work with the Commission on their product line. Motion: Moved by Scerankz. seconded by Dahl, carried unanimously, to adopt Resolution No. 81 -133, approving Tentative Tract No. 11934. Planning Commission Minutes -18- November 10, 1981 Motion: Moved by Dahl, seconded by Sceranka, carried * snanimously, to continue beyond the 11 p.m. curfew. x x x x x NM4 BUSINZSS E. TIME EXTENSION REQUEST FCR THE FOLLOWING: Tentative Tract No. 11605 Tentative Tract No. 9369 -11173 Tentative Tract No. 9665 Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded by Sceranka, carried unanimously, to adopt Resolution No. 81 -134 approving these time extensions. * x x x DIRECTOR'S REPORTS H. STA""TS OF ETryIANDA SPECIFIC PLAN Senior Planner, Tim Beedle, reviewed the staff report stating that there had been discussion of holding another town meeting in order to receive more public input. Commissioner Tolstoy stated that he felt the planning was goirg well and that there had been a lot of public input. lie further stated that he had asked Mr. Beedle to give this report to apprise the Commission of what is taking place. Mr. Beedle stated that five meetings had been held to date, one of which was a town meeting. He spoke of the field trip that the Committee had taken to acquaint themselves with the area and to better prepare themselves for discussion. Commissioner Sceranka stated that the umbrella loop idea was very good and he was encouraged by it. Mr. Larry Arsenage, an Etiwanda landowner, stated that it appeared that not everyone who wished to be heard is being given the 3pportunity at the Etiwanda meetings. lie felt that only the views of the advisory cocmnittee are being considered and be asked how other property owners may express their views. Fe indicated that they have recently formed a group of about 40 percent of the landowners in order to have their views heard at these meetir d indicated that the Committee was trying to change densities that Seen approved during the General Plan hearings. Planning Commission Minutes -19- November 10, 1981 Mr. Arsenage spoke of the traffic proposals under discussion and felt that any attempt to put in a new road was a waste of mcney and that they are opposed to this. Commissioner Dahl stated that the advisory committee is a public forum and asked if public input is encouraged. Mr. Beedle explained the procedure that had been adopted by the advisory committee which allows 10 -15 minutes at the end of each hoar for input. Commissioner Dahl stated that what Mr. Arsenage is saying is not something that the Commission would look at %,t this time as it was being considered by the advisory committee; however, he stated that they would be sure that there would be adequate time for public input to be sure that every- one is being heard. He felt that it would be good to have a town meeting in order to give everyone an opportunity to express their opinion. Mr. Beedle stated that the next tows: meeting is scheduled for after the first of the year. Commissioner Dahl stated that both the Planning Commission and City Council intent was to encourage not discourage public input. He hoped that the Committee would allows him, or anyone, to speak. Commissioner Sceranka stated that if they waited for the first of the year there might not be adequate time for input and asked if there could be another town meeting for this purpose. Mr. Beedle recommended that inpur from the landowners association that had been formed be done in a different way. He indicated that if they have a representative they can appoint him to get their point across in a succinct fashion and they will be most effective in this way at the current meetings. Commissioners Dahl and Sceranka felt that an attempt should be made to have another town meeting sooner than the first of the year. Mr. Arsenage stated that he felt the majority of the people should be heard. Commissioner Dahl replied that it depends on who is considered the majority. 'ors. Kleinmanstated that there are quite a fcw people who do not agree with what is going on. Mr. Roland Smith, property owner, stated that he did not agree with Commissioner Sceranka on the umbrella loop concept. Planning Commission Minutes -20- November 10, 1981 Mrs. Flocker stated that when people in their group speak out, no one listens; they indicated that the Committee has already decided what they want to do. Mrs. Catania stated that she agrees with everyone else that the Committee seems to listen but they don't hear. She further stated that they have paid taxes on their land for the past 20-30 years and felt that they Id be heard and the committee should care more about their feelings. r _ner, that if the Commission thinks that people will use the bypass that is being proposed by the committee to eliminate traffic they are wrong because Etiwanda and East Avenues will still be used. Commissioner Rempel stated that the Commission had listened to the people who are residents at the General Plan hearings, but not the major landowners. He indicated that it was a long decision but sad to say, it is the volume of the voice and not the individual or landowner being looker' at anymore. Mr. , Blanton, Upland, a landowner, stated that most of the landowners were h—ppy with what had come forward through the General Plan. He indicated, however, that it was difficult to speak openly at the meetings because the land<.jner was regarded as a dirty dog by the people who were living an 7200 square foot lots. He indicated that they like to look at the land but that they don't want to pay for it. Commissioner Sceranka stated that the Advisory Committee is not adopting anything but is making a recommendation. Further, that just because a recommendation is being made does net mean that their input is any less important. He indicated that the landowners have just as much right to give their point of view. Mrs. Kleinman stated that people are saying a bypass is coming in and asked that the Commission look at it from the landowners point of view. She asked who is going to pay for the land to put the roads in. Furtber, that in doing this, the property will be so cut up that it will be useless for anything else. Commissioner Tolstoy stated that someone said that the Committee had their minds made up before the meeting and he wished to advise that, as a memoer of the Committee, he listens to all arguments before he makes ap his mind. He stated that he was speaking for himself. Motion: Moved by Sceranka, seconded by Dahl, carried, to recommend that the Etiwanda Advisory Committee hold another town meeting within the next month. Chairman King voted No. Y< ak Planning Commission Minutes —21— .e<vember 10, 1981 Motion: Moved by Dahl, seconded by King, carried unanimously, to continue beyond the 11 p.m. curfew. The Planning Commission recessed. The Planning Commission reconvened. oNMENTAL IMPACT SORT - Public tal Impact Report to the Redevelopment Tim Beedle, Senior Planner, reviewed the staff report. Chairman King opened the public hearing. Mr. Beedle stated that one of the things the Commission is doing is re- affirming the General Plan and the other thing is a specific air quality maintenance plan under the Air Quality Management District. He indicated that this will go to the City Council in December and they will address the concerns in the EIR. Commissioner Tolstcy asked if the Commission will address this prior to it going to Co::ncil. Mr. Beedle replied that the Commission will make a recommendation, and that the EIR is a draft. Commissioner Sceranka asked if the Commission's comments will be taken to the City Council and whether this needed to be done tonight. Mr. Beedle replied t'aat the comments were not needed tonight and that the Commission could individually make their comments known to him during the next few dzvs. There being no further comments, the public hearing uas closed. yz1',r-2J1YA11L)N ur ULNLK&L PLAN CONSISTENCY OF PLA.ti - A determination on the consistency of Plan with the General Plan. Motion: Moved by Rernpr_l, seconded by Sceranka, carried unanimously, to adopt Resclution No. 81 -136, approving the consistency of the Draft Redevelopment Plan with the General Plan. Planning Commission Minutes -22- November 10, 1981 F. CITY ENVIRONME5TAL GUIDELINES Motion: Moved by Rempel., seconded by Sc2ranka, carried -unanimously, to adopt Resolution No. 81 -135 apprcviag the City Environmental Guidelines. ADJOU&NMENT Motion: Moved by Dahl, seconded by Tols=oy. ;:arried unanimously, to adjourn. 12:10 a.m. The Planning Commission adjourned. Respectfully submitted, JACK i.l4M, Secretary :1ai.�iing Commission Minutes -23- November 10, 1981 CITY OF WiCHO CUCAMONGA PIANNING COMMISSION MINU'_'ES Regular Mceting November 25, 1981 CALL TO ORDEP, Chairman Jeff King called the Regular meeting of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at 7:00 p.m. The meeting was I eld at the L =ons Park Community Center, 9161 Base Line Road, Rancho Cucamonga, California. Chairman King then led in the pledge to the flag. ROLL CALL F:tLSn'NT: COMMISSIONERS: Richerd Dahl, Eerman Rempel, Jefferey Sceranka, Peter Tolsoy, Jeffrey K"+^ ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None STAFF PP.ESENT: Eduard Hop =on, Assistant City Attorney; Jack Lam, Community Development Director; Paul Rougeau, Senior Civil Engineer; Janice Reynolds, Secretary; Arlene Troup, Assistant Planner; Michael Vairin, Senior Planner APPROVAL OF M= =UTES "lotion: Moved by Dahl, seconded by Rempel, carried, to approve the Minut--s of October 14, 1581. AYES: COMMISSIONERS NOES: C0101ISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN- COMMISSIONERS: DAHL, REMPEL, SCERANKA, TOLSTOY, KING N1 AE I�( `eel NONE Motion: Moved by Sceranka, seconded by Dahl, carried, to approve the• Minutes of October 28, 1981- AYES: COMMISSIONERS: SCERA -NKA, DAHL, ME-F.1, LNG NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: CO)VISSIONERS: NONE ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: TOLST(r' r Commissioner Tolstoy was absent from the October 28, 1981 meeting, therefore abstained from vcte. ANNO "ICEMENTS Mr. Lam advised the Commission that on December 3, 1981, the City Council would be holding a special meeting on the storm drain master plan for the City. The meeting would be held at the Lions Park Community Center, beginning at 7 p.m. Mr. Lam further advised the Commission that there would be another pre- sentation of the Terra Vista Planned Community on December 1, 1981. This meeting would also be held ac Lions Park Community Center beginning at 7 p.m. Mr. Lam stated that he had an item to add to the agenda under Director's Reports. The item wound be the subject of a Terra 'Vista hearing schedule. PUBLIC HEARINGS Chairman King requested that Item "G" be moved to the first item on the public hearing schedule. The Commission concurred with this request. G. TIME EXTENSION FOR THE FOLLOWING: TENTATIVE TRACTS 10045, 10363, I1434 There were no questions from the Commission, therefore the public hearing was opened_ There being no public comments, the public hearing was closed. Motion: Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Sceranka, carried unanimously, to approve the Resolution granting time extensions to the above tracts. AYES: COMMISSIONERS: TOLSTOY, SCE'tiANKA, DAHL, -R EEL, KING NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: NONE COMMISSIONERS: NONZE COMMISSIONERS: NONE - carried- A. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 81 -17 - SHIBATA - The Cemporary placement of a 480 square foot trailer on 1.29 acres of land in the C -) zone to be located at the southwest corner of Haven Avenue and Lemon Avenue. Michael Vairin, Senior Planner reviewed the Staff Report. Planning Commission Minutes -2- November 25, 1981 Chairman King asked if there were questions from the Commission. There were none and the public hearing waa' opened. Mr. Bob Shibata, Applicant, addressed the Commission stating that his lease on his present building woulc ie expiring soon and it was his desire to be allowed to place a :sailer at his site presently under construction thus allowing him to continue his business. He stated that he would answer any questions that the Commission might have. There were no further public comments and the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Tclstoy stated that he felt that the plz cement of trailers as an office to be used temporarily after building permits were issued was permissable; however, still felt_ that trailers in the City are ur_- desirable. He further stated that the only reason he would vote in favor of this request was because the building permits had been issued. Commissioner Rempel agreed with this statement by Commissioner Tolstoy. Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded by Tolstoy, carried unanimously, to approve the Resolution for Conditional Use Permit No. 81 -17. AYES: COMMISSIONERS: REMPEL, TOLSTOY, DAHL, SCERANKA, KING NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: CO%1MIrSSIONERS: NONE ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: NONE - carried- * B. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 81 -13 - ROTHSCHILD - The development of a 3000 square foot commercial building and self- service gasoline station on .70 acres of land in the C -2 zone, located at the southeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Vineyard Avenue - AYN 208 - 241 -20. Michael Vairin, Senior Planner, reviewed the Staff Report advising the Commission that Staff was recommending denial of the above project as the issues of circulation, access, and design could not be resolved between the Design Review Committee and the Applicant. Staff was recommending denial based on uoncon£ormance with the General Plan, and findings that this project could cause public health, : afery, and welfare problems as well as the site not being adequate in size and shape for this project. Chairman King opened the rublic hearing. Planning Ca= -ssion Minutes -3- November 25, 1981 Mr. Rill. Stewart, 12354 Lakeland Road, Santa Fe Springs, California, addressed the Commission. He stated that the Applicant did not reverse the gasoline station or change the driveway because it was their opinion that this would not accomplish the purpose intended by the Commission. It was the Applicant's opinion that placing the gasoline station behind the retail building would make it more visible from Vineyard and Foothill Boulevard than if it were placed on the corner and heavily landscaped. He further stated that over one -third of the Project was proposed to be landscaping. He wished tc go on record as stating his desire to proceed with this proJec* and this location in its present configuration as he felt it did meet the parking requirements and design requirements of the City. Mr- Matt McKission, project architect, addressed the Commission. He stated that approximately 40Z of the site is taken up in easements and setbacks. Mr. McKission stated that the Applicant had tried to come to an agreement with the liquor store adjacent to the project on a shared driveway but the owner of the liquor store would not agree to any type of arrangement. Tl:e applicant had also tried Design Rev?ew Committee's suggestion of placing the driveway right on the propert; line. This was not a feasible solution either as there was an ice machine in the path of the driveway. Commissioner Sceranka asked Mr. McKission if it was his opinion that the Ordinance requiring 100' setbacks on major streets was a justifiable Ordinance. Mr. McKission replied he felt that it was adequate on Foothill Boulevard and was a reasonable requirement; however, this did not meet the needs of this project. Commissioner Rempel asked Paul Rougeau who owns the approaches that are on the public right -of -way. Mr. Rougeau replied that the first 12 or 13 feet was public right -of- way. Commissioner Rempel asked if the City could require the applicant to widen the approach and add 20' thus bringing the approach up to the Property line. Mr. Rougeau replied that it could if it were within the right -of -way of the liquor store, and that :t would be the intent to ultimately combine the driveways. Commissioner Dahl stated that it was his opinion that the overall cir- culation design of the project was very poor. Be stated that the stacking of cars in the gasoline pump area was going to affect the cars attempting to null in and out of parking stalls at the retail building. It was his Planning Commission Minutes -4- November 2:, 1981 opinion that the project was not feasible from a safety standpoint, a design standpoint, nor from a retail. standpoint. Commissioner Sceranka stated that he felt that the Applicant had not shown that there was a reason why a varir-nce for the 100' setback for the driveway should be granted on one of the busiest intersections i:. the City, or that the project would be able to handle the stacking of cars within the comn_lex so that they would not interfere with the retail shop. Mr. McKission stated that it was his opinion that the requirement of placing the driveway with the driveway of the liquor store was not tLe intent of the Ordinance which Staff had quoted in regards to the 100' distance. The Applicant felt that placing the two driveways close to- gether would create a traffic hazard and a greater hazard than compro- mising on the 100' setback rn Vineyard Avenue. He further stated that the stacking of cars is a difficult item to deal with as there are no set numbers of cars a self- service gasoline stati.�n should be able to stack. It was his opiaion that the Powerine Company should know how many cars they could accommodate. Mr. Mr.Kission stated that the Appli- cant chose to screen the project with mounding and landscaning rather than to reverse the station and place it on the corner as recommended by Staff. It was the Applicant's opinion that reversing the station gave it "an outhouse" effect in its placement. Approximately 5-10% of the landscaping would be lost if the building were reversed. There were no further public comments and the public hearing was closed. Commissioner. Dahl stated that he saw no attempts to resolve the problems and issues brought up in the Design Review meeting or attempts to show the Commission alternatives on how the project would work. ae further stated that based on this opinion, the circulation of the project, and the aesthetic value of the project, he could not support approval of the project. Chairman King stated that all the problems and issues regarding this project were indicative of the two types of uses not being compatible. He felt that possibly se:.vice bays rented out to an independent con- tractor might be a more feasible partner. Commissioner Tolstoy stated that Staff had requested the Commission some time ago to work with Staff to devise a circulation system for the City. After months of workir.