HomeMy WebLinkAbout1982/01/27 - Agenda Packet YS Y
1 ..
a, : �• 1
1 .
r-
� e
Y
LQ.
.:: . :o
L 1
t a
e •
M1
1
crJ T CITY Or—
RANCHO CUCAMONGA
c . . . o PLA.��T�V rrvT�s �rV�l1 $YOly
F� z AGENDA
U� >
i977
WEDNESDAY ZANUARY 27, 1982 7:00 P.M.
" LION'S PARK COMMUNITY CENTER
A 9161 8A';E LINE—RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
CTION
:. Pledge of Allegiance
II. Roll Call
Commissioner Dahl X Commissioner Sce a a p.m.)
Commissioner King x_ Commissioner Tolstoy X
Commissioner RempelX
APPROVED 4-0-11-0 111. Approval of Minutes
.January 13, 1982
IV. Announcements
V. Consent Calendar
The following consent calendar items are expected to
be 'roa-tine and non-controversial. They will be acted
upon by the commission at one time without discussion.
If anyone has concern over any ite:v, then it should be
sea-gyred for discussion-
V1. Public Hearings
The following items are public hearings in which con-
cerned individuals may voice their opinion of the
related project. Please wait to be recognized by the
Chaizman and address the Commission from the public
microphone by living your name and address. All such
opinions shall be limited to 5 minutes per individual
for each project_
APPROVED 4-0-0-1 A. REVISIONS OF CONDITIONS FOR TRACT 10277 - BARMAKIAN
v th recormmendation that an WOLFF AND ASSOCIATES - A 30 unit single family sub-
agreement be worked out with division located at the northeast corner of Almond
property owner to the north and Carnelian requesting a change from .Y:b:ic to
�egarding public or private private interior streets.
::. access.
Planning Commission Agenda
January 27, 1982
Page 2
APPROVED 5-0 B. ENVIP.ONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 9647 -
CO1TRY HOME - A custom/tract subdivision totaling
15 lots on 4.5 acres in the R-1 zone located at the
northwest corner of Hellman and Church - APN 208-021-22
Continued to Feb.7Q, 1982 C. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 81-08 - SHARMA - A hearing
meeting with instruction to to consz er the possib a revocation 07 the Conditional
applicant to cemplete Condi- Use Permit for a preschool located at 9113 Foothill
tions 8 to have Jerry Grant in based upon failure to comply with Conditions of
attendance to answer questions. Approval .
D. ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMEN7 NO. 82-01 - A Resolution
t. of the Planning omission recommencing approval of
APPROVED pa cas with incorpora ton Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 82-01 modifying
of bicyclea spa Section 61.0219 of the Zoning Code providing for
regulation of compact car parking spaces_
VII. Old Business
VIII. New Business
APPROVED 5-0 with recommended E. RESOLUTION 79-15A - LANDSCAPE STANDARDS - A
wording changes Resolution revising landscaping standards for
special boulevards, secondary and collector streets
to implement the General Plan_
IX. Council Referrals
Commission established X. Director's Reports
a street sign design
committee consisting XI. Public Comments
of Rick Gomez, Jack
Lam, Herman Rempel and This is the time and place for the general, public to
Peter Tolstoy address the Commission. Items to he discussed here
are those which do not already appear on this agenda.
XII. Upcoming Agenda
8:53 p-m_ XIII. Adjournment
The plan+, Conuosszon has adopted Administrative
Regulations that set an 12:00 p.m. adjournment ti.m`.
If items go beyond that time, they shall be heard
only with the consent of the Com=ssion.
q.
`7 • • lL O <I W O
R
�. \ 31b y7nmWt3
j ��>• f
S��'.u. c:•r r �:.
4 ..'.u-ii•+�:.�-:,:�-Y .Q � 3en tl3153s400tl
.a
• .� " � � 3ro n�wiiiu„• /
W W • �._ GR�
V \ ^ y
Shy N3l1!'M , � N �
'7k,OTJiM,yy .
C L
�� �� ��•" � 3N/ QtlW3Nnl � r
3 M!1'lyhb y7•� �• .' Z
v_ m $ a o
ftA
Q'rl OF
L�7�'f11`/lA..d1-1�J�'7V71J11.1'11�V1'�til1 �T1� ITT
L Lill`T±�t xl`+T.�.z' COiNAlvl SIO.V
t AGENDA
1977 WEDNESDAY JANUARY 27, 1932 7:00 P.M.
LION'S PARK COMMUNITY CENTER
9151 BASE LINE,.RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
I. Pledge of Allegiance
II. Roll Call
Commissioner Dahl Commissioner Sceranka
Commissioner King Commissioner, Tolstoy
Commissioner Rempel_
III. Approval of Minutes _
IV. Announcements 1• t _
� � � cz
V. Consent Calendar 's
The foZlocring consent calendar item✓ are expected to
be routine and non-controversial. They will be acted
upon by the Commission at one time without discussion.
If anyone has concern over any item, then t£ should be
rerrived for discussion.
VI. Public Hearings
The following items are prblic hearings in which con-
cerned individuals may vo_ce their opinia, of the
related project. Please'wait to be recognized by the
Cha=rran and address the Commission rrom the public
microphone by giving a7ur name and address. All such
opinions stall be Iz, sd to 5 minutes per individual
for oath project.
A. REVISIONS OF CONDITIONS FOR TRACT 10277 - BARMAKIAN,
10 DA11D ASSOCIATES - A 30 unit single family sub-
1 tiwz !an iocated at the northeast corner of -Almond
and Carnelian requesting a change from public to
private interior streets.
S
r r
S4•i\ ski r,
'�• `mod"-�4A. . i .f,�: � i r jA1.
' , Y
•
Planning Commission Agenda
January 27, 1982
Page 2
5
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 9647 -
� l"Lf �( COUNTRY HOME - A custom/tract subdivision t�; ling
15 lots on 4.5 acres in the R-1 zone located a the
northwest corner of Hellman and Church - APN 208-021-22
C. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 81-08 - SH.'.:aM - A hearing
to consider the possible revocation o. the Conditional
Use Permit for a preschool located at 9113 Foothill
based upon failure to comply with Conditions of
Approval .
D. ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT NO, 82-01 - A Resolution
of the Plenning scot No. 82-recommending approval of
Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 82-07 modifying
Section 61.0219 of the Zoning Code providing for
regulation of compact car parking spaces_
VII. Old Business
VIII. New Business
1 ` E. RESOLUTION 79-ISA - LANDSCAPE STANDARDS - A
Resolution revising landscaping standards for
special boulevards, secondary and collector street
to implement the General Plan.
IX. Council Referrals
r.:
,• . X. Director's Reports
XI. Public Comments
This 1s the time and place for the general pub2ic to
address the commission. Ztems to be discassed haze
are those which do not already appear on this agenda.
XII. Upcoming Agenda
aiiI. Adjournment
�i . The Planning commission has adopted.Administrative
aega2ations that set an 12:O0 p.m. adjournment time..
If itm.e jr, beyond :hat time., they sha11 be hoard,
only with the consent of the Coamdssion..
W
W
e
i � Wyk N
3� 1 • •..��w .� Q' W
Y
. � • : � vC NNVNt113� �
' ��J •t�'�"': I' �;+ pia
111 »�-• ans Naxn-rm • /
6� o
WJ
VV V6
13AV 0.44M.1yv
C � 3W OUVA3NMAJ y
3nNmv a ivna
�1
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Regular Meeting
January 13, 1982
CALL TO ORDtM
Chairman Jeff Ring called the ree:l^.r aeeti:.g of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at 7:05 p.m. The meeting was
held in the Forum of the Lions Park Community Center, 9161 Base Line
Road, Rancho Cucamanga. Chairman Ring then led in the pledge of
allegiance.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: COMMISSIONERS: Richard Dahl, Herman Rempel, Jeff Sceranka,
Peter Tolstoy, Jeffrey Ring
ABSENT: COMIIISSIONERS: None
STAFF PRESENT: Dan Coleman, Assistant Planner; Lloyd Hubbs, City Engineer;
Jerry Grant, Building Official; Curt Johnston, Assistant
Planner; Joan Kruse, Administrative Secretary; Jack Lam,
Director of Couminit' Dcrelopment; Paul Rougeau, Senior
Civil Engineer; Michael Vairin, Senior Planner
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Motion: Moved by Rempel, se;=.1cd by Tolstoy, carried unanimously, to
approve the Minutes of the December 9, 1981 meeting.
Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded by Tolstoy, carried unanimously, to
approve the Minutes of the December 17, 1981 meeting.
ANNOUNCEDC-M
Mr. Lam advised that Item F of this agenda would not be discussed. He
indicated that a number of people in the community have expressed a
desire to discuss this item and an opportunity would be given to them to
do so before this again comes before the Commission. Mr. Lam further
advised that since this item is a parcel map it would be held for the
zoning hearing and these items would be dealt with concurrently. Be
asked that the public hearing be opened and closed at tonight's meeting
with the project to be readvertised as a new project at some future
date.
Mr. Lam stated that the 1982 Planning Commissioners Institute will be
held from February 24 through the 26. Further, that because the Commission
would hold a regular meeting on February 24, a new meeting date would
have to be established. Fe asked if February 22 would be acceptable to
the Commission, stating that the new meeting date would be advertised to
advise of the change.
v�.
I' was the consensus of the Commission that the second regular meeting
date for the Planning Commission be changed to February 22, 1982.
Mr. Lam indicated that under Director Reports, Items O and P would be
reserved_
CONSENT CALENDAR
Motion: Moved by Rempei, seconded by Sceranka, carried unanimously, to
adopt Resolution No. 82-01 dealing with time extensions for various
tentative tracts.
Motion: Moved by Sceranka, seconded by Tolsto,7, carried unanimously,
to approve Items B and C of the Consent Calendar.
A. TIME EXTENSIONS FOR THE FOLLOWING TENTATIVE TRACTS:
Tentative Tract 10046
Tentative Tract 10047
Tentative Tract 10349
Tentative Tract 10277
Tentative Tract 10316
Tentative Tract 11606
tentative Tract 11625
Tentative Trace 10035
Tentative Tract 9441
Tentative Tract 11609
B. TIME EXTENSIONS FOR THE FOLLOWINC PARCEL MAP:
Parcel Map 5126
C. REVISION TO TENTATIVE TRACT 11605 - NQBANK - A change from a 65
unit condominium development of 66 lots t-�, a 65 unit development
on 70 lots located at the southwest corner of Base Line and
Hellman.
PUBLIC F.EARINGS
F. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 7244 - THE ROBERT MAYER
CORPORATION - A residential subdi-rision of 23.1 acres into 2
lots located on the southeast corner of Arrow Route and Turner
Avenue - APN 290-091-5, 6.
Chariman King opened the public hearing. There being no comments from
the floor, the public hearing was closed_
Motion: Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Remnel, carried unanimously, to
remove this item from this agenda and reschedule it at some future late.
Planning Commission Minutes -2- January 13, 1982
r .,
D. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND ZONE MANGE 81-01 - :AWLOR - A request
for a change of zone from R-1-20,000 and R-1-14 acres to R-1-30,OOC
for approximately 46 acres of land, generally located on the north
side of Almond, between Sapphire and Turquoise - APN 200-061-12,
200-051-06, and 1061-172-03.
Chairman King stepped down due to a possible conflict of interest.
Mr. Lam reviewed the staff report stating that this item is a request
for a change of zone from R-1-20,000 and R-1-14 acres to R-1-30,000.
r
14
Commissioner Dahl asked if presently there is a zoning classification
fcr R-1-30,000.
Mr. Hopsor replied that the Zoning Ordinance is flexible enough to
permit this: zoning classification and that there is justification within
the Ordinance for it.
Vice-chairman Rempel opened the public bearing.
Mr. Leon Keddi.ng, representing the applicant, concurred with the recommenda-
tion.
There being no further comments, the public hearing was closed.
Motion: Moved by Dahl, seconded by Sceranka, carried, to adopt Resolution
No. 82-04, approving a zone change to R-1-30,000 for 46 acres of land
and recommending a zone change to the City Council.
Commissioner Tols•toy voted no for his previously stated reasons that a
larger site should be made available to those individuals who would
prefer them.
Commissioner Sceranka stated that it was his belief that the property to
the north is extremely sensitive and that the vote of the Cnmmission on
this portion of the property should have no reflection on the northern
piece.
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: DAIM, SCFMgKA, REMPEL
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: TOLSTOY
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: KING
x x
';. Planning Commission Minutes -3- January 13, 1982
ti l .
E. ENVIRONI=^AL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 81-18 -
JASKA - The development of a contractor's service yard including
two buildings totaling 12,795 square feet on 3.5 acres of land
in the General Industrial/Rail Served category, located at 9460
Lucas Ranch Road - APN 210-013-02.
Mr. Vairin reviewed the staff report.
Chairman King op.azed the public bearing. Mr. Juan Baines, contre.ctor,
stated that he was willing to answer any questions. There being none
or any further comment, the public hearing was closed.
Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded by T_olstoy, carried unanimously, to
adopt Resolution No. 82-05 approving Conditional Use Permit No. 81-18
in concurrence with the findings for this project.
G. ENTIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 7244 - THE MESSENGER COMPANY An industrial subdivision of 4.56 acres into 13 lots located on
the south side of Foothill, an t of Maple Place - APN 208-351-03.
Mr. Paul Rougeau reviewed the staff report.
Mr. Hopson asked about lot 9 described in the staff report, stating
that it appeared to front about 300 feet; whereas, lot 13 appears to
have less than 100 feet and might have as little as 90 feet of frontage.
Mr. Vairin stated that for purposes of this item, lot 9 had to be included.
Commissioner Rempel stated that if that assumption is used, lot 11
should also be included.
Mr. Rougeau replied that since lot 11 is an interior street, it need
not be included. Further, that the intent is to provide for lots with
smaller frontages.
.f.
Commissioner King asked the Commission what their ideas were relative
to access on lot 13.
�e
Mr. Vairin replied that speaking for the Planning Staff, he did not see
the necessity for shared access on lot 13.
Chairman King opened the public hearing.
There being no comments, the public hearing was closed.
r Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded by Sceranka, carried unanimsouly, to
adopt Resolution No. 82-06, with the issuance of a negative declaration,
<.' approving Parcel Map No. 7244.
r'
Y
Planning Commission Minutes -4- January 13, 1982
x x x x x
H. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 7218 - R.C. 11MUSTRin
COMPANY - An industrial subdivision of 15.43 acres into 2 lots
located at the southeast corner of Milliken Avenue and 8th Street -
ti?N 229-261-47.
Mr. Paul Rougeau reviewed the staff report.
Chairman King opened the public_ hearing.
Mr. Jim Westling, representing R. C. Industrial Company, stated that
at present there is no building on the right side of this property,
but that one is proposed.
Mr. Westling questioned item 10 of the Engineering Report relative to
undergrounding the utilities. He indicated that they will be serving
lot 2 and that they did not plan to run them to lot 1 and asked if this
would be satisfactory.
Mr. Rougeau replied that it would be.
Commissioner Tolstoy asked if this would require the street to be
excavated to go to the lot.
Mr. Westling replied that they would bring the utilities five feet
beyond into lot I.
Commissioner Tolstoy stated that he thought the utilities should be
stubbed out and asked if the street was already there.
Mr. Westling replied that the east half is already constructed but the
west half was not.
Commissioner Tolstoy stated that if the street goes in the utilities
should go in also because by doing this the street will last longer.
He indicated that it is his opinion that breaking up a street to put
the utilities is damages the street in the long run.
Mr. Rougeau stated that if it was all right with the Planning Commission,
what Mr. Westling had said would fulfill the requirements of the item.
There being no further comments, the public hearing was closed.
Motion: Moved by Sceranka, seconded by Rempel, carried unanimously, to
adopt Resolution No. 82-07, approving Parcel Map No. 7218.
r
x x * x x
Planning Commission Minutes -5- January 13, 1982
1,:
OLD BUSINESS
I. APPEAL OF GRADING COMMITTEE DECISION ON GRADING PLAN FOR 5171 SUNSTONE
STREET - JOHN D. ROSE AND ASSOCIATES
Jerry Gran, Building Official, reviewed the staff report and explained
that currently there were no lots of the type proposed in the city. He
indicated that a lot of the type proposed would not fulfil! r dition
of the Grading Ordinance and therefore the Planning Commissi.'�: dance
is requested. Mr. Grant stated that the Planning Commission
determination and decision to make on whether the staff approa. :_
modifying grading is correct, and if it is, then the Commission nas two
alternatives as outlined in the staff report.
Chairman King asked what Mr. Grant sees that are drawbacks, or, if a
position is taken, what grading is wrong, and what argument would he
give.
Mr. Grant replied that from a technical standpoint, fill could be
brought in and the site could be properly compacted to prevent any
problems. Further, that technically there is no problem that could not
be overcome with proper grading. He indicated that the question is one
of an aesthetic nature and whether the purpose has been achieved of
proper grading and limiting slopes in the City.
Chairman King asked if Mr. Grant were to take a position to argue against
the proposed grading if it would be done from an aesthetic point of
view.
Mr. Grant replied that essentially that would be the case.
Commissioner Sceranka asked in terms of the lots to the north, northeast
and east how the grading o,� this lot would affect those. He indicated
that his primary concern was the impact on the lots to the north.
Y Mr. Grant replied that the 10L to the north could drain to Sunstone and
that the lot to the northeast slopes almost completely to this lot and
as a consideration of the grading review, it will be required to have an
` easement because it would be difficult to drain the lot without it.
Commissioner Sceranka asked �f the grading were less severe what effect
r
it would have on drainage. He further asked if there was any feeling cf
a negative impact on the properties to the north and northeast.
Mr. Grant replied that he did nct think there would be a problem.
Commissioner Tolstoy stated that he was very concerned with the city
getting proper grading. He indicated that this proposal violates sections
A, C and D of the Grading Ordinance and he reminded the Commission that
one of the reasons that the City incorporated was because the County
allowed such grading.
Planning Commission Minutes -6- January 13, 1982
Commissioner Rempel stated his disagreement. Be indicated that this
proposed slope does not compare with the County and the grading as
proposed would improve the corner and make it look more like a hillside
lot. He felt that the overall slope would flatten the eristing slope
and he concurred with the applicant and what he is trying to do.
Commissioner Rempel further stated that he thought that this is a proper
applicati n of grading.
Co%.=issioner Dahl stated that he has ridden over to the site and does
not agree with the statement that this piece of property is in a natural
state. He indicated that it appears to have been cut and filled.
C,xamissioner Dahl stated that he did not feel the Commission would be
going against the ordinance because there is a grade to the property and
what is being proposed will bring it closer to what it should be.
Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded by Dahl, carried, that the grading as
proposed is in compliance with the Grading Ordinance and that the Planning
Commission approves the appeal with an amendment to the motion that this
does not set a precedent since it cannot be determined what the grading
on this lot was previously, and because the grading in this area is as
it is, it is logical and equitable that the applicant be allowed to
grade as proposed. Further, that the final grading plan be brought to
Design Review for final approval.
Commissioner Tolstoy voted no for his previously stated reasons.
x x x x x
7:55 p.m. The Planning Com='.ssioa recessed.
8:10 p.m. The Planning Commission reconvened.
x x x x x
J. ENVIROti1iENTAL ASSESSmou AND DEVELOPMM REVIEW NO. 81-38 - DONAT -
The development of a total of 37,000 square feet of office buildings
on 3.25 acres of land in the C-2 zone, located at the southwest
corner of Foothill Boulevard and Ramona Avenue - AFN 208-301-
16 & 17.
Mr. Dan Ccleman reviewed the staff report.
Commissioner Tolstoy asked that because of the fact that parking is is
front of the building which faces Foothill Boulevard, what conditions
did the CommiLtee make to provide for berming to obscure the view of
the parking lot.
Mr. Coleman replied that 2 to 3 foot berms were required but if the
Commission feels that more is needed, the condition can be amended.
Commissioner Tolstoy asked if the berming would be similar to K-Mart
rather than Gemco.
iPlanning Commission Miiutes January 13, 1982
"rr. Coleman replied that since this project would be on the south side
of the street the berming will be 4-5 feet >elow and there will be a
hedge roc• along the parking lot to obscure the view into the parking
lot.
Commissioner Sceranka asked in terms of ti-t. alley, is the City going
to maintain it as a matter of policy_
Mr. Rougeau replied that the City will and that it will be resurfaced
and fined up as part of this, development. Mr_ Rougeau further stated
that in the future, the Planning Commissiot and City Council may be
asked to give up alleys because of their mzintenance.
