No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1982/03/10 - Agenda Packet°r •:,e Ic a` n O t ro co 7 fD � fD � A .r. n 7 10 y O e 1977 ACTION 44L' 4 *L-� I - CITY OF . F.ANC.f-iO CLr"0, r PJLANNING CO- MMISSIQ \T AGENDA, WEDNESDAY MARCH 10, 1982 7:00 P.M. LION'S PARK COMMUNITY CENTER 9161 BASE LINE,.RANCP0 CUCAMONGA. CALIFORNIA B. RECKERT - . change of use from an existing single V� ami y residence to an insurance office on an .8;264 square foot lot in the C -2 zone located at 9G66 Estacia Street - APN 208 - 152 -14. I. Pledge of Allegiance II. Roll Call Comm ssiorer Dahl X Commissioner Sceranka 'Commissioner Kina F -used Corr�issioner Tolstoy A Commissioner Remoel X III. Approval of Minutes APPROVED 4 -0 -1 AP R VED February 10, 1982 4 -0 -1 February 22, 1982 IV. Announcements V. Consent Calendar The following consent calendar items a -; °rnected to be routine and non - controversial. Tte_o w.i l be acted uPon by the Commission at one time witlsaut discussion. ff anyone has concern over any item, then it should be removed for discussion. APPROVED 4 -0 -1 A. TIME EXTENSIONS FOR THE FOLLOWING: DR 80 -34 DR 81 -06 CUP 81 -02 B. RECKERT - . change of use from an existing single V� ami y residence to an insurance office on an .8;264 square foot lot in the C -2 zone located at 9G66 Estacia Street - APN 208 - 152 -14. Planning Commission Agenda ?March 10, 1932 Page Two VI. Public Hearings The fol2ovin!7 items are public hearings in sfiich concerned individuals may voice their opinion of the related project. Please wait . b- recognized by the Chaizman and address the Commission from the public microphone by _giving your name and addre.�. -72 srwF opinio= shall bo limited to 5 minutes per individual for each project. Applicant given 2 weeks to C. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 81 -08 - SHAiL*7A - A hearing meet conditions with excep- to consider the possible revocation of the Conditional tion of Cond. 2-•3 which shall Use Permit for a preschool located at 9113 Foothill be worked out w /staff. based on failure to comply with Conditions of Approval. T APPROVED 4 -0 -1 ' D. av- a+ -uc +ejrLjVve +rdcc of zone from R -1 Sinqle Family Residential} to R -3[p ' (Multiple Family Residential /Planned Development) and the development of 44 patio homes and 322 townhouse units on 35 acres of land in the R -1 zone located on the south side of Arrow, between Turner and Center Avenues - APN 209 - 091 -05, 06, 07. VII. Old Business VIII. New Business ` APPROVED 4 -0 -1 E. DESIGN REVIEW FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 9441 AND 11609 - w1th Condition that new NUBANK - The development of 84 single family homes rural s ;dewaik stds. be on 1 2 acre lots located on the south side of Wilson, brought back for review. approximately 1000 feet east of Archibald. IX. Council Referrals X. Director'; Reports XI. Public Comments This is the time end place for the general public to address the CmmaLssion. Items to be discussed here are those which do not already appear on this agenda. XII. Upcoming Agenda XIII. Adjournment The- Plea ^i ;+Co:m!tissior has adopted :e Regulations that set an 22:00 p.m. adjournment time.' If items go beyond that time, they shall be bard only with the consent of the Commission. i AND nAM March 1982 Planning OOmmissi Oa ch cucamx= Ci POS Office BOX 9 C-3. Ranches c 9 Dear C'Mission RObort be Of the On Tentative Trac��. , tained in le-V at4ons prior to YO"':MV are items V7, These The Cor=,alt early stage- ALe" a t4' ., - - ,,,.ch reqUire 700re firmly e£ «, later approval during this tinte ' it will fa !K r. ,,.a practical considera ":7% Specifically Item 3 that the atiti We suggest tto st t in addition of two o 15--g, A� 'and flexibility in Item of We req'aes _t Trees P-laUte<1 gemsdoors- arage to the ab i l ,ms relative Item 9 '413MLue Mt for . The reoW. f Ljje architect limits , facades With a -Item 13 t:t,.e requirement Iqr,,tI Again. dealt with as the f Projet.� schei=tj r landscape -item 16 4ft4A We agagain request the subs! flexibliity- item 19, a - Same request - 1- "IUSM , CALjOM41k 92680. .1,1EMONE 7141731--6011 of the site con few consider- to -submit a ons. waded special condit2- ,�,zop_AW*a, =*cow ted at this are adop involve cone 'ns went becomes develol, Sign 0 C2.r-y is subject t ai loved at flexib4litY is 1 aesthetic on overal, r _allon trees aver include 2 to rep_ter variety r 9 lant2. �oetveen the png S. !-azia VI= 'e]� ,Of en create major prob t doers - rS windows greatly WD", esthetlo.allY Plea5iug -ich may be better one VM jzed, in the zeS more final .............. to allow C Io r on f. Planning Co=nission :. City of Rancho Cu March 10. 1982 $5 ✓"s. w Page Two 43y'� �,:,.r�a�ire3`J < _? •? w f� is of JY. The changes we have -000mmau "`,s� � +� ~ .. h relatively minor in nature, would preveat 1q 2 %a f a g�veloper from being "locked into" conditions whisk maYiP le nAbe. future. They in no way restrict the.'Csty a -'ca p.;u�te development, merely allow greater f2exil T;ty val processes. ., _�•y M .I I Thank you for your Y�i^ Sincerely, Y. °. ME 4 , z► '' K »"` Gil Martinez Partner GM:pom '. cc: Robert *layer CorpOL�i Y , of • f' Y ' ..�J 4 L r p + �1 :rte`= �� +• ��� w i 4 w 4r 4 - ♦` � Inw :S � 1 ' f '• Vha f L7.�{ � Jr - N 1F ' Cr rv- OF RANCY.O CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA WEDNESDAY MARCH 10, 1982 7:00 P.M. LIONS PARK COMMUNIIT CENTER 9161 BASE LINE,.RANCHO CUCAM.ONGA, CALIFORNIA I. Pledge of Allegiance 17. Roll Call Commissioner Daal Commissioner King Commissioner Remaei III_. Approval of Minutes February 1.0, 1982 February 22, 7982 IV. Announcements V. Consent Calendar Commissioner Sceranka Commissioner Tolstoy The fcllowi.ng consent calendar IF are expected to be routine and rAcn- controversial. They will be acted upon by the Commission at one time witbout discussion. If anyone has concern over any item, then it should be removed for discussion. A_ TIME EXTENSIONS FOR THE FOLLOWING: DR 80 -34 OR 81 -06 CUP 87 -02 B. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 82-03 RECKERT - A change of use from an e s ng single a y residence to an insurance office on an x,264. square foot lot in the C -2 zone located at 9666 Estacia Street - APN 208- 152 -14. r �'.. 7, .r Planning Commission Agenda March 70, 1982 Page Two Vi. Public Hearings J, The following items are public hearings in which „✓ \ concerned individuals may voice tbe_ °r opinion of the related project. Please wait to be recognized by the Chairman and address the Commission from the public microphone by giving your na_^_• and address. A22 such opinions shall be limited to 5 minutes per individual for each project. CONDITIONAL USE .PERMIT ai- 08AWSHARMA - A hearing to consider the possible revocation of the Conditional Use Permit for a preschool located at 9113 Foothill based on -failure to comply with Conditions of Approval. o• -vc ro» - rut7 crt - ri %.narge zone from R -1 Single Family Residential) to R -3 /PD of {Multiple Family Residential /Planned Developmen- the development of, 44 patio homes and 322 Larwsp units on 35 acres.of land in the R -1 zone iucated on the south side of Arrow, between 7Iurner and,Center Avenues - APN 209 -M-OF, 06, 07. VII. Old Business VIII. New Business DESIGN REVIEW FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 9441 AND 11609 - NUBANK - The development of 84 single family homes acre cots located on the south side of Wilson, approximately 1000 feet east of Archibald. IX. Council Referrals X_ Director's Reports XI. Public Comments This is the time and place for the general public to address the Commission. Items to be discussed here are those which do not already appesr on this agenda. i >r•. XII. Upcoming Agenda XIII_ Adjournment. The Planning Commission has adopted Administrative Regulations that set an 11:00 p.m- adjouz=ient time. rf iF go beyond that, time, they shall be heard _. onzly.with the consent of the Commission.' ys'f'^ _ , '�:` ,�, br,- ,• ; ,.,: .�. si'. r CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Mceting February 10, 1982 CALL TO ORDER Chairman Jeff King called the regular meeting of the City of Paucho Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at 7:05 p.m. The meeting was held in the Forum of the Lions Park Community Center, 9151 Base Line Road, Rancho Cucamonga. Chairman -King then led in the pledge of allegiance. F.OLI. CALL PRESENT: COMMISSIONERS: Herman Rempel, Jeff Sceranka, Peter Tolstoy, Jeff King P_BSF -11T. COMMISSIONERS: Dahl STAFF PRESENT: Ted Hopson, Assistant City Attorney; Jerry Grant, Building Official; Jack Lam, Director of Community Development; Janice Reynolds, Secretary; Jim Robinson, Assistant City Manager; Paul Bougeau, Senior Civil Engineer; Michael Vairin, Senior Planner APPROVAL OF MINUTX.,, Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded by Sceranka, carried td- approve the Minutes of January 27, 1982. Motion: Moved by Seeranka, seconded by Rempel, carried to approve the Minutes of February 1, 1982 with the deletion of paragraph three on page twelve. * x x x x ANNOUNCM4ENTS Jack Lam, Community Development Director, announced that the presentation of the Law and Justice Center, item J under New Business, was requested to be moved up and be heard by the Co=i.ssion before their consideration of the public hearings. Mr. Lam also announced that the next regular meeting of the Planning Commission would be held on Monday, February 22, 1982 and that this meeting would also include a public hearing on the Terra Vista Planned Community. C -TINT CALENDAR A. T-"v- E i'r34SION FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 80-07 AND 81 -03 B. TIME EUENSIGN FOR PARCEL MAPS 5260, 6114, 6076, 5997 5114 C. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO. 82-02 - BARTON - The development of a 5,800 square foot two -story office building on .369 acre, generally located on the south side of Civic Center Drive, west of Utica, Lot 23 of Parcel Map 6206. D. E. r' �7 NO. OF Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded by Sceranka, carried to adopt all items on the Consent Calendar. NEWT BUSINESS J. PROPOSED WEST VALLEY LAW AND JUSTICE CENTER Jim Robinson, Assistant City Manager, reviewed the Staff Report and introduced Mr. Bill Valentine of FAK, San Francisco, who reviewed the Site Plan and invited the Commissioners to take a look at the model on display. It was the consensus of the Planning Commissioners that the architects should work to improve the north and west sides of the building and that the park -like appearance should carry around to the rear of the building. Mr. Valentine stated that they would work on the items recommended by the Commission and try to improve them before the center was formally submitted. 7:30 p.m. The Planning Commission Recessed 7:40 p.m. The Planning Commission Reconvened Planning Commission Minutes -2- February 20, 1982 PUBLIC HEARINGS F. CONDITIGNAL USE PERMIT NO. 81-08 - SHARMA - A fearing to consider the possible revocation of the Conditional Use Permit for a preschool located at 9113 Foothill, based on failure to comply with Conditions of Approval. Mr. Lam advised the Commission that this item was being brought back for hearing per the Commission's request. Jerry Grant, Building Official, and Michael Vairin, Senior Planner, presented a list of items yet to be completed by Ys. Sharma under the Building and Safety Division and Planning Division. Chairman King opened the public hearing. Sytendra Sharma, applicant, addressed the Commission and stated that he had been working towards the completion of the items remaining on the list, however, due to the rain he had not been able to complete them and asked the Commission for more time in which to complete the Conditions of Approval. Commissioner Sceranka asked Mr. Sharma Ghat the current status was of his licensing with the State. Mr. Sharma replied that he was licensed at this time. Commissioner Rempel asked if the eleven items under Planning and the six under Building and Safety still remained to be completed. Mr. Vairin replied that they were and that there was also �a temporary sign on the premise that needed to be removed. Commissioner Sceranka asked Mr. Sharma when his current term at the preschool ended. Mr. Sharma replied that he was licensed to operate year round from 6 a.m. to 6 p.m. and did not have a school term as such. There were no further questions of the applicant or comments from the public, therefore the public hearing was closed. Chairman King stated that he understood the situation the applicant was in, however, there appeared to be so many items that remained to be completed he felt that the item should be continued. Commissioner Rempel stated that he felt the same way as Chairman King, however, felt that a report should be prepared for the first Planning Commission meeting in March to make sure that progress is being made on. the uncompleted items. If progress was not made on at '_east a weekly basis, staff should report back to the Commission and the Commission Planning Commission Minutes -3- February 10, 1982 �a: would tzke appropriate action. Commissioner Sceranka stated that he felt that the Commission had been strong in their implementation of standards and the time frames in which people were expected to perform these standards. When exceptions are made for purposes which he felt are valid, it is important for the applicant to be sensitive to the fact that they are being given special consideration for changes in the proceedure and -hould not be able to take advantage of that to the detriment of t.*.o -aity. Ccmm{-�Ssioner Sceranka stated that he did not feel that this . -tld be c.ntinued indefinitely and that staff should just keep chec: -o see if he were completing the items. He felt that a date should or set and if Mr. Sharma eid not complete his Condition* of Approval by that date, staff should come back tc the Commission at the next meeting and the Commission should revoke his permit. He further stated tLat the applicant had been given several extensions alzeady and had still not completed these condition--. Chairman King stated that he agreed with Commissioner Sceranka but he did not feel it should be part of the motion. Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded by Tolstoy, carried to continue the item to the Planning Commission of March 10, 1982. AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: G. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT REMPEL, TOLSTOY, KING SCERAWU � a ItLOLU' U b1S — LEWib FROFERTIES — A change of zone from C -]. (Neigh - bcrhood Connercial) to R -3 /PD (Multiple Family Residential /Planned Development) and the development of 152 condominium units on 10.4 acres of land located north of Base Line and west of Archibald - APN 202 - 161 -37 and 202 - 151 -34. Michael Vairin, Senior Planner, reviewed the Staff Report. Commissioner Toistoy asked Mr. Vairin who owned the vacant land next to the property. Mr. Vairin replied that he was not totally sure who the owner was, but was most likely owned by the Water District. Ted Hopson, Assistant City Attorney, replied that since there was a water tank on that piece of laud, it probably belonged to the Water District. Chairman King opened the public bearing. Planning Commission Minutes -4- February 10, 1982 ' Richard Hanson, 17291 Irvine $3ulevard, Tustin, designer o' the project, addressed the Commission. He stated that the applicant was in agreement .Y...._...i =z had no questions On the Staff Report �.s ri,P Conditions Of .4 r- 7- c^ or the contents of the apprv.i "a - Comm=issioner Scerae -ca asked Mr. Vairin if provisions had been made for the tot lot as required during Design Review' Mr. Vairin replied that E= ibi.t "I" of the Staff Report would show the location of the tot lot. Commissioner TolstOy stated that he was concerned about the buffering A uz on the south side becatae of the loading docks for the 8rac�ri stores but saw where it was addressed in the Staff report - Howe :er; west side he did not see how the buffering On the "rpm the single family residence was being addressed. De sign R,-view had required dense landscaping in Mr. Vairin stated that Dethat- that area, but that an exhioit had not been drawn to 11lustrate COT=issioner Tolstoy asked if there was to be a wall in Gnat location. mr. Vairin replied that there was a wall proposed in that location that would be five to sir, feet high along the property line. Commissioner Tolctoy asked 13sat the distance would be from the wall to the first unit. t it would be twenty to thirty feet_ Mr. Vairin replied tha Chairman King asked the applicant why there was a rather substantial Ch Ch Irma as opposed to the c:her, setbacks on the south side t it was done that way `Oft' Mr. Hanson replied tha Chairman King stated if that were the case, it seemed that the same problem existed on the east side. Although they are presently vacant pieces of land, ultimately the uses to the east would be the same as the uses to the south and if it were logical to use the distance as a buffering agenr for properties to the south, it would also be logical to use it ns a buffering for properties to the east. th Con nissioner Re=pel stated were the ssame and that sthis tissue Chairman property mentioned by an Review. was addressed during Design There were no further comments and the public hearing was closed. Motion: Moved by Sceranka, seconded by Rempel, carried, to adopt the Tentative Tract 11615. Resolution approving -5- February 10, 1982 planning COMMission Minutes i� - - — AYES: COMMISSIONERS: SCERXWA, REMPM, TOLSTOY, KING NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: DAH:. lotion: Moved by Sceranica, seconded by Remp:l, carried, to adopt the Resolution approving Planned Development 82 -)2. AYES: COMMISSIONERS: SCERANRA, REMPEL, TOLSTOY, RING NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: DAffi. H. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MA) 7061 -4 - KACOR - A division of 28.7 acres into 24 lots within the ;[ -2 zone located on the southwest corner of 6th Street and Mil.iken Avenue - APN 210- 082-8, 9, 10. Paul Rougeau, Senior Civil Engineer, review,d the Staff Report. Commissioner Tolstoy asked Mr. Rougeau where this industrial tract would fit into the storm drain sy4tem. Mr. Rougezu replied that there would be a storm drain provided by the Assessment Distric` in Cleveland Avenuc. Chairman Ring opened the public hearing. Dan Reed, San Diego, representing the applicant, addressed the Commission and stated that his engineers were present tc answer any technical questions the Commission might have. There were no further questions or comments f-om the public, therefore the public hearing was closed. Motion: Moved by Sceranka, seconded by Tolstoy, carried, to adopt the Resolution approving Parcel Map 7061 -4. AYES: COMMISSIONERS: SCERANRA, IOLSTOY, RMIM, KING NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Planning Commission Minutes No -6- February 1J, 1982 I. QNZRGNMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARGr L L�[ir i uo - z ++ ,., • h •i-e -' R -1 •-1 -_ ;,iIMP;'�Y - A division of 6.2 acres into 2 lots within te zone luc at the southwest corner of Highland and Haven A % a.ted enue - APN 202- 19 -15. Paul Rougenu, Scaior Civil Engineer, reviewed the Staff Report. There were no questions from the Commission, therefore Chairman King opened the public hearing. There were no comments from the public and the public hearing was closed. Mr. Rougeau advised the Commission that the applicant had contacted him earlier in the afternoon and informed him that they would not be in attendance at the meeting, however, wished to state that they had no objections to the Conditions of Approval or any items mentioned in the Staff Report. Motion: Mc--ed by Rempel, s ^corded by Sceranka, carried, to adopt the Resolution approving Parcel Map 7128. AYES: CIII+hYiI:SSIONERS: REMPEL, SCERANKA, TOLSTOY, KING NOES: COMFf,:SSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COM"TTSSIONERS: DART. 8 :15 p.m. The ?laming Commission Recessed 8:20 p.m. he Panning Commission Recenvened DIRECInR`S ?% -PORTS K. DESIt:N RrVIEW a ^CZ PEASE I TENTATIVE TRACT 11931, - LYON -- The deveitpment of 30 single Family homes within the Vietoria Planned Community, located north of Base Line Road, writ of Etiwanda Avenue, and soutb of Highland Avenue. Jack Lam, Director of Community Development, reviewed the Staff Report stating that the Commission was being presented tonight with the revisions provided by the applicant to the lower portion of the tract. Yr. Lam further stated that the Design Review Committee had looked at the revision and stated that they were satisfied with the revisions and felt they met with the intent and purpose ;F the Condition which the Commission imposed on the tract. Planning Commission Minutes February 10, 1982 There was much discussion on the design of the park and the elements which the Commission wished to have included in the design of the park. It was the consensus of the Commission that the design of the park be brought back to them for review before final approval. *lotion: *loved by Tolstoy, seconded by Rempel, carried, Lo accept: the revisions to T :ntat'_ve Tract 11934, Phase I. AYES: COMMISSIONERS: TOLSTOY, REMFJM, SCERANKA, KING NOES: COM21ISSIONERS: NONE ASSENT: COMMISSIONERS: DAHL UPCOMING A; ENDA It was the consensus of the Planning Commission that staff be instructed to research and bring back to the Commission for discussion the Parking Standards Ordinance for residential development to see if the standards were adecuate to meet the parking needs of projects with high density. ADJOURNMENT Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded by Tolstoy, carried to adjourn. 8:45 p.m. The Planning Cosmai sio,, Adjourned Respectfully submitted, JACK LAM, Secretary Planning Commission Minutes ,x 0 February 10, 1982 Y ., CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING CON.MISSION MINUTES Adjourned Regular Meeting February 22, 1982 CALL ORDER Chairman Jeff Ring called the Adjourned Regular Meeting ng et the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at 7 P.m. The meeting was held at the Lions Park Community Center, 9161 Base Line Road, Rancho Cucamonga. Chairman Ring then led in the pledge of allegiance. ROLL CALL PRESENT: COMMISSIONERS: Richard Dahl, Herman Rempel, Peter Tolstoy, Jeff King ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Jeff Sceranka (Excused) STAFF PRESENT: Tim Beedle, Senior Planner; Rick Gomez, City Planner; Edward Hopson, Assistant City Attorney; Otto Kroutil, Associate Planner; Joan Kruse, Administrative Secretary; Jack Lam, Director of Community Development; Paul Rouges u, Senior Civil Engineer; Arlene Troup, Assistant Planner; Michael Vairin, Senior Planner APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded by Tolstoy, carried unanimously, to continue the approval of the Minutes to the March 10, 1982 meeting because they were incomplete. x i a E a is Mr- Lam announced that there would be another Adjourned Regular Planning Commission meeting and public hearing of the Terra Vista Planned Community on Monday. March 1, 1982 at the Lions Park Community Center. Mr. Lam stated that the Etiwanda Specific Plan would hold a meeting on Thursday, February 25, 1982, at the Etiwanda Intermediate School. He invited everyone in the audience to attend. Mr- Lam advised that the Planning Commissioners Institute would begin on February 24-26. Mr. Lam introduced Rick Gomez, the new City Planer, and stated that he had officially begun employment with. the City today. ice•__' —.' .. CONSENT CALENDAR A. TIME E=SION FOR DEVELOPMENT R.t'VInT = 81-LS Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded by Dahl, c_ -Tied unanimously, to adopt Resolution No. 82 -23, and approving the requested time ext =ion listed on the Consent Calendar. PMLiC HEARINGS B. GENEFLkL PLAN AMENDMENT 82 -01 - LEWIS - A request to amend the Land Use Policies of the General Plan, that would allow the City to consider development plans within a Planned Community area, prior to adoption of the Planned Community. Michael Vairin, Senior Planner, reviewed the staff report stating that he recommended an addition to the Resolution of Approval for this General Plan amendment to read: "This exception shall be limited to only one per planned community area and shall not encompass more than 52 or 50 acres of the planned community area, whichever is less." Mr. Vairin indicated that this would limit the number of times that a developer could do this without chipping away at the entire planned comity concept. Chairman Ring opened the public hearing. Mr. Ricbard Lewis, the applicant, stated that his firm would appreciate any help they might get to _facilitate their move into the City of Rancho Cucamonga. He indicated twat this would be their headquarters building. There being no furtber comments, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Tolstoy asked if the wording proposed by the applicant to replace the policy statement contained on page 30 of the General Plan was apropos. Mr. Hopson replied that he bad no difficulty with what the applicant proposed or with what had been proposed by Mr. Vairin. Further, that it is up to the Planning Commission to determine the kind of wording and recommendation they want. Chairman King asked the Commission to comment. Commissioner Rempel stated that what Mr. Vairin had proposed is applicable and should be added, but he did not know how it would fit into the whole policy statement. He further stated that the developer should not be allowed to continue to erode the planned community and the limitation suggested by Mr. Vairin would insure that it stays intact. Planning Commission Minutes -2- February 22, 1982 i' Chairman Ring stated that he was in agreement with what Commissioner Rempel said and asked if there was anyone with contrary views. Commissioner Tolstoy stated that be has a philosophical problem in that a Planned community denotes a condition of planning and standards, and when you violate the planned community without investigation into the plan, what you have is patchwork planniug, to which he is opposed_ He indicated that one very important thing a:)out a planned community is the coordination of the circulation, architectural, landscaping, and community design standards including signing. He asked if this is allowedowbo would set the standards? The planned community, or patchwork planning? It appeared that it dilutes the very thing that a planned community is for in allowing deviation from City standards by creating something unique. Commissioner Tolstoy asked what would happen if, after the Commission has done some thinking about Terra Vista, they decide that an office should noL be located at this site — they have not set land usage. He indicated that there could be some conflict with signing and landscaping which could make it stick out like a sore thumb. Commissioner Dahl stated his agreement to a point in that he thought if they were looking at major impact on the entire planned community it would be one thing. He stated that given the circumstances, they owe it to the City and to the Commission'thzt when it becomes known that a company of the stature of the Lewis Company wants to locate within the City, that they would do everything they could to be sure that the architecture landscaping will be excellent. He felt that this could all be handled with proper design review. He stated that he was encouraged that a major developer like Lewis would be interested in locating their headquarters in the City. He was also sure they would not put something up that they ;could be ashamed with. It was his personal feeling that it will be one of the most beautiful buildings in the City. He stated that the Commission must look at certain exceptions by looking at the circum- stances. Further, that they must move from their present site and that they should encourage this move to Rancho Cucamonga. He stated that he did not feel that this would impact on the planned community. Commmissioner Re=pel stated that he thought the applicant realized that there may be some things he must do at a later date to be sure that this complies with the Planning Commission. Further, as was discussed in Design Review with the applicant, this is something that would look good in that area. He felt that to hold somebody up for E-9 months before they would be able to submit building plans on that location within the planned community, or any place else, would not be right. He indicated that there are always exceptions to the general rule and this should be studied to see if it fits into the citywide plan and not just the planned community. Commi.ssione: Tolstoy stated that it is too bad that this had to be brought up by the Lewises. He further stated that speaking in general, Plarming Commission Xinutes -3- February 22, 1982 r yew.�. it is odious to use this project but there will be other Planning Commissions and he is not picking on this one in particular, but doing this violates the thinking of what he believes is the way this should go. Chairman King stated that voting on this item would be held until the next item is discussed. C. GENERAL PLAN A*END11�N, 82 -01 - CITY OF RANCHO CGCAMONGA - A request to amend the Laad Lse Element of the General Plan to change the land use designation in the area fronting 4th Street extending approximately 1400' north between Etiwanda Avenue and the AT & SF railroad tracks. This land use designation is recommended to be changed from Heavy Industrial to General Industrial.. Senior Planner, Tim Beedle, reviewed the staff report. Commissioner Dahl asked if this piece is presently owned by West Coast Liquidators. Mr. Beedle replied that a portion of it is. Commissioner Tolstoy asked if when the Commission heard the Industrial Specific Plan was this shown as the amendment is stated. Mr. Beedle replied that this was shown as the general industrial area and was in conflict. Chairman Ring opened the public hearing. There being no comments from the audience, the public be--ring was closed. Motion_ Moved by Dahl, seconded by Rempel, car =ied to adopt Resolution No. 82 -23, approving the recommendation for changes 82 -01� to the General Plan, with an addition to General plan Amendxeent 82_01_A, adding the verbiage as proposed by staff. Commissioner Tolstoy abstained for his previously stated reasons. D. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 82 -01 -B - CITY OF RANCHO CDCAMONGA - A request to amend the Circulative Element of the General Plan dealing with. Highland Avenue and the Foothill Freeway Corridor from Haven Avenue to Interstate 15. Interim improvements to Highland Avenue would be redesignated from a secondary arterial to collector standards. Senior Civil Engineer, Paul Rougeau, reviewed the staff report. Be asked that the public hearing be opened to accept any comments and, that after hearing this item, the Commission continue this to April. 28, 1982. CeyMmissioner Rempel asked if there is anything in the foreseeable future that could determine the traffic count as would be generated when the portion of Victoria starts and whether 44 feet would be sufficiently wide to carry this traffic. Planning Commission Minutes -4- February 22, 1982 Mr. Rougeau replied that in his opinion it would be wide enough. He indicated that only a few public street connections will be allowed and that the Victoria project does not propose to have any commercial or residential driveways on it. He indicated further that the north side will be protected as future freeway right -of -way. Mr. Rougeau stated that by the time this roadway is developed there will be knowledge as to whether this roadway or the freeway is weeded. Commissioner Rempel stated that he did not feel that a 44 -foot roadway is sufficient to carry the traffic generated by Chaf °fey College in the mornings and evenings as well as the Victoria development over the next 8-10 years, which would be the earliest time a freeway could be developed. Mr. Rougeau stated that there will be enough capacity even with Victoria. Additionally, there will be left turn lanes and future traffic will not exceed the need for two lanes. There were further questions by the Commission of the widths of various roadways in the City and what widths are required for two and four lane roadways. Mr. Rougeau stated that if additional width is needed it can be provided by building the second part of the divided arterial, or if that does not come about, by building extra width on the north. He indicated that one thing to remember is that along with this or any other development_ along Victoria, the City is only going to get the street that has been agreed to by all the parties or one -half a street which is 32 feet, or until there is development on the north. He stated that they do not expect development oa the north because that is freeway right -of -way. He stated that this way they get a full service two -way road out of the Victoria Planned Community instead half of a 64 -foot road. Be said that if additional road is required in the future, all that would need to be done is a City Street widening project. He indicated that on the 44 -foot standard, the width has been worked out with the State but not any details. There is the possibility that the curb will not go in which means it could be widened out. He indicated that they are getting more road this way than one -half of a 64 -foot road. Commissioner Rempel stated that there should not be curb on the north side of the street to allow the possibility of increasing the roadway. Commissioner Dahl asked why this wasn't stated in the first place. Commissioner Tolstov asked if there is anywhere on the north of this strip that is not a freeway right- of-way or proposed freeway right -of- way in the specific area between Haven and the Cherry off ramp. Mr. Rougeau replied that there is. Commissioner Tolstoy asked if this will be used as a frontage road when the freeway is built. Planning Commission Minutes -5- February 22, 1982 1".r. Rougeau replied that it will be. Commissioner Tolstoy asked if there is enough room to have a frontage road and a freeway. Mr- Rougeau replied that the plans they have are not complete but they Provide for putting the freeway on the north and having a frontage road along the south. Commissioner Tolstoy asked if there would be a problem with drainage if there is no curbing on the north side. Mr- Rougeau replied that he did not believe there would be a problem. Chairman.King opened the public hearing. 