-, with the Planning and Engineering staffs, an Access Policy was devised for the City. He stated that this is a good Access Policy and the Comm,_ssion should uphold that policy. Be further stated that the two way traffic circulation system proposed for this project would create stacking problems for bath the station and the retail outlet. The design of the site did not fit the size of the property and would not accommodate a retail use as well as a gasoline Planring Commission Minutes -5- November GS, 1981 station. He further stated that he would like to :suggest a service station rather than a gasoline station to the Applicant as a better use for this site. Commissioner Sceranka stated that he could not see a situation where it would be feasible to grant a variance on a major thoroughfare. Re stated that he did not feel that the Commission should change its policy to allow a service station bay to be a predominant feature on a major thoroughfare. He also felt that the Commission could not approve a retail usage and a gasoline usage on the same site, especially not at the square footage proposed. Commissioner Rempel stated that he felt that serious traffic hazards would be created by the access on this project resulting in serious traffic accidents_ He also stated that be did not Feel that "an outhouse" effact was what the Design Review Committee was trying to convey to the Applicant in regards to the station reversal and felt the Commission should stand behind its policy regarding reverse stations. Motion: Moved by Sceranka, seconded by Zempel, carried unanimously, to deny Environmental Assessment and Conditional Use Permit No. 81 -13. AYES: COMMISSIONERS: SCERAIWA, REMPE:L, DAHL, TOLSTOY, KING NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN- COMMISSIONERS: NONE COMMISSIONERS: NONE NONE 7:55 p.m. The Planning Commission recessed 8:05 p.m. The Planning Commission reconvened -carried- C_ ENVIP.Q^ =AL ASSESSMENT AND PLANNED DEVELOPMENT NO. 81 -14 - TENTATIVE TRACT 12040 - PFEILER - A change of zone from R -1 to R- 3 /P.D. for the development of 328 condominium units on 23.6 acres of land located at the northeast corner of Turner aid Arrow Route - APN 208 -34 -9 S 11. Arlene Troup, Assistant Planner, reviewed the Staff Report. Commissioner Dahl asked Ms. Troup if the proposed project met the recom- mendations of the General Plan in regards to zoning. Ms. Troup replied that it did. Planning Commission Minutes -6- rri• November 25, 1981 There were no further Commission comments and Chairman Icing opened the public hearing. Mr. Joe Olson of the Anden Group, representing the Applicant, addressed the Commission. He stated that the Applicant had met with a group of homeowners in the area of the project on November 9, 1981 and had been received very favorably_ He asked for clarification from Staff on two conditions in.. the Resolution; one being condition A -20 regarding euergy conservation, the other condition was L -1 regarding the installation of television cable. He indicated that he had spoken to Staff and was ad- vised that condition A -20 was an example of types of energy conservation measures and the Applicant was willing to incorporate as many of the features as possible in their project. Regarding condition L-1, the Applicant would provide this service under the provision that a viable cable franchise company that the Applicant could coordinate their efforts with at the time of construction. Commissioner Dahl asked Mr. Olson what problem the Applicant was having with Condition A -20. Mr. Olson stated that the App -11 ant was of the opinion that this was an open end condition but thrx Staff had clarified the condition and he now felt that he understood the condition. Commissioner Tolstoy asked how the roof mounted mechanical equipment, such as air conditioners, would be screened from view. Mr. Olson replied that the roof orrerhang areas were the basic screening devise. He further stated that the Applicant would meet the basic design criteria set by the Design Review Committee in regards to adequate screening of roof mounted equipment. Chairman King asked if there were any other public comments. Dorothy Emfinger, 10183 Devon Street, Rancho Cucamonga, spoke in favor of the project. She stated that she was a homeowner in the vicinity of the project and had attended the homeowners meeting set up by the devel- oper. It was her opinion that the developer had done an excellent job of presenting his project to the homeowners. Their main concern was in regards to the fencing that would be required to buffer the proposed de- velopment from the existing single family homss_ There were no further public comments and the public hearing was closed_ Commissioner Tolstoy stated that he would like a condition that would require some type of fencing along the property line that would be more substantial than the wood fence proposed. Planning Commission Minutes -7- November 25, 1981 _' Commissioner Rempel stated that he was in agreement with this statement by Commissioner Tolstoy and felt that a wood fence on a slope area would not withstand the elements. He suggested that a block retaining wall with pipe posts rather than wood posts may be a better alternative. Commissioner Rempel stated that he felt that the development of this project site would be a welcome addition to the community. Commissioner Dahl stated that he felt the issue of fencing should go back to design review at the same time the screening of the roof mounted equipment was reviewed. Commissioner Dahl commended the developer for meeting with the area homeowners prior to the Planning Commission meeting. He stated that the prior meeting eliminated potential problers betweca the developer and the surrounding property owners and help to move the project along much faster. Chairman King asked if Staff had a suggestion on the condition of the wall. Mr. Lam suggested an additional condition be added requiring some type of fencing and /or wall combination that would provide long term aesthetic appeal and stability be approved by the Design Review Committee. Motion: Moved by Sceranka, seconded by Rempel, carried unanimously, to adopt the Resolution approving Tentative Tract 10240 with the addition of the condition concerning the fencing. AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: SCERANKA, REMPEL, DAHL, TOLSTOY, KING NONE •F.f�7i :7 ABSTAIN: COItKISSIONERS: NONE - carried- Motion: Moved by Dahl, seconded by Sceranka, carried unanimously, to adopt the Resolution recommending approval of Planned Development No. 81 -14 to the City Council. AYES: 002W.ISSIONERS: DAHL, SCERANKA, DAHL, TOLSTOY, KING NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: NONE - carried- * Planning Commission Minutes -8- November 25, 1981 D. AMENDMENT To THE INDUSTRIAL SPECIFIC PLAN - Amendments to include modification of the land Use definition for "Bui lding Contractor's Storage Yard" and "Building Contractor's Services", the provisi^ns for Building Contractor's Services in certain areas of the Plan, and to provide for railroad service spur locations along 7th Street, east of Devore Freeway, by allowing the landscape setuack to be maintained no less than 20' from the ultimate face of curb when adjacent to rail service. Tim Beedle, Senior Planner, reviewed the Staff Retort. Mr. Lam presented letters received by the Planning Division in support of the proposed amendment to the Covm<issi.-)n. Commissioner Sceranka stated that he felt the wording of Building Con- tractor's Services was a bit ambiguous in that it was defining the se -vices that the contractors do and was irrelevant to the ?and ur-e. He further stated that he felt it should state offices or headquarter for contractors whose activities typicall- include, but are not limited to and then list the activities. The wording in the Resolution states that the activities would be allowed and the intent should be that people who do these activities may have t7acir offices or storage yards on these premises. Commissioner Tolstoy asked if the Industrial Specific Plan contained a statement on how a rail spur was to be maintained in regards to weed abatement. Mr.. Beedle replied that maintenance of rail spurs bad not been spelled out in the Plan; however, maintenance is usually pro•fided by the offices of the rail line. Commissioner Rempei stated that maintenance of a rail spur on private property would be maintained by the property owner. Chairman King opened the public hearing. Mr. Mervyn Kirshner of Inland Container Corporation addressed the Com- mission stating that his corporation desired to locate in the City and had written the letter presented to the Commission by Mr. Lam expressing their support of the Industrial Specific Plan amendment. Mr. Kirshner stated that some of the lead rail spur would be maintained by the- rail line with the balance to be maintained by the industries using the spur on a regular basis. There were no further comments and the public hearing was closed. Commissioner S2eranka gave the rewording of the Building Contractor's Services condition as follows: Activities typically include offices Planning Commission Minutes -9- November 25, 1981 and storage of equipment, materials, and /or vehicles for contractors who are involved in trades involving construction activities including, but not limited to, plumbing, painting, electrical, roofing, carpentry, and other services. Commissioner Rempel stated that the title of Building Contractor's Services should also be changed to read Building Contractor's Offices and Yards. Motion: Moved by Sceranka, seconded by Rempel, carried unanimously, to adopt the Resolution approving the amendment to the Industrial Specific Plan with the above changes by Commissioners Sceranka and Rempel. A=YES: COMMISSIONERS: SCERANKA, REMPEL, DAHL, TOLSTOY, KING NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: E. DRAFT EN7 NONE COMMISSIONERS: NONE COMMISSIONERS: NONE - carried- u1S'TF.LCT — The purpose of the Assessment District is to provide a funding mechanism for capital improvements within the Assessment Area. The Assessment Di =trice is generally located between Arrow Route on the north, 4th Street on the south, Turner on the west, and Rochester on the east. Paul Rougeau, Senior Civil Engineer, reviewed the Staff Report. Commissioner Sceranka abstained from vote as his family owns property in the area. Chairman King opened the public hearing. There were no public comments and the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Rempel stated that the wording in one of the sentences in the EIR, under Significant Adverse Impacts, had been changed around and he would like to see it corrected. It should have read: This requires that decisionmakers in the City determine whether mitigation measures proposed reduce the impact to an acceptable level. Motion: Moved by Dahl, seconded by Tolstoy, Resolution certifying the Draft Environmental Assessment District. carried, to adopt the Impact Report for the Planning Commission Minutes -10- November 25, 1951 AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: NEW BUSINESS C'JMh1YSSIOYEFS : COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: DAHL, TOLSTOY, REMPEL, KING NONE NONE SCEFANKA - carried- F_ r- WIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPIiavi REVIE-w NO- o1-33 - C 5 1- The develcvnent of a 2,250 square foot office building on 3.09 acres of land in the Industrial Park zone to be located at 10220 4th Street - APN 210- 072 -23. Michael Vairin, Senior Planner, reviewed the Staff Report. Chairman King opened the public hearing. No one spoke in favor or opposition of the protect and the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Sceranka stated that the Applicant bad done a very good job of addressing the concerns of the Design Reviey- Committee_ Motion: Moved by Sceranka, seconded by Tolstoy, carried unanimously, to adopt the Resolution conditiunally approving Environmental Assessment and Development Review No. 81 -33. AYES: COMMISSIONERS: SCERANKA, TOLSTCY, DAHL, REM -PEL, KING NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONEPS: NONE ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried- R. VACATION OF THE EAST /S?EST ALLEY - Located 149'1: south of 9th Street between the Santa Fe Railroad right- of-way and Calaveras Avenue. Paul Rougeau, Senior Civil Engineer, reviewed the Staff Report. Commissioner Sceranka asked if 502 of the dedication would go to the property owners on t`e south and 50% to the property owners on the north. Mr. Rougeau replied that it would. Planning, Commission Minutes -11- November 25, 1981 Edward Hopson, Assistant City Attorney, stated that if the residences along the dedication had block walls around the rack of the property and it would not be convenient -o tear down the wall, was there a process where the dedication could be included in a sideyard rather than a rear yard. He suggested that at the time of dedication it might be well to ec.sider the most effective way to equitably give the property back as what might suit one property owner might not suit another. Commissioner Rempel stated that this was a very Rood recommendation, tear there would have to be a consistency in the way it was dedicated ani _pat the homeowners on the north could possibly be approached to release thu property to the two property owners on the south. Commissioner Tolstoy stated that if something could be worked out to that nature, it would eliminate the possibility of a strip of property being maintained by no one. Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded by Tolstoy, carried unanimously, to procee.? with the vacation of the alley with the recommendation preposed by Mr. ?opson and Commissioner Rempel to work something out with the property owners on the dedication. AYES: COMMISSIONERS: R.MPEL, TOLSTOY, DAHL, SCERANKA, KING NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: N0;7E COMMISSIONERS: 14ONE COMMISSIONERS: .TONE DIRECTORS'S REPORTS TERRA VISTA HEARING SCHEDULE - carried- Mr. Lam, Community Development Director, advised the Commission that a hearing schedule for the Terra Vista Planned Community needed to be established by the Commission. He stated that the EIR for T_crra Vista was not :available at the time and that it was speculated that it would be ready in approximately one week. Mr. Lam suggested the date of January 7, 1982. Commissioner Dahl asked Mr. Lam if that was the earliest date the EIR could be reviewed and a date could not be established in December. Planning Commission Minutes -12- November 25, 1981 Mr. Jairin replied that the problem was in the completion of the EIR. The Commission would need time to review the EIR before the hearing. Commissioner Tolstoy stated that he would not be available during the month of December and stated that he felt January would be the best time to start review. He further stated that he had concerns which he would like to have addressed at the hearing and had comments he wished to make and did not want to be denied the opportunity to attend the hearing. Mr. Lam stated that the first meeting should be spent in discussing the issues the Commission would like Staff to cover in the nearing topics. He felt that the CoUmLIS`310a :auld not h--C :dC!;uatc t'sc to review the ZIR if they met in December, but would have plenty of time to review and absorb the material if they met in January. Commissioner Sceranka asked if a meeting could be held to give the developer the Commissioner's concerns and give him an opportunity tc address those concerns before the hearing process began. Commissioner Dahl stated that he would like to have the opportunity to address a tern of the basic land use concepts and problems before reviewing the EIR thus giving the developer the opportunity to work on these areas before bringing them back to the Commission. Chairman King stated that he felt that it would be best_ to have the opportunity to thoroughly review the documents before the meeting and had a preference to wait until January. Mr. Ralph Lewis, developer of Terra Vista, addressed the Commission stating that he would like to meet with the Commission some time in Det.embcor to have the opportunity to address some of their concerns before the public hearings began. There was more discussion on the date of the hearing and it was estab- lished that an informal meeting of a quorum of the Commissioners would be held with the developer on December 17, 1981, with the time and place to be determined by Staff. ADJOURNMENT Motion: Moved by Dahl, seconded by Rempel, carried unanimously, to adjourn. 9:15 p.m. Tile Planning Commission adjourned Planning Commission Minutes -13- November 25, 1981 P.espectfully submitted, JACr LAM, Secretary Planns.n,, w— ission Minutes -14- November 25, 1981 C3'I'Y OF RANCE -1) CUCAMONGA REPORT DNMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR D-EVELOPMENT RcJiEi H0. 81 -37 - - The development cf a 14,000 square foc, industrial ing on 2.12 acres of ;and in the General ndustriai located at 8613 Helms - APN 209 - 021 -31. ABSTRACT: The Applicant is requesting approval for the & of a warehouse building on an industrial site, as describ; The project has been reviewed by the Design and Develomier Committees, and is now be Fore the Planning Commission for mental review. BACKGROUND: This review is for anvironmental assessment, t� determine the significant adverse impacts on the t-vvironment as a re sult of this project. The Site Plan and architectura designs are not :onsidered at this time, unless relative to environr -xtal concerns. 'o determine significant adverse impacts, an Initial Study on environmeital concerns is prepared. Upon completion of that study, evidence woulc indicate either no significant impacts, or the potential fur significant impacts. if a determination of no significant impacts is made, basec upon the Initial Study, a Negative Declaration may be issued for the project. If significant impacts are found, then and Environrentai impact Report shall be required, to fully analyze the impacts of the project. The detailed Site Plan and elevations will be reviewed and spproved, with conditions, by the City Planner, contingent upon approrai of the Negative Declaration by the Planning Commission. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS: Part I of the Initial Study, completed by the Applicant, is attached for your review and consideraV or. Staff has completed Part 11, and has found no significant adverse impacts on the environment as a result of this project. Development Refiew Nc. 21 -37 Planning Commission Agenda December 9, l9£!i P;je p RECO.MENDATION: Based upon analysis of the Environrnentai Study, it appears that the project will not cause significant adverse impacts or. a envinment. If `�e Commission concurs, then the issuance of a Negative Declaration for the project would be in order. 'Respectfully submitted, 3 S JACK LA39, AICP Community Development Director JL-AT:jr Attachment: Initial Study, Part I Site Plan J' EJ 11 I CITY OF MXRO CU=%JO%,GA INITIAL STUDY C PART I - PROJECT INFORMATION SHEET - To be completed by applicant Erviron: ental Assessment Review Fee: $87.00 For all projects zed irirg environmental review, this form :lust be completed and submitted to the Development Review Committee throug'rA the denartment ;,where the project application is made. Upon receipt of this application, the Envircnmental Analysis Staff will prepare Part 17 of the Initial Study. The Development Review Committee will meet and tale action no later than tan (10) days before the public meeting at which time the project is to be heard_ The Committee will make one of three determinations: 1) T%e project will have no significant enviro=nental i.TMpact and a Negative Declaration will be filed, 2) The project will have a significant environmental impact and an Environmental impact Report will be prepared, or 3) An additional, information report should be supplied by the applicant giving ferthe^ ;-Format ion cencernino the pronosed project. PROJECT TITLE: warehouse Edition APPLICANT —S NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE: Mr. Don Means 861_Z Helms, P. Cucamonca CA 917 (714) 9R7 r?15 NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE OF PERSON TO BE C0NTACTED CONCERNING THIS PP,OJECT: Mr. Bob Cyran 8613 Helms, R. Cucamonca, CA 91730 (714) 987 -6235 LOCATION OF PROJECT (STREET ADDRESS AAM ASSESSOR PARCEL NO_) 8613 Helms Ave., R. Cncamonga, CA 91730 _ _4 P 6706 B.F. 209 P.G. 021 Line 31 LIST OTHER PERMITS NECESSARY FROM LOCAL, REGIONAL, STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCI:;S AUD TE M AGENCY ISSUING SUCH PERMITS: None Required —za t M0 ESCP.IPTION C DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: Addition of 14,000 on existing aanufacturizq facility. sc'' foot warehouse E ACREAGE OF PROJECT AREA AND SQUARE FOOTAGE O ^- EXISTiivG AND P D �' v=ZD BUILDINGS, IF ANY: Acreage = 2_12 acres So. footage existing buildings 21,800 Sr._ Footage proposed buildinS = 14,000 DESCRIBE THE ENVTTRONtiEN"IAL SETTING OF THE PROJE I?CCI')DI! G Itir �rZI— ?TIO \T Oiv TOPOGAPh -Y, PI ANUS (Z,B SSTTE ANT_t•IALS, A� ' CULTJR.AL, HISTORICAL OR SCENIC ASPECTS, USE OF SUPa;DM DING PROPERTIES, AND THE DESCRIPTIO_d OF ANY E iIST I::G STRUCTURES A \TD THEIR USE (AT TAC:i 3'ECES$ARY SFiBETS; SEc ATTACHED SHEET Is the project, part of a larger Project, one of a series of cumulative act_ons, which although ir_dividLally srall, May as a whole have signif -,:ant enviro -aamntal No, it is not_ 13 W'IrLL TIIT S Pp.OS'r_'C4_r: YES NO x 1. Create a substantial change in ground contour.-.? X 2. Create a substantial change in existing noise or vibration? R 3. Create a substantial :Iance in demand for municipal services (Folice, fire, water, sewage, etc_): x 4. Create changes in the existing zoning or general plan_ designations? x 5: Renova any existing trees? How raany? N_A- x 6. Create the need for use or disposal of Potentially hazardous materials such as toxic substances, flam^a tiles or explosives? Explanation of any YES answers atiove: N.A. IM'OORTANT: 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 cz- -i be made by the .Development Revipw Committee. Date li -.1 -21 Signature. —ter+ Title _ k /4. _ �3 • PAC ific ]FABrication MANUFACTURERS OF WIRE ANC METAL PRODUCTS The Project site is situat_d in an industrial area south of Arrow Highway. The general topography is flat with some undulations of very little significance_ At the rear of the project site where the warehouse addition is Pla =ed, there is a raised section of the properly having a Plateau effect_ In order not constructing the building on the to cut the bock area away, we are raised portion which will create a ste effect and the building will have a concrete area surrounding it. This will step down P to ttie existing built up section. In this way, we can preserve the natural topography of the land and be the most cost effective. l The natu::al vegetation of the area is scrub brash and all of the andscaping in this area has been Provided by the manufacturing concerns frontal aoorlion of h our ave existing mature landscaping surrounding the proper =y. The surrounding Th Properties are all engaged in ma_zafacturing of one sort or another. The existing property associated with this project was one le the first manufacturing plants in this area, and it is now completely surrounded by other manufacturers_ Thcre are three existing buildings on the project site. The original is a concrete block, building housing manufacturing and related office space. There are two additional steel buildings which were added for use as manufacturing and warehousing_ 8613 HELMS A<✓ENUE, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CaLIFORN!A. 91730 714/987 -6235 r] C1 Ll 0 ' �bwwwaw+w tyWwAJ I • L , � ' 1. T} P� } 41 a III `xaas � :;` —•--: �-�' _ � :� / i' � :• tea.. �° : L • °�' pAC�V \C CAEti�CA'TC�N . ra wLMa rra. O�.Q� PLAN ' CITY OF ® lE ` NCHO CUCAMONGA n- ANNLNG DIX�ZSI0 N NORTH ITEM: A TITS: 1'�ra�L1a -�ar i- nr.. -r►�an WMI � — -M M— E l C1NG�o��l4y ., 6�t r� r A P=V FASw1 CROYT W«T� 0 CITY OF ITI 1I: RANcHO CLCAivIO\GGA �..