Commissioner Sceranka state.. 1-h3t if the City is thinking of abandoning
alleys in the future, why are they approvia.g them now.
Mr. Rougeau replied that it is because accrss is needed.
Commissioner Tolstoy asked what kind of dr-inage there will be and
whether it will flow to -Ramona.
Mr. Rougeau stated that this project would improve the water flow and
that drainage would be routed to Ramona.
Commissioner Rempel suggested that a concrete swale be constructed down
the center of this alley to eliminate futur>_ problems.
Commissioner Tolstoy stated his agreement.
Mr. Rougeau stated that this will be requirad.
Mr. Kirk Donat, agent and architect for this project, stated his con-
currence with staff's recommendations with tie exception of 4 items.
Mr. Hopson asked Mr. Donat if the CUP that w.is previously approved
would be nullified as a result of this proje,:t if it is approved.
Mr. Donat replied that this would be so.
Mr. Donat asked under the Planning Commission conditions if Item %4o. 4
would be an issue or slow down the project.
Mr. Coleman replied that tentatively, this wi_.1 be placed on the next
Planning Commission agenda.
Mr. Hopson replied that implicit in this is teat the Zoning Ordinance
Amendment passes in order for the CUP to be approved. He indicated
that if it does not pass, there would he a pro;,lem.
i
Mr. Vairin stated that this would be handled '!trough language that
ehould this happen, the spaces would be redesi,ned.
r
N
Planning Commission Minutes -8- January 13, 1982
u
Commissioner Rempel asked if there could be language that a variance
be granted.
Mr. Hopson replied that there are provisions within the ordinance that
administratively a deviation could be permitted; however, if it is too
great, a formal application would have to be made.
Mr. Vairin stated that a 10 percent deviation is allowed and this would
be within the requirement.
Mr. Lam stated that there would not be a problem because the Industrial
Specific Plan discussed this and there would not be a difference between
this and what was approved.
Mr. Donat stated that Condition J-3 requires a cash deposit and they
would prefer a lien agreement.
Mr. Donat stated that Condition L-2 relative to the installation of
underground utilities was of concern with the implication of utility
poles on the south side of the property. He indicated that there are
houses to the south and installation of those service lines would disrupt
service to those houses. He indicated that this would create a reason-
able hardship to the applicant that they wish to have this addressed
along with the vacation requirement along Foothill Boulevard.
i Mr. S.B. Donat, the applicant, asked how quickly the vacation process
could be completed to allow recordation of the parcel map. He indicated
char he was concerned because of the economic implications of availability
of construction loans.
Mr. Rougeau replied that the vacation of alleyways is a process that
takes 6-8 weeks and that a frcntage road to the south is essential.
He indicated that they could continue to discuss this to help him out
but there really is no way of speeding, up the process.
Mr. Donat stated that his concern i.s. to get the title company to insure
the lender.
Mr. Hopson stated that they will not insure the loan unless it is recorded.
Mr. Donat stated that he thought they were already to go with a minor
revision.
Mr. Rougeau stated that the application process will take a certain
amount of time and there was nothing that the Commission can do to
hasten the process.
Mr. Vairin stated that a point nad been brought up that he was unaware
of relative to phasing and indicated that there should be a recommendation
for a phasing plan to be submitted for review for items such as landscaping
across the frontage, the seeding of pads, etc. for the first phase.
,i
} Planning Commission Minutes -9- January 13, 1982
conditions of approval:
I. The variation of roof material in the 3000 square foot lot
area such as tile, masonite, etc.
2. The height of the proposed fences in the Plauned Cor==ity. He
indicated that the developer will provide fencing in the 3000
square foot lot area and has asked for a minimum of 5-foot
fencing.
Mr. Vairin stated that the City's requirement adopted by the City Council
for fencing minimum is 5.5 feet for any unit that has a pool or spa. He
suggested that the fencing issue be takes up as a .separate condition
with future review by the City Council.
Jerry Grant, BuilAing official, provided background information on the
requirement for a 5.5 foot fence height. He indicated that this was a
minimum and not a maximum because of a sloping condition. He indicated
that it is the City's policy to encourage 6-foot fencing height and not
5-foot fences.
Commissioners Rempel. and Tolstoy stated that this is something that
would have to be hashed out at some future time and felt that a 6-foot
requirement is ridiculous.
Mr. Vairin also indicated that clarification is needed relative to
storage of recreation vehicles. He suggested a word amendment stricking
the words "all. lots with" and substituting "for".
Commissioner Sceranka stated that he did not understand why Condition
No. 4 is there.
Mr. Vairin replied that it is a condition of the planned community text
that was not realized at the time of Development Review and was needed
.• for clarification so that there was understanding by the developer.
r,.
Commissioner Sceranka asked if there is a particular requirement on
Conditj.on No. 6.
Mr. Vairin replied that there was none that he was aware of.
Chairman :Ting asked the Commission if they would like to address their
questions as they arise or if they wished to have the applicant's rep-
resentative make his presentation and then raise their questions.
The consensus of the Commission was to wait until after the applicant's
presentation.
Mr. Bob Jacob, representing SWA, addressed a landscaping concern in the
3000 square foot lot area. He indicated that they want to extend quality
throughout the project and explained that alders, pine and eucalyptus
Planning Commissiou Minutes -11- Tanuary 13, 1982
}1
r?,
Commissioner Sceranka asked if that would include resurfacing of the
alley and further asked about the cash deposit.
Mr. Rougeau replied that Staff had been asking for lien agreements only
to find that applicants would rather make a cash deposit. He indicated
that they could work this out. He indicated that the median islanA will
not be first. Further, the utilities on the south side of the aroperty
would be a question for the Planning Commission. He indicated that the
applicant can be required to +mderground up to the houses or underground
what he has but it would not accomplish anything.
Commissioner Rempel stated that he would agree that the transformer
should be underground but to bring it back up on the other side is not
pratical and he would agree with the applicant's request.
Commissioner Dahl stated that not too long ago the Commission looked at
areas to be undergrounded such as Foothill Boulevard.
r;r. R.ougeau stated that this is along the alley and not Foothill.
Commissioner Rempel felt that this project has a good design.
Motion: Moved by Sceranka, seconded by Rempel, carried unanimously, to
adopt Resolution No. 82-08, with an amendment to discuss the phasing
plan; modification to condition No. 4 so that if there is a problem with
the Zoning Ordinance, the applicant would not have to go back to the
Commission; modification to allow a lien agreement instead of a cash
deposit; that the utilities have facilities on site that are typical of
underground but that they would not gave to go through the alleyway;
and, that the applicant's concerns with Caltran's requirement relative
to the entrance be worked at between the City and Caltrans.
K. DESIGN REVIEW FOR PHASE I OF TENTATIVE TRACT 11934 - VICTORIA -
WILLLAM LYON COMPANY - The development of 301 single family homes
within the Victoria Planned Community located north of Base Line
Road, west of Etiwand- Avenue, and south of Highland Avenue.
Mr. Vairin reviewed the staff report stating that since its preparation
Staff has had an opportunity to discuss it with the developer. Mr.
Vairin indicated that there is a typographical error in the document
which reads that there should be 20 feet between buildings in the 7200
square foot lot area; however, the original text which was approved
reads that there should be 10 feet. Mr. Vairin asked that this require-
ment for 20 feet be striken from the report. Mr. Vairin provided clari-
fication on item 5 indicating that architectural treatment would be
unnecessary in places such as the Edison corridor or areas that would
net be visible from the roadway. Mr. Vairin indicated that in require-
ment 7 of the staff report, the intent is for slopes that are highly
visible. Further, that there are only two items to clar{fy on the
Planning Commission Minutes -10- January 13. 1982
Red Gum, would be used along the parkway. Fe stated that these trees
have extrmely rapid growth and will reach a height of 25-30 feet in a
few years. He also explained that turf block would be used at the end
of the streets that are visible as you look down them to break the
corners and to give a more appealing effect. Mr. Jacob also explained
that trees would be plauted in front of the fences.
Mr. Gary Frye, representing the William Lyon Company, spoke of a few
architectural changes that they proposed and .stated that with the con-
cept presented they would maximize space ana tze look of space. Mr.
Frye indicated that the drawing that fr being shown to the Commission
was not correct in that the fences should be drawn in back of the area.
Mr. Frye pointed out the steep roof lines in the development which is to
provide a "doll house" or "cute" concept and pointed out the variation
in the side of the houses. Yr. Frye stated that the color palette would
use more than earth tones and felt that asphalt snake roofs are appropri-
ate for this area.
Mr. Frye stated that originaily they thought that zero lot line would be
best but after rethinking the concept felt thtt what they have presented
is more favorable. He provided a drawing of both concepts stating that
the key difference and what led them to go to the center-plotted concept
was the interior space. He indicated that because of the kiteben
location they would be unable to go to a zero lot line.
Mr. Frye stated that pride of ownership was important and in detached
I
ouses this concept will be more saleable than the zero lot line. He
indicated that this company would be around for a long time and it is
the ?ong-term that they are looking at.
Mr. Frye stated that relative to the condition on fencing, they want to
install a five-foot fence with a ground cross of four inches which would
raise the height of the fence to 5 feet G inches. He indicated that
their concern is not the cost of a six-foot fence but rather that it
would be overbearing and they were coming from the aesthetical point of
view.
Mr. Ronny Tannenbaum stated that overall, the developer has done a good
job on the planned community; however, it appeared that on this sub-
division they have taken larger homes and simply shrunk them and'would
have preferred if the streets were not maximized and if there were some
' zero lot lines because what is being proposed is not the kind of inno-
vation they thought they were getting.
+. 9:30 p.m. The Planning Commiss+on recessed
9:40 p.m. The Planning Commission reconvened
G�
. Co issioner Tolstoy stated thar this tract needs to set a good example
since it is the first to be file.: ir the vast unimproved portion of the
city. He indicated that some of the things the Planning Commission
Planning Commission Minutes -12- January 13, 1982
should look at is innovative tract design. He stated that part of his
phi:ospc., 'o ; variety of product to minimize the tract appearance and
that variable lot size, architectural excellence, good landscape design,
and efficient use of space are important. Commissioner Tolstoy stated
that he supports reasonable density and smaller lot sizes and has dose
so through the General. Plan and the Planned Community.
Commissioner Tolstoy stated that the 3000 square foot lot size area
especially does not meet his expectation and felt that Mr. Frye has
done an admirable job on many aspects but needs to do something with
the 3000 square foot lot area and hoped that the Commission would
address this.
Commissioner Dahl stated that when looking at the elevations, there is
no problem. He then stated that he wished to apologize to everyone for
making a major mistake in the first place. He indicated that when looking
at 3000 square foot lots they were looking at zero lot lines. He further
indicated that five-foot side yards are of very little use and that
they needed to change the roof materials on this tract.
Commissioner Dahl stated that if the homes are 750 square feet he will
not accept it as something feasible even for the first time home buyer.
He stated that he is not opposed to grou.-th and is reasonable in that
regard but that a garage is bigger than what is being proposed as a
home.
Commissioner Dahl stated that when the issue of boulevard trees was
brought up, the developer felt that they should not be specimens and
that the size should be lowered. He indicated that the developer is
chipping away at everything that was originally proposed and that would
make the planned community unique. He indicated that until he sees a
major change on the entire site he will vote no on each and every item.
Commissioner Tolstoy stated that he could not agree with Commissioner
Dahl relative to the size of the houses. He indicated that this is the
only thing that will be affordable for a small family and for older
people. Commissioner Tolstoy stated that many years ago there were
3ollywood bungalows that are still there, in demand, and are not ob-
jectionable.
Commissioner Dahl stated that looking at the standpoint of affordability
he didn't know what the price of a 750 square foot home would be versus
a 950 square foot home. He further stated that going back to 1930 they
were building 900 square foot homes. After World Far II, there were
900 square foot homes and less, and those have progressed to be problem
areas of the cities today. He cited the Kaiser Development project in
the City of Ontario, as an example. He indicated that an apartment or
condo project would be acceptable in 750 square foot sizes, but not a
home.
Planning Commission San 13, 1982
Minutes -t3- �r9
Commissioner Rempel stated that the reason the Ontario project is having
problems is not because of the size but because of the construction of '
the units and they have deteriorated rapidly because of it. He indicated
that there are some small units off of Euclid is Ontario that have fared
well and stated that this is not something that Omarbe=ld be discussed at
this time. He stated that the Commission must go forward and was unable
to understand the equation that just because something is smaller, it
will be a slum area.
Commissioner Dahl stated that a 750 square foot home is too small and
lie would stand on it. He indicated that there were some other reasons
such as the lack of zero lot lines and the lack of open space promised
which rendered him incapable of supporting the project.
Commissioner Sceranka stated that he was reacting to what Commissioner
Dahl stated. He gave his early background and the kind of bome he grew
uv in. He stated that it was not up to the Commission to evaluate how
big is big enc-igh and that everyone should have ar, opportunity to own
a home. He stated that if he were just getting married today and there
was an opportunity for these homes, he ;could choose this over ran
apartment.
Commissioner Sceranka stated that in looking at what is trying to be
accomplished be can't believe that Commissioner Dahl would not find
this innovative and did not know of any project that is being built
like this. re indicated that creativity must not be a canned phrase.
Commissioner Sceranka stated that he liked the 5-foot side yards because
of the storage possibilities and felt that having side yards was better
than the zero lot line. He stated that the parkway is the biggest feature and felt that the design of the project and its cir^_ulation is
unique. He stated that if the Commission doesn't do eomething to allou
people to buy is this community they can write off a lot economically
for this community.
There was discussion on zero lot lines and open space.
Commissioner Rempel stated that the Commission must look at the whole
project. He indicated that the church site is not in this phase and
that it will have an opportunity of coming before the Commission at a
later date as will the phasing of the park. He stated that he felt
there is a lot of innovation and that the Commission never stated that
this will be a zero lot line project of 3000 square foot homes.
Commissioner Tolstoy stated that if Mr. Frye brought in a project with
all zero lot line in the 3000 square foot lots he would not like it
and would feel that it would need variation. He indicated that there
needed to be more variation on the south side of the 3000 square foot
lots but did not want the cost of the house to go up.
Planning Commission Minutes -14-
January 13, 1982
ny`y.
Commissioner Tolstoy stated that with a little manuevering, they could
make this a lot more interesting.
Chairman King stated that he has no objection to a 3000 square foot
center-platted plan. He indicated that he shares the szme concern
relative to variation and relief with creativity or adding a good mix.
He further stated that looking at the 3000 square foot area most every-
thing on the north side is acceptable, but along the south line there
are some borir,g aspcC2S.
Chairman King stated that he would like to see the majority of the homes
center-plotted with an intermingling of zero lot lines and with a right-
hand next to a left-hand lot line. He felt there sbculd be a little
more mixture to create spice. He also stated that perhaps the widths
could be varied and felt there should not be any revision to the size of
t:he units.
Commissioner Tolstoy stated that the architecture for these types of
units is excellent and what' the Commission needs to see is just a little
more variation.
Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded by Sceranka, carried, to adopt
Resolution No. 82-09, approving phase 1 of Tentative Tract No. 11934,
with amendments to delete Item 4C, a change to allow some zero lot line
units subject to the review of the Planning Commission; change to
require fencing to be at a five mad one half foot height, unless changed
by the City Council.
AYES: COMaSSIONELS: RE9M, SCEM-AMA, TOLSTOY, KING
NOES: COMaSSIONERS: DAHL
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
Commissioner Dahl voted no because of his previously stated reasons.
Commissioner Tolstoy asked about RV storage and whether what bad been
presentk:Z to Design Review relative to turn radius and traffic flow had
been resolved.
Mr. Vairin replied that the developer had not yet resolved this but will
design this to fit the minimum standards.
Commissioner Tolstoy stated that he understood this to be a temporary
situation and asked what the final disposition of RV parking would be.
Mr. Frye replied that he did not yet have a specific design.
Commissioner Tolstoy stated that recreation vehicle parking must be
convenient and that he hoped that it would not just be one large lot but
several smaller areas to serve the community.
•; _ January 13, IQ82
Planning Commission Minutes -15-
Commissioner Rempel stated his agreement with Commissioner Tolstoy.
Commissioner Rempel stated that at some future time the lot size should
be a function of elevation and that it would be well to discuss this
at some future meeting prior to the next development being brought
before the Commission.
Mr. Hopson asked who would be responsible for the plant material within
the interior streets. He felt that some comment would be appropriate
here.
Mr. Lam stated that any tree in a person's yard is the responsibility
of the property owner and, if the trees are in the public right-of-way
or a major arterial parkway, it would be included in the Citywide
maintenance district. He indicated that there would not be any staff
support on interior streets and that he disagreed with the developer
that interior streets should also be covered in the maintenance district.
He indicated that the City Council would make a decision on this.
Commissioner Tolstoy stated that he felt the! interior streets should be
included because the City may want to do some :maintenance.
Commissioner Sceranka also felt that interior trees eauould be part of
the maintenance district bcc=use of the difficulty in getting some
people to trim trees.
Mr- Lam stated that he is not saying the!:e is a right or wrong way of
doing this. He indicated that this boils down to a policy issue.
Further, that the issue will be brought forward upon the annexation of
the district.
Commissioner Tolstoy asked if this issue would be brought before the
Commission. He indicated that he would like to provide input to it
and that there should be some guidelines.
Mr. Lam stated that this would be taken under advisement.
Mr. Frye stated that their belief is that interior street trees should
be maintained within the maintenance assessment district. He indicated
that there are some mechanisms that could separate the maintenance
district for the planned community and this would be a key point.
Mr. Hopson asked who maintains the recreational vehicle center and who
allocates its spaces.
Mr. Frye replied that they did not have an answer as yet for the
permanent RV center and did not wish to answer specifically at this
time. He indicated, however, that adequate space would be provided
for the residents.
Planning Commission Minutes -16- January 13, 1982
V
�(1
L. RFFERRAL OF GRADI= AND WALL PLAN FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 11605
Dan Coleman reviewed the staff report.
Commissioner Tolstoy commented that the 18-foot wall appeared to be
out of scale and asked what the alternatives to it are.
Mr. Coleman replied that, moving the retaining wall back of the base
right-of-way line with trees and shrubs at the base of the wall, pulling
the sound attenuation wall six feet at the top, plus providing vines,
would help.
Commissioner Tolstoy stated that he could not imagine the size of the
wall.
Commissioner Sceran'da stated that there had been a lot of discussion on
this and he asked who would see the wall and what its purpose is.
Commissioner Tolstoy stated that he understood but asked about the people
at the south end of the wall.
Commissioner Sceranka stated that he did not feel the plant material
would be a problem because of the wale and drainage that would be at
the base of the wall.. He felt that this would provide adequate moisture
to sustain the plant life.
Mr. Vairin explained the wall and where the vines would be planted. He
also provided information on the construction of the wall itself and
how the vines would be pulled through the wall.
There was further discussion of the wall's construction between the
Commission and the Building Official.
Mr. Paul Coombs, representing the acplicant, stated that the wall has
not changed significantly from its original approval. and the reaaon for
this is because of the unwillingness of the railroad to grant an easement.
Mr. Coombs also explained how the water would drain beneath the wall.
Commissioner Tolstoy asked if there will be provision for the water to
drain.
Mr. Coombs replied that there would be.
Following brief discussion, the consensus of the Commission .was that the
wall, as proposed, be allowed-
M.. REPORT ON VIDEO GAMES AND ARCADES
Dan Coleman reviewed the staff report.
Planning Commission Minutes -17- January 13, ' 1982
F
w;
what difference it makes to the City in terms of enforcement if there
are machines. Re indicated that the = cr should be removed and that
the nuisances should be dealt with as they come up.
Chairman King stated that there was consensus from the Commission that
video games and arcades be dealt with through the conditional use permit
process and that an ordinance be drafted to provide some framework for
their regulation.
Motion_ Moved by Rempel, seconded by Tolstoy, carried unanimously, to
go beyond the 11 p.m. curfew.
11 p.m. Commissioner Dahl stepped down.
N. TERRA VISTA REARING AND TOPIC SCREDU1
Mr. Vairin reviewed the staff report. He indicated that a tentative
schedule had been provided to the Commission which would set meetings
once_ a month wit'i a limitation in hours of between 7 and 10 p.m. He
indicated that February 1 was set as the first public hearing date.