14r. Douglas Gorgen, 7333 Heiman Avenue, addressed the Commission, stating that he and Mr. Butler have been required to do an EIR to study the alternatives for handling traffic should the freeway not be built. He indicated that the City knows what will happen and wanted to knew why, if this is the case, he is required to do a study. He asked why standards are not set so that a study will not have to be done again. He also asked if the portion of roadway discussed in the General Plan amendment- request could be excluded from the study he is doing. Chairman King replied that Mr. Gorgen could not exclude this from the study because 13r. Gorgen's property speaks for itself. Mr. Hopson stated that it is premature to say what the City will do. Mr. He Gorgen further asked why, if standards are set, this asked if must be studied again. studies have been done. Commissioner Rempel stated that the Commission is not making amy decision or assumptions on the freeway. He indicated that Mr. Gorgen's development is in the path of the freeway and a study is appropriate. Commissioner Dahl stated that he could not recall what the EIR required on Mr. Gorgen's property which is on Carnelian. Be asked if the ElR studies the entire circulation of the City. Mr. Gorgen replied that the entire City will be studied. Mr. Dahl stated that what they are stud•;ing here is the possibility of a street based upon what the City feels will be the impact if there is not a freeway built. He further stated that he felt that Mr. Gorgen deserves an answer, and whether this study or any other, would be avail- able to Mr. Gorgen. He indicated that this should be addressed using the City's figures. Planning Commission Minutes -6- February 22, 1982 t.. Chairman King stated that the Commission is getting Into an area that is not intended and did not see the significance of the item being discussed to the property that is owned by Mr. Gorgen. He stated that he understood what Mr. Gorgen is talking about and further, that if Mr. Gorgen wished to come back and discuss this he could but that it was not appropriate or relative to what the Commission is doing here tonight. Mr. Rougeau stated that if this item is continued to April 28, Mr. Gorgen's concerns can be taken care of. He indicated that his concerns could be examined to see if the scope of the work should be changed. Mr. Vito de Vito Francisco, 615 N. Euclid, Ontario, addressed the Commission asking whether the intersection of Rochester and Highland, referred to on some maps as Orange, is going to have only one or two streets going onto Highland and if Rochester would be blocked off. Mr. Rougeau replied that Rochester doesn't necessarily have to go through but he was not sure whether this is the case. Mr. Francisco asked i£ this is the time to take a position for or against this. Mr. F.ougeau stated that there will be a future portion of Victoria that will be studied and it would be appropriate to take a position at that time. Mr. Francisco stated that presently there is a house at Rochester and Highland with a driveway that goes onto Highland and asked if any action should be taken. Mr. Rougeau replied that public access rights will stay unless a freeway is built, and, if this is the case, it would be connected to the frontage road. There being no further comments, the public hearing was closed. Motion: Moved by Dahl, seconded by Tolstoy, carried unanimously, to continue this item to April 28, 1982. E. ENVIRONMMAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 7370 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA The division of -3-2F acres of land into 10 parcels for park land located at the north end of Hermosa on the west side thereof. Jack Lam stated that this property is being divided in three parts and was not reviewed by the City Attorney at the time that this division was being developed. He indicated that upon review by the City Attorney a change was recommended to show this in concept as three parcels at this time. Parcel 1, which is the lower portion of the map; parcel 2, encompassing existing parcels 2 through 9; and parcel 3, which is parcel 10. Parcel 10 is the piece which the property owner will maintain and is not being purchased. Mr. Lam stated that this modification is requested Planning Commission Minutes -7- February 22, 1982 because it provides better protection for the City in the event of default. He indicated that this exhibit will be used in the purchase agreement with the cc -ner. Further, that = ctcb increment is picked up, the map will be revised. Mr. Lam stated that a second change would be the addition of the following condition: "That the record owner of the subject property and the City of Rancho Cucamonga now have entered into .md executed some mutually acceptable contract=al arrangements for the City's acquisition of the subject property, which agreement shall be recorded with the final map if recordation is required by the City." Mr. Lam stated that no final map will be approved until the mutually acceptable agreement is entered into by the City and property owner. Commissioner Dahl stated that this is a City - initiated subdivision so that the property owner would have the right to subdivide his property again without waiting the standard 2-4 years before being able to subdivide. Mr. Hopson stated that the resubdivision would be at the City's request and the City's restriction relative to future reparceling doesn't restrict the City. Additionally, the method and size of the pieces that would be released to the City would remain the same and lots 2 through 9 just would not be legal pieces. Mr. Hopson stated that this was done for the benefit of the property owner and explained the worst case condition that could leave the property owner with a piece of property that be could do nothing with. Commissioner Tolstoy asked where access to parcel 3 would be. Mr. Lam replied that it would be on the other side. Mr. Rougeau stated that presently there is none: however, future devel- opments would provide access and a tract that is being developed now would provide a stub street. Bill Holley, Director of Community Se-.vices, stated that it is envisioned that there will be an easement going through parcel No. 1, and would be dissolved as other access is provided. Chairman King opened the public hearing. There being no comments, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Rempel stated that it bothers him that the City is picking up a park site which use will be limited for a period of time to a very small group of City population. He felt that the City would be better off getting property in some other area of the City more centrally located and usable by the total City population. He stated that he Planning Commission Minutes -8- February 22, 1982 had no problem with the parcel map. Chairman King stated that he agreed with Commissioner'Rempel; however, he could not vote on this matter. Commissioner Dahl stated that this will be a natural park that is special and trat an attempt is being made to preserve it. He indicated that if this is developed properly it will be used by citizens all over the City. He Indicated that he has a problem with having parks that you can walk to as he did not know of any City where parks are so centrally located chat they con be walked to. Commissioner Rempel stated that he did not say that this is not a site for a park, but rather, that this is not a site for a park now. Commissioner Tolstoy stated that there is not another place within the City that offers such uniqueness and which would take at least 50 years to develop. He indicated that it offers a different kind of park than most cities can give to the public. He indicated that he vas able to see Commissioner Hempel's concern, but if this park is not acquired now, it would not be acquired in the future. He indicated further that he is a passive park user and not an active park user and be was unable to think of a better way than tc get this park now and pay less in the future. Motion: Moved by Dahl, seconded by Tolstoy, carried, to adopt Resolution No. 82 -25, approving Parcel Map No. 7370, as amended. Chairman King voted no and Commissioner Rempel abstained. 8:CJ p.m. The Plann'_ag Commission recessed 8:13 p.m. The Planning Commission reconvened F. EM4NDA SPECIFIC PLAN STATUS REPORT Chairman King stated that although this is not technically a public hearing, he felt that there were many people in the audience who cared to comment and they would be permitted to do so at this meeting. He indicated that he had read newspaper account of the diverse opinions which exist concerning the process and explained what is involved from the ground up in the development of a plan for the Etiwanda area that would be best for the community. He indicated that there had been quite a bit of discussion at the General Plan and Victoria hearings and it appeared that there wili be more in the bringing about of a specific Plan for Etiwanda. Chairman King stated that this is the first stage Planning Commission Minutes -9- February 22, 1982 and everyone would be able to provide input. Otto &routil, Associate.PLanner, provided a status report as he revieired the staff report stating that staff is confident that they will reach completion of a plan that is meaningful. Chairman Ring stated that those who wished to comment could do so at this time. Mr. David Flocker, 6674 East Avenue, Etiwanda, addressed the Commission on behalf of the Etiwanda Lrand Owners Association. Mr. Flocker stated for clarification that rhey had not requested a ct.ange in the make up of the Advisory cemmittee at the last Council meeting as bad been reported in the newspaper. Further, that the Etiwanda Land Owners Association had not undertaken any legal action in this matter. Mr. Flocker stated that what has happened is understandable because of the frustrations that exist with the plan to date inasmuch as the Property Owners Association had seat a proposal to the Advisory Committee and the City Council in 1982 that had not been incorporated in the land use map thus far. He indicated their opposition to a bypass road and asked for an opportunity to present their views before the Commission. Mrs. Mary Catania, Etiwanda landowner, stated that she had asked the City Council where else ER zoning could be found. She further stated that she was told it is a new designation and was not being enforced in the Cenral Plan. Mrs. Catania stated that it is not realistic to propose this kind of zoning in these hard times either to the buying public or the land owners as this area will never be a Beverly Hills. She indicated that the Advisory Committee is turning their back on those people who want to buy a home today. Mrs. Catania stated her agreement with Mr. Flocker in opposition to the bypass road as a waste of good land. Mr. Roland Smith, Etiwanda property owner, stated that the proposal for Base Line and Etiwanda Avenue is not right nor would it divert people from using the heart of Etiwanda. Mrs. R. Klinenan, Etiwanda property owner, stated that it was her husband who had spoken of taking legal action and was speaking for himself and not other land owners. She stated that the Etiwanda Advisory Committee tells Mr. Beedie and jXoutil what they want and they do what they are told. She indicated that the Advisory Committee is dangerously near to being a policymaking body which will create great financial hardships. She indicated that trey are to be advisory and are policy makers. Mr. Dewey Hardcastle, 2427 Vista Drive, stated that Commissioner Tolstoy had spoken of patchwork planning and, in reaching agreement_ on plan 2A, Planning Commission Minutes -10- February 22, 1532 the Advisory Committee will have a lot of unhappy people. He indicated that it did not seem right to equate quality of life with 0-2 dwelling. units per acre and asked for sufficient density to provide homes for all people. Chairman King thanked everyone for their comments stating that in doing this they make the System work. He indicated that this is a cooperative effort that will take time and in the overall process a plan -.01 be arrived at that everyone will be pleased with. G. REQUEST FOL_A TIME M=SI0N FOR SA 75-07 - BREnUtE:N IN CHRIST C Request for an extension of time to redesign or remove an exists structure located at 9974 19th Street. Commissioner Dahl abstained from any discussion on this item. Michael Vairin, Senior Planner, reviewed the staff report. Chairman King stated that it appeared that the church bad not decided what to do for sure with the existing house on the church property. Mr. Vairin replied that at the present time this is considered to be a temporary building rzd not part of the permanent master plan; however, to remove the building at this time would be a burden to the %:hutch in terms of lack of space. Chairman King asked how long a time extension they had requested. Mr. Hopson replied that the letter they submitted requests a two -year extensicn. Commissioner Tolstoy asked that should the Planning Ca.mission decide that an extension be given could another extension beyond this be received if asked for or would it be an extension period with no renewal. Mr. Vairin replied that another extension could be given. Chairman King stated that his feeling would be to extend this for a two -year period. Commissioner Rempel stated that adequate landscaping is being provided around the building and indicated that he would make a motion that staff work with the applicant in landscaping and screening and keep the building ;.or a two -year period. Commissioner Tolstoy stated that he agreed with a part of Commissioner Rempel's motion but that you would not get sufficient dense landscaping within a two-year period and it would then be ripped out. Planning Commission Minutes -11- February 22, 1982 Commissioner Rempel stated that he would amend his motion to include some type of screening to enclose the site and also, the addition of wow trim. Commission= Tolstoy seconded the motion, and the motion carried, to approve the time extension for a tun, -year period. 8:45 p.m. The Planning Commission recessed 8:55 p.m. The Planning Commission reconvened H. TERRA VISTA PLANKED COMMQlti"=Y - Residential Land Use and Design Cuidelines. Mr. Lam stated that this hearing was a continuation of the one begun at the February 1 meeting, and that the next meeting on Terra Vista would be held on March 1. Mr. Vairin recapped what had taken place at the previous meeting and stated that the developer had provided revised material which had been included in the Commission's agenda packet. He suggested tttat based upon the material received, the March 1 meeting focus on the community facilities issues, commercial issues, and the miAed use issues. He indicated that it is staff's desire to wrap up residential and those new topics at the first meeting in April. Ms. Kay Matlack, representing Lewis Development Company, stated that for clarification, 8782 dwelling units is the maxl== that is intended for this project assuming that the park site is purchased and developed as a park. Further, the maximum figure would be adjusted only to the extent that density bonuses are granted for housing iu accordance with state policy. She stated that on the question of number of units and consistency with the General Plan, they are working with staff and for the moment they would let that issue ride. She further stated that they are working with staff on traffic and that major changes may be required on what they are comparing. Ms. Matlock stateti that they feel this project is consistent with the General Plan in every respect and that they want to reduce traffic goals, work on the transit and trails which will be explained by their consultant, Gruen and Associates. Mr. Ki Suh Park, Gruen and Associates, explained that the presentation they were making at this meeting would focus on modifications made to the plan since the last Commission meeting, land use interrelationships and residential design guidelines, including buffers and connection to the greeaway system. Mr. Park stated that lighting and landscaping are still under study and would be brought to the Commission later for their consideration. He indicated that if there was time, they would Planning Commission Minutes -12- February 22, 1982 go into neighborhood commercial and recreational /commercial. Mr. Park then went through the change; which resulted from the Commissior`s comments and were highlighted by largo circles on the Terra Vista Map they were using. Circle 1, intersection of Milliken and Church, where density was increased around the park site and recreational /commercial and decrease of density across from tie park. He ind *_sated that this was changed to medium high, and the higb density residential west of Milliken was changed to medium h4--L- Circle No. 2 was the result of Cw.,miLsioa recommendation that low density not be located adjacent to Milliken and was changed to low medium density. This would foster the development of residential next to Milliken. Circle No. 3 resulted from the suggested change to lower density and the density was changed to medium hii,h and also the community use "II" would be adjacent to the park. Circle No. 4 was the result of the suggestion that parks and schools in the Etiwanda School District be shows in the same location. He indicated that land uses have been slightly modified from this suggestion. Circle No. 5 at the Northwest corner of Haven and Base Li34 was modified to include a small park Za this area to serve residents. Elaine Carberry, Planning Director fcc Gruen and Associates, presented the residential use interrelationship. She stated that she would summarize major components of the plat. She explained the parks and greenway system as a linear park whisk ties in the circulation concept and major arterials such as Base Line Rochester, Haven and Milliken. She stated that the plan is divided into four villages with. a portion of the major greenway in each. Each village has a core or foZus where the higher density will be concentrated. She indicated that villages one and two are lower density and villages three and four would be of higher density. Ms. Carberry stated that they tried to create a variety of experiences slang the greenway system and explained how it would affect the villages and the town center. Further, that th4: remainder of density was allocates' to get a mix of uses in each village with a spread of ub more than two land uses in each category. In the arts of noise attenuation, she stated that the greenway would be used as a b,.ffer, as well as a variety of walls which were discussed such as serpentine, those with breaks, and also planter walls. Ns. Carberry stated that in terms of village character which the Co=dssioi wished to have addressed, it was felt that this should be done by' the landscaping and not through architectur,. She indicated that this would i be done through the use of different tr<es in the village. Planning Commi«sion Minutes -13- February 22, 1982 Mr. Park stated that two neighborhood commercial centers were proposed at Milliken and Base Line. Further, that neighborhood centers would be at the gateway to the community and w.,uld be accessible to the villages east and west of Milliken, and would be consistent with the General Plan. He indicated that anoth ---r center was considered at the Northeast corner of Haven and Base Line, but raised concern from members of the Planning Commission and the City Council. From their standpoint it was felt that the location of the two centers at Milliken and Base Line is the most desirable for the cosmunitr. Mr. Park stated th-t the mixed uses along Foothill woUd be gone into at the next meeting. %nairman Ring opened the public hearing. Mr. James Banks, Etiwanda resident, stated that he would like to speak briefly about his concerns with density, schools, floods, roads and teeth. He stated that he felt the density proposed in Terra Vista is abominable and wab more dense than Victoria. Further, the population of the entire city would be duplicated in an area that is 10-15% of the entire community. He indicated that the land owners vane more density and he is asking for relief or this would end up like Santa Monica or Palms. He indicated that nothing specific had been said regarding the resolution of school problems. Further, that this entire area is a flood plain and nothing has been done to stop the proposed building on it. Mr. Banks stated that the Victoria Plan assumes that the Foothill Freeway would be there and there is no support for that assumption. Mr- 3anks stated that as to teeth, he wants to see the Planning Commission do something that has teeth in it and that can be enforced: He stated further that he was sure that they would never see the amenities that were proposed in Victoria and called for standards that can be lived up to and enforced. Mr. Neil Westlotorn, Etiwanda resident, stared that when the developer spoke of a mix it was only some kind of medium or some kind of high. Mr. John Lyor;, Etiwanda resident, stated that with a density bonus there could be an additional 30,000 persons in Terra Vista and when added to Victoria could bring the population to 82,000. He indicated that when the City population of 6C,000 is added to this it would not be the 120,000 which the General Plan stated at build out but more than 140,000 and be indicated he would like to see a lower figure. Mr. Joe Dilorio, 10340 Foothill Boulevard, stated that be owns a part of Victoria and wished to comment on the remarks made by Mr. Banks. He indicated that he has lived here as long as Mr. Harks and would probably continue to be here for a let longer. He indicated that he an.'