�'�.a, •F ib All PLANNING DIVSION EXHIBIT -�- SCALE° 0 c �C11 \Y\ \YL .pl\L \Yf_ LiVIL 'J\el atew�•��' tLw,.C,\p\d L�a•fr . r11 .1V \YG GrMw/ M��1`VKi V 1 Ewa •wc� t W MI.i iY/.V SON\{ Clt /\ 7 LWIr MYL\/ lrfV {t - _�_-•• � �� ra' Cif• 1W / {l{\yl f41{\ AMON,s IVNI rYLiL M_vL.l R�OVV ,.�. \V.Ar \fiV CITY OF RANCHO CUCAM ®\GA. �: � � .�... - �- �,�,..��, • � l,,,o�; P[AVN \ G DIXISION EXHIBIT- ...- SCALE= 0 E 11 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF *1EP®RT DATE: Decem5er 9, 1981 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Lloyd B. Hvbbc, City Engineer BY: Paul A. Rougeau, Senior Civil Engineer SUBJECT: REVISION TO TRACT MAP 10762 - ACACIA - located at the southwest corner of Baker and Foothii1. A change from an 84 unit condominium development of 2 lots to an 84 unit townhouse development on 86 lots. This tentative tract was approved by the Commission as a total development of 84 units on May 13, 1981. The original proposal was for an air space condo- minium project on one lot. Since that time, the developer has found, as indi- cated in `.s letter, that proceeding with the project would be aided by chang- ing the map to an 86 lot P.U.D. land ownership configuration. This change affects the map only and results in no change whatever to the project itself. The City's subdivision ordinance requires Planning Commission approval of all increases in lot number, however, so this is being presented to you for your review and approval tonight. The developer has paid administrative fees for processing the change and has also paid the difference between the fees charged a one lot subdivision and those charged an 86 lot subdivision. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the revision to tke tentative map be approved and if the Commission agrees, a resolution has been prepared providing for the change and retaining the original conditions of approval and environmen- tal clearance. Respectfully submitited, LBH: / :jaa Attachments RESOLUT:ON NO. 0 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, CONDITIONALLY APPROVING REVISED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 10762 WHEREAS, Tentative Tract Map No. 10762, hereinafter "Map" submitted by Acacia Construction, applicant, for the !purpose of subdividing the real property situated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino, State of California, described as a Planned Development of 84 condominiums on 9.6 acres of land, zoned for R -3, located at the southwest corner of Baker Avenue and Foothill Boulevard into 86 lots, regularly came before the Plann:ng Commission for action on December 9, 1981; anc WHEREAS, the City Engineer has recommended approval of the Map subject to all conditions set forth in the Engineering Division Report; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has rear and considered the Engineering Division Report. NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of 4ancho Cucamonca does resolve as follows: SECTION 1: The Planning Commission makes the following findings in regard to Tentative tract No. 10762 and the Map thereof: (a) The tentative tract is consistent with all applicable interim and proposed general and specific plans; (b) The design or improvements of the tentative tract is consistent with all applicable interim and proposed general and specific plans; (c) The site is physically suitable for the type of devel- opment proposed; (d) The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage and avoidable injury to humans and wildlife or their iio L`itat; (e) The tentative tract is not likely to cause serious public health problems; (f) The design of the tentative tract will not conflict with any easement acquired by the public at large, now of record, for access through or use of the property within the proposed subdivision. Resolution No. Page 2 ;g) The e..i- nmental immact findings in Resolution No. 81 -54 apply to this map. SECTION ?: The Conditions of Approval contained in Resolution No. 81 -54 shall apply to this map. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 2711; DAY OF DECEMBER, 1981. PLANNING COtMISSION OF ;tic" C17- OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Jeffrey King, Chairman ATTEST: Secretary of the Panning Commission 1, 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 in the 9th day of December, 1981, by the following vote - to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: ?TOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: 1] IfiC. aril Pifi 'z181?I.3liili?;zl�13�a1516 270 LAGUNA RD., SUITE 100, FULLERTON. CA 52635 r (714) 9924)880 November 19, 1981 City of Rancho Cucamonga 9340 Baseline Rancho Cucamonga, California 91701 Re: Tract No. 10762 Gentlemen: We are requesting a change in the original tract map to show a new legal description from a condominium /air space ownership to a P.U.D. /land ownership. This change would result in the difference from a one lot subdivision to an 86 lot subdivision of which tvo lots would remain as common area and all lots would be covered under the CC &R's/ The reason for this change has been brought on by the different lending institutions such as FHA and VA in regard to their Davis Bacon Act. Thank you for your cooperation and if I can be of any assistance, please do not hesitate to call. Very trul Rick Snyder Vice President RS: s-.- �� CALIFOAMIA CONTRACTOR'S LICENSE NO. 8"3964 2 Ll TRACT NO, 10762 !N T►tE CRY 01T RF1NCi'10 ^•JCJi1V10Nr.� '- Y OF � BEF:!�1AFiD0�/0 �FOF7NIA /[NO / MO�W/Ow OVA /pwT�J1't OI {.OTI � /AMP M.fRCt10N t•. T:�► t qIT� <. /YM /R T {Ir . /AY /gV./wPn+O r/R /MD KROw /f.COw. Mme' TO Tltt rw/ p. Ouc.wOn1OL LMiC/ Y Kw wL! 1' wi00wOO N WOw A pIYM. wY1R f. KfDwO/ 11I f�I11 /OwYMOlL1 � ilrR 6/ C/1LI/OAVVr OlriCCMnG'1/ wflf0 PtT� t- gnlppnwntnJM P:1RP0�2 101" � .A� GA053 LL"^ �� tt11w� t�1� Cw01111CPLwG Y� L L� N1tMq Pvt MI1Tf V �y1wYtY.O�L1I �! /Or RKwRrT w.JtwUl. ►/ wcc csoef '�? �c.rcw - cvc.riww/w cv.rTa arrr .w�Tiw- ac�..wa� ca wTa olfe Tc•.c1+.o1+z- oercwN_ TeLCw.lpl�t�C Ri,ccT�w< - /tauTrl[wa1 uyw comma+ w+c iyr•'wrRt TnKT �/ _ O_CM�U �O i wtMO�� y1Cmlor���P1� IUMMa ER �N11TwU V= NM1 RTO L_s 1Y/ wOb ✓Ti .:.e nwJ.Lw1 iM. Cwa.1► rf/f/ ww01K � ('Mf 9Y -Ot�f �� � IOOT'ItLL /� ttt~V6 nw ei �� vti T � rv+ 7,VvA=41 OWL 0 R I G r N A L , \� •{ ww1\ ^ 7'L rYw a (wRla6TV}v 1 \ S �vcwn< �tit< wN wrnr t.1+ T10 N TP OP OJ1�/ n.1 l� — • nw ei �� vti T � rv+ 7,VvA=41 OWL 0 R I G r N A L TRACTN w\• 10762 ✓ T/C C/ry Y RMK7 -tX'," v,C4Lj iV4 }� ,, •wwrLfr..worm.r . .�LIw�rrri.r�r1•GLAw O / • rtYRI.. N.K • ✓rI• n r Of/.Ica SWyM3/3V 0. /iPS. / Pf AIPCLC '40NQ ..OI /. AT Fl/1.WRX�CD N - = •••r r•m r10 �1 DJ1?G' !a/•GG6 r.0 Q O/ ^Q= w,G/ j•, IYCQlgy Q' ]'N[ CG/NSY LGr.f+nlCaW.RO/.'G, .� LT� .uwct�s[r Gvcln[l�vNC o. acue /•mod .vcr Hell � \ ���,. ? �`r _ �� r�rGn ..rnGr,rw•�yi•w�.wv y `''`• ~ S p • � t /r✓ �r.rrsn rr..0 rr..+n �G. r `"•' -��J• y q ) G \ d�y.. I ': —�1J✓d t. .a.rmr.rn/rs r...fo `T' ���,.F � �r w \ _Y �_I Yc "�� •. mini +urn .n r.erm � ? � f�`e9 . \Y +% / i I� AI � -�M' yyv • rr�rr awrn rM/an srrrNa •G \ �� M / L G ���v /J' I .. f -�� +_ , — • -G.w•• • rG wrr..v. rw rrr r..rrfn �- " � � ' �.{,'`��w �� j ~ sip t rNfru rsvr O' ICY rII / 4/ 4'" .G" �••r I h as f rf.• f 4 ,•y y ���, i •D X' ! 1 I f •w-` �' a 'fr • i ' ! » ; r 1 ..w.. M� yr• \J'•`' / / •d I -'fir •:a ^'cs� tr 1 '1 YCr' 12 lLr- 1.riz=,T•' �'�'(( _yam i � .�r'�„L[�w'`rC • r N �h a y� rs i/ V AI•' /Nr� ~Ni/Y� C � Z M �i"�OL =�� 1 C� %� �. fit• 1 i 4 A w o r iL � F �1�1 •`. • .a0 a4 I a.nl.s/.a r,ea'a.' - aL���'w•% I f .r.•r. .n+e� K'i ` Z !?? jf = / ! ill ■' � m l Imo: i ..r •1 ~ 1 .• I I -� I I a I u }1t Jir�l .I 1 liJA�rr S~ •I y =�b4v DF1ifiNil�'+N .gym0• .•y4 N w� T. 1 O wQ•�:.91j n�•w� w p• zi =: r' all �e \S' S s. W M 1 0 TRACT NO. 10762 !N me C ?r' OF RANCHO CUCAMOlv". CI.40'0 N/A &lI•VC A =Wi ION O!• MR= I OF i11RC£L MXP NO =,(, !' P" NAP RCCIYJO£O IN &VCK 32. M= S! AND d2 OF IU Xa MAPS, ikWM)S OIL TN£ C MrK Of SAN 9FRNARLYM7. STAT£ Or CALlMAWA. ANOR£AS£N FACINJ'PING IX. +'CA[£ I= 40• JULY "QB! furl N yr u /DO744L 41011ISNPO / �A•I°'p"• ~'� w+.si..n.^«.swrsrr.. 1 t�r1c wt'•� i ape• �, » 1 + a . a�!°y A' •�.` � 4 jb ul lop n. r -,•nr. � \� w w � Y' i ���.y/�r,P� vi i ' i •� 1 11 ' n.r.W w1. 11 ro J.1i - w` yi0 i \e REV ISED JYT_L \ L' r« 1 r..� �'• irfi Y+•� .ai6T7+.r �•.n 1Y r.. aL I r •• -I w J t :r%ek •O.r. e.7 ..`.� I i-. ``'� I _ " r_ i w_ I __ I .._ I rw.. � w� ` - +.rner.liw •wr.r� .iwr..r. urn awe .nri.o..w.a.. rYa n1Yrr!«w •(I,p i.r Ir M w T •r Y•. oae l w_e Rit 6 R � •lr sT i 4, � I »! MT w I rI i \e REV ISED JYT_L \ L' r« 1 r..� �'• irfi Y+•� .ai6T7+.r �•.n 1Y r.. aL I r w r w_e Rit 6 R � •lr sT »! MT w RESOLUTION NO. 81 -54 A RESOLUTION, OF THE PLANtjING COri:4ISS1Ohi OF THc CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, CONDITIONALLY APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 10762 WHEREAS, Tentative Tract Map No. 10762. hereinafter "Map" submitted by Acacia Ccnstructi.-n, applicant, far the Purpose of subdividing the real property situated in the City rf Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino, State of California, described e.s a Planned Development of 81 condominiums on 9.6 acres of land, zoned for R -3, located at the sout1west corner of Baker Avenue and Foothill Boulevard into 2 lots, regu'ariy came before the Planning Commission for public hearing and action on May 13, 1981; and WHEREAS, the City Planner has recommended approval of the Map subject to all conditions set forth in the Engineering and Planning Divisions reports; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission Fas read and considered the Engineering and Planning Divisions reports and has ,^.n:>idered other evidence presented at the public hearing. NOW, THEREFCRE, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does resolve as follows: ® SECTION 1: The Planning Commission makes the following findings in regard Tentative Tract No. 10762 and the Map thereof: (a) The tentative tract is consistent with.all applicable interim and proposed general and specific plans; (b) The design or improvements of the tentative tract is consi-tent with all applicable interim and proposed genera, and specific plans; (c) The site is physically suittble for the type of development proposed; (d) The design of tNe subdivision is n..t li:.ely to cause substantial environmental damage and avoidable injury to humans and wildlife or their habitat; (e) The tentative tract is not likely to cause serious public health problems; (f) The design of the tentative tract will not conflict with any easement acquired by the public at large, now of record, for access through or use of the property within the proposed subdivision. lul 11 Li ENGINEERING DIVISION: S. Construct the: missin3 street improvements- to include curb, gutte.•. A.C, pavement, driveway approach around the parc..l a the southwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Raker A -tnue. 6. Wid ^n c east side of Baker .,venue with A.C. oavanent at the interse ^ti n with Foothil Bouievard for separate turn lane. 7. Construct A.C. berm along the edge of the existing pavement on the west side of Baker A,.e. ^.ue from southerly project boundary to the proposed catch basin. Resolution. No. 31 -54 ?age 2 (g) That this project will not create adverse impacts on the environment and a Negative Declaration is issued. SECTION 2: Tentative Tract !lap No. 1076 ?. a copy of which is attached hereto, is h2 ^ebv approved subject to all cf the following conditions and the attached Standard Conditions: PLANNING DIVISIM 1. The s-te plan shall be modified to include the following: (a� Eiimina to thz two parking stalls located within the required front yard setback along Baker, east of Building x`16. (b) Revise parking area located east of Building #17 to utilize parallel parking and to provide 10' minimum wide landscaped buffer along the westerly prop °_rty lire of the existing single family residences. ?. Automatic garage door openers shat" be provided for all dwellings with garage aprons iess than 20' in lcngth. 3. Precise design and specific location of garden equipment storage sheds shall be submitted for review and approval by the City Planner prior to the issuance of Building ® Permits. 4. A 6' high concrete Llock wall shall be constructed along the portion of the northerly boundary adjacent to the Southern Pacific RaViroad. Sidewalks within the project shall be of Portian,'. Cement or equivalert material. Li ENGINEERING DIVISION: S. Construct the: missin3 street improvements- to include curb, gutte.•. A.C, pavement, driveway approach around the parc..l a the southwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Raker A -tnue. 6. Wid ^n c east side of Baker .,venue with A.C. oavanent at the interse ^ti n with Foothil Bouievard for separate turn lane. 7. Construct A.C. berm along the edge of the existing pavement on the west side of Baker A,.e. ^.ue from southerly project boundary to the proposed catch basin. Resolution Nc_ 81 -54 Page 3 10� 8. "enstruct flood protection wall along the west side of the project to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 9. Any conditions imposed by Cal Trans fer the project, shall be a part of the "conditions of approval" for the Tentative Tract. W In 10. Seismic design criteria, as defined by the Uniform Budding Code, shall be utilized for the design of all structures. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 13TH DA- OF MAY, 1981., PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA chairman I, „ ACK LAM, Secretary of the =1anring Commission of t5e City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the fore,-)ing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted 6, the P:�nring Comnissior of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 13th day of May, 1981 by the following vote t ,)- wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Rempel, King, Tolstoy, Dail None Sceranka lJ DATE: TO: FROM: Bu: SUBJEt T : CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT December 9, 1981 Planning Commission Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer Shintu Bose, Associate Civil Engineer OF i0277 - one at the northeast corner of Almond and Carnelian requesting a change from public to private interior streets 19777 Tentative Tract 10277 was approved by the Commission on February 25, 1981 as a custom lot subdivision located at the northeast corner of Almond St. and Carnelian '.,t. The subdivision proposed is to provide 30 single family lots, all fronting onto a dedicated public interior street. The applicant's in -Lent is to develop this subdivision as a totally secured conmunity by providing guard house and gate at the entry road to the development. Such a guard gate concept could not be approved due to the legal ramifications of prohibiting public access through a dedicated public street. The applicant is now requesting approval of a revision to the map classifying all interior stre_ts as private streets to be maintained by the homeownr.rs, whereby the guard gate provision will be acceptable. The original design of the subdivision will remain substantially the same. The change of cia >sifica- tion of the interior streets wilt require some revisions and modificat ons of the conditions of approval for the original tract, which has i,een incorporated in the attached resolution- RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that solution approving the revisions to the subject tract to reclassify the interio r Respectfully submi LBH:RSB:jaa Attachments the Commission adopt the attached re- original conditions of approval for the streets as private streets. ITEM C RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANN'_Na COMMISSION APPROVING AMENDMENT TO CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP N3. 10277, LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER. OF ALMOND STREET AND CARNELIAN STREET WHEREAS, on the 25th day cf February, 1981, Tentative Tract No. 10277 was approved by the Planning Commission by Resolution No. 81 -15; and WHEREAS, on the 9th day of December, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission held a meeting to consider the amendment to said resolution which established the requirements of dedication of all interior street right -of -way for the above - mentioned tract; and NOW, THEREFORE, THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: That the following findings have been made: a. The dedication of right -of -way for the interior streets is not essential for this project. h. The private street concept is consistent with the apps-.cable General Plan. SECTION 2: The Resolution No. 81 -15 is herebv revised to eliminate the Standard Condition No. it of said resolution and to add the following Conditions for the Tentative Tract No. 10277: a. Reciprocal easements shall be provided ensuring access to all parcels over private roads, drives, or parking areas. b. A copy of the Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC &R's) and Articles of Incorporation of the Homeowners Associaticn, subject to the approval of the City Attorney, shall be recorded with this map and a copy provided to the City. C. Prior to recordation, a Notice of Intention to Form Landscape end Lighting Districts shall be filed with the City Council. The engineering costs involved in Districts Formation shall be borne by the develop -r. 0. An access easement for vehicu'.ar and oedestrian traffic through the project area shall be recorded pro- viding access to t:,e ad,;oining property to the north- west of the oroject. Resolution No. Page 2 e. Dedication snail be made of Almond Avenue right -of -way as shown on the tentative map. f. The street improvements for Almond Street includinq, but not limited to, curb, gutter, A.L. pavement, side- walk, street lights and street trees shall be constructed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 9TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 1581. PLANNING COM4ISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Jeffrey King, Chairman ATTEST: Secretary 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 9th day of December, 1981, by the fol' :owing vote - to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COWISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: U DATE: TO: FROM: BY: SUBJECT: CITY. Or RAATCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REET0161 December 9, 1981 Members of the Planning Commission Jack Lam, AICP, Director of Community Develoixne:nt Dan Coleman, Assistant Planner zone rom R -3 Mu tiple Family Residential) to R -3 1PD (Multiple Family Residential /Planned Development) and development of 67 townouse /condominium units on 5.24 acres of land located on the north side of 19th Street, cast of Hellman Avenue - APN 201- 232 -34 and 50 ABSTRACT: The Applicant is requesting appro al of a Planned Develop - n,cnt and Tentative Tract Map. The project will ccnsist of 67 town- house /condominium units on 5.24 acres of land to be located on the north side of 19th Street, east of Heilman Avenue. The proposed project meets the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance requirements aLd has passed the City's Growth Management and Design Review process. Approval of this project requires approval of; a Negative Declaration, the rezoning of the site from R -3 to R -3 /PD, the Planned Development, and the Tentative Tract Map. Staff has prepared a detailed Staff Report, related Resolutions, and Conditions of Approval for your review and consideration. BACKGROUND: The Applicant, K;K, is requesting approval of their proposal to develop 57 townhouse /condominium units on 5.24 acres of land located on the north side of 19th Street, east of Heilman (Exhibit "A "). The site is currently zoned R -3 (Multiple Family Residential) and is designated for Medium Density Residential (4-14 dwelling units per acre) on the City's General Plan. The proposed project density is approximately 12.8 dwelling units per acre and is therefore consistent with the General Plan. The project site is bounded on the north by the proposed Foothill Freeway corridor, on the south by single family residences, on the east by a citrus grove and single family residences and commercial nursery, and on the west by single family residence; and water tanks, as indicated on the Site Utilization Map (Exhibit "S "). The surrounding zoning is R -1 -8500 (Single Family Residential on 8,500 square foot minimum lot A ze) on the west and north, P. -3 ITEM D Plannea Development Planning Commission December 9, 1981 Pagc 2 81 -11 (TT 11969) Agenda (14ultiple Family Residential) on the east, and A -1 (Limited Agriculture) on the south. The relationship between the proposed project and sur- rounding resid,_ces is shot -in on the Tentative Tract Map, Exhibit "C "_ The project has been reviewed and rated by the Design and Growth Manage- ment Review Committees in accordance with the Growth Management Ordinance. The project received a point rating in excess .