Chairman King asked if based on what was presented and the fact that
the Commission has two regular Planning Commission meetings a month, if
there would be a possibility for a meeting and a half on Terra Vista
on a monthly basis_
11 p.m. Commissioner Dahl returned_
Commissioner Dahl asked what the agenda is in March.
Mr. Vairin replied that a staff report will be provided for the Commission
on the 24th of February which would indicate that March 1 or March 24
would be available for extra items.
Commissioner Dahl stated that it would be possible to have an extra
meeting in March.
Mr. Lam stated that a lot of consideration needs to be given to flexi-
bility as this proceeds. ^Urthec, that realistically, the Commission
will have more meetings than what are being scheduled.
Mr. Vairin stated that notices will be sent to everyone within 300 feet
of the proposed project and that each meeting will be continued to a
time specific.
i
Commissioner Scerank: recommended that the schedule be changed to one
meeting per month and that a portion of the second Commission meeting
Planning Commission Minutes -19- January 13, 1982
1
Commissioner Dahl stated that Exhibit ^A: lists non-arcade businesses with
video games and asked if there have been any complaints against these
and what the nature of the complaints have been.
Mr. Coleman replied that most complaints come from arcade owners.
Mr. Vairin replied that nuisance complaints have been recieved.
Commissioner Dahl asked how a determination is made on how many machines
constitute an arcade.
Mr. Coleman replied that there is really no way of determining when it
is incidental and when it is primary.
Commissioner Dahl asked why they were unable to come up with an answer.
Mr. Vairin stated that it becomes a judgement of reasonableness of when
it is no longer incidental.
Mr. Dahl spoke of the video games at the Straw Hat Pizza Palace and
stated that the only way the games could be controlled would be through
a CUP.
Commissioner Sceranka stated that any of these users have the machines
because it is good for business and the bottom line is when they go out-
side the door, they are creating a nuisance. He indicated that you can
restrict the nuisance factor in a reasonable way and that the Commission
should not be dealing with numcers of the machines.
Commissioner Tolstoy stated that he had been in a fast food facility
which had four machines. He indicated that it was a small store and
there were so many people in it playing the machines that it presented
a hazard if a fire were to break out. He felt that patrons would be
unable to get out of the store.
Chairman King stated that arcades should be allowed in C-1 and C-2
zones with a Conditional Use Permit. He indicated that each request
should be examined on a case-by-case basis and that an artificial
number should be created to determine when the number of machines
constitute a business and when it is incidental.
Commissioner Tolstoy stated that he felt arcades and video games should
be allowed through the CUP process, but for the City's protection, an
ordinance should be drafted to Rive some framework_ He felt that these
should be regulated in some fashion.
Commissioner Rempel agreed with Commissioner Tolstoy.
Commissioner Sceranka asked if additional parking spaces were required
for the coffee shop at the K-Mart facility and hew a determination is
made for additional parking spaces if arcades are involved. He asked
Planning Commission Minutes -18- January 13, 1982
of the month be set aside to also consider the Terra Vista project.
He indicated that decisions could be made at the second meeting on what
had been presented at the first Terra Vista meeting.
Chairman King stated that this system would create the same morass as
the General Plan.
Mr. Vairin stated that this system would mean that the Planning Commission
would be invloved in a long meeting if this were to happen.
Mr. Lam asked Commissioner Sceranka if officially there would be two
meetings a month or a holdover.
Mr- Sceranka replied that there would be two meetings and whatever was
not handled at the first meeting would be covered at the second meeting
for a specific amount of time.
Chairman King disagreed with this proposal stating that the Commissioa
would become burned out as they did with the General Plan and the Victoria
meetings.
Commissioner Rempel stated that if Commissioner Sceranka was saying that
the Commission should spend one to two hours additional at the regular
meetings on Terra Vista, that is too much time.
Mr. Lan stated that if there is an opportunity to hold additional time
on this it can be plugged in. He stated that realistically if it is
once a month for the meetings, there will be times when the Commission
would meet more often.
Commissioner Tolstoy stated that be would officially like one meeting
per month because he is "meetinged out". He indicated that Terra Vista
is important and needs the Commission's best thoughts and unless there is
only one meeting per month this would not be the case.
It was the consensus of the Commission that there be one Terra Vista
meeting per month with the first meeting to take place on February 1,
1982.
Motion: Moved by King, seconded by Tolstoy, carried unanimously, to go
beyond the 11 p.m, curfew.
Commissioner Dahl stated that he had met with the Trails Committee and
they have expressed an interest in the addition of one more person to
' the Committee to represent the Etiwanda area. He asked the Commission
to consider this request.
Planning Commission Minutes -20- January 13, 1982
dLt'
r.,
Chairman Y,ing instructed each Commission member to recommend one person
t to serve on this Committee.
I Motion: Moved by Sceranka, seconded by Tolstoy, carried unanimously, to
!{ continue beyond the 11 p.m. curfew-
P. DRAFT E.1'VIRONMENTAL 111PACT REPORT ON COP@REHFNSIVE STORM DRAI*i
PLAN REVISION NO. 1
Mr. Paul Rougeau reviewed the staff report.
Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded by Dahl, carried unanimously, to
adopt Resolution No. 82-10, recommending public review, certification
and adoption of the Draft Environmental Impact Report on the Comprehensive
Storm Drain Plan revision No. 1.
Motion: Moved by Dahl, seconded by Sceranka, carried unanimously, to
adopt the priorities within the Storm Drain Plan and recommend adoption
by the City Council.
0. FIVE-YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
Mr. Rougeau reviewed the staff report stating that this has been forwarded
to the Planning Commission following recommendations made by the Citizens
Advisory Committee.
Commissioner Sceranka asked about improvement to Hellman Avenue from
Base Line going south and also Arrow, going south.
Mr. Rougeau explained the storm drain priority and how it would affect
the area referred to by Commissioner Sceranka stating that the first
project listed on the priority list will take care of the Problem. Mr.
Rougeau also stated that item No. 3 on the listing will correc* the
Cucamonga storm drain while Item No. 4 is the completion of the same
project. He indicated that the entire first part of the priority list
will take care of the problem.
Commissioner Sceranka stated that he did not see a proposal for the area
south of Foothill.
Mr. Rougeau replied that it is staff's feeling that this will be accomplished
by developers.
Commissioner Tolstuy asked what Item No. 4 on the 81-82 Capital Improvement
Program cost.
Lloyd Hubbs, City Engineer, replied that the estimate was $400,000.
Planning Commission Minutes -21- 5anuary 13, 1982
;A
Y'
r.'
R 1.
He further stated that the total cost of the protect was in the neigh-
borhood of $350,000 and was approximately $50,000 under test.
Commissioner Tolstoy asked why staff is recommending Item No. 5, the
Alta Loma Channel.
Mr. Rougeau replied that it affects many existing properties.
Motion: Moved. by Tolstoy, seconded by Remp_i, carried unanimously, to
adopt Resolution No. 82-11, recommending zpproval of the five- .ear
Capital Improvement Program and finding consistency with the General
Plan.
Q. MASTER PLAN OF DRAIIXAGE FOR VICTORIA DEVELOPMENT
Mr. Paul Rougeau reviewed the staff report.
Motion: Moved by King, seconded by Rempel, carried, to adopt Resolution
No. 82-12, recommmending review and adoption of t:�e master plan of drainage
for the Victoria Development.
Commissioner Dahl voted no, reiterating his previously stated reasons
regarding Victoria.
AD.i OURNMENT
Motion: Moved zy Rempel, seconded by Tolstoy, carried unanimously, to
adjourn.
11:35 p.m. The Planning Commission adjourned.
Respectfully submitted,
JACK LAM, Secretary
Planning Commission Minutes -22- January 13, 1982
r'.'�"...'.'�..Ct..ri^�`^Iw��^ieM..,:...:i�1,:iC•.x1'X1/v ..M4� .. ... Yr+.fir.h. !�I':� ,r' �.v�:?. ,1� '+yQY�r,(Oy`}.'��y�l.
r �.
CITY Or RANCH(,CUCAin.ONGA
STAFF REPORT o t J. ,
D'.
DATE : January 27, 1982
tgn
T0 : Planning Commission
FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer
BY : Shintu Bose, Associate Civil Engineer
SUBJECT : REVISION OF CONDITIONS FOR TRACT 10277 - BARMRKIAN WOLFF AND
1 ASSOCIATES - A 30 unit single family sub ivision ocated at the
+I northeast corner of Almond and Carnelian requesting a change
from public to private interior streets
Tentative Tract 10277 was approved by the Commission on February 25, 1981 as
a custom lot subdivision located at the northeas corner of Armond St. and
Carnelian St. The subdivision proposed is to previde 30 single family lots,
all fronting onto a dedicated public interior street. The applicant's intent
is to develop t;„s subdivision as a totally secured community 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 raaifications of prohibiting
public access through a dedicated public street.
The applicant is now requesting approval of a revision to the map classifying
all interior streets zs private streets to be maiitained by the homeowners,
whereby the guard gate provision will be acceptab e. The original design of
the subdivision will remain substantially the same. The change of classifica-
tion of the interior streets will require some recisions and modifications of
the conditions of approval for the original tract which has been incorporated
in the attached resolution.
RECOMMENDATI09: It is recommended that the Commission adopt the attached re-
solution'on approving the revisions to the original conditions of approval for the
subject tract to reclassify the interior streets a; private streets.
Respectfully submit ed,
i
LSH:RSB:jaa
Attachments
,I
I
ITEM A
RESOLUTION NO.
A MT ON, OF TH'c RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING
COMMISSION APPROVING AMENDMENT TO CONDITIONS OF
APPROVAL FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 10277, LOCATED
AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF ALMOND STREET AND
CARNELIAN STREET
WHEREAS, on the 25th dey of February, 1981, Tentative Tract
No. 10277 was approved by the Planning Commission by Resolution No. 81-15;
and
WHEREAS, on the 27th day of January, 1982, 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
RESOLV 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.
b. The private street concept is consistent with the
applicable General Plan..
SECTION 9- Tha Racnli,tinn Nn 81-15 is hvrnhv revised to
eliminate the tan and Condition No. I1 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
Association, 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 and Lighting Districts shall be filed with
the City Council. The e-igineerirg costs involved in
Districts Formation shall be borne by the developer.
d. An access easement for vehicular and pedestrian traffic
through the project area shall be recorded pro-
viding access to the adjoining property to the north-
west or the project.
4.p ..
w
to ....
Resolution No.
Page 2
e. Dedication shall be made of Almond Avenue right-of-way
as shown on the tentative map.
°. The street improvements for Almond Street including,
but not limited to, curb, gutter, A.C. pavement, side-
walk, street lights and street trees shall be constructed
to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 27TH DAY OF JANUARY, 1982.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
V^
BY:
Jeffrey King, Chairman
ATTEST:
Secretary of the Panning 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
_ regul--ray 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 27th day of January, 1982, by the following vote-
to-wit:
AYES: C0WMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
.f
s.,
w
Y✓'ice.
i
3 ` LZ
go E `
fittrig
_ .
41 `'� it . ' / ! , .,.,._' � •
It
ilkFt ) sae 0IVU
� I :
3 pi
1 ; 2
i �:3
RESOLUTION NO. 81-15
- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING CQMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, CONDITIONALLY
APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 10277
WHEREAS, Tentative Tract Map No. 10277, hereinafter "Map"
submitted by Bannakian;Wolff Associates, applicant, for the purpose of
subdividing the real property situated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga,
County of San Bernardino, State of California, 6escribed as a residential
subdivision of 24.36 acres of land located on the north side of Almond
Rved, east of Carnelian Street into 30 lots, regularly came before the
Planning Commission for public hearing and action on February 25, 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 has read and considered the
Engineering and Planning Divisions reports and has considered other
evidence presented at the public hearing.
NOW, THEREFO"F the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga does resolve as follows:
® SECTION 1: The Planning Commission makes the following findings
ir. regard to Tentative Tract No_ 10277 and the Map thereof:
(a) The ten'atiup ty-Art iC rnalfiefnn4 ..-.;+k ell
.:yr. ...au lc
interim and proposed general and specific plans;
(b) The design or improvements of the tentative tract is
consistent with ail 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 envirommental 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.
j4:
Page 2�
(g) That this project will not create adverse impacts on the
environment and a Negative Declaration is issued.
SESTION 2: Tentative Tract Map No. 10277, a copy of which is
attached hereto, is hereby approved subject to all of the following
conditions and the attached Standard Conditions:
Engineering Division
z. 1. Dedication by separate instruments of that portion of "A"
Street and the southerly half of Almond Street, which are
beyond the tract boundary, shall be recorded prior to or
r concurrent with the recornation of the final man.
2. An offer of dedication for a 60-foot wide easement for
stonndrain purposes along the existing drainage course at
the easterly tract boundary shall be made on the final
f
map.
3. Drainage crossings with adequate inlet and outlet structures
shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer
where the fire lanes and equestrian trails cross the
existing drainage courses.
4. A minimum of 50-foot buiiding setback lines from the
flowline of the existing drainage courses shall be established
and shall be delineated on the final map. The set-back
lines shall remain in force until such time as the master
planned storm drain facilities are constructed at the
�. .� dnd erosion protection measures
are provided at the westerly drainage course.
5. Building pads adjacent to the' drainaoe courses shall be
elevated a minimum of 2 feet above 160-year flood elevations
on the said drainage courses. Hydrology and hydraulic
calculations to determine flood elevation shall be submitted
for review by the City Engineer.
6. The applicant shaii be required to upgrade, to the satisfaction
of the City Engineer, the existing drainage culverts
across Hidden Farm Road and Strang Lane at the downstream
portion of the drainage course wn•ich traverses through
the :westerly part of the tract.
7. The applicant shall be required to upgrade and provide
erosion protection measures at the confluence of those
two drainage courses at north of Hillside Drive which
traverse through the subject tract.
Page 3
8_ All existing easements lying within the future right-of-
way are to be quit claimed or delineated as per the City
Engineer' s requirements, prior to recordation of the
tract map-
9. Final plans and profiles shall show the location of any
existing utility facility that would affect construction.
10. Concentrated drainage `lows shall not cross sidewalks.
Under sidewalk drains shall be installed to City standards_
11. Adequate provisions shall be made for acceptance and
disposal of surface drainage entering the property from
adjacent areas.
12. if, the City Engineer determines that runoff from the
tract flows onto private downstream properties, letters
of acceptance shall be required.
'_3. Private drainage easements with improvements for cross
lot drainage shall be required and shall be delineated on
the final map.
14. At the time of underground utility installation and prior
to installation of street improvements, the developer
shall contact the appropriate cable television company
for the area and make arrangements which would give the
company the opportunity to install cable at the time of
_s tle Caulr Leievisoon company does not
install cable, then the deveioper shall install conduit
and pull boxes throughout the tract. Such details shall
be shown and verified on the improvement plans.
Building Division
15. Surety shall be posted and an agreement executed, guaranteeing
completion of all on-site drainage facilities necessary
I
dewatering all parcels, to the satisfaction of the
Building and Safety Division.
16. Appropriate easements, for safe disposal of drainage
water that are conducted unto or over adjacent parcels,
are to be delineated and recorded to the satisfaction of
the Building and Safety Division.
17. On-site drainage improvements, necessary for dewatering
or protecting the subdivided properties, are to be installed
prior to issuance of building permits for construction
upon any parcel that may be subject to, or contributes
to, drainage flows entering, leaving or within a parcel
relative to which a building permit is requested.
1Nt
Page 4
18. Final grading plans for each parcel are to be submitted
to the Building and Safety Division for approval prior to
issuance of building permits. (This may be on an incremental
3r GOur GSitc i3B�iS.)
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 25TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 1981.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY. I��
ichard Dahl , Chai n
ATTEST e
Secretary of the P anning Commission
I, JACK LAM, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and
regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of
the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning
Commission held on the 25th day of February, 1980 by the follwoing vote
to
«.
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Sceranka, Tolstov. Remoel . Dahl
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: done
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: `lone
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: King
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
STANDARD CONDITIONS
Subject: TFF I tE �,`1t '10277
Applicant:
Location:
Those items checked are conditions of approval.
APPLICANT SHALL CWITACT THE PLANNING DIVISION FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING
CONDITIONIS:
A. Site Development
I. Site shall be developed in accordance with the approved site plans on file
in the Planning Division and the conditions contained herein.
2. Revised site plans and building elevations incorporating all conditions of
approval shall be submitted to the Planning Division prior to issuance of
building permits.
_Z13. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of
the Zoning Ordinance and all other applicable City Ordinances in effect at
time of Building Permit issuance.
® __z4. The developer shall pro:ida all lot-, with .adequate sideyard area for Recreation
Vehicle storage pursuant to City standards.
5. Mail boxes, ir areas arh_P sidew?iks are :•equired, shall be installed and
lccated by the dev ew per su:�ject to approval by the Planning Division.
6. Trash r•_ eptar:e areas shall be enclosed by a 6 foot high masonry wall with
view obstructing gates pursuant to City standards. Location shall be
subject to approval by the Planning Division.
01 7. :f duellings are to be constructed in an area designated by the Foothill
Fire Districts 'as "hazardous", the roof materials rmist be approved by the
Fire Chief and Planning Division prior to issuance of a building permit.
_ 8. A sample of the roof material shall be submitted to the Planning Division
for review and approvzl prior to issuance of building permits.
_ 9. All roof appurtenances, including air conditioners, shall be architecturally
integrated, shielded from viers and the sound buffered from adjacent properties
and streets as requir:!d by the Planning and Building Divisions.
10. Prior to any use of the project site or business activity being commenced
thereon, all conditions of approval contained herein shall be completed to
the satisfaction of the Director- of Community Development.
_ 11. A detailed lighting plan shall be submitted to and approved by the
Planning Division prior-to issuance of building permits. Such plan
shall indicate style, illumination, location, height and method of
shielding. No lighting shall adverse3y affect adjacent properties.
_ 12. All swimming pools installed at the time of initial development shall
be solar heated.
_ 13. Texturized pedestrian pathways across circulation aisles shall be
provided throughout the development to connect dwellings with open
spaces and recreational uses.
14. All trash pick up shall be for individual unit:, with all recepticals
kept out of public view from private and publi : streets.
_ I5. Standard patio cover plans shall be submitted to and approved by the
City Planner and Building Official prior to oc.:upancy or the first
unit.
_ 16. Ail buildings numbers and individual units shall be identified in a
clear and concise manner, including proper illumination.
__Voe17. Solid co-e exterior doors, security dead bolts and locks shall be
installed on each unit in this project.
18. Securi+.y devices suches window locks shall be in on each unit.
_ 19. A11 units within this development shay be preplumbed to be adapted
for a solar water heating unit.
20. Energy conserving building materials and appliances are required to be
incorporated into this project to include such things as but not limited
to reduced consumption shower heads, better grade of insulation, double
paned windows, extended overhangs, pilotless appliances, etc.
21. This development shall provide an option to home buyers to purchase a
soiar water heating unit.
22. Emergency secondary access shall be provided to this tract to the
satisfaction of the Foothill Fire Protection District.
_vlo' 23. Local and Master Planned Equestrian Trails shall be provided throughout
the tract in accordance with the Equestrian Trail Plan for Alta Loma.
A detailed equestrian trail plan indicating widths, maximum slopes,
physical condition, fencing and weed control in accordance with City
equestrian trail standards shall be submitted to and approved by the
City Planner prior to approval and recordation of the final map.
24. This tract shall form or annex to a maintenance district For maintenance
of equestrian trails.
� r
_ 25. This project shall provide percent of affordable housing and/or
rents, in conformance with e�neral Plan housing policies and the housing
criteria defined in the Growth Management Ordinance. Affordability shall
® be determined by current market rates, rents and median income levels
® at the time of construction of the project. Proof of this provision
shall be submitted to the Planning Division prior to finalizing building
;. permits and occupancy of the units-
B. Parking and Vehicular Access
1. All parking lot landscaped islands shall have a minimum inside dimension
of 4' and shall contain a 12" walk adjacent to parking stall .
2. Parking lot trees shall be a minimum 15 gallon size.
3. All two-way aisle width^ shall be a minimum of 24 feet wide.
_ 4. Emergency access shall be provided, maintenance free and clear, a minimum
of 24 feet wide at all times during construction in accordance with
Foothill Fire District requirements.
_ S. All parking spaces shall be double striped.
_ 6. All units shall be provided with automatic garage door openers.