. Victoria would not comp and go. Mr. DiIorio stated that the density proposed Planning Commission Minutes -14- February 22, 1982 A here is not high whet compared to the rest of the basin and the reason these developments are proposed is because we are all oa this planet together and this is the largest concentration of people in the United States. Mr. Dilorio stated that Rancho Cucamonga is particularly blessed with industrial zoning of a very broad nature and that there is presently a very detailed Industrial Specific Plan. He indicated that it was calculated with the expectation that some of the people who wonid work here would be able to also live here as there would be more jobs than living can be provided for. Mr. Dilorio stated that it took three and a half years after the City's incorporation to have a General Plan that was the result of a lot of people working together. He further stated that he wished to speak about the flood control system and transportation capacities. He spoke of the federal and local flood control and the Route X meeting that was taking place to p:an for a Foothill Freeway. He indicated that he .could be happy to spend some time with Mr. Banks to discuss these areas with him and spoke of the understanding and cooperation which resulted with those people who entered the learning process. Hr. Dilorio stated that it was incorrect to simply complain about densities and if the question were put to nary Frye of why he is producing 750 square foot houses, the answer in part becomes that even with the land purchase at lower prices, and in his instance, having the company that produced the largest anount of single family souses in the State and one of the largest in the Country,under the best of conditions,it will cost what has been paid 4 -5 years ago to buy this home. He in- dicated that they must look at the General Plan in light of the economic base and that he is proud to be a part of that planning. He stated that he hoped that Mr. Banks and the landowners in the months to come would come to an understanding of the complicated details that go into making a General Plan work. Mr. Dilorio stated that he thinks it appropriate this year that the counter reaction be made and become part of the record. Mr. David Flocker, Etiwanda resident, stated that he was speaking for himself and agreed with Mr. Dilorio. He stated further that he liked both Victoria and Terra Vista and their planning which would result its an improvement to the area. He indicated that it would be economically infeasible to build only 2,000 square foot homes at a cost of $225,000 when the average income is $25,000. Further, that these homes would not sell in the future and what is needed is well thought out planning. Mr. Ralph Lewis asked for an opportunity to make a statement at the next meeting. Mrs. James Flocker, Alta Loma resident, stated that Mr. Lewis should he commended for the kind of development be has brought to this area. Planning Commission Minutes -15- February 22, 1982 She stated further that a planned community is better than a hodge podge and she would rather have this than what they have In Fontana. Commissioner Dahl stated that he appreciated the comments that had been made so far by 'Ir. Banks, Mr. Dilorio and Mr. Flocker, and because of the position he is in, it would appear sometimes by the statements he makes that he is grandstanding, but the position that he has taken over the past few years, and his voting record shows that, that he wants to make it char that no matter Tihat his position is this is the way he feels. He stated that be wanted to point out a couple of things and stated that Mr. Dilorio mentioned that he lived here and asked if he is a voter of the City now. Mr. Dilorio replied that he has voted in every election since incorporation. Commissioner Dahl asked him if he is now a resident here, rather than the beach cities. Mr. D_T_orio replied that he is. Commissioner Dahl stated that he wanted to ask that question because he understood that Mr. Dilorio was a resideu: G the beech cit:cs and that he had another office there. Commissioner Dahl stated that one of the things that had been mentioned was the density of our City and the problems and the fact that the planned communities are bad or good. He stated that that isn't the issue. He felt that planned communities are the best thing that could happen for the City whether it be Victoria or Terra Vista. Further, that planned communities gives an opportunity of setting the type of housing designs and street designs that he would like to see come about for the City. Commissioner Dahl stated that he wanted to make another thing clear that when they talk about density, that is a different issue. He in- dicated that you can have a planned community with very, very low density and a planned community with very high density. He indicated that one of the problems that you run into and one of the things that he thinks our City needs is some density because he feels we need to serve all the areas of the City from the newly weds to the retired people and singles. He stated that the City must also serve the single - family residents with a nice size yard if that is his lifestyle. He stated that he does not hold with the statement that the housing market is pricing itself out. He stated that he would not bury that but would buy the one statement, if it was brought up, that the interest market is throwing people out. Planning Commission Mim•tes —16— February 22, 1982 Yew Commissioner Dahl stated that Mr. Flocker had said that over the next years, the price of commodities would go higher but the average income would stay the same and he did not agree with this and aid not feel that there is any economist in the country that would have the guts to stand up and tell you where the economy would be 8 years from now, nor would they be able to say where it will be 3 years from now. He did not feel that even the President of the United States knows. Commissioner Dahl stated teat the statement that should have been made is that the type of housing product that is introduced today is for today's market. Whether it will be apropos 5 years from now or 10 years from now is unknown by any developer. He stated that the only thing that they know is that there will be change. Commissione-Z Dahl stated that when they talk about the housing market today, it is that it is impacted and it is difficult for everyone, but he cannot buy the state- ment that density in itself is good or bad on the basis of today's economy cr the economy as it will be affected 8-10 years from now. He agreed that the City does need density and stated that he has already made himself known regarding the 750 square foot house. He stated that he did not like it nor did he feel it is a good situation but that is not what they are discussing this evening. He stated that what they are discussing this evening is Terra Vista and his feelings are that this is closer to the center of the City. He stated that cf every City that he has ever been in, density does migrate towards the center of the city and the further you go from the center of the city the lower the density gets. He stated that he happens to be one of those people who believes in a terraced city and apparently a lot of people believe in a terraced industrial section because that's exactly wb2t we've got and the only difference is that instead of running north and south it runs east and west. Commissioner Dahl stating that looking at what the Commission heard today, there is only one thing that would concern him and what he would request of Terra Vista because he had already made his thoughts known regarding Base Line and Haven, and it doesn't seem like he has won on that one. The one area that he would request of Terra Vista is what he requested of Victoria, that a minimum of 40X, and perhaps 40-45% of all areas that are being shown as low- medium, considering that the designation of low has been removed, have pool -sized back yards. Commissioner Tolstoy stated that the presentation has shown that the applicant is making changes and that he had only read the report once and would like to go back and read it again having had the presentation. Commissioner Tolstoy stated that he would hope that attention would be paid to buffering of commercial and higt, density residential uses on the south side of the project. He indicated that be still did not agree with two commercial centers at what is called by the applicant, the gateway to the project. Planning Commission Minutes -17- February 27, 1982 Commissioner Tolstoy stated that as the consultant was speaking he made a couple of remarks about the difference between village 3 being density and that landscaping would be second. Be indicated that if a village concept is used there shnnld be more than changing the landscaping and densities to set the villages apart. Commissioner Tolstoy stated that the developer is always talking about marketing and there should be a difference as to why a person would choose to live in one part of Terra Vista and not another. Commissioner Rempel stated that he agreed with Commissioner Tolstoy's comment relative to villages and that it is redly difficult to see that they have true focuses for villages, and he wondered if, instead of villages, they are phasing areas. Commissioner Rempel stated that if these are really villages he would like to see what they propose as phasing and what focus there will be. He indicated that there must not be abrupt changes in the streetscape and that the same thing holds through with the Terra Vista parkway. Be indicated that the whole thing is one community instead of separate areas. Mr. Park said that during a presentation made several weeks ago, the report stated that the parkway, would have its own continuous plan and they, would show how this is done at another meeting. Chairman King asked how, if you are a pedestrian, you get from one point in the area to another point. Mr. Park replied that it would be done through the greenway system and through the use of signals when crossing the street. He indicated that the north parkway lies where traffic is lowest in the plan. Chairman King stated that he was a little bit concerned with the two junior high schools on the exterior of the loop and would think it appropriate to have a crossing where you are not crossing the street. If the intention is not to genczate a lot of traffic, from the planning standpoint it might be wise to have. the same thing across Milliken as you had in the other two places as you cross the loop. On the differentiation between villages, Cbairman King stated that it really doesn't make any difference if there are four villages or no villages and did not feel this is a big issue. . Chairman King stated that he thought there is a realtionship between recreational commercial and neighborhood commercial and felt that there is a tendency to relate to residential. Be stated that he did not like to see two neighborhood commercial centers across the street from each other and he takes some exceptions on how they characterize the functions to be carried on in the recreational commercial. He stated that he saw this as being totally related recreational commercial. Chairman King stater; that based on what he has seen, he is impressed. Planning Commission Minutes -18- February 22, 1912 Commissioner Rempel stated that this is a big improvement from what they had seen before and that he agreed with what Commissioners King and . Tolstoy bad said. Mr. Vairir_ stated that 'there would be details on this for the next meeting. Commissioner Dahl stated that he would like some comment on his requirement for 402 of the low- medium density to have pool -size rear yards. Chairman King replied that this does not have his support at the present time. Commissioner Rempel stated that be would not comment at this time. Commissioner Tolstoy stated thst be would not comment. Commissioner Dahl stated that he only brought this up as part of the Victoria plan and was one of the issues. Commissioners Rempel and Tolstoy replied that they did not remember that. Commissioner Dahl stated that be had met with staff and Mr. Frye and they thought this was appropriate and it also appears in the text for Victoria. He stated that he would like to add that the job that was done on this Planning Commission and the housing element is well done and put forth excellently. Mr. Lewis stated that he was glad to get the various points of view and that they will continue to be responsive. He mentioned that when be went through the review on their proposed office building there were comment from Mr. Vairin, Commissioners Rempel and Sceranka and they would be pleased to see how many they have given effect to when the draAngs are brought back. He stated that they are trying to produce what is : -anted tempered by the /r requirements of what is saleable and they will bring this back next week for answers to comments that were raised tonight. Commissioner Rempel stated that there might have been more comments on what had been furnished by the Lewis Company had it not been received on Friday night with comments expected at tonight's meeting. He indicated that there was not enough time to review everything that had been submitted. Mr. Vairin stated that new ground would be covered at the next meeting and this portion discussed tonight would be brought back in April. Motion: Moved by Dahl, seconded by Rempel, carried unanimously, to adjourn to March 1, 1982 for a continued public hearing on the Terra Vista planned community. Planning Commission Minutes -19- February 22, 1982 Adjournment 10:15 p.m. Respectfully submitted, JACK LAM, secretary Planning Comcission Minutes —20- February 22, 1982 40 CITY OF RANCHO CUC.911GGONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: March 10, 1982 TO: Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner BY: Karl Hill, Planning Aide SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR TIME EXTENSIONS FOR DE BACKGROUND: The attached letters from the Applicants request time extensions for the above - listed projects. The requests are based on the need for additional time to complete plan check. The approved Site Plan for each project is shown on Exhibits "B ", "C ", and "D ", respectively. Listed below are the present expiration dates for the above projects. Develooinent Review 80 -34 81 -06 Conditional Use Permit- 81-02 Expiration Date April 23, 1982 April 8, 1982 February 25, 1932 The maximum time allowed by the Zoning Ordinance for Development Review projects and Conditional Use Permits is two and one -half years with the possibility of a twelve month extension. All three projects have been previously approved for one year. Therefore, the maximum extension available under the Zoning Ordinance is eighteen months. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that an eighteen months extension be granted for these projects to run from the present expiration date to the date listed on the attached Resolution. R�spgctful}y submitted, Planner KH:jr Attachments: Letters from Applicants Exhibit "A" - Location Map Exhibits "B ", "C ", "D" - Site Plans ITEM A i alal . sna arch oteCr COrY 'P RAroCHC CUCAh70,;rA February 8, 1981 DEW. ('pgFr4r DE ?L Qty of Rancim C==33ga :db Phl Planing Department 9320 Baseline Road , RanCho Cucananga, CA 91730 . _ • >II re_ RCR PLAZA Farrow and Turner Rancho Cucaacnga Tract no. Arch. proj. no. 8026 Dear Dan_ The developers of the above meferenoad project (Arnold Andersen/ R(M P- rat) have req th t I ssdit t= letter 3-n applicaticn for a six -month extension to our peevi==ly granted planning approvals. My offi.ee has completed the we e=-&g cL --w^=g-- for the architectural, structural and enerW part=ns cf the re- quirements far plan Check submittal, but the building department has told me that only ccupiete seta ai11 be accepted far plan cheat. Therefore the mechanical, , electrical and plumbing` drawings are now beizig ccupleted by the cOntractor. .Th3c may take us be- yond the February 23, 1982 deadline mandated by our previous pig approval, and is the prinew reason for our request for extens =an. • •� •• • 'J •• {• II •'II .1 X111 •IIJI •� • r •r Y ..J •' �1.'II � �• Very truly yo =, Alan H. Snapp i 4299 mac art-" blvd. site 700 Mwport beach caft 92660 74 833 - 3560 Reams at Bwrouieh - 9393 POO"ALL SCULKVARp. CUCAY01 IO/1. CAUPORMA 91730 PHOPK 17141 9924227 •. February 16, 1982 Dan Coleman City of Rancho Cucamonga Community Development Dept. Planning Division P 0 Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, Ca. 91730 Subject: DR 81 -06 Dear Mr. Coleman: Please find enclosed check in the amount of $62.00 as requested ir letter of Feb. 10, 1982. Plan checking is being done with regard to the road closure conjunctive with Cal Trans and Rancho Cucamonga. This has taken all of this time. We ask that one (1) year extension be granted this project at this time. We trust that we will begin real soon. Tha for your reminaer. u ery tru y Be C. Francis BCF:gl �V3Z �„•,� T� ...