Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1983/10/26 - Agenda Packet7 -.f l .� � Y .; � -r. 1977 A C T TON APPPOVED 5 -0 APPROVED 5 -0 PPR TED -0 PPROVED 5 -0 QTY OF RANCHO CUCAN-Mark R-A NLNG C0N /D,,1 SSk' N AGENDA Regular Meeting WEDNESDAY October 26, 1983 7:00 P.M. LIONS PARK COMMUNITY CENTER 9161 BASE LINE, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CAIdiORNIA L Pledge of Allegiance F, : 3.1 Commissioner Barker X Commissioner Juarez X Commissioner McNiel X IIL Announeements IV. Approval of Minutes August 30, 198: (Amended) September 28, 1983 (Amended) October 4, 1983 October 12, 1983 V. Consent Calendar PEMOVED & APPROVED 3 -2 REMOVED & APPROVED 5 -0 REMA =NING -CONSENT ND R APPRO ED 5 -0 Commissioner Rempel X Commissioner Stout X The foilowing Consent Calendar items are expect 6i o.i !!VILZ:�:i:LIY�YCf3Lak. 1 f e "all uc v'�.:.�._ ! by the one time without discussion. If anyone has concern it should be removed for discux,ion. Gv- [- C. EXTENSION FOR TENTATIVE expected to be routine Commission at over c ny iZem., 10277 - LSAtilriLii11H1� — ti UWSLOITt LUL bui Vi Awc: -- -- --- on 24.36 acres of land in the 11-1- 20,000 zone Iceated on the north side of Almond, east of Carnelian - APN 1061 - 171 -02. TIME ai-U:7 - .AV ]S"10 - t% W,-- acres of land in the R -3 /PD corner of Archibald Avenue 201 - 252 -23, 25, and 26. levelopment of t5l units on y. a zone located on the northeast and Highiand Avenue - APN KbVLLVT ea -La - rumr.A rzlr L%a - III= 4c�cavi+........ .. industrial buildings totaling 67,143 sq. ft. on 4.3 acres of land in the General Industrial category (Subarea 3) located on the north side of 7th Street, east of Hellman Avenue - APN 209- 171 -37 (a portion). D. E. land in the General In east side of Hyssop 229 - 283 -49. PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA OCTOBER 25, 1983 Page 2 RHA.N - The oeveiopment of two 000 and 70,000 sq. ft.) on 8.30 acres of istrial area ( Subarea 14) located on the Street, south of 7th Street - APN REVIEW 83 -31 - BARM3_KLsiN - T:fe cevel^rsnent of a 17,OJ0 sq. ft. manufacturing building on 2.10 acres of land containing an existing 22,100 square foot undustrial building located in the General Industrial category (Subarea 3) at 8613 Helms Avenue - APN 209-031 -31. The following items are public hearings in which concerned individuals may ,oice their opinion of the related project. Please wait to be recognized by the Chairman and address the Commission by stating your name and address. AU such opinions shall be iimitsd to 5 minutes per individual for each project. CONTINUED 5 -0 F. CONDITIONAL TJSE PERMIT 82 -18 - HOWARD - The revision To November 9, 1983 to a approved Conditional Use Permit for First cf '.'• d Church for the development of a 9400 square foot cpuii,iLng on 5.5 acres of land in the R- 1- 20,000 zone, located at the northeast corner )f A, ^hibald and Wilson Avenues - APN 201 - 381 -6i. ( Continued from September 28, 1983 meeting.) DENIED -4--1 G, FwurgONNNENT•re. -1, ASSESSMENT eNL GENEk._L PLAN AMENDMENT 83-04 B - SYCAMORE INVESTMENTS - A reoueczt. ±a ?monk the Gcne.ral Plan Land Use F.an from Office to Neighborhoed Commercial on 5.44 acres of land located at ?tl northeast corner ; " Archibald and Base Line - APN 202- 181 -27. (Continued .rom September 28, 1983 meeting.) DENIED 5 -0 H. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND ZONE CHANGE 83 -04 B - SYCAM R 1N TMEN TS - A change of zone from A -P Administrative Profesmo to C -1 (Neighborhood Commercial) on 5.44 acres of land located at the northeast corner of Archioald and Base Line - APN 202 - 181 -27. (Continued from September 28, 1983 meet -3g.) PLANNING COMPALSSION AGENDA October 26, 1983 Paae 3 APPRO "a_D 5-0 L ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 8218 - DAVIS DEVELOPMENT - A division of 4.74 acres of land into one parcel within Subarea 3 of the Industrial Specific Plan located on the north side of 7th Street, east side of Iiellman Avenue - APN 209 - 171-49 through 56. APPROVED 5 -0 J. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 83-08 - LEWIS - The development of a 377,665 square foot shopping center for Lewis Development an 8.67 acres of land in the C -2 zone located on the south side of Foothill Boulevard, between Hellman and Helms Avenue - APN 208- 261 -25, 26. APPROVED 5 -0 K. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAF tubs - LEWIS DEVELOPMENT COMPANY - A division of 8.66 acres of land into 2 parcels ;Uffi the C-2 zone located on the south side of Foothill Boulevard, between Helms and Hellman Avenues - APN 208 - 261 -25, 26. APPROVED 5 -0 L. REVISIONS TO TENTATIVE TRACT 11915 - MAYLK - Proposed architectural and site plan changes for a portion of a previously approved project consisting of 150 townhomes on 10.7 acres located at the southeast corner of Arrow and Turner and 44 patio homes on 6.3 acres located at the northeast corner of Turnner and 26th Street - Lots 1 be 2 of Parcel Map 7280. APPROVED 5 -0 M. ENV1itUNMtNTAL AJAS.uairisi�a ._••- - DEVELOPMENT 83-04 TENTATIVE TRACT M86 T- TAC - A change of zone from A -1 Limited Agriculture to R-3/PD (Multiple Family Residential/planned Development) and the development of 54 townhomes on 4.3 acres of land generally located west of Vineyard, north of Arrow - APN 207 - 211 -16. APPROVED 4 -1 N. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT lot subdivision of 19 WitTh provision that 11997 - LANDCO - A custom residential lots on 9.73 acres of land in the R -1- 20,000 zone located on various garage layouts, the southeast corner of Hillside Road and Beryl Street - APN setbacks 8 architectural treat -rents be used. 1 061 - 621 -31. APPROVED 5 -0 O. AMEND".'T•ENT TO i RACT 12090 - USA PROPERTIES - An amendment to the various smaller condominium lots to the larger models and slight modifications thereby to the open space. This is an approved project in process of development on 9.2 acres at the northwest corner of Archibald and Peron Boulevard - APN 209 -051 -01. PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA October 26, 1983 Page 4 APPROVED 5 -0 P. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 83 -19 - VILLA - The development of eight 8 apartment units on a 23,435 sq. ft. lot in the R -3 zone located at the northwest corner of Rancheria Drive and Tapia Via Drive - AP14 207- 122 -07, 08, 09. V',ZR. Pablie 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 appear on this agenda. 10:30 p.m. DL Adjournment The Pianning Commission has adopted Administrative Regulatiuns that set an 11 p.m. adjoumment time. If items 90 beyond that time, they shall be heard only with the consent of the Commission. • - - - QTY OF ` yR��A!`CHO CL'GllMONGA T' f7 T AGENDA Regular Meeting WEDNESDAY OetObes 26, 198-s 7:00 P.M. LIONS PARK COMMUNITX CENTER 9161 BASE LINE, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA L Piedge- of Allegiance IL Rall Cali Commissioner Barker _ Commissioner duerez Commissioner McNiel M. Announee(nrats IV. Approval of Minutes August 30, 1983 September 28, 1983 October 4, 1983 October 12, 1983 Y. Consent Calendar :r Commissioner Rempel Commissioner Stout The foliowing Consent Ca.endar items ar- expected to be routine and non - controversial. They will be octe d on by the Commission at one time without discussion. If anyone h (s concern over any item, it should be removed for discussion. A. TIME EXTENSION FOR TENTATIVE "RACT 10277 - BARMAKIAN •- A custom lot subdivision ecasisting of 22 lots on 24_36 acres of land in the R-1- 20,000 z -- located on the north side of Almond, east of ::arnelian - APN 1061 - 171 -02. B. TIME EXTENSION FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 11869 (PD 81-07 ) - ROBERTS - A total development of 87 units on 9.75 acres of laro in t -he R -21PD zone loeatc-d on the northeast corner of Archibald Avenue and Highland P_venue - APN 201 - 252 -239 25, and 25. C. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR _DEVEL(Prm =:nr REVIEW 83 -28 - HIMPs PETERS - The development of 15 irK=U'iai uaiiaiii.E;o t-tau g c7,, 43 sq. ft. 4.3 £ergs of I?nd � in the General Industrial category (Subarea 3) located on the north side of 7th Street, east of Hellman Avenue - APN 209- 171 -37 (a portion). PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA OCTOBER 26, 1983 Page 2 tt_ F.NV7R(1N1JfRXTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 83 -29 - FORHAN - The development of two industrial buildings 76,000 and 70,000 sq. ft.) on 8.30 acres of land in the General Industrial area (Subarea 14) located on the east side of Hyssop Street, south of 7th Street - APN 229 - 283 -49. E. REVIEW 83 -31 - BARMAKIAN - ine development of a i l,i utj sq. ft. manufacturing building on 2.10 acres of land containing an existing 22,130 square foot industrial building located in the General Industrial category (Subarea 3) at 8613 Helms Avenue - APN 209 - 021 -31. VL Public Hearings The following items are public hearings ir. which concerned individuals may voice their opinion of the rested project. Please wait to be recognized by the Chairman and address the Commission by stating your name and address. All such opinions shall be limited to 5 minutes per individual for each project. F. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 82 -18 - HOWARD - The revision To a previously approved Conditional Use Permit for First Assembly of God Church for the development of a 9400 square foot building on 5.5 acres of land in the R -1- 20,000 zone, located at the northeast corner of Archibald and Wilson Avenues - APN 201 - 381 -01. (Continued from September 28, 1983 meeting.) G. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN 1MRNn MF.NT .92-ne. R - SYCAMORE INVESTMENTS - A Office to Neighborhood Commercial on 5.44 acres of land located at the northeast corner of Archibald and Base Line - APN 202- 181 -27. (Continued from September 28, 1983 meeting.) H. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND ZUNL Utl&Ntsr. is3-u4 B - SYCAMORE LNV TMENTS - A change of zone from A -P Administrative Profession to C -1 (Neighborhood Commercial) on 5.44 acres of land located at the northeast corner of Archibald and Base Line - APN 202 - 181 -27. (Continued from September 28, 1983 meeting.) PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA October 26, 1983 Page 3 I. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 8218 - DAVIS DEVELOPMENT - A division of 4.74 acres of land -into one- parcel within Subarea 3 of the Industrial Specific Plan located on the north side of 7th Street, east side of Hellman Avenue - APN 209 - 171-49 through 56. 3. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE 9E1'lAI -03-08 - LEi'v'I.S - The development of a 377,665 square foot shopping center for Lewis Development on 8.67 acres of land in the C -2 zone located on the south side of Foothill Boulevard, between Hellman and Helms Avenue - APN 208 - 261 -25, 26. K. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 8063 - LEWIS DEVELOPMENT COMPANY - A division of 8.66 acres of land into 2 parcels within the C -2 zone located on the south side of Foothill Boulevard, between Helms and Hellman Avenues - APN 208- 261 -25, 26. L. REVISIONS TO TE &TATIVE TRACT 11915 - MA.YER - Of eroposea arcmtectural And site plan cringes ter a portion of a previously approved project consisting of 150 townhomes on 10.7 acres located at the southeast corner of Arrow and Turner and 44 patio homes on 6.3 acres located at the northeast comer of Turner and 26th Street - Lots 1 & 2 of Parcel Map 7280. uzrt.a.vr:nLl \x 0b-U4 LZLM t 1Ld001 - tn%. - A change of zone from A -i Limited Agriculture to R -3 /PD (Multiple Family Residential/Pl& med Development) and the development of 54 townhomes on 4.3 acres of land generally located west of Vineyard, north of Arrow - A.PN 207 -211 -16. N. RIMRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND iaaa. - - n MUSLV711 lUl rt!bK 11L1711 JULPU1Y1J1V11 Vl 17 lots on 9.75 acres of land in the R- 1- 20,000 zone located on the southeast corner of Hillside Road and Beryl Street - APN 1061- 621 -01. O. AMENDMENT TO TRACT 12090 - USA PROPERTIES - An amendment to the various smaller condominium lots to the larger models and slight modifications thereby to the open space. This is an approved project in process of development on 9.2 acres at the northwest corner of Archibald and Feron Boulevard - APN 209-051 -01. PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA October 26, 1983 Page 4 P. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 83 -19 - VILLA - The development of eight 8) apartment units on a 23,435 sq. ft. lot in the R -3 zone locaied at the northwest corner. of Rancheria Drive and Tapia Via Drive - APN 207- 122 -07, 18, 09. VU. Public Con. ments nis is the time and place for the general public to address the Commission,. Items to be discussed here are those which do not already appear on this agenda. UL Adjournment The P';annfng Commission has adopted Administrative Regulations that ;,;:t ay. I1 p.m. adjoummer_t time. If items go beyond that time, they shall be, heard only with the consent of the Commission. i 1 t •�`` L1 i 1 CUCar01.0. -OUAPI COU.T• .1010.AL ..i. / ONTAOIC INTEONATIONAL AW"NT' C7TY OF RANCHO CUCAMON`A .k CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting August 30, 1983 CALL TO ORDER Chairman Dennis Stout called the adjourned regular meeting of the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at 6:30 p.m. The meeting was held at the Lions Park Community Center, 9161 Base Line Road, dancho Cucamonga, California. Chairman Stout then led in the pledge of allegiance. ROLL CALL PRESENT: C010IISSIONERS: David Barker, Addie Juarez (arrived 6:50 p.in.) , Larry Mc Niel , Dennis Stout ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Herman Hempel (Excused) STAFF PRESENT: Tim J. Beedle, Senior Planner; Joan Kruse, Administrative Secretary; Jack Lam, Community Development Director; Paul Rougeau, Senior Civil Engineer COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: Chuck Coe, Senior Planner; Doug Payne; John Perevuzik; Tommy Stevens Tim Beedle, Senior Planner, reviewed the staff report stating that it would be presented in two segments: the County presentation, followed by City staff review of the major issues on the questions that were raised at previous meetings. lie indicated that following the presentation there would be time for comments. Mr. Beedle explained the process in the review of the draft plan indicating that the County Planning Commission would begin their hearings within the next four to six weeks. He indicated that following review of the plan by the Planning Commission, a recc-mmendation would be made to the City Council. Further, a copy of the Draft EIR will be furnished to the Planning Commission. Mr. Chuck Coe, Senior Planner, made a presentation of the Community Plan on behalf of the County of San Bernardino. He indicated that this is the public hearing phase following the presentation last April of goals, policies and the land use map. W. Coe indicated that the Draft Plan will be forwarded to the Planning Commission in October and to the Board of Supervisors by November. Mr. Coe stated that the prupose of this meeting is threefold: 1. To bring the City Planning Commission up to date on the Community Plan as it developed since last April; 1 ` . 2. to speak to the issue rased in the City's staff report relative to densities, land use districts, transfer of land use densities, service, and equeztriar trails; and 3_ it is hoped that a finding could be made with a recommendation to the City Council to support the Com:aanity Plan that the Commission will feel is appropriate. Mr. Coe stated that while th,: EIR is not yet complete, no new concerns have been raised. He added that the impact on services, such as water, sewer, roads, drainage, schools and fire services have been addressed, and he stated that the County has been wor {ing with the various agencies relative to services and would have a better idea when official comments on the Draft EIR have been received. Mr. Payne described the CommNnity Plan stating that it is divided into seven sections, including land use categories and building types, along with their requirements. Mr. Payne stated that the general pan map and the circulation map are adopted by policy and the and use district map is adopted by ordinance. M.^. Payne discussed three major issues: Compatibility with the City's General Plan and Specific Pans stati;:,g that the areas most directly affected are Etiwanda and Alta Loma. He stated that the goal of the community Plan is to be compatible with the west end of the community. Mr. Payne stated it is a goal of the Pan to discourage development on steep hillsides by allowing a 100 percent density transfer to more buildable sites. He indicated special studies will be required where slope conditions are such that they would benefit by the study with preliminary grading proposals and on planned residential developments. Mr. Payne stated that future building must conform to existing slope conditions. Mr. Payne advised that the County does not have the ability to provide a financing panning program for public facilities. Further, that the Plan identifies specific land use categories that recognizes public services for the area. The water district, he stated, is proposing an on site water management district as set up by the state and he spoke of the infrastructure needed to support development. He indicated interim school fees are proposed for those schools which would be impacted in the Alta Loma and Chaffey school districts, and that this could be implemented once the districts approach the Board of Supervisors. Equestrian trails and hiking trails are identified in the plan and the standards for them could be readily available to developers in that they could be a part of the conditions of approval and could be made a part of the equestrian area. Mr. Tim Beedle reviewed the staff report. Chairman Stout asked about the issues contained in the report and asked for comments from the Commission. There were none. Planning Commission Minutes -2- August 30, 1983 ! i t f 4 7:30 p.m. The Planning ;•,ommi.ssion recessed. 7:45 p.m. The Planning Coms'.ssion reconvened. Chairman Stout asked if any Commissioner had any issue that was not in the Plan that could or should be in it. Chairman Stout stated that the issues contained in the Plan should be broken into two different categories: those which are related to the Plan itself and those that relate to financing. Commissioner Mc Niel asked if what Mr Payne had stated is that a review committee is used to determine the need for services. Mr. Payne replied that any submittals like a subdir:isior. would go before an environmental review board through the review process. Further, that services are an issue and would have to be examined. Mr. Payne explained that they also have a subdivision review committee which includes water agencies, school districts, fire and police departments. Commissioner K--Niel asked what effect a project will have five years from now if there is nothing that actually pinpoints what services will be required five years from now. Mr. Payne replied that in general, the services that will be impacted are those services available to the community. If the number of homes are multiplied out they can see by the factors what services will be needed. Commissioner Mc Niel stated that these are not incorporated into the Plan at this time. Mr. Payne replied that the County can do this by factoring for each specific purpose. - .- =issicner Barker stated that if the County has something like this that works for schools, he would like to see it because his has not worked for years, Mr. Coe replied that they did not mean to imply in their presentation that service needs would not be addressed but they don't know what they would need to fully implement this Plan. Further, because of the scope of the Community Plan, financing can't be predicted and they did not know how facilities would be provided. ^,zmmissiorer Barker asked about parks, which have always been a problem to provide for. He asked specifically about the Rancho Cucamonga area and what provisions there would be for parks there. Mr. Coe replied that those topics would be addressed individually as projects are filed, cuiti,ci , t;at 'cr. f --emulating housing plans parks would have to be addressed by the developer who would have to provide public pa:R� ar to reserve land for parks. Planning Commission Minutes -3- August 30, 1983 Chairman. Stout stated that he is not familiar with the County process of providing these services and was not sure whe °e the Plan should stop and where the City's planning would begin. Mr. Stevens replied that when they say they cannot provide services beyond a certain level does not mean that these services will not be provided. Further, that when the Plan is adopted, they can come back and provide planning in much more detail that what they are doing today. c^. Stevens indicated that their charge at this time is to do this level of planning and with the City's recommendation, it will tell the County that they need to do a step further in services. He further indicated that they have done this in the past and they can do it again but they need direction and authority from the Board of Supervisors in order to do it. Chairman Stout stated that through this Plan they are looking at a possible additional 10- 15,000 people in the area which is almovt as much as a new city. He further stated that the Planning Commission does not want to wait until the foothills are developed the way that the Alta Loma area was before they begin planning for this development. He indicated that he could see the same thing happening in the foothills that caused the incorporation of the City of Rancho Cucamonga to occur. Chairman Stout felt it critical to have some kind of financial plan for the area and further felt that possibly a moratorium on development of the area is needed. Chairman Stout stated that this is not a c.rf-ticism of the plan because County planning staff has done exactly what they were asked to do. Mr. Stevens replied that they will receive the Commission's comments on all the areas and be able instead of stopping all projects, to keep certain areas open for development. In turn, they would like to at least have the ability to move abiad if they meet the City's concurrence or standards- Chairman Stout replied that it is not necessarily the standards —that his concern is that an opportunity exists to design a financing plan to carry through 20 years from now with infrastructure that will be there. Mr. Coe stated that the County's plan acts as a catalyst for input on infrastructure and schools. Chairman Stout stated along with the several issues being discussed he noticed there did not seem to be any difficulty with having equestrian trail standards; however, he saw the issue of dedication as a possible "catch 22 ". Mr. Stevens replied that when a project comes through and if a trail is needed in certain areas, it will be provided. Commissioner Barker asked how this would be accomplished. Mr. Stevens replied that if it is needed they will reserve the land to protect the continuity to link up with the equestrian trails from project to project. Development of ';e hall system will come once a form of maintenance aaa be established. Parks would be taken care of in much the same manner and he did not feel that providing for this would be insurmountable. Planning Commission Minutes -4- August 30, 1983 Chairman Stout asked what the policy of the County has been in the past for maintenance of parks and trails. 1"h'. Stevens replied that in certain areas they have districts that provide for parks, roads and drainage systems. He indicated that the parks are a high maintenance type service and is the one that needs the closest attention because of the amount of money needed from the maintenance aspect. Mr. Stevens stated that when a developer has placed the improvements, it is also determined who Will maintain. Commissioner Harker stated that a standard in the Plan states nothing will be done on trails until the Hoard of Sisperrisors take action on a maintenance plan. Mr. Stevens stated they will make a change in the wording so that whatever is necessary for the trails will be reserved. Chairman Stout stated that there are actually three different things going on: the reservation of the land itself; the trail standards of the City; and the maintenance. Of these three areas, Commissioner Stout asked just how far the Plan goes. Yr. Payne replied that in current County policy they cannot maintain_ the trails. What Mr. Stevens said is when the project comes through they will hold the right- of-way and will pick up by designing structures and the offer of dedication in enough detail so that the trail system is clear. There was general discussion on how landscaping will be ensured along with the trails standards. Chairman Stout stated that what the Commission should transmit to the County Planning Commission and the Hoard of Supervisors is that they have strong concerns about the lack of a financing plan for the services in the Community Plan. He felt that this should be done before any development occurs. V _ Coe replied that it is important for this Planning Commission and the City Cour__il to make their paints known because there are many others who feel the -me way and that this would be competing for limited county *_finds. He indicates I.iiat the County is not designed to handle service areas and everytime a new district comes up, they have a p,oblem. He indicated that in Chino Hills service was established as a part of the project and it is not something that they h"e an answer for. He indicated further that the City needs to personally become involved in the revenue process. Chairman Stout stated that if the City Council decides to rat'- the Planning Commission's concerns there will be some sort of formal policy statement which goes to tha County ?I?_nning Commission and the Board of Supervisors expressing their conccrus. Mr. Coe stated with regard to schools, the school disricts have a vehicle with the County to establish fees for impaction and when this is done the County collects the fees. planning Commission Minutes -5- August 30, 1983 The consensus of the Commission was that the Board of Supervisors be made aware of the need for a financing plan for services to be established. Commissioner Barker stated that in the proposal two things are talked about: density bonuses and density transfers and going from ': units to the acre to 8 ur_its to the acre and his nightmare is that now you will have higher density impacting low density areas. There was discussion relative to density bonuses, transfers and the population that could be suppo^ted in muck: of the area which is - nvircnmentally sensitive. Mr. Coe stated ;.hat County staff feels the Plan zceauately addresses services, capacity and the anviro ^meat and it ir, a 5Lbjeativ °_ issue of what is compatible with the surrounding area. He indicated that there is no doubt in his mind that there will be some issues that they know the City will support aid they think the Plan can be made more compatible. He indicated that if what the Commission Grants is single family detached homes, it should say so. Commissioner Y_-Niel expressed ccncern that as the Plan is presented with the density transfers, it may be too close to giving the farm away. Chairman Stout stated that they would hate to see somaone who bad moved his density transfer to a lower area off the slope put in a high density project. He further- statea that the concern would be alleviated if there was some maximum capacity for density transfer because it appears to be wide open with the way the Plan is now written. Mr. Payne explained the subareas and their designation. Commissioner Mc Niel stated that he was concerned with the area north of Etiwanda as it develops. Mr. Beedle explained -hat the General Plan guidelines are for development in the various lope areas. Further, that the overall issue is density; and further explained the recommendation of 1 unit per 40 acres instead of 1 unit per 10 gross acres as shown in the County Plan. Chairman Stout asked for consensus on this issue. Commissioner Barker asked if they could address the issue of density transfers from one area to another; and limiting a holding capacity on a particular piece of property. Chairman Stout stated that this should be addressed by some .finite rule. He indicated he felt it unfair that they do not have something more specific in that it will not say what the Plan means. Mr. Barker stated that the recommendation from staff was 1DU per 40AC and that there was no compromise t.,ith 1 DU /AC. Chairman Stout stated that he would rather say 1DU per 40AC to be consistent with the General Plan. Planning Commission Minutes -6- August 30, 1983 Mr. Beedle stated that the other issue is affordable housing and the question on the table is the City's concern of applications on a countywide policy in that area. lie indicated that there iJ- no reason that the C_ *_y recommend to the County that this policy be examined to meet the character of this Planning area. Commissic.n.er Barker asked if the Commission has already met consensus on item six relative to Chairman Stout's service district or financial plan. Chairman Stout replied that there should be some type of language because of the terrain and its sensitivity which also affects affordable housing. Co— issioner Barker asked what effect the transfer of residential density will have in special easements. Mr. Payne stated the Plan says that densities can be transferred when they are combined with an open space program and it is not automatically made, it is only made when there are £indi�gs. Chairman Stout stated that there war, consensus from the Commission that on the issue of affordable housing, it should be limited based upon the terrain. Mr. Lowell Gomes, landowner and a committee participant, stated that if the Commission was to say it was excluding the hillside area from affordable housing, they would rot be offending any property owner in that area because they do not feel that this type of housing is marketable in the area. Commissioner Barker asked if it would be appropriate to address trails on either side of the road and other small concerns such as that. Mr. Beedle replied that staff would be glad to take comments from the Commission back t;o the County and it would be helpful to go through the issues and give staff guidance in this area. Commissioner Mc Niel stated that most of the densities in the Plan are relative to the City's range but are at the top end, for example, where the City shows 2-4 the Plan shows 4. Fe asked in light of the bonus and density transfer would it not be wise that the range be reduced to the bottom Of the range since the possibility exists that what they will be doing is giving away density. Mr. Joe Dilorio tar_ other, spoke of the issue of affordable housing and indicated that tin-re are specific design standards for the subarea in the Etiwanda Specific Plan that must be applied and focused in that area. Further, that it appears the difference between the County's Community Plan and the Etiwanda Specific Plan is the design standards and type of housing. He indicated that the landowners would support doing a specific plan. He also spoke of the special mechanism for review to meet questions that have been raised. Commissioner Mc Niel asked if this Plan goes through and subareas are created for future specific plan, how would this fit with the Community Plan? planning Commission M nutes -7- August 30, 1983 Mr. Beedle replieu that certain topics can be addressed by specific plans on a subarea basis. However, there are some other areas that are general, such as o.ili:tyes or Py-ano_:n g p.a. which should d be handled through a areawide plan. Commissioner Mc Niel asked how this will affect density. Mr. Beedle stated that the Commission can state whether it is not satisfied with the density bonus proposal and affordable housing policy because of the potential impaction of services. He indicated that a specific plan can set more closely the holding capacities of subareas within the planning area. Chairman Stout stated that one thing they did in the general Plan is require a master plan for certain areas. He asked if a master plan would be consistent with a specific plan's subareas. Mr. Beedle explained that a master plan is a generic name of a plan for certain topics before any development occurs. Q7airman Stout asked if the County -an require certain areas to have a master plan for some subareas. Kr. Stevens replied that it can. Mr. Coe stated what typically occurs is that a ?UD is required by the County prior to any development plan. Mr. Beedle asked if what Mr. Coe said is that you can use a PUD where there is multiple ownership. Mr. Coe replied affirmatively. !L^. Beedle stated that you could use the PUD process like a master plan. There was further discus3ion of whether a master plan, specific plan or the Coxminity Kan would be the best vehicle to address this area and the use of density bonuses within it. Commissioner Barker stated that perhaps a specific plan would best address this for the area above ctiwanda. He indicated it would give clarification for the whole density issue and he would feel more comfortable knowing what the numbers are. Mr. Stevens replied that a specific plan can address the issue of density and bonuses. Mr. Beedle suggested that there be a tenth recommendation which would state that overdlt pl:rning be done that examines development issues and holding capac:ti, for the area which is shown as residential in the Plan. There was consensus among the Commission that this be done. Planning Commission !Minutes -8- August 30, 1983 Motion: Moved by Ba. -ker, seconded by McNiel, carried unanimously, to recommend to the City Council approval of the Draft Community Plan, subject to the 10 recommendations az modified by the P'a- ^ -' ^9 C�mt°issicn. Mr. Beedle stated that this Will now be moved to the City Council with the recommendations of the Planning Commission. Mr. Beedle thanked the County staff for the work they have done in the development of the Foothill Community Plan. Motion: Moved by Juarez, seconded by McNiel, carried unanimously, to adjourn. i i a i 9:55 P•m• the Planning Commission adjourned. Respectfully submitted JACK LAM, Secretary Planning Commission W.nutes -9- August 30, 1983 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION M114UTES Adjourned Regular Meeting Development Code Workshop October u- '9A3 CALL TO ORDER Chairman Dennis Stout called the Adjourned Regular Meeting of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at 6:30 p.m. The meeting was held at the Lions Park ^,ommunity Center, 9161 Base L ne Road, Rancho Cucamonga. C0?gMISSIONERS PRESENT: Dave Barker, Addie Juarez, Larry Melviel, Herman Rempel, Dennis Stout COMMTSST_ONERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Dar. Coleman, Associate P;.anner; Frank Drecicman, Assistant Planner; Edward Hopson, Assistant City Attorney; Curt Johnston, Assistant Planner; Joan Kruse, Administrative Secretary; Michael Vairin, Senior Planner APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion: Moved by Juarez, seconded by Barker, carried, to approve the Minutes of the September 6, 1983 Adjourned Regular Planning Commission meeting. commissioner Rempel abstained because he %.-as not present. Motion: Moved by Barker, seconded by Juarez, carried, to approve the minutes of the September 20, 1983 Adjourned Regular Planning Commission meeting. a c a s Chairman Stout advised that the purpose of this meeting is to review the Development District Map for conformance with the General Plan and to complete a detailed review of the Residential Development Standards. Senior Planner, Michael Vairin, presented the staff report indicating that they would concentrate on the Development District mps as well as the zoning maps with the iaitent to attain consistency with the General Plan. Mr. Vairin advisea that Curt Johnston would review the Development District !Saps and Tan Coleman would review and conc.ude with the charts contained within Chapter 4 of the Development Code which are the Development Standards Charts. I Mr. Vairin explained that the Development Code hearings would conclude on October 12 at which time a resolution would be prepared for the Planning Ccmmission and a preliminary ordinance prepared for the City Council incorporating all the revised chapters. He stated there would also be minor adjustments to the definition section prior to distribution of the final draft to the City Council. Curt Johnston, Assistant Planner; then reviewed the Development District Map. He explained the medium density areas which were shown on the General Plan Map and which should be shown as low medium in order to more readily transition the residential areas. Mr. Vairin reiterated tint the General Plan shows a density range of 4 -14; however, the Planning Commission and the City Council has stated that this is too broad a range and preferred a low medium category with a density range of 4-8 in order to provide for transition. Mr. Johnston explained Exhibit A as a good site for a low- medium density range. He stated that currently there are two approved projects in the area at nine units per acre. Chairman Stout asked for comments on Exhibit A. Commissioner Rempel asked if there are any tentative maps in the area at the present time. Mr. Johnston replied that there are two, the Shafer Westland project and the Roberts Group; however, the area in question does not have anything on it at the present time. Chairman Stout opened the public hearing and stated he thought the area shown in exhibit A should be designated as low- medium, 4-8 dwelling units per acre. Mr. Jeff Sceranka, representing the Rancho Cucamonga Chamber of Commerce, stated that he was a member of the Planning Commission when the General Plan was set and indicated that there was a lot of debate and much discussion on the residential are= to the west of the proposed designation change concerning the maintenance and buffering. Mr. Sceranka indicated he would ccneur with the residents that making the density 4-8 dwelling units per acre would make a lot of sense. The consensus of the Planning Commission was to designate the area shown in Exhibit A to low- medi:am, with a density range of 4-8 dwelling units per acre. Mr. Johnston stated that the second area in question is further to the south and near the Stater --ho p .,.. yytac -.6_ center and is actually two areas. He further stated that to address Mr. Rempel`s question, the M.J. Brock site is under construction at 6.4 dwelling units per acre and by designating it medium they would really be making it non - conforming to the General Plan. He indicated that this site is a little bit different because there is a mobile home park, single family tract homes by Lightner Construction Company avid a number of condominium projects adjacent. Planning Coals sion Minutes -2- October 4, 1983 Commissioner Hempel questioned whether there would getting a !tingle loaded street within this area. Mr. Vairin stated that it would be possible to get pr with a possible access way or even private streets. discussed with the conclusion that it does match the side. be a size oroblem in hate drives in that area The size of the area was street shown on the east Commissioner Mc Niel asked about the tree farm in that area. Mr. Vairin replied that it would remain in the A -14 density range which would be consistent with the area. Commissioner Bar ?cer asked if it would be possible to transition that site to 4-8 dwelling units per acre. Commissioner Hemel stated that he has no real problem with this if someone came in with other parts and divided the tree farm and the area below, there might be room. Further, there could always be modification_ at a later date. Chairman Stout asked the Commission to indicate whether there should be a change to the present density range. The consensus of the Commission was to have a range of 4-8 dwelling units per acre for the two areas in question. Hr. Vairin interjected that with the General Plan there is the option of changing this at a later time without a General Plan amendment. 1- iMr. Johnston showed the third area near the (ask 'n° Cleaver restaurant where a duplex project is under consideration. He indicated that loc there is an ated elementary school and a church as well as a mobile home par nearby with the Acacia project and a series of older homes. He indicated that part of the issue is that there is industrial mixed single family homes. Mr. Vairin stated that currently there is a project under construction with a { density range of 7.7 dwelling units per acre. lie asked if it should remain at { that range or be allowed to go higher. He indicated that it would be better to zone to the lower end of the range and charge this at some time in the future. commissioner Hempel stated he foresees this going into the Irdustrial Specific plan at some point in the future so it would be better to leave it where it iis. He indicated that his feeling is that it should be 4 -8 dwelling units per acre at the maximum. 1 � The consensus of the Commission is that this area be designated 4 -8 dwelling IIL..units per acre. Kr. Johnston discussed area D-2 and that the staff recommendation is that this should be 4 -8 dwelling units per acre in order to maintain the integrity of the area. Chairman Stout asked why the zoning isn't 2 -4 dwelling units per acre. Planning Commission Minutes -3- ()otober 4, 1983 Mr. Vairin replied because at the time it was felt that with its location and access problems it would not warrant a lower density. Further, that the oroperty owner was requesting this designation. Commissioner Rempel stated that he did not remember this being discussed. Mr. Vairir_ sated that this could be taken up in the future for General Plan amendment discussion. M:,. Rempel stated this would be the proper way of handling this and stated the General Plan Amendment could change the density to 2-4 dwelling units per acre; however, 4 -8 dwelling units per acre is all right at this time. Mr. Sceranka stated he did not think there was any discussion on this area. The consensus of the Planning Commission was to designate this area at 4 -8 dwelling units per acre. Mr. Johnston reviewed another area and indicated that this originally was a part of the planned communities. He explained the high density designation and the medium density designation as shown currently on the zoning map, with a descri,ticn of the nearest property. Mr. Johnston indicated further that the property owner requesting the designation change is in the audience and that the request is in conformance with the General Plan. Chairman Stout asked if this would require a General Plan Amendment. Mr. Vairi.n replied that it would not as it is a border line case and there is some room to decide which category this piece should be in. Further, given the Victoria Planned Community, it would make sense to put it in the same category. The property c;aners, Mr. and Mrs. Diamond, 12559 Base Line, stated they were in favor of this change. Commissioner Barker stated it would be consistent to continue all high density in this area. The consensus of the Planning Commission was to change this area to high density. Mr. Sceranka asked if the property owners in this area and all others affected by the changes to the Development Design Map would be informed of the changes made. He recommended that notification be *-de -i the in_r.aract of good public relations and to alleviate any future problems. The Commission concurred with Mr. Sceranka's statement that staff notify all property owners to advise them of any major differences in the zoning other than what they were led to believe when they purchased their property. Mr. Johnston explained the Commercial /Office category which districts include neighborhood commercial, general commercial and office professional. He indicated that the most significant boundary changes from the current zoning map would include the west side of Haven south of Foothill near the K -Mart Planning Commission Minutes -4- October 4, 1983 which is M-1 and is proposed to change to office /Professional. Relative to the commercial area he indicated there is the old downtown. Alta Loma which is .. M -1 and residential so revisions are necessary for conformance with the General Plan with a proposed change to general commercial. Charrman Stout asked if the background information on this was gathered by going to the assessor's parcels. Mr. Johnston replied that this is how it was done because Chere were so many Chairman Stout asked if any conflicts worth noting were found. Mr. Johnston replied there were none. K-. Sceranka asked for clarification of terminology on the General Plan sc that people would know what the different types of commercial_ are. Mr. Johnston deferred to Mr. Vairin who stated that within the Victoria Plan these categories appear; however, convenience commercial is not on a map except on an as needed basis resulting from a market study in the neighborhood commercial category. He indicated that they wanted to keep these three categories for the General. Plan. Mr. Sceranka asked if these will be differentiated for the General Plan. Mr. Vairin replied that the reference to these categories is within the two planned communities only. Chairman Stout asked, if there was a reason to put additional categories in the planned communities, would there have to be a general plan amendment. Mr. Vairin replied yes, but you would take care of the zoning at the same ;ime. Mr. Johnston went on to the Open Space category which includes hillside residential, open space, flood control and utility corridor. He indicated that these areas are designated in the northern section of Alta Loma where the natural terrain limits development potential. Further, the largest area of hillside residential occurs at the northwest corner of Zo eCiR-1-1, t , no and an Almond, between Sapphire and Turquoise and is currently application has been submitted for this area. Mr. Johnston explained the flood control areas stating that a compatible use would be a nursery or Christmas tree farm. Chairman Stout stated that as the City channelizes a lot ro ma He asked channels a lot of land is being removed from the flood control problem. if any thought has been given to taking some of this area that had been designated as flood control and changing it to something else. K-. Vairin and Mr. Johnston stated that at some point in time if these flood control areas are deemed to be developable they can be changed through a zone change. Planning Commission Minutes -5- October u, 1983 Pam Henry asked why the area in the northern corner which is a utility corridor can't be designated that way. Mr. Vairin explained that they are owned by the Metropolitan Water District and are shown a3 a line on the map. Mr. Coleman indicated that the corridor is 600 feet wide. Mr. Vairin stated that this area should be given some consideration to zoning. Chairman Stout asked that although they don't own the lard in fee don't they have some easement on the property. W. Vairin stated that property owners are able to use the land but they cannot put up a permanent structure such as a horse barn. Chairman Stout stated that the point he wished to make is that, if they have an easement of land in fee he doesn't know wfiy it wou'_c. be any different than any other utility corridor. Mr. Vairin stated that you could go either way and be safe. He indicated that staff will check :his particular piece of property before the next meeting, but he was sure th;t it had not been purchased. Mrs. Henry asked about the piece of property owned by Sievers Development Company at the top of Beryl and the reason for not continuing that particular wash. Mr. Vairin replied that this will be examined but it does not go that far. He explained how it would connect and make a different zone. 'Further, that they wanted to encourage that this become part of a development and if it is zoned flood control, the City might have to purchase the property. Mrs. Henry stated that is why the open space designation would be the proper one for the area. Chairman Stout stated that as a practical matter the terrain would prevent any development and if the designation were changed the City would have to buy it. Mr. Vairir_ recommended that as development comes forward on this piece of property it be looked at. Chairman Stout asked for consensus on the utility corridor. Ibe consensus of the Commission was that this be explored further. Mr. Johnston reviewed Specific Plans and Planned Communities. Chairman Stout asked if there would be conflict between the definitions and general concepts relative to the designations proposed or are they fairly consistent. Planning Commissics Minutes -6- October 4, 1983 I+r•. Voirir, replied that t!jPy are fairly consistent and when you deal with specific plans and planned comities they don't generally call out all individual land uses. The planned community is a specific zoned area and it is being zoned as a land mass and as a whole. Mr. 9airin pointed out the Data Design situation and suggested that it be amended to the planned area shown as Industrial Park, category zone. Mr. Sceranka asked if the areas that the City owns would be designated as open e"aee ;n ordPr to Dian for par's land. - - Mr, Vai_ ^in replied that they will not, although it can be shown as open space. =ie asked W. Johnston how they are currently shown. Mr. Johnston replied a number of things such as schools, fire stations, Chaffey College, civic certer, freeway rig`7,t- of -w2y are designated as residential. 