7. Designated visitor parking areas shall be turf blocked.
_ S. The C.C_ & R. 's shall restrict the storage of recreational vehicles on
this site unless they are the principle source of transportation for the
owner.
_ 9. no parking shall be permitted within the interior cirulation aisle other
than in designated visitor parking areas. C.C. & R. 's shall be developed
by the applicant and submitted to the City Planning Division prior to
issuance of building permits.
C. landscaping
_ 1. A detailed landscape and irrigation plan shall be submitted to and approved
by the Planning Division prior to the issuance of building permits.
vOO'02. Existing trees shali be retained wherever possible. A master plan of
existing trees showing their precise location, size and tyoe shall be
completed by the developer' Said plan shall take into account the
proposed grading and shall be required to be submitted to and approved
by the Planning Division prior to approval of the final grading plan.
r
t
/ r
3. Existing Eucalyptus trees shall be retained wherever possible and shall be
trimmed and topped at 30' . Dead, decaying or potentially dangerous trees
shall be approved for removal at the descretion of the Planning Division
during the review of the Master Plan of Existing Or.-Site Trees_ Those
trees which are approved for removal may be required to be replaced on a
tree-for-tree basis as provided by the Planning Division.
4. Street trees, a minimum -31 i5 gallon size or larger, shall be installed in
accordance with the Master Plan of street trees for the City of Rancho
Cucamonga and shall be planted at an average of every 30' on interior
streets and 20' on exterior streets.
5_ A minimum of 5o trees per gross acre, comprised of the following sizes,
shall be provided within the development; 20%-24" box or larger, 70%-15
gallon, and 100.-5 gallon..
_ 6_ All landscaped areas shall be maintained in a healthy and thriving condition,
free from weeds, trash, and debris.
7. All slope banks in access of five (5) feet in vertical height shall and
are 5.1 or greater slopes be landscaped and irrigated in accordance with
slope planting requirements of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Such slope
plantin:• shall include but not be limited to rooted ground cover and
appropriate shrubs and trees. All such planting and irrigation Fell
be continuously maintained in a healthy and thriving condition :)y the
developer until each individual unit is sold and occupied by the buyer_
Prior to releasing occupancy for those units, an inspection of the slopes
shall be completed by the Planning Staff to determine that it is in
satisfactory condition. In the case of custom lot subdivision.;, all J
such slopes shall be seeded with native grasses upon completion of grading
or an a, ternative method of erosion control satisfactory to the Building
Official . Irrigation on custom lot subdivisions shall be provided to
germinate the seed and to a point 6 months after germination.
8_ All parkways, open areas, and landscaping shall be fully maintained
.)y a homeowners association or other means acceptable to the City. Such
proof of maintcmance shall be submitted to the City prior to issuance
of building permits.
9. The front yard landscaping, and an appropriate irrigation system, shall
be installed by the developer in accordance with submitted plans.
_Z10. The final design of the perimeter parkways, walls, landscaping and
sidewalks shall be included in the required landscape plans and shall
be subject to approval by the Planning Division.
_ 1i. A minimum of specimen size trees shall be planter'
within the project.
_ 12. Special landscape features such as mounding, alieivial rock, speciman
size trees, and an abundance of landscaping is required along
1,
1. Any signs proposed for This development shall be designed in conformance
with the Comprehensive Sign Ordinance and shall require review and approval
by the Planning Division prior to installation of such signs_
_ 2. A uniform sign program for this development shall be submitted to the
Planning Division for their review and approval prior to issuance of
Building permits.
3. The signs indicated on the submitted plans are not approved wit:i this
approval and will require separate sign review and approval .
E_ Additional Approvals Required
_ 1. Director Review shall be accomplished prior to the issuance of a Building
Permit.
2. Director Review shall be accomplished prior to recordation of the final
subdivision map.
3. Approval of Tentative Tract lo.j� is granted subject to the approval
__
of Zone Change 2, -
4. This Conditional Use Permit is granted for a period of month(s) at
which time the Planning Commission may add or delete conditions or revoke
the Conditional Use Permit.
5. The developer is required to obtain the following signed statement by
purchasers of homes which have a private or public equestrian trail on
or adjacent to their property.
In purchasing the home located on Lot Tract ,
on ; I have read the C.C. & R. 's and
understand t at said Lot is subject to a mutual re-
ciprocal easement for the purpose of allowing equestrian
traffic to gain access.
Signed
Purchaser
Said statement is to be filed by the developer with the City prior to
occupancy.
_Z6- Prior to approval and recordation of the final map, or prior to issuance of
building permits, when no subdivision map is involved, written certification
from all affrcted School Districts, shall be submitted to the Department of
Community Devt'.opment which states that adequate school facilities are or
will be capable of accommodating students generated by this project. Such .
letter of certification must have been issued by the School District within
sixty (60) days prior to the final map approval in the case of the subdivision
map or issuance of permits in the case of all other residential projects.
ti,?'.
�. Prior to approval and recordation of the final map, or prior to the issuance
Of building permits whem no map is involved, writter. certification from the
affected water district, that is
sewer and water facilities are or
will be available to serve the proposed project, shall be submitted to th�
Department of Community
district within sixty (60) days prior
Development. Such letter must have been issued by
the water to final map approval in
the case of subdivision or issuance of permits in t he case of all other
residential projects. For projects using septic tank facilities allowable
by the Santa Ana Regional Water Control Board and the City, written certi-
fication of acceptability, includi
obtained and submitte ng all supportive information, shall be
d to the City.
_ZE- This approval shall become null and void if the tentative subdivision map
is not o• )ved and recorded or building permits issued .when no map is
involved, -- ithin twelve (12) months from the approv T of this project
unless an extt^sion has been granted by the Plannins Commission.
_16Z9. This subdivision was not submitted as a total development package and is
reouired to reapply for a point rating relative to the design section
• Growthof V�e w
gemet and record
of the map if thes bdivissionniscgoing toe prior �be developedoasnal apprvaltract homesation
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING DIVISION
CONOI TI O?]S FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING
:
F. Site Development
1. The applicant- shall comply with the latest adopted Uni'•rm Building Code,
Uniform Mechanical Code, Uniform Plumbing Cade, N Lional Electric Code, and
Of all other applicable codes and ordinances in erfect at the time of approval
t project
2. Prior to issuance of building permits for combustible construction, evidence
shall be submitted to the Foothill District Fire Chief that water supply
for fire protection is available.
_Z3. Prior to the issuance of a building
unit(s) or major addition to an existi �t fora new residential dwelling
n
unit(s)
shall a
development fees at the established rate. Such lfeesemaypinclude, but not
be limited to: City Beautification Fee, Park Fee, Drainage Fee, Systems
Development Fee, Permit and Plan Checking Fees, and School Fee_
4. Prior to the issuance of a buildin
permit for a new development or addition to an existing development, the fapplicantercialrshallspayai
development fees at the established rate. Such fees may include, but not
be 7inited to: Systems Development Fee, Drainage Fee, Permit and Plan
Checking Fees.
5. This approval shall become null and void if buildin
for this project within one year from the date of projectpermits are not issued
pproval _
_ 6. Street names and addresses shall be provided by the building official.
•y4l •
/7. Dwelling units shall be constructed with fire retardant material
and non-combustible roof material .
_ 3. All corner dwellings shall have the building elevation facing the
street upgrade with additional wood trim around windows and wood siding
or plan-ons where appropriate-
G. Existing Structures
_ 1. Provide compliance with the Uniform Building Code for property line clearances
consider - ng use, area and fire-resistiveness of existing buildings.
2. Existing building(s) shall be made to comply with current Building and
Zoning regulations for the intended use or the building shall be demolished.
_ 3. Existing sewage disposal facilities shall be re .oved, filled and/or capped
to comply with appropriate grading practices and the Uniform Plumbing Code.
H. Gradina
_ -'1. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the Uniform
Building Code, City Grading Standards and accepted grading practices.
The final grading plan shall be in substantial confornance with the
apnr�vzd conceptual grading plan.
® 2. A soils report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer licensed by the
State of California to perform such work.
3. A geological report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist
and submitted at the time of application for grading plan check.
4. The final grading plan shall be subject to review and approval by the
Planning, Engineering and Building Divisions and shall be compieted prior
to retardation of the final subdivision map or issuance of building permit
whic::ever comes first.
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE ENGINEERING DIVISIO14 FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING
CO NOITICNS:
I. Dedications and Vehicular Access
—Zi. Dedications shall be made by final map of all interior street rights-of-way
and all necessary easements as shoo-in on the tentative map.
2. Dedication shall be made of the following missing rights-of-way on the
following streets:
additional feet on
additional feet on
additional feet on
H .
i
_z Corner property line rad :S will be required per City standa •ds.
4. All rights of vehicular ngress to and egress from shall be edicated as
follows:
Reciprocal easements sha 1 be provided ensuring access to al' parcels over
private roads, drives, o parking areas.
6. Adequate provisions shal be made for the ingress, engress aid internal
circulation of any truck which will be used for delivery of goods to the
property or in the opera .ion of the proposed business.
J. Street Imorovements
i. Construct full street itr rovements including, but not limited to, curb and
gutter, A.C_ pavement, s dewalk, drive approaches, parkway trees and street
y' lights on all interior s reets1gy1&Ct to ptail6n� Covnti7iss1* tescitt,* r�crrJWv
✓ Z. Construct the following rissing improvements in7cluding, but nit limited to:
STREET NAME I GUTTER PVMT. WALK APPRE LIGHTS OVERLAY CHAIRH{ AMPS OTHER
r,
C;it i12�1�'i7
3. Prior to any work being performed in the public right-of-way, n encroachment
permit and fees shall be obtained from the City Engineer's Off ce, it;
addition to any other permits required.
n 0000'4. Street improveme :t plans aprroved by the City Engineer and pre, ared by a
Registered Civil Engineer stdll be required, for all street im; -ovements,
prior to issuance of an encroachment permit.
Surety shall be posted and ai agreement executed to the satisfz :tion of the
City Engineer and the City A:torney, guaranteeing completion of the public
improvements, prior to recor,'ing of the map or the issuance of iuilding
Permits, whichever comes first.
Y
✓ 6_ All street improvements shall be installed to the satisfaction f the City
Engineer, prior to occupancy.
Vo"0'7. Pavement striping, marking, t:•affic and street name signing sha 1 be installed
per the requirements of the C ty Engineer.
K. Drainzoe and Flood Control
1. The applicant will be responsible for construction of all onsite drainage
facilities required by the City Engineer.
_ 2. Intersection drains will be required at the following locations:
3. The proposed project falls within areas indicated as subject to flooding
under the National Flood Insurance Program and is subject to the provisions
of the program and City Ordinance No. 24.
v/ 4. A drainage charnel and/or flood protection wall will be required to protect
the structures by diverting sheet runoff to street,Lr i--.: tyi,stiry dwiverje
(-wise-S. The following north-south streets shall be designed as major water carrying
streets requiring a combination of special curb heights, commercial type
drive approaches, rolled street connections, flood protection walls, and/or
landscaped earth berms and roiled driveways at property line.
L. Utilities
,* 1. Ali proposed utilities within the project shall be installed underground
including utilities along major arterials less than 12 KV.
d 2. Utility easements shall be provided to the specif-icat-ion of the serving
Utility companies and the City Engineer.
V 3. Developer shall be responsible for the relocation of existing public
utilities, as required.
✓ 4. Developer shall be responsible for the installation of street lighting in
accordance with Southern California Edison Company and City standards.
5. Water and sewer system plans shall be designed and constructed to meet
requirements of the Cucamonga County Water District (CCWD), Foothill Fire
District and the Environmental Health Department of the County of San
Bernardino. A letter of compliance form CCWD will be required prior to
recordation.
6. App'--ovals have not been secured from all utilities and other interested
agencies involved. Approval of the final map will be subject to any
requirements that may be received from them-
M. General Requirements and Aaorovals
I. Permits from other agencies will be required as follows:
A. Caltrans for:
8. County Dust Abatement required prior to issuance of a grading permit)
C. San Bernardino County Flood Control District
a,„; D. Other:
f �
_ 2. A copy of the Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's) and Articles
of Incorporation of the Homeowners Association, subject to the approval of
the City Attorney, shall be recorded with this map and a copy provided to
the City.
__ 3. Prior to recordation, a Notice of Intention to form Landscape and Lighting
Districts shail be filed with the City Council . The engineering costs •
involved in Districts Formation shall be borne by the developer.
Z?. Final parcel and tract maps shall conform to City standards and procedures.
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
1. Bri.ef Description of Project:
Environmental Assessment for Tentative Tract No. 10277 -
A custom lot subdivision consisting of 30 lots on 24.36
acres of land' in the A-1-5 zone located on the north
side of Almond Road, east of Carnelian Street - APN 1061-171-02
2- Name and Address of Applicant:
Barmakian-Wolff 8 Assoc
9375 Archibald Ave. Suite 101
c�1 3
3- �g¢JrREa�gtheC�rbv2siZ�ns of the California
Environmental Quality Act of 197C, the City of
Rancho Cucamonga has determined that the above
project will not have a significant effect upon
the environment. An Environmental Impact Report
will not be required.
4- Minutes of such decision and the Initial Study
prepared by the City of Rancho Cucamonga are on
file in the Planning Division of the City of
Rancho Cucamonga-
S. This- decision may be appealed to the City Council
of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. A written appeal
and filing fee of $100. 00 must be received by the
® Planning Division no later than 5 :00 p.m.
Mo...•{, l l 1 QR7
6. This Negative Declaration is subject to the
implementation of mitigating measures of any)
as listed on the attachments.
DATED Feb. 27. 1981
Chairman, Planning Commission
R. L. SIEVERS & SONS INC.
GENERAL CCNMACX)Z
Si.UC NO 280OU
O481 ORAL^wt^I 1"a F'v'cNul
SUI7'c 8
MNA PARK CAURDPNIA QC6M
(714)SM-7921 (C ,7
Y OF
January IS, 19W11UNITY P'EVET 0P;rEVT DEPT,
L.9
AIIII
Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission $ 9 � Z IRM
C/O City Planning Division i a t ! a-121324A6
9430 Baseline P.oad y�
Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730
RE: Public Hearirg 1-27-82
Revisions of Conditions for Tract 10277
Honorable Planning Commission:
R.L. Sievers S Sons, Znc. are the owners of property bounding the
easterly prcperty line of Tract 10277 (Bar ak an, Wolff, and Associates) ,
our concern is based on the availability of secondary emergency access.
i' Previous approved Conditions for Approval provided for such future access
at the southwest corner of our property, it is our desire to maintain this
point for emergency ingress/egress.
Respectfully submitted,
Stan Sievers
Vice President
SS:ds
n.
a
r,
{
f
1
iY .r.
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Li
_ STAFF' REPORT �' '�
C r
� 0
F ZZ_
U >
L977
DATE: January 27, 1982
TO: Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Jack Lam, AICP, Director of Community Development
BY: Curt Johnston, Assistant Planner
SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 9647 -
COUNTRY HOME - A custom/tract subdivision totaling 15
lots on 4.5 acres in the R-1 zone located on the north-
west corner of Hellman Avenue and Church Street.
SUMMARY: The applicant has submitted a Tract Map for the above-described
project in order to gain consideration for approval by the Planning Con
® mission. Approval of this project will necessitate approval of a Nega-
tive Declaration for environmental assessment and Tentative Tract Map.
The project has been reviewed by both the Design and Growth Management
Committees and has passed the Residential Assessment System. Staff has
prepared a detailed Staff Report, related Resolution, and Conditions of
Approval for your review and consideration.
BACKGROUND: The applicant, Country Home Ranch, is requesting approval of
their proposal in order to subdivide 4.5 acres of land into 15 lots as
shown on Exhibits "A" and "B". The application is for a custom lot/
tract subdivision with lots ranging in size from 7950 square feet to
9800 square feet. The proposed density is 3.33 dwelling units per acre.
The project site is in the R-1 zone and General Planned for Low Density
Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre).
The project site is presently an orange grove with approximately 600
trees. The site has an average slope of 5% falling north to south.
Surrounding land uses include the Cucamonga Junior High School to the
east, single family homes to the south and west, and to the north is
the continuation of the orange grove and six homes fronting on Hellman.
The applicant has purchased a significant amount of the property to the
north and intends to submit a Tract Map for the property as shown on the
Master Plan (Exhibit "C"). The Master Plan is conceptual only and is
not being considered for approval at this time.
ITEM B
rF'
Tentative Tract 9647-Country Home
Planning Commission Agenda
January 27, 1982
Page 2
ANALYSIS: The project, as shown on the attached Development Plans, is consistent
7- t— h the General Plan since it falis within the density range designated. The
project is being developed in accordance with the State Subdivision Map Act as
well as the City's Subdivision Ordinance and Zoning Ordinance.
Two interior roads off of Church Street are proposed. Street "A" to the east
should become a cul-de-sac, while Street "B" to the west will be a through
street as shown on the Master Plan.
Preliminary grading and drainage, as shown on the Tract Map, was reviewed by
the Grading Committee and has been given conceptual approval . Pad elevations
from lot to lot typically vary from two to four feet. Full street improvements
will be required along all street frontages. Additionally, the applicant intends
to provide for pavement, curb and gutter for approximatly 270' on the south side
of Church Street from Hellman Avenue west. With this work, Church Street will
be improved to its ultimate width.
At the north end of "A" Street a temporary 2' high retaining wall will be con-
structed while at the north end of "B" Street a temporary 4' high retaining wail
will be constructed. Along the entire north property line, a 6' high wood fence
will be constructed. 0n Hellman Avenue, the developer wiii provide a two-tiered
wall with landscaping as shown on Exhibit "D". The design of the wall includes
a 2' high wail adjacent to the sidewalk, a 6' landscaped planter, and a second
wall 6' high. The exact materials used for the wall will be reviewed by the
Design Review Committee prior to final approval and recordation of the Tract
Map.
The Design Review Committee reviewed this project finding it acceptable for
this area. However, they did express concern with the perimeter wall materials
and stated the final design must be reviewed by the Committee. A copy of the
Tract Map and Master Plan will be available for your review at the Planning
Commission meeting.
Please find attached Part I of the Initial Study, completed by the applicant.
which discusses various environmental factors relative to this project. Staff
has completed Part II of the Initial Study. No adverse impacts on the environ-
ment due to this development have been found. If the Commission concurs with
this determination, issuance of a Negative Declaration would be appropriate.
CORRESPONDENCE: A public hearing notice was advertised in The Daily Report
newspaper on January 14, 1982. Forty-nine public hearing notices were sent
to surrounding property owners within 300' of the project site. To date, no
correspondence has been received either for or against this project.
Tentative Tract 9647-Country Home
® Planning Commission Agenda
January 27, 1932
Page 3
RECOMMENDATION: It i-- recommended that the Planning Commission conduct a public
hearing to consider all matters relative to this project. if the Commission con-
curs with the findings of Staff, adoption of the attached Resolution with Conditions
of Approval would be appropriate.
Respectfuily submitted, ,
JACK LAM, AICP
Director of Community Development
JL:CJ:jr
AtUchments: Exhibit "A" - Vicinity Map
Exhibit "B" - Tentative Tract Map
Exhibit "C" - Master Plan
Exhibit "D" - Perimeter Wali Design
Part I Initial Study
Resolution of Approval with Conditions
1�t�xt►u� ta
.- wwYjW
uN .
�dw
son
IMP pop
NJ
�. . . •totltrr.in..
.�gn�W..w...uu
t . IY�fKiS1�� Ww"No ow
sloom
RRNI
i •` 5,-i av q � Sty
E �Pal �
1
C '
5 f
JI l • '
• low _
1
JI
YACANT
! �
lit4ttGE
1 I 1
1 a '�
CWRCpT,
r 1I
N 10
� � y
F
s
vmlem nee:
' f ' NORTH
CITY OF ITEN't: g
PLAINN-M\G Dl\,- .N EXHIRT-Tom_SCALE- hl•T_�
,
e
w _
14
P.
1 ice_./ i•�%' • ' �•.w \ . - 1.1 •
tr
NORTH
t
������ �. �� •ram ..._ ` .1 r ... '.t�•c
CITY OF ITEM: �
PL.ANNIN Y DIVISION EXHIM T. SCALE-
'r�
® �S.Lov�t-O•jt099�RM\1P9 /1Wt1404L4 U.Ou•aN
S.4IU.. :1•MCWULLIL IIYARIA-M17(D LNG4
i'�� 4wM�HGMtH1 4�MII4 HAfONR`( V.XLL
•��S4.,f\IVN.OLL/W 4"K U#M1 t Mld N MA4"PLY
S OML. �YOTIMw PRA9Gf4Z V1.A.Wr IX
t ♦ T—
xi;
a • - M • Sy
LoT a L O T z ■ +dT e
A Dt�ti v.Tlp,l j VXV s cM V AT," 0 PAC vu WATLM
�l • s•�
•
TYPICAL PLANTING SCHEME'
xwL• L�Io=o•
I I ,
J
PERSPECTIVE VIEW •
CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA rTu:nj?