�JC- t� ---•�� Ci i Y OF RANUC CUCANAORGA r f OMMUN1TY LIVE! CK?ENT DEPT. 17 FEE i�� P!A Am S j� �� ES Y DEVELOPMENT CO. rowr orrICC sox Of.: S, zrvrmL7' :LLL. CA 902:0.6200 WILSMIRC 0. V LCVARD. 9evCALY FI.U..S, CA goal: • { 2:9) 563.7717 February 17, 1982 Mr. Dan Coleman, Assistant Planner City of Rancho Cucamonga P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, Calif. 91730 RE: Woodhaven Manor DP, 8o -34 Dear Mr. Coleman: Per your letter of 2/10/82, 1 am send'.ng herewith a check of $62.00, and request that a time extension of an additional 6 months be granted for the subject pro- ject. This extension is requested because the building plans are still in the process of plan check and corrections. Though the expiration date of the project is April 23, 1982, 1 am sure that the building permit would be pulled before that date. If you have any questions, please call Mr. Chandan Das of our office. S/ncerely, ` LESNf DEVELOPMENT CO_ l t. olph J_ Low•/ President RJL:CD:Ida GaE C E019LED CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA COMMIJUITY DEVEIAPMENT DEPT. FEE3 24 1982 A) P&I 71$1 °lmlll1�11121314i516 • 0 P r ao r Al r U 6A " C :J r r C ;U e �l- ► = o� L•q ���i�w���w wr.w� E� vOg J� i�ww � 1"Jr :.tlLbtro •V'fYM VUe AA IMO F 2 tu F- c� F 1 LU v 0 U 3� Y � b � Q RY0.' 5 �" 'e= � �� ;�0 fir cc ,ri R o Ilk P• a ti� feel 01 _S pIl1 -61 g I M.1 'l I 5 X ji roL r 13 3 w Z E 0�4 COMM rac♦o ne.o 2 at 1� 1 E I E` I-- i- - -tea\, �i 9: Y � JkL �- 1 � i � \ .: E oil ZI i;, S T t � �i Imo;••• -- .. •s~ - i' K 'J yrwfnV ni w , R 19 U±j. L Ii 1 Nc rrH DR jE3-1 -,gf r 1 Nc rrH DR jE3-1 -,gf 0 RESOLUTION N0. A RESOLUTION OF THE RAPJCHG CUCAMONGA PLANNING COKMISSION, APPROVIt'S THE EXTENSION FOR D.R. 80 -34 81 -06 AND CUP 81 -0a WHEREAS, an application has been filed for time extensions for the above - described projects, pursuant to Section 1.501.8 of Ordinance 28 -8, the Subdivision Ordinance; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has held duly advertised public hearings for the above - described projects; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conditionally approved the above - described projects. SECTION 1: The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commmission has made the following findings: A. That external physical conditions have caused delay in the start of construction; B. That strict enforcement of the conditions of approval regarding expirations would not be consistent with the intent of the Zoning Code; C. That the granting of said time extensions will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially 4%jurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. SECTION 2: The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission hereby grants time extensions for the above - described projects as follows: Development Review Expiration Date 80 -34 10/2-3183 8i -06 10/8/83 Conditional Use Permit Expiration Date 81 -02 8/25/83 APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 10TH DAY OF MARCH, 1982. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCJVONGA Page . 2.. -.... 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 :geld or, the 10th day of March, 1982, by the folloring vote- to-wit, AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: C"ISSIONERS: 6� E El a 11 DATE: T0: FROM: BY: SJCJECT: CITY OF RANCHO CliCAMONCA STAFF REPORT March 10, 1982 Members of the Planning Commission Rick Gomez, City Planner Curt Johnston, Assistant Planner RECKERT - A change of use from an existing single Tarn ty restidence to an insurance office on an 8,264 sge�re foot lot in the C -2 zone located at 9666 Estacia Street - APN 208 - 152 -14. TimARY: The Applicant is requesting review and approval for the conversion of a single family dwelling to an office as described above. The projact has completed the Development end Design review process and is now before the Planning Commission for environmental review. Staff is recommending issuance of a Negative Declaration. BACKGROUND: This review is for environmental assessment to determine the significant adverse impacts on the environment as a result of this protect. The Site Plan is not considered at this time unless it is related to environmental concerns. To determine .Significant adverse impacts, an Initial Study of environmental concerns has been prepared. Upon completion of that study, evidence would indi- cate either no significant i„z ?its or a potential for significant impacts. If a determination of no significant impact is made based upon the Initial Study, then a Negative Declaration may be issued for the protect. If significant impacts are found, then an Environ- mental Impact Report shall be required to fully analyze impacts on the property. The detailed Site Plan will be reviewed with conditions by the City Planner, contingent upon approval of the Negative Declaration by the Planning Commission. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS: Part I of the Initial Study has been completed by the Aoplicant and is attached for ;our review and consideration. Staff has completed Part II of the Environmental Assessment- and has found no significant adverse impacts on the environmental as a result of this project. ITEM B Development Review No_ 82- 03 /Reckert Planning Commission.Acenda March 10, 1982 Page 2 RECOMMENDATION: Based upon analysis of the environmental study, it appears that the project will not cause significant adverse imoacts upon the environ- ment. If the Commission concurs, an issuance of a Negative Declaration for the project would be in order. Respectfully submitted, City Planner RGG:CJ:jr Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Vicinity Map Exhibit "B" - Detailed Site Plan Initial Study, Part I 11 s 0 0 .;;7MPv �w C a fvC7�L- TrR 4 0.T /W+w.T lv MR741 tsmc}k LTwc; [,n C."• fC+C =104D.ALP0 .W= wKYIomm" ". KcArr 7� —o" Da'q�1., tma }L.W 4 qAb owpillL �CdQ5 r xw cater . wr -; & If%w a I CaM- � T »mewcowrw� ..=. NORTH yo- CITE' OF RANCHO CUCA1- IONGA : •JIUU�T� f"fA� PLANNING DIVISION EXHiErr- A _ SCALE: M.TS _ IOI/TW�TtlM�M I�ft b�IC'�' T!1r curR• b4 �Hy r.�,_ � � V� iflp1 a R Ga�C �� irJi: �• � � oa wr A�iJw/ j � 'Aq�rLT 1w1H 0 0 mIG.FMw. � f rw-wa 4K 0 poor. •i •�� I -7 ec�cr. m x�c= NORTH 5t7'� P CITY or- RANCHO CLTCAA'IaNGA, T11I :1: TAdI En sr F CITY OF R4"'CHG CUCAMONGA I.'=IAL STUDY PART I - PROJECT INFORMATION SEE ET - To be completed by applicant E.nviro=nental Asses=aent Review Fee: $87.00 For all projects requiring environmental review, this form must be completed and submitted to the Development Review Committee through the department where the project application_ is made. Upon receipt of this application, the Environmental Analysis staff will prepare Part II of the Initial Study- The Development Review Committee will meet and taice action no later than ten (10) days before the public meeting at which time the project is to be heard. The Co=ittee will make one of three determinations: 1) The project will have no significant envircn- aertal impact and a Negative Declaration will be filed, 2) The project will have a significant environmental impact and an Environmental Impact Report will be prepared, or 3) An additional information report should be supplied by the applicant giving further information concerning the pronosed project_ PROJECT TITLE: APPLICANT'S NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE: 9g-7- /3�Cf ESUC.A Ct RAwCho e'ttlAxO0J6A MME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONZ OF PERSON TO BE COIgTACTED CONCERNI'N'G THIS PRO 7ECT: S A AL Q - LOCATION OF PROJECT (STREET ADDRESS AM AS,ESSOR PARCEL NO.) °Jiol.�o �s'Efic:A Gf- 2c$ 152 ly- LIST OTHER PEMMITS MCESSARY FROM LOCAL, REGIONAL, STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES AID THE AGENCY ISSUING SUCH PERMITS: PROJECT DESCRIPTION DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: o4T'cf- ACREAGE OF PROJECT AREA AND SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED BUILDINGS, IF AN-y: j - th ACQ £ 45R- $ 2G4 Sa �fi �7c;s+ :JG iz�R sQ - au�d:uG DESCRIBE TEE EN'JIRONMENTAL SETTING OF TEL PROJECT SITE INCLUDING INFORP,'ATION ON TOPOGRAPHY, PLANTS (TREES) , ANIN.ALS, ANY CULTURAL, HISTORICAL OR SCENIC ASPECTS, USE OF S- JRRO *,,TNDING PROPERTIES, AM THE DESCRIPTION OF ANY EXISTING STRUCTL'RcES AND THEIR USE (ATTACH NECESSARY SHEETS) —081 Lhub— 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 environ-iental iacpact? a -2 V. -ILL THIS P ?OJF:CT: YES M 1. Create a substantial chance in ground contours? 2. Create a substantial change in existing noise or vibration? 3. Create a substantial change in demand for municipal services (police, fire, water, sewage, etc. }? 4. Create changes in the existing zoning or general plan designations? 5: Remove any existing trees? How many? /Vow d' 6_ Create the need for use or disposal of potentially hazardous materials such as toxic substances, flammables or explosives? Explanation of any YES answers above: 0 - IMPORTAM" 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 additibnal information may be required to be submitted before an adequate evaulation can be made by the Development Review Committee_ Date �� ,Z°�'8 Signature oi• /� Title ' RESIDE ?;'_I.�L CO ^:STI'.i ?CTION The fall ^:•Ding information should be provided to the City of Fancho Cucanonga Planning Division in order to aid in assessing the ability of the school district to acco:nodate the proposed residential development. 22aae of Developer and Tentative Traci. No.: Specific Location of Project: 1. Number of single family Units: 2. 2 =..oer of multiple fami'v U.^.its: 3. Date proposed to • beci: ccnstruction: 4. Earliest date of Modal ; • and = of Tentative S. Bed =oc-is Price Rance y PFF-.?SB I PEASE 2 PiiF.S£ 3 0 L w u ._4 PHASE 4 TOTr L 0 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFT REPORT DATE: March 10, 1982 TO: Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner BY: Dan Coleman, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERM17 NO. 81 -08 - SHARMA - A hearing to cc.'isider the possible revocation of the Conditional Use Permit for a preschool located at 9113 Foothill Boulevard based upon failure to comply with Conditions of Approval. At its meeting of February 10, 1982, the Planning Commission continued this hearing in order to allow the applicant to comply with Conditions of Approval. The staff will provide the Commission k1 th an up -to -date status report on work that remains to be completed at the Planning Com- mission public hearing. Rspectfuily submitted, r • . Planner :jr ITEM C ti�bq. P DATE: TO: FROM: BY: SUBJECT: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAM:ONGA STAFF REPORT March 10, 1982 Members of the Planning Commission Rick Gomez, City Planner Dan Coleman, Assistant Planner t- W111 I KesiaenLlal Planned Developme of 44 patio homes parcel located on and Center Avenue - A zone change r T to R -3 /PD (Multi nt) in conjunction and 322 townhouse the south side of Avenues - APN 209 - 091 -05, rpm K -i tbingie ple Family Residential/ with the development units on a 35 acre Arrow, between Turner 06, 0'. SUMMARY: The Applicant is requesting review and approval of a Planned Development and associated Tentative Tract Map (Exhibit "C "). The pro- ject will consist of 44 patio homes and 322 townhouse units on a'35 acre parcel located between Arrow and 26th Street and between Turner and Center Avenues. The proposed project meets the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance requirements and has passed the City's Growth Management and Design Review process. Therefore, the Planned Development (including the change of zone), Tentative Tract Map, and issuance oV a Negative Declaration can be considered by the Planning Commission. BACKGROUND: This proposal consists of 366 units on 35 acres of land located between Arrow and 26th, and between Turner and Center Avenues (Exhibit "A "). The project site is currently a vineyard. The site is zoned R -1 (Single Family Residential) and is designated for Medium Residential (4 -14 dwelling units per acre) on the City's General Plan. The proposed project density is 10.8 dwelling units per acre overall and is therefore consistent with the General Plan. The statistical summary or Exhibit "D ", Detailed Site Plan, provides a break down of the acres, density, and number of units within each planning area. The project site is bounded on the north by undeveloped land and a trucking operation, on the east by the existing La Mancha Golf Course, on the scuth by existing single family residences and a church, and on the west by existing single family residences, undeveloped land and small market as shown on the attached Site Utilization Map, Exhibit ..8... IT04 D PD 81 -02!TT 11915 Planning Commission Agenda March 10, 1982 Page 2 This project has been reviewed and rated by the Design and Growth Management Review Como ttees in accordance with the Growth Manage- ment Ordinance. The project received a point rating in excess of the required threshold and is therefore eligible for Planning Com- mission review. In addition, the Conceptual Grading Plan has been reviewed by the Grading Coi= ittee and given conceptual approval. ANALYSIS: As noted above, the project would consist of 44 patio homes and 322 townhouse units as indicated on the Detailed Site Plan, Exhibit "D ". The units are arranged in clusters around common open space areas, parking pods, and recreational facilities as shown in Exhibit "L ". The project site has been divided into three planning areas; Area "A" consists of zero lot line patio homes of 1,230 to 1,403 square feet, Area "B" consists of two -story town- house units of 1,046 to 1,534 square feet, and Area "C" consists of 150 stacked townhouse units of 740 to 1,133 square feet. The elevations and floor plans are indicated on the attached Exhibits "I ", "J" and "K ". The parking provided meets the standards of the Zoning Ordinance and adequate guest parking has been provided throughout the project site. The patio homes have been designed with a variety of exterior treat- ments and materials. All patio home units have been provided with an asphalt shingle roof. The two-story townhouse and stacked town- house units have been designed with a similar architectural treatment and are designed with asphalt shingle roofs and stucco exteriors with wood fascia. The two -story townhouse units have low profile stucco garden walls rith a brick cap and the stacked townhouse units have low profile walls provided with horizontal Wood siding. Each unit has been provided with ground floor patios or balconies in accordance with the Planned Development standards. In addition to private open spaces, recreational facilities have been provided through- out the project site. The patio home portion of the project has a common tot lot, with recreational opportunities available to each resident within their enclosed rear yard. The townhouse portions of the project have been provided with recreational facilities in- cluding restrooms, spas, swimmirg pools, sunning decks, and tot lots as shown on the Detailed 'ite Plan (Exhibit "D "). In addition, a continuous pedestrian circulation system meanders through common green- belt spaces. Two access points on either sidd2 of the Deer Creek Flood Channel will be available for residents desiring to use the future Regional Trail along Deer Creek Channel. 11 0 PD 81 -02/17T 11915 ® Planning Commission Agenda March 10, 1982 Page 3 Access to the project will be from access points along Arrow, Turner, 26th Street, and Center. Only one access point will be provided on Arrow Highway to reduce the need for left turn pockets and breaks in the future median island. In addition, emergency access points have beer. located on Center and Turner. Texturized paving crosswalks have been provided at appropriate locations to connect the interior pedes- trian circulation system. The Conceptual Landscape Plan, Exhibit "E ", provides for an abundance of iandscapirg througnout the project. The Design Review Committee recommended that special attention be given to providing dense land- scaping around the perimeter particularly against the two carports locate on Turner Street. The Committee also recommended that trees be provided between garage doors on all townhouse units and that vines be planted along perimeter walls and fences. A six -foot high fence along the Deer Creek Flood Channel has been provided for screening purposes. The patio home Portion of the croject will be provided with a six -foot high decorative masonry wall. The remainder of the project will remain open to 26th, Center, Arrow, and Turner. ® The Design Review Committee reviewed the building elevations and architectural design and recommended approval of the project. Staff and the Design Review Committee worked extensively revising the ele- vations as shown on Exhibits "I" and "K ". Colored renderings and elevations of these buildings will be available for review and com- ment at the Planning Commission mee;;inq. Eased upon the Grading Committee's recommendation, the Applicant has prepared a drainage and hydrology study that analyzes the pro- nosed method of drainage. Based upon this study, the project has been designed as per the Grading Committee's recommendation to drain into catch basins and storm drain pipes that connect with existing drainage outlets into the Deer Creek Channel at 26th Street. A minimum amount of surface water runoff will be carried from portions of the private streets and project entrances into Turner Street. A Conceptual Grading and Drainage Plan and Hydrology Studies are shown on attached Exhibits "G" and "H ",respectively. The Conceptual Grading Plan has been approved by the Grading Committee. ERVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: Attached is Part I of the Initial Study as completed by the Applicant. Staff has completed Part II of the Initial Study and found that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect because the mitigation measures described in the Initial Study Part II have been added to the project. Therefore, Staff recommends issuance of a Negative Declaration. PD 81 -02M 11915 Planning Commission Agenda e March 10, 1982 P Page 4 CORRESPONDENCE: A Notice of Public Heariiq was placed in The Daily Report newspaper. In addition, approximately 10) public hearing notices were mailed to surrounding property owners. Trio residents from the surrounding neighborhood have contacted the Planning Division to express their concern with regard to a condominiums project being located in a single family resi- dential area. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION ADVISORY Cr"4ITTEE: This project has been reviewed by the CPAC on several occasions_ The latest design was presented to the Committee on February 18, 1982, at which time the Committee members ex- pressed three major concerns: 1. The price range of the mits. 2. Compatibility with adja :ent single family residences. 3. Public recreation space The Committee felt that this project exhibited high quality, however, expressed a desire to see units that North Town residents could afford. Additionally, CPAC has repeatedly expressed its desire to see a public park site improved within the North Town area. The original project design two years ago included a 3 acre )ark site which was eliminated by t5e adoption of the General Plan that iesiynated a park on the La Mancha Golf Course property. According t) Bill Holley, Community Ser- vices Director, the park site indicated mi the General Plan has been relocated to the center of North Town, on he south side of Feron Boule- vard across from the Junior High School. The CPAC recommends to the Planning Commission and City Council that park fees collected f z, this project be used to improve this park site. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that tta Planning Commission review the proposed Planned Development and Tentative Map and conduct a public hearing to consider all public comxents. [f, after such review, the ComuA ssion concurs with the attached f:ndiigs and proposed Conditions of Approval, a motion to adopt the attache,i Resolution of Approval of the Tentative Map and Resolution of Approv.,l for the Zone Change would be appropriate. submitted, RI K Ci y Planner RG:DC:jr Attachments: (Listed on fcllowing page) 13 \J L PD 81 -02l7T 11915 List of Attachments - Exhibit "A" - Location Map Exhibit "B" - Site Utilization Map Exhibit "C" - Tentative Tract Map Exhibit "D" - Detailed Site Plan Exhibit "E" - Conceptual Landscape Plin Exhibit "F" - Phasing Plan Exhibit "G" - Conceptual Grading Plar. Exhibit "H" - Hydrology Study Exhibit "I" - Patio Home Elevations & Floor Plans Exhibits "J -1 & J -2" - Townhouse Floor Plans Exhibits "K -1 & K -2" - Townhouse Elevations Exhibit "L" - Cluster Conceat Exhibit "M" - Turner Streetscape Exhibit "N" - Arrow Streetscape Initial Study Part I Resolutions of Approval Conditions of Approval i7t J-1 -1'7 VI fy,RM"r VA 11 ,• ,dk a / { t . .. S� -:� ' .�-•�1 .. Vii_• c ,.. .we..aurn Idl... •(`h�q•� yy �•� i rani (rM1.10 4 `y -� •� .. hy:�i�i .. •tf �1; �'i4w•: wr51'l�.n � 6. AYOYwI�. .. '.•.Z a.= ; ,� y', rrn. 111 � �.. . r�+[ •. ._ 4 � tJISM NMWiY�K • V � ?I�_��1 -L�y '_' am'as•.wsrc+ � o..etw w+wc+ H,C•. 1'.,.. -� - L Z..a � �p ! • �i]j I `�iX�'•TC I't�^� -r v� (A ,. � :ACWBq� 1 � - � n � . i� S` , f 4� e—.-�- pp • k f al. Ott i s 1 •� I I• b a ! c {'y.i„t'I'a4 all t1�• -� : •';'-; :_ •_tea,... I.. " �l R-t y ( II .:. GiiC2479m . , ii 4�'u rL•.. f' .-q •'.+ ~r L_:r • �c ti "�' ly Zti." e`. ,i:J .� 4,141L- 2 Y :W IT ti ;p. ." 'y t "• 1, �� w•LLar {U� tip. �. (s� " *,.'s„ —•• { 'C —�. ri �w -. .'�•Sali' 'l i.. r':S �c—i" g hii rwaaa •F ��:++rr«.gM :f'Ai' +.r % •r, M• + 'IT-It : - �.S,M"t 1�y! Dc '�-. ���:.� Ti i 7 f i- C�F�a`�.�tt' E ,,�•}'.�f '•_ .i LEGEND 31-1 SrXLF FAiW JCy..MWW. W2 ]l0 /r V Ks2LL -v N-] AUfn/ 41rO.0�.'K C-1 AIrOWFjb .7Mel7l M-/ Y Arnirt0 ~ U-i SPOW AAVAOWO%.1+ M-N ArFlgAP ArYa•PVZMM NORTH CITY 01- RANCHO CUCANIONG. -k !TEEM: - �2 T=.. EXHIBIT- SCALE-- 1 i 1 ; Illt j1 •r --ter- r --ter =� ' '►� \` V r sj'F�• -�I Hr j _Y JT a r _ 77- `I{ I hd I ; r 0 NORTH 1 H CITE' OF ME.N1: -- QD S1- OZ. RANCHO CUCNINIONGA Tm.E: g o PLANNING DRISON E\ imrn _�� scALE- 11 j- I : 1� SMUWCAL SUMUM A B /f, 7 A" m c &W 156 to C�-� Mm A70 a:* NORTH crry or, -10 CUCAN N RAiNa L,10-' GA IG Dl�qSUN PLAINNIN nT-xl:— EXHIBIT. -C(--AL.E- >. -. . a , ^. r1.1 1n n }�� 'C . —, • .. >. -. 1 , ^. r1.1 1n n }�� 'C E Alk -fte- �rl•>rL i . 1 7•i. A .OW 'wine + I i , , _war I 1- KCAL SWVUVOAr'i Acac,0 xw%WW r 96iQc XWAM [ A eH 2 �xtce =W&m a ,mw c ="Mcw r_ T 3 PptvArozv#amv m IIKR7C TAMiaee K 'R �i V NORTH 4 ZWO&d ,. CITY 01-7 MENI: 90 91 moz RAN H o Cl TCA I L' E\ /\•4�.�: Y� �r•m r. • D �i �{ V I'�i ( . PL WINING DIVM -N • r t a.a.• 1• n J. r 1 w�� EXIMl't'= SCkLE- -' CITY OF RA-L CI3O CUCAMO GA A.A,vN=ING M.rov E 0 EXHIMT- arum ��k®lA�6� SCALE 0 0 CITY OF 7R AA ���r** T4C'll� }CT 7r���a} X/Tn�r r LAINNL1\V EX V L OEN ��Tu�9G w i t.G t a EXHIBIT: _ scAL.E: V rrH 1 -N s V. .. FmrGo HVINI ES CITY o RAIN1 7 I-i0 CUCkMONYGN PLANNING DIX'ISIQN Y ^. �.T- -: a E !I� t 0 !iv NORTH El rrr -\1: — !eo sl -02 ITRE= HOME Ed_ CTW 4 .•1_ ' .O � ~�' /;�fir /`,� � J. ru. er ✓ oe> er � er si ow r ® f cif I b .x u o I wr� r I'Iltlhhl" ' �4 � `i •vim I NORM CITY OF ITF_%l 9" 'yI " DZ Ci -= PLA \vrc DINMON EXH1131T- SCALE: y �A - '. s /: ;. . . ... .. _ . - '. s CITY OF tiCH�O CUCA1'iOeGA pLv NNING DIN-M ON r� •aryl Fq el a NoRT'f'I �I�rPS_ EXI MY: �„ � �- SCALE lr In :0 rwF< w ffMamm CITY OF RANCHO CUCATMON•GA I I.A:N'NING DIVOON rrwrprwJ •rLwlwltii F 010 FF/wlw ' 1�T1�0O H � MBE C ATE' I Trl'LE: c cue 0" EY iiw- Lo scALE. i i Im I- CITY OF RANCHO CUCA:N,fLONGA PL kNNII \G DNLS N L lYJR1N15R /74.1/ 1SUVUE C i. i A C Fal CITY OF RANCHO CUCki�IONGA MA NNG DIVISION iw ; c� NORTH y r CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA nTITIAL STUDY PART I - PROJECT INFORMATION SEEET - To be completed by applicant Environmental Assessment Review Fee: $80.00 For all projects requiring environmental 'review, this fox= must be completed and submitted to the Development Review Committee through the department where the project application is made. Upon receipt of this application_, the Environmental Analysis staff will prepare Part II Of the Initial Study. The Development Review Committee will meet and take action no later than ten (10) days before the public meeting at which time the project is to be heard. The Committee will make one of three determinations: 1) The project will have no environmental impact and a Negative Declaration will be filed, 2) The project will have an environmental impact and an Environmental Impact Report will be prepared. or 3) An additional information report should be supplied by the applicant giving further information concerning the proposed project. PROJECT TITLE: DEER CREEK VILLAGE APPLICANT'S NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE MM- ROBE= MAYER C 8121 E. Florence Avenue, Downev. Ca_ 90240 (213) 927_ NAN.E, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE OF PERSON TO BE CONTACTED CONCERNING THIS PROJECT: ipnn Matsui, Project Director, Tustin, Ca. 92680 (714) 731 -6011 LOCATION OF PROJECT (STREET ADDRESS AND ASSESSOR PARCEL NO.) c� ^l IV located on Arrow Route H4ohwav between Turner Avenue and Cente- Avenue bounded on the south by 26th St. LIST OTHER PER:lITS NECESSARY FROM LOCAL, REGIOIML. STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES AND THE AGENCY ISSUT_NG SUCH PERMITS: _ City t+ hOcess: Zone cange Residential Development, Total al Tram nn�., n.,,T77,.,.. - Y -1 District: �J { PROJECT' DESCRIPTION DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: See Attachment A DESCRIBE THE ENVIRONrUrNTAL SETTING OF Tr4E PROJECT SITE INCLUDING INMPI -I 1TION ON TOPOGPAPEY, PLANTS (TREES) , ANI*9ALS, ANY CULTURAL, HISTORICAL OR SCENIC ASPECTS, USE OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES, AND THE DESCRIPTION OF ANY EXISTING STRUCTURES AND THEIR USE (ATTACH NECESSARY SHEETS): Is.the project, part of a larger project, one of a series - of cumulative actions, which although individually small, may as a whole have significant environmental impact? No. I- 2 ACREAGE OF PROJECT AREA AND SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING AND PROPCSED BUILDINGS, IF ANY: No ev gtina DESCRIBE THE ENVIRONrUrNTAL SETTING OF Tr4E PROJECT SITE INCLUDING INMPI -I 1TION ON TOPOGPAPEY, PLANTS (TREES) , ANI*9ALS, ANY CULTURAL, HISTORICAL OR SCENIC ASPECTS, USE OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES, AND THE DESCRIPTION OF ANY EXISTING STRUCTURES AND THEIR USE (ATTACH NECESSARY SHEETS): Is.the project, part of a larger project, one of a series - of cumulative actions, which although individually small, may as a whole have significant environmental impact? No. I- 2 WILL ?'HIS PROJECT: Y=S NO _ x 1. Create a substantial change in ground contours? _ 2. Create a substantial change in existing noise or vi.br- ation? x _. 3. Create a substantial change in demand for municipal services (police, fire, water, sewage, etc.;? x 4. Create changes in the existing zoning or general plan designations? Remove any existing trees! How many? x 6. Create the need for use or disposal of potentially hazardous materials such as toxic substances, flam-nables or explosives? Explanation of any YES answers above: See Attachment C IMPJRT,aNT: If the project involves tae construction of residential units, complete the form on the r.act 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 toffbe submitted before an adequate evaulation can be madelby the De�Igpmeat Review Committee. 11 )► �►,_ Date Signature 2 -3 Title NJ L' ® RESIDMITIAL CONSTPIICSIO *I The £olloirirg info---,nation should be provided to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planninc Division in order to aid in assessinc the ability of the school district to acco'.=odate the proposed residential development. cane of Developer and Tentative Tract No.: ROBERT MAYER CORPORATION Specific Location of Project: BonnawA h.> Arr�... v....a.... - -_ 1. I.0 -lbe: o -° single • f - ^.ily rulitS: 2. hu.'isber or Multiple family units: _ Data proposed to begin ecnstr• t VC. 1c..: S. Earliest date of 0 C==j � - V.. C_i street PHASE I PRASE 2 .87 99 1983 1984 nd Turner Avenue. PHASE 3 PI'. SE 4 92 44 Model , • and ° - of Tentative 5. Bedroo =s Price Rarce Product A .;-B_ dam- S901000 Unknown at this time. Product S Avg- Based on market demand. 2 -3 Bdrm. $ i2,n00 ' Product C Avg. 1 -2 Bdrm. $64,000 TOTAL 44 322 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 0 Attachment A This application addresses a 35!' acre site in the southwest section of the City of Rancho Cucamonga on bot, sides of the proposed Deer Creek Flood Control Channc -1. The site has been planned in three sections or planning areas: Planning Area A consists of 6.3 acres in the southwest corner of the site. Forty -four zero -lot -line patio homes of 1230 square feet to 1403 square feet have been planned for this area. Planning Area B includes the- 16.7 acres on the east side of the Deer Creek Channel and is proposed as 172 townhouses of 1046 square feet to 1535 square feet with common recreational facilities. The northwest 10.9 acres of the site, Planning Area C, are Planned to include 150 units of flat /townhouse combination of 740 square feet to 1133 square feet and one common recreational facilities site and two tot lots. The project will be built in four phases with a variety of units in each phase. 0 s E 0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING TCpOgraAhY The majority of the project site is slight crossfall from the northeast of the cite. The overall change in 25 feet. The site is bisected int, Deer Creek which is intended to be in 1982. Vegetation Attachment B generally flat with a to the southwest corner elevation is approximately east and west halves by a fully improved channel The project site is currently in agricultural use. Vineyards cover both halves of the site. Surrounding Land Uses The La Mancha Municipal Golf Course is located south of Arrow Route along Center Street to the east of the project site. Directly south of 26th Street is an existing single family residential area with many older structures. There is a fairly new single family residential development south of Arrow Route along Turner Avenue, west of the project site. A market is located along Arrow Route just west of Turner Avenue. To the northwest of the site, there is a development of apartments with a segment of undeveloped land along Turner, north of Arrow. Directly north of Arrow Route, east of Turner and west of the Deer Creek channel is an undeveloped lot. To the east of Deer Creek, on the north side of Arrow Route is a trucking firm, Pacific States Transport. Extending eastward from Pacific States Transport are more vineyards and undeveloped land. A community church is located at the southeast corner of 26th Street and Center Avenue. A large business park is being developed to the northwest of the project site, between Foothill Boulevard -and Arrow Route. It is bounded on the west by haven Avenue and extends eastward to the Santa Fe Railroad tracks. The first phase of this development, includinc•a K -Mart and other commercial uses, is currently under construction on the northeast corner of Haven Avenue and Arrow Route. To the northwest of the project and Rochester Avenue, generally north of Foothill Boulevard is a community known as Terra Vista. site, between Haven Avenue south of Raseline Road and 1320 -acre proposed planned i 11 Attachment C WILL THIS PROJECT - 2. Change from existing agricultural uses to proposed residential uses may result in an increase in noise levels. 3. The completion of the proposed 366 homes will necessitate additional public services to the project site. In preliminary conversations with the appropriate departments and agencies, the anticipated change in demand does not appear to be excessive. 4. A zone change and total development application is being submitted concurrently with this Initial Study. The zone change request is from R -1 to R -3 which would make the zoning consistent with the approved General Plan designation for the site of Medium Density Residential. JI ery 0 0 0 0. ® Attachment to Initial Study Part II - Tentative Tract 11915 2. Hydrology (b)(f)(g) The removal of vineyards and subsequent construction will decrease the amount of open and unpaved areas and, therefore, decrease rain and flood water absorp- tion rates and increase surface water runoff. The Conceptual Grading Plan and hydrology map have taken these factors into account. The proposed development intends to divert the majority of the surface runoff into the Deer Creek Chan- nel and only a very small amount will be emptied into Turner Avenue. 4. Flora (d) Construction, will result in the removal of the existing vineyard. However, the vineyard industry has diminished in recent years and this would not have a significant adverse impact on the industry as a whole. 5. Population (a) Tile development of this priject will have the potential to increase the pop- ulation of the immediate area by 356 households. This increase in population will create additional demand for services. However, as an infill project, these services are available. 6. Socio- Economic Factors (a) 4DThe proposed development has the potential to affect property values rn the subject land as well as on land in the immediate vicinity. The effects are not anticipated to be detrimental. 7. Land Use and Planning Considerations (a) ` The project site contains an' existing of this project will be a substantial The proposed project is in conformance nation of Medium High Residential. E. Transportation (a)(b)(d)(f)(g) vineyard, therefore, the construction alteration of the existing land use. with the General Plan land use desig- This project will generate increased vehicular traffic volumes which could potentially result in increased number of traffic hazards involving motor vehicles, pedestrians, or bicyclists. The development of the project will include the upgrading of those streets surrounding the property and the construction of the internal pedestrian and vehicular traffic circulation network that wall be able to adequately accommodate projected traffic flows. 10. Health, Safety, and Nuisance Factors (e) Increase in noise levels resulting from this project will be due orinarily to increased vehicular traffic volumes and normal human activities in a residential area. Increased noise levels during construction will be temporary. Setbacks, berming, and dense landscaping will be used to reduce impacts and decrease noise levels. • Attachment to Initial Study Part II - Tentative Tract 11915 Page 2 1i. Aesthetics (b) The removal of the vineyards and development of multi- family structures could be aesthetically unpleasiag to the residents in the adjacent single family developments. However, the Growth Management Review process provides the opno- tunity to review the architectural design, site layout, landscaping, and other elements in order to assure the aesthetic quality of the end pro- duct. u; ry ' r71 E Yc': 0 M L RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, CONDITIONALLY APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 11915 WHEREAS, Tentative Tract Map No. 11915, hereinafter "Map" submitted by The Robert Mayer Corporation, 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 subdivision for a total planned development of 44 patio homes and 322 townhouse units on 35 acres in the R -1 zone (R- 3 /P.D. pending), located between Arrow and 26th Street, and between Turner and Center Avenues, APN 209- 091-05, 06, 07) into 58 lots, regularly came before the Planning Commission for public hearing and action on March 10, 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 other evidence presented at the public hearing. NOeI, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does resolve as follows: SECTION 1: The Planning Commission makes, the following findings in regard to Tentative tract No. 11915 and the Map thereof: (a) The tentative tract is consistent with all applicable interim and proposed general and specific plans; (b) The design or improvements of the tentative tract is consistent with all applicable interim and proposed general and specific plans; (c) The site is physically suitable for the type of de- velopment proposed; (d) The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage and avoidable injury to humans and wildlife or their habitat; (e) The tentative tract :s not likely to cause serious public health problems; (f) The design of the tentative tract will not conflict ;with any easement acquired by the pubiic at large, now of record, for access through or use of the property within the proposed subdivision. Resolution No. Page 2 (g) That this project will not create adverse impacts on the environment and a Negative Declaration is issued. SECTION 2: Tentative Tract flap No. 11915, a copy of which is attached hereto, is hereby approved subject to all of the following conditions and the attached Standard Conditions: PLANN'Pc-� 3I0N 1. Th,- roval shall become null and void if the tentative subeivision rap is not approved and recorded or building permits issues when no map is involved, within twenty - four (24) months from the approval of this project unless an extension has been granted by the Planning Commission. 