-f the re;u" -ed threshold and is therefore eligible for Planning Commis,'-in review. In addition, the Conceptual Grading Plan has been reviews: by the Grading Committee and received apprcial in concept only. ANALYSIS. The project will consist of 67 townhouse /condominium units wit" at two car garages as shown on the attached Detailed Site Plan, Exhibit "D ". As indicated on the attached elevations (Exhibit "E "), ail units are two -story and are arranged as three, foLr, and five piexes. Three floor plar arrangements are proposed, two 2- bedroom and one 3- bedroom, ranging from 1,047 square feet to 1,262 square feet (Exhibits "F -1 & 2). The units have been provided with private patios and atrium encloscd by low pro - f:ie stucco walls to fulfill the private open space requ'rements. In addition to private yards, a common recreation center, greenbelts, attd active play areas have been provided. Facilities include a swimming pool, s)a, tot lot, and open play area (Exhibit "I "). The project is proposed to be erclosed by a five foot block wall along the entir-_ perimeter (except for 19th and 4ellman front- ages), as shown on Exhibit "G ". Access to -he project is being provided from 19th Street and Hellman Avenue as shown on the Detailed Site Plan. A private drive system provides access to all dwelling units within the project. Twenty seven guest parking spaces have bee- arranged to provide convenient access to all units. A continuous pedestrian circulation system, consisting of meandering sidewalks and textur- ized pedestrian crosswalks, have been provided throughout the entire protect. The existing grade falls to the southeast at approximately a 3% grade, as shown on the attached Conceptual Grading Plan. (Exhibit "G "). Drainage will be carried on !o the sot :heart of the project site with a combination of swales, inlet structures, and under sidewalk drains at 19th, then to Amethyst as shown on Exhibit "„ ". The Conceptual Landscape Plan, Exhibit "C ", indicates an abundance of land- scaping being provided throughout the project site. Along 19th Street, the building setbacks vary from 42' to 54', which allows for a substantial amount of landscpaing indluding contour berming and speciman size trees. Existing Eucalyptus trees along the north project boundary will be preserved wherever n U 0 \® Planned Development Planning Commission December 9, 1981 Page 3 81 -11 (TT 11969) Agenda possible. The remainder of the existing Eucalyptus windrow will be removed and replaced with similar species. The Design Review Committee has worked with the Applicant in reviewing the building elevations and architectural design of the project and has recom- mended approval of the project. As shown on the attached exterior elevations, Exhibit "E ", the ;,reposed exterior f4nish Includes textured stucco, blue clay tile roofing, blue canvas awnings, bronze anodized window frames, and redwood panel garage doors. Colored renderings and elevations of these buildings will be available for review and comment at the Planning Commission meeting. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: Attached is Part I of the Initial Study as completed by the pplicant_ Staff has completed Part II of the Initial Study, and found no sigr.iiicant adverse impacts (n the environment as a result of this project_. Staff recommends issuance of a Negative Declaration. CORRESPONDENCE: A Notice of Public Hearing was placed in The Daily Report rel•spar� - -r. In addition, approximately 32 public hearing notices were mailed to s;srrounding property owners within. 300'. To date, Staff has received no public input regardi•.a this project. RECOMMENDAtION: It :s recommended that the Planning Commission review the proposed Planned Development and Tentative Map and conduct a public hearing to consider all public comments. if, after such review, the Commission con- curs with the attached findings and proposed Conditions of Approval, a motion to adopt the attached Resolutions of Approval with Conditions would a° appro- priate. Respectfully se.bmitted, ' JACK LAM, AIC7' Community Development Director JL:DC:jr Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Location Map Exhibit "B" - Site Utilization Map Exhibit "C" - Conceptual Landscape Plan Exhibit "D" - Detailed Site Plan Exhibit "E" - Elevations (Exhibits Continued Next Page) Planned Development E1 -11 (TT 11969) Planning Commission.. Agende December 9, 1931 Page 4 Attachments, Contd.: Exhibit "F -1 & 2" - Flocr Plans Exhibit "G" - Grading and Drainage Plans (Tentative Tract Map) Exhibit "H" - Natural Features Map Exhibit "i" - Recreetion raciiities Exhibit "J" - Off site Drainage Initial Study Part I Resolutions of Approval Conditions of Approval s 11 Is ir.l. .. Iti ' ni � r� � ..�, /i// ■'rte � // t ■II�IINIIt/ iN /NllAn..° n/In/ �v INI n '�tf111111� q /il: p IhnglP '� i1 /In /11 Ll a/ s► .► �In mall IIIIIIIIIIIHIIIII III I 111 NORTH CITY OF. . J. i •' •. ' ii -. �f. f 1 I if'i'f. I , �I clo t •' I • = o 1 _ «� k -1 -8500 % ! E � I God"- a. R 3 -T I R- 1-8500 9 J11 o BMk 1.01 j '01q. -km f, O O yC O O O n e a 1 I I I i _-Strpt-. Q �y R -I i o o le Ic 9 � G� NURT I CITE OZ47 rrE� r: 81- if RANCHO CUCA MONTGA. sl-� k r:,!?Ano�l w�►p PLA.i \r.NL:C DIVISION E\I?IL'm SCALE= —..— 1 El t1a r i M _ • � IJ � ` M 1 II M 13 co mete an c2 NORTH CITY . r r.••:. y, �`Y.r • " °-� ff {.�.t_ _1(i..- ._r- 9C'C._TY3y er'.P -.g.�� ee'., 1 1 I I 1 J 'Y � KL rw P!xm am i N t I i f. A i •�. �r i 31 �d� r q wao 92am� orrr�p�{,p• LMylpm� t ri ' wY+c.o..a Bxzzaga.y� :i I p . or vv. zt '� H mm ivr<Vip® im Y . 4r < Wr w,po�b� — %.'544ok L 1� aL PVam�� 60,3W is 1 % r i ❑ b W W+.- �powra a n va a)t b RMg 29Y 0 r � pie )wo -34w a 1 � W L 3 L . L r � i k i T Oi V pM R Pn21Ce -4h sired 1. b Ilk ✓�r��P V 1KV n i CITY OF rrF.e: 8 !- f RANCHO CUCA,!N'10 \CA T=: P—ml= esr PLkNNI\G Dl\rSION EXHiBrr 0 SCALE- n 0 I CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLAINNTUNc ©iViSiON rrF -\1- FXHiF,[T- s- SCALD _ H Fir -s;" ficor 0 �J NORTH CITY Oi. ML%I: F2 81 `1I RANCHO CUCALNMO\�GA Tm F: f Leom q1=!EW PI.Pu' I.1G DIVOON EXHIBIT: SCALE: E 0 unit C s,- oVj Moor CITY OF R.��LHO CUCANIO\TGA PLANNING Di.'iSlOtti rrE:NI: _ 'gyp V H t ExiiiBm _ _ SCALE- a NORTH II /��� •�7�"— -. _ s,_ .��� -- _ice _ f _,•..- _J' Cam_ ..��i Je phwetAo A /A,+1 Yt �r .� � t i Chi/ NN I I • I J � � �'-�� —✓' arc :.�J Ohme OE •/ .'.Tj rri f ��C�' ,�/ I '/. �L...+`Y�. LLL_• / / / Lip 10, _ ;� � 11 ✓' / / i _* -- • "Y r-? � yr- �'• /fT �°.i � � // / ! / I I r "'� I 1�'ORT'fi CITY ®F MEM: RANCHO CL'CAVTO \'GA TrrLE: FLA.NNING DlN L9ON EXNiBrr: _ SCA -LE: Ll 1 i I I� , i 1 .:J O J- iii , l_J " r -- i 1 c- l�J j ( �M'J nineleeith sheet ello NORTi-i RANCHO CLTCAN10 \GA TITLE } , 9AL Imo. J$+ Q PLANNING [ NM.N i1I3IIiIT �_ scALE- ;' - ��.J fr 1 ��- II It.••h / / � / / � l_J " r -- i 1 c- l�J j ( �M'J nineleeith sheet ello NORTi-i RANCHO CLTCAN10 \GA TITLE } , 9AL Imo. J$+ Q PLANNING [ NM.N i1I3IIiIT �_ scALE- CITY OF RAI\sGiO CLCANIONGA PLAINNG DIVISION NOI, TH ITEM: - 9 si- t! TITLE: 4AGI,�?; \HIBIT: _S` SCALE: Ll ® L4=1 ! 1 TR J A l�A C s ¢o.o S .4.5 24/25 6 7 Lb 2�,CtWlf, Wtjf {l8 {I! /� a r Co S =p LOMY.Xl 6R i� rl r ;• --{ i �' % J� �`✓ ^ i ° 19 •• t " till 1 id- J/ i ?G cv7�i c n PrN /Y%t E'Ca� \ • P'sfB (/JPq w..cr Bl K 7 C. H. e A.. 11 NI 1 f1 V NURTH CITY OF rMNI: E1 sl w 11 RA:I:CHO CUCAlVIONGA Tnu: _cmm flRAdMAa PLA.N?NiitiG DIVLS' -ON? ECHIMT -_ SCALE- CITY OF RANCHO CQCA: -TONGA INITIAL STUDY PART I - PROJECT INFORTMIATION SEEET - To be completed by applicant Enviro:urental Assessment Review Fee: $E0.00 For all projects requiring environmental revie -,•7, thi.- 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 :.he Initial Study. The Development Review Committee wall meet and take act-;_on 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 env= ronmeatal impact and a Negative Declaration will be filed, 2; The project will "nave 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- Pensfield Place - Tentdtive Tract #11969 APPLICANT'S NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHOIM': (213) 889 -6735 KLK Development Can an , 31320 Via Colinas; Suite 110, Westlake Viiiage, Cali.orma 91.762 NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE OF PERSON TO BE CONTACTED CONCZRNING T`rilS PROJECT: Edward P_ Becker, Executive Vice President, same address & telephone IACATION OF PROJECT (STREET ADDRESS AID ASSESSOR PARCEL NO.) APN 201- 232 -34 & 54 9388 19th Street, City of Rancho Cucamonga LIST OTHER PERMITS NECESSARY FROM LOCAL, REGIONAL, STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES AND THE AGENCY ISSUING SUCH PERMITS: Cucamonga County Water District has assured all necessary water is available, CaMfornia Department of ea [ Lstate, - Trans. _0 - - 1-1 ® PROJECT DESCRIPTION b7 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: Munit Townh=e Condo Project See Unifom Application n L ACREAGE OF PROJECT AREA AIM ST'JARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED BUILDINGS, IF ANY: _ 5.24 acres existing dwollin - c.F. ao rox_ Proposed buildings - nits - Total footage 73, 1B/ DESCRIBE THE ENVIRONNsNTAL SETTING OF TAE PROJECT SITE INCLUDING IN.- ErjR'4ATION ON TOPOGRAPHY, PLANTS (TREES) , ANIMALS, ANY CULTURAL, HISTORICAL OR SCENIC };SPECTS, USE OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES, AND THE DESCRIPTION? OF ANY EXISTING STRUCTURES AND THEIR USE (ATTACH NECESSARY SHEBTS) Project site falls to the Southeast at approxiMtely 3 %. Site is rurrPntly atilized for single dwelling. horse corral and plant storage yard. North - vacant field designated as state ig way. - East, South & West - Mixed use of old orchard; old rural singe family anti rne.Prr -air annarPnt decavinG area- sore'.; in need of zDgradinq_ Cultura , historical or scenic aspects ot no sign;,icanee. 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 - Z- 2 WILD TiiTTS pt'MJECT: LS NO X I. Create a substantial change i.-z g ground contours? ._ 2_ Create a substantial change in existing, noise or vibration? X 3- Create a substantial change in demand for mranicipal 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?Approx- rn X 6. Create the need for use or disposal of Potentially hazardous materials such as toxic substances, fla=nables or e.--,plosives? 8-planation of any YES answers above: Re: #5 - Effort - be made to save some o e uca yp s trees on the;, si e o t e proper y. if the project involves the. construction of residential units, complete the form o. the next page_ CEnIPICATION: I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and inlo= 'oration 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 an& belief- I further understand tint additional information may be required to be submitted before an adequate evaulation can be made by the BevelepeaL Review Committee. ci 7 Date July 29, 3981 Signature �lj� Tit e -X- ' 7C-3 RESIDLITIAL CONSTRUCTION She following information should be provided to the City o° R�ncko Cucamonga Planning Division in order to aid in assessing the ability cf the school district v to accomodate the proposed residential deelopment. 1. are of Deve?.oper and Tentative Tract No.: KLK Development Company, Proposed Specific Location of Project: 9388 19th Tentative Tract # 11961 St.. L;ty of Rancho Cucamonga. APP: 201- 232 -34 3. Date proposed to beei.n construction: PHASE I PHA SE 2 PHASE 3 P.iASE 4 TOTAL I. Nuke_ of single ' falnil -7 units: 10/82 3182 2. Number of multiple 3j 3¢ 67 fa: il%r units: MW 3. Date proposed to beei.n construction: 3/82 10/82 - 4. Earliest date of 10/82 3182 and o: Tentative S. Bedrooms Price Rance — Zsc� /zd�s+ Fj ZGO G�7 . C -3so zinr E8 /Da•ov RESOLUTION NO. 0 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, CONDITIONALLY APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT 11AP NO. 11969 WHEREAS, Tentative Tract Map No. 11969, hereinafter "Map" submitted by KLK Development Company, applicant, for the purpose of subdividing the real property situated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino, State of California, described as .a residential subdivis*:on of 5.24 acres cf land, located on the north side of 19th Street, east of Hellman into 1 lot, regularly came before the Planning Corrnission for public hearing and action on December 9, 1981; and WHEREAS, the City Planner has recormnended approval of the Map subject to all conditions set forth in the Engineering and Planning Divisions reports; and WHEREAS, -the Planning Commission has read and considered the Engineering and Planning Divisions reports and has considered other evidence presented at the public hearing. NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does resolve as follows: SECTION 1: The Planning Commission makes the following findings in regard to Tentative Tract No. 11969 and the Map thereof: (a) The tentative tract is consistent with all appliczble interim and proposed general and specific plans; (b) The design or improvements of the tentative tract is consistent with all applicz".)le interim and proposed general and specific plans; (c) T'ne site is physically suitable for the type of de- velopment proposed; (d) The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage and avoidable inJury to humans and wildlife or their habitat; (e) The tentative tract is not likely to cause serious Public health problems; (f) The design of the tentative tract will not conflict with any easement acquired by the public at large, now of record, for access through or use of the pro?erty within the prcpused subdivision. 0 Resolution No. Page 2 ® (9) That this projec`, will not crci-te adverse impacts on the environment and a Npgative Declaratior is issued. SECTION 2: Tentative Tract Map No. 17.959, a copy of which is detached hereto, is hereby approved subject to all of the following cord; *_ions and the attached Standard Conditions: PLANNING DIVISION 1. That vine pockets shall be prov ;ded between garages. 2. Trash enclosures shall be provided with sol d re %wood gates to match garage doors. 3. Tree planting shall consider any effects on the use or future installation of resieentiai solar energy collectors. ENGINEERING DIVISION 4. A left turn lane, including necessary pavement wide:iing, shall be provided on 19th Street., at the driveway to the satisfaction of CALTRANS. 5. Installation of a storm drain along 19th Street from the project boundary to the existing water course across 19th Street, east of Amethyst Street, shall be required. The applicant's engineer shall submit additional detailed drainage analysis for the City Engineer to determine the scope and extent of the work required. 6. The nose of the median island at the driveway entrance on 19th Street shall be a minimum of 5 -feet away from the right -of -way lire. APPRO`:ED AND ADOPTED THIS 9TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 1981. PLANNING COIILMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAKONGA BY: Jeffrey Y,ing, Chairman ATTEST: Secretary of the Planning Co� mms on 0 Rasolution Nom. �aoe 3 , JACK LAM, Secretary of the Planning Coma:ission of tie City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resnlution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Pianring Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 4th day of Decembar, 1981, by the following vote- to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: 1 c 0 O V O 4 C N 7 d y ZZ N J p �• w w -v C r L L V V- w C� P.Q C Y .qr rV OV 44 '• .� C= 9 O .n N - A = O Y 4 N ^ W r C w C9 O< O N C � J —O 7n`Ow 9 TN —N 7 �� 4J 9 lLV t'CwO ^ �VN PL. —may r + C L L C V 4 L N 9 i C j � A u 2 rpi � r1 u •!r L A N O r w O Y NY� oc co vc ` '0 +• .`,c� Pi bu aL �L y C qq r L -' �6 —rL _ ✓i 'cT.° �W�wr� Pa ^ — O Nr� Z5 c �.T. a:%-°• o —cv .:c= �-o' 9 i� FS �� C t = i�iw uGr •n p � pCN�p _ VC\ C4 A +d`Mp CV M n. 2 4• ° u O V V O N LL i C 4 _ Fs �, _ 4 4 C4C Y f �-Z —64 u W r ` _ W� 6 .Or n 9 O •`PCC oho M +V 9+Ci 7 we .' c. L � Cy Z rw qy Nn 2 0�°..� 9� —.;•N` •n ci .`. �aNVd pS =P= � OV N w ... v N V r _T N n — L r V r, d N C• 6 9 r u 6 d 0 ONO o y w S V r O S p V `9AL � O e9 O ATV q6 —�O. q� J. Ad '� N ~ r C +y GSM 9w � O° V V C L C P + l _i V r _ J O O C 9 C +• .T. L _ L S W Y r n �` ?qr 6y NT y-- N�.V LCL- 4r4 wJ�r °S JI N o yv� ".r YC °,w,• .w c c^ — .L, y wp �O Nor C° b •O P 4 0 6 �- V C r ..v r V W La V q L T = l O+ O r i C7 0 CV C + M L> . N oC N= P N — P O V 44G r .Li. V w� N yi < Y� .rr.0 �m •�...�w C �� �- � 99 -4 ) 4 POt O •rn` Je•n4O° WruY V �� p r 0� I N .Ve u° q LV — 0... � r NW >(i .� 4> ^� W�J�LrN f•— q 1 O —c ,CNeV —1 y LO Wr ° ^c O. 9r��Or. L TZ A =VCOq V•o 4 T 2F + q • � L C G N� F V l 6� L W ✓ dr i� L_ w ✓ P lJl j 0 G � S_y r Pu N N CO C V l �• N 72 v. N C ,.O A.r cN -w r0 VV Yr O� NZ W= L +�29 J CO V` V.O.rLL (fur wLOrV V.pCd j Vi rV�r O N66 00= NV�WVr Y ��. W L �qCV�= V� L+ 6q OV 1•C O fuV4 pyi >V V Y• � P•Ln Y °c_A Oar _�L�L �y4V rP pV 9n L JL P_uvO O� P4 �� Y�NL i rql 4- P + CC -, 9 r 9 N Vp Vrr ~ u ` p C ^ N+ r V V V g q 9 V r r d N C + V V G < N' •Oi• W A NLt! t: Z(.� � •C •O � W P 4 N - b _ b m ` 1 nn�1 Y 0 N V N L 14 I V b q r V C � E 4 q V O r H T: y ZZ p O rV OV 12 is� rpi rc N s oc co vc +v V P .`,c� Pi bu aL �L Z5 c �.T. a:%-°• o —cv .:c= �-o' 9 i� �� t we i�iw Jr vv JC J9c re. —q Fs v WA oho i„ L2 —C OVJ T Cy Z rw ACC w �° P •n 9 = qi. pS =P= V OV N w ... n0 NLJ P CAL d �O Y�G° OO Vr 4 r re O e9 O q6 —�O. q� J. Ad Tr Ci +y GSM 9w =P C �` ?qr 6y NT y-- N�.V LCL- 4r4 wJ�r °S JI N o yv� ".r YC °,w,• .w c c^ — .L, y wp �O Nor C° b •O P 4 0 6 �- V C r ..v r V W La V q L T = l O+ O r i C7 0 CV C + M L> . N 9 Cl a � P N — P O V y V C w .Li. V w� N yi < .rr.0 C 6 — +c t9� � ✓ N a`O+ J y G w ! 1 CLL � yNt• 9VJ V L< 4 q C r 0� I N .Ve u° q J N — 0... � C r L d .� 4> 2 f•— q 1 O � A /� ayi PO 4 O °- 2F + Czf P � S N O S C 4 t L g q �t C W n- N c :+ vq A V L� N 4 C C 4 a4i w L t l ov G V u u f « V L b_ V d r rnN O V � Oar 4 v V P f t C O L 4 O N l P n C z ° G c a V O v M P 6 L v c P f� O =c t q L u O c 4 y O O V L w O V= � p r J 2Z O N V A < c p ti« V« cc C C T O Y m 4 V ur di t � YV L r p u y .l n fi= — G « O C p V q 4 q V v L L l 4 N nV O Y V « w `oY —co J n C 6 CE Or O .. C b� `c 2� J •• l U O ° V C = u W N L c P _ q G «uV r O• n __ VO W « p My wot s�4€ J 6p w O G W q l V C p q A w O c q AS C L G P u« r 4 E ' �d c � O O, O L n o Y = i « p N Q F q d L q q O w « L v _ l G v M V o � «i c OI O� d 1 c g—1 a �II <t q rr o` V d4 Z C a- »a V � L t — V — c « n q « G b <O r L L r p O < c V O A P — C q 0 � 4 .q.• i O u is J�� 4 q 4 r bo � P G d R V q O y ` O• T a` u V r V al V O r Y r •r• < Vta two O y — 1 �0 nq O wf) rL .Z G �VCrO«ri LSO Jrq �'OY q � •J fi 4 = T Q } � C G ^ ��` 1V A« iO r L u.pry V lVy`rU � VO vy0. «yc ^p l.—.•Y V V q Y�JNy.r =V —•� C J UV" L �,�r S« q.Yn V.r <S� P � S N O S C 4 t L g q �t C W n- N c :+ vq A V L� N 4 C C 4 a4i w L t l ov G V u u f « V L b_ V d r rnN O V � Oar 4 v V P f t C O L 4 O N l P n C z ° G c a V O v M P 6 L v c P f� O =c t q L u O c 4 y O O V L w O V= � p r J 2Z O N V A < c p ti« V« cc C C T O Y m 4 V ur di t � YV L r p u y .l n fi= — G « O C p V q 4 q V v L L l 4 N nV O Y V « w `oY —co J n C 6 CE Or O .. C b� `c 2� J •• l U O ° V C = u W N L c P _ q G «uV r O• n __ VO W « p My wot s�4€ J 6p w O G W q l V C p q A w O c q AS C L G P u« r 4 E ' �d c � O O, O L n o Y = i « p N Q F q d L q q O w « L v _ l G v M V o � «i c OI O� d 1 c g—1 a �II <t q rr o` V d4 Z C a- »a V � L t — V — c « n q « G b <O r L L r p O < c V O A P — C q 0 � 4 .q.• i O u is J�� 4 N n ° v � q S ? a O 4 G « q L L aL, «cO Gp y0_ _ _ O Lr q E < 6 c 0 0 •n� d.•s qVL Y Vi ryV C v O N « t a Y �• Y q� O` q« O• V ° -nLgA •q l 6 C « LL V� Lp • t'`� O V ONq Our _ 6 L M w° .,q-4; 0 L a O t Z212 .r ov L qV V <1 C V v n y �� •PVC "i i d .n w,AO VGw dVq` V O y ••YC, � w4 C 3 �^ «6LS LG « C P _ r C > 6OL`4V V'^y 4 w t 4 G 4 V 0 « O V « y V q N ,C" z t «« L w V t V Z -'�O'v Cr OV OL _PV V C y C - }AV�VinN C �t V PV N � _PP PirNV— Mrr r� 5w NL yu v°f p. Naa p 00 4a1 y° y,9GL VGr� q«V SC l O P .. V V q n V�_ n V P� _ OAC CJ'AA q q OE q L r •'• C O V „ P t yy i r .O 4 M g q« L 4L� « Ou 4 q > 2:.E C N O r . «.. g r cn t0 6PC.Ln NY V jd i<OG' r. T � ml u V r V C q Y r •r• < Vta O wf) rL In d'O. G �VCrO«ri ��` 1V A« u.pry V lVy`rU � �` L Y�JNy.r =V � ° T t' W T r {• G u �N 4 « �,�}j P� r 1 IL « « «u 1 cL• Nt� � �� �� - o «a�ci «ice .t- {AJ� � p I�] O.._ L • - r — G =N= 40 •q..uV P < O WgdGW �� O = «� -Lj L W T �', ou.•`r0q `Ap VI pj NO YLZV 1.V. «°G N n ° v � q S ? a O 4 G « q L L aL, «cO Gp y0_ _ _ O Lr q E < 6 c 0 0 •n� d.•s qVL Y Vi ryV C v O N « t a Y �• Y q� O` q« O• V ° -nLgA •q l 6 C « LL V� Lp • t'`� O V ONq Our _ 6 L M w° .,q-4; 0 L a O t Z212 .r ov L qV V <1 C V v n y �� •PVC "i i d .n w,AO VGw dVq` V O y ••YC, � w4 C 3 �^ «6LS LG « C P _ r C > 6OL`4V V'^y 4 w t 4 G 4 V 0 « O V « y V q N ,C" z t «« L w V t V Z -'�O'v Cr OV OL _PV V C y C - }AV�VinN C �t V PV N � _PP PirNV— Mrr r� 5w NL yu v°f p. Naa p 00 4a1 y° y,9GL VGr� q«V SC l O P .. V V q n V�_ n V P� _ OAC CJ'AA q q OE q L r •'• C O V „ P t yy i r .O 4 M g q« L 4L� « Ou 4 q > 2:.E C N O r . «.. g r cn t0 6PC.Ln NY V jd i<OG' r. T � ml lY, C iLi °• SV Y ✓O�rq rC °riu ° G P ✓ L Y C A L N 7;.t ^ V 4 J Y 2 u < V ! I q I I d O ��l C O/ �O� 4 VC Ln� LnY.I �� �'✓ .L.r <p � N -' V V n�0 wnq° �✓ ✓P= C rC �u� ✓O ^_ SbN Cru =y •no VP r Va I v � I _� �` _^ w uV rVr r ,hill I b y y WO qOY ✓ . °_ =YP wlr�P SVN tPOGy S �: r cPy � �. LC• ° fPV NiVPC v LC q Nq 9T Cvi y l •JrG =y S vow s b.