PLAONNI.NG DlXgSIO,\T E\HIBrr-. +SCALE:
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA •
ndITIAL STUDY
PART I - PROJECT INFORMATION SHEET - To be completed by applicant
Environmental Assessment Review Fee: $90.00
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 13: of the initial Study. The Development Beview
Coaunittee will meet and take action no later than ten
(10) days before the public meeting at which time the
project is to be heard. The Committee will make one of
three determinations-- 1) The project will have no
environmental impact and a Negative Declaration will :)e
filed, 2) The project will have an environmental impact
and an Environmental Impact Report will be preparec, or
3) An additional information report should be suppl:.ed
by the applicant giving further information concerning
the proposed project_ _
PROJECT TITLE:
APPLICANT'S NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE: Ronald W. Martin,
1895 New= Blvd Costa Mesa CA 92627
714-833-8320
NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE OF PERSON TO BE CONTACTED
CONCERNING THIS PROJECT: Raymond Coakley, RI1A
1895 Newport Blvd_ , Costa Mesa,
VOCATION OF PROJECT (STREET ADDRESS AND ASSESSOR PARCEL NO- )
On the north side of Church Street between Lion and _
__Aellman: AP 208-021-22
LIST OTHER PERMITS NECESSARY FROM LOCAL, REGIONAL, STATE Alm
FEDERAL AGENCIES AND THE AGENCY ISSUING SUCH PERMITS:
_Grading Permit, Building Permit, Encroachment Permit
PROJECT DESCRISYTTON
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: Subdivision of 4. 5 acres into
KxS single family lots
ACREAGE OF PROJECT AREA AND SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING AND
PROPOSED BUILDINGS, IF ANY: 4. 5 acres. There are no
existing structures on-site; the proposed structures
will have apDroximately sauare feet.
DESCRIBE THE ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING OF THE PROJECT SITE
INCLUDING IWORMATION ON TOPOGRAPHY, PLANTS (TREES) ,
ANIMALS, ANY CULTURAL, HISTORICAL OR SCENIC ASPECTS, USE
OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES, AND THE DESCRIPTION OF ANY
EXISTING STRUCTURES AIM THEIR USE (ATTACH NECESSARY SHEETS) :
The project site is presently an orange grove with an average slope
of 5% failina to the south. To the east of the site is Cucamonga
Junior High School, to the south and west are single family homes
an o e nor �s ano er orange grove. -
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
• WILL THIS PROD Ecr-
YES NO
X 1. Create a substantial change iz gro+:nd
contours?
_ X 2_ Create a substantial change in existing
noise or ;vibration?
X 3_ Create a substantial change in demand for
municipal services (police, fire, water,
sewage, etc_)?
X4. Create changes in the existing zoning or
general plan designations?
in excess
X S: Remove any existing 'xees? How many?- of 500
X 6. Create the need for use or disposal of
potentially hazardous materials such as
toxic substances, flammables or explosives?
Explanation of any YES answers aboves
i. e site is an orange grove. dft
XMPDRTAT%'T= If the project involves the construction of
residential units, complete the form on the
next page.
CERTIFICATION: I hereby certify that the statements furnished
above and in the attached exhibits present the data and
information required for this initial evaluation to the
best of my ability, and that the facts, statements, and
information presented are true and correct to the best of
my knowledge and belief. I further understand that
additional information may be required to be submitted
before an adequate evaulation can be made the Development
Review Committee.
Date Signatur
,� Title
RESIDENTIAL COtSTRUCTiON
The following information should be provided to the City of Rancho Cue amonga
Planning Division in order to aid in ,assessing the ability of the
school district to accommodate the proposed residential developmen' .
Name of Developer and Tentative Tract No.: Ronald W. Martin S Assoc ates
Tract 9647
Specific Location of Project: north Sid of her h Rtr P+ ?hP+wPPn T, nn and
Hellmar.
PRASE -T PHASF 2 PHASE 3 PHASE 4 TCTTAL
1. Vwnber of single
family units: iS
2. 'Number of multiple
family units: _
3 Date proposed to
begin construction: mid 1981 _
4. Earliest date of late 1981
occupancy:
Model $
and # of Tentative
5. Bedrooms Price Rance
Zr dr
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF TVE
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, CONDITIONALLY
APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 9647
WHEREAS, Tentative Tract Map No. 9647, hereinafter "Map"
submitted by Country Home ranch 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 custom
Let/Tract Subdivision on 4.5 acres of land, located on the northwest
corner of Hellman Avenue and Church Street into 15 lots, regularly came
before the Planning Commission for public hearing and action on
January 27, 1982; 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 has read and considered the
Engineering and Planning Divisions reports and has considered ether
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 `n Tentative Tract No. 9647 and the Map thereof:
(a) The tentative tract is consistent with all applicable
interim and proposed general and specific plans;
(b) The desigr. 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 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 temcative 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
w. ch`.n the proposed subdivision.
Resolution No.
Page 2
(g) That this project will not create adverse impacts
on the environment and a Negative Declaration is
issued.
SECTION 2: Tentative Tract Map No. 9647, a copy of which is
attached hereto, is hereby approved subject to all of the following
conditions and the attached Standard Conditions:
PLANNING DIVISION
1. The final design of the perimeter wail on Hellman
Avenue shall be subject to review and approval of
the Design Review Committee prior to final approval
and recordation of map. Construction techniques
and choice of materials shall provide for low cost
maintenance and long time attractiveness. The wall
shall be designed as shown in the Staff Report with
natural field stone at the inlets and split face block,
sandblasted tinted block, or other material suitable
to the Committee.
i
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 27TH DAY OF JANUARY, 1982.
r PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY:
F; 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 27th day of January, 1982, by the following vote-
to-wi t:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NCES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
M.
N ^ p _r p L N r 0c
R NN N
p L C Oar O O O
'w V V r _ �• ry�w w N LVM u VO V6^ T—T✓ w
O ✓ V 4 •Y 1 i N G •1 T N Y J•O> `—L p Y
4y C V r
`vP mr�. � � '" $ 4� W Y ✓='.' L •P ` L' �Vm c`.'n Nr o Y c ••� < _<_$ mr� y
•W7 ^� V� C N O 4 `�+ � ✓ OTC^V V WY ��_O JOLVwP ��
LO ^9 UY = Y b � `1^ N � OV1•O• ' ✓ L^ CO i. �i.+ OC 4N
•i=•6 W V N y _ +l n L V 4
" c 1 G O p V L V O C L 4
� -C
✓V ' C✓ N ` —C YC p �� LPiiW V O � V6
�L �WJ Nr• p � P P»� L dw � NOS C �— Nam= V�Ow9y Or O
N L O 9NP6 �O• `— N LWS C Y0 J OpJO�iC YC
OV �� �� O M L gOLN C >V �_ OY� r l mr a•V rir` -J <Y P
.J..o• Q` e` y 1�•W+� o� .`9-ANv— —cr PL ✓ � t=c
y w Vyy p O V ► yY _✓•_
�w —O — •O. ✓ 20 •�
L i ••.4 'P J C _yV"r� ^ l �� V >• r T 6 t Er V L i L P� C j
�V N^ —_ r C � CdL6 � yi•` Jp�CTJp y VT ��= �CWG 4Y6 — 1
m` CJ N Y CLy`C ` MV. Y1•Li rQo 9 rV OLL 4L O• Y
gP 1 9� •-p 4LOYN G Y_ OL� _ L Y>- DLO �r_VppE O= Y1
^C PO y= OL L NO ywLy ^ . 4C✓
n L M rP � CO Z `gip CC 4•`• �j V✓
5r �� � CO—GV _Y •YO 6pir-cV V ^N O✓ ••. G� JL� CC
<V V_ Cq< �� V _V+� ••- COvy CJ CW ` C V•-•�r �.= aO ENV V V �V N
VT
MH 6C ML Oar O �y PLOT CrCO �� VI = Y
p T"` �r
NO V9 •�-. OJ y N OiVY Vp Y•O C91 Vr0 ✓� 94 b� WVV� OC S1 Cr O
P V J O W v — V P`� V L- C C .— P yV C✓ y C i C v. r 0 s 1 L 4 0 1) r V
W•yam ^pyy _SLN9 r'w ayirV r«�•Y NNWrrP _V P_ P
tv NP •C•� NO N �. w WC L-
L ■ • x V ylY V NpJ r✓i �ONC VLyCp L N `
LL �V NY✓ rQ�� \VOrq �I <O 6
^ N • N A 1 N N I
Y ^•
OO x = LP Vr J W_ V
C V O V ^ N y G Y N =V CE
q !r Q r•
d
1 _ = _
C✓ 6 C r O�
.51
s L 0C V T ✓CO "vt 2}O p O
72
1V ?J �-
�c 7 Z C. 2
O O W x✓ . •CiNr_> c ONyP Lc <z �� rV•`Yr ® V9
W q VC f6p 1p N �V� �M �iC �v YI• OQ Zz r Nr
�yOy yL ✓p qL �� C OCC •^•Y� 1'+ —^O q`O P1 {wV.^PO V py
P � �L P✓ C r V _ w Y✓C w� � 16 N O L q �O 4�L P r L. CO
~V V CV Ow •Y ` �_� 9Z 44Vs tw —2 G �w
d o a eY rw �eeN �V .s> "L q ✓v' Coro.
O � � � V• = C 4� •✓i•�r `q �u�✓ •` C.
V•`P + sp POG (: G QfL V7' � ✓r
s 4 O LO ryr 'pJ�4 p p yy
IY N 1 V •f'I 4N C21 4pge 6M NVL Ya VWL JCL V� P.W'L._V — _r
_ V C '�
T— qW ^ — -
6
y Y � G� N A P L V �P 4 �V\ MCC G✓ Cp ��•� N r V N
o ` F �C 6^_— LC� C ir � �T �N 00 ^CN L f• R r9V
1 � �C •V.rL � O fWay 6� Y� N � Y PO YP<<r^
Z �' ^_. �N$ oiau o6 .W.2$ ox •Pi$✓ .G.i� oP � ao�� cY vr�
v 2P �:g ��c mar W— .o.e✓ $� ec � ��r� E✓ Y,.
y 4 8 O b L '�C•
W C NL '0= `N Y SOY 'L `4N L4M � V•WP � • �L _`J•�Y V � ✓i �✓ V �l
yCyCg P- pPpV4 YV L _ _ N 1L9 Y-�^ `
r r � �N _� N- 0.9d {rr CWO[ F_>Z « <-N P�r �� TN v >✓N ^O YGW
VYr <y9 <4�N 6N tirM
4 V � 6 V� bi � 1• N O � W O. � � w
ti \ Oa
�� � C •' rY L OHO i�
V N C n N ` GA I q Y O 4 q✓L V L
a C •LL•4 V m.� l ^f C r VVCONr •
V C q C
o L,• Cq � v� `
'•Ci•
_r•iJ•
EE
Q •" OL `= d` N �O i « r I �Lp
O CC 4 _ C ��� ~r OO •� 9 V � lC vN r••!.J•i V Oa�Oq�
O +^ w N 4+ T L J I O Y r V
^9 = �L 4_O ^ O Cq ✓ V OV V L•Oi 4•-•r N�✓�
r y
>OC ` iW C 4O �)tL I yb _ c «�LarM
•C O b �^P c N V ✓O
G N= C Ly P A O L V d V 1 � NYlTV W�V
a6^gMN4i
� U q OL C �9 4= M C Vq s r NF^q �^Cq✓
OJP 6 6 >` ��•� Y1 pN r «I �q r' OGrO I 9ry \ CNLV VyO.G
cc f W 3 C G L W C O N i V L
✓� a � C S ✓ q V � O r N
J V q y V!J V 9 L r V G L V 4OV Pr •'.•q w � O } V�P)�G`GY � N�� Nam �= NryWN Y Y ✓ _ F :2 �= � V rE�a�ayx
4+� ✓ 4^ �+ ` y C4 a G 9 I pO✓ } r LH �tsw<\
�� r � N O C✓ r L C V O r �j \ O O
bG O V� LVN C C ^ r P� t+V q0 NC^C (- VO4
d' 4
pJ30
CEO 'W 6P•Vn VV bO 4. 0 �^ LI L �9tl• WHO P w � q�N[y'q`«
•+w04 'V wLG 06z C`O✓ Y 'J T d4 d __M1 N�iy rLN T + N40S 0\4
q P+ C ^ C N 'r rr 6 N L
C. 6' F L• =� O l\r V q✓V C � O� V�Yy.-✓ >•O
rn� eC � " NVq 06 N< = C CO � ✓ x00 Gq P OLr b4VO4
••r V ^ aL4 •r0�� Pf > G CS q v C YMr Q �q� } �P�.TrV\${.
Ccc
+4 C. d VY.d. >.✓n' Oq� bO h •' � W� ` NVV 9Vw ODYP wq L� gGO L�r Or
w VV� C >• J G .y � q4 r L�'/ � J OvS _�^�_K��•[ I a 6 6 S F•4 � O 6 N •C O ti l Y Y a w N O h�`b V M�r
\Iy11 r V T•• O S
V• f M
lV
G
^ +oG y v
V
� 00 Vr =C p} VO 4p �= • �ipYNY �G " O�
C L O O� C q •r y i C L 6 ^L L - ti � V N O _P=` >•L+ ^q
C•'^ OG4 YVG • OL✓ (O/LCr MO+ a4✓ G
q2 rn✓L �r� q � �G 4� T¢� P . Y Or 40r >VVC CJO e
N o e O H 4 L C L Y 7 Z ^ O oL 4 V V y V•V W
�c `u �e ``'. is N. a�a oa �`.. <.NiL'u o�i •"
Vv i N� ✓�� Jc �'�`4 ^+ N °•^ va^r+qo ::N Mt
AVO rrOL b VONw+ Y CV rVN C6
�qCV+w� �Vt� V
` " O Y r CVO 'C� d� �% >• q�q >M V61+ `yw nr
- •O 4 O _V^ L•'O••.. � •V r y L s L O i \� G 1C1,� V C r 4✓ V L P✓
N \ C P a r� i Va ••+ 4VrG P\ V O• •a VsV
O C V t \ N V N ^tl N N•qi•C G• V O N i' Y V c•••
L L� 4^ter V G O w 1 �?V�POa�= •s_\ �j
r✓ V V Y•N� J qLr •V VrL LN � M r�G`Or^CO✓ w
G 4
GN 4 r 22 fig] v ay O
C V y
y `Y
Y ^ <` qC uV L q0pp i •• q ` _ O: ON Va�C 'VC✓ O.0
M ec V e M +Wq in c� =Gr Y� O~ `d`r ON_4r �� �wf N�O��CS V✓ pV Cvy q`
q=3 w r C ` _y' N q'C w O A V w} w V Cy z ✓> 4 w C t •G V V
V ryL P q L N -j r q V N t J C O - L
M0 q NN W=40 � gLNadO �6�N LV VN aVV•'6✓Oq . CG+ ��
L V✓ L qV" q r c q
OC E6rw Oq_ Ou 6l ` CC wq •• L C
G T l O J 9+ V 4 N
6 xL Y,« N acdavc� W'N a G.OY.^. �G✓ tC�. o0
F, 2'I+ 4 N } +
4N xra^ xf qO} NVgP _4 4 •n fj V NO`.^ NJ•r r .Vi•f
•• N4L •' r � 8+ r >O_' NU CLV VgYq (�NJ �T1N t ��Yy1 �LLqqK CJO .`��r G; yqq
q V�r w NFL CYO qC MN1r6EC1 'Y^O NCO VG �M�ll`N✓rC OOGN g2 .
p _�
4 rL = 9 G VL + �aL q V y0 OLO 6Y r� 60.9✓r OOC N1C �>�
pj V•YY•n ✓ � ��O CC� CO V^ ✓ ns�CC y6yC oV_ \ �• VfVj \q T=C Y•a
2 Ya0 ` CA }VV `Ma0 +6 PPi _ �\ +RCN �L•p Ca 4N PCgC J \L_ > Vr C4
P! OI V V•L••
t
r yf••= r_ ••• y 4CL (4.''•^ > Cam' rr rlv WV YO• SV �•^..= ^ O w�q=���ni O.O�w ��LO•r t S O < Yv ^ENO 4L1 .-
C •Ca WVVPr✓O NVVN < P tV iP6NY�^OL t200 r+ '
V M •O 0 P � •y I{ � N
Ml
C ry qL ✓ _^ � V pp
p V ✓ � cL' __ OG AO VOG_C_ JN VQ�P6 L C
V -bic G o! _o a �� Le ' LN •AL v �".' Y Pp � I .fV
L.. pG YL n C 9• _ C L =0 Or q O r N J V A W ` L y 1 I V Gr
P= ^ =V O�y ^aq ALeyi` j-•�. =if✓[ Cw E� _ u•C•_VP r Yd ✓C � 9y _C
p Oi ry P� V94 N Q�� oVn V=:s > .rn r0� �i•-i�`� �_ .`•r 4 .Ci 4 ��
4=� = YO TV p• .V_> =4N rl V SVN ✓FOGY 1- G >� •� N
t.T � V C 9 l V (: V V G l.0i C Y J Z � „C N >' y=� W �u ! 1 �\ � .w•p
V �V ice= L V ]•` `P LAC`+ �NL .Crr Owl' < �d O `
W. �`c yr
zYo
C A A` L C C Ny c J 9.C� C' 4 y Y L 4 •� V d V ^O _ _ p N�� .