2. All units with a driveway apron for the garage less than twenty (20) feet shall be provided with automatic garage door openers. 3. The patio home front yard landscaping, and an appropriate irrigation system, shall be installed by the developer in accordance with submitted plans. Said front yard landscaping shall include at least two fifteen gallon trees, in addition to street trees. 4. The patio homes shall be provided with return fencing between each unit. 5. Detailed elevations of the carports shall be provided in the final construction package. 6. Dense landscaping and berming, including vines and shrubs, shall be planted against perimeter walls and fences, and extend out from the sides of the two carports adjacent to Turner. 7. Trees shall be planted between garage doors in the town- house oartions of the projc -ct. 8. Details and typical elevations of wall and fences shall be included in the final construction package. Perimeter walls and fences shall be decorative and include such features as columns, texture treatment and trim cap. 9. Planter boxes shall be provided on all upstairs windows for Product Type C- Townhomes. 10. The stairway landing shall be constructed with a post to support the roof canopy. 11. A tot lot should be located adjacent to the swimming pool in Planning Area C. ,1 Resolution. No. Page 3 12. The main interior circulation drive in Planning Arca 8 should be provided with a continuous sidewalk on*both sides of the drive. 13. Additional textured paving crosswalks should be provided to the satisfaction of the City Planner. 14. Access to the Deer Creek Channel, as shown on the approved site plans, shall be provided in accordance with City Council Resolution No. 81 -93. Details shall be included in the final construction oackage to the satisfaction of the City Planner. .ENGINEERING DIVISION 15. No construction will be permitted within Army Corps of Engineers temporary Easement for Deer Creek until it is released by them. 16. Construction of off -site improvements beyond a phase boundary shall be required at the discretion of the City Engineer and shall be bonded for prior to recorda- tion of that phase. 17. A lien on the entire project area nr in lieu cash deposit for future construction of median island on Arrow Route shall be required prior to the recordation of the first phase subdivision. 18. All median islands at the entrance of the private access roads shall have a setback of a minimum of 5 feet from the right -of -way line. 19. The following street improvements beyond the center lines of the following perimeter streets to the satisfaction of the City Engineer shall be required: a.) Turner Avenue - Existing P.C.C. pavement shall be removed and be replaced with asphalt concrete pave - ment of minimum 6 inches thick.. b.) Arrow Highway and Center Street - Reconstruction or asphalt overlay of the existing Pavement may be required depending on the design *N provide standard cross slope on the reconiitrissted street. APPROVED AND ADOPTED 71;1S 10TH DAY OF MARCH, 1982. PLANNING COMMISSION OF TFZ CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Resolution No. rage 4 gy. Jeffrey King, Chairman - ATTEST: Secretary of tke Planning Commissicn I, JACK LAM, Secretary of the Planning Cormission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted 'y the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regula• meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 10th day of March, 1932, by the following vote - to-wi t: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: k IF N r n r _ l �r w V �^ _ > Y b n n J ° 'r ° i N _ _ o O w A n i i V J M O rq 6 n M °a ! !x IX Ix iX I Ix !x 0 r n 3 r _w1 J o.tl r w � O ° n O r A 6 d _ n ? = u r CD ^ n Z J n w Aw A 6tl �N l nuA � N >•M n r D r ° C > n C O $ E < Vn' ° J A Q ® o> � k IF N r n r _ l �r w V �^ _ > Y b n n J ° 'r ° i N _ _ o O w A n i i V J M O rq 6 n M °a ! ! IX Ix iX I Ix !x 0 ii3n V b I N I° Y 7 w �r r0 N °a ab' nOS Ym 0 wN4a ow.w. Al A7� J b ° °pl. ddrr i 6L D O� 00'C Cp OA ON OC` a0_ 00 JJbl rN � M O� M r C ^ V / 1 w C ° ° ° 6 N < S I N w w o� ^n�iO vo =c Ja. n M Y A o 6 nw � °yr ^ n l01 Sq n Y O o ±n sN O q N ti J n N w l w w n y N O^ D G v 1 n n$ c ^ nv u° n n Y � >OSw_J r r C N O w� w w T ra O o ° �1J Y 6� w eJ l nn O D ... s m w 6 w 6 °T n° oq � Y �n d S J r n J n 1 O n w O � 1 IN x IN ++n A Zt. JR rPn 1p SON yr O 6 ^= J 6 ^ O J tl �o v Z w n rl on Y �� eo J �tl N l r r o ' n + n n ° nY O 10 _ N N ^r r p >> 0 1 J r B S n� J^ l^ ^ 4= A J� 2t_ ^7> N ^Jn nN OM °�n� � NN 4COq n _ °r 66 Qr r.tl l O b 1 r J 2 i O ° J_ Lr a� ^ Oz. O_V[ Yy ►O wr < O Is p =N ^OO CAN r6 1° JOYr n VO qJ °I° l 0._g JO nOi q D `O btl � r°i � AMA= GN � w6 rw �Ol 1r w Y w S6r k L OM r ° •- A r jl l u + 6 G' 1 n w 9 ib N 0 r Co 3 w � O ° n Y CD ^ n Z N � N y C O $ E Q � � v Z � 7 � � Iro eR L O I 1 I N N ^r r p >> 0 1 J r B S n� J^ l^ ^ 4= A J� 2t_ ^7> N ^Jn nN OM °�n� � NN 4COq n _ °r 66 Qr r.tl l O b 1 r J 2 i O ° J_ Lr a� ^ Oz. O_V[ Yy ►O wr < O Is p =N ^OO CAN r6 1° JOYr n VO qJ °I° l 0._g JO nOi q D `O btl � r°i � AMA= GN � w6 rw �Ol 1r w Y w S6r k L OM r ° •- A r jl l u + 6 G' 1 n w 9 ib N O V P M Y Y N r I •p 0 P O - Y •- " a •1 J r .• o` p. .G.'� Y r w r � r 1 ^ n � °' Y q r r. K e° � ">' J D o A t N « .. l^ _.. _ ti•J 716 .' '" oA wpN �d .N..N• '• r '��" — ann .P r 7 M ° n G O n n pK O — — — J'r\rWAJ ww r4 i0. ^gyp S � w "K •lu f'. 'Y^w 'lJa�gCAJ q.J QOy Y >CN wz.•rK qq � —wqN q�� t b 1w� •G .-O ON q 4L S n f>ir NCO .JO wwYi O'�.nw Q'. O. YO•�G C SY b4r w_N >> S�0.0 �S� w 4i O wqn Yq � >Vwrq R.W b =N Or0> J 'Y_ <O Yw.p N4 O N Lw 09 a'Y ^.OK w0 -hn OM JJN TC`i 04LY Abp rY C`•[1IgY "N u' V t l r� YN _i O_ >V 9 S1 > d r •^q _• j 0 6 O Y L S r T M O l r -j 10 1^ K� O ~� � O l " T^ N n>>OO'6.••. pw O^ NY O oV> S N Y " >p oO ONU ^YJtl 6r 6�. �q JMJ Snn Y "" dO >YN' Aw W C_ W. Y � v =• > n r e r Y J M w r +� ;� /Y ^iJ 'w6 n > =q 14 ..Y " "" � ^w °l M' NAOiI +` � !f •'. a —` r ^� _ f w Obw wa Nom. tlwO 7'��wp tlN> G_"_ � r n y '• `B >n KY �...tJ- r Cr q JVYrjO ^(w O '� �•' Z> Y O �r N >C Jb OC-^J Y !,•O .�M '6 N _ ,�A t n �^ 1 g w n O C N °O 2n >K �K_ �— OOOYS >.tl w 6.• 3w ISY O�� �-p 1••�4f• "� "' s� C N J J K ^ E M" w =. N= ID O �! l N •C D> ^ 1 J q �zL', _�> 'r;f -em ^C> _n"C wO jw:Y _tl qDN •S G 6 O 4 ^: 1 S^ b O � �. �- Y w g q J N f a � p> O •I 4 \O •J � -. => rn u �- N p ••N iii � 'r "O n'O - � �..J O^ Ji r - K O ^tl G....O,yC•- r L— t O.A. P" ^ OO .p'ri•O.. n EJ S •j O ` r a G > O r > J N r ^ v a N r n W N J O'> T Y ti nL_ wOr~ l V r�tOr gS0. O >f1 ° 4r �n 1 ON O.>' �S grief ,1.� Yp Fp wJV',Z _.ao r u^ p OK n jn Z.O °wa n° q = o por- owce:.v °a ^ .p w " Y w " � � w Y � " O N O N Y � N w > 3� �w �� g q � I_ � � p^ O •g_ g aS> w Y s _ n M w_ J 1 •Y.• Y Y ri � 9 i w N i.i � A V .n c ^. r b C l w O G •1 O Y A J 9 .0 > O 2 u. A t G L 4 u Jnn Y_nq w>w � �Yf1 •. q ^N qY w0`: 1 w 6w l_ qG _ ' n w ' - '�av _ =nn ' " ^_� � `n •`. � o o ^ _ =Y «w is r lyY.! � >Y t 1.4 f C on ca _n co O '' 1 IV IN �- I� I � 1X � Ix � �n 3 a� I I � •. N••• O � O• O� 'w y O^ � i P 7 N± o R O. C r• » N rJ Or• IN 'in �• >� I n M V - 7N I6gq` i Cu= r= t r♦ ••Z J_Tn= �} J=N� S9t �' -a '� ��O ^o nv�� nr-•r i= 422 �>•z7J r• .°a nN ino .`�.� ._r.° boo ago» e.� °o� I5 r a�•_ r�,r = nca� or `� :•� :� qua wa _.� ao_. •ow qnp �.rri'`o ^ .J .3'•ic w<w' .c —z 4n.> = °J �wqw- ^wA0 wna� Q r YJ 4oc q;Jb4�° �; q> _ -LTL w6 7S6 M O qV SJ A i `qO 6 �•6 <u.b0 Zn •C.• N� O Y` °wlp Y J O r w L M� O» q r N A i ]• C R 1 A 0 4 N J pnq ;eeu � ^•'vi N� og3o J W •...�� a C _ O; -Y _ __ •'�. .q..°^ n:.ruJ « u "� -� N ^ pi �W o.. j N N_n�q -• L b n > O O n O q r w � '< � n w � w� q °• 4 A 4. > f 4 r n =- � •ww b _ �. of o'er .. a _° >e• wnn e• w �o�ir ogsi <n� .: ■.. n � °C � �o i' On Q q' � r «o-I °. o n u-•J V.cp�.. S j`cn v° /p�iJ,� °D. »pgww �_ - >p 6Sp n1S >4 •lf 6G J nOJJ nw n r "1 w6 •S• >n ` O L Np • i0- S•...;4���K O r p q 9 G9 C I< b " oS °° t_ 4 r• 1 0 �-+i C. O L q -" N 0. •iS• 0 y 7 •-n n o .J.9 L .C.. r_ q n_ .n. L'r C_ V N +. N O N J - ` ^•.. '� 96 a S S q •r Nry� .r q w> 3 9. q•O q T n � � A J'� P� ° 6 0 =� 0. O q O� 46 N O lO _1 qJA PO9r •O6 G OS > JO rq p � o _ S C M•p� f1 q � c «C �w i `n AY a 6wH �g•o �° »�O 006 COO Nr'G=0 906 L Rrwr J NY w wY�i� r �° 1 JMr p f •Oi• �•'4 ^90 _ � p i grNp �N;� r Orn•'Srr Y'J wN w �Jn }N •° qp�:l J�T_''J -r q- � 9t1 � =7N_ _�q� 4.w� �. 9w >i N'4 OnN Rw_O Z .0 4» � S •� R�� W w J C� �^ •,7j ^ Y � 6. �i Y 4 Y q w 6 1 M 6 !i •i f1 q w � q /• 1 N r q O -��}}�qn r v�� Qy y r_ 7.•r•° w_3 ro S r AQJ ^c1i <�•••n Y_ 6_r G6 •�= C•'. �. r ��VK O ^�6 it Q.w 9 w Z-i m YJRw Y T.n nq �A�wi " wr__ - n q _ 1 w q m O •O u ws>, M.> O wr_ °YA p f'• L �i G �. ci:� •_°nvo.= �•�.°. n r•_ n oNe3 �1� j.'. uv p w0 >90 O -�_O 6J 6r ,° J N^ u 1. .� n�p ° O•n 0• O�O�f •Y° Yw �.c >w�p i•»• c £ .. =- r.`Q. or Ng` n -Y _o° .b. o'`> n � }-�iMar�n 4rT. �� N� G n > •"Z' L �C 4 • •(y Y, •OO �{w bq q�N 1 � P' >1rrO � n �( �S lSJ q4 - N » � O �= Rti N N O. q;_ O \6 •4 IN n P 6 M 2'' �1 n � n tt n �Y RGi •L L•9 r c ^ Y wJ O•�q - Q Y 4 ^�_ qr �.. OS a b^ K f1 1Nr_ _ ZOQwJ A N T°• 06M1 <» C.°r 'J l4 » ij � J nb Y�� AM_ Nor �O 1N � � 4J OCIpJly dtl�u qi �• �„ 1I(� •y'• GOO 01.0 nJPq 6 p» -•< B �R Q•O w6 q 6z- ` j MfTO 26 ^l 7 r t� 1' r O. r � •O O w IM �n Q °dam _ v•we •4uu �OpO qOJ =n ^C q J� N_ ^� J w0 I O q n T� ~00 nY _d > N nq•9 �N O+ Or C ,b0 p4N � 6uY Y w° IN >_y gGwdwa SO -1 p Y. •O Jay f l 4 »u NLSNOJ 6 •• NVO O•� nqN _� �4 ,.+4T MO.r » ��.�•q., O�Z Q •»ir q O L > 4 O P J > »Ow1N J F N >p•i.0 dMP N OO �• =ZNOq < J nw A qC w ? .v P w YIWN ^ M OM c>rw r••04 A6» n04 ^ N 1C r ��� w 1 N\ •) O� •i r •y 17 n O_G 7 O. q 7 ^lam Y > O q Yrz � 9 6 q j N l •>r• »3 _ $ vc >vn � n n» •1'ie� + m�6 q ee �6 A> 7 ...2i Y 1 N gWnYw q Y > gip» ^ c.JiN y C r P S O O J N Y Z b r 4 ^ J J J S >wmN _ 1 O n Or_J Om 0= d•grV •° tl Y O I I q w N 6•Nr N F g N .l lli v •° J e 7 6 w J V If L _> O j: = N y I 1 Jn .L Gq EOY Z O W Win^ •O AOl9 Y � to. •'1 ^ter Cyr YfOR>•^ q �y^ i� � N T �� a =•°y`r °w qY0 yi up r Nr w lq >v n ' I 4l =qv Y � T �� O O•r0 O N I _ i� ^ �G'w> � `Nq Na4q w1 � 4 0. •9q0 w q�CC � �OZ Y= q > '•� O p r � r N � y � � 6 •'i O .� ^ ^ J g q n N _ J C_ .D l 6° �. n n J C O p J r I I r I • \ Y NA =A n ^J l •1 ^ q ^. ^. A �� = I �•N.. � �.r0.�^ J V1w q �.� r �o �� » n06 .n rt`l1 D �° N2J' V P T J w I v Z� i I i � °•o >'.> - -`..9 0o nipp» ^i •>o.'• �•o_ �° •>• •1T„�Y•y S i� O0 Dui wR > •D w� a Or J • r_Nn ` no .e nn i w -� wqQ t e.nne f Q r O ° -1 4 A n U 79 w n O .n C AT A � U � Pn �p n M JD 6 A i 0 �w Y � O.= O Y o J n W a� 21 n � :W C n 4 M O' n A O a n r 0 N ^ J V K C n V S J r wv n pv O " •i J � ru n •J N O A C C O + rO + r ` M T_ b J O T O ➢ �w io , + Nn A J S •� J 6 w O , 6 r. O n r Y� + O 7 A i z n 6 � 6 6 l �C n° e n• = M 7 L J , �Y c: r i V l n K c O O , A p O p d O J _ I W r s rq v � A ' C S� wW O.O. O � S A n nK r 6 wo n n N J , 4 ° i n L � ICE I 1N � �7C b m r P N paYS ��Yin Ma r N � �Y K +O �.7.w Y� K•n W >T^ M r4 � Oi pr 1+ ^JOK N• q e� S fJ S T IJ �r 1 r 1 ` iO N tl •j J 6 N >�. 9 ^• , d S-g- p 4 n �r� J•J n7 wNw6 tz S3, 1 w a K ° P�KN � N 0 V r. 'r O Of• � >C O Y rN.• �. OrY f: � lz b z M i.W y r0 w OPr C w0 E M O a� rn _..•. A A =yK 4 O J 4 A n U 79 w n O .n C AT A � U � Pn �p n M JD 6 A i 0 �w Y � O.= O Y o J n W a� 21 n � :W C n 4 M O' n A O a n r 0 N ^ J V K C n V S J r wv n pv O " •i J � ru n •J N O A C C O + rO + r ` M T_ b J O T O ➢ �w io , + Nn A J S •� J 6 w O , 6 r. O n r Y� + O 7 A i z n 6 � 6 6 l �C n° e n• = M 7 L J , �Y c: r i V l n K c O O , A p O p d O J _ I W r s rq v � A ' C S� wW O.O. O � S A n nK r 6 wo n n N J , 4 ° i n C Ir 2 I� 1 O r9 E� O iiu .r O. ••. n � 4� ��11 •> K -• w^ .l O � °moo O u °•' ... N r t � ro An nr Aw dp �nu Y J �� ^• 1F �r °J OFr �^ nN •� w 90 J� ° i T A° N i t J O N ry i SR �� AFC VW ZE Ow CCN �•r� ^ �J Z!ZZ iU�i N 6Y r0 A d 7 IO r r0 ° a q0 �� Kq `' bN tQpt°N w wA� Mn �L V pd q? NKM I� �• r.J• � A n N O ° w • 10. 1 � K or'rr 1 � • P k J �IO w = v e IV rp J J , 1 6 W 17 r LL eJ w yy}•vw� SA E •/yJ C' � r 4 d<n,w J >Y w� go9 w� 3f O r w w > w u �wJr oN F °Nn iJ LQnnN ov t'3;a °nv JY � 1n d, N Av O M C 6 p a �•n' a i +`o �A;Y rC ^Ol O /li t A J 9 y r.0 v N c 6 w m 6 ,v + O r� N + O J ,N 'J r rj r A3 T O ° A �• zz `Yn A 6 O n �2 Mp S E 0 0• n + a w =w� JAT N� J O A < Y N ? 6 � O A O �J1 4 rp O i n �O n' C S Jy O = o r C f.1p N C opu YW_^ O P r O � N n •-L Q+= 6 ° r Y `c. O � � pn 6 ^O+ PJ4 � N w ' S w 0 0 1' J n N w d i m ° o ? �� N = r �p A q Ot °c � q O " INS N i! N 1 ` i Im S- �r � ix 6 J y r N r O N 'rw ANww n F w � Y d�NSY n A �•�O. b^ d Y•� �° 6r ^q�N Mr QYJ' Nd O O• un ,•jq O 6 ° iK M w O y w J ••. y w a n w •L d O. Y r y� J 1 r __ ow wwY y W 0 N, L � ICE I 1N � �7C �IO w = v e IV rp J J , 1 6 W 17 r LL eJ w yy}•vw� SA E •/yJ C' � r 4 d<n,w J >Y w� go9 w� 3f O r w w > w u �wJr oN F °Nn iJ LQnnN ov t'3;a °nv JY � 1n d, N Av O M C 6 p a �•n' a i +`o �A;Y rC ^Ol O /li t A J 9 y r.0 v N c 6 w m 6 ,v + O r� N + O J ,N 'J r rj r A3 T O ° A �• zz `Yn A 6 O n �2 Mp S E 0 0• n + a w =w� JAT N� J O A < Y N ? 6 � O A O �J1 4 rp O i n �O n' C S Jy O = o r C f.1p N C opu YW_^ O P r O � N n •-L Q+= 6 ° r Y `c. O � � pn 6 ^O+ PJ4 � N w ' S w 0 0 1' J n N w d i m ° o ? �� N = r �p A q Ot °c � q O " INS N i! N 1 ` i Im S- �r � ix 6 J y r N r O N 'rw ANww n F w � Y d�NSY n A �•�O. b^ d Y•� �° 6r ^q�N Mr QYJ' Nd O O• un ,•jq O 6 ° iK M w O y w J ••. y w a n w •L d O. Y r y� J 1 r __ ow wwY y W 0 N, N c 6 w m 6 ,v + O r� N + O J ,N 'J r rj r A3 T O ° A �• zz `Yn A 6 O n �2 Mp S E 0 0• n + a w =w� JAT N� J O A < Y N ? 6 � O A O �J1 4 rp O i n �O n' C S Jy O = o r C f.1p N C opu YW_^ O P r O � N n •-L Q+= 6 ° r Y `c. O � � pn 6 ^O+ PJ4 � N w ' S w 0 0 1' J n N w d i m ° o ? �� N = r �p A q Ot °c � q O " INS N i! N 1 ` i Im S- �r � ix 6 J y r N r O N 'rw ANww n F w � Y d�NSY n A �•�O. b^ d Y•� �° 6r ^q�N Mr QYJ' Nd O O• un ,•jq O 6 ° iK M w O y w J ••. y w a n w •L d O. Y r y� J 1 r __ ow wwY y W 0 N, 1 :9 \�. I §H � \. ( Ef� \ { {:° } .r i � «L ;I /{ ■3== � � -; `� -2." � ; { !F' § , )k - . I z t¥ \ 2 f _; � |s,§ ^i !M; }} %E; {\{ -- - I 22 , � � � �� )© ' ( - ! ;« - r � _ _ \ � I §H \. ( \ { {:° } .r i «L a; §%- I `� -2." $2 { , )k z -- I 22 , � � � ® RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING APPRO'vAL OF PLANNED DEVELOPMENT NO. 81 -02 REQUESTING A CHANGE IN THE ZONING FROM R -1 TO R- 3 /P.D_ FOR 35 ACRES LOCATED BETWEEN TURNER AND CENTER AVENUES (APN 209- 091 -05, 06, 07) WHEREAS, on the 15th day of 4une, 1981, an application was filed and accepted on the above - described project; and . WHEREAS. on the 10th day of March, 1982, the Planning Commission held a duly advertised public hearing pursuant to Section 65854 of the California Government Code. SECTION 1: The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission has made the following in ings: 1_ That the subject property is suitable for the uses permitted in the proposed zone in terms of access, size, and compatibility with existing land use in the surrounding area; 2. The proposed zone change would not have significant impact on the environment nor the surrounding properties; and 3_ That the proposed zone change is in conformance with the General Plan_ SECTION 2: The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission has found that this project %i %ill not create a significant adverse impact on the environment and recommends to City Council the issuance of a Negative Declaration on March 10, 1982. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: 1_ That pursuant to Section 65850 to 65855 of the California Government Code, that the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga hereby recommends approval on the 10th day of March, 1982, Planned Development No. 81 -07. 2. The Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council approve and adopt Planned Development No. 81 -02. 3. That a Certified Copy of this Resolution and related material hereby adopted by the Planning Commission shall be forwarded to the City Council. Resolution No. Page 2 4. All conditions of approval applicable to Tentative Tract No. 11915 shall apply to this Planned Development. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 1011i DAY OF MARCH, 1982. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Jeffrey King, Chair -nan 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 10th day of March, 1982, by the following vote- to-wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: ON 0 11 0 is CITE' OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: -March 10, 1982 TO: Members of the Planning Coraani ssi on FROM: Rick Comez, City Planner BY:' Dan Coleman, Assistant Planner cUBJECT: DESIGN REVIEW FOR TENTATIVE TRACTS 9441 AND 11609 - NUSA The development of 84 single family homes on half acre located on the south side of Wilson, approximately 1000' east of Archibald. SUMMARY: Tentative Tracts 9441 and 11609 were approved on February 25, 1981, by the Planning Commission with the Condition that the Applicant reapply for a point rating relative to the design section of the Growth Management Ordinance. Tentative Tract 9441 and 11609 were originally filed by Mark III Homes and Bob Jensen Builders respectively, and have since been purchased by Nubank International Corporation.