•w ° � I I I �. •. 4' C = nP _ T Gu L i� V nN Owe `� '' ` Wr ry, G urN _c ra p J y �r r I y � •` i J +o� V qVy V Pl � = YNNVC Wy <Oq Z _IS.. I I C r V�r r4O AN_ P ((����I �4J N qq p_py I Vr` = L¢'_ 96r VVCL� V6 L V V r q F N w 9 d^ r •r L r L A O A r. ✓ OI T N ^ O O C' V V N w `✓ CO �V✓ P= M CA O q C 9�l lw.'nJ pV n� J •Or ^J 4a� •r ��� Nt ^ uuu V. y� q 9 J' D C?✓ 12 �.q• NN �n LG 6A Yyv L y r O9u'Y.w ` q me o q� O I � V •d`•`� _ •- P4V LNG a,• 40 O ,°C.�� C• N' VC9L_ VAfr N�AW rrO ^PVC✓ �1 L r ana VV. O'a Vl U r w. � �. C 90Yr w �L» p Y lv OOV wr VnygPC - ^ a ✓ V 200 t q f 6�9 P6 _V O'= ^•: �wi � � O N �G �Nr lVL OL ✓S V. r•.c s[ N N�+O O� v� Y Or C rur •� .� r _ i �•O• „n uA0 LOU =[�U NC il1 YO ✓ VtJ „� q •Vn 9N = 9r L.+ „O IV N� N6�r w�A �� °r9� r (.n ° � nq°9Y i q LlV _ ✓L_ 49 PN.��nFF�Y Ps4 i I L�CP n. Y Y`q qOL /ir��l W VI Lb I d V y9 N r A C P O w •� �• V r r^ C l r °• C j L > N I V Y I r yL N 6 N Y✓ ~✓ O � O ✓ W _ W ` •r°r I ` ✓.n V ✓p r L NVy 7�4Cy ', ql L ^C� 9 A_ 4• G w = °r OPVL 'Z N yy 4P�_� f q 1 r_P _ t.Vi° p C L I A.2 q V N N N A✓ r O y q r N O g V q 4 ! L� V C ^ L r} �} O CC Pr NO =G CM V nVV CN ^ •`blb V Y� rA V 4 LV /JL6 V w W C ] V •/Ji O✓ 6 OrY•°+L 4 r�v { 'n O a] N •p � Y• 9r� LN P^ 4 c A M n u a V q r O` °t •� VbV �1 G:rUVV �.N CA Y=.pw t T J' O 9 J �M V I •� CI y0 tq (C 8:5 d �I _ zr G n G• °N N ° c 9 4 Lr• g �. N r J/ J= C r V C � V 9 •nr• 4 T•' •� � r ' w✓ q y° y r ` ` .`.r q J. q 7 p N V •L G q P ` T L N N L 6 C N O b L V r n L O _ V W_ rJ V O 7 r = p N O✓ e = yr o' O r r j 4 0 V _ pL _ V nvC C r9 °VO• i�u4 gV✓FO �LNO VCLC qVJ r r` qP •y JV�� `�O uq�{`N j7 4N�JV V UNSL ^• LLiN b2`C r pWN Nr7O 9��P^ y ^rte q uj On V9 c�Qai 4 -y cv° o.`•. `r•gl` q° N .^ ► .°e ` r°r• ^r q: VL_rL VVV �NO6 1 H `C_L. y N N T�� LC Y•O. � r po WS W �m V N9w Y> C L Y A C G P r_ l C Gru J_ q Or 0° ^_ O A rr V' V N °` V xr •r ° 4 O° c pyYM�Or °spa^ Dia W ✓V VL q ✓ q �� y= W� O ✓C VCJ U NGQ V y p Y q0 W �' °^ V �`� � V V ✓LT G Nq CCV� C u aN VV � O_ `”' A ^;v �J �S9�r ONr OI�V °� � u 6 Ey i OYN V° �WC L�•V•w OrJ •fa �^ r V VC VO 2V �l 9 W q`q ✓ G O A V= V •` _ V• =V OOJ V. ^ V• P✓ Y`� v 0 4- .n � A V. V L � y V r 4� � V � q •r ` V L � � 2 C N y° L V °c � y ��i " _u _ ✓� o. ra o y �L o.>- .y.'Jr4'c 9Tr Y� did cL- °•u -r � E9y L. � °c oG O ✓� N W� V V n p 9 y� V q P p' V V�^ G r� r yy44 � r J r� V M 1 C CnC OJu�Y =�� w =l°u W �IafA 3 . -D 6�LW/ O.�YV. f. 2 p LL O✓ OJ wV O .uOVNC Vr rN �P _ G r0 q ry PLO CL P✓9Y Y q N r NO`C•41 rOCV Gcq Wr�-Wa C`yr �wLC rlI C69 _ 1_r C ° L (.r 9 NP Nc i r c.°. L V yL4'o ✓ b P •nj rro L 4 q v` »�q =��d v .N. ri •°�� �O w G r ��� N� .V.. r✓ j° 1• P �^ I r c _ c 9 .ir Gn�O C9N G N u LL r O I ! r T COQ � q 6 Y J C g Y YA O r N 9 Q� r OL aN }.�r VC ✓iG`OOnAV M c 0/V 4 .On yy ^� .� LC q•4� VVVY ✓n9= r V= O 1. b y J✓ r N O G �/ .7 C 4 N r L r _ ° 2_ •n __ O` O 6✓ V d Y D C` O 8 S• V I: G. O C f j N c j q L' M` q tiC 2NNCy ^`L N C�J y^ •r •°.r .N.r •C• (� v9r fit` u✓ ✓.b+ _ W o 4; �N 1/.�T 2�w? d r__qw O O ^q✓= Cr N r •Y N P r q SV N M� V67� _qr= p Y• 4 n O A 1 NL1 C6P•n r � Vb4N wiAV � rJnuN� N ..r4 VA O•C 9t °G °C O M4LN W O q N -�C• C r V C N O Y V N d yC O r q O � v NIDVUJ ^OO N �•yG q N V✓ GP.V..�p�N6AOq ✓�9 >lyr rL7y V 'Lqj w�]Vr T�yW OVwN V N i 9_q -J rG .T +Piu �Oqw 9V� SV _>� ti Y NN V C�'r �rr °c b� r Zr GL•2` N, Dv N•>. �Yr C q +_ �i00 V q upuL.L tVt�� �r.'r` r°9. Tt `9 O� L CqL OVV� _ r u a°•u4rP r FO�rrD OrN rUl J CI 904 lrnP LN0,.C.� L_VrV °i .J.rl �� r°• ✓J ®OL` i�� ^GLLVa.�y O••Sxrr VO L FN =J ^`L.= �pAO e/ iry °(y 4 VI uCN' I O< �C . r .. 4 4w�•r 4O9Y G pC 9a]V N GV <JO r pV Wti Z � ~ P i0 YY O said p w' �i •n •p �l � � 1 ZI v r A c� L <• G � y r it C z ` _r N p P o� A t O l we O p C L q J �2 G.n V N C q r l vow < ur. O E, 9 q v .. d u .°e ` N Ll N U v L n L �r M N C 4 o� Lni y v V z� �( w ry O t i cW `2 Y 6 O r l r O F � or ry � ` r V V q \• w C °2 J � S C n C W L 4. l V L q u n» r y ��A e G » °cd q J y —CA V O c W V q C .n y V o�y r d i IP ^O qL O L a A •n L q wA» r T•q� r Y� O c ° a C a L G C.. 3$ P� S V T 1� r b G v � A u q` C C' O W o� � V d y A � L r qE J 4 L r L O » v u d r L` i O T —�a CL .n L q A L J o� aL. u bu N V •n � d J q 4 o 4 O ✓ D• S v i O Py V Y J — o c — L W .w p q — l �• L V � 4 L y C r ° q d J J - c < r ' O ' SOI n N Y � S J Q N c C w V L r a d P t C r W 0 v A V O nq p .n i — C » O C ✓ N w 4� Y.P r C 7 w V p 'o W c V O a u v 0 V L L b� p T ^ L » V W » or. i� 4 J f L A L i _O p .°.• at ° w C— a •a W O O 'L° nvi v» •P oWC=. p q q V`YK q r' l MGQV 1r 4 d I � q LV.ri °w •r• rip ✓ .w L V C ~ � ` ` •Gi 4PCV Y W »v YC 4.^ .r fT`° V L r ✓ [ O � ✓q V A b O V � Y O ... L.ri= r C✓ O < V 4 r y q C O V W V ✓ J p r CC4 IrOV q V 0VO�4 T•.qO yqw —� QI .<r� .n V � r .w V V Ac✓ V Aril oLY P�U- f. G U.V.y p� V _ q A a 3 m V q T gP•ci. »P Y Tq'Jr G GWI�� Srr P�• tz — p c o a L JfAO — cu c « iac q fir` ON d.n LO= pWVL TL 4l �.•. Lr S 4 V V 4 r C V � �• w r `\ff0 Y C 4 V Np —p•r NOV— <V 4•r WrV4� 4 •. y T y r b A = '�_ ✓ L b = Ja u O O w i L ✓ p W 4 A V✓ OY Cq �y A �> O w �• O C A L q L » O Q y V q 4 O y y ✓ JL C— O— r w g ✓ 3 O l V S°c W V y 4 O n w O .' � °c " .P a .. •. �,i, cd A 4L y w a00 � b (V �:� cc 'fig. s ^� � »pti ✓.� ZVr C 40 VS y�r O —_ ' ll a <L V SY r A c� L <• G � y r it C z ` _r N p P o� A t O l we O p C L q J �2 G.n V N C q r l vow < ur. O E, 9 q v .. d u .°e ` N Ll N U v L n L �r M N C 4 o� Lni y v V z� �( w ry O t i cW `2 Y 6 O r l r O F � or ry � ` r V V q \• w C °2 J � S C n C W L 4. l V L q u n» r y ��A e G » °cd q J y —CA V O c W V q C .n y V o�y r d i IP ^O qL O L a A •n L q wA» r T•q� r Y� O c ° a C a L G C.. 3$ P� S V T 1� r b G v � A u q` C C' O W o� � V d y A � L r qE J 4 L r L O » v u d r L` i O T —�a CL .n L q A L J o� aL. u bu N V •n � d J q 4 o 4 O ✓ D• S v i O Py V Y J — o c — L W .w p q — l �• L V � 4 L y C r ° q d J J - c < r ' O ' SOI n N Y � S J Q N c C w V L r a d P t C r W 0 v A V O nq p .n i — C » O C ✓ N w 4� Y.P r C 7 w V p 'o W c V O a u v 0 V L L b� p T ^ L » V W » or. i� 4 J f P » r � = w W V » C q o+. q 4V.• G � 1 q r L .s 4w u .L. L y 4 V V q u L A L i _O p .°.• at ° w C— a •a W O O 'L° nvi v» •P oWC=. LpE V`YK 4L MGQV yrr. b LV.ri °w rip ✓ ZT — ��V JL° 4PCV Y W »v YC 4.^ .r fT`° V L V✓ � ✓q V C u « a V Q 4 OV A d Y O ... L.ri= r C✓ O < V 4 r y q C O V W V ✓ J p r CC4 IrOV q V 0VO�4 T•.qO yqw —� QI .<r� .n V � r .w V V Ac✓ V Aril oLY P�U- f. U.V.y p� V _ q N V O V q T gP•ci. »P Y Tq'Jr G GWI�� Srr P�• tz — p c o a L JfAO — cu c « iac q fir` ON d.n LO= pWVL TL 4l �.•. Lr to — 4 V Np —p•r NOV— <V 4•r WrV4� P » r � = w W V » C q o+. q 4V.• G � 1 q r L .s 4w u .L. L y 4 V V q u �I Ln e W Y L L_O O c O ;E `r CyG SV _ V _ < nod n :fir CVL ' •^d 6w� q ' O O C y L r V V O u O� G w [ l d 4 L •YO C V OY N wV V< C 4GLJ cS T 9`r V y Y �M V`�f N N y M C V•+4 c v4 !V n�Nm� _VY �OL�� lCJ VZZL iq ry W �L 06 Ln ;E Z.. N < nod ' CVL ' •^d 6w� q ' Y �M V`�f oin c v4 � VVVIII --- .Y• w yp � V CO O CAL �0 9 yNr_ r Q' CCy 9Y PYT nOr_r V �jV ryLry wYC1O� VLgT �I O O O q ^ Lu dJCV �.dn cCwV D NI r d � 7 � d i r L P n_ •Ge L 10 1 q 1,0 V V � Ln RESOLUTION NO. 0 A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION RECOF2ENDIaG APPROVAL OF PLANNED DEVELOPMENT NO. 81 11 REQU-'S?ING A CHANGE 1N THE ZONING FROM R -3 TO R- 3 /P.D. FOR 5.24 ACRES LOCATED ON 11HE NORTH SIDE OF 19TH STREET, EAST OF HELLr4hN AVENUE - APN 201- 232 -34 AND 54 WHEREAS, on the 16th day of September, 1987, an application was filed and accept_-_ 0. ^. the a!`:._-deSCrib_d •.`_ and V� vJect; WHEREAS, on the 9th day of December, 1961, the Planning Commission held a duly advertised public hearing pursuant to Section 65854 of the California Government Code. SECTION 1: The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission has made the following findings: 1. That the subject property is suitable for the uses permitted in the proposed zone in terms of access, size, and compatibilit wi to existing land use in the surrounding area; 2. The proposed zone change would not have significant impact on the environment nor the surrounding prop- erties; and 3. That the proposed zone change is in conformance with the General Plan. SECTION 2: The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission has founa that this project will not create a significant adverse impact on the environment and recommends to City Council the issuance of a Negative Declaration on December 9, 1981. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: 1. That pursuant to Section 65850 to 65855 of the Caiif;,rnia Government Code, that the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga hereby recommends approval on the 9th day of December, 1981, Planned Development No. 81 -11. 2. The Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Councii approve and adopt Planned Development No. 81 -11. 3. That a Certified Copy of this Resolution and related material hereby adopted by the Planning Commission shall be forwarded to the City Council. Resolution No. Page 2 4. All conditions of approval applicable to Tentative Tract No. 11969 shall apply to this Planned Development. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 9TH DAY OF DECEMBER., 1981. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA i BY: Jeffrey King, Chairman ATTEST: Secretary of e-Planning Commission I, JACK I'V4, 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 Ranchc Cucamonga, at a regular :meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 9th day of December, 1981, by the following vote - to-wi t: ® AYES: COnalISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ASSERT?: COMMISSIONERS: 1 J �J CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: December 9, 1981 TO: Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Jack Lam, AICP, Director of Community Development BY: Curt Johnston, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: zone :rom R- Singe amity —` Residential) to R-3 /PD (Multiple Family Residential /Planned Development) and the development of 128 condominiums on 9.2 acres of land, located on the northeast corner of Archibald Avenue and Feron Boulevard - APN 209- 05i -Oi ABSTRACT: The Applicant has submitted Development Plans and a Tract Map ?cr the above - described project in order to gain consideration for approval by the Planning Commission. Approval of this project will necessitate the approval of four integral parts of the project; a Negative Declaration, the rezoning of the site from P.-1 (Single Family Residential) to R-3,/PD (Multiple Family Residential /Planned Development), Lhe Site Plan and building elevations, and the Tentative Tract Map. The project has been reviewed by both the Design and Growth Management Review Committees and has passed the Residential Assessment Syster... Staff has prepared a detailed Staff Report, related Resolutions, and Conditions of Approval for your review and consideration. BACKGROUND: The Applicant, USA Properties Fund, is requesting approval for their proposal in order to develop 128 condominiums on 9.2 acres, located on the northeast corner of Archibald Avenue and Feron Eoulevard (Exhibits "A ", "B ", and "C "). The application is -For a planned develop- ment with the density of 13.9 dwelling units per acre. The project site is in the R -1 zone and General Planned for Medium Density Residential (4-14 dwelling units per acre). Existing on site are two resident -es in dilapidated condition which the develoaer intends to demolish. The proDerty slopes uniformly from the north to the south at approximately 1k %. The site is currently rough graded with no substantial ground cover other than indigenous weeds. Approximately 30 trees are located near the two residences and along Feron Boulevard. These trees consist of a variety of species and are ITEM E PO 81 -133M 12090 Planning Commission Agenda December 9, 1981 Paye 2 in generally poor condition, and the developer intends to remove them. The surrounding land use and zoning is described as follows: Direction Land ;°::e Zoning North Existing Elementary School R -1 South Single Family Residential R -1 East Single Family Residential R -1 West Commercial, Industrial, General Industrial Single Family Residence, 'vacant Land ANALYSIS: The project is being developed in accordance with the State Sub- arvT'ision Map Act as well as the City Subdivision Ordinance and Zoning Ordi- nance. The proposed zone change is consistent with the General Plan. All setbacks, building separation, height, parking and open space requirements in the Zoning Ordinance will be complied with. The project will include sixteen 8 -plex structures. All units will be one or two bedroom flats (Exhibits "D" R "E "). Of the 320 parking spaces, 128 are provided under carports, while the remaining 192 are open. Texturized pedestrian crosswalks and entryways are provided throughout the development as shown on the Illustrative Site Plan (Exhibit "F "). Recreation facilities include a pool, spa, and a recreation room. An improved tot lot with an active recreation area for children will be provided at the center of the project. Two points of access have been provided into the project, one off Archibald Avenue and the other on Feron Boulevard. Full improvements will be required along both streets. The interior road system meets the design standards of the Zoning Ordinance with 26' curb to curb. The streets, landscaping, and open space will be maintained by a homeowners association. The preliminary Grading and Drainage Plan has been reviewed by the Grading Committee and given conceptual approval (Exhibit "G "). Fifty -four percent of the site will be devoted to open space and land- scaping in acccrrdarce with standards and pol'cies set by the Planning Commission. The Applicant proposes to install a 6' high meandering block wail along Archibald Avenue and Feron Boulevard. Undulating turf mounding with dense shrubbery will abut the wall along its entire length and wrought iron will be incorporated into the design to provide vistas into the project. The average setback of the wall along Archibald will PD 81 -13 /TT 12090 Planning Commission Agenda December 9, 19-01 Page 3 be 45', while on Feron Boulevard the setback will be 40'. The final design of the wall will be submitted with the Landscape and Irrigation Plans. The wall will be completed with the -First phase of the project. Also, the devel- oper intends to place two carports on the exterior of the loop road adjacent to the Archibald Avenue entrance, as shown on Exhibit "N ". Staff feels that these carports should be moved to the interior side of the loop road away from Archibald Avenue. The Design Review Committee reviewed this project, finding it acceptable as the style for this area. Detailea L-ilored renderings, Site Plan, and building :nateriais will be available for your review at the Planning Commission meetin3_ A neighborhood meeting was held on Tuesday, December 1, 1981, to familiarize the surrounding property owners with the project. No significant opposition against the project was voiced, and when the meeting ce)ncluded the residents were satisfied with the proposal. Please find attached Part I of the Initiai Study, completed by the Applicant, which discusses various environmental factors relative to the project. Staff has completed Part II of the Initial Study and found no adverse impacts on the environment as a result of this project. If the Planning Commission concurs with this determination, a Negative Declaration should be issued. CORRESPONDENCE: A public hearing notice was advertised in The Daily Report newspaper on November 27, 1981. Fifty -nine public hearing notices were sent to surrounding property owners within 300 feet of the project site. Ts.• date no correspondence has been received either for or against this project. RECO1>NENDATION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission conduct s public hearing to consider all matters relative to this project. If the Commission concurs with the findings of Staff, adoption of the attached Resolution with Conditions of Approval would be appropriate. Respectful:y slmitted, p , 7 JACK LAM, AICP Community Development Director JL:CJ:jr Attachments: Exhibit "A" Exhibit "8" Exhibit "C" ° Exhibit "D" Exhibit "E" (Exhibits Site Utilization Map Detailed Site Plan Tract Map Elevations (2 sheets) Floor Plans Continued Next Page) PD 8: -13 /1T 12090 Planning Commission Agenda December 9, 1981 Page 4 Attachments, Contd.: Exhibit "F" - Illustrative Site Plan Exhibit "G" - Conceptual Grading and Drainage Plan Exhibit "H" - Line of Sight Drawings Part 1, initial Study Resolution Approving Zone Change Resolution. Approving Tentative Tract Map, with Conditions C j , • �' r Jr. 1 N .•Ir �J(•4v' r � - � r� � .i!' � ` s ••. 'ifs '4,�. ,v�` 1.� � IY t� b• I.qj, - •'S� lam'( 1' �• — ` ' -+r: -'•;: !• -:; _' � I � � i ti ; •• -. <� ::/' . � . Sys •-- 1�~'s. , J' 11 Ie 11_: • C,,.�.au it 4 lL.: - -'..yy ^ >,y�• T t�; �'r '' w :' _' : � '7 n .o"f f•- •a.! . :,� .-i ` LA ^a •_� � ��. Tye f 6y� t fl �'�' " •�� i fit -mss t• I V � �: L. ,j � � _ i1 � ••� . YqM .rte �- _._JTRCIf -�� • •'�� -M ^: �'Y'T r....••�- ... -... _ .•. ...yr:..`.roC =, ......... . _ •\ : `� ��'}!- � �� •!'! Lai �.- •' r• .1_ -___.1 � 'A _ _ } � �• �+ ' AL rip 7 PSOMAS 0 a'� !'' �u.s.A. FAOPLRnE. PJnw. INC. ry r. .�l> �I.M VwV WV•YUAIM IY•M•• I' NORTH TH CITY OF T /^ /' T h rrF - %1: � ® PLANNING DIVISION E, \IiIBrF: SCALE: M.�w•f. rk—ropwtwo r� I ► �•��l J INMJM6 OV&PI40 p"Wielwb CITY :.fir RA\CHO CL;CATNIO.NGA PLANNING DIVLSION 0 fMP91wo� 9oNYW1.G rT . • I • • '�r�T'•aY 1•�1{ ••t' ��{{ 1 M wM a- F41 Y�R R. II1. w�tr...•n M �Wrr.Wr. yrM 'w stir 1�1•!w 7L!rTdwww Nf de wt na) •.r. � nrw ....iT M> {•uT • � 1 a•.w.ww� � MAN IN W'fI T�T•1. r�nl•iTy Li.2 Nplf /Vpr. M ►tM7� {1.i N. w I \1 IINT.�Pry�r y}YNwb ••. Nra .V 71.y ITEtiI- _ E\IiIII -.-5 _SCALE -_PiT S. _ V NORTH 0 ' jl! r; i Yl i. n e 7•i t I`' 1 Ji K� i �U^.o AVE r[nw o�w Imo) I� I L ..L J' r r wcm nv ..m.o .. �., mao+r aw�o•er aauv "" rnnorrwn ruwn, ac w..:acc, it roo. 6q i 4J�r W CO IIYI WPM �•f•V Y!••..W MPf �IM.W P. i. 4On.• rW yMKt I.rIfIA - ^/y(�y� N ,U •l.K/' d?J.4Y <0Mn' �. IAM¢• M•t WYE tii wAM�' NI�••l ••1[ y. IF•. �..If•. •,VV Y 4lCAt. Y WOti �i�0• lMl MMI� CITY OF rrLtiz: ® RANCHO �O CUC'�- -AVIO\'GA nTLE: -TKN---- LIN- PL.A�ivtl \G DIZiSION MEW- 0.- SCALE: N.-T- S. I A. lY'+'+S�JL11 Jr EXTERIORS A ZTEnm a -'� 6:IrA-r a-- _ r � L�1��L'�71`? �`tiAfiJKAL �zai.!c STpr� FGttc,�5 0 CITY or, ITL.I: RANCHO C CAMONGA TITLE: �w�n.►� _ -_ P. .NTNI \G DI<rU0.N EXI MIT � i SG%.LE: E E LI Sx Cm G ODMr=—; D �DG`✓�.iD��.G3 CITY OF RAIN'CHO CUCf �NIONGA PLANNING DIV!SfON rmA 6 sPIC..PAs rrF—x is EXHIiu"E':-1-2 SCALE: M.TS. 5la�T Z 1 --- jYYY � w i.v J man B i Yr ww.G I I ��� � �. _.w., -.•.. � G � X116 • naL i 8R tr.l.. 1. r w+•r{ i.z ,_Yw. u'IV+Y61 Y wN MK 1T1► ✓ r NV .W CITY OF ITEN•i: � RANCHO CUCAd'i0.XLCA PLA\ cliNG DI's OO` E \Iili3I r: S SCALE: 1s,- -s — L k/ GI rc�_ 1"y�l..r�tl�� f.. !C. . / :rJ:� �!i!d`.t�l ~�'b �t • ►i ti �i�.�f � 1 � : yl _v H I� it r Elk- Ilk' 1 I• 1..^��`T�� /��.G. � "Y q'���r ��i.��l"��.(�.'� r�� �Y M�lra "il , Jt A • *9*,Ob.i. nWuw" CITY O-F RANCHO CLTCAl"VIONGA nANINING IOW SIO. I 0 —mac— c.wn.c erw __y�:i_ w.•r.wiw•w �.� ewirnawraJw.ccrr 1�r �o c:wiw kaw nwa.Y WIWIaH4o 9 Mwci M 4Ypr1 InN: TFE:\ is E--- 'PTU: �KAIWtC- Eli "AMT. T. SCALE-. W.-T s. -% E 1 T M MVKiRL 4lM�aY i..nw waw(s•awac) s. +as c. h,tw cv 7SfiJiii 1if'fd 'L7' 1 yo c� Mwci M 4Ypr1 InN: TFE:\ is E--- 'PTU: �KAIWtC- Eli "AMT. T. SCALE-. W.-T s. -% E 1 t ARROW. 1 4 d �� i. 47 � rVC). c1G3fi r, 1� _7 }S � oe �cY.tsr 3 Yi�ilL'l �•'crr. rRA C r A'J. J, ::.7� Vol 7_7 P7 11j i1 .��t i l� is i ;.7 �i - L� �� ..'� �. •' -: _ I t �. ^1�U' c ♦ G+ ✓�rtJ J.�JJJVi� 3 . i .4c'QcI'Q :!;Ir V NOf%7H CITY OF rrE%I RANCHO CL'CAiVIONGA ,,, a: ,IM" PLANNING DIN'ISION ALE, µ.7 5 SkPEi2 P�Ha�a+t.a cwehvE s��1DN �� �s-r ,� -rte LsNE SIGHT LJAME CI'T'Y OF ITEM: � RANCHO CL ,I.N /1O PLANNING Dli'ISIO�e -GA ;I; -LjNF rE -51 �WT E\IiIBIT =9scALE --u r,- . E CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA INITIAL STL-DY PART I — PROJECT INFJ_TZMATTON SHEET — To be completed by applicant Environmental Assessment Review Fee: $6.0.00 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:rraittee will make one of tt_rce determinations: 1) The project will have no environ•�nertal impact and a Negative Declaration will be filed, 2) The project will have an envirorLnertal impact and an Enviro=ental Impact Report will be prepared, or 3) An additional infox:.iation report should be supplied ® by the applicant giving further information concerning the proposed project- PROJECT TITLE: RANCHO CUCAMONGA CONDOMINIUMS APPLICANT'S NAIME, ADDRESS, TELEMSONE= USA PROPERTIES FUND P.O. Box 2165 Santa Monica, CA 90406 (213) -s NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE OF PERSON TO BE CONTACTED CONCERNING T 1IS PROJECT: Michael A. Porto (Project Manager) P.O. Box 2165 Santa Monica, CA 90406 213 453 -3311 IOCATION OF PROJECT (STREET ADDRESS AND ASSESSOR PARCEL NO-) N.E. Corner Archibald and Feron - Rancho Cucamonga. ^-- - - - - -- -- LIST OT:iER PERN.ITS NECESSARY FROM LOCAL, REGIO Z L, STATE AND FEDERAL 'AGENCIES AND THE AGENCY ISSUING SUCH PERMITS: �tnnp Jcnn,un - - Y -1 PRO T'CT DESCRI 7r TO \T 0 D8'SCRI?':IOi`T OF PROJECT: Development of 128 condominium units or. 9.2 acres located on the N.E. corner of Archibald and Feron Yielding ? efencity of tq 9 nnitr pnr 1C�M -r;,p nroio t will bo comprised of 4 - -different and distin � unite whi h will .o citpe to nrovidp i2 nni c of oar'h pon- Tho nnitc will ho cYarPoA rlptc .Within 16 hllilrli q[ ACRr —SGE OF PROJECT AREA ALM SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING AND Y UPOS ED BUILDINGS, I ANY: 9.2 ar--et- 97.952 square feet proposed; 2 very small units existing (square fcotaae unknown). DEMSCRIBB THE E11VIR^ \. _NTAL SETTTNG OF THE PROJECT SITE T–= cCLT.iDI_.G O\ TOPOGRAP:_`l, PL N -rTS (T' BS) , �1::2.'