Q Y A �O.V P ./ W 9 O V W N 4 Y= •... Eby ` N ` �9�
Y opL CO ✓yP 1 VNC -aG Yy F.�C ` � •wW > A � O� C I ` Q L' LS
- N AT Oq Y=� � `�C OOw bOGti- VGL V�✓OL S L V VY
2L� >.L qV E-2
>� L�w OI CN 000 L C bC �
Cw nw O_ „O •! 9_ J N N �j�j p�Y 4 wr✓ O. A v-` L
Vmp V C wY9 `gip V4^V } » N O Ytl
G d p
L N A E (a q O V O C V O A V N N N A A A V N- g N r C G ` V N v V = L V L
00 20 �] _ YN ` fV� W L4 NA Lr E� U• ✓ _� p V
4 C g V O _V C PL. •L .`An O L L V N. N^ L T q C N
4W y L O MY Et "OL z-- a r•r P% L V 4 •V
D•q 4 4 ;2 N ✓� Yr Q'V Lnn2 440 O.' W dV O yr _N`
s - L= Cow 44O NC 1 c ___✓ •p
W V G_ _ `N Z V y Q.O N b O•N.Y• N o w P V•.I V f L n C. A q 9 ` 9 L V
uSY oS ..P.eeryry lZi C•. .dr W i .i J .no:
wV-� wE 6✓ PWO w _rn YC✓ �p iy✓ P`N gCYL OV I V V S w ✓ .N
p O ` `Y u L ✓ �p _w
O g
PZ ✓- qw = C }}� yy ..T.1
d=P 9y {E CZ Vw Ly0 PPVI L4 XP•��(p
VO_ �V __ _POO S ��Y CVO rM� L_ e�qa � � O✓� r V Y i V O 4yL
LJ„ bAu Y9` N _Oy _NN MO C Cn C O •..n _.pL
-�-W 4 .r Or L L 6 Ir 9�+ •(N Oa n.p ' A ^ Ar z^ OL6
9 NT J OI V Vb � L` =41w
V OJ�V tN <A �Vw < O C V V Y .. C 40 GN I I V iA oycpw
T tti'j
N _ „
C.L. Y� V _ C `. L- c V .L.4✓ . C V �
`pLL' e a aLA' NCO -Ac yr Pqr
_L4•O.. j V Y _ Y. „ - OC 4 .J NYC = 6C(�. �=C Gp A Y w
-�...� C-u � G= VCw V]..V _ J6' ✓w C adiG �. V_
�`Aa„• OAYO �6V N�w t� TV` ` J %^O>. -Nbp q V A {p V •
rCO
b r C lip M >rLO�_,VVV��rL_L wV=i�4mV�q rVyj�_r't Cw_pn»PC yO.rwc_VEi p�p fyJ -mS/G WSuVy i✓✓C S�0` OwC_rV4�VVV..�WVyPL'_LNNV-. ^r0(V�_raq.a_VT p
LL N.2_ u Z=Gr
pC4rr1_ Au N ^
rvOL cv VY CY
"•- J} dYVr = a V22_pun�
-_w
Yw ✓aW W�C090wwg �rTVLL_9�✓N� �_7OCC4l
�`wOYqC
SL O V N O 9 r .0
qp�Y N`�_r� R u`EC T.O..G4 W � •.. �V Crw
C r c_•� V C ` N q d =
V N O 1 pC lP AN Y V t4 C, O V 4LrC E�
C L 4•U-_� O E 6 +r A a V V Y =4 O O r>!_ V 0 0 � ` V C v O 3 Y v
OVO 4 V ✓Cd q AOC �VC L. N V L• Nl 9 ` C_ PM I..� VC L.V T L � „O q � Z y�v V Cy V•�• d6 C W Y !J C _ 4
tp YyV• O N6PmP 4 V .✓i.PN Lr rJ 6 ✓Y O � p •a
•.Y d y_�O V •_ O C• A `•Oi� OC V C Y v w= E C�Y� E�S b Y � ^C ^ C f. O =V
C•� VJE Jy YO N=L� W YarC MQ `VY PAV J - Y VOY O
Or'° p •O V„w y_ e= O A✓� �n ^ J C r0^ Z» V W 4= LL. Q 2 E
Cxp O M Ov .LnV
vCVV�V pJ\tr �qLC O �6V _ P-O COL PNV✓ �J �q r NT
{�� > Y.Lr..•V i u V � ✓.5
✓ h a N E r ` O O r C Y T = ✓ C O p L A C r 9 9 T 4-
p> L Y✓ Z C Y 4
J Ir qY J-A_qV O
`p J C _ O ✓ Sf V ^
pp 9 PON
LOi Y�✓ J`�v. E0= O -w C� GJ LA y � L C .r_
O CryC� LL_ Ld�J! y C S7I >.�N ^ ACYg4 Yam✓`
V� 4 • r
% ;w-7 � y ✓ O z V o�[_ _.�_ Y_p 4 �LLj•a4 u > m� �8 �rVR rm- oL I• .. aya� wC w i i
.Ci w•O..0 N�d nVOS _9S „ G _VY Ir•Oi.V.•Yi yV_ rTp Yww.Yi _y .nOu ` O
r„� 4�rwr V� n• ^9. � •t '••V` w✓ O�jOH AAYrVLaA R Pr1 E N wS
W 9 t/ p 7 ?. wlY Orr
'EyCLVyL` OC NV�C rp•P. N r LV� f VrGn• OL „U Jn NN N C` 4Y PC O�
4C ~ N.r L C✓`C =0 b = y - r O rV c � O
p ��.aN 6 CA NLgqi H uCL6 Mw � .{.y• Y U.. „O l gy _ jPr
p Pn gOVV q.A.�O gISN �YS✓ V CL6 S4.r yF✓�✓ ��✓•O.W Y CN �L1 C•' Y 41
O�w
�^CYbYV MrN_V� pYTY L10 � -� L� -pOr OLVr� ( ��` y J� LS � SC aP
r�.Y.•• Cyy G 4 JY�C V 6 SA •O.r4`E ���r P
OV_ Ll V=t�L q N�V� J yC •Co00` L_�p NOCo
` YV VN LO �-0� �QYV K y w6V ✓6•.V 2>i V i 1 L VI NC -U
OYiOr� Ya VL r„� J rLrw. NN 4 •-�q0 4N✓.r pJVaiO 6OVLV N CaV < JO r y0 a0 a0
N V Y I V V✓
= y}r
4 rE4 u iE > = • � O � � _
Q � w Grp •• y^ 4yL a '. o c � I 90 L_ ? �";
�i V .D.O Fe C _� u N 'J . e Y V ��yn •• I O L O O P r
�' Y C � _N� ` V �•� • l V SN _ N d 6w N � I ••� 4 i V O O � 4 J
�� 4 C vOF 9 jqN 1N OV L� jug _ 1 Pl• �w tlY = K :•y
IU « r VCe• C V g 0 r 9 V L Y ^�v 4 � r.�i N� y f V O CY
; Y r
E rim O ]•. _ C C �d V•r O p P— I p O r G G_ t I l �W V9 CEO V� yy Y �9 y
i�� Yw L` p� NO F En/ V _L �✓ Lti
.o. a
C g« =Cn G V � Y O OC y4p : W•r C p � � 9� SL •`i•r4Y. YV Y _� W� Y.• — �Oq fG C�y 4 E C O 4 4 � 4 u b = W O `
C •! E./C D O' u O Y r 6 r O C 4 •... p Y^ u L r•
Y_ •—C N YY. i W5 =� ZW Lr. �� � r Ly Y
N� LVS O V Y N— �O 4Y Vu e w wr EZ p.Go � �y 9 �V O✓OY = b _ I _44 OL 'w_1G �L � q 1 _� �P V P « OG
QV A `O V A d t 2 I ��u q N C L L• 6 b L O« w L_ _ C �O w >
_ L «C y A V f ry C N f'•• L L LN 6 9 N ✓
�N 4 4rVL _ _—y C'L dY O P C OLD
_=_ Cc
�
O` >� 4
A d— 9�\� V` e9 M YC' Vw - Or V<. •J O CP « y�
T� PNl 7I _ V Y VPT in v •V.r� OC N r CC
L A� _ P 4 > LM pL�O
Vw VLrI qw « E= E � �.� v L � . O_ uy < �V urJ •TrC OY LYO
^
=
�G vV t r.G TM��L V y "ZL J > OL r > Y A S` VO C�( O C �9 � � •rr Kw �y 'VIw j Y�r r` G 1Y WL
V «
� N rJ 9' N •O A m P
Y �
w
C 11 •
a zv
a i E V m V
L w W ~ MC • e y
u $ o y
C.
cc L ad+ � Y ro` edi'•` rn_ �+W o � � u
�.• � � s d� CY a � � )'..o• osi.� «s s did .,
N`� D 9= V OV r � _ _r •n 6 Y _ ` N
✓ . r«
C.
04 4..Ip Ltli COC OLO` L'L ^ Cry
L V,• C e P L 4 Y �V.
P p — C —V V �—W T_•+ y— V JP L Y Y C N >V C
'Cp `— Lp ^. p ai M De0 > O E Y VW L�•O
N E V =O L 9� N J G _O E C R d V O O r� �«t r•
V >4 �b Lg »p !f .« Co•. � S � pN+ VE O V E ^ a
wa4 oL. .�. � ��L s:e Y• f{ �.•� i4 c_ c N— ro
A
V L V u ✓O � O. rNC CO OO.0 V ar— O�O`S' �r�C y� �O V A.O.•OP
.. To
Y
4cr) �c '4> 9• am�e Y2 N c ��p': dM .
u '.
9� •�nC
.�N(� .•o ^^ .O... p T o 4 c i ' ac. � e 4 PT^� e O = iV L y b=v
I 4
r q C b _ 4 U P L F o• q� p_ ✓ L P L C` N C_
c=>TA0•0 VC_v WDyO xL� ��tyo` •OO•w \Y •p� I � C �pT'O«L .�O__ 4ryWCE
0�36C— CC 'XZrrg.
ESS 6w pL CT.oC 2L >r•••L Or
p >• {� P `N `••N y S ^. Ey jL Y Y4 rAY=V
lCr AD �' X D OA .. I q d p
P« C « :grao .�cY « V-•rL»
V Tr r= N= J O r l = Y—NOY �_ J Yr O • 3
+p q N r -JaC Qj4 _ `\ ` P (•gyp C— V4Y :P Z
E uL R� CM Ci `99 4O `V •_� I � r .pw � C VWO_ l' rW CY ==V pu
'J >6 YY .6ji y^�' M Ci ur y� V LrW b� ONr uyy M T r`•OCA
IAL w � }w N`•C_N
f� < p Op•L.r Z.5 C LC_ u '�R_A r
•' OVr 69 (O' W� EI VY ti V_ ! 9 ONV MD-6`• •n00— (V 4_ WUVZ
IN
a
• P N r y N r � r 1
r P
OylY?YE Z 7;wq Ci OJT O� ,OaT Aj �i_ Ago ���ps
O >•A«1 1
-0+r0 7i 6rOr .J.� c nit OPT WT M 1� 1—eOS ~ iOJ ~
= ,(IY 9i'A A 6N aO
�
lZ4. 6J J A =O.O
O 36 �q 06 Or
IL w« ` J RIOw � a+OrwO Yb� J •rA W�� ~
.pia Nr Ne. CA ew `�wo r a S i
J�lw =� n6 3� w ONO J �T, � Y. T� TI•FN
p Oe w�p 96 JO NN w s±OJ� Ow� N bOJ _+fin
r N1 J J4 �w WO 6N Nwwf: OI N 1 � n w=e �
pp N $ a
R'.vN we 2 .Jw.rS3
�RFa
a .ra96
GrO"i.7 �. a ppN 2Aw2
A
O.
f
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA '!y�'kc
STAFF REPORT' j
o; fo
FI Z
U >
077
i I
DATE: January 27, 1982
TO: Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Jack Lam, AICP, Director of Community Development
BY: Dan Coleman, Assistant Planner
SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMI7 81-08 - SHARMA - A hearing to consider
the possible revocation of the Conditional Use Permit for a
preschool located at 9113 Foothill Boulevard based upon fail-
ure to comply with the Conditions of Approval .
SUMMARY: On May 27, 1981, the Planning Commission approved Conditional
Use Permit No. 81-08 for a preschool facility in an existing building
located at 9113 Foothill , subject to Conditions. The preschool begar
operation on or about October 1 , 1981. For the past four months, City
Staff and the State have cooperated with the applicant in allowing the
preschool facility to operate while at the same time completing the Con-
ditions of Approval. The State will not issue a license for the pre-
school until all State and City requirements have been met. During the
past four months little progress has been made towards the completion of
1 said Conditions. The applicant has repeatedly ignored notices from the
City to complete said work. Much of the work that has been completed is
of a substandard nature and has to be redone. In addition, the Faithful
Perfo:mmance Bonds and Improvement Agreements for the completion of said
Conditions have beer. in default for over two months.
Therefore, the Conditional Use Permit was suspended by Staff on December 23,
1981 , in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance regulations for Conditional
Use Permits. The attached memorandum dated January 12, 1982 summarizes
the project history to date. A list of those Conditions remaining to be
completed as of January 20, 1982 is attached as Exhibit "A". Pursuant
to the Zoning Ordinance, the Planning Commission must hold a public
hearing to consider the revocation of the Conditional Use Permit. Staff
is recommending that the Planning Commission set a time limit for the
completion of the Conditions of Approval.
OPTIONS: After holding the public hearing, if the Planning Commission
is not satisfied that the Conditions of Approval are being complied with,
the Commission may revoke the Conditional Use Permit or take such action.
'- ITEM C
�5:i
Ccnditional Use Permit 81-08/Sharma
Planning Commission Agenda
January 27, 1982
Page 2 -
as may be necessary to assure compliance with the Conditions. Basically there
are three options availabie to the Planning Commission as follows:
1. Set a time limit for the completion of Conditions of
Approval.
2. Instruct the applicant to cease operation of the pre-
school until completion of the Conditions of Approval.
3. Revoke the Ccnditional Use Permit based upon failure
to comply with the Conditions of Appro.!al .
CORRESPONDENCE: A notice was placed in The Daily Report newspaper aivertising
this a�ic hearing and notices were sent to property owners wivhin 300'
of the project boundary. Attached is a letter from the project architect ex-
pressing concern for the safety of preschool children and recommending revo-
cation of the Conditional Use Permit. No other correspondence has been received
either for oragainst the project.
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission review the s
Staff Report and options available and conduct a public hearing to consider
all public input and comment. In light of the progress the applicant has made
in the last two weeks towards the completion of the Conditions of Approval ,
Staff would recommend that the Planning Commission select option number one
and establish an appropriate time limit for the completion of the Conditions
of Approval and a final hearing date.
Respectfully submitted, ,
JACK LAM, AICP
Director of Community Development
JL:DC:jr
Attachments: Resolution 81-58 with Conditions of Approval
Memorandum dated January 12, 1982
Exhibit "A - Uncompleted Conditions
Letter From Project Architect
RESOLUTION NO- 81-58
A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING
CO"'IMISSION APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
NO. 81-08 FOR A PRESCHOOL LOCATED AT 9113
FOOTHILL BOULEVAP.DIN THE R-1 ZONE.
WHEREAS, on the 9th day of April , 1981, a complete application
was filed by Satyendra K. Sharma for review of the above-described
Project; and
WHEREAS, on the 27th day of May, 1981, the Rancho Cucamonga
Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider the above-described
project.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission
resolved as follows:
SECTION 1: That the following findings can be met:
1. That the proposed use is in accord with the General Plan,
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 to the public
health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to
properties or improvements in the vicinity.
3. That the proposed use will co-,ply with each of the applicable
provisions of the Zoning Ordinance.
SECTION 2: That this project will not create adverse
impacts on the nvironment and that a Negative Declaration is issued on
May 27, 1981.
SECTION 3: That Conditional Use Permit No. 81-08 is
approved subject p the following conditions:
I- That the median is.'and in the driveway be extended northerly
to the property line in order to preserve the existing
tree at this location. Attention should be given to site
visibility. Also it should be extended south to save one
additional tree in the existing row of walnut trees.
2. That existing shrubbery adjacent to the building should
be retained wherever possible.
3- Existing and proposed masonry walls shall be given an
off-white stucco finish.
r.'
a
14
Page 2
` 4- That a planter be provided in the parking area south of
the preschool building to preserve the existing tree at
this location.
5. That the proposed landscaped planter along the east
property line be continuous across the entire length of
this property line.
o. That the parking lot design be revised to accomodate the
above listed condition. .
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 27TH DAY OF MAY, 1981.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
7
BY: c! Lam' /L i /
Richard Dahl , Chairman
1
ATTEST:
Secretary of the Planning Commission
ty of Rancho
I, JACK LAM, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the Ci
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 27th day of May, 1981 by the following vote to-
wit:
AYES: COr,GNISSIONERS: Rempel , Sceranka, King, Tolstoy, Dahi
NOES: COMMISSIOrIEPS: None
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None
C . '
V ' Y
r r+ �. 4 y r ^ w •N• mac. ..= Y qr =✓ oN?__G 7 9 V V � •• O G V O V V � •4 �V r
� T VO9 _ CVa C V .4 lG Vr Y
VN 4 V ! LC V L rY" V
e OV C N I", 4 V�� O r V Ny l CO V•O. Cr G'.CC
C T e Y 1_ w }V V w� 0 1 f..V O i•o` C N r y
' L_Y O_r V � _ O w O V � ✓ Q 6 T✓G � �w V T.n V V 4 C✓_ 4 N
.w•.Oi V w 4 � _ O v Vv r ._� ••� V Y� G Y q C P d L i L c i
9 S ✓ 4 L y N C 4 O� r 4 Y V � C_ �Y�7 V V C G
VL •+O 3__ V N V �ti� 41 G }� V�p � O r�U CEO�.� �:
_ O O C Y C w r� C O 4 V ✓r' ✓ � G u
9 V a. �V f. V w N C V 4 6 4 u _ V V z O _ +•. V y < r_ � P
- 4 0 _V � r✓ y V � N
C + O _ _ Y_r O OV < N ��i Y '•� L < ]. b6 �y�� T9
O A
` w✓ O wV4p Y 9< N.•o-iLVd 1p LCY 3LY0
YVCw _p GV VNwG91 ,f 9YC ✓✓+ I<L
V G <� G O :•� ` V N C L N+ W.G..I V Y C y C w a y V R t r 4 '•^ G
r C p O w= O p Y 1l� 9 n p S G 4 V_ v 2`r V V•_ L f S �� L q= E C O C Y' w
M� L RT Iu d t N] w N G L _ u^ .� S V p 1 O L✓ C e r V✓ � Y
G 09 Sr Or r= r O w ��. V CC p4 = VV � pw OVL `�Y eG
7 Y � G C N P O+9 L E Y q L ✓L✓ L r�
_V > �Oi P� r � =X nC pVp � O� �O VOO r� wV 4r✓ wCwi l.<V _V
n� q0 =� Y� T r V�rr 4C wy yt�r0 �w Nr ^=r L` VG V N� •r V
~ � 9V �C yy }• ✓✓ Vpl V4 YV VO 9wVVr V9 V1d V� � VV VCR ].. R� Pw ✓
�f ^ C 4V �y L 7L T4VS O+ 4O C+ p�j�✓ �� Z,C w4yp O .� EV9 r ^
G� N6 •C.Ga NU N �E V< ` G✓ 40 OL+�wyyV J L.LiV .Li•wrn w.w.r�r0 �I YN
_ m A _ rC� GV4✓1 }I LO 6
� m
C
� O O✓ Z � L p V V N + O C�� ✓ O
4 M P Y L O 9 p N
� + V 9 L S C_ O L� 1✓ y 1^V V 4 N� G G P V �w
r �L a_ .L..�V � P..� n •—SLY ��� �✓ ,•� A.
4WVV C+r V_ Y NN
Z E 4G C MO _J P QO � � C 04 ♦�4» Y Vp
� < O > �V �q b 9rpp LV� ry �•r dw riNO +
p �V ziG
•�•I ti Y� O, a.^y! wig T.90 r` uwV �9� G✓ � J •O. r w. 1C p _• C 2= � G T V rj + �Y CO 4_ Cj Y rw rV9V O V_
Nr} V.Gi VwP LG ,e• tiw VO '• 4Cr_ V. � 2
3O T O E' V Vp tV �✓ .2VP �a7i �•ii OVL1 Y `6 F. �`wL C VO
p }u O t'I y 9 a w j W wp l z-
l = }s0T Y`Y G 4 ✓V C O v .f r
c N Z `'".a `I W� � ✓..�_✓ ` L ur .gd.n 400 o ZZZ ctY uo cr
V1 Nv9 VNV G `.fir � ^ Ow 7 C
.•�. p 4 O' 9O IV 4N V•Y..G d L =•Li V= J_✓ ✓ p
C W rVy� NN VC6 L'OT �✓V. �✓ VNp ON •Y < 2
p M I U r 9 Q ✓r p P Y� Ye.�O E 9 V V V N90O w 2 ^ C V Y=�4 N •L.. }N
v•I ` L p—r < c C
0 Vr. �9r C V�p t_9 LLN wV Y: N < ✓w g `^9w
�I—y'�7I < i =w �L V 4�� 4Y 6✓pp< V.� �Nw >1�✓i y V O^ ��,C w 6 V` J
✓ + q� V af6 N_ Y O�m �� VLy 0Y V9r Yww w0 ��4 L �V D.V 4✓+
'1 'V1 V V ✓ G `•0= 1G�r Y✓ VQY Yr V� � O.i C O 94� _ ++ 9✓C
< ,n� y^ 'o.o.ocw w� yyo
® \��-�(jj(l( ✓,� N _� T+p' 4
6—E
� O r Za pT Yrr < Y.l f0 ✓w •Cw ��V
•. YI Y r Y �r G r w, _. V
•ij• C .O•y l O .� u< an _
V Ob ✓ ✓L CAN �� 2 V < �• � YG V✓ b60 ` VG'� L�.L.••—�
� 4� � aV m r✓ V' � 4 y to u _ �- C �GC� :�_ b
L C ' p V •O.r 00 N b Y � 'p .� J` _ _—••.. NO•V•i
—_ V — �.� V •nL CV — Q V V b` y•OrY V 41.0•�J�wr
✓V.J^ O •�.2 y ` a O _ v V r i
rii•VL
i V •<• T' _— G •<w^Y V y L r l Y G •�Y.O•l i 4 i •`••
•<� 3 P M O �• � � T pb - �Y L C J r L Lr V
r Y Y L �' S O p ✓N L w .. •f
_y > ✓ C�� Nb= �` q` G 6 P Vb `O rILY 4 ��LC_C V4V
LO T r•� fN� �b C � N r � w J �Y✓ P � ` 6^9NN4i
qo � o or I� o=_'•.J.�i�.