1qr. Vairin stated that the City could show the parks it owns as open space on the map . The Commission felt that City owned parks should be shown in this manner. Qiairman Stout stated that the Commission would discuss the overlay district. Mr. Johnston explained of the three districts previously discussed, mobile home parks will be eliminated and included in the residential area and another overlay area will be added which is an equestrian overlay in the north Alta Loma area above Banyan. Chairman Stout stated he thought that the area just south of Banyan and west of Sapphire should be added to this district. Mr. Vairin explained that it would not prevent the people living there from having horses. Commissioner Rempel stated that the properties that are now excluded should be; the reason is because of deed restrictions, and they must be careful not to include those areas with the restrictions in the overlay area. Mr. Hopson s::ated that Mr. Rempel is right in concept but he did not know how the CC&R=s can be pulled in residential tracts and the acreage covered in the overlay. He indicated it would be a gigantic task. Mr. Coleman read a section of the code on animal regulations that deals with this in the Development Code. Commissioner Rempel stated that the Commission and the Council have passed a resolLtion that allows horses in any future development. He felt that something should be said so that there will not be hassles over this. Mr. Vai.rin replied that the Development Code contains a statement in the event there is a conflict between the CC&R's that the more restrictive covenant would be applicable. Planning Commission Minutes -7- October 4, 1983 Commissioner Rempel stated that what he is getting at is that he does not want the reverse of that either. Mr. Vairin stated that the Code speaks to this issue on pages 91 and 162 of the revision. Commissioner Rempel stated that his only concern is that the Commission does not face Pature problems in dealing with this issue. Commissioner Barker stated that the Code is all right as long as it covers the 168:iG i.ia `uGtii uia CiJ a.iviao. Mr. Johnston stated that relative to the master plan and the General Plan statements staff will add the designation to the zoning map so that it will be clear to developers that a master plan is required. Further, that the original intent was that they would add the master plan designation stating it will be required when the master plan is done but if it is done initially, it would work better. Mr. Johnston then went into the Special Considerations section. yr. Vairin stated that they would prefer, since these are permitted uses or conditional uses within the special zones, that they be shown as proposed because they will be much clearer to understand. He also asked the Commission to keep in mind the Foothill Freeway corridor. He explained the possibility of inverse condemnatin should the designations change. There were no comments from the Commission on the Special Considerations Section. Chairman Stout asked that other properties held by the city such as Civic Center also be shown. rt^. Vairir, explained why tney did not choose to do this and the ability :o include some of these designations into the Industrial Specific Plan. He fe_t there might be a redundancy. Chairman Stout stated that he only wants something shown on he map so that everyone will know what is proposed to be there. yr. Vairin replied that this could be done through the use of an asterisk marking. Further, that the Chamber of Commerce map will show there areas. Commissioner Rempel stated that the only people looking for s!ach designations will be developers and people purchasing property. Mr. Sceranka spoke of the special language in the General Plan that deals with Chaffey College and its surrounding area, and asked if this special designation will also be shown on the development district map. He also asked if this special language could be shown in the text of the zoning ordinance. Mr. Vairin explained that this is a very precise policy for a ipeci'ic area. Planning Commission Minutes -8- October 4, 1983 Chairman Stout stated that this was left out of the General Plan but he is sure that the City complies with t`iis. Mr. Sceranka stated that most developers will not look at the General Plan but at a zoning map or they will go to the Development Code. He felt it should be called out in the zoning map. Mr. Johnston replied that the pieces around Chaffey College would all have an asterisk to designate it being a special area. Commissioner Rempel stated that this could be a master planned area. hir. Johnston replied that is correct.. Following brief discussion, consensus of the Commission was that the only matter to be brought back at the next meeting is the utility corridor issue. a { ■ x ■ 7:45 p.m. The Planning Commission recessed B:05 p.m. The Planning Commission reconvened Commissioner Juarez left the meeting at 7:55 p.m. f E i • i Chairman Stout stated that the se._ond major issue concerning basic and optional development standards would be discussed. Mr. Coleman explained the basi-, and optional standards to the Commission. Commissioner Barker asked about cul-de -sacs and front setback lines. Mr. Vairin explained hog: this is done and referred the Commission to numbers 4 and 7. Mr. Coleman explained the reduction in open space in No. 16. Commissioner Barker stated he wanted a guarantee that 75 feet of open space would be used by private owners and that common areas will not be lost by building density. He asked if this would give him that guarantee. Mr. Ooleman replied that it ::vuid because the C?ty it now requiring 40 percent. Further, thst whatever is required in private ends up in common as it is just a breakdown of percentages. Mr. Vairin stated that the 40 percent can be left but this af-fords the ability to select where the open space is put. Further, it provides flexibility in design. Commissioner Rempel asked about the 100 -foot setback on upper story units. He felt it was too little. Planning Commission Minutes -9- October 4, 1983 I. . . .. Mr. Vai in stated that even when it is under 100 feet developers ask if the: must have a balcony. Commissioner Rempel stated that if a minimum is set they would have a hard time arguing the point. Commissioner Rempel stated that on the low medium it should be at = ast 200 and on the low at least 150. Mr. Scaramka stated that he was curious about lowering the percentage from 40 to 35 on open space. Mr. Coleman explained the difference between the basic and optional standards and how it would affect this. Following brief discussion among the Commission the consensus was to go to 35- -40 percent. Chairman Stout stated it was difficult to compare the two charts and suggested that they be set up on such a way within the Development Code so 'rt_ : they would invite easy comparison. in conclusion, Mr. Vai ir. reviewed the new requirements under the optional development standards. :hey include increased setbacks around the perimeter of the project, recreation facilities, front yard lardseapi_pg, and energy conservation measures. The energy requirement will require an alternative energy system to provide domestic hot water to all dwelling units and heating DDols and spas. The Commission corsensc:s was to approve these standards. e * t * a 9:00 p.m. The Planning Commission Adjourned Respectfully submitted, JACK LAM, Secretary Planning Commission Minutes -10- October 4, 1983 OF R_A% -H0 CUCAMONGA ' lilt_ PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting Sentember 28, 1983 Chairma•1 Dennis Jt01t cal'pd the Regular The tmeeting was held at Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at 7:0epimg 161 s - Rancho Cucamonga, the Lions Park Community Center, ^ in pledge to the flag. California. Chairman S,.ou.. th° —_ ed ROIL CALL COMMISSIONERS: David Barker, Addie Juarez, Larry McNiel, PRESENT: Dennis Stout, Herman Rempel ABSENT: CCMMISSIONERS: None STAFF 'RESIAT: Rick Gome z, City Planner' va.—rd Hopson, Assistant "r City Attorney; Part Johnston, Assistant Planner; Jack Lam, Community Development Director; Janice Reynolds, Secrets =,: Paul Rougeau, Senior Civil &ngineer; Michael Vairin, Senior Planner APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion Moved by Barker, seconded by Juarez, carried, to approve the Minutes of the august 211, 1983 Planning Commission meeting• Commissioners Re=pel and McNiel abstained from vote as they were not in attendance at that eeeting. CONSENT CALENDAR GROUP A A. TIME EXTENSION FOR cNTATIVE ?RACY 110111 - THE DEVELO� deve opaent change of zone from R -1 and R -i -S to R -303D for total p- generally located of 80 singie family attached units on i0.1 acres of ]and ge y on the west side of Ramona at Monte vista Avenue -APN 202- 181 -05, 05, and 15. B. TIME EXTENSION FOR CONDITIONAL development of a church facility located on thc: east side of Haven, USE PEi(MIT 82 -03 - h'ORTHKIRK - The on 3.3 acres of land in the R -1 zone, south of Figbland - APN 202 - 5111 -24. Motion: Moved by Barker, seconded by Re=pel, unanimously carried, to adopt the consent calendar. Commissioner Barker advised that he would like staff to relay to the applicant of item B that when this project comes before Design Review, alternative methods other than asphalt could be considered for the parking area. Planning Commission Minutes -1- September 28, 1983 } * i i i PUBLIC HEARINGS C. CONSIDERATION CF REVOCATION OR MODIFICATION TO OPERATING CONDITIONS FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 78 -03 - BOARS HEAD - This is a review of potential operational modifications to the conditions of approval which are intended to resolve complaints and disturbances created by this establishment. The business is within. the Rancho Plaza located on the northwest corner of Carnelian and 19th Street. Rick Gomez, City Planner, reviewed the staff report. Chairman Stout opened the public hearing. Larry Arcinage, owner of the Boars Head, addressed the Commission advising that his establishment began serving dinner as of Sectember 27, 1983. Fe stated that he was not sure what this would do to help with the noise problem as it would bring more people to the restaurant. He further stated that this is the third time he has been before the Planning Commission and considered it a form of harassment. He advised that the shopping center ouneu�reme.ts spent in excess of $12,000 trying to comply with the City's requirements alleviate neighbor complaints. He pointed out that some of the complaints registered with the sheriff's department state problems with 17 patrons fy year old kids in the parking lot. He advised that these are not pa Boars Head and could be Bob's Big Boy patrons, over which the Boars Head would have no control. He further stated that many noise problems associioated Head the shopping center parking lot are not entirely originated by customers and that many of the problems, such as racing around the parking lot, are caused by people driving in off of Carnelian. He additionally stated that the complaint of bottles being thrown against fences and into back yards cannot be attributed to the Boars Head since they do not allow containers to leave the premises. He stated that most of the complaints come from one family, the Futrells, and suggested that possibly their religious beliefs play a large part in their complaints. Mr. Arcinage further stated that 60 to 70 percent of his business is generated between the hours o£ 11 p.m. to 1:30 a.m. and that if his hours are cut back, he could not economically keep his establishment open. Rick Gomez, City Planner, advised that the Conditional Use Permit vas granted with the restaurant as the primary use and the bar an ancillary use. Judy Adams, 6611 Topaz, addressed the Commission in support of the Boars Head. She advised that she lives directly behind the Boars Head sessions She been bothered by the noise problems since Mr. Arcinage Took p o calls and the stated that if occasionally noise becomes a problem, she employees are quick to alleviate the disturbance. She pointed out that Bob's Big Boy remains open until i a.m. and agreed that not all of the noise can be attributed to the Boars Head. Planning Commission Minutes -2- September 28, 1983 Douglas 1400re addressed the Commission in opposition the Boars Head stating that the problem originates in that the Conditional Use Permit£ asPgrasnnted for a restaurant which has no materialized. He suggested be a restaurant, it should be a restaurant; however, if it is Song to be a bar, it should to in an area compatible with this type of use. Mel Futrell, 6623 Topaz, addressed the Commission in opposition to the Boars Head staling tidal :while i`• �y appe =r that he is the only one complaining, he is actually the spokesman for many of his neighbors. He stated that the problem with the Boars Head is the hours it is open and that being open until 1.30 or 2 a.m. is too late for a residential area when ao compatible closing and go to work in the morning. He suggested 10 p.m. time. He commended Mr. ryrcinao 's attitude in trying to work out problems with the neighborhood, but stated that the use is just not compatible. 1-gr. Futrell submitted a letter from to the Commission which voiced her neighborhood incompatibility. Bonnie Worrell, an adjacent neighborhor, opposition to the Boars head based on Gene Collins addressed the Commission stating that he has been working with the Boars Head or, the sound problem. He advised that the back door is being replaced and a sound proof door is being installed and that he wanted the Commission to know that they are aware of and are working on the noise problem. Laura Ford addressed the Commission in opposition to the Boars Head stating that this is not a compatible use in a residential neighborhood. Gayle Dyke addressed the Commission in apposition stating the Boars Head are uncompatible with a residential area. June Rice addressed the Commission stating that a bar should this area, however, a restaurant would be compatible. stating that he has had a come to his door asking to parking lot. He suggested restaurant, not a bar with A resident at 6671 Topaz, addressed the Commissio n back yard full of beer bottles and has had people use his telephone after being in a fight in the that the Conditional Use Permit should be for a rowdy patrons. that the hours of not be allowed in Larry Arcinage, Boars Head owner, addressed the Commission business stating that practice. He limiting the hours of operation to 10 p.m. is not good that he should also be pointed out that Bob's Big Boy is open until 1 a.m. and ess allowed to remain open until that time. that He stated Bows forcing the Head tos contributes to the City's tax base and could even more problems will leave a half empty shopping center, which for adjacent residents. Chairman Stout closed the public hearing. Planning Commission Y.inutes —3— September 28, 1983 Commissioner McNiel stated that when he knew this item was coming before the Commission again, he visited the parking lot of the Boars Head around closing time. He stated that there was i•.ctivity in the parking lot between 1:20 a.m. and 1:30 a.m. and that by 1:45, a.m. the parking l.ot was empty. He pouted 01-It that Bob's was also closing at this :ime. He also stated that he observed one car driving behind the Boars Head and when he investigated, found that the chain had been removed. He further stated that he realized that limiting the hours may be the guillotine for the establishment unless they change their method of operation, however, did not see any other way. He advised that he would not like to be a neighbor of the Boars Head. Commissioner Barker stated that when this item came before the Commission several months ago it was a use which bordered on incompatibility, however the ComWissio:: was satisfied that the owner of the property had made satisfactory efforts to mitigate problems. He further stated that there are certain characteristics which are incompatible with residential areas and that this use does not blend and is not working. He pointed out that the Conditional Use Permit was issued for a restaurant and they only began a dinner menu last evening. He recommended that the Commission require the Boars Head to be a functional restaurant with a dinner menu and require a more compatible closing time or to revoke the Conditional Use Permit and require the establishment to close and be removed from the area. Commissioner Rempel advised that he was the only Commissioner remaining of the original Commission which approved the CUP for this project. He stated that the approval of the permit was based on the Boars Head being a restaurant similar to the one in Upland. He further stated that he realized that Mr. Arcinage and Mr. Gorgen have done everying they can think of to mitigate -he problems and the noise disturbances can be mitigated inside the building, however the outside noise is much more difficult to control and realized that some of the parking lot noise is attributable to Bob's Big Boy. Further, he was in favor of limiting the hours to those more compatible with a residential area. Commissioner Juarez stated that people are bothered by noise all over, however, they do not all complain to the City. She further stated that this business establishment is Mr. Arcinage's livelihood and she realized that something has to be done to mitigate disturbances, however felt the hours and days of operation were fine. chairman Stout stated that he agreed with Commissioner Barker in that this use is net compatible with a residential area and realized the Mr. Arcinage has tried everything possible to mitigate the disturbances. However, his preference would be to limit the hours of operation to 11 p.m. He further stated that he realizes this will mean a loss of capital to Mr. Arcinage, however, could not see any other way to make this use compatible with nearby residences. Commissioner Barker asked if there was a way to insure that the dinner menu would continue to be in force. Planning Commission Minutes -4- September 28, _3 Edward Hopson, Assistant City Attorney, suggested that the condition dinner owls be amended to read that the diner menu and the serving Of effective on September 27, 1983 and would be required to for the life of the approval. Commissioner Barker stated he would like to be assured that the establishment will not stop serving dinner after this hearing has ended and recommended that this language be added. Commissioner Barker referred to condition 2 of the modifying resolution and a3ked if the sound analysis would be reviewed by a third party. I.L-. Gom -•z repiied that staff would review the analysis and suggested that language could be added. for assurance. Commissiner Barked recommended that this language be added. Motion: Moved by Barker, seconded by MoNiel, carried, to adopt Resolution 83 -117 modifying Conditional Use Permit 78 -03 by limiting the hours of operation to 11 p.m., requiring the installation of sound attenuating materials to existing interior walls and doors, the requirement of a sound analysis to be done by a licensed sound engineer which is s on and e reviewed and approved by staff, annual review by the Planningf dinner will and language a for added to assure that the dinner menu and serving the life of the approval. AYES: CONI4QISSI03'ERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER, MCNIEL, REMPEL, STOUT j AREZ NONE Commissioner Juarez-stated her reason for voti a no was that she not feel stated. it necessary to limit the hours or days of operation, as previously 8:15 - Planning Cnaa' -ssion Recessed 8.25 - Planning Commission Reconvened D. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 82 -18 - HOWARD - The revision to a previously God Church for the approved Conditional Use Permit for First Assembly of of land in the development of a 9400 square foot building on 5.5 acres Archibald and Wilson R- 1- 20,000 zone, located at the northeast corner of Avenues - APN 201- 381 -01. Michsal Vairin, Zenior 311 °nner, reviewed the staff report. Chair-man Stout opened the public hearing. plan. -ling Commission Minutes -5- September 28, 1983 Pastor Lawrence Howard, 9540 Ironwood, Rancho Cucamonga, addressed the Commission advising that the Commission had approved the Conditional Use Permit for this project in Novel* _-er with minor revisions. He stated that the church received Resolution 82 -108 after, that meeting and rioted that one of the Planning Division conditions required the temporary buildings to be upgraded arc'r_itecturally to match the permanent facilities or be removed, wbic that claimed was not discussed at the November public hearing. e stated these buildings cost the church in excess of $225,000 and that kind of money is not invested in buildings to be torn down. After receipt of the notice that these buildings were not to :,c permanent and the desire of the Commission at the November public hearing was that the proposed multi-purpose building sould be pulled away from the east side of the property, that they would be better, off to build a permanent rather than temporary structure which would have to be torn down in a few years. He stated that the use of the proposed building would be the same as the one previously approved by the Planning Commission and members of the church staff contacted the Planning Division asking how this change would affect the Conditional Use Permit and if the city would permit a metal frame building with stucco outside and drywall inside. Pastor Howard stated that the Planning staff advised the church that it would not affect the permit and would be better received than the original plan. The church then submitted new drawings and elevations and were told by staff that a new permit would have to be applied for which would also require a fee. Upon filing a new application and paying the fee, the church waswinformee of a number of necessary revisions, which were made. The church submitted the revisions to the Planning Division and were informed of additional changes, which he stated were not previously mentioned. He further stated that this was the pattern four times until the preparation the elevations before the Commissicn this evening. Pastor Howard referred to the analysis section of the staff report and the Design Review Committee's recommendation for major revisions needed to bring the building into conformance and stated that these revisions would Zut up the building, thus changing the design and the usage completely. He indicated n that the church had agreed to window, roof, and column changes, but felt the structure that is being presented this evening is more compatible with the existing single family residences compared to other churches in the area. He presented the Commission with photographs of area churches %-hire he felt were not compatible with their adjacent residential areas. In regard he t dose Grading Committee recommendations, he stated that little grading on the north side of building and that the 2:1 slope which is used to give the maximum use of the plan is compatible with the area. Regarding the Development Review Committee comments, he stated that all of their requirements had been addressed in the revi 'd site plan. In conclusion, Pastor Howard stated that the purpose of this application was to further the church's outreach to the Community and that no one wants the church to be compatible with their neighbors more than the church itself. He stated that the church feels their request is just and reasonable and asked for the Commission's approval of the project. planning Commission Minutes e -6- September 28. 1983 Pat Guerra, 8218 Kirkwood, addressed the Commission stating that when the (t Commission originally reviewed the CUP there was some discussion regarding the improvements to A ^chibald which in hi6 cp�nicn were not reflected in the minutes of the meeting. He stated that rovementsl the con waivedsunt l such Commission at that time was that the imp time as the Edison Company is ready to install of the their improvements. He further stated that the church had received a letter from Curt Johnston of the Planning Department which informed them that the equestrian trail easement was 20 feet rather than the 25 feet ahoan on their master l nand ndicated tat 25 feet was what they were originally told. Purther, with Rick Gomez cation, informed after that they the Planning 1Division file with new CUP app ti that -a new application was necesary. He stated revised drawings, .;ere to -3 a,,nctua. and that this building proposed is a multi - purpose building, not a among other things, would house a gymr .asium. He pointed out that a building that size is going to be massive and hard to hide and that a car parked on Wilson would have its view of the building shadowed by 45 t c50 fe t o ty reos, with and to the east by 40 feet of trees. Regarding t any existing residences surrounding residences, he stated this building e° In closing, he stated that which will be looking directly thin possible in the way of revisions and the church had complied with allow he building to proceed. asked the Cpmmissian's app Edward Hopson, advised that the City's Attorney's office requires that if any kind of land use designation made by the Planning Commission is significantly changed after approval, it must go back to the Commission and cannot be approved at the staff level. He stated that this is in compliance with State law. Commissioner Rempel stated that the church should to be be It i ed osco e the for a new CUP each time a building i proposed the original CUP should stand since the Commission knew when they approved n that more buildings were going to be built. Further, the, UP that ould run sfor pthe center is approved" and it is not entirely built the CUP entire shopping center. Mr. Hopson replied if the CUP had been approved for a single level shopping center and the applicant later decided to build a two story center, the City Attorney's office would require the applicant to come back before the Planning commission. Commissioner Rempel agreed that they should have to come back for review, however did rot see the need to pay additional fees. Mr. Hopson replied that there may be some discretion for modi Would one oal ed area, however he wanted it clear why an item of this nature back for review. Michael Vairin, Senior Planner, pointed out that the main reason for bringing this item back before the Planning Commission was that there were significant changes from the master plan which was originally approved. Planning Commission Minutes -7- September 28, 1983 Commissioner Barker stated that if a decision is made on information received at a public hearing then it has to be heard publicly again before major modifications are made. He pointed out that when people attend a public hearing and view what they think is the final product and that product is built with significant changes, they tend to get a little excited. Gayle Dyke, 9777 Peach Tree Lane, addressed the Commission stating that she is nearby resident of the proposed church and was of the opinion that the church will be very compatible with the neighborhood. Bill Ungels, 6375 Sapphire, Rancho Cucamonga, addressed the Commission stating that if everyone else is required to put in curb and gutter at the time of development, the church should too and the c,rb and gutter requirements should not be waived. John Vale, 2423 N. 5th Avenue, Santa Ana, addressed the Commission stating that the churek: thought the street improvements had been waived at the previous meeting until Edison eras ready to go on their project and did not feel that this was granting a special privilege. He urged the Commission's support of the project. Mr. Piker, 205 Santa Rosa, addressed the Commission stating that the building has already been purchased and is on the site ready to be built. He additionally stated that there is just so much you can do with it and that the future buildings would virtually hide the multi- purpose building. Pauline Martin, 311 East 25th Street, Upland, addressed the Commission in support of the project. Dick Nelson, 6320 Holly Oak, stated that he is in favor of the church at this site and that ii has been proposed as a church site for quite some time. Chairman Stout advised that there seems to be some misconception of why this project is before the Commission this evening. Lie pointed out that it has been brought back because it appears that a radical change has been made from what was originally approved, which is not to say it is a good or bad change. Further, that the purpose of this hearing is to notify adjacent property owners that a change has been made and allows them the opportunity to view those changes. Wylie Amyck, 6267 Jasper, addressed the Commission stating this is a good project with a good design and is compatible with the surrounding area. Pastor Howard again addressed the Commission stating that all of the changes that have been made to the project were done at the direction of the Planning Division staff and that the only thing the church wished to do was to move the multi- purpose building to the west and increase the size. Chairman Stout replied that the issue came forward because the size of the building had been increased considerably over what was originally approved. Planning Commission Minutes -8- September 28, 1983 He pointed out that this kind of change could cause concern among adjacent residents. Mr. Guerra addressed the Commission stating that as a point of clarification, the church desires to have he curb heya do nott want ttaldo tthem on Archibald delayed which is not to say that advised that the church Plans to begin on its second phase in the near future. There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed- hat Commissioner Barker statedhewhen concerned particular he change compatibility before that Design Review Committee, charge with the su.- roundi ^-g area. He pointed out that the sanctuary is going to reflect that same theme and the question became one of whether this the•ae would be compatible when it is continued and brought to the front along the main thoroughfare. He stated that it was unfort Ba to that advised purchase that ha already been made and that hurdles had been jump Design Review Committee makes its concerns applicant. and endations known that staff and staff commits these in writing is happening here is that the Design Review Committee's recommendations are being appealed. Further, in their written comments, staff had expressed ;:is concert =s and the way he saw the problem. Chairman Stout stated that one of the comments this evening was that it was the Design Review Committee's recommendation to out up the mass of the building which would limit its effective use of the basketball court, and asked if this was indeed a recommendation. Commissioner Barker replied that he did not he frankly ju5tl looked sats'lenbuf } ld ing itself in Design Review. Further, f that particular elevation would be appropriate and asked if that view o located in that neighborhood. Rick Gomez, City Planner, stated that there was some discussion regarding the reduction in volume of the two story structure in order that it would blend in with the surrounding area, which may be what the applicant was referring to. Commissioner Rempel stated that ore problem may have been that the applicant did not provide the Design Review Committee with colored renderings of the elevations. He further stated his opinion that it was not necessary to make a gymnasium look like a permanent sanctuary; however, one suggestion might have ose building because it been to eliminate the tapered columns on the multi- purp was doubtful that they would be desirable on the permanent building. Additionally, it would have been desirable to have angled some of the buildings and also raised and lowered a few of them to take ful I`the CUT of the beautiful site. Further, that he had no problems with approving to allow construction of the multi- purpose building. Commissioner McNiel stated that the project was a good one. He further stated that one item not yet discussed was the improvements on Archibald and seemed to recall that the Commission allowed those improvements to be deferred. planning Commission Minutes —9— September 28, 1983 Chairman Stout stated' that he recalled discussion regarding waiving the street improvements until Edison was ready to go on the project, but that the Resolution was passed as it stood. without reference to the street improvements. Michael Vairin, Senior Planner, advised that the Commission could direct staff in that area at this time for inclusion in the Resolution when the item comes back for finaiization, however the change could not be made at this time. Commissioner M--Niel asked for clarification of the grading issue. K-. Vairin explained tnat the grading plan technically works; however, the Committee felt that for aesthetic reasons, rather than creating a level pad a stepped engineered slope would be preferrable. Commissioner Rempel pointed out that the applicant could work with the Grading Committee on alternate grading plans which would greatly improve the project. Re further suggested modifying the CUP to allow construction of the multi- purpose building to proceed and require the Off -site to come back for review. Michael Vairin advised that the applicant has not gone through the plan checking process, the preparation of landscaping plans, or submissior cf detailed material necessary before the issuance of building permits. Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded by Juarez, unanimously carried, to approve the site plan as far as location of proposed multi- purpose building. Alternative phases of the site plan including xtreet construction and design and grading of remaining sites will come back to the Commission for final approval on October 26, 9983. Mr. Hopson advised that the applicant can start the building if and only if the plan checking and all other requirements have been met for the issuance of building permits. AYES: CONLKISSIONERS: REMPEL, JUAREZ, BARKER, MCNIEL, STOUT NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMN :SSIONERS: HONE ■ i f 4 9:30 p.m. - Planning Commission Recessed 9:40 p.m. - Planning Commission Reconvened t a * ■ c Planning Commission Minutes -10- September 28, 1983 E, VAR "ANCE 83 -04 - ROBERTS - A request to reduce the front, rear, and side yard setbacks on a 3,280 square foot lot is the 4 F zone located the q by northeast corner of Amethyst and 140r- 202-131-04. Curt Johnston, Assistant Planner, reviewed the staff report- Chairman. Stout opened the public hearing. Charles Roberts, 6969 Amethyst, addressed the Commission stating that he agreed to the conditions of approval for his project. Mere were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Rempel stated otecttthe privacy oft the adjacent homeowner. be moved to the west side to p- Motion Moved by Rempel, seconded by McNiel, unanimously carried, to adopt the Resolution approving Variance 83 -04 wish the above revision. AYES: COMMISSIONERS: jiEMPEL, MCNIEL, BARKER, JUAREZ, STOUT NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERSt NONE F. GENERAL PLAN A*�ri�MENT 83 -04 A - CARNELIAN INVESTMENTS - A request to amend the General Plan Land Use Plan from Low Resided re 1 of land, in the Medium Residential (4 -14 du /ac) on approximately 7 R_1 -8500 zone (R -3 pending) located on the south °ide of Highland, between Jasper and Carnelian - APN 201 - 214 -08. G. FNVIRONN�NTAL ASSESSMENT AND ZONE CHANGE 83-03 - CARNELIAN INVESTMENTS - A change of zone froc R- 1-8500 to R -3 (Multiple Yamily Residential) on approximately 7 acres of land located on the south side of Highland, between Jasper and Carnelian - APN 201 - 214 -08. Rick Gomez, City Planner, reviewed the staff report. Chairman Stout opened the public hearing. Doug Gorgen, 7333 Hellman, addressed the Commission advising that there is no location at this time and the request is p2-uject proposed for this for a is a change in the land use and zoning. He stated that this roperty °in this designated Route 3d corridor and Caltrans has begun future his property will area for the freeway. He pointed out that in the future not be located in a quiet residential area, but on one of the heaviest nd traveled intersections in the City. He referred to the General Plan g policies which recommends medium density as a buffer between low and high Planning Commission Minutes -11- September 28, 1483 density or areas of greater traffic or noise levels ar.3 stated that this request is 1Z1 eey ^1P� with those goals. He stated that need did not know of any major thoroughfare in the City wh ich would `aye more need io: a buffer than a reference to the General Plan which states that freeway corridor. o ht dwelling units per i�00 feet of the free.•ay cc:ridor, and stated that this de-elopaent should be designed to allow a« least e�$ gross acre within project is within a few hundred feet of the transit which rreflected that stated that a studl had been coi:ducted on this however could be undesirable, R -1 lots could be constructed at that tocmal-ket the lots would be to place a would be unsellable and the a lyo ay bring Drop rty values down in the area. very low price on thee, •s planning process, it Fe further stated that he disi nct feel that in the City P ands hanging ever r Pn farther stated that this project would require the freeway. I'II'. .G was their intention to line the. freeway corridor with bac orge' « however it would be difficult to screening and buffering :+i�h landscaping, e of the freeway ramp. He pointed screen single family lots due to the grad yards exposed to the out that of the 29 lots almost half of then have back iL Mr- freeway and 90 percent of the lotus are the - Gamm°ssicn+whichhisf proposed fcr Gorgen presented a conceptual plan « ht be preferrable to the nearby this location. He suggested that this might residents than single family hones. The following individuals addressed the Commission �n opposition to the project: Dave Headiy, 64? Jasper, Rancho Cucamonga, stated that he checked the master plan before purchasing his home and found tha`• it was in an area of single family residences. He expressed concern with whP- would happen if the amendment and zone change were approved and this applicant decided to sell his ore`s comments regarding the his concern with the construction cf HL property before development and also projects in the City. He referred wil be a rrong time to comp let !or, He freeway and stated That the freeway stated that he would prefer lower priced single family homes �' apartments or condominiums. He pointed out that there would have to b lexhickna' ady of access for the project which would probably be on Highland, is experiencing traffic problems. He disagreed that this p eject would not contribute experiencing the noise or services to the area and stated that the City does not need any more apartments. Chris Day, 6429 Jasper, Rancho Cucamonga, referred to Mr. Gorgen`s statement regarding the low quality single family homes that would Planning C,o�ssionlwould this lo( •ion and stated that he doubted thh he . Gogeen`s motives were apprcve such a project. He suggested that Mr. profit - oriented in that he would not make as much money from the sale of the single family lets wisich are in keeping with the land use plan. Additionally, this is not consistent with the neighborhood use and might set a precedent for ill t*:er stated that those who relied on the master plan the community. H_ : when they purchased their homes hone that they can continue rely or. the es of developers. master plan to not be changed to suit the profit motiv _qyptember 28, 1983 Planning Commission Minutes -12- Bill Cox, 6487 Cameo Street, Rancho Cucamonga, expressed his opinion that the only people who would move into apartments adjacent to the freeway would be those interested in governmen�.•,subsidized apartments. Donald Nicholson, 8575 Orange Street, Rancho Cucamonga, stated that he didn't put much credence in an applicant who first informs the Commission that there is not project for this location, then produces artist's renderings of chat he was proposing. He disagreed that the only low priced homes could be constructed along the freeway and citing the 57 Freeway as an example. Estella Hedley, 6474 Jasper Street,Rancho Cucamonga, s ate concerns fire impacts of condominiums and apartments on city streets protection. Cheryl Haro, 8353 Orange Street, Rancho Cucamonga stated concerns with impacts on schools due to multi- :amily units. She also expressed concern with increased trine. Jay Johnson, 6321 Via Serena, Rancho Cucamonga, disagreed that "shabby" housing is the only type that will be constructed along the freeway. Frank Ike, 6491 Jasper Street, and Tom Reingrover, 6487 Sard Street, Rancho Cucamonga, both reaffirmed the comments of those who spoke before them and requested the Commission to deny the request. Dennis Mart d313 Orange, Rancho Cucamonga, stated concerns with the rumben of apartment and condominium projects being approved in the City and their impacts on increasing the crime rate. He suggested that single family areas be retained as single family areas. Douglas Moore, 8339 Garden, Rancho Cucamonga, stated concerns t:.at the purpose of the General Plan is being undermined and expressed hope that this project would not set the pattern for future grWth in the City. Bill Ungles, 6375 SapE':ire, stated concerns with what is happening r to the adopted General Plan. He reaffirmend the comments that multi- family pjects do not mix with single family homes and did not want them in his neighborhood. Chris Sheradon, 6450 Cameo Street, Rancho Cucamonga, stated that he checked the master plan carefully befc^e purchasing his home to make sure it was in a single family area and requested that the single family atmosphere be maintained. 'r jorie Day, attorney repressating an adjacent property owner, urged the Commission on his hehalt to deny the request. Dick Nelson, 6320 Holly Oak Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, stated concerns with traffic and safety of school children calking down Jasper. He stated his rty opinion that the applicant did not show sufficient need to ezOnedthe p rop was or to amend the General Plan. H ` e further stated that the p P o shown on the General Plan and if at the time of adoption it was thought Planning Cates -scion Minutes -13- September 28, 1983 multi - family placed t'rere. Brace Lutz, family homes apprcpriate Cucamonga resident, stated that in i be placed with single family homes. There were no further comrents, therefore the public hearing was closed. Commissioner ML-Niel stated that Mr. Gorgen may have painted a rather bleak scer_ario, but those who addressed the Commissi011 in opposition were no less guilty in their, presentation of the other side of the coin. He pointed nut that if only single family homes were placed next to single family homes. the City would only have single family homes; there has to be some sort of a buffer. He advised that most freeways don't traverse back yards, they traverse higher density or commercial areas. He further stated that the audience may not want to hear this, but this proposal does work. Commissioner Barker advised that the General Plan is u living document which mast ba monitored by both the City and the public and is subject to change. He stated, however, that there are enough provisions for higher density housing in other areas of the City and considered the General Plan Amendment and zone change inappropriate. Commissioner Rempel stated that the General Plan is not cast in concrete and was ne.-: intended to be; it's a plan th?t could be amended with what is happening at the time. He advised that when the City adopted the General Plan four years ago, it thought these were the best designations at that time; however, the City was not scrutinized lot by lot but on a general bass. lie pointed cut that as the City changes, changes may be needed in the Plan. Parther, at the time of the General Plan the freeway issue was very urcerta in, however the State has begun to move forward in its plans and the freeway will be a reLl:ty in some form in the near future. He stated that when the fieesay is developed it would be difficult to find a person who desires a lot on the freeway. Commissioner Juarez stated that she didn't know if the freeway would become a reality, therefore recommended that the General Plan amendment zone change be denied. Chairman Stout stated that apartments and condominiums are necessary to provide housing affordable to the average person. Regarding the number of apartments and condominium units approved it the City, Chairman Stout advised that the City has been very careful in placing them in areas where they will h2 °e as little impact as possible on existing residential. On the issue of this project, he stated that it is on the southern edge of a residential area that runs all the way to Foothill and is imcompatible with anything in the area. Commissioner Rempel addressed has no authority over schools established a policy that does the issue of schools and advised that the City or the number of students, however the City has not allow residential development to take place September 23, until they have the approval of the school discome .levels and expressed his concern with the stratification of the City by ur ir:cotre paople also deser-ve a vin; and a nice place to live• opinion that lo carried, to deny General Plan Motion: Moved by Barker, seconded by Juarez, Amendment 83-04 A, Carnelian Investments. AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER, JUAREZ, REMpEI., STOUT NOES: COMMISSIONERS: MCNIEL ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE Motion: Moved by Barker, seconded by Juarez, carried, to deny Zone Change 83-03, Carnelian Investments. AinS: COMiHissIGir -PRS: BAPIKER, JUAREZ, REMU?EL, STOUT NOES: COMMISSIONERS: MCNIEL ABSENT: COMOESSIONERS: NONB ! f f } f g,NERAL ?LAN AMENDMENT 83-04 B - SYCAMORF. -NVESTMENiS - A request to amend the Ge ^.eral Plan Land Use Plan from Office to Neighborhood Commercial on 5.�]u acres of land located at the northeast corner of Archibald and Base i ino _ APN 2D2- i8i -2T- I, ENtTiRONI�NTAL ASSESSMENT AND ZONE CHANGE A� -OA B - SYCAMORE INITESTn.NTS - A change of zone from A -P (acre for lade located at the northeast (Neighborhood Commercial) on 5. corner of n ^chibaid and Base Lir=e - APN 202 - 181 -27. Rick Gomez reviewed the staff report. Chairman Stout opened the public hearing. Jack Tarr, representing Sycamore investments addressed the con�ission stating his request is not for elimination of a policy but to focus in on a specific request. He stated that the major' iifference between the present zone and proposed zone a an increase in the allowable retail uses and does not intensify the area. He introduced Nelson Wheeler of Caldwell E3n' er who has done a market study on the area. Nelson Wheeler, 9820 Redding tray, Upland, addressel the Commission stating that the property has been marketed for two years and very few users have been interested p in this site, preferring to be located along the Foothill Boulevard this that this property is in competition with three other corridor. Archibald, ara market areas; namely, the I -10 off ramp corridors of Viney ', Haven, the area surrounding Ontario airport, and the Mountain Avenue corridor ping Commission Minutes _15- September 28, 7963 in Upland. He explained that this site could have viability in the future and as an office and limited retail use. Jack Tarr again addressed the Commies sic - ^- stating that some office users, such as insurance and retail offices, have expressed interest in this location. ve XT- agreed with r. 'Wheeler in that there is more than enough administrative li professional office .pace to support Rancho ned for this property rather Cucamonga. e advised that more of a convenience commercial cluster is envisio than a neighborhood commercial use which the General Plan defines as a center which contains a major super market. i further stated that his use was ro ert contains more than 3 acres, does mewhere between the defi- *sition of neighborhood commercial an proposed to be so convenience commercial in that the p P Y less than 100,000 square feet of not have a major super market, and will have building. There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing *gas closed. Commissioner Rempel stated e d that the emandrfor office professicna' almost residential use, and agreed vacant and that the best nil due to sites being developed and then remaining use for this site is co shopping He advise that who pth enttall four established the Policy regarding shopping centers, it was supermarket on each corners of an intersection being developed with a majo- corner. Commissioner McNiel stated that he agreed that this request iq a gac3 request and didn't see any problems with the proposal. COmniasior.Pr Juarez stated that if this request 15 approved, it sets a precedent for other intersections of the City and felt it should be 3enied. Jack Liam, Community Development Director, advisee e the' if the Commission is inclined to approve this request, it sheu'_t 'a aware that ehiteconsisten`. to be a policy change made to the General Plar �a order to make the Chairman Stout disagreed with Commissioner Rempel's statement regarding viability of this site being residential. He stated that this t woulicviolat saturated with commercial already. Further, that this req the General Plan: and approval would necessitate modification of He recalled Plan, which would open up every intersection in the City. Plascusaioa at the General Plan hearings regards this site and stated that AP was a compromise because a decision couldn't be made between residential or commercial. Further, he would prefer no change in designation; however, if it was nuecessary to change it, he would prefer residential- policy Tarr asked for clarification of the policy change from the City Attorney. � ,. Hopson replied that it would be difficult to taka a five plus acre pascal and cal'_ it convenience commercial with ;.re definition wording the General a language change would have to be made in the General Plan. advised that Plan. _l�_ September 28, 1983 Planning Comvission Minutes r„t.,airman Stout stated that if an exception xas made heowner who thas oartieala-r parcel, it would be unfair to every property `* �a denied. approached the City with a similar request but their red. Mr. Hopson stated that language eculd be added which could state that no more than two centers containing major super markets shall be located at any one intersection. Commissioner Re=el made a motion to change the definition in the General Plan as suggested that no more than two shopping centers containing major _ super markets ommerciacould uses be located aae CUP, oThi inmo` iont1was s seconded by McNeil, t however failed 2 -3- Mr. Lam advised that wording WI-Ild have to be added which further defined a major supermarket, sec_i as size. G,mxissioner Hempel replied that 50,000 to 30Q,000 square feet of leasable area should be used. Chairman Stout stated that he Pelt it shcald be changed to residential if a change was at all necessary, considered the request a violation General Plan, and he doesn't want to change the policy Commissioner Barker stated that while AP may not be the best use for this site, lie was not comfortable in making a mange to neighborhood commercial without knowing the rami m fications. Mr. Gomez suggested that the item be continued to the October 26 meeting to allow staff to work up language for the Commission's eonsideraticn. Chairman Stout made a motion to deny tte request. This motion died for lack of second. Motion: *loved by Remp.1 seconded by McNiel, carried, to continue General Plan Amendment 83-04 B and Zone Change 83-04 B to the Planning Commission meeting of Or-tober 26, 1983• Staff was directed to draft alte3ocatedy a1a^ world allow small shops without major supermarkets to be intersection. AYES: C07-e .SSZOhaRS: HEMPEL, MCNIE'i., BARKER NC:.S- ColeUSSIONERS: JAUREZ, STOUT ABSENT: COK%nSSIONM,- NONE Commissioner Juarez and Chair-man Stout voted no for previously stated reasor_s. m : i * R ! September 28, 1983 Planning commission Minutes -17- Motion: Moved by Me Niel, seconded by Barker, unanimously carried, to continue past 11 p.m. adjournment time for consideration of next item. f f f f f J. GENERAL PLAN AMEENDMENT 83 -04 C - r:CACIA - A request to amend the General Plan Lard Use Plan from Office to Medium -High Residential (14 -24 du/ac) on 3.58 acres of land located on the west side of Archibald, north of Base Line - APN 202 - 151 -83. Rick Gomez, City Planner, reviewed the staff report. Chhairmar, Stout opened the public hearing. Alan Aierick, applicant, addressed the Commission stating that in light pf t?ie previous item, he wondered if it might be possible to continue his req.