- The Design Review Committee has reviewed the design package for both tracts. The project received the maximum points available under the Growth Management Residential Assessment System, and is `therefore before the Planning Commission for review and consideration. Staff has prepared a Resolution of Approval with Conditions for your review and ccnsideration. BACKGROUND: The Applicant, Nubank International, is requesting review and approval of their design package in order to develop' 84 single family homes on half acre lots. The Design Review package submitted consists of elevations, floor plans, and conceptual gradinq plans. Colored plans of the above items will be available for your review at the Planning Commission meeting. ANALYSIS: The Design Review Committee felt that the conceptual landscape clan and perimeter wail and fence treatment proposed exhibited a high quality of design. Therefore, the Committee rated this portion with the maximum points available for landscaping and screening. Also 6iscussed was the design and plotting of the units within the subdivision. As you can see from the Site Plan, Exhibit "B ", the houses and detached garages are plotted to minimize the need for grading. The Conceptual Grading Plan, Exhibit "C ", retains the natural contours and existing Eucalyptus ITEM E Design Review/'.? 99441 & 11699 Planning Commission Agenda March 10, 1982 Page 2 windrows to create a rural atmosphere. There are 24 different exterior design treatments as shown on the attached elevations, Exhibit "E". The elevations include a variety of siding and trim treatments incorporating wood and masonry along with concrete tile roofs. The elevations received the maximum points available under the Residential Assessment System. Originally this project was designed as a custom lot subdivisior and approved with sidewalks on one side of the street. The Applicant is requesting that the Commission give consideration to deleting all side- walks within the project and instead provide a wide -roiled curb for cir- culation. The Applicant feels that this is necessary to retain the rural setting of this project. This is similar to the existing Fox Hollow development in that landscaping extends from the curb to the house. The Design Review Committee felt that wide -rolled curbs was an acceptable alternate to sidewalks for a project of this nature. RECOMMENDATION: The Design R ?view Committee has given the project a favorable rating and recommends approval. Attached is a proposed Reso- lution with Conditions of Approval should the Planning Commission find the designs acceptable. 0 ly submitted, Planner RG:DC:jr Attachments: Exhibit "A" Exhibit 108" Exhibit "C" Exhibit "0" Exhibit "E" Resolution - Location Mao - Site Plan - Conceptual Grading Plan - Conceptual Landscape Plan - Elevations of Aporeval with Conditions K %tf �. , .; I, c ' I f I I �! 1 1 P I ^4 I I ' ' .. � I 1 �� I I II 11'.,1.1 J Ism Il � � ft � � � � tt '� 1 GG• _ V 4 tV ::.� • . is ,..a .Itr ;� '�d: rtj��ff� _ '' 1, -ti tali Y`. � — t —117_ � Wes- �5j �� � :� _ •n �• -qtr t �•.. 11'jTi�i F7v L d�A• iy— f�Si!�ss'- -•J �"aca1 r,mMWE � .f'r72Ac��i�ilii'"`�fl� .�.•.t'�ilyd . fl Krl rim IOn, 1 El D ,�t�l� I� • r . rjLu. It. J*: ;..•:�_ ri�i. } •7wyr!'�'...7.•Sr.'�a��lni .iMn[e�uuu �:.: L..•, •.....:LI1"�nn. , .�'�F . y__ }��'/'y+u'Z'�uS i.n nn.. ��yuii I � ri./ .. ..iSi7f� iii.. •. ���� W i ,•^ I In V4 i . •jT �IwRR1 �I1I�rIM r . �/ � r � 1 r ��,,jJ�!ja� •ryw II M I t ..t �:�� 1�Y.Nr I • fra'^"�.•wr. •.NM.�i M..r�.N. Y (11,. w lwr Mr4l Mukr r• +' ^.ti. WI, ..�. A �i1F� -� t "'•� i�iGi/+'���yht'r1iiM.�l �7?� +r�, t �� i ;;c'/I'_�'ri��.,�' � . y w►�.�^ .h. 'rr it. Lm • Rol :'a• ti •.I-i• r r Cl it I-i II �i ^i Y� i " � � '. 'I 1. .. r'r I _r ,. .�.� ' I f 1 I I_f 11 � 1, 1 Mill �..�' r . �� -,, 17? V ,;� • ha— t.Slls(!.� _��'�• `-'� � ������� -..•e -era I _AT4Y•�rk'�:� ^'ter TM .. .. 1 I • J ,,,,fi�e. •� Y �.,1„et���!�'�z���.'y�^� /�.�� C h.rl �y ��«.�:�•�� „ •e /-�"'li.:�• . _• • S'C1`� 1• � � y ....i'�1G�'rr'.:..�i'n`s�Ct••:' �.� ��"•' ': = �� �`._1•n'.d - �.r �¢_•'.... 1 r.n•urw _W �'�s• ,� ��- ar•!= '.i��.�.'r�W�.{- •�fiT ? =L. IS �� a —i' r .1 r ri r r C 17I I f• I I 7 1' Il 1. w iILl f 1 ! I I cl f ... =__p. iC'.�� `yam _' i r1• . 7 f W --� 4.��. r �� wv��:'.�'v" "r?••t?�i, ;j "rid:. .. • �_���� �� cite � ,— �� Y== �,���� �.�.�r�"�,1'�1y1�"�'- ra. , l — - '�(}WJ•n a j'W 411 r fD't . '..�..+ •' t .. 9 i it! o(oar w F -1 P, i i fqo- crio io d ��C� 2 i ci $o 0 o� o� L T_ I 1 I 1 1 I I i T� i I N 6� I C� z a I I l,i I i 1 c� Z �� .. ' 0 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING SITE PLAN AND DESIGN REVIEW FOR TENTATIVE TRACT NO.'S 9441 AND 11609, LOCATED ON THE S=,H SIDE OF WILSON, APPROXIMATELY 1000 FEe EAST OF ARCHIBALD WHEREAS, on the 1st day of February, 1982, a complete application was filed by Nubank International, Inc., applicant for the above - described projects; and WHEREAS, the Design Review Committee has recommended approval of said projects, with appropriate conditions; and WHEREAS, the project point ratings exceed the minimum threshold as required by the Growth Management Ordinance. NOW, THEREFORE, the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission does hereby resolve as follows: SECTION 1: Findings: 1. The design and layout of the proposed developments are consistent with the applicable elements of the City's General Plan. 2. The design and layout of the proposed developments will not unreasonably interfere with the uSe and enjoyment of neighboring existing or future devel- opments, and will not create traffic or pedestrian hazards. 3. The architectural design of the proposed develop- ments are compatible with the character of the surrounding area and will create a harmonious, orderly and attractive development. 4. The design of the proposed developments would pro- vide a desirable environment for their occupants and visiting public as well as its neighbors. through good aesthetic use of materials, texture and coior that will remain aesthetically appealing and will retain a reasonably adequate level of maintenance. SECTION 2: Conditions of oroval: Site Plans and Design Review for Tentative Tract No.'s 94441 and 11609 are approved subject to the following conditions and attached standard conditions: Resolution No. Page 2 1. The Developer shall comply with all conditions of approval for Tentative Tract No.'s 9441 and 11609. 2. The Developer shall include provisions to accom- modate future front yard irrigation systems. As a minimum, such provisions shall include the in- stallation of Schedule 40 PVC pipe loops under driveways and sidewalks. 3. Tree planting shall consider any effects on the use or future installation of residential solar energy collectors. 4. Landscaping shall include Special Boulevard treatment over and above that required by City Standards along Wilsor. Avenue. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 10TH DAY OF MARCH, 1982- PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Jeffrey K ng, thairman ATTEST: Secretary of the anning fission 1, JACK LAM, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City'of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 10th day of March, 1982, by the following vote - to-wi t: AYES: NOES: ASSENT: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: 0 L_J 4,. ` V Y � L • Y i 1 V q L...C. �` O p O C w V = 4 C ° � V OVw�Y C rVV qEZ�t O r. pC Vrtyf ✓ V ° V O a G C° r �� i '� L W 9 4 w.r w r 9 LO Y `_• ` LO r• C O Vily ✓ a✓a ^'L ` 7a .•L Ta JO ^ a y r lrr�L � �9 q>,4 �4 9✓ V � .nw� =Y4C ^ CP a =vary �y4 Pt [ ' L «G 9ibG ^°4 «CL Y r0 T L �t• r0 w JC C 'PC9gV '�� •. J` •V.J « ar Y N qY Gr V y �.0 SO f� ° „ aai9 f. r0 ^�O�° .L•' }L jt" rFr C4J 1.V ^ n° 4O O° rY 8 V r 6 6 'J 1p 4 r« q y V; 35 W f 'g y {U -^ N y P O L b G l G '0 � R �' Y a L V r ` 9 C 1 O M ✓ ° q ° °« « Y. a V °C n Y S L L l O C Go N= o C L V e »Y ^ C M J r i V 1 0 V I y V W i V N r L P _ N V pp q LOO q r C S P 9..C. 'YV � �� C q O Y� C `r a'� `C9 ✓ �°• °i v w JV C l « Yy Czra O .9yr ^N CO r `r C g Z- S2 r airy q N� G M, 4CV O :g °.rev° F.L. °p Y ^r w V J . V Y O O {�o Y Va Pw y d ° V V ✓✓ TV V F r0 a' g r y M V Op °V Gyq= Nd4 c qq J+ Or VO P� ry.S t 6.L •diwY P _Y y7 N V q <r. NO. ZO NO V9`a�"V N 6 WrLf Gq y'" r C •- CL rf WCV JYV LL FY NSr =4"'r r(�r rf'VG�q Y OIC NI <O 6 N N N N N O �[j O ^ °p v s 0 q V a•°. J V L Cy°V O V �L L_m C O C q L V C rZ LI N r 4 16 r �" � Z ✓ Ly' S O a ^� l° yr Li V' b0 '« r - Yq N=r L O C Vr L G V .5 Lq PV .L4•_i' 4« v W V « q N« C rV W �� ^V p qC q✓ tl.70 VC M� GCP 3 SC L4 ix J P w`G `O V `p�W Ma °p '+ i iCw 0 O °q p9C �a 8 .• ua «4^ �° 9r 4N C� V V V �N °V.O O 8F 1 J C V �O tl i.N 9v r_�tD h"• � (6 _q� ^v.?.. D _ r ar o O L6 d 0 Va y,G. q «rY G wV �qJ 00 O '0 r4°CL� Y Va F ICO C O _6 L 6 4 OrC V « =LG --c V } 9 O O. I L G� C v «V L N LyV L'y OF r y V °n Vrr �a9 . r90 CLv' ." =P4° V R C X ° OL P G•C+° wr• gib° N`L qq N Y ✓ �< w.w �O � y C.s y 90 V � � •^ L O V 9 e a 'L _ ^ L •1 W f W° ry Y Y r . C CV Y V 4 2Z C ^_° N ^w V r6 L L Y = G'� L V p °; = ^O r H f Q i1. OY { C ✓ y 6 ) q F u° s L 0 0 0 CV Y O E I° Y •O L ISf N 7 « ✓c �O { O L C Q% 6`� q; tea$ .? i p•w ZF E �C r0� JVy Y Y1 3 N �_ .YiL� YY yVV 9 9 ^Y =rrp = =mow G `�!�ri irr i oy r� .ww4 Op7 4?O O I' «9 YV .O•Y C° ry Q L. N ps q °Y « _CCI �C Vrr � 9Cy �YV q9M 06 �� e•.p�i + '- ` wt Y y C 9} C i✓ Gy YY L.V V O CL G Z VV L L rti i✓r� L LU �~a0 l i• L N L` `M pC� J ^� XI <I aS �1 F p� L p E G o _cW [c 4 � _ V L i e � q V � L V! � N C O G ✓ q V C N ` C � b V V . Q 4 G a o L }O rC�jj N L N N drr _ q Y w O N 6 V � <Yr OV. e n S x 4 V c q V q u 7 v V } b� Lq G W O O v 4q C C i L v u P V; 0 aN fl < 4i i O O r O_ O t 6 N V L — p N� i 9 V (Y V c � V � -cCC c Op q 4 N V Vr r r ° v c iN c G� P G V C w � O N 6 <nV'� qqY. 4 Lvbr V p� V O � y z V zg C P q - - ^ w — L iw =3 � P6V r d 4 �w O a N >o 2 ` Pg96 L9 A� Nz O v � r —c- 6 S V 4 O 9 O2ln °NL 7Z .Vr L09 YL < q �Nmc V 8 2 Y q� 0i O A r V 96>. PL L' ph 'f Y p •��Gr,`O --AN acP.V LY' °gn Z t � q P oP f2'r ce: u� < "}•qLS r O � fy <p W 4 V PY✓ O N V OY P 4 9 ✓ C r � ✓ C` v V Yom.—'. ✓ C y T 1 LL y L LZ^ o0 y� q � — � ✓ Y N V ` '� V — _ _O � y.� � — q u 4 L L V G V p p y y pp V C 1 9 9 ✓ ✓L.Cw � q ` N N N ^✓ ` N p S � � 9 9NrC9 N�4. O LLcCC O ;;✓ 1 1 ° C A 4 c__ °�Y ✓YSL` at.ncq ✓o.�.. P C q q ✓V V N ✓ 9 — — t t r V V N '^ r N rC C y0 —�VLCV CCC ' n 9 O O O = = I e Nvo C Z.= `C V n n az _•y 2 2 °. ' c— ✓ 2,. � ° � °w Zvi pLq r.eq C r °� — .°. d lV0 q =C .Ci• .Ln y'A � Lq GCS T9 NT (� P_ V � r ` ° O L A s � ` ✓n N� r r w � -- 4 =.—i• •°s i rL-.v O U q V �C— O �frr Ir i^ u -Z.2 C LL Y y ^ `C C C Cl q p �TNy fl C� .ri. ��..V N L rf= ° =T } V O 4q Y =q co °':� •' �.`e_ NO �� .0-✓ o ^1 <N LL C>•S 4u �� c4E pdrS 2 V•r CSC C61u p6 Ow 1`o '7l: Ar 9 r-2'.w � o W E G o _cW [c 4 � _ V L i e � q V � L V! � N C O G ✓ q V C N ` C � b V V . Q 4 G a o L }O rC�jj N L N N drr _ q Y w O N 6 V � <Yr OV. e n S x 4 V c q V q u 7 v V } b� Lq G W O O v 4q C C i L v u P V; 0 aN fl < 4i i O O r O_ O t 6 N V L — p N� i 9 V (Y V c � V � -cCC c Op q 4 N V Vr r r ° v c iN c G� P G V C w � O N 6 <nV'� qqY. 4 Lvbr V p� V O � y z V zg C P q - - ^ w — L iw =3 � P6V r d 4 �w O a N >o 2 ` Pg96 L9 A� Nz O v � r —c- 6 S V 4 O 9 O2ln °NL 7Z .Vr L09 YL < q �Nmc V 8 2 Y q� 0i O A r V 96>. PL L' ph 'f Y p •��Gr,`O --AN acP.V LY' °gn Z t � q P oP f2'r ce: u� < "}•qLS r O � fy <p W 4 V PY✓ O N V P P •-4r q0° 7t_ w =V< C70 '•C — qjGyLVbV qNV O_ V N p V L a r y • G Y • < L fj r rS r Cr Ow OL L L b r pp P�°-Y O• q r�P°S >.L Nom' zr� �S —emu 1. � nr r Y Y< a Vr OgOT•Or C CN' i� �° N�L. PPVV VCS °\- ✓ � C C � O✓ 4 C °( C O •� O q Y w Y T 49 � v C_ J C r C p° q gFlZ 9p V� wV��G V_E wLU •°<s'V L q _O — C r �• V�< py L N/f N q ✓O NQw <y :2:Nr ^Soak w 2 yV V C ° w qq w � .y°. Vl,. CZ CC V••C��yy q %`y y V ■ r ^ r ^ 4 w —° yVy r C V NqV M <NP <° <P6wM V py <.OaL ti.E As 1 Y D A v OY 4 9 ✓ C r � ✓ C` v V Yom.—'. ✓ C LL y L LZ^ o0 y� q � — � ✓ Y N V ` '� V — _ _O � y.� � — q u 4 L L V G V p p y y pp V C 1 9 9 ✓ ✓L.Cw � q ` N N N ^✓ ` N p S � � 9 9NrC9 N�4. O LLcCC O ;;✓ 1 1 ° C A 4 c__ °�Y ✓YSL` at.ncq ✓o.�.. P C q q ✓V V N ✓ 9 — — t t r V V N '^ r rC C y0 —�VLCV CCC ' Cq_V �✓ 9 O O O = = I Nvo �i 7t_ w =V< C70 '•C — qjGyLVbV qNV O_ V N p V L a r y • G Y • < L fj r rS r Cr Ow OL L L b r pp P�°-Y O• q r�P°S >.L Nom' zr� �S —emu 1. � nr r Y Y< a Vr OgOT•Or C CN' i� �° N�L. PPVV VCS °\- ✓ � C C � O✓ 4 C °( C O •� O q Y w Y T 49 � v C_ J C r C p° q gFlZ 9p V� wV��G V_E wLU •°<s'V L q _O — C r �• V�< py L N/f N q ✓O NQw <y :2:Nr ^Soak w 2 yV V C ° w qq w � .y°. Vl,. CZ CC V••C��yy q %`y y V ■ r ^ r ^ 4 w —° yVy r C V NqV M <NP <° <P6wM V py <.OaL ti.E As 1 Y D A v V_ F .w .a D O �yw ✓ '1= y,JN� 04 �ILp � . Y N '°war 4C JV L� O J W L ArV GV` .n 4 -27; ww Y �.. LVl .J! C, !- II � VY Or O V C yP itr N ✓ PC v I Y :feT. � V V f..c iGd �V -V0 =1 V -(.^ - r. wG^wr j�F o � =p �`✓ � P� � �'r = -sC _ Ate` 37% v CA wvn0 r V- ✓ 1I►' I 9 I I _` .a w ♦ V 1 ° uC w .'•'.T'T rVN i CC� CL wi ^.P II.iV LPOG1 r lC }- � r r V w VaV•C� W ObC i �G� N � L ^4 ±� pnA C✓0 =G C V4 p y I � aji�F r �m `.�� ow- �n -.V. r ° r N94 V �c r L✓ v V rr Vr v �. oc :: r '^ 1 O � L �9 _ 4 LC ✓YC NN_ = `_ f�j' _C� ` 4 W` ` 8 Vv 2,T N �- -' d_ _pr �q "° ^9 ^ Nu. b✓V �' O'= lr0 YV C� = O�„ � GCC V 9 bC'�C u.iii u° uN TEL ° V `\- °4C �.� LNG eC o r o oTu Err-q Err- Y'NV O �4 V b Z ` ✓ W v ca ` ^Ov� .N,... 1 .» [ + .. <.. r N n v L L o .-.r V e V i•aW -L� - '' rw V.✓e �I r» �n.re ��W G °^ .pp-_C ✓Y- �taOyZ .� YVONOC� ^iO Lay wr > 4q. w. `V NO LuN I ii V d0Z 4Nw 6 9 yOw 4.w �44� NI OO 2.w` .0 ✓V y �9r NOV P4Jrpr wCC wY3JVP WI i� q War O4- NrG9 NV �u0. 1 ..n .OA q ✓� L J �✓ i'y l 4n°VlV bPi qrT ✓��°_ ON PVF a. 1� iLY z z Via P` Q 4 � V 9 L^ L g P A✓ V I N q V O { 2ND V o n 9 .eV .wV O-', WC Or 6VV Oy�Y4 Wu.^ -. tiN Oaa w40 .vT r _ I �^ V10. N- C C P9 Nq �� q J o VmrV V - N _ N� r6 U► y f � \ T N r N 4V r CL V < 4 NJ LS., C G � yw ° �9 C Wr p r9 ✓ C .nS °O� wY N LN N �- °C V r2'J rte° `O • uq V r ex C. q C°n � VV_ V' yw CO ^'' •'-J- 'nre 9 V roN r r.. -GG �Cjri j3 �o. P TMr „L,.Ld .c� �.pr Von�_1L EY9W VCN4 rVW qr9 ^ Vr L`°. Laf-M ![ ` VC G rJtl bN - wj� q � _uL GOI 7V °��✓ � O rn�vV ��.'.✓ L 9 PM Y,9 .a ? VNYL N yN 4POV C GVV W Cp r ^ GLrWgVn »Y.�.r LL j`F _W F = ^R yq -E V�j T9 Vw VwV�V� ->,eoL LuL -.✓.� Ce/ ^M x °G v bfj Tw Y a0 WO 46 lP . �•9y Y W `N>.GO � r y �� WO OV_b�C: L `°p• b41LN VL_Mb w`- n 4FL 1r 1C � rl-r wyT/ W ✓V mm Crpp rNL Yr°r d _VV Cr WC C✓bW P q rV ` V V` _ j q�° O L V y �^ J O. ^ r T O �1 _C •�O% L� V' V N L Y. � pR O_ _� F� V LY i+ Iaa•b NVq nJCV O EgOC gWT V+V, OriV V C OO J+ V V9 VO jy L VV34 �Lw -C�4 T -9 �V`Y V_ ✓ V ✓yC ` V VrNq z P� G 9 VO.i UpOP r V V6 YJ 6 ✓V O W � C�pN�pjj yq �ON9J.�G _ C`A qir� rACV y CS�✓ �= rV NN arL VPgW V, �aO VAC V_ 9 -NW Ocu coLr OTLC �I ✓Oq ry PrT CL mN N� Cr i �Y 96 -C. gOrq X10._ L6` r _^ R V PVT✓ 9 Vq _ E r' .i,dV "''!zt 9a pp "'� P N O q V_Y °.{.q V» .wN�/ �] nT ✓ �6 V� �c T _ of C = .{..o ff A� °c �V�G ° ` i✓ W c ?r- O YF9 JOB ��- VW �(C/C qr NJC °y gyryY, 6 C _ ye �L `� »���`� G✓ i N irp O N O O � ./ r- ° V O a V q . E 1, ` V V-C LL ^G C YY a� W C VY O� V {d -n O br ✓ C q�N ✓C? Yew PVL rTEr= .2t; � N O`er wa ✓J6 C 'ii C E LIto ���+ V�6N q �q w 2_p4 09 �EE4PM �V E1�= Nq �riC wLwu_ `ww6Cq r��r �LGC w V -g ^` V -LV._ y Y r d g 9 r w C ✓ V oprcpr.��hpej' y V J C b OQ liq G EP �^ r+f ryo�Gp 2L`L pep pyyey.$v. Y=o � '22-tw 1���� O °�C W�j i ^`3 N r„� ✓b _ i �' L✓ r N .. > q O 6 i -a= 1 � V 4 V w'000 1 V b �y L 0.99LV ✓ � CC Y f O C N lJY 6.�p yV Yw WY N �O l O\ i s r p ®� 6 9 yT W r i Q V V r x 6 r • r d N T q T� d — by i 4 1 C +o �r v T O ` Y V P p �4 O rx� L w Y O d �= O x` i f T y O t5 > CO O O L 4 Y r p 4 V x Nn 4 w C T e LV O N O v V Y� .°F o C N L o b Y� d L �e L V A 4M ^ v L � V W y O o v V V^ V YV y o= v r y by Y i L l O.L L 4 r p � 6 i C rrj C V n U c Lr r V NQ =d C V � ry4 Y Y L N+N[ O L.. c b v j ^ A C M L r A 4 V N A P I u b 4 r L V n i G 4 b i P l c e V r L e yXC r v ^ •G V V P �4- N ` r — � V =r� PO yyC j +q "C' rcGV Y N L V b Y 7 � N z E: A C _ L s`o C V w L c .L. 4 C r O S Y V r p V N N O L O C r G C• t L N 1 O P i t W Op i P a P O v v O � ri I v v ` r O C O u 4 r V � C p V C Y �rV r [Np. r 4 w= a. v. p „.GL r •n yP C. o c r T F V L` y g C T oL P44 L H V �4L ' = cc- q 0 CV 6r . WCpY L yrC rM « L o L VG _ Q T N r l w d q j u° r z � C "CPC` W C r r b V C L V � !tz 4 .`. —V ?r = M ow � pq = oy .F � c Y._w0 ` � q4 O ATV 4 <�i C rdyVV r VCr VcOOIZ LYL Y[ —vL CC V aV' V w__L t Vc L4 p 00rp t% YTr<C `V° ° uV ` [r w c e o Vdc OxOo qyo - .o. L.N. ryC Lo$ O qC „L.�i y _� r� o O•j C yWLrr PC »Cw..r wwC4�. NO C4 L u V V T W y Or V —V � V GY 4.L. �w [ [ 47 L��q ..s N [q w. •11 Yq0 8r�r M °6 n w0 ° GIVG i °r xt —d4T� V40 zc q `P r_V C.q 4Y... t:5 G e w w C Ox S V c q Iz 04 Y^ w O�iO ci �` rT[Viu L d 3 +C °L 4A � A^ YET Vl eJC �T W �A° CP VY YG_•`r� L V= O pnPi .`n UCO Cup �e °O ^� ^^ L V yb Ln.V J 4 V x Nn 4 w C T e LV O N O v V Y� .°F o C N L o b Y� d L �e L V A 4M ^ v L � V W y O o v V V^ V YV y o= v r y by Y i L l O.L L 4 r p � 6 i C rrj C V n U c Lr r V NQ =d C V � ry4 Y Y L N+N[ O L.. c b v j ^ A C M L r A 4 V N A P I u b 4 r L V n i G 4 b i P l c e V r L e yXC r v ^ •G V V P �4- N ` r — � V =r� PO yyC j +q "C' rcGV Y N L V b Y 7 � N z E: A C _ L s`o C V w L c .L. 4 C r O S Y V r p V N N O L O C r G C• t L N 1 O P i t W Op i P a P O v v O � ri I I v ` r O C O u 4 r V � C V C O r [Np. P 4V w= a. v. p „.GL r •n yP C. o c r T F V L` y g C T oL P44 L H V �4L ' = cc- q 0 CV 6r . WCpY L yrC rM « L o L VG _ Q T N r l w d q j u° r z � C "CPC` W C r r b V C L V � !tz 4 .`. —V ?r = M ow � pq = oy .F � c Y._w0 ` � q4 O ATV 4 <�i C rdyVV r VCr VcOOIZ LYL Y[ —vL CC V aV' V w__L t Vc L4 p 00rp t% YTr<C `V° ° uV ` [r w c e o Vdc OxOo qyo - .o. L.N. ryC Lo$ O qC „L.�i y _� r� o O•j C yWLrr PC »Cw..r wwC4�. NO C4 L u V V T W y Or V —V � V GY 4.L. �w [ [ 47 L��q ..s N [q w. •11 Yq0 8r�r I rV �Y d y O C O u 4 r V � C V C O [Np. •bY a. v. GrW.J „.GL r •n yP C. o c r T F V L` y g C T oL P44 L H V �4L ' = cc- q 0 CV 6r . WCpY L yrC rM « L o L VG _ YY r l w d q j u° r z r C ry "CPC` V N 4 —V r or co:� r a `zts .F � c Y._w0 ` q4 O ATV 4 <�i C rdyVV r VCr VcOOIZ LYL Y[ —vL CC V aV' V w__L t Vc L4 p 00rp t% YTr<C `V° ° uV ` [r w c e o Vdc OxOo qyo - .o. L.N. ryC Lo$ O qC „L.�i y _� r� o O•j C yWLrr PC »Cw..r wwC4�. NO C4 L u V V T W y =P4V rCj 2r Yq0 8r�r M °6 n w0 ° GIVG i °r xt —d4T� V40 zc q `P r_V C.q 4Y... t:5 G e w w C Ox S V c q Iz I �\ })2L % )k� ) 2ƒ)[ J @z \ / § #� — ƒ!— _ ( }} Z / \4 kk(, - \t#� Zz. : iy; })2L % )k� ) Ln 0 0. . / § ( }} Z / Zz. : \ \ ` ) a I{f{ Ln 0 0. .