C j•6 r Mvt y0= �� !l•� + Pr ✓1 Y � O >rY N4 wr
Nap C
V 0 •• Y L L� V
� � O � 1 C L Y� 4 r = —q —y F F V r V V t G V L � � y 0 0��J.cV•`O
V� M • V N T ` L L 4 Q L G V 4 p L r- p Y� Y ♦ O S V<�b
O 4•� I~ V w C� '� b LV C � V C p O 1 i � N V O [Gi F`�O �
r O 11 y C!1 M Y u O C r l I Y W q w V L N p ✓r r T i '.z 2 J
u t♦ i V ✓ 4. P <V r _V r �I > r ( �6> '� l C r L ' < N�" V r
•• ' Y w d r i p4 1C
p C
Vr OM GCV N > C �� OC 6L — �i� Lw•r Gar ✓ O� yyr V�NI
� Y T V M ^I ✓ ✓< � V O V .9.f V C C l � 4 a r�0
` NV _ L n `•n ��6 ��� n1 Y y LQVN — C`� SLY u 4N= M 4• •IG90y uEp
N —V ry •^ L c0 Y O� =r pY •� OUC i•eG C <GTw ,. �Cr�VOW<N
TJ C � •' `�• Tu✓• J1— Nl •VwVV VVV OJYP Nn � Tf4L r
— Y t• N✓� 6 S G � J ' p •L < L L 6 — 4 V t T b J C 9 S � a•✓y
<6m a G4 Gi •Ji a0 Lc H q � O �-
P o NC 4
W
c c
N
0
Cti t rpq p 4240 b � �`'� V y 1 •yb V
C y �r w O_V< •� O lV.i 4< N q �q V N y O NOT^ i P_4 O L .:Y J
O— 09 O•n C= VI GL ^ V ON6lC f.r bi4 w
yv � O••.•L TNp 1r TTLL T� CVu P � � b= VOC JV VC �O -
_ c G�- 1— •rG OL V
� C y T CG' yG ✓ pL �L � 11N 9
C �O obi 4 yOCb �.� bO Su qv`��s NV .C.r
9V O Ypj y9 j r� Lr9 C VO �— b — ,ZZ M�
d 1 O 4 _N =y 9 <gOON� wyn O + <� L—�•{Iw =•'A= Cp
b V q O V— LV✓ wL V� VLY LL r✓ � VTPy tpl `r.e.. ••r
N + O •sue b YV _ — ?I
C <r O.> OL P✓
` V O N V � D O p N i Pb� P V Y O= y rz C b� >L N N L � F
O � ` q � LL ���e✓ V NCr pV� rV0 V� L is VJ�L wV� rVp «
V✓ � � Y p r V J L 2 w O 4�• C Y < O r P O V � w V P L�✓r•r T_� �C_
w V Yam—•�`
GL O��-. p « Ti-r 62 ✓ L 96 rM ✓ OV L0= V
L V _ T � PVC �� d V N vp YY O✓ O V c C P�V dY
P N •J w OV � Y` pL lV� Vrc N •� �E ✓.06` L T 'br G<
� � L ? C _ ✓V .� j r 0 r C r 4 Y� v u � C O v O��.<� V V•f•r C
_� O O — ST�L r CV� `V� TOT ` Yy '�T FrJ j ✓ ^4•rG•C l- CO YV
O C 2 Y ✓✓ � P G V _ L �GN T Y P n •� C C •a L V� �L.V• V
GV •� N� CO YCOY =ryN •^C L i: V L Vr CY
N CN � b T C� •%. T aL. t T= y \. ` G•.• L1 o� — V4f GrO
itrsG OG �b� �• 4 VVL� G VL .<p= 01C _� ObL=L7OTV •>Or1
M�.:
2 - t . 2 =� O
N •<a r.C:Tre' T�cL r+cO.`p.
.
Va
N N V l •Vi r _ V M r�p� M O 2.2 E `T 2 q
1 y O_ w — w •L T >�L b q N Y r 6•O L Y✓G O r V M T� L � J ✓ O N i.y c t 0
VSV Y yrL LV == G� Nr VP TAN—O Nam~ V• N{� �.JVYr�P O�N b
� b = Q < C C N r V L G V V >�•O i)r r N S C~ 4` n L J 4 l= < l G � 9 r
7 rrLl i` _V C 06c V_V L= ` jr SAC 'T� �O
V V w`j 8 q q y C Y o V V N V�b•—• '�� _ O
N Y p O� V V✓C L •w r N T V == N V ✓O O r L CC C c O 4 T = G V r • < V
t ♦/O� < < 4 — Y� Q <�� C � � VI�Or �VwL YT_ __ _Y•s >` .•.r GO. LCyy `�
O � tp uV Pr✓O N.Vi�N <wP fC <Ppw•Lr. Lr
fib' � V ' • • - •-t�!
G
P • c + N � _ i� _ L _ 2 e
�. 7 r -• O V ^` N — t O r L_ t N 4 r -• 1 R ✓ L = + r u V
Y V dV CVO CV .!O c_ 1: 0 J � W 1•� '1 I "i
4 �' S V (.OV G\:i� f.•Cq a✓ Y u0_ � _ _ f I 1 I1 �• V 9C
4 U � V L r v V -• l a•� �4 r a �t_� i [ l N L P:V 9 �i r-a O �I 11 r �✓
A r C !'C 9 � V • b=C w�C c 4 •� .n N r N V P� W a 4 � r_I .. _
y••� V ^ q T.Oi2 -• Vl� ... V ^ j.. Yr LN4 �uOC I. G =N O ` I ` -' 4 .Lr.0
v ! I V
C � -.P f L r V -a 9 O q� r 9 C V✓ Y � r L^ ma c ✓ C r
�_ VL L`r t �VC .—n w� `.^NGr .0..« Y�r.cAq -' L � '. I u V � .a•`L
r q . V y O.L A V ... 9_ C!V LL V r, w._ r L b •✓ O P I c r
Ci q VV 94 = � CQ 4Vm •N.4 [.l � w—py NC j✓ d IY. 9f L �'IIi ` v � LNy
^O� q F d 9 mil.•V C •� �rC O O..' V j G V� V 4 G 4 N u O Y T O••`• � 11 � V W V_
a Ty A4b ` 9r_ `✓�. �V� aN0 _ d .
py Cam— c0 .VVmpp GY.. ^Co
T9 N �f w c�i4 410.a •lrm w yC c o'_N 5 5
✓� � r w uNV r cal' '�� L qor + c _ � �' $ I
u 4 l •9 q _ V�.r ZaJ
12 . _ v =0 L- qV� �wQ vV CCL VqW rgL_ l� � 1• j _ I 4GV
✓ Lq9 4� L1 f~w - `9= COS �. �0 2 NGr V4O diL V y rrr i — V9
�` L•n _ NN mac". Y >r .�.o n�4�� �:. � ? W L.. `•
O.O ` q _r6 ✓ ��r .V. J� V�uuq _PY .' Om .O.� W YII! .� V y _ CNL
`b P l a r L 9 L •Ln C 9 w C Y€ S.a..4 4 A V 6 q H ^ c •. _ V I b
�•= P 4V u c Oq LrY -J PVL V3� LA=^ VN
OV 9q Vr ^�� C T—< OVi �w=0y .•Va(+ M4wa GLj < (Ji .n9 \ I V I VV..
V J .r P C q '• b q r OC4 � <r 9 V O— L � �� P 4
1•J q V V O w G=) V V+O G V V p w L r 6 W 9v ^ V C V YI r A ` L ! O q Y O
U C]... LN Le ra7w t • � V Oc � I �1 � by � 1 V — VV�
Y •• �I CO fdN I V <9 QOr
r N I•a N TC YI — • .
M
V
L✓-O C L r 9 l ' 4 J ' 7 C q r u 4 O • L _ b
r` 4r _y^ CC Z t TOq r VOr V ?•` d C.. Cau9 C �� !•6,i
�i G✓N N.L 6 ' N O 9 Y V
•0.4�=G `_ LC YO�C eV0 � '`.Y �4 —r4 . yq<N _ yG' `n CL �O
G4^ U N J V ✓ � 9 U= R
L�V N i C 4_.•-. l-C•- 4.~i•'1 � m—✓ J✓ G C_V .4 W V ✓ t =M T= — P
pV==`� .. q a2r� ✓ L C LW� Li. �orR — q V•v ca oL c—
V_V> Ya0 CC ✓ V �q Vur 4>.� q L w0
O 4^ iY 4✓ u V V M — ✓ L._ YN _ V r
•V �lG 2 r ... r.rJi9 c =✓O 4 2 �'q 4 V Q L y C 9 V V L ti . _� C G G� C VCJ
C N { M ✓ V _ _
2�b 'cL�=--.14 4r`C >� 4 y b� �VV Lr dGC L✓41r O C `C ` •^ V.J �
r � �4 � C d V r . G I N A •9.. a( � a�
L •�^4.r=Y9= rgl6 Y _ S^Y L�9 L.N-.V� L � LC C OV
•'�Y t O G L` M 9 q t_ VL L' V q q�C � y= S C 4_N L V `O J_ � ` 4 C V O S
V_�6V N_C'PCaP 4rC .O.L�b V NPN `u� C Qr
IOVV�C•r— OV O� VO YL-•` OC N^ V Y L ✓r`OV - V bb O ` CL
O � VOJr�i >=rb �Oy O 9lJ� N� L 6r LYy ` P9V -- � J rY VY wY
✓G V N L V_ O'N 4 q _ P '_J� �O q 4 d 6� L ar Y• 2 a.� �
J `Vv^ VV_V 9ilru 4L4C � �.O.b [1=+ Arb c� C✓ts✓ L C i O7 .Lr•V
�OS TJ=a _L _ ' g N ✓- V CL_ Y VSV _-`� O y -= EM "'V NP i��_�:.�.�.`..'.•' _ otw (.'c�N i � ('�"
o L�4(ir w"3_✓ �/VNW
COO^GY y J4`— O S_ e C`^ LO`�� 4•GeDd O w Yfpa � ` <•c r..
LVG -`V l. Lv4 NqC= S-a =I- b C 1u.n b q ju_y L C L• •S y` L� V6
4yN>.�CG L.Q.✓ 4V OLON 6 V ^ice_
9 N r O G S N N C V 7 L d 2 L G C_ V V V L j V 4 O✓L U O G V N r b O
_N.•c r4VG ..CSG N >•NO VAN V Vyr�� V✓ram y N�V uq —a —
`qi�L{l 9•VY..�LtVVrYOY.O�✓N�t�JwM rVYOG.�NCwC.a��O9r_V�c_ wqqw g}c rV.TC.=amqYN ONLS_e�L rn�nYyyxJ.ipNJ mFFVa. _r•l wVL_y�✓IV .<�O4�WuV L4LO N€WN>. rra.LJi.�9c9N_V L-Va r�Nys b'-�✓-qy-Nurr 4 LM`9•n —r_eC�uVd �_CC•..a rT_r^n•L• —V_S q(.!'•
Z
4
OZ 0 z9 5-5
�y
Ob — �
ZZ
or p c c car J_ L S a N i
L 4�� Y N NLO4 V u uY� l •O. 1 J_ .4i � • V� JC
_ yCV 4N yO o•L O_Y V Oa L a...Y G.-. .o. � yCL ya == � ✓ f
f.0q 20�r rO V4 ti�GG —�rr 1 iC—� rz L_ z 4 `I:
-• O r790 6wJ 4JbLfr 6OOYV Va OV iC rI ��G y N` < J V N C V Ww0• W
• A O N
s
p o .� _N.rr. _ + C„• Y O rt
¢ ' a < V !_. • k N J w. _� A V L+ a T Y V O P ..�
yV
L_r r o 4 = + ii 6 ✓v r ^j'.V -O f�i C O C C
= `C O
V7 C a V•.�"r CO �r j` Vr �^4V � r V+ C4 _f
� o C `C _ ,• w� ]n V a `4 A.+.. C A �-' ^ V " O T r.
4 CY < A� `y V =r^ Ww •� n0 Yi>Vy M Z;2 r� U� •L...y • CYv1
V y CUN L ` T V OP iL SC Orr � I Vr
=.•. ' C O 4E 4r V -L .O..y V
r � .� D O O r O •Lo L-' I1 6 V 4 4 V V Y V C n y r r• �
I 0V9 O� 1 SaL O > fiV Xa 2O .0 .. O Y� L `L�
V `a
Q 00 \ a �V L 1 e0 `� i Or 2.n=.; w L•� V •O O V 4.1
v`'N> ^e.".i. '� " �•L'o � '> iN :S �iw.'>Ig of zm �`I
..0 n Cr.` .. GI C .Vi C OV� ICI < .. LR •"� p4 ^ _ r <' V dL
Zz
+ qL i�40L V r. V VC >r Ya + O AA O r _ Fr 2
4..=
Y '
Q
L4C
+
4 V 4 .•. c �. � W v : y., re
y C ^ >•P r _ V �u. - \ I l C w C •.. C w V O A � T l
C P �— Oqr S_ a P„G, C Vow
'O E - r0. i• E L' 4 r r r r C V L C O
VOGwK UL • .ri •� ZyCV
_ yr :>dz
CEG •.� L4 _ G CILm ` O __C WmL1 `L O` .Li t _ AOr
b >6 CV rn •Cl �C.i +L � = e•pp .+��e` >PC✓ Y ` • � LVO
`_ .^O `•i.. .V.. f '^C W L L O I•'r � L ee + i 4 Y+ V C V L ^ Y. � '-`
= C�
kV. V rC t C � y4y4 r r4'f+ 1j1I I V G
i
-• P r41 1 �C� ew�i-I L•Ti L_ >� a. <4� �
Li 2 f ^+ c.a " f . � � A` � �b_ � mr f w�.^=>i �c ` � v"s'N•o�
..• Y L ✓C =� `.CL. � Y C 4•rrl .w � C a V S 6 V C
G C 9 O 4 C M M f
.wiw l - i .=^ c
"' L 8 i :� k .r `� -' �� L G=L y �� o c Cs Li S••
eu=uc
tat +L PO O. F ..� aiC 4 �L I + i w .�.i4G�.=i 4A OC Ly�� C
V 9_ r4 w= �I ypa 3 O, i[ ( w V O r _V Ur �f\ Li •>-r wyr
CC
i wI , k `�\Nv. '� ^ t.YV Ny�p� `y'•10 O_ <V Cr ZZZZY
N m V , ••11'111111 � 1 I
ti. .1
if
b
v
_ v
V y 4
V_ S O i w `Atl O L 9t� w r"A
g pia - war $ ro Ao
V A gI O ` O — \�}!y� y r t ✓ T 4'! O N T V r w
C.
N VI.n_ 04 rI r �I2:.rV V'�V� Y 4V � Y 4w � 444 J 4
Abr � � � LI P `rl' nOrr V bJ .AN 7V ` vim
O r � �' O rC9VL VOnO n �� SJP4 ni � CrV
�g= o
L C V_ Q m1 VO f.l V LL y" Ptl l9 1 OTC
rr VMS LLO .-� l 1 ! ! VirO .-� L W • .VnVL" 4.Vn rr.n. �
6 C=q \ L N P
� 'Cn Y.O i4 LLJ�p iz LG_
CrrY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ��ycanro,
_- MEMORANDUM
0 a
70
� $ z
U >
j M77 I
DATE: January 12, 1382
TO: Jack Lam, AICP, Director of Community Development
FROM: Dan Coleman, Assistant Planner
SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 81-08 - SHARMA - Failure to satisfy
Conditions of Approval for a preschool located at 9113 Foothill
Boulevard
On May 27, 1981 the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission approved a Conditional
Use Permit for a preschool facility located at 91i3 Foothill. At or about the
first of September 1981 , Mr. Sharma contacted the Planning Division to find
out what needed to be completed to open the preschool in September. On this
and several subsequent occasions, staff informed Mr. Sharma that all Condi-
tions of Approval must be satisfied prior to occupancy and operation of the
preschool use. The Conditions of Approval included such items as street im-
provements, sidewalks, upgrading of the existing building to building code
requirements for a preschool, and on-site improvements including parking lot,
landscaping and irrigation systems.
As October approached it was apparent that Conditions of Approval could- not
be completed in time for the opening of the preschool. Therefore two sepa-
rate Performance Agreements and bonds were executed for the completion of
all Conditions of Approval. At this time, the street improvements, drive
approach, and parking lot had been installed. Based upon these agreements,
Foothill Fire District clearance, and assurances by Mr. Sharma that the
improvements would be completed within two weeks, staff permitted the pre-
school to open.
The existing building required extensive modifications to comply with build-
ing code requirements as a Condition of Approval. These are outlined in a
letter dated September 22, 1981 from Jerry Grant, Building Official, to Mr.
Sharma. On November 4, 1981 , staff notified Mr. Sharma that progress was
not being made for the completion of Conditions of Approval as bonded for.
During this time staff made repeated visits to the site to inspect the pre-
mises and to discuss the matter with Mr. Sharma. In accordance with the
provisions of the Improvement Agreement limits, Mr. Sharma was notified again
on December 4, 1981 that the bonds were in default and that all improvements
required as a Condition of Approval must be completed within 14 days of the
receipt of the letter. Subsequent field inspection revealed that no additional
work had been completed.
f''Iv
Hey.
Jack. Lam
Conditional Use Permit No. 81-08/Sharma
® January 12, 1982
Page 2
The State placed a hold on Mr. Sharma's preschool license application until
completion of State requirements and City requirements. The State has agreed
to cooperate with the City in not issuing a license for the preschool until
such time as ail Conditions of Approval have been completed to the satisfaction
of the City staff.
After four months of attempting to work with Mr. Sharma in the completion of
Conditions of Approval , staff has seen little progress, and in many cases work
that has been completed is of a substandard nature and has to be redone. Be-
cause Mr. Sharma has failed to uphold written or verbal commitments to the City,
staff felt that suspension of the Conditional Use Permit was the appropriate
action_ As you are aware, the City experienced a similar situation with the
Ed Young preschool which was constructed without building permits. The City
was criticized by the State for not taking a stronger role in obtaining com-
pliance from Mr. Young. Eventually the State license was pulled for the pre-
school .
Under the suspension of the Conditional Use Permit the applicant has until
January 11, 1982 to complete the Conditions of Approval or make reasonable
progress towards completion. The Building and Safety Division and Planning
Division w:il conduct an inspection on this date to determine what progress
has been made. In accordance with the Zoning Code, suspension of the Condi-
tional Use Permit requires holdinq a duly advertised public hearing before
the Planning Commission, within 40 days of said suspension. Therefore, this
item has been scheduled for consideration by the Planning Commission on
January 27, 1982. Unless the work has been substantially completed, staff
will recommend that the Planning Commission take appropriate action.
DC:j r
CC: Michael Vairin
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
rr..Ph::lip D.Schlosser
Cj Arthur IL Bridge Ion D. 4likela
H c IIZ — Jmmes C.Frost Dtichxl A.Palumbo
1977 '
September 22, 1981
S. K. Sharma
7577 Sunstone Avenue
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
Dear Mr. Sharma:
Following is a list of items *necessary for compliance with City of Rancho Cucamonga
Building regulations, applicable to your day-care nursery proposed at 9113 Foothill
Boulevard.
Most of the items are safety or sanitation matters and r=st be completed prior to
occupancy. Others do not present immediate safety hazards but are part of State
requirements or convenience to the applicants. Certain of such convenience items
fail into a construction sequence so as to require their incorporation prior to
safety measures being performed. Therefore, very few items can be delayed until
after occupancy as we first'discussed. Those which could logically be delayed are
marked with an asterisk (*) . 'Items so marked may be delayed a maximum of 30 days
after occupancy. All others will require completion prior to utilizing the building
for day-care use-
The items of correction are:
1.) Obtain building permit for remodeling of residence to day-care use. Plans for
the conversions are to be prepared, clearly showing methods of resolving items
setforth herein as well as any other revisions proposed. Plans should show complete
floor plan of first floor and basement, proposed use of all areas, mechanical
equipment locations, etc. See Uniform Building Code Sections 301 (a) and 502.
2.) Useable space under the first floor is to be enclosed and separated from the
upper floor with one hour fire-resistive construction. Basement may not open into
first floor area but must open directly to the ourside. Sections 1702 and 3317 (i)
UBC.
3.) Provide products of combustion detectors, interconnected with fire alarm system
in all areas used for exit passage from interior rooms as an second exit for occupant
load exceeding 5 persons. (This will require detectors in center west bedroota,
living room and dining rooms.) Check also with Fire District additional requirements
in this regard. Section 3317 (d) UBC.