-_-I as he faces the same problem with this site in that it might be suitable for s.me other commercial use. :d". Gomez advised that this would be an entirely different request which would necessitate rpadvertisement. Mr. Wierick withdrew his request to continue. He advised that this site is in competition with nine office use designations located along Base Line, which is a more desirable location for office users. Of those nine designations, he stated that half are undeveloped, and the half which have been developed are approximately 32 percent vacant. He stated that this request is to allow the proposal of medium high residential affordable housing which is more in demand and compatible with adjacent uses now being developed, such as the Calmark project. He pointed out that the staff report stated this request would not cause adverse impacts and urged approval. Rick Snyder, representing Acacia, concurred that the best use of the site is medium high residential. n-. Snyder presented and art;.st's rendering to the Commission which depicted what was envisioned ^or this site and stated that construction would begin in approximately six months. There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Barker stated that this request would go against what was envisioned for the Senior Housing Overlay District by surrounding it with residential uses. Chairman Stout stated that when the City made the decision to allow Calmark to locate at their site, the City counted on the surrounding area to provide office and commercial services which would meet the overlay district requirements. He advised that there is litigation problems with protecting the senior citizen project from the market rate units within Calmark and that adding more market rate units on the other side might pose more of a problem. Planning Commission Minutes -18- September 28, 1983 *Sr. Weirick replied that there would be a wall between this project and the Calmark project. vide Hoffice tuseshfor the ffiee ^scitizen oroject.nd the Sizzler which would p Motion: Moved by Barker, seconded by Juarez, carried, to deny General Plan Amendment 83-04 C, Acacia. STOUT AYrS: COMMISSIONERS: BARICrR, JUAREZ, NOES: ABSENT : COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS'- MCNIEL, REMPEL NONE Commissioner McNiel stated his reason for voting no is that onable and could work- the request is reas Commissioner Rempel agreed that the request could work and that concerns could be worked out in Design R3view. } } } } } DIRECTOR'S REPORTS 1 -02 K. -IMIrE t.7iltNJ1Vr1 ry +� •••,_. development of a retail center on 1.5 acres o= locatcd at the northwest corner 2u f19 Arrow Route and 208 - 321 -32. Continued from August , DERSON - The C-1 zone to be 'turner - APN Michael Vairin reviewed the staff report stating that this item had been continued by the Commission at their August 24, 1983 meeting a to allow the applicant and staff time to work on landscaping issues. He advised that it was agreed that additional planters would be installed the existingtplanter planter would be widened on Turner, as well as widening and adding a double planter on Arrow - Edward Ropson, Assistant City Attorney, asked how the agreement is covered in the conditions of approval. replied that it would be a matter of approving the Rick Gomez, City Planner, site plan. of official action that adopts a modified ,X. Hopson advised that some kind approved site plan should be included. Mr. Vairin replied that this could be done through minute action. not covered in the resolution which is currently - Hopson advised this 1s proposed. Mr. Vairin replied that a statement could be added to the resolution. Ping Commission Minutes -19- September 28, 1983 Motion: Moved by Rempei, seconded by Barker, to approve the time extension for Conditional Use Permit 81-02 with reference to adoption of the modified site plan to be included in tl+T Resolution. AYES: COmMISSIONEIZ: NOES: COMMISSIONEis: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: REMPEL, BAR: {ER, JUAREZ, MCNIEL, STOUT NONE NONE ADJOURNMENT Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded by Stout, unanimously carried, to adjourn. 12:20 a.m. - Planning Commission Adjourned. Respectfully submitted, Jack Lam, Secretary Planning Commission Minutes -20 September 28, 1983 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting October 12, 1983 CALL TO ORDFF Chairman Dennis Stout called the regular meeting of the City of Rancho Cucamonga planning Commission to order at 7 p.m. Tne meeting was held at the Lions Park Community Center, 9161 Base ..ine Road, Rancho (kcamcrga, California. Following the call to order, Chairman Stout led in the pledge to the flag. ROLL CALL CONR'.ISSIONERS PRESENT: D&vid Barker, Addict Juarez, Larry Niel, Herman Rempel, COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Dan Coleman, Associate Planner; Franc Dreckmanr Assistant Planner; Rick Gomez, City Planner; Edward Hopson, Assistant City Attorney; Curt Johnston, Assistant Planner; Joan Kruse, Administrative Secretary; Paul Rougeau, Senior Civil Engineer ANNOU NISS Rick Gomez, City Planner, announced that meeting considering the final City budget Lions Yark Community Center. there will be a City Council budget on October 17, 1983 at 6 p.m. at the Mr. Gomez stated that the Environmental Review Board of the County will look at the West Valley Foothills Community Flan Environmental Impact Report on October 18, at 1:30 p.m. Mr. Gomez also stated that the County Planning Commission will continue 0 their public hearing on the Foothill Coamunl..y Plan on October 20, ch,i ^man Stout asked if City staff will be present for the EIR review of the Foothill Comaunity Plan to give their testimony. ., Gomez replied that he will be present to comment on both the £IR and Community Plan. Chairman Stout felt that this is important for legal reasons- Commissioner Rempel asked if the City /County Planning Commiss ioners Steering Committee meeting is open to thr rest of the Commission. Mr. Gomez replied that staff would check into it and get back to all Commissioners. } } } } } APPROVAL OF MINUTES ' Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded by McNiel, carried unanimously, to approve the Minutes of the September 14, 1983 Planning Commission meeting. } } } } } CONSENT CALENDAR Commissioner Rempel stated that he had some concerns with Item A o£ the Consent Calendar in that this tract was approved six months after the Planning Commission approval. He asked if the time extension should be contingent upon the council approval or to the Planning Commission approval. Mr. Hopson reviewed the actions that took place with Tentative Tract 11928 and stated that while he has not researched this, his feeling is that the Planning Commission approval would be used as a measuring stick. Commissioner Rempel stated that the applicait was unable to do anything due to the Council action and wondered if the +.ime extension caused time to run out. Further, the resolution does not Tike any statement to the change of date by Council and wondered if it should. Mr. Johnston replied that the title indicates that the Resolution has been amended. Commissioner Barker stated that this is very awkward because after the Council appeal this did not come back to the Planning Commission but now the Commission is berg asked to extend it. yr, Hopson stated that the City Council really sees every tract but it is a ministerial act and therefore this tract did not have to come back to the Commission. Commissioner Rempel stated that the difference here is that they put the condition on the map but not on the site plan. Following brief discussion, Chairman Stout indicated that this item had been dealt with de facto and recommended that item B be moved first. Motion: Moved by Barker, seconded by Hempel, carried unanimously, to adopt Resolution No. 81 -38A, approving the time extension for DR 81-06. B. a 15,buu square :%;or, a -sL7ry plvlcaQ parcel in tb,� C-2 zone, located on the San Bernardino Road - APN 207 - 191 -50. 81 -06 - FRANCIS - The development of Tonal office building on a 1.39 acre south side of Foothill Boulevard at Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded by McNiel, carried unanimously, to adopt Resolution No. 81 -117A, approving a time extension for Tentative Tract 11928 with clarification of tae actual time period. Pjanni-; Commission Minutes -2- October 12, 1983 A. TIr EXTENSION FOR TEh"TATI�'E. TRACT '11928 - 47ESTLA2� F - A total acres of land an the R -3 zone .,P 5o units ,, and Past of Archibald Avenue - planned deveiopm2a.. - located on the north side of Y.ig: land Avenue, APN 201- 252 -32• ■ t s ; : PUBLIC HEARINGS ENVIAONNfENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEi. MAP 81- - MAY'r --h - A division pe 1.01 C. arcels Within Subarea k of the Industrial Specific acres of land into 2 p p)an area, located at through west corner of Acacia Street and Cottage Avenlae - APN 209 - 192 -13 Senior Civil Engineer Paul Rougeau, presented the staff report. �,r_ Hopson stated that there is no specific reference in the proposed ,r. Intion to vacate the alley to the north. w asked if staff would cratat ission recommendation that the City Council vacate some specific Planning Comm the alley. u_ Fougeau replied that in the past staff has brought alley vacations to the thinks it would be they no have found that this can e Commission for their recommendation but done by minute action. He stated that if the City Attorney covered by minute action it would be handled in that manner. Further, it was intended that such a condition oe inuorpy Chairman Stout asked if this is the north -south alley to the crest of the property. Mr_ Rougeau replied that it is. Hr. John Nelson, 10155 Norwick, Rancho Cucamonga, represented the applicant. He a ----d for clarification, stating the alley sought to be vacated is on the no•.•th siac of the parcel. He further stadhatonhishe desttside and defer they can enter a lien ovements attthos time. property doing any alley imp Chairman Stout stated that the only thing required is AC pavement. Mr. Rougeau stated that this had been discussed with the applicant and after looking at all possibilities for future development, if the Planning Commission desired, it could postpone the improvemf ^_ts and put in a lien agreement because there is likelihood that there b`ou d be assessment at district for the Belmont Street area and the imp that time. if putting in a piece of asphalt will jeopardize the Chairman Stout asked alley. Mr. Rougeau replied that it will not; but, if it is combined with the ant and would remain in better assessment district it would benefit the applic condition longer. planning Commission Minutes -3- October 12, 1983 Commissioner Rempel asked if the alley is really usable with the power poles going down the middle. Chairman Stout asked if the power poles are a residential size and whether they should be undergrounded at some point in time. Mr. Rougeau replied they could be because they are 12 KV. Chairman Stout asked if the recommendation is that the applicant be allowed to lien for ore -half of the alley. Staff replied that is correct. There being no further comments, Chairman Stout closed the public heari-ng. Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded by McNiel, carried unanimously, to adopt Resolution No.. 83 -122 approving Parcel Map 8179 with provis..ons for a lien agreement for future alley improvements conditional on approval of the street vacation by the City Council and the issuance of a negative declaration. ■ t i 3 i D. YNVlnunneirix e: ana�c�... .... __..� -- - - - -- ,,�,, rha final public hearing before the Planning Commission for review and comment on the proposed Development Code and Development _ District 1-41 4 . l .inv nvovidedl for action by the recummc«uaLiv , L� Ll,e City --- -- - - - .- - planning Commission. N,r. Gomez stated that the Commission should review what has occurred with the Development Code to date and make a recommendation to the City Council on the text and district map. He indicated that the balance of the staff report deals with the major revisions of the code and a description of the Environmental Assessment. Mr. Gomez stated purs;int to the State law and the EIR findings, the Development Code was done under the General plan and other related elements of the land use map. He indicated that staff feels that the Development Code is an extension of the General Plan and the single EIR findings would be appropriate under Section 21166 of the Public Resources Code. Mr. Gomez explained that there ha- been a revision to the development standards matrix format to allow better reference. He indicated that this has been consolidated fo- easier reference. Mr. Gomez stated that a short memo had been included on the revisions to the District map which reflected the actions of the Planning Commission and also a letter from the Baldy View Chapter of the BIA commending good work on the Development Code. Chairman Stout opened the public hearing. There being no comments, the public hearing was closed. Planning Commission Minutes -4- October 12, 1983 Commissioner McNiel asked if City o.med parks would be identified cn the Development Map. Mr. Johnston replied that they will be shown as open space- Barker stated that previously they had talked about Commissioner maturation date rk large animals and shifting the time period for the keep�.19 ussed this with the Equestrian of them. He asked if staff had disc Corm ittF:e. Mr. Gomez replied tlat this had been discussed with the Equestrian Committee, which felt that 12 months would be the appropriate time. Commissioner Barker asked that the Development Code the come back ay It to theaPl nning Commission for review to see whecher it was working to see if there are areas where some asjustments should be made. Mr. Gomez replied that one year would be an appropriate time and would staff the Necessary basis for evaluation after working with the Code. the part of the Development reading the charts is not a such documents but it is give Commissioner Rempel stated he would like to see Code Standards shown in a graphic. He indicated problem for developers who are familiar with d4rr;r, lit for the lay person. Mr. Gomez stated that up to this point staff has put all of their effort into the test of the Code and are nox in the process of following up on the graphics. He indicated that this would be consido=ad- Cairman Stout added his compliments to those of the BIA for the excellent job on the Development Code by staff. He stated it is difficult to start from scratch and c ^eate something. wha`ther been submitted. theras comparatively little fine tuning or changing done Motion: Moved by Harker, seconded by P.empel, carried unanimously, to adopt Resolution No. by Ba approving the Development Code and Development District Map and recommendirg its approval *.o the City Council. ring Motion: Moved by Barker, seconded by Juarez, carried unanimously, to owbr3 as back the Development Coda for review by the Planning one year period of its operation. a a • * : s, ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW t3 -e7 CORPORA ION - The development of a 20,000 square foot office complex on 1.79 c south sided Base Line, (Administrative near Hellman Avenue - LPN 208- tt31e30 Gated on the Associate Planner, Dan Coleman, reviewed the staff report. chairman Stout opened the public hearing. planning Commission Minutes -5- October 12, 1983 Mr. jim Previti, 10313 Ranch, Rancho Cucamonga, the applicant, stated that they were under the impression that this would be approved under the original that this is a comprehensive plan but they were unsure if pw... M-'�il would approve it. He indicated that he is concerned about the easemcnt ar i was unsure as to whether it co,:ld be realigned. He further indicated that h:: does not want problems with this piece of property downstream and was the purpose of the letter which he transmitted to the Commission this evening. Mr. Previti indicated that he is very happy to work out a compromise. Commissioner Rempel asked Mr. Previti tc paraphrase the letter. He asked if when the parcel map was done the easement was there. Further that the Mobil organization has been asked to align their entrance with that of the City Hall. Commissioner Rempel stated that he is the only one left of the original Commission which approved this site recalled that means of a condition e the site approval to eliminate any left-hand an island. indicated that giving Mobil the option of putting in the island or moving the entrance would provide Mr. Previti with a strong argument. Imo. Rougeau stated that Mr. Previti`s concern is that if Mobil has a problem with the relocation of the entrance driveway it will jeopardize their property. He wanted it made clear that it is a City requirement and not something that Mr. Previti would like to have done. Mr. Rougeau stated that fire City -- N.obil ' ^a o nigined the circumstances to them but they are iaoa �. >..-- a large organizat5 c,n and it would take some time for them to get back to the Cicy. Chairman Stout asked if the N--bil station was approved under a CUP. H uldtbe that if it becomes evident that they do not want to comply, this o flagged back to the Commission in the event there are traffic problems. Mr. Rougeau replied that the City has the power t� unilaterally require the removal of the present driveway and the acceptance of new easement given by the applicant. Mr. Hopson stated that if Mobil has a ground lease and is not the owner in fee of the parcel they would be unable to say anything about moving the easement. Further, the City has the direct power to require that they relocate the driveway. esign Commissioner Barker stated that when this project was looked at z tDcular Review they were not aware that they should be looking P alignment. !ie asked if there are enough parking spaces to allow adjustment into the service station if the easement is changed. He asked if they could lose some spaces in order to round the turn into the station. Mr. Coleman replied that they have 5 spaces in excess of what is needed. Mr. Previti stated that they do not want to get to a point to where Mobil will object in not having left hand access into the property: because this could be a liability for his property. Chairman Stout stated that the way the condition is phrased there would not be a legal problem. planning Commission Minutes -6- October 12, 1983 Mr. Previti stated that the City initiated the requ" t and he foes not want to get in the cross fire. stated that the applicant is concerned that his project will be Mr. Coleman held up because of this issue. -a.. tr,o �rh'_ir hearing was close'. There being no Lllrther cvum.�c.. °�+ - Motion- Moved by £a ricer, seconded by Rempel, carried unanimously, to adopt roving DR 83 -25, issuing a negative declaration with Resolution No. P3 -124 app Renovate in the condition to provide for flexibility to dez:gn the driveway and for the replacement of the existing easement with a new easement. F. 1983 -84 FISCAL YEAR 9ORK PROGRAM City Planner, Rick Gomez, reviewed the Plarning Division work program for Commission comment, deletions and recommendations. Commissioner Tiempel stated that the Foothill Boulevard Study should be moved forward because the City will be getting some pressure in this area an new businesses occur on Foothill. Mr. Gomez replied --a *_ process of readjusting this project. Chairman Stout asked if th chart places the Foothill Boulevard Study to be done in January- Mr. Gomez replied that it is scheduled in December. Chairman Stout asked relative to billboards if there is some bill pending that proposes to take away the City's power in the amortization of signs. pr. Gomez replied that the League of California Cities osed the station planning Association have removed their opposition, to the prop 8 (SB 142 ELLIS) and that the actual bill has been watered down 11 beerably. Mr. Gomez stated that as far as the City is concerned, aggressive program in 1984 which is when the City's sign program begins the amortization process. staff feels that this is a high priority and is in the its personal resources at this tiMe it order to start C,om-Dissioner Barker stated that his new job duties will require the assignment of the alternate to attend some of the upcoming Design Review meetings and he asked if Commissioner McNiel would be able to fill in for him some of the time. M- . . McNiel stated that he would act as the alternate in the event Commissioner Barker is unable to make the meetings. {, t i f t October 12, 1983 planning Commission Minutes ADJOURNMENT Motion: Moved by P.empel, seconded by Barker, carried unan4-ously, to adjourn. 7:57 p.m. The Planning Commission Adjourned Respectfully submitted, RICK GOMEZ, Acting Secretary Planning Caxaissisn Minutes —8— October 12, 1983 CITY OF RANCHO CUCA TONGA STAFF REPORT E I DATE; October 26, 1983 1977 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: kick Gomez, City Planner BY: Dar. Coleman, Associate Planner SUBJECT: TIME EXTENSION FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 10277 - BARMAKIAN - A 36 custom of su ivision consisting o c[ lots on in the R -1- 20,000 zone lccated on the north acres of land side of Almond, east of Carnelian - APN 1061 - 171 -02. BACKGROUND: The developer is requesting a time extension for the 10277 located at the northeast easter y po-tion of Tentative Tract Carnelian 'Exhibit "A "). A final rap was recorded corner of Aliord and for the westerly eight lots. The remaining 22 lots range in size from is designed as a 26,000 square feet to 36,800 square feet. The project private, gated community. The project was originally approved on February 25, 1981 and granted a time extension. The developer is requesting for subsequently another time extension for the remaining lots in order to allow 18 north final recordation in the near future. An additional ane final - time extension may be granted. ANALYSIS: This tract is in conformance with the City's derelcpment and trail and animal su vision standards with the exception of the request (attached), this regulations. As discussed in applicant's planned and designed to allow limited animal tract was originally uses. Since the time of the original approval and recordation of the to prevent w_st portion of the tract, the City has adopted new policies from the keeping of developments in the equestrian area prohibiting to include an interior trail system and access to all lots. animals and The approved Tentative Tract Map, Exhibit "B:', included dedication of tract boundary and the Almond community trail along the southerly along the easterly and northerly project 15 -foot trail easements boundaries. This project, King Ranch Estates, was designed as a private be community and all animals other than cats or dogs were intended to approved by the j prohibited. The CC&R's �- veloped for this tract and and bovine animals. Therefore, • 1 City prohibited the keeping of equine the *rails included were designed around the perimeter of the project to provide community trail and regional trail access. �To cgmply with the have to be City's current policies, the Tentative Tract Map would ITP-H A PLANNING COMMISSION Time Extension - TT October 26, 1983 Page ' STAFF REPORT 10277 /Barmakian revised to include 15 -foot local feeder trail easements in the interior of the project as shown on Exhibit "3 ". Further, the following condition of approval would need to be added per City Council Resolution 83 -70: "That subdivision CC &R's shall not prohibit the keeping of equine animals where zoning requirements for the keeping of said animals have been met. Individual lot owners in subdivision shall have the option of keeping said animals without the necessity of appealing t:o boards of directors or homeowners` associations for amendments to CC &R's. A copy cf the CC &R's shall be reviewed and approved by the City prior to final map recordation." OPTIONS: In granting a time extension, the Planning Commission may add, modify, or delete conditions of approval with the applicant's consent. If the applicant does not consent, the Commission must either conduct a public :earing to alter the conditions of approval, or deny the time extension. Therefore, the following options exist: 1. Grant time extension request for the re'ainir5 eighteen months; or, 2. Grant an eighteen month time extension subject to confor;.111ee with City trail and animal policies, with applicant's consent; or, 3. Deny time extension request. ECLESTRIW,! ADVISORY COMMITTEE: The Committee's consensus is that the proposes conf icts wit the neral Plan and City Council policies for the equestrian /rural area. Therefore, the Committee recommends that all lots be prow ;ded with trail easements with gated access and that CUR's not prohibit t%.e keeping of equine animals. L.J E PLANNING COMMISSION Time Extension - TT October 25, 1983 Page 3 11 STAFF REPORT 10277 /Barmakian RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Planning Coruaission consider all Input an material relative to this project. A Resolution of approval is provided sfieuld the Commission decide to grant the extension. Respect fully sabmitted, Rick Aomez City'Planner RG:DC:jr J yAttachments- Exhibit "A" - Lccatior. Map Exhibit "B" - Tentative Tract Map Letter from Developer City Council Resolution 83 -70 Resolution of Approval with Conditions Minutes of Planning Cormission Meeting Time Extension Pesolutio,% of Approval E E February 25, 1983 E TRA R-1-20 ;: i i i �I 4 eillll ,y �AA.e.�� I✓ Y Off`✓ r.t A ok 1 OW14.11W t: in ,C;T lo7.7' R Q CITE' OF R( N-,,\ci�HliOCUCC MONGA PLAN 1 LNG t1 iJINr&QN i lei Ls NK)Irm 1TE�I- � la4 -z 111111111111imIll, III ExHFBiT- -_ - ALE' - --- r --.rj y ,y �AA.e.�� I✓ Y Off`✓ r.t A ok 1 OW14.11W t: in ,C;T lo7.7' R Q CITE' OF R( N-,,\ci�HliOCUCC MONGA PLAN 1 LNG t1 iJINr&QN i lei Ls NK)Irm 1TE�I- � la4 -z 111111111111imIll, III ExHFBiT- -_ - ALE' - --- -'"I 6MWAKIAN Coleman O" Rancho Baseline Loma, CA Cucamonga Road 91701 Dear Dan, to request an extension in the Ci *YtofORanc'no This letter is Ranch £states, otherwise known as King Cucamonga trving to do away of Rancho Cucamonga 1a very difficult 1 am aware that the C 'against horses. i have developed with restrictions against was or_ginally the City with any our time with this because ur cc & R's Were read approved for restrictions against horse him before oar tract was and approved by compieted and because of Attorney lots have been ht have been construction. The fir°r1YBtw0 lots of those first e- that the a very quiet market, been sold with the uaderstaading sold. These lots have roved by the city CC & R's have been app horse trails inai tract maps never made reference to any '_oi subdivision. jve did arovide a community horse Onr on , that will 'oe built within the 30 0`. our periferal walllannin& commission- outside the P secure and trail around and Certain that all of this walled, in the future. I ors beard our intent and wishes to develop private community. of the community where ttion ies and the odors I believe that there should be atPO Put up with f' of horses. In fact' our someone may live without having $ the keeping be kept on the property that occur throng no animals may restrictions read that except dogs or cats. matter. hall literally ge from my original I "'an Thank you for your consideration in ti;is invested a fortune in this project and any program would be devistatiag to say the least- program very truly , t ANDR£M BA,. AKIAty president ••,• - -• CALIFORNIA 91730 7 t <- 987 -:>_ ": ":.F Ci- i�BALD A\ .NUE JUlTC -'� aaracyo -UCAT,;,ONoA Architecture En GI ?e:: ^9 rr.00n ent Brokerage PrnPer;; management L] i d l L Qv- s (N T.ESOLuTioN No. 83 -7C A RESOLUTION 0? TaE C7TI C HITHI :i FAIL- STP -iAR %Ali .AL R.SEA FOd I"dE KEEPING OF ANIIMLS OF -aNE CITY W;'EREAS' it is the City Council`s desire to provide for protection of the at"ity to keep animals; and a5, the Tra11s El'v�ent of the General Plan designate, the crea generally north of Banyan ae an "Equestrianlaura -" area; and u.� . members of the public have participated in the public hearing review of the Trails Element; and wiC EAS. the General Plan provides that the "Eoue. ,13 on Private oral" area snail provide for the keeping and protection of equine a.�:i,mals property; and yg;?Ep,S. the Cltp Council recognizes the benefit derived froe L'fe YeeDin6 or use of aaiaa3s as an educational and rnreatioaal resource; and SOW. TE-,n =, ES IT AE =OUM, that the City Council of the City of Rancbo Cucamonga does hereby declare its Polio% to be: SECiIOfl ; That subdivisior. CCSR's shall nut DrohlDit the keeping of where zoning requirements for the kee;+a& of said animals have �y,1e anycai, have the option of been met. Individual lot owners Ya subdivisions shall boards of directors keeping said anitaL without the necessity of appealing or homeo.ner's associations for amendments to CCS 1 nlltioned�c subdivision mays for single family to be nvi wed and by Lhe City Lrlor to maP a copy of the GCAR•s recordation. PASS&), APPROVED, and ADUFfED this 18Lh day of May. 1983. AYES: Dahl. Huquet. Schlosser, Frost. MIkels NOES: None ABSENT: Some ATTEST: uren M. Wa3se7na'O. City Clerk RESOLUTION NO. 82 -13 A RESOLUTION OF THE'RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSID" .A. °PROVING AMENDMENT TO CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP N0. 10277, LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF ALMOND STREET AND CARNELIAN STREET WHEREAS, on the 25th day of February, 1981, Tentative Tract No. 10277 was approved by the Planning Commission by Resolution No. 81- 15; and WHEREAS, on the 27th day of January, 1932, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission held a meeting to consider the amendment to said resolution which established the requirements of dedication of all interior street right -of -way for the above - mentioned tract; and NOIL4, THEREFORE, THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING C07111SSICUN RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: That the following findings have been mach: a. The dedication of right -of -way for the interior streets is not essential for this project. b, The private street concept is co- .istent with the applicable General Plan. SECTION 2: The Resolution No. 81 -15 is hereby revised to eliminate the Standard Condition No. I1 of said resolution and to add the following Conditions for the Tentative Tract No. 10277: a. 0eciprocal easements shall be provided ensuring access to all parcels over private roads, drives, or parking areas. b. A copy of the Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC &R's) and Articles of Incorporation of the Homeowners Association, subject to the approval of the City Attorney, shall be recorded with this map and a copy provided to the City. C. Prior to recordation, a Piotice of Intention to form Landscape and Liahtina Districts shell be filed with the City Council. The engineering costs involved in Districts Formation shall be borne by the developer. E El 11 Resolution No. 82 -13 Page 2 {_. d. An access easement for vehicular and pedestrian. traffic through the project area shall be recoraed providing access to the adjoining property to the north of the project. Gateway Road shall be a fully dedicated public street unless developer executes an agreement with the northerl_' property owner to the effect that access to the notherly property at the intersection of Gateway Road and King Ranch Road is acceptable if Gateway Road becomes a private street. e. Dedication shall be made of Almond Avenue rich t -of -way as shown on the tentative map. f. The street improvements for Almond Street including, but roe limited to, curb, yutter, A.C. pavement, side - walk, street lights and street trees shall be constructed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 27TH DAY OF JANUARY, 1982. PLANNING CO;tmISSION OF THE �ITY OF RANCHO CUCAMGPlGA BY. /�✓/% / / Jeffrey King Chainnary' Seer ty of the Piammng Commission I, JACK L.M. 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 °Ttheefollowirc vote- to-wit: held on the 27th day of Januar., 1.82,' to -wit: AYES: COh1,MISSIONERS: NOES: COmmiSSIONERS: ASSENT: COhE41SSI0NERS: ABSTAIN: C0:•44ISSIONERS: Sceranka , Tol s toy, Dahl, Rempel None None King I r RESOLUTION NO.. 81 -15 C A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCA.MGNGA, CALIFORNIA, CONDITIONALLY '' +PPROV =NG TENTATIVE TRACT MAP N0. 10277 WHEREAS, Tentative Tract Map No. 10277, hereinafter "Map" submitted by Barmakian /Wolff Associates, applicant, for the purpose of subdividing the real property situated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Ber.iardino, State of California, described as a residential subdivision of 24.36 acres of land located on the no:•th side of Almond Road, east of Carnelian Street into 30 lots, regularly came before the Planning Commission for public hearing and action or February 25, 1981; and WHEREAS, th= 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 Lotmrission has read and considered the Engineering and Planning Divisions reports and has considered other evidence presented at the public hearing. NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the Cit_• of Rancho Cucamor,= = Loes resolve as follows' SECTION 1: The Planning Ccmnission makes the following findings ` in regard to Tentative Tract No. 1.0277 and the Map thereof: (a) The tentative tract is consistent with all applicable interim and proposed general and specific glans; (b) The design or improvements of the tentative tract is consistent with all applicable interim and proposed general and specific plans; (c) The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed; (d) The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage and avoidab'. injury to humans and wildlife or their habitat; (e) The tentative tract is not likely to cause serious public health problems; (,f) The design of the tentative tract will not conflict with any easement acquired by the public at larg:, now of record, for access through or use of the property within the proposed subdivision. Resolution No. 81 -15 Page 2 i6 - (9) That this project will not create adverse Impacts on the environment and a Negative Declaration is issued. SECTION 2: Tentative Tract Map No. 10277, a copy of which is attached hereto, is hereby approved subject to all of the following conditions and the attached Standard Conditions: Engineering Division 1. Dedication by separate instruments of that portion cf "A" Street and the sou`l.herly half of Almond Street, which are beyond the tract boundary, shall be recorded prior to or concurrent with the recordation of the final map. cr__. F dedication for a 60 -foot wide easement for G. flit of C. V. stormdrain purposes along the existing drainage course at the easterly tract boundary shall be made on the final map. 3. Drainage crossings with adequate inlet and outlet structures shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer where the fire lanes and equestrian trails crr.ss the existing drainage courses. 4. A minimum of 50 -foot building setback lines from the fl owline of the existing drainage courses shall be established and shall be delineated on the final map. The set -back lines shall remain in force until such time as the master planned storm drain facilities are constructed at the easterly drainage course and erosion pc teStion measures are provided at the westerly drainage 5. Building pads adjacent to the drainage courses shall be elevated a minimum of 2 feet above 100 -year flood elevations on the said drainage courses. Hydrology and hydraulic calculations to determine flood elevation shall be submitted for reviev- by the City Engineer. 6. The applicant shall be required to upgrade, to the satisfaction of the city Engineer, the existing drainage culverts across Hidden Farm. Road and Strang Lane at the downstream portion o` the drainage course w,,....f t. a•2. ses through the westerly part of the tract. �. The applicant shall be required to upgra6a and provide erosion protection measures at the con`luence of those two drainage courses at north of Hillside Drive which traverse through the subject tract. I] Resolution No. 8115 Page 3 8. All existing easements lying within the future right -of- way are to be quit claimed cr dcli heated as per the City Engineer's requirements, prior to recordation of the tract map. — 9. Final plans and profiles shall show the location of ary existing utility facility that would affect construction. 10. Concentrated drainage flows shall not cross sidewalks. Under sidewalk drains shall be installed to City standards. 11. Adequate provisions shall be made for acceptance and disposal of surface drainage entering the property from adjacent areas. 12. If, the City Engineer determines that runoff from the tract *lows olrto private downstream properties, letters of acceptance shall be required. 13. Private drainage easements with impro.emplits for cross lot drainage shall be required and shall be delineated on the final map. 14. At the time of underground utility installation and prior to installation of street improvements, `.he developer shall contact the appropriate cable televisin company for the area and make arrangements ..hich would give tha company the opportunity to install cable at the time of trenching. If the cable television company does not install cable, then the developer shall install conduit and pull boxes throughout the tract. Such details shall be shown and verified on the improvement plans. Building Division 15. Surety shall be posted and an agreement executed, guaranteeing completion of all on -site drainage facilities necessary for dewatering all parcels, to the satisfaction of the Building and Safety Div =ion. 16. Appropriate easements, for safe disposal of drainage water that ere conducted u,:to or over adjacent parcels, are to be delineated any recorded to the satisfaction of the Building and Safety Division. 17. On -site drainage improvements, necessary for dewaterin., or protecting the subdivided properties, are to be installed prior to issuance of building permits for construction upon any parcel that may be subject tG, or contributes to, drainage flows entering, leaving or within a parcel relative to which a building permit is requested. 11 L -] 11 Resolution No. 815 - Page 4 18. Final gradin." ^!ans for each parcel are to be submitted to tht Building and Safety Division for approval prior to issuance of building permits. (This may be on an incremental or composite basis.) A.PPRO'4ED AND ADOPTED THIS 25TH DAY G= FEBRUARY, 1981. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO C;ir-AMONGA BY: �z ATTEST :—�— Secretary of'the Planning Commission I, JACK LAM, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, de hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution .,ras duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucarmnga, at a regular meeting of the Planni g Commission held on the 25th da; of February, 1980 by the follwoing rote to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONEPS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ASSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: Sc eranka, Tolstoy, Rempel, Dahl None None King DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STANDARD CONDITIONS Subject: '117ENTA IV w 10277 _ Applicant Location: Those items checked are conditions of approval. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DIVISION FOR COMPLIANCE I4ITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: A. Site Development _ 1. Site shall he developed in accordance with the approved site plans on file in the Planning Division and the conditions contained herein. 2. Revised site plans and building elevations incorporating all conditions of approval shall be submitted to the Planning Division prior to issuance of building permits. El Ir . U -1/-3. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Zoning Ordinance and all other applicable City Ordinances in effect at time of Building Permit issuance. -I Z4. The developer shall provide all lots with adequate sideyard area for Recreation Vehicle storage pursuant to City standards. _ 5. Mail boxes, in areas where sidewalks are required, shall to installed and located b, the developer subject to approval by the Planning Division. _ 6. Trash receptacle areas shall be enclosed by a 6 toot high masonry wall with view obstructing gates pursuant to City standards. Location shall be subject to approval by the Planning Division. V/7. If dwellings are to be constructed in an area designated by the Foothill Fire Districts as "hazardous ", the roof materials must be approved by the Fire Chief and Planning Division prior to issuance of a building permit. 8. A sample of the roof material shall be submitted to the Planning Division for review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. 9. All roof appurtenances, including air conditioners, shall be architecturally integrated, shielded rom view and the sound buffered from adjacent properties and streets as required by the Planning and Building Divisions. _ 10. Prior to any use of the project site or business activity being commenced thereon, all conditions of approval contained herein shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development. _ 11. A detailed lighting plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Planr.i;.q Division prior to issuance of building permits. Such plan shall indicate stvie, illumination, location, height and method of shielding. No iighting shall adversely affect adjacent properties. _ 12. All swimming pools installed at the time of initial development shall be solar heated. _ 13. Texturized pedestrian pathways across circulation aisles shall be provided throughout the development to connect dwellings with open spaces and recreational uses. _ 14. All trash pick up shall be for individual units with all recepticals kept out of public view from private and public streets. _ 15. Standard patio cover plans shall be submitted to and approved by the City Planner and Building Official prior to occupancy of the first unit. • _ 16. All buildings numbers and individual snits shall be identified in a clear and concise manner, including proper illumination. w'0'17. Solid core exterior doors, security dead bolts and locks shall be installed on each unit in this project. V/ 16. Security devices such as window locks shall be installed on each unit. 19. All units within this development shall be preplLmbed to be adapted for a solar water heating unit. 20. Energy conserving building materials and appliances are required to be incorporated into this project to include such things as but not limited to reduced consumption shower heads, better grade of insulation, double paned windows. extended overhangs, pilotless appliances, etc. _ 21. This development shall provide an option to home buyers to purchase a solar water heating unit. 22. Emergency secondary access shall be provided to this tract to the satisfaction, of the Foothill Fire Protection District. 23. Local and Master Planned Equestrian Trails shall be provided throughout the tract in accordance with the Equestrian Trail Plan for Alta Loma. A detailed equestrian trail plan indicating widths, maximum slopes, physical condition., fencing and heed central in accordance With City equestrian trail standards shall be submitted to and approved by the City Planner prior to approval and recordation of the final map. 24. This tract shall form or annex to a maintenance district for maintenance of equestrian trails. E 25. This project shall provide percent of affordable housing and/or rents, in conformance with General Plan housing policies and the housir.S criteria defined in the Growth Management Ordinance. Affordability shall be de *- ermined by ci.rrent market rates, rents and median income levels at the time of construction of the project. Proof of this provisi3n shall be submitted to the Planning Division prior to finalizing building permits and occupancy of the units. fi. Parkinq and Vehicular Access 1. All parking lot landscaped islands shall have a minimum inside dimension, of 4' and shall contain a 12" walk adjacent to parking stall . —2. Parking lot trees shall be a minimum 15 gal-ion size. 3. All two -way aisle widths shall be a minimum of 24 feet wide. 11 C. 11 4. 5. 6. 7. Emergency access shall be provided, maintenance free and clear, a minimum of 24 feet wide at all times during construction in accordance with Foothill Fire District requirements. All parking spaces shall be double striped. All units shall be provided with automatic garage door openers. Designated visitor parking areas shall be turf blocked. g. The C.C. & R.'s shall this site unless they owner- restrict the storage of recreational vehicles on are the principle source of transportation for the g. No parking shall be permitted within the interior ciruiation aisle other than in designated visitor parking areas. C.C. & R.'s shall be developed by The applicant and submitted to the City Planning Division prior to issuance of building permits. Landscaping �. A detailed landscape and by the Planning Division irrigation plan shall be submitted to and approved prior to the issuance of building permits. V00102. Existing trees shall be retained wherever possible. A master plan of existing trees showing their precise location, size and type shall be completed by the developer. Said plan shall take into account the proposed grading and shall be required to be submitted to and approved by the Planning Division prior to approval of the final grading plan. 11. A minimum of specimen size trees shall be planted within the project. 12. Special landscape features such as mounding, alleivial rock, speciman size trees, and an abundance of landscaping is required along U 3. Existing Eucalyptus trees shall be retained wherever possible and shall be trimmed and topped at 30'. Dead, decaying or potentially dangerous trees shall be approved for removal at the descretion of the Planning Division during the review of the Master Plan of Existing On -Site Trees. Those trees which are approve'. '-or r2l.o-val may be required to be replaced on a tree- for -tree basis as provided by the Planning Division. 4. street trees, a minimum of 15 gallon size or larger, shall be installed in accordance with the Master Plan of street trees for the City of Rancho Cucamonga and shall be planted at an average of every 30' on interior streets and 20' on exterior streets. 5. A minimum of 50 trees per gross acre, comprised of the following sizes, shall be provided within the development; 20% -24" box or larger, 70% -15 gallon, and 10 "< -5 gallon. 6. All lardscap?d areas shall be maintained in a healthy and thriving condition, free from weeds, trash, and debris. 7. All slope banks in access of five (5) feet in vertical height shall and are 5:1 or greater slopes be landscaped and irrigated in accordance with slope planting requirements of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Such slope planting shall include but not be limited to rooted ground cover and appropriate shrubs and trees. All such planting and irrigation shall be continuously maintained in a healthy and thriving condition by the developer until each individual unit is sold and occupied by the buyer. Prior to releasing occupancy for those units, an inspection of the slopes shall be completed by the Planning Staff to determine that it is in satisfactory condition. in the case of custom lot subdivisions, all such slopes shall be seeded with native grasses upon completion of grading or an alternative method of erosion control satisfactory to the Building Official. irrigation on custom lot subdivisions shall be provided to germinate the seed and to a point 6 months after germination. Z B_ All parkways, open areas, and landscaping shall be fully maintained by a homeowners association or other means acceptable to the City. Such proof of maintenance shall be submitted to the City prior to issuance of building permits. 9. The front yard landscaping, and an appropriate irrigation system, shall _ be installed by the developer in accordance with submitted Glans. �10. The final design of the perimeter parkways, wails, landscaping and sidewalks shall be included in the required landscape plans and shall be subject to approval by the planning Division. 11. A minimum of specimen size trees shall be planted within the project. 12. Special landscape features such as mounding, alleivial rock, speciman size trees, and an abundance of landscaping is required along U T D. Signs 1. Any signs proposed for this development shall be designed in conformance 'i:ith the Comprehensive Sign OrdinanCP, and shall require review and approval by the Planning Division prior to installation cf such signs. 2. A uniform sign program for this development shall be submitted to the Planning Divisior. for their review and approval pr or to issuance of Building permits. The signs indicated on the submitted plans are not approved with this approval and will require separate sign review and approval. E. Additional ADprovai, Required 1. Director Review shall be accomplished prior to the issuance of a Building Permit. 2. Director Review shall be accomp..:hed prior to recordation of the final subdivision map. is granted subject to the approval 3. Approval of Tentative Tract No.J L _ „ IF o," Zone Change 9kmJ2 . 