•i:LS, ANZY CULTU7–:kL, FISTOF=C L OR SC =ST_C ASPECTS, I SE Or SUR?.OUNDING PPAP?.?TIES, ANM THE DE SCRI: WILL THIS PP.OSECT: YES L*O X I. Create a substantial change in g ground contours? X 2. Create a substantial change in eristinq noise or vibration? 3. Create a substantial change in demand for municipal services (police; fire, t•.atar, sewage, etc.)'_ X 4. Create changes in the existing zoning or general plan designations? X 5: Remove any exist ng trees? How many? X 6. Create the need for use or distrosal of potentially hazardous materials such as toxic substances, fla- gables or explosives? Explanation of any YES answers above: The existing trees located ® on -site have not been maintained and are in deteriorating condition. in most cases the trees have had to depend on seasonal rains for their water _supply. thereby, making their root system surface located, which does not provide sufficient stability in strong winds. The unkept arnc, inadequate -m?intenanrP of thp *rPes in additi the tential hazards associated with root structures do not make the existing trees good can d7 ates cr saving. IMPORTANT: If the project involves zhe construction of residential units, complete the form on the next page E 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 t:_e 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 b--• the Development Review Committee_ n Date Sept. 23, 1981 Signature , MICHAEL A. PORTO Title -Proiect Manager 2 - -3 - t W 552,350 5oi3OSv 577,300 r. ____ + Efficiency J_Gl fir= �C i- .... J: `� r % ^nQ �C51C1 ^_:7 �1d1, ClCVC�C^,^•!C;1 �_ 1 an VC Tn,, --z.. -- =° ��' je Piorth = __ *5✓ Corner, Arcilic_T� Fercn i 12090 8 V 32, 123 1�-=- -- --- - ----- 3 -22 IO -O2 -3J 9 -23 �- 10 -22 .G _?j _ 12 -33 W 552,350 5oi3OSv 577,300 r. ____ + Efficiency W 552,350 5oi3OSv 577,300 RESOLUTION1 NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, CONDITIONALLY APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP N0. 12090 MHEREAS, Tentative Tract Map No. 12090, hereinafter "Map" su:jmitted by USA Properties Fund, applicant, for the purpose of subdividing the real property situated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, Co --nty of San Bernardino, State of California, described as a residential devel- opment of 128 condominium dwellings on 9.2 acres of land, located on the northeast corner of Archibald Avenue and Feron Boulevard - APN 209- 051 -01 into 4 lots, regularly came before the Planning Commission for public hearing and action on December 9, 1981; and W!!EREAS. the City Planner has recommended approval of i:he Map subject to all conditions set forth in the Engineering and Planning Divisions reports; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has read and considered the Engineering and Planning Divisions reports and has considered other evidence presented at the public hearing. NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does resolve as follows: SECTION 1: The Planning Carnission makes the following findings in regard to Tentative Tract No. 12090 and the Map thereof: (a) The tentative tract is consistent with all applicable interim and proposed general and specific plans; (b) The design or improvements of the tentative tract is consistent with all applicable interim and proposed general and specific plans; (c) The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed; (d) The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage and avoidable injury to humans and wildlife or their habitat; (e) The tentative tract is not likely to cause serious public health problems; (f) The design of the tentative tract will not conflict with any easement acquired by the public at large, now of record, for access through or use of the property within the proposed subdivision. Resolution No. Page 2 (g) That this project will nct create adverse impacts on the environi.:nt and a Negative Declaration is i.ssued. SECTION 2: Tentative Tract Map No. 12090, a copy of which is attached hereto, is hereby approved subject to all of the following conditions and the attached Standard Conditions: ?LANNING DIVISION 1. The perimeter wall on all four sides of the project shall be completed and fully landscaped with the con- struction of the first phase of this project_ The design of the wall along Archibald Avenue and Feron Boulevard shall be meandering with turf mounding against it and wrought iron shall be used to provide vistas into the project. The final design shall be submitted with the landscape and irrigation plans prier to issu- ance of building permits and shall be subject to review and approval of the Planning Division. 2. The developer shall contact all property owners along the east project boundary to coordinate the construction of the block wall with the removal of existing fences. 3. The carports on the west side of the loop road along Archibald Avenue shall be relocated to the interior side of the loop road, away from the street. 4. An improved tot lot shzA'l be provided in the center of the project. The tot loi shall be enclosed by a fence, shrubbery, or other physical form and must include an active play area for children. The final design and location shall be submitted with the landscape and irrigation plans subject to Planning Division approval. ENGINEERING DIVISION 5. A lien agreement or in -lieu of cash deposit of the estimated construction cost_, plus 20ro at the disr_reticn of the City Engineer, shall be provided for the future construction of the landscaped mediar island on Archibald Avenue (one -half width). 6. Left turn ingress and egress to the project from Archibald Avenue shall be proH bited once the median island on Archibald Avenue is constructed. The developer shall incorporate a clause in the CC &R's notifying the pros- pective homeowners of this access restriction. E Resolution No. Paga 3 ® 7_ The ncse of the median is } h r$� Vk- 1�6� and a_ t e d veway entrance shail be a minimum of 5 -feet away from the right -of -way line. „� 8_ Drainage flows from the major portion of the drainage /F Area' "F" as shown on The Hydrology Mapj sF.a11 be conveyed Z to Archibald Avenue along Feron Boulevard.C�4 P -11 necessary perr•:i is and apprcva i from Southern Ce f�r �� r so. Gas Company for the construction on their easement area CS-le shall be required prior to recordation of the map. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 9TH DAY OF DECEISER, 1981. �Yrn� PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA / "- �i� •'�f-� ��ti �...� ate-, BY: Jeffrey King, Chairman nQ t!� ATTEST: Secretary 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 9th day of December, 1981, by the following vote - to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: _ n 7'2 ' w S � c p Y r 4 N a�- _Sn ,= 6 O O6� � 1 q ,O n • V r 6 m P V _ •O 4 u C- N o'Y � a > n r � •. O 4 i rY �V1w m Y f -J^gO wn V ��� •O Y O V a W (VVV�c N r bw° S v O ^ S Y t N O, w •e 0 W •C jL(� ,Jir =p W p yr�4 V d F�v . b P O,(�]c•��K Y >y1 �Nw v� s N u q � o m 1 > � V R r N O S� WN C 6 O L_ =w _ J iW w� y w � 'INC d 4 yV � r _ •N- .p O_ 4 N O N ro� ti R ,6 a w c=% n w J W Y L N O' 2 .W 4 N J L pD 6g r > i a w r W � n w ^ 7 W_4 r N r q >� N N c b 3F w v a n O j O > u b O c �3 C �d o� r l 0 b N �IN > r h N O Y 1T � N O � u O ? 6 N� a � >o N c 4 R w ` J S O N > Y �J T 4 J N Y 0 o � � A A N r M r V y� N Z v 4 I O � r 1 v r v N G c r A r r n y N ° 9 T O Y w 0 H I v 0 O 0 N NY c s T � O i N J n n =FEZ •y w r _� r J r O>� '- \ \11m 4 K n r w q I n 000 aan.�0 aJ9 Pr °OC _ V.N.• N �w6 r..0 0��4 l= � na OT W 91 i^ pr>r. w - >14 'a SO a1 uanOr N 7� M4ain Lr K �r i> N•I •] f N N 6�. rJN iC� .ia � `� Ya r r- I' >� n J r� LL 0� 4 - q •1 A > w '°J m r 0 r w 4 N � w >t � O) +. = n w N da v -� n, o w J 0. b a �• `^ w m o 1 m e n r b N '� I^ r� w w =^ 7'2 ' w S � c p Y r 4 N a�- _Sn ,= 6 O O6� � 1 q ,O n • V r 6 m P V _ •O 4 u C- N o'Y � a > n r � •. O 4 i rY �V1w m Y f -J^gO wn V ��� •O Y O V a W (VVV�c N r bw° S v O ^ S Y t N O, w •e 0 W •C jL(� ,Jir =p W p yr�4 V d F�v . b P O,(�]c•��K Y >y1 �Nw v� s N u q � o m 1 > � V R r N O S� WN C 6 O L_ =w _ J iW w� y w � 'INC d 4 yV � r _ •N- .p O_ 4 N O N ro� ti R ,6 a w c=% n w J W Y L N O' 2 .W 4 N J L pD 6g r > i a w r W � n w ^ 7 W_4 r N r q >� N N c b 3F w v a n O j O > u b O c �3 C �d o� r l 0 b N �IN > r h N O Y 1T � N O � u O ? 6 N� a � >o N c 4 R w ` J S O N > Y �J T 4 J N Y 0 o � � A A N r M r V y� N Z v 4 I O � r 1 v r v N G c r A r r n y N ° 9 T O Y w 0 H I v 0 O 0 N R M ti �q L O V M E v 4 1 I�11( '- \ \11m N °OC _ V.N.• N �w6 r..0 0��4 l= � na OT W 91 i^ pr>r. w - >14 'a SO a1 uanOr N 7� M4ain Lr K �r i> ` •] f N W H O O' > 6 O K W 6 0 N O `� Ya r I' >� n J r� LL 0� 4 - q •1 A > w '°J m r 0 r w 4 N � w >t � O) +. = n w N da v -� n, o w J 0. b a �• `^ w m o 1 m e n r b N '� I^ r� w w =^ •• Kn_ wNS pr NN >9W .p r^ WGNp .6 W V n rW � 1N W W_ S N O W n ^w fV u yl OP _ >Y, nJCwa1 aT0 °r i.a. iw O m L m. �a � ON s 6 �N W •f .. ry b S LI 1- ���v, u i N N J u 0 1> N =• ,> ,n a M Jr N� w N -J N l• ,O 4 r • f R A O w r N 1 ^ Q r r w. > r > p > u,r 6�N �� O �. y. •+ d ^01 �Nr� N � •[ Np IN p4 Ow 1161 lO >� ^.o i >nur. OO j� 0� K> .^a +b. 1 e+ -• 00 r — r r N W �c `w Om �r •9 ='. rrf`.NJY >� j 6 J n� .W.. >- r Y�GLL � w u P n r 1.O e A 1� S Y 7 N q ^> ON.. R W - J W K w S i q > N• e• ro_ n O � r W G. K O 6 2 O Y r w a O_' 4 w O b> r- a r> O• S � N [$ � -e •i n � > Q. C>a � 0 n� 0 ^j o•cY d_K p= rN 4 O b' ^�m `O a —p >N = >> O'A ti; = OOua> S dL6 O > w R >`• an_ N � rf16 n. a alN R C O a0 rrR� > O Y i ^ N l �9M O_n ��.� • O >a V r O p W (e> w Y a0 ' 4 a O•NN 00. ' ^V Sw ' �j n 1 - R M ti �q L O V M E v 4 1 V., o ((�r` a V Gu I of O tJL q x +• !.� � q � o v q d c N L..NJ t I Y» � �s � �J�r ✓���� WO.✓i. d .i °r>lL " V;.G•• ✓��up C. _ C. » q C 6 l l Y A 4 _ V 0 °• V 4 = L A P J A» ;. i1 4 t� °• La .`O _y' - _ r OV 4q V7P C. �rw ,V adiC V WN p _ �� u4 r' pp _'4 a .•Lr.iV•Cirn W � C p✓ 7 C �� ` W ur ( V N� •GeG � 6 6.- L O� .r �L �' N -' C T L O V )a N a 'O � vVV q 11`rq� •' NNN _✓ l� �� ✓ M v L a U 0 L O1 i 4 q -. O.{1?Y O V I� V 0 } V» C} _L t �•° 7. G �C L d� � y 1 _-- V )I LV._. W V V a �� i� V �pC`''�p V�`O ✓?� "' u 4 L.- _ L °d `•. `.q. V ��r`L ^cu c qL a i z OVq �y � ^y ��� • al a' VC pil . L a •[:✓�_Lq �r `i Cw» VO iG y G.Vi• N¢ - Ggrp� - OM °cV ctSC r�N �O h) (Y KL H -J^ qL•V� : Ir ✓adi P C pC`a���.O V- ..O 'Lp T V q O n 1 w ✓ G •.��� � 4 p • C ll ✓ N 4 C y V V V •n ✓ i C a P p) ° I✓ O } V✓ O V 4 V •• O I P N r G C 9 T .y O W CO N a�Q LW V•Yr T..L.r -� GC- Nl Y •.'• / N� i �V JL,'p a^? L^ CL� V .�S.On 4w J•.`�� K %o CoG �q �I �M 4✓ cLL ° _ C_✓ � L �n Y•i •-�aq NO 6D�V 1� »V4 O � _, I N) I I 1 , o W _ G _ v G J lz L 4 P L P LV �` AV6 'O n^ ✓%ter G°a •V•' P^ y C�pLC�V V°CL GJO F q. L C 4 W ✓ n p O r` ^ M g V d l II V .° '• °� y • V �° _ a`� rYVS VL �.�.0 �? � LuL VOO_L �•yT „C _ C -qL ✓v LCq» G O V q taNq O�` ^Vw CD. V qV O r r„ `••.r u_>> 4 yi »� �Vn i °p a°i VN °LN °r .O �°.�VOA �•.y d. ✓t} L �� ✓Ll ✓ VgPO L4V ` ✓✓ P✓ C LV _ Oq Ol tl d0 V V n �_j0 PTV O• q rCO VOr ._» y O LS 4 �-- ut VP YaV� 4Vj G Tv P 4 L� �G -r .-.c No ✓Ci[l� `d° .WN A =�V .2 2.s!d.s! w7 --GGI L^ OrP LL¢l°V C Pf1 PLr q�. wn_ ^r CO ` • .�i•� �V°.•�u u^ iC•wr 46 wW` cr 7L LVCUaf ✓G CVV O C GV M G .• »V Tp nV °ry1 Tb✓V »_q VG q r�pA VQ�q 04 ^ !1 Or q N^ L T .Gi. C / .Vi. n p 's - V C i. �L a •^ �Y ne =d c✓ °L_ ✓y qo'q > �$ •ear : >n.°.c O C T � WPf3v PLO alp laN�¢pY =_a✓ ° M V�_LV -V✓ a' °� f. N L V 4 V "O O _` L .l � l L d •- V a i! q w° C ✓ C rc q C Cn Lq' 'TS i aa� -yam° V AOD - y✓ V ` ? J L 4✓ q •°C° 4 d <' O A q ° .Vi D, l C G - - 7 A 9» . i a = 4 aPr+m�• C a: -O 2.: woi.'a'a.v�.°. ^o v Syq u u »� 4L]<« « GT•OVO6 i''0' �� ° N ✓ -� -G lOG 11 q_ -' - " Y w y N _V AtOf 4 L y ON d 'O LV Vqy� CL_C l °i = -CC Vq 'O✓- aV » N41� _ _ L'w. -T ^� .Vr.° w yL_ ` Crt° ✓N~ Ori �� ✓'L_yaA `mot qa yam= v '�. �L �a 4� _^C V W TTU ✓_ ± ✓ »O Pte= t.V N -Dy-x- °N» L C C L O yy V V C C L- y 9 r •° V C a TOF N.'YL n ✓✓4t {» » %AN BOO A` �4PV ✓_>OC SAC AT Y VW•• °' »° PLaG �_ ai_ {r LVgC °6G • �L�°V_VC q Tp Vi`_ Y w• O » iJ G 6 P_ P Z P% •iy. v r C P g V q .w d w P C M q 6 Y r y ✓ Q a° o s a •JJ `W_N Av =�� yd r:,G» M.r. nq d4.L.• V``°r°, `�.°.. ^E :,•:.. vx to M t tJ OW t t G Ya_ O 0. 4G V �P�.°u0 NqV < P t np »`4r OD _I 0 a i ✓ C O �� q O V P O r✓ 9 N y W p= O:F L V J 1 m A Z L V u •n C ✓ C r V w 1 9 p A b u O « O _ N V ✓ L NN �p uo• =_y« n. •� l �N OL•r N•O V •J O � r N S T \O _« U' r a L — Or PL O J J r N = O 60 V b _ O . � J V L � qr 1r d •Lev v n� d Lr rr or°— L °Lr• u_L =oc C 4 ✓ « G •r✓ -• � O i r.W> V V V C r r L Y• ]y l l V 9 C pr F` r O qy= P° ? r�i• _ _ -' r r O y yI VVyV. M W � q t• c N L °� �Jr'L �rrrOi•rL V Or OV C<� <NqP � J � � rwrL c i_q •r>i r °O i O A- C y✓ q S Q L 0 V � y ^ P L ✓ °PTV b W w 9 rC `>, O V W V l G\ L E rb N 4 •ny �_P O � 70 _ °� « W LJLr _�b L-� VV•.C.V y"'C 9LrC VLG� N l rr �Lri��Nir��• L ^ ✓ VY y r P LO^ •J 4I �v�ci •_n ^ �' Ir A croc C •r L `� r « n � � Vr VL�C r4•r' O O L •: CS•'i•y PVC J O « � •. N G > Lt V ✓r= V' L O C V S Y O 9 O r CEO 4.9 yrV O •.• 4PV yV ✓` O _ Y• °« �rLr L�9 n01 •V••�O _ud « O_C q 4 •. _ « L N q V�]N— y r t✓ nv° r O-YLC� �vL � M AC•N• 4C 9 q .r 9 9 � V • � ° r s LC N V• N nr •�y-.� V • �a0 � r 40pp r + d V O ✓y ^P � C F y A✓ V✓ °• O v 9^ rnC 4 ryV V_ J q Vr�m•• V � > V n r—i• u V •Jn •r 9 A 4• N 4 \ te va•. � 6h � w rLiM K ✓ C O �� q O V P O r✓ 9 N y W p= O:F L V J 1 m A Z L V u •n C ✓ C r V w 1 9 p A b u O « O _ N V ✓ L NN �p uo• =_y« n. •� l �N OL•r N•O V •J O � r N S T \O _« U' r a L — Or PL O J J r N = O 60 V b _ O . � J V L � qr 1r d •Lev v n� d Lr rr or°— L °Lr• u_L =oc C 1 S •r✓ -• � O P r.W> °.rJ.✓ Z V V C L N L Y• ]y l O L F` r O qy= P° ? r�i• _ _ -' r r O y yI VVyV. M W � q t• c N L °� �Jr'L �rrrOi•rL V Or OV C<� <NqP � J � � rwrL c i_q •r>i L 4 °O 9 9 O A- C y✓ � OI 0 W4vrn PmP y O_ •r rQ_' q °PTV b W w 9 rC `>, O V W V l G\ L E rb N 4 •ny �_P O � 70 _ °� « W LJLr _�b L-� VV•.C.V y"'C 9LrC VLG� N l rr �Lri��Nir��• OlT Cd« IOLr�N -43�� L�•�� LO^ •J 4I �v�ci •_n camy �' Ir A croc C •r L `� r 9 N q y V !, Vr VL�C r4•r' O O L •: CS•'i•y PVC •0 0 N V � V � V' L O C V S C O 9 O O r L O✓ ^ C .� u 1C n rrNrr>r yV O r O Y• °« �rLr L�9 n01 •V••�O _ud « O_C q _ 4N° -% -_ __ V V N L O -v `,�" cod nv° ✓.io qv•' O-YLC� �vL � M ' 4C 9 q .r 9 9 � V • � ° r s n O O N V• N L V V • Jqy � r 40pp r + d V O ✓ C O �� q O V P O r✓ 9 N y W p= O:F L V J 1 m A Z L V u •n C ✓ C r V w 1 9 p A b u O « O _ N V ✓ L NN �p uo• =_y« n. •� l �N OL•r N•O V •J O � r N S T \O ar rc•. U' r ° V •Nr• V L — Or PL O J J r N = O V b _ O . � J V L � qr 1r d ^c mrr d Lr rr or°— L °Lr• u_L =oc C 1 S •r✓ -• � gO.nA Or O= _ J ✓ LC •a._O du uO« _ •r � r C¢_ �- O N O F` � qy= LOr +N 'G Orr YOi L Of _f5= rV••a•` G ff v yI VVyV. M W � q t• c N L °� �Jr'L �rrrOi•rL V Or OV C<� <NqP � J � -� C p n L` c i_q •r>i L 4 °O �I i g t 9 V I r Y v OI 0 W4vrn PmP -�LLr° O_ •r rQ_' Vr•n J+y 4= L °PTV b LO �Vrn _ rC `>, + •°.rte m O r O � V l� d N ✓r O — 9 O 70 _ °� « W LJLr •� Q Oq L-� VV•.C.V y"'C 9LrC VLG� N l rr �Lri��Nir��• OlT Cd« IOLr�N -43�� L�•�� LO^ •J 4I i• N •_n r��i _90 me ._G�oo_ao ^•�•V.r d �qo-o l rM>L CG y0 cF Vr VL�C _ •: CS•'i•y PVC '• F N r> -L'• r °N T"I V' NI q V O C O O OGr- •Lr• O T C � 9 °�O+ W✓W NLCY rrNrr>r yV 4C w >r O'q.rW I �rLr . P ry✓ L q _ 4N° N __ V V N L O N C O V N �V {• /G Y L p y y L O b t L O 1 Z L• ✓ � M ' 4C 9 q .r 9 9 ✓ C O �� q O V P O r✓ 9 N y W p= O:F L V J 1 m A Z L V u •n C ✓ C r V w 1 9 p A b u O « O _ N V ✓ L NN �p uo• =_y« n. •� l �N OL•r N•O V •J O � p S T = ar rc•. U' r ° V •Nr• V L — Or PL O J J r V = O W O . � J V c •• ^c mrr d Lr � u_L rpr 1 S •r✓ -• � O - L r0 V T ��•W LL V W r n � qy= �✓ N 'G V S y r✓n P N V VVyV. O W � q t• c N L °� _ V 6 ° C<� V .•• � J � O p n L` c i_q V L 4 °O �I i g t 9 V I r Y v OI ' V O —� V Vg4N --.r Z• •s wJ t O_ L •1 m r LL C V d ✓ 6 = -� L f «t •Vr T q V •C-. l VW L_ y ° N ••r J CI q`✓_ •J 4I i• N •_n =1 _90 d r O I cF Vr aI _ d '• F _i V N + w EOrd V' NI ✓ C O �� q O V P O r✓ 9 N y W p= O:F L V J 1 m A Z L V u •n C ✓ C r V w 1 9 p A b u O « O _ N V ✓ L NN �p uo• =_y« n. •� l �N OL•r N•O V •J p S = � T r I �Z V O J J o V = O O . � c •• ^c L E d �L u_L c r -L•.Ln 1 S •r✓ -• � O - L r0 � `V• 4i T V LL V W i � N N _ �✓ N 'G Y S y < V VVyV. O P � N L °� _ V CN C<� V .•• � 9 QV W r p n L` I V L 4 °O �I i g t 9 V I r Y v OI C V V. --.r Z• •s wJ t O_ L •1 m G LL W C d O -� L f «t •Vr ti s• l 4 I _ ° l uL W _ •J 4I i• N V 49 O[Or V r o •� C cF V✓d e. P Lr.r d '• F _i V N + w EOrd V a:: L1r L•r N _ yV 4C >. I u` c� a V P ry✓ L V N � N r 4C 9 q .r 9 9 � V • � ° r s zl L V � • O V O " b V O O u°oo LI u l� WI W l- V � T I V O_ o V = O c •• ^c c v �L u_L c r -L•.Ln 1 •q v+0 w - L r0 � `V• 4i _�N - L O✓ -° LL L q 4a V N N _ C L j V A r Y S y L d VVyV. V ✓C N °� _ V CN C<� V .•• � 9 QV W r p n L` F' e Y• 4 V °O V V i g t 9 V I r Y d= Q V --.r Z• ri rC O_ L •1 N L „` P •r.. d � 9 L L v C r N -� L f «t •Vr 9 P q l 4 I _ r l uL W _ V 49 O[Or rJ r o •� C cF V✓d e. P ✓> o d .` OpC LYpNV EOrd rOL a:: L1r L•r a.r _ yV 4C >. I u` c� a V P ry✓ L V N � N r 4C 9 q .r 9 9 � V • � ° r •� L V Cdr _V L)y`�L° Jqy � r 40pp r O C q ✓ C 9 Y 9 ° C N - Jr Y f. OC V_ J q Vr�m•• r^ 9 A 4• 4 \ te V Q v M q+ N L � L ♦ .. M N° p � urL � cr q r �� _W -rMrd LL✓ ✓ err ✓b N °�° f.V °< sari °i .V. lV 4vv` n mZ9 OO�� ✓ L�s�d� _N OVL L LLNMw. 4JOL� yY c. py OLV L� pV GJO N •O LI u l� WI W l- V N L I V O_ o V = O c •• ^c c v �L 1 v+0 w < O •i V 9 L LL V N N _ C L j V A r Y S y L d 9 I = L O n 4 c _ N G F _OJ O -- QV W I _r0 L I r Y --.r Z• ri rC < I cou N L P C O C r XLs W _ V 49 O[Or LI u l� WI W l- 1 i v O_ o V = O c •• ^c c v V d V O S y L - Y N •may m✓ _OJ Ny --.r Z• ri rC N L P C O C r V� GP V C• r = r o •� C V LO 1 i 0 v 6 q v a d u v O O a - yq 9 q N + w r F N = v Y t s 9d L r 0 V ` o c N c v s = d V q P � c c b z V _ l N cq of V 9 W r �I G 1 4 T L T rN ° ° G G b °I < N4 � 1 .V N � TVP O OrWJ N ��9V .n+ui. G j1 L � 4 c•� W 41 9 W VV� T a 4= N C C P V T b i V O r;; _ r L M 4 � ° = =fir 4 � y 4N � °Or <°.c .c„ c � o 9 L W oo ° 9� �:c 9 d L •Li• l u C L q O � r•°. : � � z ° N C 2,— 9L • •r �n ^ v�W G �`� r= O y r .r�� r L V r y pp yl n dOL ;"z t• 22 G r90VV _ 4 ^� Lbw qG G = �Yr 6 9 L° L n _ = C Ly, d r `� M O N d L — V LT Y. L r I I q O • ° r p f 7 L b q w r w P P G r G< C 9 n C -IV P h r f r O • T V I r'V - a i v F I � ` 4 � WW �� •^ « O n• war r � °Y � F ... cdF 4� l i I '=— � °•c• ° c — Nb � `a L ., I L �' l � d p Cry T C 4 1 IT.� c c <e « p wD o m .°. z F I +a :'• i Z Oq•� rC 4 199 l n Vr_ O qp! q G wN 4V q _l W 00 ` W �LS v 01 L'yI L_ C^ w C r � G O T « q O O« V� 4 l n f L ^ I V .°i = V ^ r •r°i b S r n G N C V q q F O O Y L _ _ 9 <� c P � m I � c .•• �. .`-. r .L... � ter• ^= °, � a a q y: � LI <rL• I 1 L �• W P ^ 1 C O C 4 O V O l Oi •r V a I? q fj w O V r G I LL � �� O`9 Oai 4 `IIII _``P' W9 d•L.. �r �WL L I Q� r v.•Q _ I T ` � � P G O V •� d L I L T q C N N L 4 W� L °• L u 4 4 V CO T O U r 'a « 4 b I O« « Z 9 •L... 7 N u• a j V y N V n l q I u � � E I V V� NnY t� � .-. � b O 0 n` C a4. d NP °r C O q r• � N I w Y n O .� 4 �� —« N ♦ D T d .Li r. cN rp c Y I 9 n —c V `' V L P. I O rr V ` W l• C ` V i O u^ y N n 4 P w L r r ^ r` ° y C Y •J L« � ry — O w � T q r f d 4 P a C ^ T o? v G M .` rS Iwr S_ 4 s Ur 4I Y W r �I G 1 _ L T rN ° ° G G b °I < N4 � 1 .V N � TVP O OrWJ N ��9V G L 1 W 41 9 W VV� T a 4= N C C P V T b i V O r;; _ r L M 4 � ° = =fir 4 � y 4N � °Or q C 9 � « � i 0 � « P � • •Li• l u C L q O � S � � � 9 y ° N C 2,— t r • •r �n C n v�W G �`� r= O y r .r�� r L V r y pp yl n dOL ;"z t• 22 G r90VV _ 4 ^� Lbw qG G = �Yr 6 9 L° L n _ = C VJ yLC d r `� •^� �yL LT (b YI L r _�� C Y a� b r C V r'V - WW Nb �9 NLL r W•V• ar .L d T C 4 T C d y « p F J^= z F 1C F N L qp! q Tw Ned 00 W �LS r°. 01 L'yI L_ V q= r^ S r n G N C V q q F O O Y L _ _ 9 <� •I � LI I 1 W r �I 1 I� rN ° ° G G b °I < N4 � 1 .V N � TVP O OrWJ N ��9V G L 1 W 41 N VV� _Z2 r r N V� O, V V O L g 4 =N Lzg G V «q «q...4 NL l'J C •.�� is` °�LN� voc W.o faLP. �d� �/�\ YyC� pCy'V_ =C a]�G= P1 O •G. 1 O LV > L ` r 4 V W T� OWN 2 _ Vu v yVP P °b� NV 9 •F `SN �• 7 ^� Lq°gV L_rVw N� iN �wf <V 11 El 0 rN ° ° G G N4 � � N N � TVP O OrWJ N ��9V _Z2 r r N N C C P V L y V V O r;; _ M 4 � ° POQ = =fir 4 � ���r M 4N � °Or � « � i 0 � « P � • •Li• l u C L q O � S � � � 9 y ° N C nut" ; t r O 9 C n t ; a r r r= O y r .r�� r L V r y y V gfWj d dOL t• 22 G r90VV G = =L r d r -IV 11 El 0 �JA a �4 El c ^ a 9 L�0r .Y.