.. POSr OFFICE LOS 307 0 RANCHO CCCA.lIOXGA.CALIFORNIA 91730 (723)939-285I
S. K. Sharma
September 22, 1981
Page S _
21.) Reconnect warm air ducts where disconnected from forced air unit under building.
In addition to the above items it is also necessary that you clarify or verify
the following:
a.) Verify that State regulations will allow omission of hot water from premises.
b.) Obtain approval of Foothill Fire District for proposed modifications,
compliance with State Fire Marshav s regulations and acceptance for occupancy.
c.) Verify that work already concealed without inspection complys with all
applicable codes and ordinances. (This may require exposure of concealed work.)
d.) Verify adequacy of existing sewage disposal system for new use or provide
connection to sanitary sewer within 6 months from date of occupancy. Existing
system nay be used temporarily during 6 month period provided that any disposal
problems that develope are resolved immediately. At the conclusion of the 6 month
period, the existing system is to be modified to comply for the proposed use.
it is suggested that you obtain _h+• services of a qualified architect or building
designer to translate the above information Onto a set of plans for submittal to
this office. After review of the plans and issuance of permits, work may resume
to complete the project. Plans should.be submitted through Paul Quintana, Plan
C1:eck Engineer of this office, who will review and process them as soon as possible.
If additional information is necessary or if clarification is necessary please
feel free to contact him. -
Sincerely,
CMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEI-ARTNENT
Bu filing and ety Division
y //�
erry.[i. Grant
Building Official
JRC/ps
cc: Paul Quintana, Plan Check L•ndinecr
Foothill Fire District
State Department of Social Services
Community Services Departnent
.N
E:'.HIBIT "A"
PLANNING CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TO BE COMPLETED
1. Installation of ail landscaping and irrigation systems.
2. Reconstruction of trash enclosure gate per City Standard Drawing No. 901 .
3. Removal of pavement and construction of a new planter with 6" P.C.C. curbs
in parking lot.
4. Soil preparation and mounding along Foothill Boulevard prior to planting.
This should include:
a. Tilling the soil to a depth of 6" and removal of
rocks larger than 1" diameter or other deleterious
material.
b. Importing soil for mounding.
C. Finish grading of mounds and all other areas to a
smooth, even surface.
d. All existing weeds and natural grass shall be killed
or removed, and the soil treated with a soil sterilizer.
e. After planting, the entire planting area must be sprayed
with a pre-emergent herbicide to prevent weed seed germi-
nation.
BUILDING AND SAFETY CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TO BE COMPLETED
1. Determine; through the State Department of Social Services, whether or
not hot water facilities are required on premise If required as a Con-
dition of Approval by the State, an approved prop ly installed water heater
must be provided. If proposed to be located in the basement area, an appro-
priate fire resistive separation between the basement and other portions of
the structure is to be provided.
2. Replace all glass lights indoors that are subject to human impact with
approved shatter-resistant material.
3. Provide handicapped toilet facilities including grab bars as desired.
Any towel or soap dispensers, mirrors, or other similar equipment that
is provided shall be so located a_� to have one of each located with forty
inches of the floor.
4. Provide drinking fountains properly connected to the drainage system located
so that controls are available at front of ea,_� fountain and spout is not
more than 33 inches above adjacent ground.
Building and Safety Conditions, AA,,
5. Screen all opening into under-floor areas with screen having openings not
less that one-quarter inch and not more than one-half inch in size. (Access
to under-floor furnace must be openable or removable.)
6. Provide secure attachment and connections between porch trellis beams at
building and to each other.
7. Repair parking lot paving so as to drain properly.
8. Replace southerly parking lot curb with curb and gutter as shown on the
approved Grading Plan.
9. Remove debris from under-floor area. •
® r1
DESIGN SERVICE
9795 MILLS AVCNUC MONTGA,R.C.- FOR IA 91761; - /NONC 4241-415"
City 0_^ Rancho Cucpmonga
'nor, 807
ianebo Cucamonga, California 91730
16 January 19$2
Sub.iect: Revocation of conditional use permit No. bl-03 Sharma
Gentlemen:
xaoro)d.-ateiy two weeks after Sharma officially, or
unofficially, opened his school for business I paid a visit to
the subject property. I noticed at that time a L'n-fe•iced play
yard, no provisions for, the handicapped except a. pariing space
that eras requested by you planning department on the site plan
1 do not know) and railin..as at the front entrance that were
very loose.
1 would like to point out that in the event of a child
Setting out of the un-•fenced yard and inured or killed, someone
falling off the step as a result of a loose rail or possible
in cries from other infractions, that the city of Rancho Cucamonga
n.nd other parties involved could be in for some sizable law suits.
_"also if you will read part 5.5 of the California Access Taws
ycu :•.ill note that the Building Department of the city of .Rancho
Cucamonga is responsible for the enforcement of these laws.
I had the iatpression from talking, to i•L". Sharma that he was going
to omen his. school in spite of the requirements of the planning
depart.:.est axd a_p-)arently that is what he aid.
At the ti.�e that you revoke ,'•tr. Sham.-.; lic�,c 1 suggest
V1at 7ou n- evoke" the pasty responsible for issuing hi-.., a licence
In the first place.
�o-u= 'R esp ectful2y
r.LC zorew� y
:.iTY OF R„W;;iO OtjO�,�v;O,yC�1{
GO Mit:ttTY t?EK,nPORNT DEFT.
EL/hs
,
,M FIN
718191ID13111211�2j3��StStS
> x -
1
CrrY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA �ycr,,yo
_ STAFF REPORT �'�
z
DATE: January 27, 1982
TO: Members of the Pianning Commission,
FROM: Jack Lam, AICP, Director of Community Development
BY: Arlene Troup, Assistant Planner
SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT
NO_ 82-0 - A Resolution of the Planning Commission of
the City of Rancho Cucamonga recommending approval of a
Zoning Ordinance Amendment modifying Section 61.0219 of
the Zoning Code to provide for regulation of compact car
parking spaces.
SUMMARY: The Planning Division has initiated this request for an amend-
ment of the Zoning Ordinance in order to bring the present parking require-
ments into conformance with the Industrial Specific Plan and with certain
goals and policies of the General Plan regarding energy conservation and
preservation of open space. The amendment would allow 20% of the required
parking spaces in public, commercial , and residential developments to be
designed for compact car use.
BACKGROUND: Currently our Zoning Ordinance does not allow for compact
car stalls. Section III E4 of the Industrial Specific Plan, adopted
in August 1981 , includes a provision that 20% of the required parking
stalls be designated for compact car use, and establishes a standard
minimum size of 8' wide by 16' long for compact car stalls. Striping,
maneuverability, and access requirements remain the same as those out-
lined in the Zoning Ordinance.
A commercial development proposed for the southwest corner of Foothill
Boulevard and Ramona Avenue has proposed the use of compact car stalls
in its parking area_ Staff feels that this is an appropriate time to
consider compact car parking requirements and to incorporate them into
the Zoning Ordinance.
ANALYSIS: The or000sed size criteria of 8` wide by 16' long for compact
car stalls is consistent with the adopted Industrial Specific Plan. It
is recommended that the 20% figure be used as was in the Industrial Plan
We would recommend that this be monitored and adjustments made if neces-
sary.
I
z�
ITEM 0
Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 82-01
Planning Commission Agenda
January 27, 1982
Page 2
The adopted General Plan iacludes several statements in support of the proposed
concept in its goals, objectives, and policies for Circulation, Community Design,
and Conservation of Resources. (See pages 13, 17, 18, 46 and 125. )
Part II of the Initial Study, completed by staff, is or file and available for
review. No adverse environmental impacts are anticipated as a result of this
proposed amendment to the Zoning Ordianance.
CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised in a newspaper of general circu-
lation. To date, no correspondence has peen received regarding this proposal-
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission issue a Negative
Declaration for the proposal and recommend approval of Zoning Ordinance Amendment
No. 82-01 to the City Council. Should the Commission concur, the appropriate
Resolution has been attached for consideration
Respectfully submitted,
t � '
,
r
JACK LAM, AICP
Director of Community Development
JL:AT:jr
Attachments: Resolution of Approval
r . 1:
® RESOLUTION N0.
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMIS SIO THE CITY
OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF ZONING
ORDINANCE AMENDMENT 82-01 MODIFYING SECTION 61.0219
OF THE ZONING CODE PROVIDING FOR REGULATION OF COM-
PACT CAR PARKING SPACES
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly advertised public
hearing to consider Zoning Ordinance Amendment 82-01; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission seeks to provide comprehensive
parking standards in keeping with the goals and objectives of the City
General Plan with regards to conservation of open space and energy; and
WHEREAS, the Industrial Specific Plan includes compact car
parking requirements.
SECTION 1: Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission hereby recommends
to the City Counc-il approval of the Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 82-Oi
which modifies Section 61.0219 of the Zoning Code by adding (2L) as
follows:
(2) Minimum Design Standards
(L) Public, residential , commercial or industrial
sites may designate up to 20% of their parking
stalls for compact car use. Such stalls shall
be not less than eight (8) feet wide by six-
teen. (16) feet long and shall be clearly
signed or indicated for use by compact cars
only.
SECTION 2: The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission finds
that this amendment will not cause significant adverse impacts upon the
environment and therefore recommends issuance of a Negative Declaration.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 27TH DAY OF JANUARY, 1982.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY:
Jeffrey King, Chairman
ATTEST:
Secretary of the Planning Commission
Resolution No.
Page 2
I, JACK LAM, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly ana
regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by "w a Planning Commission of
the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning
Commission held on the 27th day of January, 1982, by the following vote-
to-wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
T40ES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: CONMIISSIONERS:
J�M
J7
1
its
4•�:
JI
CrrY OF RANCHO CliCAMONGA
STAFF REPORT
v
'g77
DATE: January 27, 1982
TO: Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Jack Lam, AICP, Director of Community Development
BY: Dan Colman, Assistant Planner
SUBJECT: RESOLUTION 79-15A - LANDSCAPE STANDARDS - A Resolution
revising landscaping standards for Special Boulevards,
Secondary, and Collector Streets to implement the General
Plan
SUMMARY: On February i4, 1979, the Planning Commission adopted Reso-
utf ion 79-15 which established iandscape standards for Special Boule-
vards, Major and Secondary Thoroughfares, and Collector Streets as
® designated on the Biayney General Plan. The Comprehensive General Plan
of the City of Rancho Cucamonga and the Industrial Specific Plan have
established new landscape standards for streets. Therefore, the stan-
dards adopted by Resolution 79-15 are no longer consistent with the
General Plan or the Industrial Specific Plan and have been revised -
accordingly in Resolution 79-15A. Please note that these proposed
standards apply only to streets located outside of the Etiwanda Specific
Plan, Victoria, Terra Vista, and the Industrial Specific Plan as shown
in Exhibit "A-A".
RECOMMENDATION: If ;;he Commission concurs that the landscape standards
as set forth in Resolution 79-15A are the minimum necessary to imple-
ment the intent and purpose of the General Plan, staff would recommend
approval of Resolution No. 79-15A.
Respectfully sa mitted,
p� A a �
JACK LAM, A—ICP J �� � "•
Director of Community Development
OL:DC:jr
Attachments: Resolution No. 79-15
Resolution No. 79-15A
® Exhibit "A-A"
ITEM E
'i
RESOLUTION NO. 79-15
A RES07=11ON OF THE PLANXIVG CGTMA77.SSION OF THE CITY
OF v4NC20 CUCAMONGA ESTABLISHING LANDSCAPING STAN-
rARDS FOR SPECIA' SOULE:ARDS, MAJOR AND SECONDARY
THOROUGHFARES, Al., COLLECTOR STREETS AS SHOWN ON
THE GE117-PAL PLAN
WHEREAS, the Flanning Commission of the City of Poncho Cucamonga
finds that it is necessary to set standards for landscaping along special
boulevards, major and secondary thoroughfares and collector streets for
the orderly implementation of the General Plan.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the standards attached
to this Resolution and has found that these standards are the minimum
necessary to implement the intent and purpose of the General Plan.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION HEREBY:
1. Adopts the attached landscape standards for special boulevards,
major and secondary thoroughfares, and collector streets; and
2_ Finds that such standards are the minimum necessary to implement
the intent and purpose of the General Plan.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 14TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 1979.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
�� -
✓ Herman Rempel, Cha-Iriman
ATTEST: -- -� W�/�-� UR
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 Commis-
sion held on the 14r_h day of February, 1979 by the following vote to-wit:
AYES: CO,`NISSIONERS: JONES, TOLSTOY, GARCIA, REMPEL
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: DAHL
;E1� fir?
LAIMSCAPE STAMARDS FOR SPECIAL BOULEVARDS, MAJOR AND
SECOPIDARY THOROUGHFARES, AM C( r�LECTOR STREETS
SPECIAL BOL'LEVAF.DS: Six (6) major thoroughfa^es are identified as special
boulevards; Foothill Blvd., Archibald, Haven, Milliken, Etiwanda, and Base-
line. The text of the Plan indicates that increased landscaped parkways
should be used to provide a distinct identity for special boulevards. In
addition to increased landscaping, design eletents such as meandering side-
walks, mounded landscaping, pedestrian plazas , low profile walls and fences,
and textured sidewalks and crosswalks, can be used to denote special boule-
vards. A variety of designs and building pla :ements are encouraged so that
parking areas are not always located along the street frontage. S{nce Foot-
hill Blvd. is the City's major east/west focaL point, a higher standard should
be used. The following standards shad be used:
Foothill Blvd.: All new development or redevelopments shall provide
landscaping at an average depth of 25', measured from the front pro-
perty line, along the entire street frcntage. In no case shall the
depth, as measured from the front property line, be less than 15'.
This landscaping shall be in addition t-) the parkway landscaping
between the curb and property line (Exhibit "A").
Other Special Boulevards: All new deve.opment or redevelopments
shall provide a landscaped area across the entire boulevard frontage
at an average depth equal to 20% of the depth of the property. The
depth of the property shall be measured from the property line adjacent
to and parallel with the boulevard to tPe opposite parallel property
line. This landscaped area need not exceed 35' in depth; however, in
no case shall there be less than 15' in iepth as measured from the'face
of the curb. Such area shall include any required sidewalks or wallcaaya.
(Exhibit "A')
MAJOR AND SECOSDARY THOROUGHFARES: Major tnon-ughfares not shown as special
boulevards are; Carnelian/Vineyard, Fourth Str( et, and a portion of Milliken
and Etiw_ada. Secondary thoroughfares are indicated as; Carnelian, Beryl,
Banyan, 19th, Arrow, Grove, Wilson, and Seveath Street. The following stan-
dard shall be used for major and secondary thor-)ughfares.
All new developments or redevelopments shill provide a landscaped
area across the entire street frontage at an average depth of 25',
as measured from the face of curb. In no case shall this dimension
be less than 15' in depth (Exhibit "B").
COLLECTOR STREETS: The remaining streets indicated on the Plan are collector
streets. Staff feels that landscape standards are also needed for collectors
in order to establish consistency among developments. The following standard
shall be used:
All new developments or redevelopments shall provide a landscaped
area across the entire street frontage at :m average depth of 20'
as measured from the face of curb. In no case shall this dimension
be less than 15' in depth (Exhibit "B").
i
r 1v l
•/S11•
A .
Cur6
FOOTHILL f3LVD• ST,a,QDARD
tP
1
-o
.y
C • �. `
SPEC «.L BLVD. ST IDARD
--_ -� _ -C�
I
MAJOR AND 95ECONDARY T gOUROU6HEARES I
COLCECTOP, STREETS
RESOLUTION NO. 79-15A
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF RANCHO CUCAMON;GA, AMENDING RESOLUTION 79-151
ESTABLISHING LANDSCAPING STANDARDS FOR SPECIAL
BOULEVARDS, MAJOR AND SECONDARY THOROUGHFARES, AND
COLLECTOR STREETS AS SHOWN ON THE GENERAL PLAN
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga
finds that it is necessary to set standards for landscaping along Special
Boulevards, Major and Secondary Thoroughfares and Collector Streets for
the orderly implementation of the General Plan; and
WriEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the standards
attached to this resolution and has found that these standards are the
minimum necessary to implement the intent and purpose of the General
Plan.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission
hereby:
1. Amends Resolution No. 79-15 by adopting the
attached Landscape Standards for Special
Boulevards, Secondary, and Collector Streets;
and
2. That the attached Landscape Standards supersede
those standards previously adopted as part of
Resolution No. 79-15; and
3. Finds that such standards are the minimum
necessary to implement the intent and purpose
of the General Plan.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 27TH DAY OF JANUARY, 1982.
PLANNING C01MMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY:
Jeffrey King, Chairman
ATTEST:
Secretary of the Planning Commission
1�
Resolution No. 79-15A
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
Coranission held on the 27th day of January, 1982, by the following vote-
to-wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
1,
LANDSCAPE STANDARDS FOR SPECIAL BOULEVARDS, SECONDARY AND COLLECTOR STREETS
Fpeciai Boulevards
The General Plan indicates that increased landscaped parkways should be
used to provide a distinct identity for Specie' Boulevards. In addition
to increased landscaping, design elements such as meandering sidewalks,
mounded landscaping, pedestrian plazas, low profile walls and fences,
natural rock, and textured sidewalks and crosswalks, can be used to denote
Special Boulevards. A variety of designs and building placements are en-
couraged so that parking areas are not always located along the street
frontage.
11 arterials designated for Special Boulevard treatment in the circulation
plan of the General Plan shall observe the following requirements, unless
otheriise indicated in the text of the General Plan:
- A landscaped area along the Special Boulevard frontage
at an average minimum depth of 45' from the face of
j curb and in no case less than 25' from the race of curb
(Exhibit "A");
- The landscaped area need not exceed an average depth
from the face of curb, equal to 20% of the depth of
the property;
- Major broad leaFed columnar evergreen trees on both
sides of the pavement area within the right-of-way;
- Meandering pedestrian paths (4' minimum width) on
both sides of the pavement area;
- Mounding and use of hedges to obstruct views to parking
lots and to create a distinct difference between the
roadway and the development.
Secondary and Collector Struts
The remaining streets indicated on the General Plan are Secondary or Collector
Streets, and shall observe the following requirements:
A landscaped area along 'the street frontage at an average
minimum depth of 35' from the face of curb and in no case,
loss than 20' from the face of curb (Exhibit "A");
Columnar to roundheaded, fan shaped deciduous or evergreen
trees on both sides of the pavement area within the right-
of way.
n 1 �
h `
EXHIBIT A
STREETSCAPE SETBACK
SPECIAL BOULEVARD
• Archibald V
• Arrow �
• Base Line ' Ail,
• Foothill 4t
• haven v3
• Wilson (Bast of haven)
.. .. ._.x:,twY.Yi1.7' 1 �� k+A+. Lf�.'Y(�.15� Nsr.1.r'L..�sarl..L'�rd�...r�Pr.' �':.' :�..� �'.�✓s•.
® bike lane Mt. Sidewalk bwlding
2SIL lain.
Parking Setback
45ft. Streetecape Setback
SECONDARY a�r�ci 'C®LLECI'®R
• Amethyst
• Banyan
• Beryl
• Carnelian
• Church a
• Grove
e Hellman
• Hermosa
• Hillside
• Sapphire ;,,> , : ' . �:• ..
• Vineyard
• Wilson (West of Haven)
• 9th Street 20tL Mht-3; building
• 19th Street Parking Setback
�--35ft. Streetscape Setback
7,,
N
vWi O • • t� Z Q
Z g>O`a��� = W i LLI
N Cs
Q i i ZO a 0V 0 Q
a i I < _ <' ZOR
CV' U
�` ¢ OO �
z ?U w m`
y -J o
N , LU J -rai
LU o O
0CC�. > aJa cc- (aJa cU==U
a
= Uoa C zu,w WN
Ga ¢ C 1
� 7 a
J =E O O 2j
pp7
OC
__._.-----------—
1 \m
' j o
!
r I II �
• �. a it I � �f\�(����
� W f•r �
. Y 1
• - �y. K P rrfFl{]♦+1 ''U1�, , j " J .a•• r,1� tl� ...:w
-. �• 1 7y -�J a `-!�L: •�1Y'�. ,... F G.a 'UwZ•. .q I I ,
f
� 1 ► 1 ! - I� � � If
• r 7
• ��YY♦ \r 4r YN yam: .wj' t x J•�•II•r•.•.7
IQ
DE
1