4. This Conditional Use Permit is granted for a period of months) at which time the Planning Commission may add or delete conditions or revoke the Conditional Use Permit. V/ S. The developer is required to obtain the following signed statement by purchasers of homes which have a private or public equestrian trail on or adjacent to their property. In purchasing the home located on Lot , Tract , on I have read the C.C_ & R.'s and understand that said Lo: is subject to a mutual re- ciprocal easement for the purpose of allowing equestrian traffic to gain access. Signed Purchaser Said statement is to be filed by the developer with the City pricy to occupancy. _Z6. Prior to approval and recordation of the final map, or prior to issuance of building permits, when no subdivision map is involved, written certification artment of from all affected School Districts, shall be submitted to the Dep Community Development which states that adequate school facilities are or will be capable of accommodating students generated by this project. Such letter of certification must have been issued by the School District within sixty (60) days prior to the final map approval in the case of the subdivision map or issuance of permits in the case of all other residential projects. F. _Z7. Prior to approval and recordation of the final map, or prior to the issuance of building permits when no map is involved, written certification from the affected water district, that adequate sewer and water facilities are or wilt be available to serve the proposed project, shall be submitted to the Depar =ent of Cone -unity Devetopment. Such letter must have been issued by the water district within sixty (60) days prior to final map approval in the case of subdivision or issuance of permits in the case of all other — residential projects. For projects using septic tank facilities allowable by the Santa Ana Regional water Control Board and the City, written certi- fication of acceptability, including all supportive information., shall be obtained and submitted to the City. This approval shall become null and void if the tentative subdivision map is not approved and recorded or building permits issued when no -nap is involved, within twelve (12) months from the approval of this project unless an extension has been granted by the Planning Commission. 5. This subdivision was not submitted as a total development package and is required to reapply for a point rating relative to the design section of the Growth Management Ordinance prior to final approval and recordation of the map if the subdivision is going to be developed as tract homes. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING DIVISION FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: Site Development --14of 1. The applicant- shall comply with the latest adopted Uniform Building Code, is Uniform Mechanical Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, National Electric Code, and all other applicable codes and ordinances in effect at the time of approval of this project. 2. Prior to issuance of building permits for combustible construction, evidence shall be submitted to the Foothill District Fire Chief that water supply for fire protection is available _Z3. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for a new residential dwelling unit(s) or major addition to an existing unit(s), the applicant shall pay development fees at the established rate. Such fees may include, but not be limited to: City Beautification Fee, i rk Fee, Drainage Fee, Systems Development Fee, Permit and Plan Checking Fees, and School Fee. 4. Prior to the issuance of a bui'iding permit for a new commercial or industrial development or addition to an existing developraant, the applicant shall pay development fees at the established rate. Such fees may include, bu: not be limited to: Systems Development Fee, Drainage Fee, Permit and Plz.n Checking Fees. This approval shall become null and void if building permits are not issued for this project within one year from the date of project approval. 6. Street names and addresses shall be provided by the building official. 0 �A Dwelling units shall be constructed with fire retardant material and non - combustible roof material. 0. All corner diJa lin gs shall ha`: the huilding elevation facing the street upgrade with additional wood trim around windows and wood siding or plan -ons where appropriate. G. Existing Structures 1. Provide compliance with the Uniform Building considering use, area and fire - resistiveness 2. Existing building(s) shall be made to comply Zoning regulations for the intended use or t 3. Existing sewage disposal facilities shall be to comply with appropriate grading practices Code for property line clearances of existing buildings. with current Building and le building shall be demolished. removed, filled and /or capped and the Uniform Plumbing Code. H. Grading _joer1. Grading of the subject property° shall be in accordance with the Uniform Building Code, City Grading Standards and accepted grading practices. The final grading Plan shall be in substantial conformance with the ® approved conceptual grading plan. 2. A soils report shall oe prepared by a qualified engineer licensed by the State of California to perform such work. 3. A geological report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and submitted at the time of application for grading plan check. 4. The final grading plan shall be subject to review and approval by the Planning, Engineering and Building Divisions and shall be completed prior to recordation of the final subdivision map or issuance of building permit whichever comes first. APPLICANT SHALL CONTAZT THE ENGINEERING DIVISION FOR COMPLIANCE :dITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: I. Dedications and Vehicular Access �1. Dedications shall be made by final map of all interior street rights -of -tray and all necessary easements as shown on the tentative map. 2. Dedication shall be made of the following missing rights -of -way on the following streets: additional feet on additional feet on additional feet on J. _z. Corner property line radius will be required per City standards. 4. All rights of vehicular ingress to and egress from shall be dedicated as follows: 5. Reciprocal easements shall be provided ensuring access to all oarcels over private roads, drives, or parking areas. 6. Adequate provisions shall be made for the ingress, engress and internal circulation of any trucks which will be used for delivery of goods to the property or in the operation of the proposed business. Street Improvements i. Ccnstruct full street gutter, A.C. pavement, lights on all interior ve'2 improvements including, but not limited to, curb a,,d sidewalk, drive approaches, parkway trees and street streets �9i; fe-1 to P1anPa�YjCavnNissico, resc(Li6or AZ!gQ play Construct the following missing improvements including, but not limited to: STREET NAME CURB & GUTTER. A. C. PVMT. SIDE- WALK DRIVE APPR. STREET LIGHTS A_C. OVERLAY WHEEL CHAIR RMPS OTHER �e titeli�l ✓ a✓ ✓ ✓ � ✓ I 3. Prior to any work being performed in the public right -of -way, an encroachment permit and fees shall be obtained from the City Engineer's Office, in addition to any other permits required. 4. Street improvement plans approved -by the City Engineer and prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer shall be required, for all street improvements, prior to issuance of an encroachment permit. ✓ 5. Surety shall be posted and an agreement executed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the City Attorney, guaranteeing completion of the public improvements, prior to recording of the map or the issuance of building permii:s, whichever comes first. 6. All street improvements shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, prior to occupancy. VOOOO'7. Pavement striping, marking, traffic and street name signing shall be installed per the requirements of the City Engineer. 0 K. Drainaqe and Flood Control 1. The applicant will be responsible for construction of all onsite drainage facilities requires by tho _ity Enn;noo. ,nee. 2. Intersection drains will be required at the following locations: 3. The proposed project falls within areas indicated as subject to flooding under the National Flood Insurance Program and is subject to the provisions of the program and City Ordinance No. 24. 4. A drainage charnel and /or flood protection wail will be required to protect the structures by diverting sheet runoff to street7er it existi q dtpwr�ge ce-atse- 5. The following north -south streets shall be designed as major water carrying streets requiring a combination of special curb heights, commercial type drive apprnaches, rolled street connections, flood protection walls, and /or landscaped earth berms and rolled driveways at property tine. L. Utilities 1. All proposed utilities within the project shall be installed underground including utilities along major arterials less than 12 KV. / �0 2. ULility easemcnts shall be proride3 to the specification of the serving utility companies and the City Engineer. 3. Develop=-- shall be responsible for the relocation of existing public utility �;, as required. '✓ 4. Develope-c shall be responsible for the installation of street lighting in accordance with Southern California Edison Company and City standards. ® y 5. Water and sewer system plans shall be designed and const-ucted to meet requirements of the Cucamonga County Water District (CCWD), Foothill Fire District and the Environmental Health Department of the County of San Bernardino. A letter of compliance form CCWD will be required prior to recordation. o y 6. Approvals have not been secured from all utilities and other interested agencies involved. Approval of the final map will be subject to any requirements that may be received from them. M. General Requirements and Approvals 1. Pe+nits from other agencies will be required as follows: A. :altrans for: B. County Dust Abatement required prior to issuance of a grading permit) C. San Bernardino County Flood Control District D. Other: _ 2. A copy of the Covenants, Ccnditi ons and Restrictions (CC &R's) and Articles of Incorperation of the Homeowners Association, subject to the approval of the City Attorney, shall be recorded rr th this map and a copy provided to the City. _ 3. Prior to recordation, a Notice of Intention to form Landscape and Lighting Districts shall be filed with the City Council. The engineering costs involved in Districts Formation shall be borne by the developer. _1/4. Findl parcel and tract maps shall conform to City standards and procedures. E 11 E Mr. Gorgen stated he would be willing to if in two weeks he could dcc- --ion on this property. i Mr. Hopson advised against a continuance under the circums ces because of the condition of agreement requested by Mr. Gorgen further advised that you don't agree that you bar yourself from ma g a Discretionary decision at some future point in time. Commissioner Sceranka asked if the apnli t would agree to a two week continuance for staff ro study this. Mr. Gorgen replied that he -o Motion: Moved by Scera seconded by Tolstoy, carried unanimously, to continue this item. Mr. Hopson star that if and when tite agreement is found that the County ent Bred into with Caltrens, it will need to be searched in order to render 11 opinion to staff and to make a report. He stated that the City Attorney will certainly respond as soon as a copy of the agreement was received. E. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSIENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 10277 - BARMAKIAN - A custom lot subdivision consisting of 30 lots on 24,3b acres of land in the A -1 -5 zone located on the north side of Almond Road, east of Carnelian St. - APN 1061 - 171 -02. ZC 80-12. Commissioner King stepped down because of a possible conflict of interest. Senior Planner, Michael Vairin, reviewed the staff report. Chairman Dahl opened the public hearing. Mr. Andrew Barmakian, the applicant, advised the Commission that he would answer any Questions. Commissioner Rempel asked the applicant if he was planning to sell any lots that he could develop on his own. Mr. Barmakian replied that if they do, it would be handled through CC&R's, and their firm would be used as the architect. Commissioner Rempel stated that the original i-,tent was to have the individual do his own lot. He indicated that he did not want an owner to circumvent the design review. Further, that in pregrading the land it would be important to be sure that the houses fit the lot rather than the lot fitting the house. He stated that he did not want the land destroyed. Planning Commission Minutes -8- February 25, 1981 l� 6 Mr. Barmakian stated that they have shown a grading plar. that is minimal and that they are moving a small amount of earth. He added taa t they expect to do additional grading each time a home is constructed but that they do not want to do a lot of cuts and fills. Commissioner Rempel stated that in looking at the contour map he still sees a lot of straight lines in it and did not think there was any way to build a street with just moving 10,000 yards of dirt. Mr. Barmakian replied that staff had reviewed this plan and he did not see why he was being questioned about the amount of dirt that is proposed to be removed. Mr. Barmakian stated that he had a question on condition 12 of the Resolution under the Engineering Division.. He further stated that he did not intend to do this and thought that staff should reconsider this rather than require a letter from private property owners downstream of this project. He further stated that he was agreeable to all other terms and conditions of approval. Mr. Paul Rougeau stated that he did not feel that a. letter from downstream property oimers was necessary. Commissioner Rempel stated that this will create a prool= like one that occured at Red Hill. Commissicner Tolstoy asked what the impact of increased drainage is as a result of this tract. Mr. Rougeau explained the drainage as proposed by this development. Mr. Stan Sievers, 5484 Ornsdorff, Buena Park, asked about the emergency secondary access to be sure that it is sufficient for both parcels. Mr. Dara Henderson, 8887 Fidden Farm Road stated that he was concerned about drainage and asked that condition 12 be modified to require that Mr. Barmakian work with the City Engineer to assure that there will be no further erosion. Mr. Gene Sisen, 5100 Carnelian, stated that he is in favor of the project but was concerned about the row of trees along Almond Street. Mr. Barmakian replied that there is a condition of approval that requires that the trees be preserved. Mr. Vairin, Senior Planner, explained that the first row of trees may have to be removed because of the knuckle, but many of the trees where possible would be saved. Mr. Barmakian stated that he was unable to get dedication from the doctor who owns the property. Planning Commission Minutes —9— February 25, 1981 is Mr. Sisen stated that he was concerned that the trail that presently exists will rc-arn_ Mr. Bruce Chitiea stated that he thought this is a well conceived and designed tract and deserves approval. Chairman Dahl asked if this tract will be equestrian oriented. Mr. Barmakian replied that there is equestrian all around this tract. / Chairman Dahl asked if this particular tract will preclude or allow horses. Mr. Barmakian explained that there would be a choice of homeowners depending upon where they locate within the tract. Motion: Moved by Sceranka, seconded by Tolstoy, carried, to adopt zone change 80 -12. Mr. Stan Seivers asked if the applicant will also have to abide with the requirement for fire access. He indicated that this can be by private agreement between two property owners. Chairman Dahl stated that the secondary access is in the major trail system and would better be continued to the next project. ® Commissioner Tolstoy stated that he did not want some type of barrier that would be a physical barrier. He stated that it should be one that a fire truck could get .r_hrou -h to the property. J Motion: Moved by Sceranka, eeconded by Tolstoy, carried, to adopt Resolution No. 81 -15, approvi.ig Tentative Tract No. 10277 with the suggestions for change on cond_tiz)n 12 of the Resolution, no barrier for passage between the two projects along the eastern boundary, and the preservation of trees along Almond. Commissioner Rempel voted no stating that for the protection of the City and the property owner, a letter should be required. 10;10 p.m. The Planning Commission recessed. 10:25 p.m. The Planning Commission reconvened. G. �ENVTRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 11608 - L S G LIMITED - A total eve r0- 1. P of acres into L lots comprising 120 condominium units in the southeast corne hhiland Victoria - APN 202- 181 -07. Planning Commission Minutes -10- February 25, 1981 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING CD^4miSSiON, APPROVING THE TIME EXTENSION FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 10277, LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF ALMOND, EAST OF CARNELIAN - APN 1061 - 171 -02 WHEREAS, a request has been filed for a time extension for the above - described project, pursuant to Section 1.401.11.2 of OrdP,A11ce 28 -B, the Subdivision Ordinance; and WHEREAS, the Planning Co=ission conditionally approved the above- described Tentative Tract Map; and SECTION 1: The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission has made the following , i'­n ffi gs: A. That prevailing economic conditions have caused a distressed market climate for residential projects. B. That current economic, marketing, and inventory conditions make it unreasonable to record the Tract at this time. C. That strict enforcement of the conditions of approval regarding expirations would not be consistent with the intent of the Zoning Code. D. That the granting of said time extension will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. SECTION 2: time extension tor: Tract 10277 The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission hereby grants a ARalicant Andrew Barmakian Expiration August 25, 1984 APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 26TH I)AY OF OCTOBER, 1983. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Dennis L. Stout, Chairman 11 I Resolution No. Page 2 E ATTEST: Secretary o t e P anning Commission I, JACK LAM, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 26th day of October, 1983, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: HUES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: CO"MMISSIONERS: \ -:J 11 E LJ CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: October 26, 1983 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner BY: Dan Coleman, Associate Planner SUBJECT: TIME FOR acres of land in the corner of Archibald 201 - 252 -23, 25, & 26. Fr.L�I R -3 /:?D zone located on Avenue and highland 11"i 0:a -vi - Uni t�.%--;i the northeast Avenue - APN BACKGROUND: The property owners, Matthys and Barbara Kooyman, are requesting a time extension for Tentative Tract 11869 as described above and as shown on the attached exhibits. The project was originally approved by the Planning Commission on October 14, 1981, but an appeal was filed by homeowners protesting this project and an adjacent tract to the east (Tentative Tract 11928 - Westland Venture). After numerous public hearings and meetings with the homeowners, the City Council granted approval of the project on December 2, 1981 for a two year period with several conditions. The conditions included reducing the project density from 136 to 87 units and requiring enclosed garages. In addition, the City Council required that the Design Review Committee review the revisions prior to issuance of building hermits. To date, these revisions have not been submitted. ANALYSIS: A review of the tentative tract map and site plan indicated t at the project is consistent with current development standards. in addition, the building elevations meet the City's design policies. Tentative tracts are valid for a maximum of four (4) years from the date of approval with appropriate extensions per the Subdivision Map Act. This tract was originally approved for two years and is now eligible for the first of two possible twelve month extensions. A copy of the amended Planning Commission Resolution of approval with conditions and Planning Commission and City Council minutes are attached for your review. ITEM 5 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Time Extension - TT 11859 /Roberts October 25, 1983 Page 2 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that a twelve month extension be _ granted for Tentative Tract 11859. The new expiration date would be December 2, 1984. 11y submitted, Rick Gomez City 1rlanner iRG:DC:jr Attachments: Letter from Property Owners Exhibit "A" - Location Map Exhibit "8" - Natural Features Map Exhibit "C" - Subdivision Map Exhibit "D" - Site Plan Exhibit "E" - Landscape Plan Exhibit "F" - Grading Plan Exhibit "G" - Phasing Plan Exhibit "H" - Elevations Amended Planning Commission Resolution with Conditions Planning Commission Minutes - October 14 & December 9, 1981 City Council Minutes - December 2, 1981 & February 17, 1982 Time Extension Resolution of Approval El GEORGE W. VINNEDGE HAROLD J. iAKCE HERSCHEL R.GLENN BRUCE J. LANCE. JR. RICHARD A. DONNELL'E'Y WILLIAM A.vAN OYK JAMES RECALLON MARJORIE E. MIKELS October 13, 1983 VINNEDGE, LANCE & GLENN.INC. A PROCESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION 20. NORTH SAN ANTONIO AVENUE TELEPHONE 083 -9574 ONTAR10,CALIFORNIA 91762 w:.Ew Mr. Dan Coleman City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department 2.0. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91703 JAI .. s tSc�ti�tLt''t " 7��3t`lta;� Re: My Clients: Matthys and Barbara Kooyman, Cotrustees Request to Extend Expiration Date of Tentative Tract Map Tentative Tract Map Number 11869 Property: Northeast corner of Archibald and Highland Dear Mr. Coleman: My clients, Matthys and Barbara Kcoy..an, Cotrustees under Trust Agreement dated August 16, 1975, are the owners of that certain real property commonly described as an approximate 10 +/- acre parcel loacted at 6433 Archibald (northeast corner of Archibald and Highland Avenue) in the City of Rancho Cucamonga and more particularly described as San Bernardino County Tax Assessor's Parcel Numbers 201- 252-23, 201- 252 -25, and 201 - 252 -26. Mr. and Mrs. Kooyman have previously filed a Tentative Tract Map affecting the above described property. However, the uncertainty of the economy in general and the construction industry and financial market in particular, have prevented my clients from completing their intended development of the property. It remains their intent to proceed with the development of the property and, accordingly, they hereby request a two (2) year or other appropriate extension of the expiration date of Tentative Tract Map Number 11869. Inasmuch as Mr. and Mrs. Kooyman are presently out of state, they have provided to me a Power of Atorney pursuant to which I make this request on their behalf. A copy of the properly completed and signed Power of Attorney is attached hereto. I appreciate your prompt attention to and cooperation in this matter. Very truly yours, VINNEDGE, L NICE 5 G 1N INC. WILLIAM A. VAN DYK WAV /ml Enclosure CITY Or, ITEM: 12 i, S ♦1�� le -4uia j a!_ � R- 1- 8500-T 4 14ula R i 12 T _ R- 1- 8500-T 4-14u/a ,PA, 0-r 1- 8500 -T i NNORTH CITY OF ITEM: R,� \CI i0 CUCANNIO\'GN Tom: 5i pas PLANNING DINTOON Extim = SCALE= o, R- 1- 8500-T 4 14ula R i 12 T _ R- 1- 8500-T 4-14u/a ,PA, 0-r 1- 8500 -T i NNORTH CITY OF ITEM: R,� \CI i0 CUCANNIO\'GN Tom: 5i pas PLANNING DINTOON Extim = SCALE= n I - j _ I _ r- �ww+:y ••reel -r_:. I wc�� I LL '' l� - .w� a w� (/' 1 fir_- _ �-f f _ -i r fl �1 N mss-%. r� lil' -• � IT p �S I. M1 I � /� , •i� � -i' LI i - '� M�� wr �' „Iw.y .rri� R – r C/ V NORTH CITY OF ITEM: 'PG SI -07 RANCHO CUOXN-IOe�:� TrrLE: -r �'ila� ?IvE PLANNING BINIOUN EXi ?i m. scA E- �I 0 CITY Or RANCHO CUCA'iON"GA PLANNING DINISIO\ NORTH SO La 9 4 A ia•- (% l y_ fa •Li li.'' �-r�ti i��s�, �... � �iN-• as /i� {l�,�,'��`d •l i t.�n + a �tl� '3► " ► � low �:f dry �b a f: .i �.•• • -u.1 r cx wLa • all lit ILIC del `z E I E L� LEGEND NOTES' L1 a CITY O RANCHO CUCANL IO`Grk PLAINTNING DIVOON NORTH 1r :'.:. -.it I i ;--qL LEGEND NOTES' L1 a CITY O RANCHO CUCANL IO`Grk PLAINTNING DIVOON NORTH 1r :'.:. -.it I �1 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAIMU GA PLANNINNG DIE'LSK),N ITEM: TITLE: EXHIBIT- SCALE- ..... FORTH IN CITY OF lTr—%I-- RANCHO CUCA,,N,10.NGA TITLE: (M jar PLANNING DIXISION EXHIBIT. K,? SCALE: El "4=4N 3 .1704- 6 NORTH AIIENDED PER CITY COUNCIL ACTIDN ON 12/2/31 - SEE PAGE 3 RESOLUTION N3. 81 -115 A RESOLUTION OF •THE PLANNING CG;7111 S )1OII vF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, CONDITIONALLY APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 11869 WHEREAS, Tentative Tract Map No. 11869, hereinafter "Map" submitted by The Roberts Group, 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 136 condominium units on 9.75 acres in the R- 1- 10,000 zone (R- 3.!P.D. pending), located on the northeast corner of Archibald and Highland Avenue, APN 201 - 252 -23, 25, and 26 into 4 lots, reqularly came before the Planning Commission for public hearing and action on October 14, 1981; and WHEREAS, the City Planner has recommended approval of the Map subject to all conditions set forth in the Engineering and Planning Divisions reports; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has read and considered the Engineering and Planning Divisions reports and has considered other evidence presented at the public hearing. NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does resolve as follows: SEECTION 1: The Planning Commission makes the following findings in regard to Tentative Tract No. 11869 and the Map thereof: (a) The tentative tract is consistent with all applicable interim and proposed general and specific plans; (b) The design or improvements of the tentative tract is consistent with all applicable interim and proposed general and specific plans; (c) The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed; (d) The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage and avoidable injury to humans and wildlife or their hab.tat; (e) The tentative tract is not likely to cause serious public health problems; (f) The design of the tentative tract will not conflict with any easement acquired by the public at large, now of record, for access through or use of the property within the proposed subdivision.. l i l Resolution ido. 81 -i15 Page 2 (g) That this project will not create adverse impacts on the environment and a Negative Declaration is issued. SECTION 2: Tentative Tract Mar, No. 11864, a copy of which is attached hereto, is hereby approved subject to ail of the following conditions and the attached Standard Conditions: PLANNING DIVISION 1. A minimum of ter, (10) feet iandscaped planter, as measured from north property line, shall be provided between uncovered parkins areas and the north project boundary. 2. If the Atchison Topeka =nd Santa Fe right -of -way to the north is acquired, >vised plans shall be submitte6 to the City Planner for review and approval. 3. That vine pockets with irrigation be provided at car- port posts as indicated on elevations. G. That a directory sign shall be provided at each project entry subject to City Planner review and approval. ENGINEERING DIVISION 5. All interior private streets shall have a crown section 6. The applicant shall attempt to acquire necessary right - of -way at the southeast corner of Archibald and High- land, for street widening purposes prior to final map approval. The applicant shall coordinate efforts with staff. 7. The Commission recommends, to the Council, that the Systems Fees generated by this project, be earmarked to widen the Archibald and Highland intersection. APPrOVED AND ADOPTED THIS 14TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 1481. )CAMONGA CA ATTEST: '�� (; Buren t4_ tdasse ..an, City Clerk Phillip D. Schlosser, Mayor Resolution Page 3 Fto_ 81 -115 1, JACK LAM, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho ^ -solu. <..- .. the fureguing 'a 1U6 VU was ��•; �••� Cucamonga, do hereby certify that 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 14th day of October, 1981, by the following vote - to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Dahl, Tolstoy, Rempel, Sceranka, King NOES: COP-74ISSIONERS: None ADS u: : Cnv' MTSSIDNERS: None This project was appealed to City Council and the City Council held a duly advertised hearing and made the following modifications to the project. i_ The maximum density permitted for this development shall not exceed nine (9) dwelling units per acre. 2. All carports and garages shalt be fully enclosed and shall contain doors. 3. The site plan shall be mooified to meet the maximum dwellings per acre and shall be submitted for review and approval by the Design Review Committee. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 2nd day of December, 1981. AYES: Frost, Mikels, Palombo, Fridge, Schlosser NOES: Prone ABSENT: None ATTEST: '�� (; Buren t4_ tdasse ..an, City Clerk Phillip D. Schlosser, Mayor o u r, � r V y n V S a q Y O r 4 J t N L J ` = C u rp P v`-_ _ � c v 'O � ° 4 o D o u q> ✓ _ _ L'-c. L.T. a q o � � v✓ uLb.. ° -O o q - cL.N. o Y v v _e ^ W L Y r q ✓— L >� G L _ r r✓ - Lu o r o a y q v ✓c = L r � u � La, j V. G_ _�° pL`G P vr+ p pL V 9 ✓ � r > O V e u _° L -- r a O C ✓� q q � G r' � � T q G L d V G C F P L 4 ^ _ 9 g r� .Vi 4 y G O 'r O l O L �_ d ✓_ V✓ G J .q. � P C 4 T Nc- J = 4 -_-i ✓,. a.'L p W u a V -._ .may➢ - -o L q V q C`d� N d yT V r• -L'pd � •� O✓i �GC.rL r 4 ✓ ` C'° GL N ✓ e � a V _ �9c ✓u O U n � P� q y v r° .N. L L _ .° c c a✓ :.� r-, qc -q u c of .d.� ° °„L- °mN -MJPg ...N �rcc i✓ ° r � Q � °L ° ✓�> -._ o _� � a °o =v _r oyG � "' VTLr � a q � c_ 4 M _w _ o L c Y_ r c o n - ✓_ 'W' �' 6i „o °- b _ _ °p ✓N ° ° _ � .. NLr L O.=e L ✓r _-• .N-. V W D= C o ^ q_ G W U q V_ N L L ✓ O _ If ry C ✓_ L ✓ q n G V q -C L Ll O C S C O FL V_ y _ S 4 G T �a `L N CP 4 Q EbLO p �C b_W •r UC r°r✓ CL�VLG _- N 9 r> 1.',7 V 4 NV VC -V 2 W✓ L W� C Y q q � PpLC O Na• E S OD1 Oq q O d✓ � C. S 6 d V�� V� .� i _ j�VCOL q JV _ O � V O q V -- O y V_ 2 V G q O d b L V ✓ O L __ ✓- q > 2 w C O_ C g4_C7� Nr dL DF LOy M LP Jr CO O Y�•°. nvGyJ✓ r w d ✓� N O � i� O 6 ✓ L b .N L O G` J 2 y0 _ 9 C C _ �_ r C✓ P.O. ✓ 4 C u C O 9 i C q - s L L y_ N n ' _ _ V � � V y L C6C L ... -t�` � N fVi it n r -J T✓ 1 y_ OJ N ✓ OL y7� _ 4 ••no °.r L =V>Gb NI ✓_ V> ro PE dY �� EGJ my vL✓ O „� c�V V`u �I �A .,J. .V. GP c �Y rGV .N. Y d o 7 M L d g E > W UU G( N ts n V d o N° r. ✓ Q b q r M c 0 0.9 c 9 o 9 04Fq p- q' I �S �Fn V� DV OT G TOVI 9L u0 Y r ✓� 6 L.V.�v P O IT'_., —Y U U ✓ V• p .-.6 q �_ V _ V �_ gV_325` N rr✓n Nor _ V _I y _ 6F N6 Gq NO Vf G+°, WCLS 1-p u`- J�TTawl� O N = A m O, 16 ✓ N Y4 y� " H � 61 m q L 9✓ ° L '3 v C✓ I I ` N O✓ _ � � 6 V � C O V P j 9 Y L r L _ I,11 aD� pI G ''N PV q0 9N ✓ n Tqq y q NN I _ .ab � E 0 J Sa ✓ q Y 6 6 �` q Lp V C L y E F N r 9 rp _ r L r �`> c 'o q F °u• L.c Pq b q✓ c Q4 Y _ � c L G O D� � n O _L N€ fE_ju n-", V G L vi• � N M O O Ijf L_` qu rL 9 V �. Va. q Y i N L ✓.O = (] V nq SN q= r G S_ I I q C O Y V Q L O q V -- q v d J D C = D •� O b _ J V _ O L j r V _ C r ✓ P .c I 6 ' O b N 9 O . a N-Z V J c• � q O V O O Z� r• O _ Yq rG q C O L O q vd wr ?✓ N q N 4✓ u n � 4c - Y L _ C)J�I cc >� YEO °°,so d ° 2 w •p. i� >d Mn'W -, aL,> = noo o = it c .'°� .N.c'_ e -_ q in CJ "�_ �> q v N O F G i^ 6 I ' O G T .n V d n G � w✓i _ O q P> L C N J �. O'- O _ _M L_ F P r�� ... C I •� � V, O C d Q G. q _° '✓ q r> N u mGl Z_ Q Li -�. C% I q � _ q Ld r 4 O P J G O a �` ,r O G -.n L_ >� r�4 iEY �-•' 9 0.= V CV G ✓r � � M .°.i V q j r q q r O G � E✓ 4 r C d� C�Z) V �.rr _ 4 vq_ c� O M0= >✓ O � D a _ V J L Or°, O` i N r ✓ >V 11 CN �! �r >6. L 4 r w� w V.:. _GV L •q._ _dN rL � ✓_ •• G L �V•, � G a � O' N ,Y O Yf ,6 w LO P1 � V ✓ b iC� x x� x x X iC x g G O 1 • N 6 J i V HI 11 i u o qC Cq c9 C� .� C] t O LVJ• CJ ^ V' O° �N O Tl� f d � ✓ r 'u r. r "NV � -i 4r >O OY _^.. r -' cor� `. 'V G rC =y0 v4 L ✓v O � y -4 O_ � ~•tq T. C' •'� S> u� q> L•-Y O G I' J 7 N 7 i L V .On q V q .rV. s o< cow n av Fcrq. ' .0 CO= f.a°a is .L+aa lv vo_ OL IV 6�V ✓ rJ[- 'APL � r a G - u^ �'- i��L�r� ✓� N V `.v °a ° ° " ✓- €t, .. vii �` i V °?L'� ` Yi:. - L - °ro G.n o e ""�-,. a c� _' N M 4� �L O° t �Na 7 a Y o x c ✓G. mac. v 2 ao.°.. arc "' �"_G. 'q °g_q °L� ''�o ::._ it 2 ••� o � E G C I1 ¢ N p ! w: u ° 'EL E 9 G Y O y � u c V 4 NI b ✓ c u � d O ` :r N ° 0 c= �°i� =n- •a- '-; VL O 1 Llpi > Nc _c G: OOdP NL .�.p�o OV =r 2 G N✓- f.j CVV 62j GL� .^-.o � �.°n >V{ Nlq C� Cy?-r�>.NV O° `.tr r >V NO 4L�V V.r00. x.- j N 1 O C G _ O oc -� Gp [L-' Oan r0 _ 0 C�40 .0 2.T% T .a..Y .p OL -L.a uaL.°.. r P G 4.GiJ LU N q✓ q_UL F dr S- ��'_a" � r VT q�60%0= C CJO C ✓C G d° a gvU�p GNU Sr O V O VGC?GO C V f ' O �"�N - r - y .o qy al .✓...� ..'U ��C ^.� JCL < -a vow .°.� a - °a �- s rt °c- •°• �� .o a � `�'>. a'iem �: 170 Nu Sk L � r - O• ` � S L r t=i �� 0li r - q V V C V w 6+0 ^` C i d - O r r V % ° qV � N✓ PVT(" O� �O %VS V% �✓ V4 LOS rNV yZ E L � $ -�' ^cv °a - L di¢ `oviceo oa _ Na va i T r 4 p c is �- o.o✓ ` .p. _� c - - N ✓✓ c i pJl _ � - C � C_ 2 9�� �✓ O - J g O u G V V L O V C r r C C 4 O' °,° P >? 9 v a %CU ra E ✓.-.LV CE ^b.%Vr V V C .7 rN VLGO qLN qV > Y CO -ra S - Cr -79 T O PL QO Gr0`.r° .p tV- _ � NV_ V T�J V O CN Ll -J' r0� cyC CU -O YSP 4JU 06'0O� N.Vn Vr^ M r VN r_6� VC LN -T G d GrCC vU Y � E r� 0 ✓ C N L E .T.r c% L_ O C O �- Y_C ✓r nOO ^� N L V u �V >. Q V O. ' wOVO -L T_ VC O O�O �> V.r NN L.0 U9 =rP V�r r ` L' ✓ 6 L ` U T g J ... - N r S= r C G O V � C G � V O% 2 >. V� � y. C q O 2 P ra C G r Y J L %9x_ % O q O. T_ 3 O'C ✓ r N O CwV._ V = �' VNO CPS °'_ -L� �yq= °nL Vl �L�CC OVT '•T` ]1J I r^ U= N V 6 7 P ;5 N G u n VJ". V !V = ^= r0 rte✓ 'eV ° <a ua C✓.p c .naVN ¢.L. o. <a CPn.L,.wti =oc Gxpy ti� u u � ✓ O L q `J C• _ ^U = d V V q O�r0° _ O• F t T F.n ✓O"'. V _C 11 ` ° V_` V- y= uVN✓ OG =O._S 3 Y NC >. O y I _ U_ a O. r u m C 9 N y O= C =`_ � t - I I ✓j I I � 4 y_ r Jpo `o- o o_x _ CIS v I rLG mc' R o•' _ °.�c °1 cao � U V I"R� O J � _ - PEE � �� C �_ � I I n I( I R .L. P� V N n .n 4 b n� .d.. ✓✓ .n C q R °> C D N ✓ V r C O G� I N V V C V G O U °`L = _L O' U V _ N >q.n W _= °u i � I � I'= =PC '^ °P P C V`G g0•°GV -V NNn >aVC= V � . I rjC .Ti N VC lVI• r' 202 E ✓ � L✓ 9�tP _.�� V V G l -• >•�' ��CL9 O =° P CJ O -z: E uV° qN•° C✓'J G F n Y 111- �Iw-�. I N L L N_ 4 0+ q - G c «dux O �S ^ r N 4 6• F i•o G 1....1 -+ L .>n �c N_ `-,� 1 1 .^ > p c W R✓ q T W � �� •� G Y N .r � J° L °- - R 2 V� W N ° 9 p= i r O O b _ > V r �I N c O J O O i - 9 TL t V -° AGE r. Su- `✓ .r CO d^ -V ✓'- v- 6 >' •> U E S R 9� L o veb_ C °' C LE 6•a a v. V `q✓ iN «t Vq « ��_ V 0` ' o q �, u buc9� d N..L�EO � ✓ Ri-q z Y iJd °9 pYN Vr V a O -_ V C q q - L O O✓ V -_ L `` U VN�rbr V S P q Tq CO- C � j ¢I Vd ° r ✓ -b°L Gq�_- LE +•N N N c cca Eco Nc G prE of V __.- ° >o C _O��y 9�A C�V� =I 9 9°° it t_ r a� L✓ y>. y 4l0 £ N En Y Q «9L VN- ° 29N °✓ 40 VGA✓ rN u.M 4d V dI E SRq _ Vr w-= ✓� GRr A DyS RyY R9_D> G >O Yi .°.�l WI Vi DV V I G y .- °.d. =ov c ° ' �_ L` o Pao .-_N c "i✓ com °` W �-4 I - `F+o- GoR ` q rG ✓ nr >G -_ o� bP -Gq :I •- a qrE � wo.gw °e,, nw__d.mN r L•.� M � � ' soc.> �_d. pac"Y e`+• =� ' °' � N ur uoRq -��o� `u Vp ✓6 _L o> N 9 iG L4 I q_ V Mr P° �J •� K_ qI ° � -Jl I V _Iyi (1 I Vpr� 6.n 6q wV.>n 6 q a V 9 V CI GO L�N 1 V 6R GOr S M =r L.'J d O --Jq V� PTU u • C � L ° C A q6 r' M E O✓ N E _ O f• 9- M 2 9 '� GCE - C O 4 - q u 9�- d ✓ .•>. ✓° C � V q O u U' V O' V TT r > V c O V �u � °n 4.: °fi �- �Gl a.� �o e e �_ _ c .°.. <v- dy � - o.c d ✓c =_ L> Off.- _ «> C - G C V - V C p•` C£ 4 ✓ O U 9 V k V_ .T.. LLi OL ._.. r V o � '- C W V = N R� c L 9_ - G n O c_ q _ ' E 7 0 o L ✓ H __ pYr LL_R �- tC ` -✓ Or✓ Nq>.'O ISVT° _ r f CP iU` ✓_C GC WO C� VY Vr 9��' CdS �- C09 VV -E W q G�Z« G ✓9G y° Vy V °n _r C y.0 C ✓_ P K i_ _ > u0 WP g NGC _ _d .ri.iP q. --.�N' u6 -ie y✓.o «.'> = ✓4= °% -a � °o °om a>i -= .= %.L.`- -i_ _ O O� U -✓ G9� C•L- r C 6 Cb -- > =b ✓ 6 99 SOC Erg `r JY V `U J V C � P- PN L ° '+_i -VL _ 9= O G N q b qu V_ C C ✓ V - L C N Ir -NS V. A ` C Z C T✓ VC L q ` L L O _ G� O -- V° O r. ✓J _ >✓ T6P0= 9PCr ✓b N V u.C� ii4 -LP _V .O V 99 ✓c✓ L✓ �Id- >• z Y-.° o.• L..0 _o>l >� Q �>. � ...c n -O _ ��C _a ✓Oq GNyL.V a Gc A q po O > u O V - V_ c.a p��C. 9_ +• � P °`cc I O _ Go - _ P_ 9 C. o.- P J 9 J c «VC o ° U LE _ C✓ 9 N P b Vc _�U V`p 9Ojq Cie � N' Ey -•'Q ✓ u o✓ o r _ P Lo Ok L r✓VP c - yC° 6�R _C_nF -V'^� ` V✓ _ «- 9t'c- -__ ✓�� c9 ^ -oa= c n_A PoN LL �oD l 0✓ _a N 3 -_ > l C 11 - _ O C O O- a q° O V c V O r C - L g V -OGU O ✓ .I G L ` O g ` a 4 c r r. Y V ✓.Ui.r C`O« O' Vr -. --- q_ ✓� iiN 69V D✓✓N _ •ce L� s N.n Pa'ij -o i c n wy9 of -•"� o o« c q ✓.T.i c- P_ ✓n 2 � ,G.p ✓ N ✓�✓ C S> r- C r 0 � R L <Li. N n C = V R ...- N _ V L�L G fa > W n�� b � 6.�n y N w N C L NC_c N O O - V O O° OVlR ✓N G N 9- C »� O n y V =G - ✓ V R_ C «^ V 4 _ V.. N V _ V.. N - «` d q 4 _ 9u °.✓ °° u c i V ✓°r c v ° 6 C n S V- .CC2 >-.L O•' ✓� > Y V 06 > �l G V n V uG «> - V y r ✓ = L✓✓ ✓WYVW V C V __ >D yt L` N g -C p - i� Q--!l ° U i • 9 9 V U V V N u G S V q .O 9 3 4 ar g4V�r qr >« Y c ✓� - >.p NoEO coE- > yV V_ ✓ O N C N> J V I l ='°` O✓ G- V � V a V ` Y N r N w G V V N i= }- 60q 2G ✓vulva VL rN�> I"'Cuw N•• O .�OqO L.Ln wv L>9C0 L99GV N CV 6J0 N 6V Ww°. yw C6 oz ti n e � v CC) P 0 a G. O O s vd V v Y S a 4 _ a n V -- V « q c Ty iN 0 2 6 �I X� 2 O 0 9 r O o L 4vq C r — y t V 2 r Ar C C q V O a V — Yr V C V C x9 d i O u p as E u U — N u r n � + C O J V L 9 L u X90 c w o d � CPi O ^v OTC d� V q L V od r =r C l pu U V V d rnq.oL C C u r d ✓ a a`. C O G r6 0 I u c O C O L V G u W c iu v V u +'l T N C � ni i P d � L N �I ✓ =I q P GI ti p V) —I Y c O O G O V 0 v d a 2 C 0 G NI I O a r « r O O t N d c P T W ou V V xi c q L L` 7 V � n O W O j 7 - c' L� d L q4 0 v � O (u S �] q r t a O N G V V r O 4 V S L ✓ L L T4 ov- p P� if 4 r c V ` q L V p U V N Y P M y v J J y q O - U °r p j �I rI .� �I `J C G Y 7 — V n ca aq � V ✓ L 4 O nE d C u C q 2 y u� J C J � O u � V V 9 L O nc 4 ° — C L C NF r� V J T P u C � N c C d 0 G 0 0 i u v a n. l L� d J a C 2.- q U d O u O � P � C -) — u 4 V r O T C - O 'a — C uv r i V � a c ru J L VOi a ; u L o � 4 q ti f•j - yj C L O L E Z. q r r C L u 9 q I L r u u -co o✓ � n'i L oc � � Z d C O L u S a O L � O O l L -fin oa -c w L° ` �iv N O u Tr. d r q u r j y V U 9- 4 J O� I I y r L ✓up 4� q u i- � n^ d C L > CL p l V C V V C l Cc 91r q O I O C \ J «n .`T v c r ✓u d XI i 1 O a r « r O O t N d c P T W ou V V xi c q L L` 7 V � n O W O j 7 - c' L� d L q4 0 v � O (u S �] q r t a O N G V V r O 4 V S L ✓ L L T4 ov- p P� if 4 r c V ` q L V p U V N Y P M y v J J y q O - U °r p j �I rI .� �I `J C G Y 7 — V n ca aq � V ✓ L 4 O nE d C u C q 2 y u� J C J � O u � V V 9 L O nc 4 ° — C L C NF r� V J T P u C � N c C d 0 G 0 0 i u v a n. l L� d J a C 2.- q U d O u O � P � C -) — u 4 V r O T C - O 'a — C uv r i V � a c ru J L VOi a ; u L o � 4 q ti f•j - yj u C E I L r u u d V �_ � Vr Tr. N 1 O M G q 4 J I I 6�LL J r L ✓up 4� J «n .`T v c r ✓u d N � c m ..O -•� Ou n r✓ � cam wL °V � 9 O� J -C Ij PO6 C� y�.L.r✓ r IVVG q P` aL � � cC POL. P O ar I I VLV iaVVq CLOY r=. n O N 4« T V <`� ✓ � � i` w G Y C X U�= V = N= fi t q d r 7 r V O � V C v 9 V. G_ � A y= � L O p X � ✓ O` L V L_ >� _ t p� C C �✓ 4� q p�Lq �° TL >L � p6 1 EO OL VL O r 6 O M r C —.✓< O C -- V T 0 O C E ,Iw L C? G q �n L r L q q`✓ Em u✓ ✓ .-� � � uLOp �4 ,- I A � v q -�q Vega .N.� v 2 U.� -. qd � mgr "10 > L o n c« ,qor �cqc °- r._s `< �a c N_ .N.° �I v E i ✓.°. °' Gc r`° o`o ✓ N J. r___q O � J J 'p C= q V V � L � r q N �-- r _ IVU I I y G V r q✓ G -- V �O ✓.� NL V N I V uVi L d¢ O Nr �L d ` N~ � `� PN iVr 1 I VI Lqq L tP {.i2 ll VV✓ Gy O � ( = iNV ✓�N _ r y 4 /Q 7 u a E S v d a s • q O� 4 u CI � 91 O st C C c GG ^I i •� C ze O O L O 1 V J 9 d C ✓ ' C I4 O �u =-�Cv NG 6q •- � q O V V PY.O v _ v .n T 1 c � — YouL ` u d c c a N CVO_ OJ N c � .d.•v C= qS iy S L C K L V O ^ L C V C q O T d O C C N C _ u - - O V d ACT NVdQ q C L�••^JOU O_`J� q ^ T N •yJ' 9 H N q ✓ q C � C N^ V C O S q d Cq V >_ L� L c G M O G 6 q J S v d a s • q O� 4 u CI � 91 O st C C c GG ^I i •� C ze O O L O 1 V J 9 d C ✓ ' C I4 O �u =-�Cv NG 6q •- � q O V V PY.O ME 1 — " £ c u N e c a o v D S L C K L O C C V C q O T d O C C u O V d q C J N q ^ T N •yJ' 9 N q C G. N^ V u a Y N 6 O E W r uoq o .+ o Yv N N Y N N ` P E d V�r Y q NO 7J Pd CC•+V LNOL 6q VC L.°. U gOiO TL C i L v V C g y d L N 4 G G .Vn 6A�V w.G C6 6.r G 6_ �Lm N� ••f� OI MI b� �� ME C Commissioner Rempel agreed with the R- 1- 30,000 and stated that his only comment on larger lots is that there isn't any reason that a person buvinz the lots could not combine two lots to make it larger and did not feel that Commissioner Tolstoy's argument is a valid ore. 1. ROBERTS GROUP AND WESTLAND VENTURE Yr. Lam reviewed the Council action on the Westland Venture and Roberts Group submittals stating that the City Council had conditioned these tracts so that density was limited to no more than 9 units per acre. He indicated that the Council did not change the zoning to R- 3 /P.D., in- stead, they changed it to R- 21F.D. and un.'.cr the when thev did this it created a legal requirement that this be returned to the Planning Commission for a report of their action. Further, that as soon as the report had been made to the Commission, the City Council would have a second reading of the ordinance to change the zoning. Mr. Lan then explained how the Planning Commission might respond to the Council's action. Commissioner Sceranka asked how the City Council could approve the total project and charge the zoning. Mr. Lam explained that the City Council could change anything relative to the project at that time on appeal. He indicated that they had the legal right to do so and elected to change the zoning. Commissioner Scera --la stated that he wished to make some comments. lie indicated that this project is near where he lives and he was not rep- resented by the homeowners and would have spoken had he known that Council was going to take this action. Commissioner Sceranka stated that he has some particular and serious concerns with their action on this not on the basis of the political situation within that development but on the basis of his being a Planning Commissioner. Mr. Sceranka stated that when this project went through Design Review with the developer they tried to mitigate homeowners concerns. Further, that he had a serious problem with how they can take the freeway corridor, Alta Loma Channel, and a thoroughfare and not consistently say that this project is not appropriately medium density and yet approve a project on Foothill near Heilman of 19 units an acre which is on one arterial not adjacent to a channel and also adjacent to single family homes. He indicated that he is very concerned and uncom- fortable with setting a precedent in this community in not giving the northern property in this city affordable housing projects and saying that any affordable projects will be below Foothill only. He stated that because of this, he cannot support the City Council's action on the basis of density. Planning Commission Minutes -18- December 9, 1981 Commissioner Sceranka indicated further that Council's action took the ` prices of the homes from the affordable range to higher than what those across the street are worth. Commissioner Sceranka stated that since this would be a report to the City Council, he feels that on the basis of the trees per acre which is higher than those required in a single family tract, the 120 foot right -of -way, the buffering between the single family residences, and with the conditions imposed co mitigate traffic impacts, that the density requested is appropriate. Commissioner Pahl stated that the only affordable housing that presently exists in the City is in the northern section of Alta Loma at Carnelian and 19th Streets, in the Lewis tract where the prices range from $43,900- 59,000. Mr. Dahl further stated tnat ar_other project had been approved at Highland and Haven which is approved by HUD, and classified as afford- able. He indicated that in Cucamonga only two or three projects are approved and classified as affordable. Further, that any time an attempt is made to put in high density housing in an area of single family resi- dences, the main concern of people is not traffic and density, it is property value. He indicated that he did not know if he could support R -3 zoning but felt it should be R -2 as the Council recommended with redesign and with the bad points swallowed by the Roberts Group. He also stated that through the General Plan the Commission looked at 19th Street for high density and when you get up to Highland, he felt chat it was an area where you would wan*_ to start decreasing density. Commis- sioner Dahl stated that the General Plan was pushed through to meet a deadline and now that the Commission is no longer under a deadline, they should spend more time with it and support it. Commissioner Rempel stated that he agreed with what Commissioner Sceranka said about traffic but that chat he missed is that the Planning Commission's main concern was traffic at Archibald which was discussed at the hearing. One of the things that the Commission talked about is that the street should be widened out and they gave direction to do that. He felt that the Commission_ had done the propet thing in making the recommendations that they did for the Roberts Group and Westland Shafer. Commissioner Rempel stated that his recommendation going back to Council would be to adopt the recommendation as passed by the Commission as they did the right thing when they sent it to Council. Chairman King stated that it is difficult to view separately the question of the projects submitted to the Commission apart from the zoning requested. He stated that if a piece of trash had come in for the same area and a change of zone had been sought, the Commission would have viewed it differently. Chairman Ring indicated that this was a totally excellent project and when the zoning was requested was viewed in con- junction with the General Plan and the project, the recommendation made by the Commission was totally appropriate. He indicated that he had no reservations whatsoever. .O-., 1114 Planning Commission Minutes -19- December 9, 1981 c � Commissioner Tolstoy stated that he wished to bay pictured as a balancing scale because on the one hand you have the property owners protesting the high density and he is empathetic with then, and this project as the Commission looked at it is not in keeping with the neighborhood as it is today. He indicated that a freeway will be going through, although it is still a dream. He stated that he knew Commissioner Dahl is wrong to think that there will not be one because in a foothill. community it will be there whatever it is called. Commissioner Tolstoy stated that there will be some people who will say, Planning Commission, this is where the density should go. Commissioner Tolstoy stated that the flip side of this is that there are peopie who live next to him who don't ta. - -c carc of tbci- property he agrees that the density is high and his only concern is Archibald. There was discussion or. the area set aside for higher density in the General Plan and higher density as proposed in this project. The Planning Commission consensus was 4 -1 against the City Council's decision to rezone these projects to R- 2 /P.D. and to uphold their recommendation for zoning of R- 3 /P.D. for these projects. There was discussion berweea Commissioners Dahl and Sceranka relative to the definition of affordable housing and where affordable housing is located in the City. Commissioner Tolstoy stated that the City Council has a very sensitive situation facing them as one of their calculations has to be what is the consequence of what they do. Tf they were to reverse themselves to agree with the Commission that may trigger something the Planning Cormi.ssion may not like and that is the swelling up of a number of people in this covmrinity with an initiative of no growth. The City Council will have to look at that, he stated. Further, he thought that as a Planning Commissioner he made the right decision tonight, but he thought it would be pretty bad if the City Council doesn't measure the community and he would not be upset at all if the Council chooses not to go along with the Commission. Because, if they did not, the citizenry may close this City down. Motion: Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Rempel, carried unanimously, to adjourn to a Terra Vista workshop on December 17, 1981, at 7 p.m. at the Neighborhood Center. ADJOUR`.'i EN i 10:52 p.m. The Planning Commission adjourned. Planning Commission Minutes -20- December 9, 1981 11 E LI Respectfully submitted, �C JACK LAM, Secretary Planning Commission Minutes —21— Rf- December 9, 1981 c � dealing with the public's money and a slump stone wall would be con- siderably more expensive. He felt that a block wall could be matched in color very closely to what Is presently there. Commissioner Sceranka stated that he would like to see some kind of planting material on the block wall because of the possibility of grafitti. Mr. Vairin stated that the condition for the slump stone wall had been in the original resolution and that there had been discussion on it as well. He indicated that the opinion of the Design Review Committee was that a slump stone wall would be aesthetically more appealirg and would blend in better with what is present. Commissioner Dahl asked who sits on that committee. Mr. Vairin replied that Com=issioners Rempel and Sceranka do. Commissioner Tolstor stated that the City, the Council and Commission has been trying to get the Private sector to do their projects in such a way that they would enhance the City. He stated he felt that there would '.-e a problem with making an exception on this project. He indicated that the City believes that the Commission asks someone for an upgrade, he will point his finger and say that they let the public sector get away. He felt that this could happen with this building and if thev allow corners to be cut, they will hear about it. Mr. :Michael asked if the Commission normally specifies the type of building material to be used in walls. Commissioner Tolstoy replied that the Commission has in the past. Commissioner Rempel reiterated that this is a Commission prerogative and they do it for private developments. Mr. Michael indicated that the Water District would comply with the request for a slump stone wall. Motion: Moved by Sceranka, seconded by Dahl, carried unanimously, to require the slump stonewall, as stated in the resolution. F. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ARID PLANNED DEVELOPMENT 110. 81 -07 (TT 11869) - ROBERTS GROUP - A change of zone from R -1- 10,000 to R- 3/P.D. for a planned unit development of 136 condominium units on 9.75 acres of land located on the northeast corner of Archibald Avenue and Highland Avenue. ArN 201 - 252 -23, 25 and 26. Planning Commission Minutes -6- October 14, 1981 El E L'J Senior Planner, Michael Vairin, reviewed tre staff report. Commissjo::er Tolstoy asked if grading on this project could be addressed. Mr. Vairin asked if he meant anything in particular or the concept. Commissioner Tolstoy stated that he had noticed that there are some 3- story elements in this project and asked if they were suggested to minimize the grading. Mr. Vair_n replied that this had been suggested by the applicant. Commissioner Toictoy as-iced if tnac meant that the project will require less grading. Mr. Vairin replied that he was not sure if it mean*_ less grading or if it was being suggested in terms of scale. He felt that the applicant could better answer the questions. Chairman King opened the public hearing. Ms. Tony Quezada, representing the developer, the Roberts Group, stated that they were in concurrence with staff's and the Design. Review Committee's recornnendation and have.no problem with the conditions. Ms. Quezada asked for clarification of Engineering Condition No. K8 concerning drainage. She asked if the wording should be southwest_ corner of the property rather than Archibald and Highland. Ms. Quezada then answered Commissioner Tolstoy's question by stating that it was a design function and would not affect the grading of the project. Mr. Phillip Marcacci, 6368 Jadeite, Alta soma, stated that he was con- cerned about traffic as a result of this project and school overcrowding that may result. He indicated that this project is compounded by the next agenda item which will also adversely impact these areas. Commissioner Dahl explained the school certification letter which is required before building permit issuance, stating that school over- crowding is the responsibility of the school district. Mr. Vairin explained the rigorous review process that this and other items go through in order to determine the availability of utilities and other services. Mr. Rougeau, Senior Civil Engineer, explained that the traffic situation is one thing that is examined closely prior to approval of a project. He indicated that with the widening of the street that will result from Planning Commission Minutes -7- October 14, 1981 C C this project, impaction will be reduced. Cc _._sS ioner ?cls. asked what the p 'an � is for Archibald Mr. Rougeau replied that Archibald is proposed to be 72 feet wide and compared it with other north -south streets which are 44 feet wide such as Amethyst and Beryl. Mr. Fred Nelson, Alta Loma resident, stated that he was not particularly opposed to this project but asked what will be done with Archibald and Highland Avenues. Mrs. Judith Heinz, Alta Loma resident, also addressed the traffic problem that she foresaw at Highland and Archibald. She indicated that presently there is a school bus stop at that location. Further, that heavy trucks will be using that routs with the proposed development and voiced her con- cern for the safety of children. Mrs. Sheryl Moody, Jadeite Street resident, questioned the comment that the schools will be able to handle additional children that may result from this project. She asked if it were true that school children are presently being bused. Commissioner Dahl replied that when it comes to schools, we as a City, have no real responsibility as t.. .net school districts will and won't do. He added that before building permits are issued, the builder must receive a letter from the school district stating that there will be room. Commissioner Dahl indicated that in the case of the Alta Loma School District, they will issue a letter if they feel that they can absorb additional children. Chaf£ey High School District wiles also issue a letter; however, they certify on the basis of classroom space within the di^trict rather than the local area. He indicated if no certifica- r_ior letter is issued, there can be no building permit issuance. Commissioner Sceranka further explained the mechanism involved in the certification process stating that the letter is good for a period of 60 days during which time the building permits must be pulled. If the letter is older than 60 days, it becomes invalid :and a new one would have to be obtained. Mrs. Moody questioned the water pressure that might be lessened as a result of this project, indicating that there currently are problems with it. Mr. Vairin replied with an explanation of the Growth 11anagement Committee and how they investigate these kinds of concerns to be sure that service can be provided. Further, that this project would not take water pressure away from this area. Planning Commission MinuCes -8- October 14, 1981 L-J 11 E Mrs. Moody stated that Archibald cannot handle any more traffic as there is presently only one l -ine between 19th Street and Highland Avenue. She asked when Archibald would be revamped, before, or after, this pro- ject's construction. Mr. Rouv.eau replied that when this project goes in it will be fully widened. However, he stated, it will not be widened south of Highland Avenue, it will just be two lanes. He indicated that this would be mitigated by a four -way stop. He explained that this is because the property on the southeast corner is privately owned and in the Foothill Freeway corridor. He indicated that it cannot be expected that they will just give the City this property, the City would have.to purchase it. Mr. Rougeau stated that if after tl-is project_ is built, there is an unbearable delay in traffic, staff will propose to the City Council some appropriate means to do a road job. Mr. Rougeau then explained t:.e systems development fee which helps to provide necessary street improvements. Mr. Frederick Stuart, Alta Loma resident, stated that a myth exists relative to the school certification letter in that it carries little or no weight. He indicated that a private attorney had been hired to investigate its legal merits and concluded that it was not worth the paper upon which it was written. Further, it was this attorney's opinion that the letter would not withstand a court challenge. Mr. Nelson asked why a requirement for improvement is not imposed on this development and asked how long it would be before this inter- section is improved. Mr. Rougeau replied that these two projects will not be entirely responsible for the traffic at this intersection and that is why the fee is paid. Mrs_ Lee Marcuchian, a resident of Jadeite Street, asked If the fire station on Amethyst will be able to handle the additional dwellings. She indicated that at a neighborhood fire recently, it took the Fire Department 5 minutes to respond. She asked if the fire station will remain opened_ Mr. Lam replied that as far as the City knows, the fire station will remain opened. He also explained the response time criteria. Yrs. Marcuchian commented that she travels Archivald twice a day and the stop sign that exists at Archibald and Highland is not observed by 50 percent of the people. PI_ =.ruing C3timission Minutes October 14, 1981 5 r Mr. Lam explained the City's requirement for off -site improvements so that what has been said would not be taken out of context. He indicated that when it cones to an intersection S•-h as this where the developer is net the total contributor to the prouler.:, the City imposes a Systems Development Fee. He indicated that very few cities in the State of California have such a fee and that Rancho Cucamonga is one of the first. He advised that this fee is outside of tax dollars, it is contributed by the developer and goes into a special fund for Capital Improvements. He explained that the City Council each year evaluates projects that need improvements. He indicated that it is each citizen'a right to ask the City Council to set a priority on how these improvements should be made. He indicated that a problem exists in t:iat there are not enough funds to make all the improvements needed. Mr. Lam also e--Dlained that outside of the public Capital Improvements Program, the City has a Public Safety Committee that advises and makes recommendations to the City Council. He stated that these are the mechanisms for people to get the input into the system when there are perceptions of safety problems. He indicated that no one is saying that a problem is non - existent. What he explained is that there are mechanisms for people to set priorities and let their opinions be known relative to the Systems Development Pee that can be used for capital improvements. mere being no further comments, the public hearing was closed. Co:- :issioner Dahl asked Assistant City Attorney Hopson if the school certification letter is binding or if there is some method of getting around it. Mr. Hopson replied that Mr. Zruart's reply was totally erroneous. He indicated that in this City a developer cannot obtain a final tract map without an approval letter. ; urther, that this option is w- ritten into State law and the attorney w-itl: whom Mr. Stuart spoke could no be more incorrect in the opinion he gave. *h-. Hopson indicated that it is legal and binding and he had no doubt that if this was challenged in court, he could defend the City's posture. Without a letter, he stated, you cannot build a house. Commissioner Dahl stated that he wished to go on record relative to the intersection of Archibald and Highland that be believed it to be one of the most dangerous it the community. Be stated that it was his hope in these projects that are adding impacts to traffic that the Commission can do something to deal w;rh these dangerous situations. He indicated that he would not support any �f these projects unless this is taken care of. Commissioner Rer..pel stated that having, sat on the Design Review Coma.^ittee. and lookiam at this project's aesthetical aspects and whether circulation is adequate for this facility, this project has gone a long way in r..eeting the criteria set. He felt that the developer should be commended Planning Commission Minutes -10- October 14, 1981 0 E C on this. He stated that with regard to the traffic problem at this intersection that it has been stated that there would be widenin¢ at Archibald and at Highland, the length of this tract, and will addition- ally, ha-2 to pay the systems development fee which will go into the City's fend for future improvements and possibly this intersection. He - indicated that until the City has some money, it can only wait until there is enough either in the development fee or the road tax funds to make these improvements because the existing funds are woefully in- adequate. Commissioner Dahl stated that he wished to comment on the intersection stating that if it was cut down and smoothed out it wouldn't have to be widened because there would be adequate visibility waiting less of a nrcblem at that location. He also stated that he wished to go on record that this is a very attractive and one of the best condo projects in the City. Assistant City Attorney Hopson observed that the mechanism with the development project would make the developer improve that intersection., however, the Commission is overlooking one point. He indicated that to improve that intersection the City asst have that piece of property that lies south and the developer has no power to condemn that property. He indicated that if the Commission requires the developer to improve that intersection by widening it with Archibald south, the Commission will ha-re imposed a condition on him that he cannot satisfy. He indicated that it would be nice if whoever owns the property on the south either gave it or said 1 will contribute by setting a reasonable value on it. He indicated that in giving tentative tract approval, the Commission must impose conditions that can be met. Commissioner Tolstoy stat .i that wher, the storm drain project goes in, it will take :rater off o' that intersection and it will be improved somewhat through that aT_ the repavement that will be done. He indi- cated that he had somewhat the same problem that Commissioner Dahl has and he would make a statement, although not as stror_ as the one that Commissioner Dahl has made, in that he knows that the Engineering Department and the Traffic Department has in the past taken care of Problems. Although Commissioner Tolstoy acknowledged that there is a problem here, he felt that the Traffic and Engineering Department will continue to take care of these problems and will monitor accidents and keep traffic counts here. He indicated that the two projects before the Commission at this meeting will generate some funds and will allow improvements to be made as they have been at Base Line and other areas in the City. He indicated that he would support this project because although it has problems, it is in the right place and he felt that the City can take care of these problems. Planning Commission Minutes -11- October 14, 1981 Commissioner Sceranka stated that he wished to acknowledge that there is a problem at this intersection as he lives to the north and east of this and drives it 3 -4 times a day. He indicated that the Commission must try to deal with a solution to -this problem in that all of the improve- ments cannot be enforced by any one development because of impacts which _ occur all along the corridor. Commissioner Sceranka talked about the Svstems Development Fee and how it works. He felt that the best_ solu- tion tc this problem would be to look at priorities, the road figures and traffic flows that would result and go on from there. He stated that the City does not have the luxury of funding to use to make improvements to what have long been problems as new developments come in. He stated that if these projects were not allowed to go in, there would be no money from systems development fees to solve any of the City's problems. Commissioner King stated that basically he agreed with Commissioner Tolstoy that this is a good project that should go forward. However, in light of the dangerous intersection as it now exists, he felt that the conditions of approval should be amended to state that the developer of the property at the northeast corner make an attempt to obtain some property from the owner at the southerst corner, and perhaps in lieu of contributing funds to the systems development fee they be contributed for the possible acquiz�i- t_ion of the land or portion of the land on the east portion of the inter- section for purposes of best dealing with the intersection as it presently exists" Commissioner Dahl, for clarification, stated that at this point in time the Commission would be looking at an easement and the widening of the intersection to get rid of the danger. He indicated that the City could also seek out the easement and felt that it st.ould. He indicated that if such a condition were added, he would support this project. He reiterated that if an attempt were made by the developer to acquire the easement and if the Citv asked for dedication as a condition of approval, he would support this. Commissioner Sceranka stated that a problem still exists with requiring this property owner to acquire the property to the south and he objected to this. Chairman King stated that the developer should try to obtain the property and if he is able to do so, the money he would pay in systems development fees could be used to purchase the property. If he comes up against a hard -nosed guy who doesn't want to deal with him, then obviously, he has :made his best attempt and the project should go through as it is and the intersection will be dealt with at a later time. He indicated that the acquisition of the property is not a mandatory thing. Commissioner Tolstov asked if such a condition was legal. Planning Commission Minutes -12- October 14, 1981 C Assistant City Attorney Hopson asked if Commissioner Tolstoy meant, can the Co,W„io :o. r� •• �� r,.-at the f-e'f eloper mate a best effort and have the y City helps He indicated that it is possible. Chairman Dahl stated that they were not talking about the entire freeway corridor prnperty but just the property at the intersecticn which would allow widening. Paul Rougeau stated that to make it worthwhile, it would take the whole waa,:h of the right -of -way at the freeway and that it would taper to an easement on the south to make this feasible. C,i.rissioner Sceranka asked how much systems development fees would result from this project. Mr. Rougeau replied that it would be between_ $50,000- 100,000, as a guess. Commissioner Sceranka asked if the Citv could condemn the property necessary as a solution to this problem. Mr. Hopson replied that the City could condemn t ^e property if it felt that it were necessary as a solution to this problem but it could not do so for this project. Motion_ "loved by Dahl, seconded by Tolstoy, carried unanimously, to amend the resolution of approval for this tentative map with the condition as stated by Co- .nissioner King. Ms. Ouezada asked that the Resolution also specify that the systems devel- opment fees be earmarked for use directly in improving this particular intersection. Commissioner Sceranka asked how long the developer will be required to try to acquire this property. Mr. Lam stated that there is a legal question relative to the dedication. He stated that he had heard that the developer is to try to acquire the property and then he heard that the systems development fees are to be earmarked for use on this intersection. He askcd if the Commission is trying to have both of these things incorporated into the process of this approval. ;;r. Lam stated that the question on this is that the Planning Commission does not have the authority to earmark fees but could recommend to the City Council that these fees be used for this project. Commissioner Sceranka stated that the motion should be that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council that the systems development fees be earmarked for the improvement of this intersection at highland and Archibald. 4DPlanning Commission Minutes -13- October 14, 1981 14s. Quezada askP -; what the time limit should be for the a isition. attemot. Commissioner P.E.,ipel stated that the attempt has to be made before they go ahead. Mr. Lam asked if they want it prior to the issuance of building permits and asked for . better definition of lice. He indicated that it should be before final map approval to facilitate the street improvements so that they are not skipped over. `;r. Lam explained to the audienr_e how the tentative tract map approval is done and 'now the acquisition of property must take place in relation to the issuance of building permits. Commissioner Dahl stated that he recommended that the City also try to obtain the dedication necessary for the widening of the intersection. Commissioner Rempel stated that this was part of the motion. Motion. Moved by Rempel, seconded by Sceranka, carried unanimously, to adopt the Resolution. of Approval for the site plan and rezoning of this property. Mr. Vairin stated to the audience that they would receive notice of the Zone Change on this when it comes before the City Council. G. ENVIR=!AE -%TAL ASSESSMEIT AND PLANED DEVELOPMENY N.O. 81 -08 - (TT 11 SHA FER /WESTI.AND VMrrJRE - A charge of zone from R- 1- 10,000 to R- 3 /P.D. for a total planned development of 67 townhouse units on 5.85 acres of land located on the north side of Highland Avenue, east of Archibald Avenue. APN 201 - 252 -32. Senior Planner, Michael Vairin, reviewed the staff report pointing out for the record that this particular project would be utilizing the Alta Loma channel for drainage and would be required to be fully improved. He indicated that this was a requirement in meeting threshold and should the applicant not agree to this condition, this project would have to go back for further consideration. Chairman King opened the public hearing- .r- Yom Davis, 9381 Business Center Drive, concurred with the staff findings and stated that he had nothing to add. He asked for clarification of Item 27- Mr. Vairin explained the definition of affordable housing and asked if the applicant was also accepting tae improvement of the channel at this point. l'J E Planning Commission MirutFs -14- October 14, 1981 0 11 u Ll City Council minutes I December 2. 1981 Page 3 - I G -P _zc 1 Map 4907 - iuueteu on t`. - _rtF.east comer of Cleveland Av ue and 4th S.reet. Owner- Racor Development. i abor b Material Bond (road) $92.000.00 _ h. Revision to the A-nua1 Subscrip[Sor. Resolution.. S f is reco ®ending that fees for the mailing of agendas and minutes be ' creased to reflect increases in overhead and mailing costs. This re re' s the first cost increase for subscription rates which were establishe n April. 1979. RESOLUTION 81 -66 -A A RESOLUTION OF CM C0 ',5CIL OF THE CITY OF I� RA• \CH'0 CUCAMO CALIFORNIA. SETT21G CE27ALN FE LS rvR ' AL S'.'PSM?TIONS AAD CODES• CODES- J. Set December 16 981 for public hearing on: City E,, required Guidelines s Ling forth procedures to i. lenient LCyfN. Mott - -b removed to S1�oRe7crLnlxem E andtdeletionoof St dn$eMotla°necarriedth . animously 5-0. i 4. PUBLIC }RINGS. 4A. APPEAL. OF PLANNING C0%MISSION DECISION ON F-%N m."4S1TAL ASSESS`fEV'L A`.D pUtti -gip OryfO,OpyE`,^I v0 S1 o7 (TT 11569) - ROBERTS GROUP- A Proposed planned unit development of 136 condominium units on 9.75 act laced located on the north- east corner of prchibal.l Avenue and High Avenue - ApN 201- 252 -23. 25. aced 26• Mayor Schlosser made the following comments for Council to think about before opening the meeting for public hearing= He stated that at the last meeting a public bearing was held and Council listened to concerns of the citizens. Both Councilman Milcels and he met with a group of the citizens. These citizens also have met with the developers of this project and the developers of the next item- Some of the concerns involved the aligcmemt of Azchlbald. the access require- ments, schools, police protection, crime. eucalyptus trees, open carports. water pressure, fire protection, yualitg of life sale in the eammuaity. and consistency of development in the area. He stated that he felt the most important issue to the neighbor: was the neighborhood compatibility and the severity of lifestyle change: that say occur with this development. He stated that he felt these changes could be kept to a minimm and provide for a the citytbyrreducing the dnumber tOfll Units a to a�zone ofhR- 2 /?ol). Sozls of Councilman Mikels who was also at the meeting with the residents, added the follcwing= L =S He reinforced the Mayor's comments in regard to-the carports with open doors. He felt this was a valid concern. that garage doors would be preferable to open carports. Tae re was also concern regarding the -,=t of visitor parking and the width of Highland Av�ue. Residents wanted to be assured there wauld be enough room on 'Highland Avenue for traffic Jr. both directions if cars were parked on the south side of the G street. He said he talked with the city engineer and was assured that the improvements would be suf fitient to provide for traffic in both directions and for cars parked on both sides of the street- Another concern expressed vas in regard to the rotor scheme, but he stated this had been worked out. There was concern about the Archibald entrance which is now L�ing worked on by the city engir�er. Although there were other concerns expressed such as fire p 4 �� City Council Minutes December 2, 1981 Page 4 r etc. he felt the growth management Plan adequately deals with these. The vain issue was identified by the Mayer, and that is the overall impact of the density in that ztea_ Be then put two motions on the floor for consideration, which were seconded by Councilman Bridge for discussion purposes. '- lotion: Moved by Mik.ts, seconded by Bridge to uphold the apoeal in eart by modifying the develcPmen' plan and tentative tract map to reduce the density to a maximum of 9 units per acre, plus an additional condition to include doors on the garages, work with the city engineer regarding the Archibald entrance /exit problem, and condition the development plan and tentative map resxctively, and to refer the foal modified design to the Design Review Committee for design review approval. Motion: Moved by Mikels, seconded by Bridge to approve the first reading of Ordinance No. 164 to modify the zoning of the subject property from R -1- 10,000 to R- 2 -P.D. sod request the Planning Commission to report according to Government rode Section 65857, and to set the second reading after receipt of said report :rom the Planning Commission. City Attorney, Robert Dougherty, was requested by Councilman Palombo to explain the meaning of Government Code Section 65857. Mr. Dougherty seated that this was a section of the Government Coda which required that any time the city council proposes to modify a zone change in a tanner not Considered previously by the Planning Commission, that the rezoning must be referred back to the Planning Commission for a review and report. The Planning Commission has a period of time up to 40 days in which to make its report. The Planning Commission seed not hold a public hearing on the matrer. If the report is not i received within 40 days, the city co =cil is free to act. COUecilman Bridge expressed _hat this proposed density was more compatible pith A the community than the 14 originally presented. �I Mayor Schlosser opened the meeting f�. public hearing. Speaking were- i William Conger, 6365 Jadeite. He asked if these two motions are passed, does Chi s mean that they will automatically go into effect? Councilman Mikels answered yes, that the council Will refer this back ro design'review to make the appropriate changes. Mr_ Conger asked, "if both of these motions pass, will there still be a Public hearing Mr. Lam stated that if action is taken oa the first reading. then the first Public hearing will be tonight. Qhen the council sets second reading, that is the second public heat .ug. That will conclude the public bearings. The second reading will be set when the report is received from the Commission. There will be no public hearing at the Planning Commission. Mr. Lam them presented the city clerk with the modified ordinance which incorporated the changes in zoning from R -3 to R- 2 1P.D. Ton.'- Quezada, representing the Roberts Croup, � L they vent back through the Desi _ p• She asked i£ this meant that if have co go before the Planning Commission ag n`as araublic hearing item ?e alas Mr. Lam stated that once referred to the Design Review Committee, the matter of density would be concluded. All the Committee would deal with was how it would be rederigned for the lower number of units. It would not require another Public hearing. i V Em City Council Minutes December 2, 1981 Page 5 Mr. Lam stated that the zon_ change, development plan. and the tract map were appealed. The council has the au.bnrity to set the number of units as a con- dition of the tract map and of the development plan. This is what the Council has discussed. Therefore. the zoning is a clean -up action to reinforce the action of the first motion. Toni Quezada asked that if this occurs at Design Review, wtll the PlanainR Commission be more administrative and not require coming before the public again. Mr. Lam stated yes, u:.less appealed. He went on to stare that once the council set the density, then there will be no further discussion. John christison. 494b klusmar.. He wanted to knew how much more high density was being planned through this area and would this set a precedence for a whole belt of higH density? Councilman =kels pointrd to the general plan map on the wall. ?ir. Kasscrman stated that at the break, a staff member could go over this with him to answer his questions. There being no further response. the Mayor closed the public hearing. Councilman Frost asked if the product which comes out of the Design Review Committee, would thin be subject to Council review if they so chose? Mr. *= stated t*-at the on -y way this would return to the Council is if it were appealed or if council maea a special request. Mr. Frost asked if this request needed to be a formal one. with the potential for major design cbanges. he felt the Council should look at i:- Mt. Ism stated it really depended upon what the Council desired. Coupcilmam Mikels said that once the Design Review Committee has made its review and modifications to the project, staff can notify Council- Council could check it out to make sure It is in line with the council's suggestions. if not, then council could appeal it. Mayor Schlosser asked if council mould still have a chance to look at this a the second reading. Councilman Mikels stated that the second reading was on the zone change. :.e said if council were notified of the completion of the design review. that would suffice. Councilman Palombo called for the question. City Clerk Wasserman read the title of Ordinance No. 164. DRDINANCE NO. 164 (first reading) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CII OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA. CALIFORNIA. REZOFING ASSESSOR'S PARCET. N MBER 201 - 252 -23. 25. AND 26 FROM R- 1- 10.000 TO R- 2 1P -D. FOR 9.7: AC..ES GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE NORTHEAST CON. \'ER Or ARCHIBALD AM HIGHLAND KMQES- Motion- Aoved by Palombo, seconded by Mikels to watve further reading of Ordinance No. 164. Motion carried unanimously 5-O. Motion. Moved by Mikels. seconded by Bridge to uphold the appeal in part by modifying the •levelopment plan and tentative tract map to reduce tha density to a maximum of 9 mmi,.s per acre. plus an additional condition to include doors on the garages. work with the city enginoer regarding the Archibald entrance /exit pro- blem, and condition the development plan and tentative map respectively. and to refer the final modified design to the Design. Review Committee for design review approval. Motion carried unanimously 5-0 Motion: Moved by Mikels. seconded by Bridge to approve first reading of Ordinance No. 164 and request the Planning Commission to report according to Government Code Section 65857, and to set the second reading of Ordinance No. 164 after receipt of said report from the Planning Commission. Motion carried unanimously 5 -0. 11 Motion: Moved by Palombo, seconded by Frost to approve the Consent Calendar :rith items "c" and "e" deleted. Motion carried unanimously 5 -0. El 4. PUBLIC HEARINGS 4A. ZONE CHANGE FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT NO. 81 -07 (TT 11869) - ROBERTS GROUP. A proposed planned unit development of 136 condominium units on 9.75 acres of land located on the northeast corner of Archiblad Avenue and Highland Avenue - APN 201- 252 -23, 25, and 25. Staff report presented by Jack Lam. City Clerk Wasserman read the title of Ordinance No. 164. ORDINANCE NO. 164 (second reading) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, REZONING ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 201 - 252 -23, 25, E 26 FROM R -1- 10,000 TO R- 2 1P.D. FOR 9.75 ACRES GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF ARCHIBALD AND HIGHLAND. I City Council Minutes February 17, 1982 Page 6 Motion: Moved by Bridge, seconded by Mikels to �."ive further reading of Ordinance No. 165. Motion carried unanimously 5 -0. Mayor Schlosser opened the meeting for public hearing. *Ken Kerner, of Shaffer /Westland Venture. He stated they were requesting a continuance from the homeowners. *Philir Marcacci stated that they were still working with the developer and the homeowners would not object to a continuance. There being no further response from the public, Mayor Schlosser closed the public hearing. Councilman Bridge stated that he felt they should keep the 9 units per acre as originally desired by Council. Motion: Moved by Bridge, seconded by Mikels to approve the continuance to April 7, 1982- Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: Frost, Mikels, Bridge, and Schlosser. NOES: None. ABSENT: Palombo. ®Mayor Schlosser called a recess at 8:45 p.m. The meeting reconvened at 9:00 p.m. with all members of the Council and staff present. PTO TITLE 10 V OF THE RRECTIONS IN WORDING AND INTENT AND TO REVISE SPEED- City Council minutes \ e� December 2, 1981 Page 6 Morey McConnley. 6481 Jadeite. He stated that he had heard that the Environmental Impact Study had been hived on this project. With two other projects in close proximity to this project, will the EIRs be waived again? Mr. I= stated that a taster EIR was done for the general plat.. The EIR was not waived an any of these projects. It is either a determination of an EIR of a negative declaration, not a waiver of the environmental process. They all vent through the process according to the State Environmental (Quality Act. The action to be taken will be the reduction of density and the issuance of a negative declaration. This means a finding of no significant adv_rse impact by this project. Mr. McConnley asked if all three projects were considered as a whole when looking at environmental impacts or were Lhey ca".sidered individrilly? Mr. Lam stated that by Inv you have to make an individual determination. She accumulative impacts were dealt with on the master environmental impact report which was heard at oublic hearings at as time of the adoption of the general plan. Mr. McCannely asked who does the environmental impact reports? Mr. Lam said they are done by coasultauts for the city and paid for by '.he developer. In this case each (reject went through an environmental review and was judged in accordance with the general plan. A full environmental impact report was done for the general plan with all the density categories and the land uses adopted Last wprinC. The findings made for these projects is that it is consistent with the general plan. of townhouse waits on 5.85 acres of land locate6 on the north side of Highland Avenue, alt of Archiblad Avenue - AFN 201- 252 -32. Mayor Schlos stated that he felt essentially the same way about this item as the last one. Coun has heard input and met with residents. The item of greatest importance is the ghborhood compatibility. `,. Mayor Schlosser opened t meeting for public hearing. Sam Angora, has o_ Westland venture company. He felt that everone basically liked their pro t The only criticism was the off - street parking 'i ich they agreed to mitigatKwith staff, and the nature of the design. It was very simple to change — a they had to do on the five -plea, units was to drop off one In%it apiece which ould reduce heir development by eight units. Bill Conger. He said they went into dis lions with the developers with good intentions of trying to reach some typ of agreement. Up until this very moment, they were told "no deal." He or Council to follow through with the same two m,tiors made for Che Robert's jeer. Counciimar Frnst stated that he disagreed }n a direct comp_. son between these two projects. His main concern on Archibal! and 19th Street i the visual impact within the area. He felt on item B there vas an indication of a llingness to compromise by the developer to come up with something close to what urcil desired. Sheryl Moody. She stated that when they ].eft the meeting with the velopers, they had requested a time extension. They were turned down.. Both de :opera were to notify them of their willingness to comply with their requests. They were to be notified by Wednesday before Thanksgiving. They did not hear from the Shaffer /Westland group until Monday. They were told at that Q time they would work with the city and whatever th,ty requested regarding the Highland Avenue parking, but they would not reduce the density. LA RESOLUTION NO TENTATI''1E TRACT 1IS69 A RESOLUTIUN OF THE RANCHO XTENSION A�IONGA PLANNING CAVEt_SEI AND APPROVING THE TIME LOCATED ON THE NOT 201- 252-23,025 AND 26 LO HIGHLAND AVENUE - WHERE-As, a request has above - described project, pursuant Subdivision Ordinance; and + - EAS the Planning been filed for a time of extension Ordinance for 28 -8> io Section 1.401.11.2 Commission a d the the conditionally approved the kHtR , -n above - described Tentative Tr act +aP+ and added triHEREAS, the City of appro Council has also reviewed this project further conditions val. SECTION 1 The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission has mad- further the following fin ings: A. That prevailing economic cenditio��s have ro ects. a caused distressed market climate for residentiandp inventory B. That current economic, marketing, ��rd he Tract conditions make it unreasonable to re at this time- approval iraeme nsistent with C. would not be co That strict enforcement of the conditions o regarding exp the intent of the Zoning Code. ranting of said time extsafety, will pot welfare, p. That the g improvements detrimental to the public fie�oterties or imp or materially injurious top p in the vicinity. rants a SECTION 2: Tice Rancho Cucamonga Planning Comm 'ssion hereby 9 time extension or: Expi_ ration Tract Apply t December 2, 1984 11859 Roberts Group APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 25TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 1983 - PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA El 11 Resolution NO. Page 2 E BY: Dennis L. Stout, Chairman ATTEST: Secretary cf the Planning Commission 1, ,SACK LAYI, Secretary of the Planning Connissien 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 Citv of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 26th day of October, 1983, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: I] E CITY OF RANCHO CUCtIMONCA STIFF REPORT DATE: October 25, 1983 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner BY: Dan Coleman, Associate Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 83 -28 - H MET-P" - e r�a bu �ngs t eve p n ut tots zng 3 square feet on 4.3 acres of land in the General Industrial category (Subarea 3) located on the north side of 7th Street, west of Hellman. Avenue - APN 209 - 171 -37 (a portion). Related File: Parcel Map 8218 ;. PROJECT AND SYTE DESCRIPTION: A. Action Requested: Issuance of a Negative Declaration B. _PurBoose�: Construction of 15 industrial buildings totaling 37,143 square feet C. Location: North side of 7th Street, west 3f Hellman Avenue D. Parcel Size: 4.3 acres E. Existing Zoning: General Industrial category (Subarea 3} F. Fxisting Land 'Use: Vacant G. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North - Manu acturirg uls Ongg and vacant icad; General (Subarea 3) South - Single Family Residential; R -I East - Vacant; General Industrial (Subarea 3) West - Citrus grove; R -1 H. General Plan Besi nations- ro3ect ite - General Industrial North - General Industrial South - Low Residential (2 -4 du /ac) Zast - General Industrial West - General Industrial E ITEM C PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Development Review 83-28 /Rimes Peters October 26, 1983 Page 2 I. Site Characteristics: :he site slopes to the south at approximately one to two percent grade. Two s -ma-1; structures exist near the west end and the rernainder of the site is overgrown with weeds and grass. II. ANALYSIS: A. General: Part I of the Initial Study has beer, completed by the np.t�t and is attached for your review and consideration. Staff has completed Part II of the Environmental Assessment apd found no significant impacts on the environment as a result of this project. B. Imoacts: Development of this project will generate additional traffic on 7th and Hellman and increase the amount of water runoff from the property; however, these increases are insignificant and will not exceed the capacity of surrounding streets and drainage facilities. Iii. REC"ENDATIO44: Eased on site analysis and the Initial Study, this proliect will rwc cause significant adverse impacts on the environment. If the Commission concurs, issuance of a Negative Declaration `ar this project w -uid be in order. Resp �tfullybmitted, Ric: Gomef City Planner RG:DC:jr Attachments: Exhibit °F." - Location Map Exhi�)it °8° - Sit_ Plan Initial Study, Par` I N 0 17) V 09 Ll I t w z w z to B'ff:i.'i!: W !I!IIgn 12 113 S 114 15 F7 STREET _ .:.. . CI'T'Y OF ITEat - RA: -NCM CUCNMO NGAL - P.-PU- PLA TLNG M'7SI N EXFIBrr SCALE- s° 0 E C NORTH E C � rTmv OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA INITIAL STUDY PART I - PROJECT INFOpIgATION SKEET - To be completed by applicant Environmental Assessment Review Fee: $87.00 For all projects re (Fairing environmental review, this porn must be completed h thsubmitted ent her the Development Review Co."«i. tee ,.i+roug project application is mad e. Upon receipt of this d application, the Environmental Analysis staff will prepare Part II of the Initial Study. The Development Review Committee will meet and take action no -ater 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 oroj_oc will have rationgni- fica:.t environmental impact and a - 9 ificat will be filed, 2) The project wiles have a sign :i environmental e Paor and Environmental e will be prep An add tionalinformat1 nreport should be supplied by the applicant giving further informa- tion concerning the proposed project. PR0J75CT TITLE: APPLICANT'S NAME. ADDRESS, 'TELEPHONE: Davis DeveloDmeats 14G0 3ri� #� Nrt Suite 245 New part Beach, Street ca i£o 752 -2066 NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE OF PERSON TO BE CONTACTED CONCERNING THIS PROJECT: Rimes /Pets'Cali£orn ac 54 - -0644 _ Santa Ana Attn: Randy Jepson LOCATION OF PROJECT (STREET ADDRESS AL? StreetATtCEL NO.) I -7th LIST OTHER PER MITS NECESSARY FROM LOCAL, REGIONAL, STATE AIND FEDERAL AGENCIES AND THE AGENCY ISSUING SUCH PERMITS: N/A _ I -1 C PROJECT DESCRIPTION - DESCRIPTION OF construction con C 71: New constructlo Buildings are of irq o warehouse an of US units) of concrete tilt -up office areas. ACREAGE OF PROJECT AREA AND SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED BUILDINGS, IF ARTY: Site Area: 187,125 sq. ft_ total building area: 57,143 sq. t. DESCRIBE THE ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING OF THE PROJECT SITE INCLUDING INFORMATION ON TOPOGRAPHY, PLANTS (TREES), ANIMALS, ANY CULTURAL, HISTORICAL OR SCENIC ASPECTS, USE OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES, AND THE DESCRIPTION OF ANY EXISTING STRUCTURES AND THEIR USE (ATTACH NECESSARY SKEETS): The site is adjacent to a residential tract and is essentially void o anv siani scant eatures. The natural tcDograFhv is exist rear the e se no orner vegetation life is anticiaat new cons significant or cultural Is the project part of a larger project, one of a series of cumulative actions, wh?ch although individually small, may as a whole have significant enviro=ental impact? RE',E'? JUL 2 51983 I -2 HIMES - PETUS e►ormIMT 8 AS:;?C.. �1, . - C E WILL THIS PROJECT: YES NO X 1. Create a substantial change in ground - contours? X 2. Create a substantial change in existing noise or vibration? X 3. Create a substantial change in demand for municipal services (police, fire, water, sewage, etc.)? X 4- chans in the g zing zoning or desinations ? X 5, Remove any existing trees? How many? X 6, Create the need =or use or disposal of potentially hazardous materJals such as toxic substances- flar.nables or explosives? Explanation of any YES answers above: IMPORTANT: if the project involves the construction of residential units, complete the form on the next page. CERTIFICATION: I hereby certify that the stater.:nts furnished above and in the attached exhibits present t'r_e data and information required for this init4 r_1 evaluation to the best of my abil_ty, and that the facts, statements, and information presented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. I further understand that additional information may be required to be submitted befox= an adequate evaluation can be made by the Development Review Col=ittee. Date 8 /25/83 Signature Title Project a er 1-3 11 Ll CITY OF RANCHO CtiCAMONGA STAFF REPORT z� DATE: October 26, 1983 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner BY: Frank Dreckman, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 83 -29 - FflRHAN - The development of two industrial buildings �Fand 70,000 sq. ft.) on 8.30 acres of land in the General Industrial area (Subarea 141) located on the east side of Hyssop Street, south of 7th Street - APN 229- 283 -49. ;. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action Requested: Issuance rf a Negative Declaration B. Purpose: Construction of two industrial buildings (76,000 and 70,000 sq. ft.) C. Location: East side of Hyssop Street, south of 7th Street D. Parcel Size: 8.30 acres E. Existing Zoning: General Industrial (Subarea 4) F. Existing Lard Use: Vacant parcel G. Surroundina Land Use and Zoning North - Vacant parce , Generai Industrial South - Vacant parcel, General Industrial East - Vacant parcel, General Industrial West - Vacant parcel, General Industrial H. General Plan Desii Project Site - Gel North - General South - General East - General West - General i_nati ons : 9erral Industriai Industrial Industrial Industrial Industrial I. Site Characteristics: The site consists of two vacant parcels T4.05 acres and 4.25 acres) adjacent to each other, which slope gently from the north to south. Currently, all site vegetation has Seen removed as part of previous grading operations. No str.ctures are located on the site. ITEM D PLANNING COMMISSION DR 83- 29 /Forhan October 26, 1983 Page 2 II. ANALYSIS: STAFF REPORT A. General: Part I of the Initial Study has been completed by the applicant and is attached for your review and consideration. Staff has completed Part iI of the Environmental Assessment and found no significant impacts on the ervironm,2nt as a result of this project. This review is for environmental assessment only; staff will issue final site plan and building design approval with appropriate conditions following the Planning Commission's action on the environmental review. 6. Imparts: Development of the project will generate additional traffic and increase the amouit of water runoff from the property; however, these increases are insignificant since the surrounding streets and drainage facilities will be provided to handle the project increases. III. RECOMMENDATION: Based UPI-1 site analysis and the Initial Study, t is�i` 'project—will oTt will not cause significant adverse impacts on the environment. If the Commission concurs, issuance of a Negative Declaration forthis project would be in order. Respec ully submitted, Rink GorJez City Planner RG-FD:jr i Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Site Plan Exhibic 'B" - Elevations Initial Study, Part I 11 Mra6ov sue_ ! ;1 -111)7 I 11 i. t CITY OF RA'LCHO COCA TMON A PI,AZ NU\r-w E•NWiGv EX IIW: �- SCALE: - f c. i - Y t. I y S u zi i� Yid 1 Ye fis i J� a: i a i I ' 1 i i I Li i i hcn5 0 CITY OF RANCHO CUCF.%1ONGP_ INITIAL STUDY PART I - PROJECT I17FOR:4ATICN SHEET - To be completed by applicant Environmental Assessment Review Fee: For all projects requiring environmental review, this £ors, must be completed and subritted to the Development Review Co-- ,mittee through the department where the project application is made. Upon receipt of this application, the Environmental Analysis staff will prepare Part II of the Init'-al Study. The revelooment Review Co.^.:nittee will meet and take action no later than ten (10) days before the pablic meeting at which t he the project is to be heard. The Committee will :cake one of three determinations: 1) The project will have no signi- ficant environmental impac-- and a Negative Declaration will be filed, 2) The project will have a significant t�_,•7�ronmental impact and an Environmental Impact Report will be prepared, or 3) An additional information report should be supplied by the applicant giving further informa- tion concerning the proposed project. ® PROJECT TITLE: F.PPLICANT' S M ADDRESS TELEPIiONE: %'f1 FzyeH.a� ¢�dss3� *1A*J 'Wzo3 NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE OF PERSON TO BE CONTACTED CONCERNING THIS PROJECT: Jriix� LOCATION (S ASSESSOR PARCEL NO.) LIST OTHER PERMITS NECESSARY FROM LOCAL, REGIONAL, STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES AND TEE AGENCY ISSUING SUCH PER."IITS_ 0 I -1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ION OF C a ACREAGE, OF PROJECT AREA AND PROPOSED BUILDINGS, IF Atyy: OF EXISTING AND DESCRIBE THF. E'N4_TRONMENTAL SETTING OF THE PROJECT SITE INCLUDING INFORMATIQN ON TOPOGRr,pHy, PLANTS ANIMALS, ANY CULTURAL, HISTORICAL OR SCENIC ASPECTS USE OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES, AND THE DESCRIPTIr� Y N OF AN EXISTING STRUCTURES AND THEIR USE (ATTACH NS`' ccrn:r Ir 111 _ Is the project part of a larger project, one of a series of cl=":1ative actions, which although individually small, may as a whole have significant envi r-On- ^-ental impact? /�?v 1-2 z 0 WILL THIS PROJECT: YES NO 9n 1, Create a substantial change in grow-id contours? 2. Create a substantial change in existing noise or vibration? 3. Create a substantial change in demand for municipal sarvices (police, fire, water, sewage, etc.) ? 4. Create changes in the existing zoning or general plan designations? /.,o 5. Remove any existing trees? How many ?