•v C fyy C v Q� �OL�• q ^ ,Zzz_ P� « C JwV O O C P O L N u C Y V. J O b Wn « V q V y cb^ E L q f Mm 4 L G C r L 7 4 N O O 6 b d O r c r d d IC •O R « OC � 1�V Q V q IO S� O V vr` [ V Qwr 4 •q......y _ II'•' N r •� � c 2 EV O �� o � M C ^° rry ^'r r o 4j I O: N ,O � L � � u �� '�fi Ord €;�•ry a�« � 3;, �p��.. c�^ � ✓�J CSC tires q fllW� -4 �9� V _V N O ^ V ILrO V r' Cy 0 0 e• y �O= p� y C Lvi ^I q O O44b yG d �� C o• K pLpVr =d q py_ w K T L r T` i �°• V 2S P 40 d U L V G y.a VO �w >;r CI ° aL,, c'�Gi O 1 wY CJPV C r M 1• � V V l qL �„ V ('' CyC f.s q .I V.4 tG • b 4J ►Q rG q P�qqi C � (r JL`� hESCLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMO1*14 PLANNING COMMISSION RECO101ENDING APPROVAL OF PLAN"IEL, DEVELOPMENT NO. 81 -13 REQUESTING A CHANGE :N THE ZONING FROM R -1 TO R- 3 /P.D. FOR 9.2 ACRES LOCATED ON iE NORTHEAST CORNER OF ARCHIBALD AVENUE AND FERON BOULEVARD - APN 209 - 051 -01 WHEREAS, on th% 9th day of November, 1981, an application was filed and accepted on the dbove- describi-d project; and WHEREAS, on the 9th day of December, 1981, the Planning Commission held a duly advertised public hearing oursuan *_ to Section 65854 of the California Government Code. SECTION 1: The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission has made the following findings: I- That the subject property is suitable for the uses permitted in the proposed zone in terms of access, size, and, compatibility with existing land use in the surrounding area; 2. The proposed zone change would not have significant_ impact on the environment nor the surrounding prop- erties; and 3. That the proposed zone change is in conformance with the General Plan. SECTION 2: The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission has found that this project will not create a significant adverse impact on the environment and recommends to City Council the issuance of a Negative Declaration on December 9, 1981. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: 1. That pursuant to Section 65850 to 55355 of the California Government Code, that the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga hereby recommends approval -n the 9th day of December, !981, Planned Development No. 81 -13. L. The Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council approve and adopt Planned Development No. 81 -13. 3. That a Certified Copy of this Resolution and related material hereby adopted by the Planning Co =ission shall be forwarded to the City Council. Resolution No. Pace 2 4. All conditions of approval applicable tc Tentative Tract No. 12090 shall apply to this Planned Development. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 9TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 1981. PANNING COTP.ISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CJCFJMONGA BY: Jeffrey King, Chairman ATTEST: Secretary of the Planning Commission I, OACC 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 adcpted 5y the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 9th day of December, 1981, by the following vote - to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: CO M7ISSIONERS: ABSENT: C ^v 711SSIONERS: 11 is 0 C 40 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: December 9, 1981 TO: Members of the Planning Commission FROM- Jack Lam, Community Development Director BY: Jerry Grant, Building Official SUBJECT: APPEAL OF GRADING COMMI77EE DECISION — Gradi::g proposal - .4cr acre site, in the R -1 -20 zr,;,e located at the northeast corner of Sunstone Avenue aa:c Hidden Farm Road. ABSTR'aCT: Ordinance No. 118, which established the Grading Committee, also includes guidelines for use in grading review and established the procedure for appeal in the avent differences of opinion arise in application of the ordinance_ The applicant, John D. Rose and Associates, acting for owner Gary MacDonald, has appealed the decision of the Committee relative to disapproval of a submitted grading plan. XNALYSIS: The topography of the subject lot forms, generally, a slanted plane that slopes from northeast to southwest toward the intersection of Sunstone Avenue and Hidden Farm Road. To accommodate const:uction of the street, and gain reasonable access to properties along south side of Hidden Farm Road, the roadway was benched into the natural slope at the time of street construction. This created an earth bank along the north right -o£ -way line varying in height from 5 to 6 fee*_. finis bank conti.aues on around the corner onto Sunstone Avenue, decreasing with its northerly progression.. The applicant's grading plan proposes to create a single, level pad over the preponderance of the site, that would result in cut slopes approaching 10 feet in height at the northeast corner. At the southwest corner ar. additional 6 feet of fill would be created making the top of slope at the street intersection approximately 14 feet above curb elevation. It was the consensus of the Grading Committee that such an arrangement was inconsistent with the purpose of Ordinance No. 118. Ordinance No. 118, which established the Grading Committee and procedures W �e for plan review, provides that excessiv_ slopes should be discouraged, �� adjacent developed properties be ted. It also encourages me use of r spit- eve gra ing techniques and a variety of housing styles. jf� After several telephone discussions, a meeting with the applicants, and 3� a visit to the site by the Grading Committee, the Committee disapproved 'S the submitted grading plan on the basis that the -rading failed to achieve the purpose established by Ordinance No. 118. ITEM! F Appeal of Grading Committee Decision December 9, 1981 Page 2 At the meeting with the applicant several alternatives designs were explored including terracing, split level building construction a combination of the two. None of the alternatives were acceptable to the applicant, hence this appeal. Attached are copies of the proposed grading plan and Ordinance No. 118. Slides of the site will be available for viewing at the Planning Commzssi,, RECOMENDATION: it is recommended that the Planning Commission review the plan and Ordinance No. 118 to determine if the proposal is within the parameters of the ordinance. Respectfully submitted, , f a JACK LA,ti1, AICP Dire:tor of Community Development JL:JG:ps Attachments: Grading plan Ordinance No. 118 &` CITY OF 16 RANCHO CUCA MONGA PLA INC DiVnON ra.d; t a fast EM-fl f: _ __ } __ SCALE- 0 CRDINA,YC^w NC. 118 1S. f.7 ORDIKAP E U! 118E Crrf OP RA.VCRU CUCA7R) %C11 ESTABUSHIYC . _... A CRAD INC COW. *TTEE, PROVTDInC FOR Drj=P=.— D; CRADINC STA.vDA= v:D C- ZA5L'5RLYC POUCI= FOT =*JEW Dg GCADI IC t— (� ai PLA4 The City Comeli of tic City of %aacho Gxe - :nge doe. amain nn follms: // y SECTTOt: 1: TZ �E ipS ThIs ordi Unca nna12 be known and referred to as the Or.dlng Raviea protelure of the City of sancho Cucamonga. SPCTTOR 2: SCOPC ' This o:dienuce establish.. regulation, for aabmictel nod revim of Conct tual grading plans In connection Kth proposed irve:opnenc, ectabllaMe a Grading Coneittee for revlev of grading plan, and proof .:_ for estab :lohment of standards and guideline to be utilized by the ma Crading COittee and other City agencies it review o! Hoch plats. SRM04 T: p'dRPOSE ..�..,_�....��.... _. _.... .. Th. purposes of this ordinance uret (a) To mfalmlte the effects of Rrading by dlacouraglag sass grading and excessive alogen to ensure that the n,,nral chu:.ccar of crrcain La ratelnd. fb) To pteoerve significant copoyiap: :it features. Including, rw: u k oterrpp jags. native plant naeerlals and mcurel hydrology while al.v eseOvtaglag improved dralawge, from lots directly m a str.•st, star, drain• or rnroueh public or privately malnteined a,,mm t. (t) To limit the Impact of slopes On ad)ucant developed prOPnrtlx and limit COnettuction on ldentX1ad saiamie er RaOlogic hazard areas. (d) TO ancourege the use of a vsriery of houaiog atylaa, a9litlmel grading techniVUas. varied lot Ajaea. Rite design drnsStiea, maintenance of v1Oes and arraw,emaac and spacing to sctmpileA grzdlnl Policies. SEMON A: DEPINMMS For r:m purposes of thin chapter the drfinitlons listed h.zaunder OWE be Caatcru.d as npeclfiM In thin section. ifs) - 1CMICEPMAL CRADV:f. PLAN. Cradlag plans eontormine to the Provisions of S.ctlOn b of chin Ordinal.. (b) rtWAL CRADILLC PUN is A plau shoring all datalled drainage information, grade a :evnciona, building location and floor elevations. (c) FRELTM INAPT GRADING PLAN - plan ahoning bu Llding pad elevation, typlcaL drat Inge methods to be ut111zcd, and similar generalized infomaation, usually "Cluding, finish floor elevations• building locations, cad a.prcific drainage demis. SECTION 3: P ',n .1 ISRlff.NT' OP CRADING cc• lTTCE . Thom is hereby vstnbllnhaei t Crading, Commlterr, conpri,4 of one repreementi,: from chc Sending DLvinian, our represrnutLvc free • the Engineering. D1v Lalan. one one represeatativr from the plunn(:yr Dtvi.'1". Th, Crad Lng Camnitteo devil: (a) metes all grading plans submlctsc under Section o of this ordinance: (b) compLIV standardu and Cufdelanea relating to grading practices Including, but not liuLtcd to, topogrrp:.y, drainage str.icturee, slopes. Irrigation• planting. building pad dlffcrrZCa1 haghts, nr.. L:1111ry and such ocher feacares ar functions oaeesmary to atcanpllah the :ama NrL. 1S. 0 11 ar.., Ordinance fro. 118 pages 2 of this ordinance. Such standards and guidelines nhall be reviewed by the Planning Commi.w1as and a,,r ad by the City Council. When approved, the etandnrds and guidelines shall be utilized in rcylvv of all trading plena submitted to city mgeac Les for checking: and (c) act as An Initial reviewing, body in she event that practical w.If,w«.w r nMpw FwrAeblr n. rwne.,M .. w ww.,.er N .wne1..H..w e( the standards of guidelines, or In the sweet difference of opinion arises as to the r application. The findings of the Crading Com mittae are final unlama modified by the Plannlnr Commission at A regularly uehedul d site plan review hearing or through appeal, As sat forth in Section ) of this ordinance. when plans ate not subject to review trr the planning Comaiaalon. SECTION 6- CRADM REVf FJ PROCM ES At the time of submittal of w Tentative Tracr Map. Tentative :arcel Map. or Sit, plan for rr Aloprvat R -vlew, the applicant ,ball also submit tae tollovl"g icfoemaclon: (a) e_rorural reaturer. Map which shall identify all slope banks, ridgelle -s. natural drainage eonraes, rock outcroppings, etisrtng vegetation worthy of considerattoi for vcesarvation. Ala. depicted shall be landal:d. xnd ocher axlxtlnz gmclopiC hazards. each feature depicted shall to noted for its visual signiticance, emirontseetal function, or both. (b) A Conceptual Crading Plan Including Snformaticn naeasse" to determine the proposed grading, Concepts• elevation of pads, and natural futures r.. be preserved. The following specific information shall be depicted: 1. Arena to be laCt natural_ 2. Arms of propomad cut and fill in contrasting color,, with areas where cat and fill steed depths eetabllahsd In the hillside development guidelines clearly 3. Contours shall he stow for otlntiog natural land conditions and proposed work. The proposal final grades shall indicate clearly all, cuts, fills. and slopes. Coatours shall be show scourdlsg to the following schedule: A.curnl Slope 1Neximun Interval, Fee, ZZ or less 2 Over TL 6 up to 92 Over 92 10 4. A conceptual druf.nse mad flood control facilities describing planned drainage Smprooemants. 5. Conceptual Landscape treatment plan depicting proposed aroslon control ,assures. 6. Cseral vicinity of the proposed site. 7. property Brits and accurate contours of aslsting ground and detail of carrel" and arm drainage. S. Limiting diasneLons. alevatlona, or finished contours to be Acaiewd by the grading. and propomad dralnega• channels, retaining walls, and catered construction whown by contour asp. trove - sections, r ocher Aetna. 9. Location of any existing buildlnzs or structures on the property where the work. In to be performed and the Approximate loestion and tiro of any bnlldinC pAda proposed on the land. Adjacent parcels within 50 feet of the property or which try be affected by the proposed grading shall also be show. (e) A Ccoloe lcnl and Sall. kepere, prepared by an approved sells enn.inoertng fire and In same Lanc detail to substantiate and support the dewkgn concepts prevented In the preparation as submitted. (A) A Tnp rraphlc modrl, as determined neeasaary by the Viraetor of Community Oevalps"ent tot clarlticcttou of the proposed trading plan. The scale must be nuft N4ene to delineate details. f l 11 El Ordinance No. 1:B Page 3 The nUbmLttc.d intcrmotion nhall bo reviewed by the Crading Comlttnr during pertinent review process. The Gradi:C Committee ahsll act approve a conceptua. grading plan u•:eae it is found to conform with the policies. utandarda, and guldclinee, e,tab-ln1w.d by or pursuant co thi: ordln.nca- The approved conceptual grading plan mull provide the anla for preliminary and/or final eradlnE .Jn. Q =—r �!L' lrawlali.nn. SEMON 7 The Comounlr/ Develoy rnt Director may ualva any or all of the [r9uireme[tts of Section b of this VrC l.unee if be decern�ines that any p.0,ovad waiver will have no siF•niflcant nflect upon topography. Cralnage, and /or natural feacuras. SEC.T 09 A Ito Tentative Tract Map. Tan ncive Purcal Yap, or Site Plan submitted for Davolopsent Review shall be approved until a conceptual grading plan :.as been approved or has bean valved. SEC710N 9 Any Sncerasted parena may, within 14 days after a decision by the Crading Cp Jctao, appeal mid decision In writing to the planning Cooslacion pursuant to appeal proeaduras autllned in the zoning ordinance. SE[TIOY ID is The Mayor shale sign this ordinance and the City Clerk e�+ll attest to the arose, and the CSr� Ulu';, " shall use the fame to to published within LSfreen (15) days efr a its panaage, at least once in T+,T peily Report• a nounoaper of groartd. G _culatlon publishad in the City of Ontario, .:olifornie and circulated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOP=D this :0th day of August, 1980. AYES: Front. Mlkels, Relombo. Bridge, Schlosser MOPS: Nom A=IXr: Bore A 1CST: l+uren tt. W0"Vean, City Clerk Yn111Lp D. Schl tLLoasrr, Ynyv[ 11 E 2 U DATE: I: FROM: BY: SUBJECT: CITY OF RANCIiO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT December 9, 1981 Members of the Planning Commission Jack Lam, AICP, Director of Community Development Curt Johnston, Assistant Planner 81 -35 - JEhKIPIS - The development of two inauscr:a buildings totaling 36,150 square feet in size on 2.14 acres of land located on the northeast corner of 6th Street and Turner Avenue - AP' ^09- 261 -19 and 20 ABSTRACT: The Applicant is requesting review and approval for the development of two industrial buildings as described above. The project has completed the Development and Design Review process and is now before the Planning Commission for their review and approval. Staff has prepared a detailed Staff Report, related Resolution, and Conditions of Approval f:r your review and con- sideration. BACKGROUND: The Applicant, Robert Jenkins Associates, is requesting approval o° their proposal to develop two industrial buildings; one totaling 16,500 square feet and the other 20,250 square feet. The 2.14 acre site, located on the northeast corner of 6th Street and Turner Avenue, is divided ioto two lots as shown on Parcel Map 5499 (Exhibits "A" 8 "B "). The site is designated as General Industrial/ Rail Served (Subarea 5) in the Industrial Specific Pian and on the General Plan. Since 6th Street i; a Special Boulevard, this pro- posal requires review and approval by the Planning Commission. The project site is currently undeveloped witl only deteriorating grape vines. Existing on the east side of Turner, bordering the site, is an existing concrete -lined dra "nage channel measuring approximatt_,ly 8' deep and 6' wide. Land adjacent to the site on the south and west sides is vacant. To the north is Sharon Circle, which is surrounded by vacaat land. ITEM G Development Review 81 -30. Planning Commission Agenda December 9, 1981 Page 2 .ANALYSIS: The project site is adequate in si - >e and shape to accom- modate the proposed use as shown on the Development Plan. All building setbacks, landscaped areas, and parki,cg requirements for the buildings are designed and provided in accor:ance with the industrial Specific Nan, City Standards end Gr•dindr -es. AS shown on the Si Le "Plan, Exhibit "C ", the Applicant intends to develop two buildings fronting on Sharon Circle some time ;,i the future. These buildings are shown conceptually. Their fins" design will be determined through the Development Review proc:ss at a later date. Access to the site is provided by a 35' driveway off of 6th Street. Temporary access wit: be provided at the north end of the site to Sharon Circle. Emergency hammerhead turn, arounds will be provided behind both t i ?dings to satisfy Eire District requirements. Roll -up doors are provided on. the north side of both buildings for loading, while office space wilt be provided for each tenant on the south side or the buildings facing 6th Street. As a multi - tenant industrial use, ooth buildings are parked at one space for every 400 square feet of ouilding area. Approximately 20% of the required parking is for compact cars and bicycle racks are provided for each building. The elevations are shown on Exhibit "D ". A covered sidewalk and entryway will be provided along the entire front of the building, as can be seen on the typical section shown on the elevations. The exterior materials will consist of concrete wills with wood siding provided along the south side of the buildings below the office windows. Landscaping will be provided on 6th Street and Turner Avenue at an average depth of 35' as shown on Exhibit "E ". Trees will be provided in front of the west building, but not in front of the building to the east. Staff recommends that tree planters be provided between the parking stalls in front of this building. Also, Staff recommends that landscaping on Turner Avenue be pro- vided up to the north edge of the loading dock area pavement. This landscaping is needel to screen the view from Turner Avenue looking into the loading area. Fuli street improvements will be required along the frontage of the property on 6th Street and Turner Avenue. The existing drainage channel will be covered up and the street expanded to its ultimate width. A meandering sidewalk will be required along 6th Street, while the sidewalk on Turner Avenue will be provided adjacent to the curb. TPie Grading Committee has epproved the Conceptual Grading and Drainage Plan. Also, the = oothill Fire Protection District has approved the Site Plan with the understanding that both buildings be fire ,prinklered. Development Review 81 -35 Planning Commission Agenda December 9, 1981 Page 3 he Design Review Committee formulate the design which recommends its approval. A elevlltior!s pikm a building at the Planning Commission and Staff worked with the Applicant to is presently before the Commission and colored Illustrative Site Plan and materials sample board will De available meeting for your review. Part I of the Initial Study, as completed by the Applicant, is pro - vided for your review and consideration. Staff has completed Part II of the Environmental Assessment and found no adverse impacts on the environment as a result of this project. If the Commission con- curs with such findings, then issuance of a Negative Declaration would be in order. CORRESPONDENCE: A Notice of Environmental Determination was advertised in Thy Dai ly Report newspaper an November 27, 1981. To date, no cor- respcndence has been received either for or against the project. RECOMMENDATION• It is recommended that the Planning Commission consider all input and material relative to this project. Ir the Commission con- curs with the findings of Staff, adoption of the attached Resolution with Conditions of Approval would be appropriate. Respectfully submitted, JACK. LAN, AICP Co=. unity Development Director JL:CJ:jr Attachments: Exhibit "A" - 'Vicinity Map Exhibit "B" - Parcel Map 5499 Exhibit "C" - Detailed Site Plan Exhibit "D" - Elevations (2 Sheets; Exhibit "E" - Conceptual Landscape Plan Part I, Initial Study Resolution of Approva: with Conditions i ( i i .. _iILIG'r r < z ft1 i(J y Z 1II > <� FOO" H 1'.: SL.% - ....... .. ......... i• r !Z loo tv � .:,:. _iILIG'r r (,aa�i- 4+-- �+- +.+•^���'i t1i -►�•f -moo... i-- w•.Y+' !s :: •I •.• -�i - i j to (4• C I T :" Or Iran: G RANCHO CLCAMO\'GA -rrny-: yiomrr-r mm[ PLANNING DIVIRON A _ SCA LE- ttr4 Vww ♦♦^^,, V =`VI� ft1 i(J 1II 4 D = _- (,aa�i- 4+-- �+- +.+•^���'i t1i -►�•f -moo... i-- w•.Y+' !s :: •I •.• -�i - i j to (4• C I T :" Or Iran: G RANCHO CLCAMO\'GA -rrny-: yiomrr-r mm[ PLANNING DIVIRON A _ SCA LE- ttr4 Vww ♦♦^^,, V =`VI� 0 I tiV 1,41IVt PARCEL MAP NO 5 a 99 , I i 9 I�Id i •,r.ip! _irj I u fl W i (f ii III I I i'.' •I IY1 °I ✓'��nli Ih _7 I t' it � 1 i ��. P.N. LOT 'C' NO. C'Zf=UON,:C TOWNSRE [stSSwo ww[rAwDS •LDQ / \ 4 ,.«.. �p. A SMEc, _yp t w•!c LW< &Loa x c 6 [:,r,wc WADEVARD3 c L25A 1J DLOG /\ D I 1 G� NORTH 17,7 OF ITE is —s RANCHO CUCATNZOi GAL T1Ta E: L. �L.S' AP 51gfM PLA.INNING D!t'L`" N EUil9T : IF- —SCALE- *4.175• to S ' m.[ w•i O y N . t• y - et � IIt I 1 G� NORTH 17,7 OF ITE is —s RANCHO CUCATNZOi GAL T1Ta E: L. �L.S' AP 51gfM PLA.INNING D!t'L`" N EUil9T : IF- —SCALE- *4.175• 'SITE,.: 'PLAN' E II 15� 25-VlL=nA4& 45 NORTH CITY OF ITEM: a- RANCHO CUCATMONGA -,IT,-E: PILAM PLANNENTG E"XqSIO.N F-xP,Pzr- r-- E �� tea" ®. •C ' ��11 - i- � Vi r.