___ 1.4 6. Create the need for use or disposal of 7— potentially hazardous materials such as toxic substances, £lammables or explosives? Explanation of any YES answers above: IMPORTANT: If the project involves the construction of residential units, complete the form on -he next page. CERTIFICATION: I hereby cart fy that the statements furnished above and in the atL:ached exhibits present the data and information reauir-ad for this initial evaluation to the best of my ability, and that the ;acts, statements, and information presented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and relief. I further understand that additional information may be re (7-aired to be submitted before an adeauate evaluation can be made by the Development Revew C _.ittee. a Date 1 - 3 Signature Title_ 1-3 l RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION The following information should be provided to the C_ty of Rancho Cucamorg Planning Division in order to aid in assessing the ability of the school district to acco—inodate the proposed residential development. Name of Developer and Tentative Tract No.: Specific Location of Project: _ 1. Number of sins_- family units: 2. Namber of multiple fam?.ly units: 3. Date proposed to begin construction.: 4. Earliest date sf occupancy: Model and # cf Tentative 5. Bedrooms Price Rance PHASE I PHASE 2 PHASE 3 1 -4 PHASE 4 TOTAL F] 0 11 E DATE: TO: FROM: BY: SUBJECT: C*_TY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT October 26, 1893 Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission Rick Gomez, City Planner Dan Coleman, Associate Planner 1977, BARMIAN - -rne development of -a 1 /,UUU bgUCTU 6VVO manu acturing building on 2.10 acres of land containing an existing 22,100 square foot industrial building located in the General Industrial category (Subarea 3) at 8613 Helms Avenue - APN 209 - 021 -31. Related File: DR 81 -37 I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action Requested: issuance of a Negative Declaration B. Pub Construction of a 17,000 square foot industrial ui Tng C. Location: 8613 helms Avenue, south of Arrow D. Parcel Size: 2.1 acres E. Existing Zoning. General Industrial (Subarea 3) F. Existing Land !Use: A 22,100 square foot industrial building exists -front portion of the site. an the G. Surroundir. land Use and Zonin North -Industrial; nera In ustrial (Subarea 3) South - Industrial; General Industrial (Subarea 3) East - Vacant; General Industrial (Subarea 3) West - Industrial; General Industrial (Subarea 3) H. General Plan IN Pro3ect eta -- North - General South - General East - General West - General >si nations: enera Industrial Industrial Industrial Industrial Industrial ITEM E PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Development Review 83- 31 /3armakian October 26, 1983 Page 2 I. Site Characteristics: The site slopes uniformly to the south and southwest at approximately a one percent grade. The area proposed for construction is vacant with no structures or significant vegetation. The parcel does crntain one existing structure. II. ANALYSIS: A. General.: Part I of the Initial Study has been completed by applicant and is attached for your review and consideration. Staf� has comple'l Part II of the Environmertal Assessment and found no significant impacts on the environment as a result of this project. B. Impacts: Development of the project will generate additional surf ace water runoff from the property onto Helms Avenue; however, this increase is insignificant and will not adversely impact drainage on Helms Avenue. III. RECOWENDATIOY: Based upon site analysis and the Initial Study, this project will not cause significant adverse impacts on the environment. If the Commission concurs, issuance of a Negative Declaration for this project would be in order. Ob Respe tfuully submitted, Rick Gomez / City Planner RG:DC:jr i Attachments: Exhibit W - Location Map Exhibit °B° - Site Plan Initial Study, Part I C Z a, I ,Cqr if¢ JMQ'llti8 �Jt@LS1X3 1e-bcz CITY OF RA\CHO CTUCAMO;`GA a A,NTNIING M ISM J 1 v � Y t J Y F rm\I- TITLE: EXHIBf SCALD u Nom{ CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA INITIAL STUDY PART I - PROJECT INFORMATION SHEET - To be completed by applicant Environmental Assessment Review Fee: $87.00 For all projects requiring environmental review, th:s form must be completed and submitted to the Development Review: Committee ittee 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: 7.) The project will have no signi- ficant environmental 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 31) An additional information report should be supplied by the applicant giving further informa- tion concerning the proposed project. 0 PROJECT TITLE: Pacific Fabrication Industrial Urit 4 ICI APPLICANT °S NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE: Andrew Tlir SARMAKIAN COMPANY 93.75 Archibald. Ave., Suite NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE OF PERSON TO BE CONTACTED CONCERNING THIS PROJECT: Andrew Barmakian c/o THE BARiAKIAN COMPANY 9375 Archibald Ave_, Suite 101 Rancho Cucamonga, CA. 91',30 (714)987 -5 ^34 LOCATION OF PROJECT (STREET ADDRESS AND.ASS/ ESSOR PARCEL NO.) LIST OTHER PERMITS NECESSARY FROM LOCAL, REGIONAL, STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES AND THE AGENCY ISSUING SUCH PERMITS: I -1 f PROJECT DESCRIPTIOD; DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT:— Cncrete tilt -ua 17 nnn ind st SF �iaht �,_rial building. ACREAGE OF PROJECT AREA AND SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED BUILDINGS, IF ANY: 2_13 acres W1 22 100 SF of e�i�'iw any DESCRIBE THE ENVI 2ONIA-ENTAL SETTING OF THE PROJECT SITE INCLUDING INFORMATION ON TOPOGRAPHY, PLANTS (TREES), ANIMALS, A—NY CULTURAL, HISTORICAL OR SCENIC ASPECTS, USE OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES, AND TI:E DESCRIPTION OF ANY EXISTING STRUCTURES AND THEIR USE (ATTACH NECESSARY SHEETS): are masonry an-1 poses_ 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? 11 I -2 0 E I- ?APORTANT: 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 a*id to the best of my ability, and that the facts, information presented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. I further understand that additional information may be required to be submitted b e an adequate r-� made b elop ent Re ew or�nitN e. evaluation can ` _ _A Bate 9- 22 -183 Signa Barmakian Title Pro'ect Architect I -3 mask WILL THIS PROJECT: YES NO X 1. Create a substantial change in ground contours? X 2. Create a substantial change in existing noise or vibration? X 3. Create a substantial change in demand for municipal services (police, fire, water, sewage, etc.)? X 4. Create changes in the existing zoning or general plan designations? 5. Remove any existing trees? How many? X 6. Create the need for use or disposal of potentially hazardous materials such as toxic substances, flammables or explosives? Explanation of any YES answers above: E I- ?APORTANT: 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 a*id to the best of my ability, and that the facts, information presented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. I further understand that additional information may be required to be submitted b e an adequate r-� made b elop ent Re ew or�nitN e. evaluation can ` _ _A Bate 9- 22 -183 Signa Barmakian Title Pro'ect Architect I -3 C C RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION The following information should be provided to the City of Rancho Cucamona Planning Division in order to aid in assessing the ability of the school district to accommodate the proposed re= idential development. N -ame of Developer and Tentative Tract No.: Specific Location of Project: Number of single family Units- 2. E umber of multiple family units: 3. Date proposed to begin construction: 4. Earliest date of occupancy: Model r and # of Tentative 5. Bedrooms Price Ranae PEASE I PHASE 2 PHASE 3 PHASE 4 TOTAL I -4 El E a L CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA MEMORANDUM DATE: October 26, 1983 TO- Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner By- Curt Johnston, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: CONDI':IONA!_ USE PERMIT 82 -18 HOWARD - A revision to a prev'aous y approve on rt�ona use Permit for the First 400 Assembly of God Church for the development of a square foot ldlocated at 4 the acres northeast corner the of Archibald and Wilson Avenues - APN 201- 831 -01. BACKGROUND: At the September 28, 1983 meeting, the Planning Commission approved the modified site plan and building elevations for this project as described above. However, the Commission did not approve the conceptual grading plan and stated that a revised plan must be pre aced to reduce the height of the slope along Wilson Avenue. The app engineer is currently working with staff to provide a grading plan which is consistent with the Planning Commission's intention. The engineer stated that approximately one additional week is needed to prepare the necessary revisions. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission continue t is item to the November 9, 1983 Planning Commiss ^on meeting to allow the applicant's engineer to prepare a final grading plan for Commission h hie anticipated date of review. This continuance building permit issuanc e building have yet to be Respectfully submitted, kv R:ck !_nmP7 CityiPlanner RG:CJ:jr will not delay the c ur since the construction drawings for the church submitted for plan check. ITEM F I] 11 DATE: TO: FROM: 3Y: SUBJECT: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA. STAFF REPORT October 26, 1983 Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission Rick Gomez, City Planner Tim J. Beedie, Senior Planner f R INVESTMENTS - Ts report discusses the options available regarding z General Plan Amendment to charge office designation to Neighborhood Commercial on approximately 5.4 acres of land at the northeast corner of Archibald and Base Line - APN 202 - 181 -37. BACKGROUND: The Planning Commission, at their September 28, 1983 meeting, Teed a public hearing to discuss a request to amend the General Plan from its office designation to neighborhood commercial . on the above - described property. This report will discuss in further detail the possible options which are available to the Commission involving this matter. The recommendation of this report and the previous Planning Commission report are to be considered as a recommendation on the original General Plan amendment request. The issues discussed by the Planning Commission on September 28, 1983 include the following: o Retain the current designation as Office to meet the future office needs in the area. o Modify the existing City policy which restricts no more than two (2) neighborhood canters at intersections of four corners. o Consider a possible alternative land use designation which would provide a new level of commercial activity at the proposed site. ANALYSIS: During the review of the Planning Commission staff report on September 28, 1983, there appeared to be some questions regarding the definitions and application of the General Plan policy regarding two centers at an intersection. The following are definitions taken from the General Plan and an analysis of their application. Neighborhood Commercial: "Neighborhood Commercial includes shopping centers an4 convenience commercial clusters that provide essential refai —goods an services o e residents or occupants of immediate vicinity." This is an overall commercial designation which includes both sho oinq centers and convenience commercial clusters. Further definitions are provided within eac of those categories ITE14S G & H PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT General Plan Amendment 83 -048 /Zone Change 83 -04B October 26, 1983 Page 2 D Nei hborfiood Sho in Centers: "Retail and service needs of a cluster resi entia areas wit a total population of roughly 10,000 resicents. The primary use within neighborhood shopping centers should be a major super market and total leasable area ranging from 30,009 to 100,000 square feet. The rollowing provisions shall gui a the development of suc—` caters- A. Centers shall be approximately 5 -15 acres in size. B. No more than two centers shall be developed at each designated intersection. C. The center shall permit the following tenants: eating, drinking, food, beverage, retail sales, general personal services, repair services for commonplace household appliances, and retail offices. Convenience Connerciai: "The establishments are small, localized retail or service businesses--that provide goods and services to the immediate surrounding uses. The small clusters are on land no larger than 2 -3 acres primarily intended to serve a specific local need. They may be appropriate in residential, office, or industrial uses." The definitions indicate a difference between neighborhood shopping center and convenience commercial clusters on several features. o Total service area of the site ranges from either 5 -15 acres or 2 -3 acres for convenience commercial clusters. o The convenience commercial cluster is intended to service the ;mmediate surrounding land uses whereas a neighborhood shopping area can service more than immediate uses roughly an area of 10,000 residences. o The neighborhood s :,cpping center designation has a total leasable area of activities ranging from 30,000 to 100,000 square feet with a much greater use activity than the convenience commercial level. Within the definition of neighborhood shopping center, is included the provision for no more than two at any one intersection. This limitation is to restrict centers for the following reasons: o To assure the vitality of co�nercial uses within any two neighborhood shopping centers. o To limit the nuisances which commercial development may have when located on four corners such as hazards associated with increased traffic and access problems from all directions. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT General Plan Amendment 83 -04B /Zone Change 83 -04B October 25, 1983 Page 3 o To create a diversity of community desian characteristics (i.e., architecture, landscaping). During the hearings on the General Plan, the Planning Commission considered requests to add more commercial acreage to this particular intersection of Base Line and Archibald at both the northeast and southwest corners. The Commission's action was to deny the request. The options available for the Commission's consideration ir%:lude the following: Option 1: Retain current City olicies. This option would retain the current app ication o e po icy oar no more than two neighborhood commercial shoppino centers at any one intersection. The owner would be able to develop within the use categories of the OP (Office Professional) Development District designation as set forth in the Draft Development Code. The new OP designation provides for an additional 23 uses which were not formerly permitted under the current interim zoning designation. Should the Draft Development Code be approved, additional uses would include health clubs, automobile sales and rentals, cocktail lounge, restaurants, fast food restaurants, commercial recreational facilities, hotel /motels, and a range of public_ and semi - public uses including day care facilities, convalescent facilities, private clubs, educational institutions and trade schools. These uses are all in addition to those that are basic within the OP Development District designation which is generally office and support commercial uses. 0 tian ^c: Create a new neiahborhood commercial land use category. The creat7on o a new neigh orhoo co:mercia an use category appropriate for this site would be a designation without the provisions for a major retail user, it would have the characteristic of a convenience commercial cluster, however, on a much larger scale. A series of commercial /retail uses are very similar to those located in shopping centers located at northwest and southwest corners of Carnelian and 19th Street. These commercial centers are shown on the General Plan as Neighborhood Commercial. The effect of adding an additional commercial category could not be applicable to other intersections as there are few. that have the nature of the parcel size and configuration which tend to limit the ability to place a major retail operation within the overall design. Any new commercial designation would tend to be only for the single purpose of this particular site. The effect of allowing any additional commercial at that intersection would do little to negate the overall concern regarding limiting commercial centers at intersections as previously mentioned. option 3: Elimination of policy regarding no more than two neighborhood commercial shopping centers at a corner. This option appears to be a straight forward change of the policy which the City has set forth in PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT General Plan Amendment 83 -04B /Zone Change 83 -04B October 26, 1983 Page 4 its General Plan. It would c--:early eliminate any future ambiguity, however, it would have little effect on addressing the concerns regarding the associated impacts of commercial development. CONCLUSION: The options avaiiablE to the Commission are essentially to either clarity and retain the erist'ng policies and retain the General Plan designation as office (OffiLl Professional under the Draft Development Code), or to eliminate tho provisions of no mcre than two centers at intersections. Any change of the use designation to provide for an additional neighborhood commercial designation apart from those existing in the General Plan would negate the overall interest in effect to reduce the impaction of an additional co- nercial activity at intersections with two neighborhood centers and would effectively modify the policy as set forth in the General Plan without specific action by the Planning Commission. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission deny the request for the General Plan amendment and zone change based on the finding in the attached Resolutions. If, however, the Commission finds that the request for the amendment is consistent with the General Plan goals and policies and findings as outlined in the attached Resolutions, a recommendation of approval should be forwarded to the City Council. Should the Commission recommend approval of the General Plan change, a revision of the General Plan policy is necessary and should accompany the approving Resolution. Res ectfully ubmitted, R1ckjGomez City Planner �G:TB:jr Attachments: Planning Commission Staff Report - September 28, 1983 E 2- 0 E DATE: TO: FROM: BY: SUBJECT: CPTY OF RANCHO CUCAMON YA STAFF REPORT September 28, 1983 Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission Rick Gomez, City Planner Rick Marks, Associate Planner 1977 YCAMORE INVESTMENTS - A request to amend the Genera! Plan Land Use Plan from Office to Neighborhood Commercial on approximately 5.44 acres of land located at tt•i northeast corner of Archibald and Base Line - APN 202 - 181 -27. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND ZUNL tHAMit zss -U-a o - SYCAMOR INVESTMENT„ - A request for a c ange cf zone from A- A min-,stra�` tive and Professional) to C -1 (Neighborhood Commercial) on 5.44 acres of land located at the northeast corner of Archibald and Base Line - APN 202 - 181 -27. I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action Requested: To change the General Plan Land Use Map for subject site from Office to Neighborhood Commercial. To change the zoning on subject site from A -P to C -1. B. Purpose: Broaden the range of allowable retail and commercial uses. C. Location: Northeast corner of Archibald and Base Line D. Parcel Size: 5.44 acres E. Existing Zoning: A -P (Administrative Professional) F. Existing Land Use: Vacant, undeveloped G. Surroundin Land Use and Zonin : North - Vacant - KJIFU kil 11797 - 240 condo units) South - Commercial - C -2 East - Vacant - R -3 (TT 11797 - 240 condo units) West - Commercial - C -1 ITEMS H & I PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT GPA 83 -04 B /ZC 83 -04 B - Sycamore Investments September 28, 1983 Page 2 H. North - Meoium Residential '�4 -1 South - Neighborhood Commercial East - Low Medium (4 -8 du /ac) West - Neighborhood Commercial i I. Site Characteristics: Generally a flat area with low growing grasses; no structures. II. ANALYSIS: A. General: The analysis of an amendment to the land use plan general y focuses upon surrounding land use compatibility, General Plan land use and goals and policies, and potential environmental impacts. The subject site is immediately surrounded by Medium residential uses and has an approved tract map (Tract 11797) for 240 condominium units. The site is also located on a corner which already has three neighborhood commercial center =. B. Reasons for Requested Chance in Land Use Cateoorv: The reasons oo r requesting a change in an use ram of ice to Neighborhood Commercial as provided by the applicant are to broaden the range of allowed commercial activities on site and the stated inability of the applicant to market the site for office development. C. General Plan Land Use Goals and Policies: The General Plan policies governing Neighborhood ommerci-e clearly state that °no sore chan two centers shall be developed at each designated intersection The intersection of Archibald and Base Line already has three such centers. The current land use designation attached to the site (Office) does allow commercial uses including restaurant, pharmacy, and business support services. D. Issues for Consideration: o Considering the General Plan policy (page 36) restricting the numbers of neighborhood commercial centers to two per designated intersection - Does the policy require revision by the City? - Does t':e Planning Commission feel that this particular intersection nerits an exception to the policy? - What are the long—range consequences to the City of granting an exception to the policy or eliminating it? C1 11 1 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT GPA 83 -04 B /ZC 8'21 -04 B - Sycamore Investments September 28, 1983 Page 3 o Is there a need for additional retail and drive - through commercial space at this intersection? o The office designation does allow commercial activities. o Is this site appropriate for office uses and what are the long -term needs for office in the City? o Is the fact that the site has not developed a result of the recent recession in the overall economy of the nation or the result of an inappropriate General Plan designation? o Has the applicant presented sufficient data to the City indicating a need for a General Plan change? E. Im acts of the Pra osed General Plan Amendment: The impacts of the proposed amen I dment page 36 of the General Plan clearly question for the City. tails for a limitation on neighborhood centers to a maximum of two (2) per designated intersection. The requ steedxcame°dment is in direct contravention of F that policy. the policy is made for this project, the precedent is set for granting exceptions elsewhere in the City now and in the future. The corner of Base Line and Archibald is already extensively developed as a commercial area, the applicant has presented no data showing that the market in this area requires or can support a new commercial center or that the uses now permitted under the office designation are insufficient to meet whatever need does exist. During the public the Planning Commh eie nerafitP that ttimesthe was discussed by Commission determined that due to the fact that tine intersection of Archibald Avenue and Base Line Road already had three Neighbori%ood Commercial centers and in light of the General Plan's proposed Policy limitation of two such centers at any designated intersection, another neighborhood center was inappropriate. Because the intersection was felt to be too busy for residential uses, office uses were deemed to be the most appropriate for appropriate office term land use g to iven the most flexible and app P g" ypoicy,th existing tin three centers at that intersection, and the i PLANNING C0MMISSION STAFF REPORT GPA 83 -04 BJZC 83 -04 B - Sycamore Investments September 28, 1983 Page 4 The land use impacts of this amendment will be most sharply felt on the property directly to the north and east of the site; Tract 11797, an approved 240 condominium project, is located on this site. The impacts of the amendment on the project can, through deign techniques, be minimized to an acceptable levei, but will include noise, traffic, and pedestrian activity. F. Environmental Assessment: Part I of the Initial Study has been completed by the applicant. Staff has completed the environmental checklist (Part II of the Initial Study) and found no _significant adverse environmental impacts attributable to the proposed amendment. While no significant environmental impacts are expected, the proposed land use change would have the following impacts: o The requested change from Office land use designation to Neighborhood Commercial is in direct contravention to the policy contained in the General Plan which states that "no more than two (Neighborhood Commercial) centers shall be developed at each designated intersection ". o The proposal will result in an increased number of vehicle trips to the site beyond what a project developed under the Office designation would generate and will therefore require a greater number of on -site parking spaces and, more importantly, increase traffic hazards to other vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. o Because of the increased intensity of activities associated with the shopping center, office, and related uses, and considering the increase in traffic to and from the site, there will be an increase in ambient noise levels. If the Planning Commission chooses to recommend approval of this amendment, it is recommended that issuance of a Negative Declaration be recommended to the City Council. P El PLANNING COKMISSION STAFF REPORT GPA 83 -04 B /ZC 8 -04 B - Sycamore Investments September 28, 1983 Page 5 III. FACTS FOR FINDINGS• Following are the findings required to be made for approval of this amendment: A. The amendment does not conflict with the land use policies of the General Plan. B. The amendment promotes the goals of the Land Use Element. C. The amendnert would not be materially injurious or detrimental to adjacent properties. The Commission must examine and decide whether the amendment from Office to Neighborhood Commercial would promote the land use goals and purposes of the General Plan and whether this amendment would be materially detrimental tc adjacent properties or cause significant adverse environmental impacts as listed in "C" above. IV. CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised as a public hearing in The Daly Report newspaper, the property posted, and notices were sent to property owners within 300 feet of the subject property. V. RECOMMENDATION_ it is recommended that the Planning Commission deny this request for a General Plan amendment and zone change on the grounds that they are inconsistent with the policies of the General Plan and that insufficient evidence was presented to the City on which to base a decision to change the General Plan or Zoning Ordinance. If the Commission finds that the requested amendment is consistent with General Plan goals and policies, a recommendation of approval should be forwarded to the City Council. If these findings cannot be met to the Commission's satisf- ction, a recommendation of denial to the City Council would be appropriate. ful I_wlubmi tted, 'ty' Pl anrer G-- jr ttachments: Exhibit "A" - Location Map Exhibit "B" - Letter from Applicant Exhibit "C" - Excerpt from General Plan Initial Study Resolution - General Plan Amendment (Denying) Resolution - General Plan Amendment (Approving) Resolution - Zone Change (Approving) Resolution - Zone Change (Denying) .1lnulsn Jµ6.Lv" a■.b..o . � +D 7 OMR'Wj- ; + cri'iv'Fv„'s 4ar'Irx-7 -7p �l 1 a� O - T- at I I l� 3 a �^ D O �L7 I 1 e 7f 1- � .. z— �\ � 601 attachment 'a" it r CM 0 c t DIVERSIFIED INVESTMENT COMPANY 270 S. BRISTOL STREET. SUITE 201. COSTA MESA. CALIFORNIA 92626 (714) 957 -2651 July 11, 1983 Mr. Jack Lam Community Development Director CITY OF RANCHO CUCP.MONGA P.O. Box 793 F Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 attachment "h" Re: General Plan Amendment and zone Change NEC Archibald and Baseline Rancho Cucamonga, California Dear Jack: We feel that the requested General Plan Amendment and Zone Change would not have a significant adverse impact on either the immediate area or the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Since the property is now zoned Administrative /Professional, which permits financial institutions and restaurants, changing the zone to a commer_ial designation which would basically allow retail, commercial and drive - through facilities, would not significa*it7.y intensify the uses proposed or the traffic generated. Within the last two years since the adoption of the original City Master Plan, there has been a tremendous evolution in the office building marketplace, both nationally and locally. I would respectfully submit to you that, during this period of time, the planned office projects on Foothill, in and about the new City Hall location, is much more attractive to office users and lenders willing to finance office space than the Administrative /Prof :.-�ssional designated on this site. 0 JT:sc Sincerely yours, DIVERSIFIED INVESTME= SYCAMORE �— �,;'�I'NVVE`STTMENTS Jack Tarr General Partner COMPIMNY FOR / o DIVERSIFIED INVESTMENT CIOMPANY 27 1 --i BEET. SUITE 2rj1. COSTA MESA. CALIFORNIA 92525 I7141 957.2551 July 11, 1983 Mr, Jack Lam 1 pment Director Community Develo CITY OF RANCHO CLTCAXONGA P.C. Box 793 Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 Re: General Plat Amendment and Zone Change NEC Archibald and CBaseline alifornia alifornia Rancho Cucamonga. Dear Jack: information T endment and Zone Change li- Pursuant to our discussions enclosed is the following to be submitted for the General Plan Am one Uniform APP requirements. F.s we had discussed, I am using cation for both the General Plan Amendment and'ie Zone Change- Enclosed is the following: 1, site Plan 2. Written Justifice.7!on Plan 3. 835x11 transparency reduction of the Site the Zone Change , 4 Part I of the Initial Study 5, Fees for both the General Plan Amendment and calculated as follows: 0 General Plan Amendment Initial Study Zone Change plus 5.44 x 32.00 Initial Study Total: $1,272.0 87.00 649.00 174.08 87.00 $2,269.08 red Also enclosed is one radius maP. Per your by First American Title with six sets of requirement labels typed, gummed E Ll Ll E . Jack Lam tly 11, 1983 ige Two listing the names, owners within 300 property. addresses and assessor's parcel of all property feet of the exterior bour_daries of the subject If there are any questions or any further ir_formatioa that you need for this application, please do not hesitate to call my office. Sincerely yours, DIVERSIFIED IN- VESTMENT COMPANY FOR SYCAMORE IINNIVESTMMITS Jack Tarr JT:sc General Partner Encls. Commercial General Pure o Proposed development shall conform to the building intensity (density range) shown on the Land Use Plan, Figure Ill. The overall base density of the proposed devel- opment shall not exceed the maximum dens- ity permitted for the site nor be less than the minimum density permitted. The dens- ity indicated excludes rights -of -way neces- sary for secondary or major arterials. Four commercial land uses shall be estab- lished to meet the City's need for retail establishments and assorted personal ser- vices_ Designated on the Land Use Plan are neighborhood commercial, general commercial, community commercial, regional commercial, and offices. Neighborhood Commercial. Neighborhood Commercial includes shopping centers and convenience commercial clusters that provide essential retail goods and services to the residents or occupants ire the immediate vicin- ity. Neighborhood Shopping Centers. These centers shall be provided to meet the retail and service needs of a cluster of neighbor- hoods with a total population of roughly 10,000 residents. The primary use within the neighborhood shopping center should be a major supermarket and total leasable area ranging from 30,000 to 100,000 square feet. The following provisions shall guide the de- velopment of such centers. e The centers shall be approximately 5-15 acres in size. o No more than 2 centers shall be developed at each designated intersection. o The centers shall permit the following ten- ants: eating and drinking establishments; food and beverage retail sales; general personal services, repair services for com- monplace household appliances; and retail sales. Administrative and professional offices, medical services, and financial, insurance and real estate services may be permitted. 0 M r C CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA INITIAL STUDY `v ` " f PART I - PROJECT INFORMATION SF.E£T - To be completed by applicant Environmental Assessment Review Fee: $87.00 For all projects requiring environmental rP +iew, this form must be completed and submitted tc the Development Review Committee through the departme.lt 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 signi- ficant environmental 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 inforsa- tion concerning the proposed project. PROJECT TITLE: syc more Plaza APPLICANT'S NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE: 270 So. Bristol Street, Suite 201, Costal NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE OF PERSON TO BE CONTACTED CONCERNING THIS PROJECT: Jack Tarr 270 So. Bristol S ree` 47fi96 (7141957 -2651 __ LOCATION OF PROJECT (STREET ADDRESS AND ASSESSOR PARCEL NO.) 9738 Baseline Foad Parcel L Parcel. Map 6651 APN 202 - 181 -27 ,'..IST OTHER PERMITS NE. ARY FROM LOCAL, REGIONAL, STATE AND "EDERAL AGENCIES AND ThE AGENCY ISSUING SUCH PERMITS:_ _ I- l restaurants and financial uses. ACREAGE OF PROJECT AREA. AND. SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED BUILDINGS, IF ANY: 5.44 acres: 51,550 square feet_ DESCRIBE TFE EN'IRONMENTAL SETTING OF THE PROJECT SITE 'MCL- T__i.: INFORMATION ON TOPOGRAPHY, PLANTS (TREES), ANIMALS, ANY CULTURAL, HISTORICAL OR SCENIC ASPECTS, USE OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES, AND THE DESCRIPTION OF ANY EXISTING STRUCTURES AND THEIR USE (ATTACH NECESSARY SHEETS) Is the project part of a larger project, one of a series of cumulative actions, which although individually small, may as a whole have significant environmental impact? M. 11 I -2 E WILL THIS PROJECT: YES NO _ X 1. Create a substantial change in ground contours? _ X 2. Create a substantial change in existing noise or vibration? X 3. Create a substantial .:harge in demand for municipal services (police, fire, water, sewage, etc.)? X 4. Create changes in the existing zoning or general plan designations? X 5. Remove any existing trees? How many? _ X 6. Create the need for use or disposal of potentially hazardous materials such as toxic substances, fla.mnables or explosives? Explanation of any YES answers above: Existing abandoned fruit and miscellaneous tree types. Count is an aporox3,nat3.on. IMPORTANT: If the project involves the construction of residential units, complete the form on the next page. CERTIFICATION: I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and information required for this initial evaluation to the best of my abilifv, 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 nay be required to be submitted before an adequate evaluation can be made by the Development Review Cc ommitt�,e s Date_ -' it ( „ Signature- _- """(""^°' ` ,! Title I -3 M RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION The following in£ornation should be provided to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Division in order to aid in assessing the ability of the school district to accommodate the proposed residential development. Name of Developer and Tentative Tract No.: Specific Location of Project: 1. Number of single family units: 2. Number of multiple family units: 3. Date proposed to begin construction: 4. Earliest date of occupancy: Model and # of Tentative 5. Bedrooms Price Rance PHASE I PHASE 2 PHASE 3 PHASE 4 TOTAL I -4 r 1 LA 0 4 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF T14E PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 83 -04 B - SYCAMORE, TO AMEND THE GENERAL PLAN FROM OFFICE TO NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL ON 5.44 ACRES OF LAND AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF ARCHIBALD AND BASE LINE ROAD - APN 202- 181 -27 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has held a public hearing to consider said amendment; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has considered all public testimony regarding the requested amendment. WOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, .- "at the Planning Commission approves General Plan Amendment 83 -04 B based on the following findings: A. The requested amendment is in cci.formance with the City's General Plan policies regulating Neighborhood Commercial Uses. B. The amendment promotes the goals of the Land Use Element. BY Dennis L. Stout, Chairman ATTEST: Secretary of the Planning Commission I, JACK LAM, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 26th day of October, 1983, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: E APPROVED ANO ADOPTED THIS 26TH DAY OF OCTOLER, 1983. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY Dennis L. Stout, Chairman ATTEST: Secretary of the Planning Commission I, JACK LAM, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 26th day of October, 1983, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: E RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CIT`,' OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA DENTING GENERAL, PLAN AMENDMENT 83 -04 8 - SYCAMORE, TO AMEND THE GENERAL PLAN FROM OFFICE TO NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL ON 5.44 ACRES OF - LAND AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF ARCHIBALD AND BASE LINE ROAD - APN 202 - 181 -27 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has held a public hearing to consider said amendment; and ' dHEREAS, the Planning Con:nissi:;n has considered all public testimony regarding the requested amendment. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Tanning Commission denies General Plan Amendment 83 -04 B based on the following firdings: A. The requested amendment directly conflicts with the City's General Plan policies regulating Neighborhood Commercial Uses. B. The applicant has presented insufficient_ information with which to Justify a change in the General Plan. C. The amendment does not promote the goals of the Land Use Element. 0 APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 26TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 1983. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BV: Dennis L. Stout, Chairman ATTEST: Secretary of the Planning Commission I, JACK LAM, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Comnissior. of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Plan-ing Commission held on the 26th day of October, 1983, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: CO"ISSIONERS: ABSE17 : COMMISSIONERS: 11 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLP,PINING COM4ISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING ZONING CHANGE 83 -046 - SYCAMORE, A REQUEST FOR A CHANGE OF ZONE FROM A -P (ADMINISTRATIVE - PROFESSIONAL) TO C -1 (NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL) ON 5.44 ACRES OF LAND AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF ARCHIBALD ON BASE LINE ROAD - APN 202 - 181 -27 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has held a public hearing to consider said zone change; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has considered all public testimony regarding the requested zone change. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Planning Commission approves Zone Change 83 -04 B based on the following findings: A. The requested zone change is in conformance with the City's General Plan policies regulating WEighborhood Commercial Uses. B. The zone change promotes the goals of the Land Use Element. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 26TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 1983. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Dennis L. Stout, Chairman ATTEST Secretary of the P anning Lomsmisslon I, JACK LAM, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and reguiariy 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 26th day of October, 1983, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: RESOLUTION NC.. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, DENYING ZONING CHANGE 83 -04B - SYCAMORE, A REQUEST FOR A CHANGE OF ZONE FROM A -P (ADMINISTRATIVE - PROFESSIONAL) TO C -1 (NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL) ON 5.44 ACRES OF LAND Al THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF ARCHIBALD ON BASE LINE ROAD - APN 202 - 181 -27 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has held a public hearing to consider said zone change; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has considered all public testimony regarding the requested zone cho.nge. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Planning Commissior denies Zone Change 83 -04 B based on the following findings: A. The requested zone change directly conflicts with the City's General Plan policies regulating Neighborhood Commercial Uses. B. The applicant has presented insufficient information with which to justify a change in the zone. C. The zone change does not promote the goals of the Land Use Element. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 26TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 1983. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Dennis L. Stout, Chairman ATTEST: Secretary of the Planning Commission I, JACK LAM, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 26th day of October, 1983, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: C 11 U. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: October 26, 1983 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer BY: Barbara Krall, Engineering Technician SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 8218 - DAVIS DEVELOPMENT - A division o acres of ian into parts wit in u area of the Industrial Specific Plan located on the north side of 7th Street, east side of Hellman Avenue - APN 209 - 171 -49 through 56 (RE: DR 83 -28) I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action Requested: Approval of Parcel Map. B. Purpose: To merge 8 parcels into 1 parcel for industrial commercial condominium purposes as shown on D. R. 83 -28 on tonight's agenda. C. Location: North side of 7th Street, east side of Heilman Avenue. D. Parcel Size: 4.74 acres. E. Existing zoning General Industrial - Subarea 3 of the Industrial 9 eci is Ian. F. Existing Land Use: Vacant. G. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North - existing industria building at Hellman - general industrial South - single family homes - R -1 East - vacant - general industrial West - vacant - general industrial H. General Plan Designations: North - heavy industrial South - residential - low 2 -4 du /ac East - heavy industrial West - heavy industrial ITEM I ENVIRONMENTAi_ ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 8213 - DAVIS DEVELOPMENT October 26, 1983 Page 2 I. Site Characteristics: The site is vacant and slopes from the north to tTie south. II. ANALYSIS: Parcel Map 8218 is the site of a previously recorded parcel map whin divided the site into 8 parcels. These 8 parcels are now being merged into 1 parcel for industrial condominium purposes as shown on Development Review 83 -28 on tonight's agenda. A portion of the off -site improvements have bEen completed. The remaining improvements are to be completed at the time of building permit issuance. Iii. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: Also attached for your review and consideration is Part I of the Initial Study as completed by the applicant. Staff has completed Part I1 of the Initial Study, the environmental checklist, and has conducted a field investigation. Upon completion and review of the Initial Study and field investigation, Staff found no adverse impacts on the environment as a result of the proposed subdivision. IV. CORRESPONDENCE: Notices of Public Hearing have been sent to surrounding property owners and placed in the Daily Report Newspaper. Posting at the site has also been completed. V. RECOMMENDATION: It is reconmended that the Planning Commission consider all input and elements of the project. If, after such consideration, the Commission can support the recommended conditions of approval as written in the City Engineer's Report, then adoption of the attached resolution would be appropriate. It is also recommended that a Negative Declaration be issued. Attachments: Map, Tentative Resolution City Engineer's Initial Study & Vicinity Report E 0 0 11 cap tiVN. 5238 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMCGNICA D.R. 83 -28 =c ENGINEERING DIVISION v� > VICINITY MAP � page KAIZ - - till -rz L.] 11 ioF L.] 11 0 11 r1 �:11 CITY Of RANCHO CUCAMONGR INITIAL STUDY PART I - PROJECT INFORMATION SHEET - To be completedby00applicar : t Environmental Assessment Review Fee: 5 87 For all projects requiring environmental review, this fora must be completed and submitted to the Development Review Committee through the deparme.nt 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 signi- ficant environmental 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 reporma- should be supplied by the applicant g tion concerning the proposed project. PROJECT TITLE: APPLICANT'S NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE[ NAME, ADDRESS, LEPHONE OF PERSON TO BE CONTACTED CONCERNING THIS PROJECT_: Hines°tes7A� m cts a Attn: Randy Jepson LOCATIOA' OF PROJECT (STREET ADDRESS AND SStree PARCEL Y30.) LIST OTHER PERMITS NECESSARY FROM LOCAL, REGIONAL• STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES AND THE AGENCY ISSUING SUCH PERMITS: N/A I -1 E PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT: New construct, 13ings Buildings are o cons ce areas. ACREAGE OF PROJECT AREA AND. SQUARE FOOTAGE OF 5EXISTING t AND PROPOSED BUILDINGS. IF ANY: Site Area: 187. 1 total building area: 67,1 sq. t. DESCRIBE THE ENVIRONMENT =AL SETTING OF THE PROJECT SITE INCLUDING INFORMATION ON TOPOGRAPHY, PLANTS (TREES), ANIMALS, ANY CULTURAL, HISTORICAL OR SCENIC ASPECTS, USE OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES, AND THE DESCRIPTION OF ANY EXISTING STRUCTURES AND THEIR USE (ATTACH. NECESS,u;Ry SHEETS): The site is adjacent to a residential tract and is ,rant eatures. T e natural tot -f - i a wa.Exi na ura ra,nage see ,n s ructures exist near a extreme west en of t.e ese w, a remove riot to new construction. ect property ,s current y grown over w,} wee s an t oug no o er vegetataon ,s evident. No si nificant n ana.ma , e 3 s antic.- atea and h,stora.cal or cu tural ..,, remain unchange _ =s 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? R F C E I 'E JUL 251983 -t I -2 lilt .S -Pte= "S 11 � r WILL THIS PROJECT: YES NO X 1, Create a substantial change in ground contours? X 2. Create a substantial change in existing noise or vibration? X 3. Create a substantial change in demand for '— municipal services (p -)lice, fire, water, sewage, etc.)? X 4. Create changes in the existing zoning or general plan designations? X 5. Remove any existing trees? How many? X 6. Create the need for use or disposal of potentially hazardous materials such as toxic substances, flammables or explosives? Explanation of any YES answers above: IMPORTANT: If the project involves the construction of residential units, complete the form on the next page. CERTIFICATION: I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and information required for this initial statements, and to the best of my ability, and that the facts, information presented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. I further understand that additional information may be required to be submitted before an adequate evaluation can be made by the Development Review Coaraittee. Date 8/25/83 Signature Title P 1-3 RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION The following information should be provided to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Divis:.on in order to aid in assessing the ability of the school district to accommodate the proposed residential development. Name of Developer and Tentative Tract No.: Specific Location of Project: 1. Number of single family units: 2. Ntanber of multiple family units: 3. Date proposed to begin construction: 4. Earliest date of occupancy: Model and s of Tentative S. Bedrooms Price Range PHASE I PFiASE 2 PHASE 3 P A.Sv- 4 TOTAL I_4 I?gCEf JUL 2 5 7983 nMEEZ - PETE K$ LtYlTrrr a ...- . U Ul 11 0 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNI :% ADDROVING PARCEL MAP NUffBER 8218 (TENTATIVE PARCEL MAY NO. 8218), LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF 7TH STREET AND HELLMAN AVENUE WHEREAS, Tentative Parcel Map Number 8218, submitted by Davis Development Company and consisting of 1 parcel, located at the northeast corner of 7th Street and Hellman Avenue, being a division of Parcel Map 6724; and WHEREAS, on August 25, 1983, a formal application was submitted requesting review of the above - described Tentative Map; and WHEREAS, on October 26, 1983, the Planning Commission held a duly advertised public hearing for the above - described map. NOW, THEREFORE, THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: That the following findings hare been made: 1. That the map is consistent with the General Plan. 2. That the improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with the General Plan. 3. That the site is physically suitable for the proposed development. 4. That the proposed subdivision and improvements will not cause substantial environmental damage, public health problems or have adverse affects on abutting property. SECTION 2: That this project will not create significant adverse environmental impacts and a Negative Declaration is issued on October 26, 1983. SECTION 3: That Tentative Parcel Map No. 8218 is approved subject to the recommended Conditions of Approval pertaining thereto. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 26TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 1983. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Resolution No. Page 2 BY: Dennis L. Stout, Chairman ATTEST: Secretary of the Planning Commission I, JACK LAM, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Cormmission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 26th day of October, 1883, by the following vote -to -wit: RYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: E] L� 0 J CITY OF RANCHO CLNAMONGA RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL LOCATION: North side of 7th Street, east_ TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 140: 8218 side of Hellman Avenue DATE FILED: 9/23183 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: A division of lots I thru NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 8 of Parcel Map 6724, as recorded in Book GROSS ACREAGE: 4.74 72, Pages 22 thru 24 of Parcel Maps, Records ASSESSOR PARCEL NO:209- 171 -49 thSuu of San Bernardino County, California ** �1Fintirl c*: t* �t** A**** ic*** k** irir* iHc **aHF***4ir*ielr+� **intiA -Xir ** seat * *4irztxye * *k**fici4 *irt irk DEVELOPER OWNER ENGINEER /SURVEYOR Davis Development — same Williamson & Schmid 1400 Bristol Street 17782 Sky Park Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92650 Irvine, CA 92664 Improvement and dedication requirements in accordance with Title 16 of the Municipal Code of the City of Rancho Cucamonga include, but may not be limited to, the following: Dedications and Vehicular Access 1, Dedications shall be made of all interior street rights -of -way and all necessary easements as shown on the tentative '.nap. 2. Ded :ration shall be made of the following rights -of -way on the following streets: additional feet on additional feet on additional feet on 3. Corner property line radius will be required per City Standards. 4. All rights of vehicular -ingress and egress shall be dedicated as follows: X 5. Reciprocal access easements and maintenance agreements ensuring access to all parcels and Joint maintenance of all common roads, drives or park`ng areas shall be provided by C.C. &R.s and shall be recorded concurrent with the map. -1- 6. All existing easements lying within `uture right- of- wnyirto be quitclaimed or delineated on the map per City g eer requirements. 7. Easements for sidewalk for public use shall be dedicated to the Citv where sidewalks meander through private property. Surety_ 1. Surety shall be posted and an agreement executedAttornthe satisfaction, of the City Engineer and City guaranteeing completion of the public improvements andilor prior prioo recording for to building permit issuance or 2. A lien agreement must be executed prior to recording of the map for the following: x 3, Surety be posted and an agreement executed, guaranteeing completion of all on -site drainage facilites necessary for dewatering all parcels to the satisfaction of the Building and Safety DivisOn prior to is of building permit. Street Imp- oyQSaents Pursuant to _he City of kanch Cucamonga Muni*Qp�a n nand �ist Esecu'rity Section with 16.36.120, the subdivider may enter into an agreement map the City guaranteeing the required construction prier to recordation of and /or building permit issuance. 1. Construct full street improvements inele ding, but not limited utter, reaches, streets. 2. A minimum of 25 -foot wide pavement within a 40 -foot wide dedicated right-of-way shall be constructed for all half- section streets. Construct the following missing improvements: X 3. Prior to building permit issuance for. Name 7th St. Hellman *Includes landscaping and irrigation o meter -2- 11 11 A.C. Side- Ur�ve �irec� �•.�-_ Li hts 0verla isl ter . PvC Salk Apr. Trees , air repair X X X X air repair 1 K X I X ^ *Includes landscaping and irrigation o meter -2- 11 11 11 �J X 4. Prior to any work being performed in the public right -of -way, fees shall be paid and an encroachment permit shall be obtained from the City Engineer's Office, in addition to any other permits required. 5. Street improvement plans shall be prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer and approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of an encroachment permit. 6. Developer shall coordinate, and where necessary, pay for the relocation of any power poles or other existing public utilities as necessary. 7. Existing lines of 12KV or less fronting the property shall ba undergrounded. X 3. Install appropriate street name signs, traffic control signs, striping and markings with locations and types approved by the City Engineer. X 9. Street light locations, as required, are to be approved by the Southern California Edison Company and the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Lights shall be on decorative poles with underground service. X 10. Landscape and irrigation approved by the Planning building permit. X 11. Concei+irated drainage f Undersidewalk drains shall Drainage and Flood Contro`_ plans shall be submitted to and Division prior to the issuance of lows shall not cross sidewalks. be installed to City Standards. 1. Private drainage easements for crass -lot drainage shall be required and shall be delineated or noticed on the final map. X 2. Adequate provisions shall be made for acceptance and disposal of surface drainage entering the property from adjacent areas. 3. The following storm drain shall be installed to the sat ;:faction Of the City Engineer 4. Prior to recordation of the map, a hydrologic and drainage study for the project shall be submitted to the City Engineer for review. 5. A drainage detention basin per City Standards shall be constructed to detain increased runoff -3- �ra3ing X 1. Grading Uniform grading substan plan. of tt.e subject property shall be in accordance with the Building Code, City Grading Standards and accepted practices. The final grading plan shall be in tial conformance with the approved conceptual grading X 2. A soils report shall be prepared by a quailficd engineer licensed by the State of California to perform such work at time of development. 3. A geological report shall be prepared by a qualifier. engineer or geologist and submitted at the time of application or grading plan check. 4. The final grading plan shall be subject to review and approval by the Grading Committee and shall be completed prior to recordation of the final subdivision map or issuance of building permit whichever comes first. X 5. Final grading plans for each parcel are to be submitted to the Building and Safety Division for approval prior to issuance of building permit. General Requirements and Approvals X 1. Permits from other agencies will be required as follows: CalTrans for San Bernardino nun y looa ontro �str�ct — Cucamonga County Water District for sewer and water Y San Bernardino County Dust Abatement (required prier to issuance or a grading permit) _ other X 2. A copy of the Covenants, Cord ;':ions and Restrictions (C.C. &R.$) approved by the City AttornEy is required prier to recordation of the map. X 3. Provide all utility services to each lot including sewerage, water, electric power, gas and telephone prior to street constructor. X 4. Sanitary sewer and water systems shall be designed to Cucamonga County Water District standards. A letter of acceptance is reouired. 5. This subdivision shall be subject to conditions of approval from CalTrans /San Bernardino County Flood Contral District. 6. Approvals have not been secured from all utilities and other interested agencies involved. Approval of the final map will be subject to any requirements tnat may be received from them. -4- 11 El El 1- U X 7. The filing of the tentative map or approval of same does not guarantee that sewer treatment capacity will be available at the time building permits are requested. .Wthen building permits are requested, the Cucamonga County Water District will be asked to certify the availability of capacity. Permits will nGt be issued unless said certification is received in writing. 8. Local and Master Planned Trails shall be provided in accordance with the Trail Plan. A detailed trail plan indicating widths, maximum slopes, ph4 . --. cn-ndi *_ices, fencing and weed control, shall be submitted to in accordance with City trail standards, and approved by the City Planner prior to recordation for and /or prior to building permit issuance or 9. Prior to recording, a deposit shall be posted with the City covering the estimated cost of apportioning the assessments the newly created parcels. under Assessment District 82 -1 among X 10. At the time of final map submittal, the following shall be !sheets), suumittej: Title Report, traverse calculations deeds used as reference and /or copies of recorded maps and original land division, tie notes and bench marks showing referenced. X 11. Agreement submitted under Parcel Map 5724 for the improvements to 7th St. and Hellman must be extended. This request for extension must be approved by City Council. X 12. All applicable conditions of Parcel Map 5724 shall apply to this parcel map. -5- CM. OF RAMCM Q CNN" LLOYD B. NUB8S, C°TY ENGINEER by: E E 1 A CrrY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: October 26, 1983 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner BY: Frank Dreckman, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: ENVIROMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PEPVMIT 83 -08 - LEWIS e eve apment o a square foot shopping center for Lewis Development on 8.67 acres of land in the C -2 zone located on the south side of Foothill Boulevard, between Hellman and Helms Avenue - APN 208- 261 -25 & 26. Related File: Parcel Map 8063 I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action Requested: Conceptual approval of master site plan, precise approval of Taco Bell B. Purpose: For the construction of a 377,665 square foot shopping center C. Location: South side of Foothill Boulevard, between Hellman an He ms Avenue D. Parcel Size: 8.67 acres E. Existing Zoning: C -2, General Business Commercial F. Existing Land Use: Vacant parcel 6. �urraunding Land Use and Zon:n North - Commercial, zones t, -c South - Single Family Residential, zoned R -1 East - Vacant parcel, zoned C -2 West - Vacant parcel, zoned R -3 H. General Plan Desi nations: roJect Site - oaonerciai- North - Residential, 4 -14 du /ac South - Residential, 2- 4 du /ac East - Commercial West - Residential, 14 -24 du /ac ITEM J PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Conditional Use Permit 83 -08 /Lewis October 26, 1383 Page 2 I. Site Characteristics: The project site is located on a vacant parcel with a s ope of approximately 3 %. In addition, the site contains various indigenous plant materials and grasses with only limited animal life consisting of small rodents. Presently, there are no structures located on the site II. ANALYSIS: A. General: The applicant, Lewis Development, is proposing the eve opment of a 377,665 square foot shopping center including a Taco Bell restaurant to be located on the south side of Foothill Boulevard between Hellman and Helms. As illustrated on the attachr-d exhibits, the proposed shopping center consists of one large major tenant with associated satellite retail establishments. A 15 -foot minimum landscape buffer has been placed contiguous to the south property line which buffers the single family residential uses (Exhibit "A"). Specific site plans and elevations will be required prier to development of each individual building or phase. The approval of the center, other than Taco Bell, is conceptual only. At the time of precise review, such things as parking lot design and trees, circulation, south building elevations, buffering, and final grading will be considered. In addition to the above proposal, Taco Bell has submitted precise plans for the construction of a 1,700 square foot restaurant and drive through. The restaurant will be located on the extreme northeast corner of Foothill and Helms. B. Desi 22 Rev iew Committee: Design Review Committee comments typica l y revs ve around architectural treatments. Specifically, the Committee recommended that the proposed Taco Bell be in substantial architectural conformance with the entire shopping center. The Committee suggested that this could be accomplished through the inclusion of a trellis /colonnade designed to integrate with the entire shopping center. It was suggested that the trellis /colonnade be located along east, west, and north building elevations. Lastly, it was recommended that the building materials used for the entire center be used on the Taco Bell in order to integrate the two developments. As illustrated on the building elevations (Exhibit "D "), the applicant has included trellis work on the north and west building elevations. Staff recommends that a similar trellis structure be placed along the east elevation, over the drive -thru area. Staff also recommends that the columns used with the trellis structure be modified to be more compatible with the scale of the columns used throughout the center. Exhibit "E" illustrates a comparison between the two column E E PLANkING COMI!ISSION STAFF REPORT Conditional Use Permit 83 -08 /Lewis October 26, 1983 Page 3 El designs. These two improvements will bring the Taco Bell design more into conformance with the shopping center. A condition of approval to cover these concerns has been included in the attached Resolution. C. Develo ment Review Committee: The Development Review Committee recommended the inclusion of a decelaration lane with a "right -in, right -ou *_" drive approach to be located on Foothill Boulevard. In addition, the Committee recommended various street improvements including sidewalk, drive approaches, street lights, median islands, etc., to be installed contiguous to Foothill, Hallman, and Helms Streets. D. Grading Committee= plan subj cta to approvalyof a finalvgrading conceptua grading p plan. E. Environmental Assessment: Part I of the Initial Study has been comp eted by the applicant and is attached for your review. Staff completed the Environmental checklist and found no significant adverse environmental impacts related to the ® development of the proposed commercial complex. If the Commission concurs with these findings, issuance of a Negative Declaration would be appropriate. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: This project, together with the Conditions of Approva , -s consistent with the Ganpral Plan and applicable provisions of the Zoning Ordinance, and will not be detrimental to the public health or surrounding propeties. Iv. CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised as a public hearing in die any Report rewspaper, the property posted, and notices were sent to property awners within 300 feet of the project site. To date, no correspondence has been received either for or against the project. V. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission consider ai I material and input on this project. If after such consideration the Commission can support the facts for findings and conditions of approval, adoption of the attached Resolution and issuance of a Negative Declaration would be appropriate. -sybmitted, Rick(Go i Cit? Planner Ota:FD:jr PLANNING COMISSION STAFF REPORT Conditional Use Permit 83- 081Lewis October 26, 1983 Page 4 Attachments: Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit exhibit Exhibit Initial Resolut '1W uBn „C" "D" uEn Stu ion - Site Plan - Elevations - Site Plan - Elevations - Buttress D dy, Part I - Hellman Shopping Center - Hellman Shopping Center - Taco Bell - Taco Bell etaiis W] IJ U 1 111 1 - ii 1 Shm low Semm II li I ,111 fl • -�, r. - ST/00 f 912 e 310/1 au 066 fed ^ /1mDf I L�L�r' 1 CITY OF RANCHO CUCALMONGA PC.A.INNM IDIVLS QN i1L`t 'I i�L --- I ! !I J� *c �.1V 1 of 1 -i 'J,t'y� � . �.:• ..: 1 .y. `may„ EXHIBIT: SCALE- it a l e'!rts i 3 , a. + r :k�oi2rH CITY OFD V Im a TITLE' w- PLANNING DIVLSIQN EXHiBrr. J -B scALE- E E CITY OF RAIICHO CLCAMOtGA PLANNING DIVISION ITE�I , EVHIBIT: Cf SCALE �I C? Go -i n (�{n t 2l a z i U HILL] NIORTH CITY OF ,T'E%'I: RANCHO CUCAMONGA TITLE: PLANNING DIVISION EXH[BrT= D SCALE= CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA INITIAL STUDY PART I - PROJECT 111FORMATION SHEET - To be completed by applicant Environmental Assessment Revie.- 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 apDii_cation is made. Upon receipt Of this application, the Environmental Analysis staff will prepare Part II of the Initial Study. The Development R=-view 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 signi- ficant environmental impact and a Negative Declaration will be filed, 211 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 informa- tion concerning the proposed project. PROJECT TITLE: Parcel *tap APPLICANT'S NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE: _Lewis Development Co. 985 -0971 1156 North Mountain Avenue, P.O. Box 670 Upland, California 91786 NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE OF PERSON TO BE CONTACTED CONCERNING THIS PROJECT: Ron Nott' igham 985 -0371 Same address LOCATION OF PROJECT (STREET ADDRESS AND ASSESSOR PARCEL NO.) South side of Foothill between Hellman Avenue and Helms Avenue r'1 U LIST OTHER PERMITS NECESSARY FROM LOCAL, REGIONAL, STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES AND THE AGENCY ISSUING SUCH PER!i=S: None I -1 E c � iPROJECT DESCRIPTIv:: E DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: Z- • t0 b-9 sold f R 1 ACREAGE OF PROJECT AREA -!AND SQUAFZ FOOTAGE OF EXISTING AND cr„ n:VTTTTnT C IF P'3Y: 2 c7 Aczes Tor al : -4� maco Sell PRO PO NG_ , 1 , r,� � Tarn Roll Pr000sed Builainc: DESCRIBE THE ENWIRONI MENTAL SETTING OF THE PROJECT SITE INCLUDING IIusORM-ATION ON TOFOGRAPH'_', YL,'- -vTS (TREES) , AiCIMALS, ANY CULTURAL, HISTORICAL OR SCENIC ASPECTS, USE OF SURFOUNDING PROPERTIES, AND THE DESCRIPTION OF ANY EXISTING STRUCTURES AND THEIR USE (ATT &CH NECESSARY SHE',TS) : ♦• f -p SO'.i mgt P7V 'The oro�ect site has a slia`it sloce °mm nn� 3% T`ie site has be n - ,erloa_.c 1 stvs2 -•+?d n£ cFCeta cn e�� rtiP.wtr, -e r t_e only alant • £° sc c �a � ., • ° s l torsi °tS _ �,..., e� r mmr�, -•.; Lai - as follows To the h th co, 7 circle r� ,lv res_dQ ^_? no str''Ctu c Is the project part of a larger project, one of a seriel, of cumulative actions, which although individually may as a whole have significant environmental impact? Yes, this project is part of a larger p . roject It is not expected that the larger project will have significant environmental impoct- 1-2 C C HILL THIS PROJECT: YES N0 X 1. Create a substantial ;range in ground contours? X 2. Create a substantial change in existing noise or vibration? X 3. Create a substantial change in demand for municipal services (police, fire, water, sewage, etc.)? X 4. Create changes in the existing zoning or general plan designations? X 5. Remove any existing trees? Hurw many? X 6. Create the need for use or disposal of potentially hazardous materials such as toxic substances, fla enables or explosives? Explanation_ of a_ny YES answers above: IM -PORTANT: If the project involves the construction of residential units, complete the form on the next page. CERTIFICATION: I herebv certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and information required for this initial evaluat.on 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 infor.ation may be required to be submitted before an adequate evaluation can be made by the Development Review Co^raittee. Date Jose- 10183 Signature Enaireezina Coordinator I— 3 C C RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION Oe following irforsaation should be provided to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Division in order to aid in assessing the ability of the school district to acco=nodate the proposed residential development. Name of Developer and Tentative Tract Nr.: Specific Location of Project:_ PtZaSE I PHASE 2 PHASE 3 PHASE 4 TOTAL 1. Number of single family units: _ 2. N=ber of multiple family units: _ 3. Date proposed to begin construction: �. Earliest date of occupancy: _ Model and # of Tentative 5. Bedrooms Price Range I -4 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTIOH OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 33 -08 FOR LEWIS LOCATED BOULEVARD,,T O SOUTH FOOTHILL BETWEEN HELLMAN AVENUE AND HELMS STREET IN THE C -2 ZONE WHEREAS, on the 28th day of September, was filed by Lewis Development for review of the Planning project. WHEREAS, held a 26th public hearing beo, 1983, a complete application above - described project; and 1983, the Rancho Cucamonga consider the above- described NOW, THEREFORE, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Comnis� ion resolved as E follows: SECTION 1: That the follow -ng findings can /cannot be met: 1. That the prop _,sed use is in acr5rd with the General Plan, and the purposes of the zur._ in which the use is proposed; and 2. That the proposed use, together with the conditions ;jrplicable the,to, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welf are, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; and 3. t the proposed use will comply with each of the applicable provisions of the Zoning Ordinance. SECTION 2- That this project will not create adverse impacts 983n the environment an that a Negative Declaration is issued on October 25, 1. SECTION 3: Thar. Conditional Use Permit No. 83 -08 .s approved subject to iFe-­f­0-TTOwing conditions: PLANNING DIVISION 1, As a conditional use have the authority operations of this compliance with any c such operations are public health, safety permit, the rommission shall to periodically review the development to determine onditions or to determine that not adversely affecting the or welfare. E_ Resolution No. Page 2 approval is conceptual only and doc not 2. This ap? royal of 1:,y specific designs, constit92te app excluding the proposed Taco Bell Restaurant. for structure or ph se of the project required - r 3. All project textured treatmenshall such as bauman te. a a. All arbors and trellis work shall be planted with vines. b. Exterior building materials such as stucco color, roof tile, ceramic tile, and wood stains, shall be the sane as that planned for the other buildings in n the shopping center. The shopping center shall review the final building plans and verify such consistency. 6. Taco Belt trellis supports shall be increased in size and designed to harmonize with the shopping is center column design. Final details fbytthe revision shall be submitted to and approved Planning Divisicn prior to issuance of building perm its. Ithede east addition, ever the drive -thru facility. ENGINEERING DIVISION 7. Parcel Map 8063 shall be recorded prior to issuance of bu ;16ing permits. 8. A decelaration lane shall be required with a " right in -right out" drive approach of a minimum tangent length of 60 feet plus curve transitions to the satis °action of the City Engineer. 9. Prior to issuance of a building permit, reimbursement to the City shall be made for Hellman l Avenue reconss ruction, per agreement signed by the property owner APPROVED AND ADOPTED T-. -S 26TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 1983. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMOY.GA El Resolution No. Page 3 BY: Denis L. Stout, hairman 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 ResoWLion 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 26th day of October, 1983, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COKJISSIONERS: IDES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: C IAI 11 .O aglL •= L FC L .".q •7.r q_ =L'v Nu1 ��� V✓ �� � m 0 9 N C ^ � C N L D q= C N S N d T.+ d q6 f N�q .•.Y L �Nq u.Yr_ NC ^n C C V N T O u g Gi L� q E d � Y � q q C A J N C Z �� O q� Y � G•. y�pC .0✓ � u ^ =^ LCC V L �y T7 �. CS pq a.n � P C n� • L 9 Y O 2 NVV VS � _Y FO G2i •" ^n O_ � V r` LPG L n N V C y C O •�'� y� o °vin °.r s oT" Y?� � ec q�N= °' p o N �' � q °,FC ;.v Yq^6 p1 .a°ey �n�✓ c °✓ q>i'n^ P`� • i py � t:. =/ o ✓o L '^pr Neq yEb E� o ^L^ Q°+L°e ✓sdu u o 4M�q LM a =^+Ne r N^ n•' -ds <'V CON d C. ^yCP >y O� �L qq Fd YC Jr u^ .° .L pr✓ P ^y L.Cjd ML j .C� iL �.°JN t L 7 ^n N` C q N q C P N E'^ � V y • ... V N L „ M M� 6 a y O ° q Y yy C N q� C F C N S C y n P9 � C � M O e Y r6 ^ O C`✓^ n L d C l C� C � f N S A Y C ^ = y Py�O YC �� udiCi rdnG �9R nN� Jr 00 O PY r e � q N N O J J O N L< L ^ q t � q a ^✓ 6 d d fJi � r L y T C d n � � C O E >•O py O E � �L L � N >� 4 d� C A CES VL L L V� �> • F C A N T N F d <C� n ✓ V O E W � y C b d� i C !7E C q EOn C i Y Y C E n i 9 N V L V E O o b �J v g y 9 C y q j✓ L V p V n V d C C y NY.eVF O� ^9 ' 0 d�.EaO ^PCy ^T.1 ^VL VO6 ��n. rC NO NL ^LN�O p n L 40Y0 6VL <06L .1 <JOV <NO.d 69Vm 6W` ~aN g rd 'o �m r g Tdud DS Lim r .Y+s zi I Dp9 a9 L° > >_• � W v0✓ yr �CqE Y O �/ • q UC^ F r g o q e NN` b GOB ^V P h. W y✓Y 6d CC �n✓ L� �� CLC �p V Nom• N C J V J 9 n_ � V N S � V Yp V d w O F F J O O q O� r P !Kq n� NqN ..L qC dr r � t ✓.I N C V ^ V✓ 4 ^ q C � r i L . N � L� • a L ^ y. O `� C i� q C y j^ O �• � L n d t � � O iS- � ••` °V W Y� V V �� b � e L_ � O t y O P q cc i� �{ •V y V OSLO rSrL ^C� yCLY qT C N- �Cn \�{1j Y J y pC ypp R``b Qp v C L C p J � .. � J1 y j • • .. a6 g I I T Y c 0 y V y O i a Ell Ll P oV - D a r P✓ L O ✓ C O ✓ V�✓ V O d 0 T> N� 9 M C j V Lam✓._ H A a!✓ N E Q G L �� 9 E 6 n i r G J N N O U l V d r l G q O l O P L .8 A r r = qA N � p .4,. p V✓ Y L N N V V O S p y U� p Od wr✓ n✓ n _ c � E ✓ C O. � E L V O.^ V G e �_ P> p A L y d O T= O c � t� G c -9 L v n n✓ v O � E w s O � � V E C� h C � 0 PV a� w q � c .T. a � .^a V 9 J nE�C D CG d. V =O O.� 9 4�iV qN ✓ 2jOVd ✓9� > G �}v�6 ACS '_ L OA✓ 0?�dyyVO�OV LENA�N.Si CfJ`Y 9� ° r A r_ T A 0 E^ 9 b r ^• Y V C T» C rd. d D r� 3� J V C 9 C c' .O -�wAmE gEOy�� rxTr >OaOC pq o" °c cw LD ✓� o n ° �' Lr plO Z. `o q rE„ qq EOJ .°i��LC v Va.0 -. ca �_ o« ✓3.V.wOw. nPV9 - Oq DE'ACyc 7V 7 N gVVNO NG O ✓A 6�'_V V €wd.p�_EL °O¢q� J`P d bb_ ` dw r ��N G rT� Nye p= ✓ `>.y✓_ ErLwO S r d A N ° G ^ D g S O L N- J C r Y p r° D G C 4 L N A s q S E J ryO i° w J C r T 9 p'] O_ c q E.2 nJJ V< C N a ° ^_ ✓ G� D_ ^O E d0_ 6 d0 ^�d yLt MP rLL9r r9 pL.�D pr A�VO =D �O aN.q PP hL O tC0 a 'da �.` �Lr�rr >J �O�A C U'✓ NI ^' n roCi9 qNN qq °J��piN 0 Dw ^^ py✓i Lw a ^ = pp N` 9 ODr O rp p OVq N _O yC a✓ PQ q_'4. o «�9c�.+.°. ° d and NU d ✓c��n`G .°. aai = ✓.. nG -c q u A r� A•. o>�S ccp c cc °—'A °i4 c oG>u ` .'. my °v � nc_ L c °nt'O rO i rEq _V c NN7�� -Vi0 =�rEd �✓ Oit+? «�r� > Q9N IAN /OC 6Ei6 r2o. Y o. 6�INA NL Y•^ p�Vgp9 xNLA Tr ✓Nl Q M r C r Ip I- m P y O � q 9 Q - T9 w 9 u d G a N 9� T d a C 4✓ w« D^ N ` q L e L C q J T G p6 N A r pw q D✓ L P 6 E 9�� L! d e d L L 9 O ✓ 6 r Q= d L° O 9 C C✓ .UU.. �> Y p r V l a _ _�r�.a rE� ^L V O�rc NjgO M U L O q y V C✓ w` n r = q O T 9 qt.� N` cqo ap s:.. rr ° a✓ Q9Ai r��o° n � W N d0 NQ p pNt� q9V N= q0'T' ^dw9 V��NL P9 O 0 ' O V > r' O D A q V 9 T 9 ✓ D 4^ L r ,D c o C L ✓ « w°i �� °o ca c� -°•'A° c Giap i vui y _ -;m L q i O E✓ p q n � n 0' Y� N N d O .�C^+ Q S c y V u° O y y � d = V � r � x« ° S=> ' N G v r ✓ y.) L O J r ✓ Y V P q C O 9 � U 9 � 9� p C q � ^ � W O N Y �✓ ° � a S p° Y N H G r p A A ° C^ O O V w P S r C G O A t o- E n y✓ c C y P9 > 6 G S L L7;; « q G = q? C o. ° G V �. > 0 Oi L V d~ G F q� � y 4 C G� `O ^. O r A O= p q G� y .• = 90 N✓ �VJq d d V� 6r ^C - >' ^C =qnC �q64 L N0 � ✓�= 0 J� Lr J O � M �✓ A— n q Y- E L � r r� � 0 n� a ! H P O J j � n �J � O � V .0i � L 4 6 C Aw v O D_ Y � 6. u G C b O✓ A C V e 0 tGS «_o AG _"c �vv � z yeLVN �o�� Zoe• - No O r a" > r w A N r= 0 ✓ t 9 F A G V Q r� V T~ ✓ y C w Q Q w O d° S N � O A CO✓ '�vl AD_pP GaON✓ O OT °d ^9 V09uT CM�O" A.JOV LP =q Lq�l>C aC•P >M� TVgd ✓I V= � « G >.SOgV aC r9` J _ VM> C� OY �,rN • L.1 L C Oq U DS r Oq PL ✓ ^�_ ° PV d J CLL prj V.°'• OV .°..r u °.q.. «a na'eu dabD •' ✓a, �i �✓�. J y, -^L « VVE c Leo �a q 6`• W•^ CND NqA QV J✓9 pd ABM I.. r_i l(NCn QQ�QI..I y°�� N CI S, U Ell Ll P O Z Y L% 4� i d E ^ r O N o c N Y�- O q C d p O ^' a u P Tm V dL q'i -NjC O A S C G q O p G J Y✓ ° O „ u y E S ` q p = ✓ Hp >'p =ir - �i� °oa L 'QC< > �pLa n d ^ n o E O O q V`�lN L r N QV L N J a e L V Odj T r 9 ✓2 N'T .L Yp_ N q �m ✓ V p j dcN WLC a _ C! ✓.°- N O OO T .a ✓ ^ J cp L a J✓ C q n a d� P• O V q c 3 N✓ J L fi^ cr Es n_� u c ° Q° PorU rd NS S >�OS V9 A U O S m P✓ q.r C C =L ^ r O N o c N Y�- O q C d p O ^' a u P Tm V dL q'i -NjC O A S C G q O Ni! GC q J O G O 6 6A^ 6 V C ^Lr yd Am `a C° _ ggCP - V N p L Y�- O q C d p O ^' a u P Tm V a 'a .s „qpE > p = V L O C J O ENO Aqa A ✓� VG" Hp >'p =ir y y G n p q L 'QC< > �pLa n d ^ E ✓ L u O O q V`�lN L r N QV L m ✓ a N e _ V T✓ N T r 9 PA dpa ` Yp_ N q ruq nN a1PC °may dcN WLC Ow m nA d9� ca o Gc e° P L P A•O `V l a ✓ P Ac r d A L qd c n✓ C d 2 L _ p C N O q d G C C.r A d p L r V E u P Tm V a 'a N N A ^- cc and d J O ENO ^ ^NP C A ✓� VG" j WyN W ✓ qL `J r0 u.mn 4 q � Z raY F=-NLI V� NNA `V l a ✓ P Ac r d A L qd c n✓ C d 2 L _ p C N O q d G C C.r A d p m r V E u P ✓ V 'V a 'a Nu✓ p T •� d J O EL E L o ✓ qL `J r0 ` 4 q � Z ca _ a N q L M d y n ` � m i v O < ✓ O N Ni Y L 6 n i°1 m yC- � ✓ 6 dm�o. e c C V ° Q ✓ C � N n m 6 L L r m ° _L N i da> qL m O ✓ —L nG ✓° P e m N d 7 cam`. O A Vr = N O_ ✓ �" oc p a C C.r v` qo w m In m P n i. ✓ V 'V a 'a Nu✓ T d N �c wrw MC✓ �� ✓ o L `J r0 N c�o T• d r• U Od V`�lN ` Y-ONGL N f1 N I V ^ ^ c v v c° A 'c O ✓ p - c d „ o m In m P r� a 'a Nu✓ T d N �c wrw P N P MGLLLL `J r0 ✓ Q N 2 N m m �p r• r r• P> N m V V T✓ N T r 9 PA p C V S °>.p a1PC U `'C �1 PgaO CSp^ � A O A ✓ a d� P• O q c 3 N✓ J L fi^ 1 I Npy� �O y C T a R. S 2 p pa j � C ✓cqG O C P e�qq ° d6 n� e S ✓ r V ° Ta N N °N N n ✓ 0 P �C✓ 9. T p A Q C r C G. L C q G y N(-O�Y �AU AG C e L p � V d a L G L y N ° C G 9 6 c d m m p r L L d Lq O P`• 0 C 6 O M a= E N G 6 O C C � C9 O q . c n m p m .- ✓ L c o Poq `oaAs.o aoq` ay✓ L✓ P6� A G t � NS • d 6 m w°i � y✓ W L p O ` ry 3 C N d d C E M V S G6n d ^9 ^d rOVT �C�� S`G °�� TL •'n NG LS=D `G✓ 9-°d .`TCG Pfx L a qv,e qo ` O q l L° Y O j q✓ � °"° =UGC °sue vi V�NV MOpL 2'a V °✓ m_ N N P O N V v � F�✓ d i u� i L m n ry t. N ✓ p O P�� 19 L p q = o c m e a> m ✓ t0 ✓.yr `u qt 9 0` q '� K� v OL d✓ c r .Ce N p� 6N0 Wm On2N� cV `TJI ` NI W <nc q M d 0 0 m C r 0 Q' .f ✓ d o � n V C v �- V O � �C^ N N q O C N^ v Lea v S O c a N V a P � M N O ✓ c C � g` i C 3� V p i C O O U d Aee✓ M J V L N V V ✓6'°'O.0 q J = G e ✓ �� L Vmod^ q > T ✓ 9 ° K 0 r �•i 4 m d „ o m In m P O d Nu✓ \`a+ Lcaw ✓ N C m 6r r nrw C6 MGLLLL Q N 2 N m m 6 A r �•i 4 m O Z y u Q% G Z ✓ 2 V D N °m � P 9 L E a 4I 6 Q >I 6 LI V C' V 1� Qi 1 !7 1 m I C I r O O >° of on 6 e N� v u v' 0 9 °c me J e L • do y C ti 7 C O O 6 T4 PL q V L O O V V 4 c GV .V. V c •+ EL N C L 9 N v �= l O y J U y «� q -;z; N`4 V N T O w F •°L P •Ei� uE x �I a 6' N LI i m N T 9 r W P d D O G L V C t Lam° C CT° 1y 4 a LL q LF L L V 9 C. y s� O V ` `,.j F G y n 6 � •Dn � 9 C E 9 — P y Y t i `�•�N d J Ly•„u V oc SAP` c �seW°e O. ✓� VSO DVCV ^� ✓ 9� O V •r y� 4 d W j N � O L L q y � Q� p �� V q V p N q 7 C q N O • a p «✓ 9 O V y G P L V C L q N fJ ^ G vV WVST yV PNO p•'�L DV G =dm — CL p q_ d.V �Y Tq qLq N 6 {L V� L F q 4 °✓ O. 3 l 4. N= ✓✓ ^� C T E L � N� � C N C T N ° t O V °C ✓i. mf.w > >4 E� q4 VU 6PQ` NL j`V qdm� V` a✓ d � o m✓ V W _ �D ' O V� D V V 7 � °i i T C— d 6 ^✓ 9« d_ V J O ✓^ 6 ✓ M t C ` V -gj 6� ^ q ^ 9 q L O 6« J m q « ^ ° �C•. X �• �a L6d L' a°s q NiL.. r= '�.°.•.� =� oa "cPC�c ° ono •'� =c �� •` v N m 9 f ✓= N L � °« q« U C� p . E N 9 T n 9 V� N� ..y^ d � y Q° V {E} V V V 9 —E >° V ° N — L O a d N A y• P G — t p O r� L ^ •Vi 9 N N � L y O � lI ° C N t� P y V q d T 4r r— G '+ V A 1` V P V• L O✓ ° P rCrC d L N ^ � LC•• y U' y° >iN v 71 •Oi• �p «F N m O =Ee N C « d mil= �C� .9V- i ✓r ^•^ Vq e°iGy O• o �J D �9 N O N m m e q� � y°� ° L (' �° aPV 'Q V•r° 6] °D4N 6�4�L.0 • ` 6V WN9 WVt°.l VOGZ6y N r _1 f � X ✓ 2 V D N °m � P 9 L E a 4I 6 Q >I 6 LI V C' V 1� Qi 1 !7 1 m I C I r O O >° of on 6 e N� v u v' 0 9 °c me J e L • do y C ti 7 C O O 6 T4 PL q V L O O V V 4 c GV .V. V c •+ EL N C L 9 N v �= l O y J U y «� q -;z; N`4 V N T O w F •°L P •Ei� uE x �I a 6' N LI i ^ f N O e•^ v ^ O q E qE c u �O9 ° ^ o u cvc 9 r"_ Q� v° q 6 � y V V arEDe c q O V L oV i E 2V «+' O V Q <� w� m V N � G 6 �j clcJ VI OI NI� ml "" ic m N T 9 r W O J ` ✓WV Lam° C CT° 1y 4 a LL q L L V N G) ✓ G y n 6 C � 9 {6 •y `�•�N d J Ly•„u °� oc SAP` c �seW°e O. ✓� VSO DVCV ^� ✓ 9� O V •r y� 4 d W j N � O L L q y � Q� p �� V q V qL t N 9 O V y G P L V C fJ ^ G vV WVST yV PNO p•'�L �� r i� N 6 {L V� L F q 4 °✓ O. 3 l 4. ^ f N O e•^ v ^ O q E qE c u �O9 ° ^ o u cvc 9 r"_ Q� v° q 6 � y V V arEDe c q O V L oV i E 2V «+' O V Q <� w� m V N � G 6 �j clcJ VI OI NI� ml "" ic A Y U N 0 i d C E s vb Q 9 6 q � S Lo a c '^ .N.• � D r P C q e N t N _ 4O0• V d ouc N i N q b_c „ q qy^ Nn a ✓ i w'^ O Y w 09 n � V P P N �9D d � L . ✓D✓ > Q �aV O NO ° C C oa. o v n b T V y rT- N.. N[oL.i . co �cnY_ ^YO ODD T k � d v ° v ✓ d V n _LiVt q° q a`i 9a 0 V✓ n ✓ q O l �� 0 9✓ M Pt • ..0 LVE 1 ¢ ✓aYa 6VU O-q LL 6c -c L u a io is fD nVLDfp N P C N yEO� y j✓ q & i a• N P N w CC9 V W S Op. V g q N K O 6� d N T D' u o W V � C H� u q o Y = a v PO O L O d a mE ✓ r c �6 b.• L � ✓ d V Sq P d C� N � U q d L O P '^9 C K� L dY7 V � V L .JI ` 1 OI PI a € v D' y N d W P � i C f N 9 vp1 qV C C E F a S � E L Cti P E 9 C v � i o V m D w N O T � S O C y E c W O Q S v N 3 —. 6 J V W ao S L y ✓ L d � E V ^ N `� �ivT W N J 9 i � c N 3 2 W Im ^ .r N W N eO O C✓ i �' w C`q io•r 0✓ P- � -O C L 1 � I L✓` .L...✓ uQ y ` ^�R P C u>.P CVI P��•VE yq� �.mi.d J9 L6 C iLO`cm mrV mN o >� mE 4 a ev av ba _ Lgod° `c i LN iLi aaWLNP _� P9��0 _ J d 7 C ✓g • O A O '� d C Y C u N O~ «✓ A i y C VT Ll^ ` nPD D��! CVOA udc ✓o� O Q` m O N m Ty y L V q r ✓ L M C� ^ O L O C ^y✓ NV j T lOe �.�d ✓L. 'aC y ✓ A L O 'Y 9'• A T C C C E`�r.0 O A O me ✓� � G Y�bjgN PO JZ ` 000 2 bC9� OTC 0���� LL mmL ✓� Eq .dr�V O eN " ..D✓ aZD �DOO C M - ` AO�i -•A � >-L^ LCT � ^td r' � ✓ AACq O N� I VO C E O N$ a U z ✓ O N �� ` O N Ol v L V L S C E % O O � A C D d 9 9 e 9 N O V� �O� -9 L: O'er 9✓ � 9VUd EN m �' e u in N C O b «:E aN � N y PD V � O{ L� •. D � °✓ � ee�d ✓_ c P « ^ o •,� M c' e 6 q a z ° q° ° b L p� yE e ✓ .Lip A � O Y P P ° O✓ y A l- CIE ✓ ��Y' OV A � ^��N Yl n✓�E.d.. � A ✓ II _ N % N L�wn p�q� Cr S'Edd WC]DD 60V OPA O� V v• E1 N� W' 9 ' WI J d c q P i v 9 P a r O ^ IC C C 6 q N p V q v A n S ✓ 4 N O y L u r L Z V . 6 y � O v o � P O L N 1 q V q Z p Y O^ C e — s eb L e d =a E y 9 d 6 N i L C 1n r � _ 4O0• E N c N q q qy^ Nn ✓ i w'^ ✓ D D n n � V P P N �9D d � > Q .Y Qb ° C C oa. J - d N T D' u o W V � C H� u q o Y = a v PO O L O d a mE ✓ r c �6 b.• L � ✓ d V Sq P d C� N � U q d L O P '^9 C K� L dY7 V � V L .JI ` 1 OI PI a € v D' y N d W P � i C f N 9 vp1 qV C C E F a S � E L Cti P E 9 C v � i o V m D w N O T � S O C y E c W O Q S v N 3 —. 6 J V W ao S L y ✓ L d � E V ^ N `� �ivT W N J 9 i � c N 3 2 W Im ^ .r N W N eO O C✓ i �' w C`q io•r 0✓ P- � -O C L 1 � I L✓` .L...✓ uQ y ` ^�R P C u>.P CVI P��•VE yq� �.mi.d J9 L6 C iLO`cm mrV mN o >� mE 4 a ev av ba _ Lgod° `c i LN iLi aaWLNP _� P9��0 _ J d 7 C ✓g • O A O '� d C Y C u N O~ «✓ A i y C VT Ll^ ` nPD D��! CVOA udc ✓o� O Q` m O N m Ty y L V q r ✓ L M C� ^ O L O C ^y✓ NV j T lOe �.�d ✓L. 'aC y ✓ A L O 'Y 9'• A T C C C E`�r.0 O A O me ✓� � G Y�bjgN PO JZ ` 000 2 bC9� OTC 0���� LL mmL ✓� Eq .dr�V O eN " ..D✓ aZD �DOO C M - ` AO�i -•A � >-L^ LCT � ^td r' � ✓ AACq O N� I VO C E O N$ a U z ✓ O N �� ` O N Ol v L V L S C E % O O � A C D d 9 9 e 9 N O V� �O� -9 L: O'er 9✓ � 9VUd EN m �' e u in N C O b «:E aN � N y PD V � O{ L� •. D � °✓ � ee�d ✓_ c P « ^ o •,� M c' e 6 q a z ° q° ° b L p� yE e ✓ .Lip A � O Y P P ° O✓ y A l- CIE ✓ ��Y' OV A � ^��N Yl n✓�E.d.. � A ✓ II _ N % N L�wn p�q� Cr S'Edd WC]DD 60V OPA O� V v• E1 N� W' 9 ' WI J d c q P i v 9 P a r O ^ IC C C 6 q N p V q v A n S ✓ 4 N O y L u r L Z V . 6 y � O v o � P O L N 1 q V q Z p Y O^ C e — s eb L e d =a E y 9 d 6 N i L C 1n d c q P i v 9 P a r O ^ IC C C 6 q N p V q v A n S ✓ 4 N O y L u r L Z V . 6 y � O v o � P O L N 1 q V q Z p Y O^ C e — s eb L e d =a E y 9 d 6 N i L C 1n O Z v i d .V. C O C O i L y C W L T V V a � O D r w i L O1 a a L YI Y L C q q O, y V � a OI 6 V o q q` Ir y A, . S 41 d C � O v a J V a J c O 0 P v d v q V v s A C N r � C ✓ O O a ` V •+ V C y Y L a q � L V y C I ✓ qAw D« 4L `f —ad N W S ^ q N > d ^ O V ✓ V L y� ^L. C t q C V p q V V^ A V `q0 d L`6 pV .�` c ✓u. u U d ` °✓ 9 N n✓ q C 1 L ✓Y✓ �� d a= � 1 VE C✓ ° L N ^ V p y I �r p N d � �O P 4 < c I ALC l . °� V•r 6 > � �P �C y O L V ✓d aV I � At O Pa y L p^ C V V OL �i✓ $r �L S .T. 2� �.L. 4✓ I �a✓ c nN N 4 1 � 1 1 a� a� G > d q d V y a N Y � O L c ?� d E a c 0 r S a- - a s Y Y J J � c = d N T•` d C a d V D °'✓ N L ✓ ✓_ O� O .° N O A F ✓CO T a a a �V� e�M �T ^ dam^ O V ^ A O � n^ A V r O✓ N N T` y N d. C C O ^ V L✓ A J 9 E �Y L N �'o «c« ` C c C✓ • {c�yo N � N L Y � V t V V � N d P✓ � C° �✓ yqV A d E d q L q > �Dp Np°• q ✓ d C N V V i � ^ d E N nL " q n> �+ J ei .L..A d n� a vOa `✓ T c9 2 O.N N V°�O nE9 yW J V O TgNAN T% A Nl v✓ w N� u� O YT L qcn cAL N` L r pT� m� F.O+O N i0 00 « nS Ci U� Oy Cii A O Ep _ 9_ q ` L D_ ° V E✓ q� P N C — e V O N S P S D Liq �d �V 6 �V,.°.W� L �� A�Ld V � �V �r Y•Ow C J � p V N D_ n o d •L^ J � L J 1 E V O U d y J a q C a L E w E E y .Y A•r °�L Gn qEa pCUY c YEN d� PV ° ✓ni ^4 F V q= C t D C Y • 6. p 4 L At n _W_ v yA1 L V E L L yJ, d L p S^ w: 6 V a N V q✓ V C t C W ✓` S^ r q= .°. w� if c. •°•iW reid�o �� _'"c F&M COYLCW � ✓da ddT o NT °��_ `ncdq V N ` N11 .aq Lc�.>+ C U L M C✓ N O✓ O N M V L V L a✓ LV M5 W✓ N �. L V 6MV Nnr, 11 �p V CC Y r F 0 r u d i D 9 O n ^ V rq N e Y N C q sn d L 0 G 7 N N 0 i V q F� T t V N ° O ^ w� C C L d O l` A — de i N uN c C ` V A Q N C- 0 Cam 0 z 41 u Q) 0 L a L 11 n OV r P. G r 6 i =Q r0 d G y Z O 9 J N C a A I d d r r « A G d N F dV I'N d00 MV'J 9 d O _ d d • Y r a e ^ \t111 � I • `4' I 1 VY 1 T • o. n 0 0 E CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONCA STAFF REPORT J DATE: October 26, 1983 TO. Planning Commission FRUM: Lloyd B. Hubs, City Engineer BY: Barbara Krali, Enginec.ing Technician 1977 SUBJEZT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 8063 - LEWIS DEVELOPMENT CO. - A ivis°cn of 8.66 acres of lana into 2 parcels within LAC- T—zone located on the south side of Foothill Blvd. betweer. Helms and Hellman Avenues - APN 208 - 261- ^5,26 (RE: CUP 83 -08) I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action Requested: Approval of Parcel Map. B. Purpose: To divide 8.66 acres of land intc 2 oarcels. Parcel 2 to be the site for a Taco Bell to be preser,:ed as CUP 83 -08 on toniots agenda. Location: South side of Foothill Blvd. between Helms and Hallman Aven :e- D. Parcel Size: Parcel 1 - 8.20 acres Parcel 2 - .46 acre E. Existing Zoning: Comriercia'l. F. Existing Land Use: Vacant. G. Surroundina Land Use and Zonin North - conmiercia - R -3 South - existing s.f. - R -•1 East - commercial - C -2 West - vacant - R -3 H. General Plan Designate 'ons: North - commerical and medium 4 -14 du /ac South - low medium - 4 -8 du /ac East_ - regional commerc4,1 Test - medium high 14 -?4 du /ac ITEM K ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 8063 - LE11IS DEVELOPMENT October 26, 1983 Page 2 I. Site Characteristics: The site slopes from north to south at approximately a grade and is vacant. 1I. ANALYSIS: This parcel map divides 8.66 acres into 2 parcels. Parcel 2 will b —the site of a Tacc Sell Restaurant submitted for Planning Commission approval as CUP 83 -08 on tonigh�L's agenda. A Reimbursement Agreement between the City and Lewis Development Co. for the construction of street and drainage improvements on Hellman Avenue and Foothill Blvd. has been accepted by City Council. The remainder of the improvements will 'je constructed at time of development. III. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: Also attached for your review and consideration is Part I of the Initial Study as completed by the applicant. Staff has completed Part II of the Initial Study, the environmental checklist, and has conducted a field investigation. Upon completion and review of the Initial Study and field investigation, Staff found no adverse impacts on the environment as a result of the proposed subdivision. IV. CORRESPONDENCE: Notices of Public Hearing have been sent to surrounding property owners and placed in the Daily Report Newspaper. Posting at the site has also been completed. V. RECOKMENO;TION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission consider a -input and elements of the project. If, after such consideration, the Commission can support the reccm�w-nded conditions of approval as written in the City Engineer's Report, then adoption of the attached resolution would be appropriate. It is also recommended that a Negative Deciarat on be issued. Respectfully Attachments: Map Resolution City Engineer's Report Initial Study 11 TENTATIVE JL�I� �Of3 .ILL M" Me IN 'THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMOVGA g£ING A SOFIDIVISON OF THE WEST 702 FEET OF THE NORTH ONE - HALF OF THE NORTHWEST ONE-OU4RTER OF THE NOPTMEAST ONE - QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 10. TOWNSHIP i SOUTH. R=.aZ 7 WEST. SAN EIERNAP.OINO MERIDIAN. IN THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO. STATE OF CALIFCRN:A. UT /L /T /CS wv>•E.r LLC•AAdfa LJ�. r !✓Ares Sww&,4r AGOI //ppNN ATE R' vrerir /cr - P/w�/C 6EN�RAL• TfL �G GO �/ S BEN�•NM.O.rL O° CGLAW -Mi .v AwrN/LL Av ✓P y!L1JLN sNa[Y / or / sN[LTs JUNE 7083 ♦f1OC1p1� ?[* [NGlNfstl (mil r '�d•'.'J'Q�X N/ L!✓NE•r' CEN✓YJ Of✓EGQ°MtNr d . -ANT / /X/ NO MLY/NTA /N A ✓G. UPC FNO.0 4/:11G .. - lwsi •!C3-PT�I MOSILE HOME PARK - :1 FAMP_Y =FI ENTIA! VACANT _s• .� yr FOOTHILL BOULEVARD I J j W Q � � V a' V g��`i Ll w m 3 �R I r�W •� 1 J / VACANT a �/ j�` �1 �✓ I� / HE 1 I ��� V I VACANT Mz K ii \ 7ii. ND. R -1 9083 -1 TRr CT N0. 9933 -2 kR L30,'14-L5 J I N. B. 129. SINGLE FAMILY RES. 11 -13 L El RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONG.A, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PARCE_ MAP NUMBER 8063 (TENTATIVE PARCEL PAP NO. 8063), LOCATED 014 THE SOUTH SIDE OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD AT HELLMAN AVENUE WHEREAS, Tentative Parcel Map Number 8063, submitted by Lewis Development and consisting of 2 parcels, located on the sacth side of Foothill Boulevard at Hellman Avenue, being a division of the northeast one quarter of section 10, township 1, south, range 7 west, San Bernardino Meridian; and WHEREAS, on June 9, 1983, a formal application was submitted requesting review of the above- described Tentative Map; and WHEREAS, on October 26, 1983, the Planning Commission held a duly advertised public hearing for the above- described mam2 FOLLOWS: NOW, THEREFORE, THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLVED AS SECTION 1: That the following findings have been made: 1. That the map is consistent with the General Plan. ® 2, That the improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with the General Plan. 3. That the site is physically suitable for the proposed development. 4. That the proposed subdivision and improvements will not cause substantial environmental damage, public health problems or have adverse affects on abutting property. SECTION 2: That this project will not create significant adverse environmental impacts and a Negative Declaration is issued on October 26, 1983. SECTION 3: That Tentative Parcel Map No. 8063 is approved subject to the recommended Conditions of Approval pertaining thereto. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 26171H DAY OF OCTOBER, 1983. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA E Resolution No. Page 2 BY: Dennis L. Stout, Chairman ATTEST: Secretary of the Planning Co=ission i, JACK LAM, Secretary of the Plarring Co- fission 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 26th day of October, 1963, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: 11 11 11 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA REC"ENDEO CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL LOCATION: South side of Foothill Blvd. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO: 9063 between Hellman and Helms Avenues DATE FILED: 6/9/83 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: A subdivision of the west NWBER OF LOTS: 2 702 ft of north 1/2 of the northwest 1/4 GROSS ACREAGE: 8.66 of the northeast 114 of said Section 10, ASSESSOR PARCEL NO: 208 - 261 -25&26 171S, R W, San Bernardino Meridian, County of San Bernardino, California DEVELOPER OWNER ENGINEER /SURVIVOR Lewis Deveio ^lent Co. same Associated Engineers 1156 N. Mountain Ave. 316 East "E" Street Upland, CA 91786 Ontario, CA 91761 Improvement and dedication requirements in accordance with Title 16 of the Municipal Code of the City of Rancho Cucamonga include, but may not be limited to, the following: ® Dedications and Vehicular Access 1. Dedications shall be made of all interior street rights -of -way an- all necessary easements as shown on the tentative map. 2. Dedication shall be made of the following rights -of -way on the following streets: additional feet un additional feet on ,dditionai feet on X 3. Corner property line radius will be required per City Standards. 24 inch radius at the intersection of Hellman Ave. and Foothill Blvd, and Helms Ave. and Foothill Blvd. X 4. All rights of vehicular ingress and egress shall be dedicated as follows: on Foothill Blvd. except for two openings to be located on Parcel No. 1. X 5. Reciprocal access easements and maintenance agreements ensuring access to all parcels and joint maintenance of all common roads, drives or parking areas shall be provided and shall be recorded concurrent with the map. -i- X Surety 6. All existing easements lying within future right -of -way are to be quitclaimed or delineated on the map per City Engineer's requirements. is 7. Easements for sidewalk for public use shall be dedicated to the City where sidewalks meander through private property. X 1. Surety shall be posted and an agreement executed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and City Attorney, guaranteeing completion of the public improvements prior to building permit issuance for each parcel. X 2. A lien agreement must be executed prior to recording of the map for the following: one -half landscaped median island en Foothill Blvd. X 3. Surety shall be posted and an agreement executed, guaranteeing completion of all �ln -site drainage facilites necessary for dewatering all parcels to the satisfaction of the Building and Safety Divison prior to issuance of building permit for each parcel. Street improvements_ Pursuant to the L;i-,y of Ranch Cucamonga Municipal Code, Title 16, Section 16.36.120, the subdivider may enter into an agreement and post security with the City guaranteeing the required construction prior to recordation of the map and /or buildino permit issuance. 1. Construct full street improvements including, but not limited to, curb and gutter, A.C. pavement, sidewalk, drive approaches, parkway trees and street lights on all interior streets. 2. A minimum of 26 -foot wide pavement within a 40 -foot wide dedicated right -of -way shall be constructed for all half - section streets. X 3. Construct the following missing improvements: Prior to recordation for Prior to building permit issuance for each parcel Street frame ,Gutter ¢rb & A.C. Pvmt. Si e- Walk Drive Street Appr. Trees Street Lights A.C. . overlay Medianj Island* Other Helms repair X X 11 X X Foothill IreDair shouldey X X I X X lien *Includes landscaping and irrigation or meter E -2- X 4. Prior to any work being performed in the public right -of -may, fees shall be paid and an encroachment permit shalt be obtained from the City Engineer's Office, in addition to any other permits required. X 5. Street improvement plans shall be prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer and approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of an encroachment permit. X 6. Developer shall coordinate, and where necessary, pay for the relocation of any power poles or other existing public utilities as necessary. Y. 7. ,2-M , f� ^ ^ +i ^^ the property stall be Existing 'tines of ,cnt or .2ss ........ 7 undergrounded. X S. Install appropriate street name signs, traffic control signs, striping and markings with locations and types approved by the City Engineer. X 9. Street light locations, as required, are to be approved by the Southern California Edison Company and the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Lights shall be on decorative poles with underground service. X 10. Landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Division prior to the issuance of building permit. 11. Concentrated drainage flows shall not cross sidewalks. Undersidewaik drains shall be installed to City Standards. Drainage and Flood Control X 1. Private drainage easements from parcel 2 to parcel 1 for cross - lot drainage shall be required and shall be delineated or noticed on the final map. X 2. 3. Adequate provisions shall be made for acceptance and oizposai of surface drainage entering the property from adjacent areas. The following storm drain shalt satisfaction of the City Engineer — be installed to the 4. Prior to recordation of the map, a hydrologic and drainage study for the project shall be submitted to the City Engineer for review. 5. A drainage detention basin per City Standards shall be constructed to detain increased runoff -3- X 6. An offer of dedication to the City for a drainage easement across Parcel 1 shall be required at the time of development of Parcel 1. This easement is to accept the drainge flow from Foothill Blvd. Grading X_ _ 1. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the Uniform Building Code, City Grading Standards and accepted grading practices. The final grading plan shall be in substantial conformance with the approved conceptual grading plan. X 2. A soils report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer licensed by the State of California to perform such work at time of development. 3. A geological report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and submitted at the time of application or grading plan check. 4. The final grading plan shall be subject to review and approval by the Grading Committee and shall be completed prior to recordation of the final subdivision map or issuance of building permit whichever comes first. X 5. Final grading plans for each parcel are to be submitted to the Building and Safety Division for approval prior to issuance of building permit. General Requirements and Approvals X 1. Permits from other agencies W:11 be required as follows: X CalTrans for Foothill Blvd. San Bernardino County Flood Control District X Cucamonga Ccurty Water District for sewer and water San Bernardino County Dust Abatement (required prior to issuance of a grading permit) Other 2. A copy of the Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (C.C. &R.$) approved by -LhE City Attorney is required prior to recordation of the map. X 3. Provide all utility services to each lot including sewerage, water, electric power, gas and telephone prior to street constructon. X 4. Sanitary sewer and water systems shall be designed to Cucamonga County Water District standards. A letter of acceptance is required. 11 ME �J X 5. This subdivision shall be subject to conditions of approval from CilTrans. X 6. Approvals have not been secured from all utilities and other interested agencies involved. Approval of the final map will be subject to any requirements that may be received from them. _ X 7. The filing of the tentative map or approval of same does not guarantee that sewer treatment capacity will be available at the time building permits are requested. When building permits are requested, the Cucamonga County Water District will be asked to certify the availability of capacity. Permits will not be issued unless said certification is received in writing. 