�:. ►. �RTN XLEVATION — ELEVATION _WE9 ?_ :ELE1/A770Nf • F' .. . 777777? Ohl - 61.F^iT.4tF.'L a M T m=u- 9;=r=m _lw=ua - ^dDE 'aGlT77 .ELEVATlMM WEST SulL�1NG CI'T'Y Or. IrF-:,t: C-6 ® RANCHO CLTCATMO`GA mu: or ls_wrsr PLANNING DIViSiON EXHIBIT:_ T SCALE: ;�eeT t LJ 6CUTN O.EVATIO" I .ZR- 4 D.:VATxm CITY Or, RANCHO CUCATNIONUk PLANNING DIMS ON TITL °= 9:LsmoCr,das — EAST Inxic., c \I iIBri - �_ SCALE_ :�;Osfrr z El I I . I 1, I 1 I I I ! I � I I I I I Lj +�w.•• �ww� q..�.w ,w. gent >w�I�6��(rA•�A .-!M -wart 1 I1 S�C:M VRE1: PARKDO 1117 PLAmmag � ...o ate. w•.vnt..�wwe / r1Pw� • � _O, ZSo SC2. CT. I I � r L ' +F. � L Au;rnc+4R 2'd L- AHt>sCJkTINlo CITY OF iTENI- a RANCHO CUCAI ONL GA - nn-E: ,l , vs -m -nv% sr ?LAw PLANNING DIVISION Extil - — SCALE. --N.-77 NORTH CITY OF RS.NCHO CITC.,MONGA INITIAL STrmy PART I - PROJECT INTFORM.ATION SHEET - To be completed by applicant Enviro. -rental Assessment Review Fee: $ &0.00 For all projects requiring environmental review, this form must be completed and submitted tc the Development Review COmmi.ttee throi,an the department where the project application is made. Upon receipt of this application, the Environmental Analysis staff will prepare Part II CE the Initial Studv. The Development Review Committee will meet and take action no later than ten ;10) days before the public meeting at which *_ire the project is to be heard. The Committee will make one of three determinations: 1) he prefect will have no significant environmental impact and a Na"ative D=l.aration will be filed, 2) The project will have a significant 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: I v-7-0 T�2iAL Gil•! APPLICANP4S NP� , Al)rRESS, TELEPHONE: 2 c _ 11"? 2710+ (714 ) 751 -5i6� IT' M.E, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE OF PERSON TO BE CONCERI7ING THIS_ P:.OJECT: Jep955 -R-r %G_tifl[s t'714 i -751— 7745 LOCATION OF PROJECT (STREET ADDRESS AND ASSESSOR PARCEL NO.) 95. � ne-rU -:5-r. GEL AJX- 54 _ aLS�c�yi� c T'i - LIST OTHER PERNdITS NECES ARY FROM LOCAL, REGIONAL, STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCi S AND THE AGENCY ISSLTING SUCH PERKITS: 1 �V PROJECT DESCR =?TIOR 2 1 ACREAGE OF PROJECT AREA AND SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED BUILDIP:GS, IF ANY: 2L -14 A 06I rS DESCRIBE THE EMIRO'_r_^NTAL SETTINTG OF T= PROTECT SITE INCLUDING INFOR -1— TION ON TOPOG ?AP -3Y, PL_AZ,7.LS (TREES) , ANIIdALS, ANY CULTURAL, HISTOP.IC.-M OR SI.'NIC ASPECTS, USE OF SURROLNDING PROPERTIES, AND THE DESCRIPTION OF ANY Is the project, part of a l.rger project, one of a series of crmulative actions, wnich a'_chough individually snail, may as a whole have significan environ- ntal z=mact? Ir.� ems, $ �� r'}GGgvAL fJESt��! of -��� , 12 WILL T ?:IS pRO.:r•,^_T: _DES NO Create a substantial change in ground contours_ 2. Create a substantial chance in existing ncise or vibration? _LL 3. Create a substantial change in demand for municipal services-!police, fire, water, sewage, etc.), ?. Create changes in the existing zoning or general plan designations? 5: Remove any existing trees? How many? KAM ♦�:, a ., Create the need for use or disposal o£ potentiall;a hazardous materials such as toxic substances, £iaables or explosives? answers above: IMPORTANT: If the pr•,ject involves the construction of residential units, complete the £orm on the next page. CERTIFICATION: 2 her- '-may certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and information required for this initial eva_uation to the best of my ability, and that the ::acts, statements, and information. presented 2ze true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief_ I further understand that additicnal information may be required to b-z submitted before an adequate evaulation can be made by the Developr,,ent Review Committee. Date 2 -3 Signature Title 0 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION Ot AE RANCV0 CUCAMONGA PLMN,ING COMIM.ISSION 5111F 'I.NG DEVELOPMENT REVIF4 NO. 81 -35 LOCATED ON THr 11RTHEAS7 : CORNER Or SIXTH SIMEET 1N0 TUR -NER j= 1N THE GI/PR ZONE WHEREAS, on the 9:.h cay of Octaber, 1981, a complete aoal;,;atior was filed by Robert Jenkins AssoLiatpc foi review sf the abcve- described project; and WHEREAS, on the 9th day of December, 1:81, the Pancho Cucamonga Planning Commission held a meeting to consider the above- described project. NOW, THEREFORE, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission resolved as follows: SECTION is That the following findings can be -net: 1. That the proposed use '.s in accord with the objectives of the Zoning Ordinance and the purposes of the zone in which the use is proposed; and, 2. That the proposed use, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental -) the public health, safety, or welfa -e, or materially in,;urious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; and, 3. That the proposed use is in compliance with each of the applicable provisions of the Zoning Ordinance; and 4. That the proposed project is consistent with the Genefal Plan. SECTION 2: That this project will not create adverse impacts on the environment and that a Negative Declaration is issued on December 9, 1981- SECTION 3: That Development Review No. 81 -35 is appr.,ved subject to the following conditions and at-cached standard conditions: PLANNING DIVISION 1. Landscaping shall be provided up to the north boundary of the loading area pavement adequate to screen view from Turner Aveosue into the loading area. Also, trees shall be provided in finger planters in front of the east bull4ing. Both items shall be designated on the landscape and irrigation plans submitted to the Planning Division for review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. Resolution No. Page 2 2. Both buildings shall be fire sprinklered as per Foothill Fire Protection District standards.. ENGINEERING DIVISJON 3. The existing concrete channel on the east side of Turner Avenue from 6th Street to Sharon Cr., shall be reconstructed to a box culvert or replaced with a pipe of sufficient capacity to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 9TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 195, . PLANNING COMMISSIOI. OF THE CIT" CF RANCHO CUCAMONGA SY: Jeffrey King, Chairman ATTEST: Secretary of the Planning Commission I, JACK LA.M, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regu':rly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning 'omumission held on the 9t:- day of December, :981, by the following vote - to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: E 11 ElR rl 13 • 4 4 4 n V r ✓ � _ V V V O r — W O � n ° L C .� = y i ry l . N O �✓ L O L G d � r _ 2 q — 4 U d 4 S L r O p P A n b r � — � f «� d ✓ U A✓ O � r r 0 U L O♦ C V + r= .l C r y -r u � P L 4 T N V q r ✓ V l O V 6' ^ V d Q j 04 °C° «� r r V L � Vv 64.nV 4 ✓O .u1 WTC '$ N �.. 04 � .«. Y. L �ta•c L i r - - T✓ .`. -L- qc ns4 � ✓ Jb G ✓V r .� C � � Nl � A O. 2 . V U U C r b� � �— O T V OJO ✓Rn L✓ L w C T . V O r ti y L ✓ Diy n ^ l>d = pLC `L NV^ LL 4l ✓ _ � Vr S;.NVO — N _� .n .TV C ^ Q n— ✓ IJJ Y [LL+T �— �L. L ✓L.�� «A i. L O u u A = VG U6 grpL — ♦ Fr y c` � TI. IA �JL40 b n b� r �r o6 Vt VO q Lt _ ✓aVL L — �` U C C_ V � .rr6 .rirW P Y✓ IW LN U «� NA •.•V �� °V d F O li'VL_ N` >V «L °J ✓> MJZLr A yW ° '.: PO P_ O nr Wr�iiG A iS bOl V��104 - cs e� io N upR.c o �1` °W L•o WOr c v^ _ u N` ° r « °� 6 « N O rV q > V V r L c � r°r ✓ V rLrr A L ✓ A 1C ` «✓ =. V .nl V' V n .� C 7 \: L 7 CV Y +J �°. `� � V 4 L` N L C 4 "ii °e -�� .ri �c i ^1 r � o °i Nnn �_ °✓ wQ =a �� - L O. 4= f J✓ n Y✓Vd � 4 ..vir aAgVr .n✓ N �I V1 — ✓ °r 4q �N V FL «✓ C (� L = SS S WV`s C'�N L— O� `C S A dV c r r ✓ L Rr q r• V O V.L O: O L O. C L I �.� � .n [+ V —_� U r« V _ `C = —S^✓ ` r l —O —V J A Vyy�C NV «O �4 W�V «.n= �V` °du N Jt 4•V AALV �� Li �� NU 4.La �r� y4r 4.°r. WOLF �Y v� ✓A4i tid Ntw r. r°.[W it WY�A m V .. _ v °O W A _ L <L d✓ L ✓✓ ✓ VJI W m L O C r y 6 V N A n q Y G P V V 1 � � = V � C ✓ � V n� VI A M « U —✓ AC La —C _ 4w u 9 _ r — uLO9 4 �N N4 =L —u E ri z o r d 1 w FC J ✓C `L 3 OW qL «` VP ✓CO v4 ° CO r t q ^ } a b m ° r V V ✓ O A f) C O T V r N —p N V- w -q e� WY rr4,� = r VV 0 O W 4° —4 v NG ^r0 LM L`L4Q OV YLr GCU� ✓ ti r I CV YA « V Ou w 1 � SI 46 cVP —N A q —U °l 4A =P` V OV z ly — J v ° ✓ 4 LS O C A � Y �� °L L ✓L�' �L Z =yY y _. d r u —� r�C4 A V � ` O V SO .V �wur q> «� dpV >A Ld u °rq ° w� cn °L C A V° . P ry�U Vy � Oq� 11 ✓9 M a � O ! T �✓ r A L J L' V° r f. Q T GOO 0 C V l_ A A L ti z N I C S I _4W. CV ✓ ` A w� V V C � r.J ✓ A ✓ °C r�fn� K' P.' N 7.15 � d �V 4� � C^ N a LY V� Y•I �ffT Ar N Nr i ' °l jZ q 1 c i0 .>ir c4 �4 pR APA 4Q a =d OO° ^y�A � K cy •—n GV O °r.^ •^ V✓U N JVV rrN n� 4 V F yC 4 �rj dS� LC �V w N Iii A V r AO 27° PE 4�r G `G 4Y VVA 2r C LtL Sr 00 °d I� J( �U TJAC ACU Yu ld✓ 4T Oqy �Cq °N 4 °rA rL r✓O CyI O^ O� VL LQ« L`« qr r� `JG Nor y jPA � MW1 nL r; „ Vr O Nr 60� c(r✓ Y•. OC fTw <V 4z A D.�.I t0 «w z rtL .. 4 � �1111M1\ A \J1 \JIB \JII y° o F 46 3 \JIB \y I1 1 1{ ElR rl 13 !r = •- 1� ° - VW •J9 .- r � Lrn Ir V� r °fju ONrV II 2 Jlp�� o M: "�°.� a ry 9 . y v oN ° YN _ r ° ° ,� ° ° � li: �✓. .ems ` L � o��L vo q d .n•.(� :T w ° PW ` u N n' 7'-oiO w Y.r° 9 � L L V I Su L V r_V r qA L L v un N �.. C• .�:•r V9y�9 < �°, � W .�. �• u L � .L. .n V =y p� a.N V. ly y N N« r✓ LC V rJ b�u `' L4 r L w Y� r _ L V O O L L l 9 4 « ° 4 I✓ I4 u� y n< G C. « N n= r ._ N W p ^ r .r n. .°- � .. V O M✓ y ` y�l r ¢ L i' y y rr rc - F' p 1j4 ` V J N M a LN.n br � 'o y � yb�nir °a.�_a�•'p ✓: — I tom= W�� Y ✓JL V` 4`4 Y O a p C r V �• ` � �` w rLir � � l %` C V WiuVllw «q VxVrC <✓J� <} `r [Tn wO L°C 4 4IV W ✓ I q L P � � I✓ b N O 2 6' G V L u � C f «✓ V T O C I A¢ ^ �� V ° <l F n � r' y N �� •JVq d� W w- ¢` C' ��O L n W ✓ < V � N L >GL AO O ^9 4« 6GC rnyL �� ¢' - � Or V C� = y`.V ^� 9 ^ V9 04 9 N1 C cr� O =y' L IN 9 IW yw y9.d, 9L ..0 v Cy6 CCr .T C I c _ 4 Gy .� O =V✓ b.nr n� paV p-W Lq -w «N CT C N ✓C r r OLI ^r q Vr0 e94 C ^OJVCn N Va, `b r C=e p Nt Oi 4I 1Ln � I dLV LL9 JLYa�NV i.nA Ca 6V� T^r VV r i.J'r <rn Nr 1.fy <6m r9 ' U6 �O Uw }-x✓ r(i9 NO 64vV F ^NO4 ^l � �� � •� I � I N' ^1 � N� atl O W C _ v o � NV iu y Uw L = < l4 .p o^ e•uF L cL COP L o �YLC y 9L `O✓ ,- YV4 y _ °L• NOO �!G N _ QS ✓ C ry`r O =VC �O NL r «1..%9✓ C¢� �� r L cb o <.4i. _ ✓c y c c ..: . Vo =x� y N`1aL �• YiC _L ^q _ °� ryL «V � t ~¢ .21 ^ ✓ = ^L•sY^a°.°n Y n.�.� o,r r_ 4 T•CV u �C .n a�Vq rr4 ^L•_ p_ VVNgr TON CO. V O u I V 9 •� V fq Srpi l �VN 4 q r� V b C M p v nl V` r V 0 r LV VO 9 rNi YV = N..[Cn �J J 4' °4. 9 C W P «cr _ = N n nW r o .`.r � a`�c =.«. ..� if dr 9 c�°.v:�LC, Y'.L.N �o. 4•, ' V - Y � q� u r N✓ L ^rCadOd y< u .n.aRgVY�•- N La°i r V n N` =Q V ✓G «L9 C ¢ qYr p°C. N O9 ytr �'MG�wr CNC 1N, l� NQy PC�O V� q` 9 P Q r r NuQ_ Cr �� •VaCY 4V 29 VG ✓ dL9�q� 9 q V _ T v a- O •� Y L ✓u n.� L PO �4Ny r N' t « N1- N.Li. PVC LVC^ r 9_ 4yVTrL., a L r W✓ C9 o rn O.O �4�N O ✓O +V pyr y= aWaC2O l+ t O Y✓ ` r w T L C J L 4 r 9 9 C 4 O 6 y C n O y✓ V OY TO•�r ^� yPr CO. • w i N _ yt Tr,Jrr rrir « r r_ `CG Y G ul TN wt ,tea <u q L c nb` Cdr4 `3P -GC 4.i C9 Y 9� r V Y Y `• 4N VN V ^4u lr0 =�0 t;'4 C. ✓nN 4 �N(+,✓ .l��JN y�G « NdL r � }O pq «N VU GTJi Cu w�« OON n� L « ^V v�u w C. O NC OV• NL4 V9rGrP ONV L 9 `p NFL L�dO N a~ �G Vern _ C•� �O IL. V` L� n Q CC NT9!!rr «Y Y Pb Y rVr y COS PNV6 '09 ✓`A Yr C� VVgG °4C VV y^ ^C�^ L 9 «f_ �Y 9 G. r•nPY .r »Y.. .L.r C�gyb VO. �N.4.. F w 0 e C OIL LN�O .n rW •C°GngW9 Y^ C� OL V� P� 4 J � V V r w V ^« r t .4n N d Y •f Q � a 4 C ^car v t r V_ t L 4 V�` « 20 V y✓ V C 9 V `r= {Cj ^`�� y r O. O aq Q W ° ^'L^C. r'N`✓ ✓YVN r. a`r .<.wu". � <L WYVO�r�O .n9ri <rrn V. <p tP6MMlr yA <L 04 r. N I� W G L + P - < O P w rq C✓ 4 {{C (b`4 ✓O+Viro L~w ✓ C V 4fa VO �oLr �t°c P� V O � V Y C L V J� O 4 q Vr N` q S M 1 N Y L .✓rr — Y °. l cq rVr �� ^� ✓ C J 9 Y �r= Na u�Y= c �°. I I I L �� Vri ✓ O� OV Y Ong •-JC ✓ lC .f 1 N° n ° ✓ N V O -• V i° w U O � V .n L r V T C` i R W V Y .� ✓ i ✓ I! m V V a u°mL N ° q m amp Q m V N .: ✓.: ^ -.. �..�� 4T O V q .- ]G Nm ✓ V m b W W L V Y r . ,� L —= J N ` ^ N I. ✓ 9 V L y ..` W S + V L' `m ` +C J ✓ c� � L SA ° e0• 6 „Vr -TV •N.r �•°.•. rCA � ` V Pc � Vary d L -� m Ny —r. du ✓fro : L G I Tr � V �° P I c° d L L 4 ♦• W N I N �. L °, —` V r 4 rr V M C I L n O P = W •+ C C °Y V V q ✓I' — T 9L °q YVi � aV— p °✓ `y Cr+ `4l dN T� 6N t C C n ° A y( °tN m �}° �_✓.: O✓ V. `m 4V0 L T I y.V V JP� NvY ` —� \°.WO -W✓^^ �r •'J- Y w ` ” am we q o _o`.. tL It ° .. .°. o•r .'..: c f P i a. a_ ✓ " ` it Y' N i ro .. y + o I - - o L � V` ✓ !. T^ ! r . a V O V G L V mT= L ° a O ym0 L M Nd p✓ V - L �C u rr = �m.L- .O'.PC L'W Vp JGy N , a I I + 4°— LL n-L NY ✓ C a_ V 40 O +r W N � -- N d� pp O✓ OL°.N✓ q 0' c ONir C Y �'/ —+ A I �� ro ✓. .�Y✓m.- `.. `r n<rN� °N Liv � a.�N ✓�irn �� a L� � f ' 1 :.� a.T `1 _ 4n` Ar d V WL4 N:: - 4 +- a M rul VIN - ' 1�. N —n ✓y ? ^w y r. v IOW r.. c s`>6v YL aWW N dam✓ =oN LLq oar `::o � N4 W✓ r-✓° ^- °�•°. yo:: Nom• ✓ .r LTYC2 TyY PZ6q y ar- .Y..Vq VA VA PVL n F. .P-- H •Y^^ 1 rVTP C dN 1 r!^ V �_ V✓ °ii4 16, uJ�l— �� y°Y•YC. ti V n'q 4 .. ✓� � ' `V O -� ✓r — V N O u�i W S ✓ � V O ^ ° ` ✓. T + N O � - � — ♦l LJ I � I � c 4 ' i N — PrnP✓LL NO �� CC+' —� j �rr0 YVV WN CL �q � �? —^..V m` V _• ✓N ✓N 14 1 a —V yy VL/3 +VmW �� •Oir vr0✓ ¢ L O 4 q' I�� 6N 0•J N•p J A V� VN l + f yV�• J 40 11' Lr QI�V 6v to N O p .i S V C+w V nCq � 40� yV •� � I V VI $ , 1 C GI � /� I 1 CL N� V r _ ° V 0 u �.`. c d.W. a�4Y r�✓ c N L c � 4 N o ✓u NJ GO VAN + .°._ i L AC V WlL Cn✓ - V V n�wmo- 4N m�ro � av✓_ m ^ J'>rN^T Lu Nv b rov W :. r =m.✓.c c+ a �. o N o oN r o � ire v✓ -o .° G.a ._ c cc ov .✓. o �._ +W -� �° "m2` `° ✓a. _ °N w.. .`a° - ._ vii r _ <` W + ✓Y -WO _•. y -?Y °O W_ � Pt m ^a ✓r c•J VW V. V �_ d =N ✓ � A� r+ 4 +p u CyrG w' C Oy. N_ VNaCV oi�zi d W {yam E ✓i� P '- ✓ ✓ �� ar Vn 'r l eo vv aiD ilea c ^: d V V T —° O — q V NLLTC£ N q V -• Td -v Oydr .✓i.�VYd✓ n —V LW 4i qS r ... SJ✓ VNP V d~LVr V _N L- LW Lr `.�L O C✓N.nC V✓21 J +✓ YLV br 'r ° ° • 40 Oy =�f0 r-•u W +L+ VIP W r WOO C W -c L✓V P q V .°.r V° r L. M ✓ � �ZgVVON✓gN `ca Y ` ` ✓ -rr N q c ✓ � Np = V n O r ° = L O .LV.. VV t �W .4, ` ✓ t�1[Vr ✓ L �Y - °�� {yNJLC 4 9 J W IL�LC U — W° VO •L L LJ ° W v r �yF� L m✓ C W � ! r4 V r � .•°. ^q s V a� a� Tr zN <�eNaq �a� ��_° <yrm.� ✓ ✓, � __ °,N cO°c r`yy `> Nco -c W._W,. °a�.`. q V a`o-i- r Y r .G P a G r r Y V W N O V N O V O+ L p TOrr° Or nCJL l w Yaa.. C ✓ Y l �,°La r+ V T V =✓Op OJ J� O � r /J N C �+ ° A N N =ice q = a rr •• •� _ ✓OS •-• 4�LY P<L1_ � _ Or ✓ D N° V 4 d N R C_ r O C V �✓ ° T l C s I O Y G O r c +ie O O V C r✓r. 0 C ° b i E q— C N ° N P V <r fr• Ca.VV+ L °�q 44w � y q ✓ 4 I r�L! ^+ 1• 9 +d „+ —YV N ✓ r+ VV °V rY M+rW -G —lpt ✓Ypp�� I X00 6�q Sr �W � t y_ C yJ �4L PO+ --.c Y.6 TCYW Y nA �= r ALY�d� +4w +0 LAMP OI Y.^9 � O•e Y•a e L N = p Yr V4 G C W O •� N Q T W fJ z ✓ r ✓= C - L q V l 0, ` — - W WZLL�ar_ ✓ � } L r WiNp Y l L oN r•°• o � by V O �r�N Y W r y °✓ l a✓ + ° O L W + Y L Yq N c � N N L q N ` ` jC SN•n PqL_ y NTM1C I `rte:. y ✓ rs °° - ai'�✓ - +N N�.W- - = � r r°YC m Y C UN c>r ✓ .T. -. � - arm ✓°• r r— V P V T aVi K N L✓ = V _ ro e W 4 oY•i R q+ 6 V .Li. O S CA N L Y ` _. V .Nr N nC °� q Ly° V Cy ✓� °�< CC u N C n � y +�� `°W ✓` M C q u -Z ^t L�` C O C g O4��O .ra. N O d 4 �OV +N Lq 4q eO•mW V .VirSu✓ b V °��d r V�° GO -• L+ q ✓r q V V u u f i Y .a mu4LL e V N T u r Y ✓ V L q = g c °— N< _Lyi N L W ✓ c C C c y l 9 `= V c L b ✓r L 1 V c b V N r N O. q� q Y E S r/ V r a-- •°.. V i�r <bui .LLe YN •O.rt04 u�Y•N Y --.��L u4 +< ✓ V dl V L --- Lkv =. OrN —VG J cI ro✓Od t—�LL L•Nr� ^� ���Y 1 .2 � r V —u VlL rO �Y yL W_ O NCO= M'J I ... 4. =-•6V N -�C 1CV yy �•^ =C ZVLL SSS y {U pOq =� ✓✓l0 L + J ►L-•✓ Vr •• rJ90 4�nv 4:>VO� 4OVYV N �..rV N�J� r VV W_• Yrw T W Nr c O i V L P n y V a � n L M l P ✓ L C y V� �v c r O P Y V V � q l L E: i -1 e `I L 1i v V c v r m s'Z y"a o✓ a ` L V .w G � � I SAN y � 1 v r r V Ate` Xa r ` V G C f0- AV� �- V a rp O r O P T i O C u y u u A d c V 4 4 9 O O a a v 6 n w Y O d r A C r ly a Y y rn y ` C O - ` ✓ T �WWO i E L L N o 7 - M O i A V 4 C Or A q� P n C 9 �✓ �OA r Er q V u= C O r - -N. C C Pd G b q = °x ✓ FJ G v¢• L Vu 4L� V L O V V n CC a P v oA V �y�a O -• Ct W LJq n• -Ja r r.l. an0 ✓COO r= n P Y r C CSC V 7 N V 4 O � MO d� ✓a nom• Lr ^y PO CA vn�r = i aXY E. 4 r q M Y Y 4 V V Y w 6 V \b y'R � f i V\ r c O i V L P n y V a � n L M l P ✓ L C y V� �v c r O P Y V V � q l L E: i -1 e `I L 1i v V c v r m s'Z y"a o✓ a ` L V .w G � � I SAN y � 1 v r r V Ate` Xa r ` V G C f0- AV� �- V a rp O r O P T i O C u y u u A d c V 4 4 9 O O a a v 6 n w Y i L r .e P l r c v . V � � n C IJr_ P v q w r_ t <L jI r P G j t q l q O � a $Gr WI NI Y d c x� < A y T �= N L 4 Yi r y ;t 0 i ? T <. N .n.. V C uL v N w 2 O l V ✓ ✓ .0 < V V N O d r C r ly � O 4 V rn y ` C O - ` ✓ T �WWO i o L o bcl A'n rn Or A q� P n C 9 �✓ �OA r Er q V u= -N. r ` b q = °x ✓ FJ G v¢• L Vu 4L� V L =rJ rL CC a P Y l b 6t p -• Ct - ✓a QOO LJq n• -Ja r r.l. an0 ✓COO ;q n r✓ C d C CSC V Va Yy O � C ` ✓ W nom• Lr =y r L PO CA V ] = i aXY E. 4 r q M Y > <Q W T \b y'R � f i i L r .e P l r c v . V � � n C IJr_ P v q w r_ t <L jI r P G j t q l q O � a $Gr WI NI Y d c x� < A y T �= N L 4 Yi r y ;t 0 i ? T <. N .n.. V C uL v N w 2 O l V ✓ ✓ .0 < V V N i 4 P ql AC n V V� O l v L.. Oy A - {If r V O Q� V �c � b tJ L r L A yd C 4 V o. r t. ` P � L r n r y J l 4= v l O \o i A O P' J� O ^ L �y V O O P L G n x- ✓ J- z. O v i y 'l V o d � A V a .n r C w O c a. 4 J p � uL a C a. C r tJ O Z . ` A L L d p v v � TO q 4 V A O f qv � W � q � p �.4 C O V L q V La 7 V 4 q v� O d r _ Z7 r O 4 V 0 �WWO i r L o SQL A'n rn lT � -^l q� c n C 9 �✓ �OA r Er q V u= -N. u u _y CC rL -• Ct - ✓a QOO LJq n• -Ja r r.l. an0 ✓COO ;q V '" JC n C la L VC J ` ✓ W nom• 4 y V ov = i aXY E. l � ^g y'R RC =0 V\ r G O V V n W n O C y _ a a a. O d y^ V V I» dYrf O a i 4 P ql AC n V V� O l v L.. Oy A - {If r V O Q� V �c � b tJ L r L A yd C 4 V o. r t. ` P � L r n r y J l 4= v l O \o i A O P' J� O ^ L �y V O O P L G n x- ✓ J- z. O v i y 'l V o d � A V a .n r C w O c a. 4 J p � uL a C a. C r tJ O Z . ` A L L d p v v � TO q 4 V A O f qv � W � q � p �.4 C O V L q V La 7 V 4 q v� r d r W L o SQL A'n rn lT � -^l Er rL -• Ct - ✓a QOO LJq n• -Ja r r.l. an0 ✓COO ;q V '" JC � 4\r VC J G O .n - y i V W ✓ L = ". r l V l � q y'R ✓ V A✓ = ^ G O V V W n O C y a O C a. y .r V •V.. � O+ O °c a�J�r °c � —� c Te. ° -Y• c ✓ C 4 y N "' y n L O N r O � r_ V P VN.r G V Y Cl pp�� ` rl-OaT Ld l y�C '�O ✓` lr 1�p L _ � S 4= 4.n u. •., r L V r p .y Y� �� A V O �- ✓C q _ q V T u�Vr 1. C V y V✓ V' Y V W P T 9 f N V W V �� T ry V n ✓_ .J N w C r r A C y .� l.aI �n .ra .n •-.•. �` V r & b § r L^ _* R'. - §� �- /\�� }: \ \\ / Z .- z2\ a -- - � ° _. §{ % Ell - -! ! _ !� [ - !\ -- w - = \. /. r L^ _* R'. i Density Criteria (Hillside Development) City of Rancho Cucamonga Slope DU's %Gross Acre 0 -i0% 1.5 10 -150 1.1 15 -30% 0.7 over 30;, 0 -3 The planning Commission may approve bonus densities of up to 25% for: - designs v&icIi preserve the natural topography aiU /0: vegetation - developments under pRD standards which cluster units in the more appropriate areas of the property - other aspects of desigp, . excellence, as may be 3ppLove3 Tract 10210 Slope 0 -100 10 -15% 15 -30% Over 30% Lawlor Tracts utilizing criteria (excluding any bonus density) Acres (percentage) 22.29 Ac. (66.98) 8.67 Ac. (26..0 %) 1.52 Ac. (4.6 %) 0.82 Ac. (2.5a) YM AC. Total Acreage 48.0 Ac. -Open Space _ 12.6 A^.. c. - Almond Access 2.1 Ac. Rd. in power - line area --M'S -Acres Tract 11931 Slope Acres (percentage) 0 -10% 21.38 (25.9%) 10 -15% 34.66 (42.0 %) 15 -30% 24.55 (29.7%i Over 30% 1.98 (2.4 %) '9=. AC. Total Acreage 113.0 Ac. -Open. Space 30.43 Ac. x-57 Ac. Density/Gross Acre 'Units 1.5 33.4 1.1 9.5 0.7 1.1 0.3 0.2 units 1.32 units /Gross Acre Density /Gross Arne #Units 1.5 32.0 1.1 38.1 0.7 17.2 0.3 0.6 �7 7 -units 1.06 units /Gross Acre- ®) DATE k P FkOM: j SUBJECT: STAFF *cember Members of the Planning Commission Jack Lam, AICP, Director of Community Michael Vairin, Ccninr Dlannnr TIVE TRACT ZONE CHANGE NO. 81 -01 The Ci?y Council held the first public hearing on the zone change for '_ -a vc Tract No. 10210. The Council had concerns that a change in zone to R- 1- 20,000 could allow further subdivision of in.ii..id ..,l l_t- __ 41.... 7..L.. -- G....— � M^ rn .,nn ... .•c wM .v .un C I" w,VVV W L ,Vw �4�arC fee n e ounci is concerne a, slope/ ensity factors are developed for implementation of the Hillsidd-Reu.sidentlal ca e Gi n ra I gja§; I herefore, the C ounce as erred this matter to the Commission for their recommendation. The simplest way tr, approach the matter is to re -zone the whole tract to an R -1- 30,000 designation. This would prevent any further subdivision of the individual lots. Staff has looked at several hillside density regualtions and have found that the project, as designed with the given slopes, is gen- erally compatible. Because of the lesser grades onthe lower tract, full development of hillside standards may not be as critical, es- pecially since this will take a good amount of time. However, such standards are needed to determine density of the upper tract or any other area of the hillsides. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Commission consider these issues and provide direction to Staff and Council. P.espectfully su tted, JACK Community Development Director JL:MV:jr ITEM H n