8. Local and Master Planned Trails shall be provided in accordance with the Trail &;:dn. A detailed trail plan indicating widths, maximum slopes, physical conditions, fencing and weed control, in accordance With City trail standards, shall be submitted to and approved LY the City Planner prior to recordation for and /or prior to building permit issuance for 9. Prior to recording, a deposit shall be posted with the City covering the estimated cost of apportioning the assessments under Assessment District 82 -1 among the newly created parcels. X 10. At the time of final map submittal, the following shall be submitted: Title Report, traverse calculations (sheets), copies of recorded maps and deeds used as reference and /or showing original land division, tie notes and bench marks referenced. 11. Prior to building permit issuance for Parcel 1 or Parcel 2, the owner shall comply with Item #2 of the Reimbursement Agreement For Street and Drainage Improvements at Foothill Blvd. and Hellman Avenue as recorded in Official Records of San Bernardino County as Number 83- 130338. -5- CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMOWA LLOYD B. HUBBS, CITY ENGINEER by: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA INITIAL STUDY Cd PART I - PROJECT INFORMATION SHEET - To be completed by applicant Environmental Assessment 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 staf will prepare Part II of the Initial Studv. 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 signi- ficant environmental 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 jr-forma- tion concerning the proposed project. PROJECT TITLE: APPLICANT'S NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE: Upland, Califon---a 91786 NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE OF PERSON TO BE CONTACTED CONCERNING THIS PROJECT: -Ron No }tirgham 485 -0971 LOCATIOF OF PROJECT (STREET ADDRESS AND ASSESSOR PARCEL NO.) South Side of Foothill between Hellman Avenue and Helms Avenue \:. J LIST OTHER PERMITS NECESSARY FROM LOCAL, REGIONAL, STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES AND THE AGENCY ISSUING SUCH E I -1 ;E PROJECT DESCRIPTION DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: to be sold.. ACREAGE OF PROJECT_ AREA AND. SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED BUILDINGS, IF ANY. 8 67 Acres Total o -.-, ccc T..�al - 1 '70(1 for Tam_APt 7 Proposed Bui.ldina; _ DESCRIBE THE ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING OF THE PROJECT SITE INCLUDING INFORMATION ON TOPOGRAPHY, PLANTS (TREES), ANIMALS, ANY CULTURAL, HISTORICAL OR SCENIC ASPECTS, USE OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES, AND THE DESCRIPTION OF ANY EXISTING STRUCTURES AND THEIR USE (ATTACH NECESSARY SHEETS): „ , .,•. 3i. -1,he site has .. .• .. _ ' .. . . no st ,9=M2--e2xd1sXt-i1QnSL- the- n. a • •.. . ...- 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 enviro uaental impact? Yes, this project is part of a larger project. it is not expected that the larger project will have significant environmental impact_ I -2 WILL THIS PROJECT: YES NO x 1. Create a substantial change in ground contours? X 2. Create a substantial change in existing noise or vibration? X 3. Create a substantial change in demand for nranicipal services (police, fire, water, sewage, etc.)? X 4. Create changes in the existing zoning or general ?lan designations? X 5. Remove any existing trees? Hors many? X 6. Create the need for use or disposal of potentially hazardous materials such as toxic substances, flanmiables or explosives? Explanation of any YES answers above: IMPORTANT: If the project involves the construction of residential units, complete t-,e form on the next page. CERTIFICATION: I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and information required for this initial evaluation to the best of my ability, and that the facts, statements, and information presented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. I further understand that additional information may be required to be submitted before an adequate evaluation can be made by the Development Review Committee. Date J6'« 10 163 Signature Title Engineering Coo- einator 0 1-3 RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION Mk We following information should be provided to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Division in order to aid in assessing the ability of the school district to accommodate the proposed residential development. Name of Developer and Tentative Tract No_: Specific Location of Project: PHASE I PHASE 2 PHASE 3 PHASE 4 TOT %L 1. Number of single family units: 2. Number of multiple family units: 3. Date proposed to begin construction: . Earliest date of occupancy: Model # and # of Tentative 5. Bedrooms Price Range 0 I -4 11 u E CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT 0 Z}d DATE: October 26, 1983 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner BY: Dan Coleman, Associate Planner SUBJECT: REVISIONS TO TENTATIVE TRACT 11915 - MAYER - Proposed architectural an site pan changes for a porticn of a previously approved project consisting of 150 townhnmes on 10.7 acres located at the southeast corner of Arrow and Turner and 44 patio homes on 6.3 acres located at the northeast corner of Turner and 26th Street - Lots 1 & 2 of Parcel Map 7280. I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action Reauested: Approval of subdivision map, architectural and site plan recisions B. Purpose: Development of 150 townhomes and 44 patio homes C. Location: East side of Turner, between Arrow and 26th Street ('x iblt "A") D. Parcel Size: 17 acres E. Existing Zoning: R -3 /PD (Muiitple Family Residential /Planned Development) F. Existing Land Use: Vineyard G. Project Density: 11.4 du /ac H. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: or n - Vacant �approveo tract i2040); R -3lPD South - Single family residences; R -2 East - Vineyard; R -3 1PD West - Single family tract; R -2 and R -1 I. General Plan Designations: Project Site - Medium Residential (4 -14 du /ac) North - Medium Residential (4 -14 du /ac) South - Low Residential (2 -4 dulac) East - Industrial Park West - Low Residential (2 -4 du /ac) ITEM L PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Revisions - TT 11915 /Mayer October 26, 1983 Page 2 The site consists of vineyards and characteristics- There are no existing J, Site Cfi m °aerate y to the south. s opes structures or mature trees. planned development combining R -3 and p no minimum K. Ao licable Re ulations: spaces Per 1, 2, districts permit townhomaa and zero line unit esp and visitor parking - lot size; respectively, 3- bedroom units, ANALYSIS: cbrett Homes, II. �� Crowell Industries to and Tract A. General equesting developers, approval of modifications Robert Mayer „C„ originally approved for the o project density i1915 (Exfiibit units and P 3 , lam Corporation. The number of dwelling Thep P architectural and s� - the same. ro ose� c nstitute a will remain relatively minor inapprovedaPry 'ct. All access changes are to he are consistent with the revision landscaping points and perimeter previously approved project•e committee has worked with both relative to the architectural the townhomes, the Committee B. )es' on Review Yeso�ve econcerns to the site plan developers to es. Regarding and site Plan changes. ro osed revisions to on the end recommended approval of to providing siding - off -1n�, In the Exhibit approval subject and elevations subjec_ pled app ro ect for the St"C elevations to reduce the CommitteearecomFme zero lot line area, _ le composition to distributing the three elevations throughout the The project and using a thick butt fect on cthearoofY variety iron fence and the zero shingle to provide a shadow ea wroug�•° portion will be surrounded by a combination of 6 -foot lot ,ine Portion will be suht on fencing. high masonry walls and wrou9 , has reviewed the The Committee major concerns rovai. The Sheriff's C. Gro. ManaoemeStand°�ecommended and drainage. the propose c ang were security lanted along of the Committee shrubs be plan provided townhome Portion Department recoaanen wended that thorny Cc 'ttee and Engineering perimeter fencing and that the with security 9 gates The oradrogect be graded to drain into Division recommended that th� P Deer creek Channel- Planning commission issued a for Tentative Tract 11915 on Environmental Review: The changes not result in D. Dec aration will the original Negative 1982. The Proposed in March 10, not addressed a Nega- significant adverse impacts therefore issuance of ve Tract 11915, review of Ten at'would be appropriate. Live E M El PLANNING COMPASSION STAFF REPORT Revisions - TT 11915 /Mayer October 26, 1983 Page 3 III. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: This project is consistent with the General Plan and Zoning Or Trance. The project will not be detrimental to adjacent properties or cause significant adverse environmental impacts. In addition, the proposed use, building design and site plan, together with the recommended conditions of approval are in compliance with the applicable provisions of the Zoning Ordinance and City standards. Iv. CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised as a public hearing in The Dal y Report newspaper, the property posted, and English and Spanish notices were sent to property owners within 300 feet of the project site. To date, no correspondence has been received either for or against this project. V. P.�COMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission C er a material and elements of this project. If after such consideration the Commission can support the facts for findings and conditions a approval, adoption of would be Resolutions and be app opr ate ® Respectfully ,submitted, Rick 1Gomez City Planner J �G:DC:jr Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Location Map Exhibit "B" - Site Utilization Map Exhibit "C" - Approved Tentative Tract 11915 Exhibit "D" - Proposed Zero Lot Line Site Plan Exhibit "E" - Proposed Town Home Site Plan Exhibit "F" - Proposed Town Home Landscape Plan Exhibit "G" - Zero Lot Line Elevations Exhibit "H" - Town Home Elevations Initial Study, Part I Resolution of Approval with Conditons 11 Ll E R ti • a-t LAMA-amp , ar ; c :t WR R-t .1 e ? I Aa s R-2 m i.lvrr+•� %� ' R4 C-7 Ai1bdMS :L IFt W2 QI11C MI(gtT.M %" AMW=ZP ..KrPC7~ CITY OF IAA \CHO CLCATNIONGk PLA.NL NLN, -C DINrbgQN .nTLE EXHIBM - SOLE- V ��� [V� NI CR11l 9 ..1, • `• Zag„e AA .. ez• cxwr . '�• r- .nTLE EXHIBM - SOLE- V ��� [V� NI CR11l I� IV .rill. _I •l _ h 4. • i I •4 i 9 4ffIZOVC� /.AAP i i i 1 (h. h lam'= I12 ly 110 i� I i 0 11 NORTH CITY OF I'M%I: pp sl - OZ RANCHO CUC- MNIO\GA TITLE: TESTATIVE ` 1LACT P,4o PUuN;NTING UN ISKA\ EXHIBIT :_ C SCALE= E E oho L07 &/,O e — �S NORTH Crate OF rrE\I: - trr licit 1 RANCHO CUCAMONTGA TM- E= F-1?9, -►'�'E BAN PLANNING DIV.Si YN EXHIRfT - SCALE- ...... ,.: s. t F •.. N r v c. tog �-. r,..rp',e s�•�.�y ;_ ;JO., fro f w_,.►� �� - S:�l�.�, ��Y'•+'8 z'�i'= e....:'r�w,=•R�.1Qa►i! -i. l,T s•�= !s"s:,'wrwS7fq- /Pl�ai r- !r 3.•,f r-. •,� g�j��p�•10{gFll O �� 1 �'O N I • C .., . �. - ± 1. ••�.6. S VM1 rM WSW �rJ&•! w� 1 Qn • n ., jam• kXML ON MINE� s• O •rte. .',. -- ��. �!, =1 �i ..• - _•:a '� iG•��: = -•I 5�:.9- ��r��- ►•�y Orr AM MERL NOW 6 � —��t0 .C���� � lam•'/ T.�����^� � 'taC �:1 Mme. fliR lli' ��� �z. • ._e,�ch� : <, .,J .. Via, � /: i,l(( �l{U°i I� ,oi�� !�1� •��I�i���$Illliifr ±t� . • 7:3 F -:. �' e,n.r o I.JMir :tlltAi4 O ^` � e.o �� a °��r °..�r:� - e• °•- � eaD �e tee_ �• • • l 1 ce,: 11 l l.' l: . Q O H CS Q F W J r Z O Q W� J LU : (:iF4 11 CI 11 L 11 0 11 } ; ►a 101 r' O N F S 2 t W J 1 r l� O 1� I' a y �r 'o Of 0 0 eyRIA31T C-rz ) O rr M +C[ 3EC _ � W r' O N F S 2 t W J 1 r l� O 1� I' a y �r 'o Of 0 0 eyRIA31T C-rz ) Q 0 0 }. 'Z .O 'tL 1c. C L Lj- LU J E a M O -0 4 'V E 0 f • j�m�.; �'�' Gds .�i� �... o .+r,. —r =s .vs. n.,.. — ""' y.a., -- v y�.��._� —c•_.. � �'� •• ''--� --- --rte' Uill NORTH CITY a RANCHO I 0. • _ �. 7 87:'9i:lti.,i r�i`y PIP � BUILOIIl113 11 MEM ,110-M i :5� NORTH CI'T'Y OF RANCID ITE:11- CUCAMONGA TrrLE: f4191lsw� PLANNING DIVISION EXHiB1T --/ SCALE- El RESOLUTION NO. ® A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF T4E CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, CONDITIONALLY APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 11915 WHEREAS, Tentative Tract Map No. 11915, hereinafter ovo:lp° 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 residential subdivision for a total planned development of 44 zero lot lire homes and 150 townhomes on 17 acres in the R -3 /PD zone, located on the east side of Turner, between Arrow Route and 26th Street into 48 lots, -egularly came before the Planning Commission for public hearing and action -i October 26. 1983; and WHEREAS, the City Planner has recommended approval of the Map subject to all conditions set forth in the Engineering and Planning Division's reports; and 14HEREAS, the Piannin� Commission has read and considered the Engineering and Planning Division's reports and has considered other evidence presented at the public hearing. NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the city of Rancho ® Cucamonga does resolve as follows: SECTION 1: The Planning Ccnsnission makes the following findings in regard to Tentative Tract No. 11915 and the Map thereof: (a) The tentative tract is consistent with the General Plan and specific plans; (b) The design or improvements of the tentative tract is consistent with the General Plan and specific plans; (c) The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed; (d) The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage and avoidable injury to humans and wildlife or their hebitat; (e) The tentative tract is not likely to cause serious public health problems; (f) The design of the tentative tract wili not conflict with any easement acquired by the public at large, now of record, for access through or use of the property within the proposed subdivision. E 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 dap No. 11915, a copy of which is attached hereto, is hereby approved subject to all of the following conditions and the attached Standard Conditions: PLANNING DIVISION 1. The conditions of approval for Planning Areas A & C of Tentative Tract 11915, as listed in Resolution 82 -27, shall not apply, and are superseded by the following conditions and attached conditions. 2. Dense landscaping and berming, including vines and thorny shrubs, shall be planted against all perimeter walls and fences. 3. Access to the Deer Creek Channel, as shown on the approved site plans, shall be provided is accordance with City Council Resolution No. 81 -93. Details shall be included in the final construction package to the satisfaction of the City Planner. 4. 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. 5. The townhcmes shall be provided with trees between garage doors to the satisfaction of the City Planner. 5. The townhomes shall include horizontal siding material on all ground floor end elevations. 7. The townho-mes shall be provided with planter boxes on upstairs windows per approved elevations. 8. The tow;ihome driveways shall be provided with textured paving crosswalks to the satisfaction of the City Planner. 9. The townhome project entrances shall be provided with security gates subject to approval by the Sheriff's Department and Foothill Fire District. 11 11 �J 11 Resolution no. Page 3 10. The zero lot line 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 an average of two fifteen gallon trees, in addition to street trees. The zero lot line homes shall be provided with return fencing between each unit. 11. The zero lot line homes shall provide a variety of elevation treatment distributed throughout the project. ENGINEERING DIVISION 12. Construction of off -site improvements beyond a phase boundary are required at the discretion of the City Enineer as needed for and shall be bonded for prior recordation c safety phase. 13. 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. 14. The following street improvements beyond the center lines of the following perimeter streets are required to the satisfaction of the City Engineer: a. Turner Avenue - Existing PCC pavement shall be removed and be replaced with asphalt concrete pavement of minimum 6 inches thick. This work subject will be to Development fees orotherereimb•i s rsement by the city. b. Arrow Highway and Center Street - Reconstruction or asphalt overlay of the existing pavement shall be required depending on the design to provide standard cross slope on the reconstructed street. 15. All streets within the zero lot line portion shall have a minimum of 50 -foot right -of -way and shall be dedicated to the City. 16. All drainage runoff from the project area west of Deer Creek shall be conveyed directly to the Deer Creek Channel through pipes or existing inlets an 26th Street. Resolution No. Page 4 17• Permits will be required from San Bernardino County Flood Control District to connect required storm drains to Deer Creek Channel. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 26TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 1983. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONCIA BY: 7e,7in7 SrOL U ly 1CiTma.. ATTEST: Secretary of t e ,anning ommission I, JACK LAM, Secretary of the Planning Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the fore Commission of the City of Rancho regularly introduced, passed, and adop;edf bregoing Resolution was duly and Cit of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting the Plannan on the 26th day of October, 9 Commission of the 1983, by the follewin the Planning Commission held AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: 9 e- to -wjt: 11 Z Lf d �O i d o � a q O.Li C_ _ c y o P C V O ° Q v�¢L 9 V 9 M �ga_pO eo✓ ° L v ^ V p y a� O M ✓= Q E N L °c °,✓ N C9 D °uo �✓+. 0 i = 0 0 v C V � O 6 S N 6 6 O No e -F M �J � a Q' C J O V V � quy ^ V C P� r ,- -d �v 9 b dMi C L � — O q N y Q9 '3 q6 u� L. ^ ° r ii_ No L d y N O O ✓ y C C O M p C Or ° y O � � a 9 ✓ V M C O 9 �S� r M O L ^ J oNad ^ 4 0• � d G�OJ 6 O e O vccc c a ao� c ci o � t. ^_ V . ... C ✓ O firms °o N C T ✓ O d Y � �r N V✓ Y N q"— � Y O w� � � Y L ✓� . v o o v q o .°i c q c a a o ^ V r r'90= ✓ ✓^ O T✓ d d L « — 9 « q q O. - o q NC✓ b bgyr � 922 q c.-rr^ L LN a a WE �C' N N42 C C O O O V O r 9 9 L S O 'JO N JtL V L p N_ i�var pa on di c p4° 9 J O E d Y Y✓ L y t✓ d V= C L O a y^ L d L 9✓ L b�L 6 O.Lp <J6V CNG H u N C cL J S 6y O O, O 2` r Y' s V 6 V �o= _ r w J < O 6 V < OJ J s =o c °u ^� 1 d d v P N r a c q (c Cl Js _ O J T> ✓_ a a 9 q9� y 07 L y J O ac 6 ^o ^ L M i P N C e� d C ' � V J a C uc L D c-JJa d ^ = y C NO N dl v d q✓ q r d ✓ N c aJ� c _ ✓ ' O N M O C p 2 N L� 6 q E P 9 N u F ^ y Qum co U U � 6 0.b L � 9 N o� O J 6 d O L O. O✓ c TOS i Y M s °r 6 J V q✓ C ✓ O p apy v vam y L M99 L9M � } V xoq f 6M d Q r e Ct _✓ aJ ✓ T P o -= Luc .co �O O^ q ✓ 6 T N�a ° V q c awo e 6 aPQ L 9 N J 9 9 V ^ L V V � V D u C `? N�l N� ; O Tae � us a �- 9 dc N Z d C Z m O d L t C dJ✓ O.O CC ^G(✓� NO O L g q V b J E C 9 9 �� N Q O L= �_ N wCd ^bye n966� _ L v - - ✓ r per✓ L'N EE G� p ✓ 9 _ 9E _ V O A Z =✓ r n 9 V O c L O L L G✓ ✓ L L V N J� O6 J 4 YE VCCCCCC O VO.Y rL � 6 F9 E .rI � C C ' S C d L v t we d C q °G e V 0 GO L � Y O d d C � 9 O G uq 9 c 0 w O > 00 P O C d a L ^ a ^ i N C r _ c N � O � O � O ,j x�y.l O ^ P« 9 d o° L L V Ada d 9 L c ^^ r r Z ° q J 6 C e M V N y C C E q� q =9> p FL NO \n� An 9 P p c eq O � og ° 4 1 C ^ r L ^ S� O >pG � V O 0 auce c� o � N N 'r a 9 L n N _ G N q C qo� Lo > y` o _ O P N N � O q N�6 > C 0 6 V ✓ y U U � 6 0.b L � 9 N o� O J 6 d O L O. O✓ c TOS i Y M s °r 6 J V q✓ C ✓ O p apy v vam y L M99 L9M � } V xoq f 6M d Q r e Ct _✓ aJ ✓ T P o -= Luc .co �O O^ q ✓ 6 T N�a ° V q c awo e 6 aPQ L 9 N J 9 9 V ^ L V V � V D u C `? N�l N� ; O Tae � us a �- 9 dc N Z d C Z m O d L t C dJ✓ O.O CC ^G(✓� NO O L g q V b J E C 9 9 �� N Q O L= �_ N wCd ^bye n966� _ L v - - ✓ r per✓ L'N EE G� p ✓ 9 _ 9E _ V O A Z =✓ r n 9 V O c L O L L G✓ ✓ L L V N J� O6 J 4 YE VCCCCCC O VO.Y rL � 6 F9 E .rI � C C ' S C d L v t we d C q °G e V 0 GO L � Y O d d C � 9 O G uq 9 c 0 w O > 00 P O C d a L ^ a ^ i N C r _ c N � O � O � O ,j x�y.l O ^ P« 9 d o° L L V Ada d 9 L c ^^ r r Z ° q J 6 C e M V N y C C E q� q =9> p FL NO \n� An 9 P p c eq O � og ° 4 1 C ^ r L ^ S� O >pG � V O 0 auce c� o � N N 'r a 9 L n N _ G N q C qo� Lo > y` o _ O P N N � O q N�6 > C 0 6 V ✓ y C ' S C d L v t we d C q °G e V 0 GO L � Y O d d C � 9 O G uq 9 c 0 w O > 00 P O C d a L ^ a ^ i N C r _ c N � O � O � O ,j x�y.l O ^ P« 9 d o° L L V Ada d 9 L c ^^ r r Z ° q J 6 C e M V N y C C E q� q =9> p FL NO \n� An 9 P p c eq O � og ° 4 1 C ^ r L ^ S� O >pG � V O 0 auce c� o � N N 'r a 9 L n N _ G N q C qo� Lo > y` o _ O P N N � O q N�6 > C 0 6 V ✓ y S,;2 % T y�LC TY riaTi q�C C� ` c � c mr n^i. Ea rae'• n L^�«QC o.°e y. i= Nn'Nao�ce � qdr rq [V_` G C� O 9 O� L Q -• � T g N O C N E« � l E� T r d 6 O> O° E✓« w.LC�C^ °rrgFr Cd n T ULV_ a utL e� O. Y ��« n L � I N N r r O L 9 O'✓ �'� q N .°w E odt.E «V o.^ ✓�e�O,>° ^ ot-�e r cw^ cc _qE S «i_d 6 «.r ^^ G°qi a^ ✓�q� dVA E� L y° i N G L 6 V O✓ V C U N [. e O C i N C « i L Y � �� .. 9` L T fj •rd C °qt ^ TC pd — •'-7 d : °GO °to L c ^"u r5y c « —•' GaG..`.. �i .... d'O cL _so. �� €wA o G O d q U E C i d m� E D A y orEN E�- a-r•�LG. o .�`aLe a�-Gr 9�Y S.a.wo� °O,yo �qc ,°.r c s _q - eG u w >a «c o°u" ✓N °s e° a €" o E a °LL Aw n N,L $' a °r D` esoL o .N ^g.,o g �n ^= E •� o0o ni °utc�y`o °o�jj.aar .Li,C AO �° O yJ CAL - rVd ^QCSE cA �d ° L�vr q l� j L yD ^.. L•C�N �u ,OC nD OL �.ri� 2-S .O dCC r °y NP O C F uN G�O�V r S�O� JL dY_ Ptf L��O\ OANV .� Om ddNd`d e�V «Y� _ G ✓ V C Y 4 m D V V L 9� Z N� �� 9 2 L N O V = 6 L^ 9 ^ U ° z L q NN. « O � N� E �_ � v �N« VAC N��� �L✓ a°i D r`A � L ii LNtDa OM iryC�d�ML^ C �N „`� N N y O L^ 0 0 L • � O C C Erb n0 6 6 pr 2 N ND «r -0 O ^ u L O ^ > G O V .O^ c A L i Y ^ t✓i V O r J C 9 L� d L 0 L C N 6 v ✓ m q L V m N _ yam' ri G y,Orp � u m�ai L Q Q i ✓^ N V A qJ d�.. >o y p0 r TW � DON Vr Ob 6-NC9 � D m 6d G �� D` Y O, r r '^• ✓ O q N w r. 4 e g O C E G r LV, Qdq O✓S en O`- 0=W= MICCWrdq LT 6• �IC �� x Y A «G p C ^ yC C � VV ^� L O PC.°. ^CJ N.D�OV rdCy J apC r �O qZ ayQ _r Nor Ca>SL' nCD d_ ✓N CV N_ f C'J e�6GV C C q ° r e O m � l 4 0✓ L O, C ° A V O« D_ V V M � d C C C V E° O C N 2 r P O r C L � .Ci. d r r r O N ✓ q M m C > F l N V � . N i 9CS P✓ '� d D S 7 r p W^ O V ^ O V rl 9 .qi U Or '+J, .' (�-ND NeA 6V CGV P^ Y Ce 66 «6V N— N 6�- Wr' ^r C S� t.. V E U 0 u P 9 G q q G i nu C 9 q o` N O• r A r r O A M O. N Q N n q O •+ P� r N l M ac G9 O� °q nL 9 e V £ N q G d A q a r O P O S b L l C i S _ d V A � M q G O 9 ^ q ^ C � V V V M +o A q P� c 7 E E C V £ ✓ T 4 aD P D ✓ � ^ NX r V d L r L N V e N V d` V i0 p L ^ N` c >L L a f V m � C L p+. •r v O S m 9 P V i v O N a M N u N P r i 0 q Q`L N W P 9 L q Q V N9 L ^ MqL A G V Z CAL A N S T > y y C n c G L 9 V V V r N dy6 � 0 T CC m 9 D < O _ � N O y C > � Y T r v L v o o i >+dV gL✓TL C N V G V � N rAJ P•N�l V �t A 6 L'q f C q q ` O N F G a d N N c i < q O V d C P P^ C pn Pi ✓cc N 6 v V n•°i r N u � Lbc> ^- nP r ✓ q „ N N G 4 � C^ V C O - C e VV. L C L u y L C C N _ O�✓gCO O YM•+ V G^ •S �J N c„i✓ O _ C T T y O puV� y V L l V C LV J✓ V L F•Ow ^V d d S A P E � ° y O d L J y � V Ow �� t. L A t � P r ` �v D. Q^ ^ C P A 4 V N q V q d 4 N 6 G > � j • V EE c aXi OJ Li0 Vr L y UN ✓ d ^ X M N 4 N V P ✓ C ^ A G N C V V q O A• t q U � V N N C^ Pq N V P H a d P C C V V M N 9^ ^ V C G W V wmiq V N Y N N U Z N v V T9 J O C C y e V T Aar ✓ ^ V A a N � d A A T �VD q ✓ ry id✓ Ara z V ✓ H O j V V 9 ✓ L j G ny' L E 6 q -✓ Y q p T M D q PO 4 q v C V Y y ^ A C J L E ^ n APL✓ 9 N S O C Or P� rLr � V A Ep N d p C L ^ c C Na 4q °6 d = G _ q ✓ ✓ 00 l]Z CD N M P O V" b n • ✓C � t ` C 03✓6N N CZ A 9_ T V M t O 4 C CTd 4 � 9 Q < ^ C O J N t O ^ ✓ d G dM V � Y O � b 9 d N N L D o O L 4 Y N O cQ o O'9 o b b v b Y Y r 9 Y°. q r O n a t d H Y PAC L O N 6 P > Fx N � V O 6 PP O _ N i rN N O C 6 P ^ r N O ✓ L Cy o F y Jp E L Opppi T Cg V O bq L C o °u n P V P t V 11 q V N CO 4 .a✓ .vv s c c c p E L✓o' �. p L N O O 7 ^ 6 LL Y ✓9T'N nP� Vm0 nc O V 67 • � c N S- S- A LoN 0- �D T✓ O C✓ D u O n V E O� G 0. N ^ W 9 A `o R H N O ✓c qb P C cn� � V MO yr r c 4PV�� r f V >q q J 9 VS L P✓ =pG Y _O C C A C C J � > n Tr O b L q T ^ n✓ J V O Orq S. m > 6C y d 9^ 6 Lr yC J L A C N✓ V Q M 9 C M 9 P A 0 U 0 u P 9 G q q G i nu C 9 q o` N O• r A r r O A M O. N Q N n q O •+ P� r N l M ac G9 O� °q nL 9 e V £ N q G d A q a r O P O S b L l C i S _ d V A � M q G O 9 ^ q ^ C � V V V M +o A q P� c 7 E E C V £ ✓ T 4 aD P D ✓ � ^ NX r V d L r L N V e N V d` V i0 p L ^ N` c >L L a f V m � C L p+. •r v O S m 9 P V i v O N a M N u N P r i 0 q Q`L N W P 9 L q Q V N9 L ^ MqL A G V Z CAL A N S T > y y C n c G L 9 V V V r N dy6 � 0 T CC m 9 D < O _ � N O y C > � Y T r v L v o o i >+dV gL✓TL C N V G V � N rAJ P•N�l V �t A 6 L'q f C q q ` O N F G a d N N c i < q O V d C P P^ C pn Pi ✓cc N 6 v V n•°i r N u � Lbc> ^- nP r ✓ q „ N N G 4 � C^ V C O - C e VV. L C L u y L C C N _ O�✓gCO O YM•+ V G^ •S �J N c„i✓ O _ C T T y O puV� y V L l V C LV J✓ V L F•Ow ^V d d S A P E � ° y O d L J y � V Ow �� t. L A t � P r ` �v D. Q^ ^ C P A 4 V N q V q d 4 N 6 G > � j • V EE c aXi OJ Li0 Vr L y UN ✓ d ^ X M N 4 N V P ✓ C ^ A G N C V V q O A• t q U � V N N C^ Pq N V P H a d P C C V V M N 9^ ^ V C G W V wmiq V N Y N N U Z N v V T9 J O C C y e V T Aar ✓ ^ V A a N � d A A T �VD q ✓ ry id✓ Ara z V ✓ H O j V V 9 ✓ L j G ny' L E 6 q -✓ Y q p T M D q PO 4 q v C V Y y ^ A C J L E ^ n APL✓ 9 N S O C Or P� rLr � V A Ep N d p C L ^ c C Na 4q °6 d = G _ q ✓ ✓ 00 l]Z CD N M P O V" b n • ✓C � t ` C 03✓6N N CZ A 9_ T V M t O 4 C CTd 4 � 9 Q < ^ C O J N t O ^ ✓ d G dM V � Y O � b 9 d N N L D o O L 4 Y N O cQ o O'9 o b b v b Y Y r 9 Y°. q r O n a t d H Y PAC L O N 6 P > Fx N � V O 6 PP O _ N i rN N O C 6 P ^ r N O ✓ L Cy o F y Jp E L Opppi T Cg V O bq L C o °u n cn �. m^ d q V� u t P t " O J • V C P O 4 s p LL PS4',N nP� Vm0 nc O V Md 6C0 +d N>'✓O�9iND0 L>t ° a ONNV O C✓ u V O n V E O� G 0. N ^ W 9 A `o R H N O P C cn� � V MO yr r c r A iP.` =eo ^ d^ L A W N V O m V y d 9^ 6 G> E^ J L A C N✓ V Q M 9 C M 9 P A 0 A V V L j ✓ q m g C « •• q 9 i V ^ G S p L Yxf GyE =� i G 0✓ L W C Z L V° m y j G Q O i y Y r N C V ^ q L O � r✓ J C ✓_ q S j� M � 9 i .-N O v V� N V NL O L f R1 V C� m P b N q✓ q✓ N P C N V` L X p 4 � L N 4 V• O m 4 Sq N rr.•. ^ N `oc G`6^ _ n ^�r y✓ - L ii�°.��✓`N'' °far O eb'. 'Oma °.°.M qt+ c ✓✓ LP L P 9 r q i M� F V °O n P O 9✓ G b �"' C� N F V N ^O O � l N N r 9 y• > O V C V L ^ � L O V� V a V aV'I G N d G N N O L L L L CNP E br'° N��✓ouL✓ q L b ^•....uuu .. J o N p f( Y M � L✓ C N C Wm OnSN� T M + 9 <M^ 6a <NSNVV 6 64 C p1 q+ NI � 1 I J� W cn y S PY -• =�VPC OLNa __ pp = ✓pl a Ln Q' L F C � C L y = N p 0 G f^ C = P q d C✓ G� 4✓ C d L � �� C a � _ C y r EaP = nN .` c c py ago u 6 y T p i u 9 -1; o O V a d O N •Q ��`6L d ` > JD apC p VpN v ^O LpDa Z luL ^ C �` P 9N Vy Eq q JqD 6-^O C C N + u �^ W 6 L% m N _ P a 2 l d O u O � C • A C b q �"� ✓ C `dd � `l O DU A� mA �` y�6 C` i• `P V 1r y �L. O,J Ld �d gVl��q� d0 uLa �p u L� qp Yi N^ y N b n J q �✓ G ✓✓.a_ ✓E n aI� a 60 ✓9 and ° °NCaN W� Ems^ K A Q O wa. E V p V A V Y E d uE A ^� t O g � 0 d C O 6 m CSI V Cq C ^= A a{7 nY V.L dOV NHTa ^OydV > � �! n_ Nn A PPN rV' Du D d O J �' �L _ ✓ ^pd A Lp N V A Y O y C � � Y L N Y ✓ J d d V�� .�" L •Ln ° -Np� aqD✓ n nN — mL aacvAO a� n.°. c.N. � °o` =d d� ` w mo ..c v2 ✓` N �pL� J �-� y O�C�� �_�n y� �•0 �A 9F q� �YL•l�` �� Li�6 NF WN �pLCV d y�SV JJ NV V� V •Q`O �A rnpC uO•-C T\r YATd a '5 a N •^ c �Y O Ecqa � p g N 0 L N� E 4 a r � 9� ✓� Q N V d P c pZ V y N d °\ O V L O S Y• L CA7d'L OCgyL L � O ^� 'N^CE •r qV ^JA AAA %O WVV �6 cT7626.L. VS PV 6VW0 6JnD\rN 6•� O N N OVD WN9 7 Y ✓ ^q off— d�N _ CLY _� --. 2 v q L Lc .d.. G e •° o cc V ^J C ✓� LAY N SOLD pd�6 I J 1°ye ` °CI' - i� G •• N _ yVW^ Cl°! Oq N` dL ^j N Y A� V y u ��\•'\ pE OW 7 C O5C N O 9 y C Ono An =V a a -0,- ' �... °q WyN oo Wrnq y c z_ c ais n � N O L� O`�C P r'` LO a0- y AEA SVI•" JL A E ^T• ^ ° V I N •Iii A �I•°r ✓ S� N Ia Ny _ .� c � ma_T"• c o _� r c ^�.o NSW d ��AA s' '� Ay qv` Nnd u^ s a c Lrn `C I qVd ^LpV V� 2 q A ✓ a!-\ N� q _ C O' V N� n C L C A N V y ' � p0 Nd td `may L C PL ` VV yN__ NNZO Z Vd.� O SO?AL NN ^tea VC r T_ TO✓ 1 O O N\ P E •.r ml s- SI °� ed� 6n 1 C✓ Vk�y dC tiG OL L l �i � YL.•UWL a C y \v_1T _ _ • V _ N ` I • N's u x 11 `I �. J nk Q Z Y V 0 i d E E O V L J N J C r .e. "• E aY -fi . c e �- - �cce O• DgYV`,O a 0 3 0. y q O y y L u ^tea O N 9 q C d �p Y a... .JnV PDm J W J i c N Y d 4 O LAY ICY E J PN t uge.^i. ac - O- L N x Lo, v o, v N d v aJ„ c � J O N q ct Y A W � G 9 � Y y ox v - .d N N O W O C Y C-' 6 L .N•o� c Di W I D o � � P - O �P P w CLLyD ^ L L dam• V M p y Q 1 •c J jI k F . � p O ('o 0 qC 4 E r N cv P N J N J_ O-' 6 N d N C n 9 O•� N d p Y V 9 d z. 9 J D � 6 O, G 9 N L q G L V Y C- L L D n -o o•eo A L °c iE L �. a L cN °� :e boNO O° pa o L p J N O e 01 L y V c .u_1 O.Y _ O O r p C - Y 0 Y.. QECryE• yy N � i.v= Y N ad Fye oq= c ��` NuMdE d mY d N j C L q Y A 0 0 q a e•v � wp.. V l V a � y L •� 'a i ms o_ W L 6'.•+GrL• L O. <V GA SCL O V L J N J C r .e. "• E aY -fi . c e �- - �cce O• DgYV`,O a 0 3 0. y q O y y L u ^tea O N 9 q C d �p Y a... .JnV PDm J W J i c N Y d 4 O LAY ICY E J PN t uge.^i. ac - O- L N x Lo, v o, v N d v aJ„ c � J O N q ct Y A W � G 9 � Y y ox v - .d N N O W O C Y C-' 6 L P V d Y Y t 9 r C E 40.1 n N O SUE P O N y OLm rA.•m. l�iY a0 Y O��Q qE� d m O -�s V L N o D L N G 9 q d 9 g a n y N t m O b 0 m Y V 6 P J^ L L Lp O - PNVm aa• S�Ti� F 0 mPCY Li• G PD P q C ``:J L✓ 0 W � W b 0 dx. oq o od DJ � m D a` cL. .. vLi. •' L a ^_ J Y Jd 0�L TY� L^ m^ d LMC.Or y C Y� -dJ NdVVT bO vC� r A L L m Y Y _ N q C C Pq�CO .^ CNCNb O O VNdt�P Y- d� �L YO.�t` VCT edeY C y ,•,mL p�NG �E Om,O�C L� b d V,C d e cot, u V ^ N N N m o F q` L� �• N O O -. p .2 M b C ^ O Y G N L d E= d d N{ O O d O C 0 rL• - 9 C O m q Y C 9 V � V ^ m _ y` a L p <. ^ L C P� P O L P P G O rmi C: O _ N _ J O L D C 02 c 2 �, y L J C m C ^ a L V L Sul i V J VON (q L7 00 ^E -L .rmDD QOVVO Pm Q n D V 9 V %xIx x `x' u �/� �c � W i m �IXI�iX V V' N I�� �I t L L Y E t V J - C - O O L N fi 4 G � V- S a V 7 T yt D 6• V -d 6 ^ c �1 m L III m. =I W J �i 3 N 1 P r O O O Q O O O b v "79 e E m a A m ONa T V Oy O o O EC G P O e 0 v V C 0 P O y J T L O Q N bW V C v C C p q 4 � a e 9 � C m O N ` T r � u L f Y O b � �^ r V � O O v O t 4 Y L m i N ^ Y Y m V A m� O L m p L l c� m L L o V L 9 d R p q y 6 N V D P �^ L7 € W I D o � � P - x ^ I ON V M p y Q 1 •c J jI k F u W ('o 0 4 E r N cv P N J N J_ O-' 6 P V d Y Y t 9 r C E 40.1 n N O SUE P O N y OLm rA.•m. l�iY a0 Y O��Q qE� d m O -�s V L N o D L N G 9 q d 9 g a n y N t m O b 0 m Y V 6 P J^ L L Lp O - PNVm aa• S�Ti� F 0 mPCY Li• G PD P q C ``:J L✓ 0 W � W b 0 dx. oq o od DJ � m D a` cL. .. vLi. •' L a ^_ J Y Jd 0�L TY� L^ m^ d LMC.Or y C Y� -dJ NdVVT bO vC� r A L L m Y Y _ N q C C Pq�CO .^ CNCNb O O VNdt�P Y- d� �L YO.�t` VCT edeY C y ,•,mL p�NG �E Om,O�C L� b d V,C d e cot, u V ^ N N N m o F q` L� �• N O O -. p .2 M b C ^ O Y G N L d E= d d N{ O O d O C 0 rL• - 9 C O m q Y C 9 V � V ^ m _ y` a L p <. ^ L C P� P O L P P G O rmi C: O _ N _ J O L D C 02 c 2 �, y L J C m C ^ a L V L Sul i V J VON (q L7 00 ^E -L .rmDD QOVVO Pm Q n D V 9 V %xIx x `x' u �/� �c � W i m �IXI�iX V V' N I�� �I t L L Y E t V J - C - O O L N fi 4 G � V- S a V 7 T yt D 6• V -d 6 ^ c �1 m L III m. =I W J �i 3 N 1 P r O O O Q O O O b v "79 e E m a A m ONa T V Oy O o O EC G P O e 0 v V C 0 P O y J T L O Q N bW V C v C C p q 4 � a e 9 � C m O N ` T r � u L f Y O b � �^ r V � O O v O t 4 Y L m i N ^ Y Y m V A m� O L m p L l c� m L L o V L 9 d R p q y 6 N V D P �^ L7 C F :• a d ° A p p q � Z �• p ^ O q p N D L C J q w ^orb � q d C � C � O . O d C l L E L •n t V c �l a ^ p0� O nn O qy ✓d p Qi C •r C �• Y� p• G O _ •O oW � d4� ^Y q� aN cq0`' q OY q Ou at WT 6L O d °a.q O p N D r •L. 0 c p L e t Y° Y ^ C a r N T � 2 o Z 9 Z- DO iA C- M✓�t •Li• r L a r P ✓ p �_ C O a 40 r G V •GO 'y c O i c p d u N o q ¢ o c o w r ~ N °o rn�e °vL qo av W �� 6 p y� O C p C Y p N V Y a 9 ✓ Q� V- ^ V L L v F �✓n .V i— F� �p �• N n V 10 y^ m O, O p r a w a L G r 0 • 2 Na a c i p L A c+W 0 O c u T L d d L u = T p N G C ^ c� � o V C r � O 9 L q d rn i a Yo O. N� _T a aN 9 ciH V E✓ aO M� � yI� Nd N��a L ooa yY �:�o Ld.. s `oaar° u °L r °✓ a O � NL 'VO q YC°q T Ti ^ Gam` ^_ M CC WE >,L ^t HV G !✓� 6 Vr N OVL G r N q L N N r i = c'L ✓D c c'nLe a'rot 1 O` PDr qN2 d ✓rn C ,✓i••=n 4 ! rCp P•qi, 111 O i Oy ` •n r �• NoN4ZE p O r02 d d > O r 6Y 7qL YCiG^ < W �> y..•T y LC GN6p•°i N 1 ^i nN✓ •CC WE cc ✓W r0 q C O T YpN >• ��. p YO C O '�C O>,GN Zay NV �✓ O ✓ na ✓ � Y w V q� q Oi.^ N` ✓ a p' L O a Cr T Y g L z G G nu oso rq.• y o.�,`v" L c4_ c Q r ✓ e q g T O b K J E t q T „ L a` � £ v —:ear qup _ 'u � v •+ �4 '°° va - u L oe^ oe c^ PNC cuii fd `c' rN °„>a d yC Uy_ pN q ON Ni V rn iL-T N� 6 l`p �VVLL� «T qV L Pa -�✓ J c r nL C G N L i - P p r N q p V ^ G V V O Y^ 6 N✓ G C cc J a q V 6 N C£ N q p L � y C� ° r I] q O y L E N L C D✓ u 6 K GN O nay a a.e �•<� cq^ acted a` • =G� �� nL .T,° u i �C y ✓ n V p ^✓ O C O N n d P� N V� � •Tp l q •T• V C V• l� 'C ^ W ✓= N !`y �d�P ydlG y`d Vry � r „T lLC C CV l�W �N L Lr+u ✓ dG nGr �L 47 �dW V '^ F Nr �V E n V NpW C�" Q✓ NO ✓O NNV 6•r✓ 6V n� W ✓N V d O 'a 9 O v p q G C p 4 G S d N L ^ u a• V i �a q o L O.^ a E r P 0 tq u q � p J Q ^ p V a O r M p O 6 D m t4 N y Y a s' n l va a �o O V p 4 C N L V N O O p V P „ C G pLa e — ✓ q q N r C N ac V Q r_ u °o f ,O 0 z Y U CL) •n 0 L d E 11 P U P T i d 9 V 9 L� d N ^ 9 C P 9 d T d W 9 d N E 4 H G J d L ^ O V L Q G O W A Y N q O d d G ^ c c y •L+- p T ^ � p� uP W�E pp oV W. w0. N Dy o is `a n C° E° N• .W. a� p N A G L A d M .� ^ • ryry t.a q.5:w 6 N- \4 \I 1 1 ul\I c T� O� A nV M L V G �S v r.. c q�l ZY V 9 yj Opt G ` O V � a c u C q S T N O d V -o 1 qG d _ O L C � PO y °JG O L l L a J ~a V Oq .0 J ^ l l N V O 1 ov_ ca 0 p J U a \1 1 0 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: October 26, 1983 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner BY: Dan Coleman, Associate Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRUNmtNIAL TENTATIVE TRACT 2386 - TAC - A change o zone from A- L'imite A ricu ture to R -3 /PD (Multiple F,-nily townhomesaan 14.3eacrreseof' land) generally elocatedPnwest o` Vineyard, north of Arrow - APN 207- 211 -16. Related File: Tract 11144 - TAC I, PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action Requested: To change the zoning from A -1 to R -3 /P:) and approval of the site plan, elevations, and subdivision map S. Purpose: Development of 54 townhomes C. Location: West of Vineyard, north of Arrow (Exhibit "A`-) D. Parcel Size: 4.3 acres E. Existing_ A -1 (Limited Agriculture) F. Existing Land Use: Vacant G. Project Density: 12.5 du /ac 4. Surroundinci Land Use and Zoning: North - Vacant; A- South - Townhomes; R -3 /PD East - Vacant; R -1 West - Cucamonga Channel; A -1 I. General Plan Desi nations: roJect Ite - Me iun Re 15 dential (4 -14 du /ac) North - Medium Residential South - Medium Residential East - Medium Residential West - Flood Control Corridor ITEM M PLANNING COMMISSION PD 83 -04 /TT 12386 - October 26, 1983 Page 2 STAFF REPORT TAC J. Site Characteristics: The site consists of large man -made berms as a result of the Cucamonga Channel excavation and slopes gradually to the south; no existing structures or vegetation other than native grasses. K. Applicable Regulations: R -3 and Planned Development combining districts permits townhomes; no minimum lot size; 1.8 spaces per two bedroom unit and 2 spaces per three bedroom unit plus visitor parking. II. ANALYSIS: A. General: This project is an extension of the approved Tract 44 that is currently under construction on the we-IL eiOe of Vineyard Avenue. The proposed units are identical to those under construction. The loop circulation system established by Tract 11144 will he continued throughout the proposed project. In addition, the open space corridor will be continued into the prope:ed project as shown on Exhibit "D ". The grading concept will "balance" the site by using soil from cutting existing berms to create stepped building pads. E. Design Review Committee: The Design Review Committee reviewed this project and to t that the project desigr is consistent with the existing project. The committee recommended approval subject to providing a usable open lawn area next to the pool. It was recommended that this be accomplished by pulling sidewalks and landscaping to the edge of the open space ;.rea directly south of the pool. C. Growth Management Committee: The Committee recommended approval based upon provisions for reciprocal access easements with Tract 11144 and joint maintenance of all common areas and infrastructures through CC &R's with Tract 11144. D. Grading Committee: The Committee reviewed the conceptual grading plan and recommended approval of the grading and drainage concept which directs water to catch basins connected to a storm drain that drains into Cucamonga Channel. Slopes must not exceed 2:1 and the final grading plan shall include a hydrology study for the off -site drainage area to the north. E. Environmental Review: Part I of the Initial Study has been completed by the applicant and is attached for your review and consideration. Staff has completed Part II of the Environmental Assessment and found no significant impacts on the environment as a result of this project. E E is PLANNING COMMISSION PO 83 -04 /TT 12386 - October 26, 1483 Page 3 C STAFF REPORT TAC III. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: This project is consistent with the General Plan an oning Or finance. Tie project will not be detrimental to adjacent properties or cause significant adverse environmental impacts. In addition, the proposed use, building design, and site plan, together with the recommended conditions of approval are in compliance with applicable provisions of the Zoning 3rdinance and City standards. IV. CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised in The Daily Report as a public hearing item and notices sent to property owners within 300 feet of the project site. To date, no correspondence has been received either for or against this project. Y. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the planning Ca- mission cons- era material and elements of this project. If after such consideration the Commission can support the facts for finding and conditions of approval, adoption of the attached Resolutions and issuance of a Negative Declaration would be appropriate. RespgtVfully submitted, YZI ` Rick Gomez City4Pianner lI2G:DC:;;r Attachments: 11 Exhibit "A" - Exhibit "B" - Exhibit "C" - Exhibit "D" - Exhibit "E" - Exhibit "F" - Exhibit "G" - Exhibit "H" - Initial Study Resolution of Location. Map Subdivision Map Sipe Plan Landscape Plan Grading Plan Elevations Floor Plans Site Utilization Part I Approval with Conditions .,Y. nun■ ' f u O NORTH CITY OF .. .. ��1 i�f• �.1 �L lay& -.�. . SCALD i3. T f U [ r [ . .J L., I D f. M 1 •i i!ij1,tl'a'1 f I• � 'n'' �1 Ll - t i t t TF t ; I 1 t�I � 1 i • �� lr e �1 � `RN �hl� ���� �hV _ I` n =; it r' t•: 0! 'j. A T1 . L4 .,W. is C *0 Y n V � '. •rr� aiS�Lft t t J TY4 X ���n k -ki w r.C• � 5 %i LY��a+• '• •ta. Y J , � w iSv�^ •n[ �� t R � - W�1v 1 a - P112i'•Ly F. � ♦. s r. p r y -f -f uisj I 1� r O •`-\ S6 i w 1 A i Wit,�.J 9 7IN,v �+ F::T c �._ •_�� " N B• i U i� t ^-- ,[,�'�• i� `11{ 4t \m1 �� �li.ifr` /_..:�nn�1.�:�f~� M�..Lu�ti '��7�:`Y1:A`�,. �•Ti1lMi` �, /l�,f q yr` ..� Y. � ♦ I I Y � r 1 + �' 1`I'��f pr U= MM G NORM oz TTI CITY OF -IT 7r RANCHO :.ter .. •• 1 ' is i %zsi? ` .t i E 11 V 2 Jr br 0 CITY OF (� RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING DIVLS! N 1 ITEXI- TITLE: _� r EXHIBIT= tf t t i I ;5 �z 0 i 3 Qcc Y . �Y} F �z 0 3 Qcc Y It :! s .. Ld i U) G�� •Ge.{�l ��t = �6 �• � L i C W _ i LLS -cum A 11 Ii v L i i U G�� •Ge.{�l ��t = �6 �• � L i C W _ i LLS -cum A 11 Ii v L i I. is ® CITy OF R;^NCH0 CUCAMONGA INITIAL STUDY E PART I - PROJECT INFORMATION SHEET - To be completed by applicant Environmental Assessment Review Fee: $87.00 For all projects requiring environmental review, this form must be completed and submitted to the Development Review Committee through the depar` =en} 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 p,.Iblic meeting at which time the project is to be heard. The Committee will make one of three determinations: 1) The project will have no signi- ficant environmental 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 informa- tion concerning the proposed project. PROJECT TITLE: .47FJC*4 t,4ex'Dd"s IL APPLICANT ' -S NAME, ADDRESS, A T�ELFPHO�E'cA- NAi`1E, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE OF PERSON TO BE CONCERNING THIS PROJECT:_ Tom. a � LOCATION OF PROJECT ;STREET ADDRESS AND ASSESSOR PARCEL NO.) �[u3E`�]►'(� AYE' It,�Tt -� �C 1►- iZis�GV� t"}°�- LIST OTHER PERMITS NECESSARY FROM LOCAL, REGIONAL, STATE 'N.D FEDERAL AGENCIES AND THE AGENCY ISSUING SUCH PERMITS: - J�o•�E I -1 PROJECT DESCRT_ ?TION E ACREAGE OF PROJECT AREA AND SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED BUILDINGS, IF ANY: j�eeTtk"� W SXts'Cit��_f3�tt�e►aCi DESCRIBE THE ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING OF THE PROJECT SITE NCLUDING INFO VINTTON ON TOPOGRAp1jy, PLANTS (TREES), ANIMALS, ANY CULTURP_L, HISTORICAL OR SCENIC ASPECTS, USE OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES, AND THE DESCRIPTION OF ANY EXISTING STRUCTURES AND THEIR USE (ATTACH NECES£ARY SHEETS) Is the project of cumulative may as a whole !b part of a larger project, one of a series actions, which although individually small, have significant environmental impact? I -2 i 11 ® WILL THIS PROJECT: YES NO E Create a substantial -hange in ground contour,.? 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 r•r general plan designations? 5. Remove any existing trees? How many? 6. Create the need for use or disposal of -- potentially hazardous materials such as toxic substances, flannnables or explosives? Explanation of any YES answers above: 6 La IMPORTANT: if the project involves the construction of residential units, complete the form on the next pace. 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 knowedge and belief. I further understand that additional- info- rmation. may be required to be sub 'tted before an adequate evaluation can be made by the Devel nt Review o- ,=ittee. Datee- 24 -e3 signature Tit'_es 1-3 RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION PHASE I PHASE 2 PHASE 3 1. Number of single family units: 2. Number of multiple s� family units: 3. Date proposed to bogin constriction: 4. Earliest date of occupancy: Model n and 4 of Tentative 5. Bedrooms Price Range - -c. 4, -M.900 c m_ PHASE 4 TOTAL 11 1-4 0 The following information should be provided to the Citv of Raacho Cucamong Planning Division in order to aid in assessing the ability of the school district to accommodate the proposed residential development. gV-%Cr !a. Name of Developer and Tentative Tract No.: Specific Location of Project: VJC'4i'mF Vc"C -If' PHASE I PHASE 2 PHASE 3 1. Number of single family units: 2. Number of multiple s� family units: 3. Date proposed to bogin constriction: 4. Earliest date of occupancy: Model n and 4 of Tentative 5. Bedrooms Price Range - -c. 4, -M.900 c m_ PHASE 4 TOTAL 11 1-4 0 RESOLUTIGN NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF PLANNED DEVELOPMENT NO. 83 -04 REQUESTING A CHANGE Ill THE ZONING FROM .7 -1 TO R -3 /PD FOR 4.3 ACRES, LOCATED WEST OF VINEYARD, NORTH OF ARROW - APN 207 - 211 -16 WHEREAS, un the gtt day of September, 1983, 1�n application was filed and accepted on the above - described project; and WHEREAS, on the 26th cay of October, 1983, the Planning Commission held a duly advertised public hearing pursuant to Section 65854 of the California Government Code. SECTION 1: The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission has made the following findings- 1. That the subject property is suitable for the uses permitted in the propo =3d zone in terms of access, size, and compatibility with existing land use in the surrounding area. 2. That the proposed Zone Change would not have significant impact on the environment nor the surrounding propert;es. 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 not create a significant adverse impact on the environment and recommends to City Council the issuance of a Negative Declaration on October 26, 1983. 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 o. Rancho Cucamonga hereby recommends approval on the 26th day of October, 1983, Planned Development No. 83 -04. 2. The Planning Commission hereby recenvnends that the City Council approve and adopt Planned Development No. 83 -04. 3. That a Certified Copy of this Resolution and related material hereby adopted by the Planning Commission shall be forwarded to the City Council. Resoluticis No. Page 2 4. All Donditiors of Approval applicable to tentative Tract °:o. 12336 shall apply to this Planned Development. A- PROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 261H DAY OF OCTOBER, 1983. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY Dennis L. Stout, Chairman ATTEST: ecretary o tthe Planning Coinrission I, JACK LAM, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the Cit; of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the pity of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 26th day of October, 1963, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: .DES: COMUSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: El E PJ 11 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION Or THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALTFORNIA, CONDITIONALLY APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP N0. 12385 WHEREAS, Tentative Tract Map No. 12386, hereinafter "Map" submitted by TAC Development Corporation, applicant, for the purpose of subdividing the real property situatP_d in the City of Rancho Cucamnnga, County of San Bernardino, State `of California, describe land subdivist of V6 Vineyard and development of 54 ,.o+. -ft— es Mn fortpublic h into action on October 26th, a Planning Commission 26th, 1983; and WHEREAS, the City Planer has to all conditions set forth in the reports; and recommended approval of the Map subject Engineering and Planning Division's WHEREAS, the Planning Commission Engineering and Planning_ Division's reports presented at the public hearing. Co mission of the City of Rancho has read and ccnsidered the and has considered other evidence NOW, THEREFORE, the Planing Cucamonga does reso�ve as follows: The Planning Commission makes the following findings in Tract No. 12386 and the Map thereof- SECTION 1: regard to Tentative (a) The tentative tract is consistent with the General Plan and specific plans; (b) The design or improvements of the tentative tract is consistent with the General Plan and specific plans; (c) The site is physically suitable for the tyke of development prnoosed; (d) The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage and avr.idable injury to humans and wildlife or their habitat; (e) The tentative tract is not likely to cause serious publi;_ health problems; (f) The design of the tentative tract will not con'lict with any easement acquired by the public at to ge, 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 _reate adverse impacts on the environment and a Negative Declaration is issued. SECTION 2: Tentative Tract Map No. 12386, a copy of which is attached ereeto, is h:reby approved subject to all of the following conditions and the attached Standard Conditions: PLANNING DIVISION 1. Construct gated access to regional trail along Cucamonga Channel and obtain any necessary approvals or permits from San Bernardino County Flood Control District. 2. Provide colored concrete pavement in all visitor -,drking areas consistent with Tract 11144 to the satisfaction of the City Planner. 3. Construct overhead trellis /lattice to shade al'a trash enclosures. Details shall be included in construction drawings. 4. Sidewalks and landscaping to the south of the pool shall be pulled back adjacent to the townhomes to create a usable lawn area. ENGINEL•RING DIVISION 5. A reciprocal access easement deed between this project and Tract 11144 shall be recorded by a separate instrument concurrent with the re..w ration of the map. 6. The CUR`s of Tract 11144 shall be revised to incorporate provisions for joint mair.:enance of common roads, drives, parking areas and drainage structures and shall be recorded concurrent with the map. 7. All private drives shall be constructed per City standard and to the satisfaction of the b:JIding official. 8. Slopes shall not exceed 2:1. gradient. A hydrology study shall be submitted fer the contributory off - site drainage area to the north prio.• to issuance of grading permit. E E J E Resolution No. Page 3 APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 26TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 1983. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CL'C.kMONGA BY: Dennis L. `„.out, Chairradn ATTEST - ecretary P anning omv ssion I, JACK LAM, Secretary of the Planning Commis °ion of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foreaoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, gas_:ed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of F. -ho Cucamonga, at a .•eguldr meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 26th day of October, 1.33, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: 0 ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: E 0 n. S O OS Y v OS G 6 0 ^ a 6 p6� V VS 6 .OJ W O d97 dd 6E TP V L L C Dnq r q •� O V r VV CO V QO VL D W_ uCD N•.] V L O V 9 9> 4� do 00� .E � -9n Vyc C• rrC ~ V /V Oa V / VLF- nr L_ dNy.0 T= —m ^q •�M LJCC C � NI 9 L qun �J Qq n � � � D � G V d O C` C E O • 6 ^ ^ P L N V L o` N C M NL T N q � q d v u q u 9 J•N ! U 7 V q � ^ N D -` u.•OG O �_ u C Q O ` y r/. V N qY O> n P C 6 V N q V ^ a C s u T J i• G Z Vq V q nN 'a �• Y=. ant PYV .. .N OC �JJ L Oc yWa V F� d ••o T- � ^4 cqa� <� o2 don ^9 WjL JC C dLi dqr L G Ol 'Si q a n EnE .Da i • E Z Y d S N C.2 _ -Z n^ P O •� .di. O T C 0 0 � O L O q O L> y= O V _ VgCJ V q r D'TU V9 j ` L ^ OPN O V aq NLo e�q � E NO c gQw WI d�G G $D pp �O i r!n q> NOUN V Out• CYrD G 7 ZLr• O d /O` d• � ^/fV� Flrf 9C Mc N S C�C y C d O C 4 �• C r _ M` J sVr OL Or r NZN /GO�V+ My �C�t+',� =C6 ^ °_ ^rL Oru a L07 q ` OC ZjY. VO O'i^, p N V G H S C 9 G V N d l •�� •"• =� � � .di• Z^ r n E- x d _ aNN `F N_ P uy_9d rV` rGNN M'00 CVL t g Ny°� r •O qy q Vine QQ 6` O q� J�y�r Nip �O„ Z-- ry "4CO �'Z O PV C V9�N V �L -9 /..� •O V5 G V N O CE�• V V6O'O pO C I-OC J� n 8Z O L ^ V • N J° NC Y V rG� ^y O` E N/ N 9 J e J OOV E 9 q C> P G Ld qVd NL...60C Gy PVC O.i.rf% C °i n 9DN9 N VS�G N G _JTO O V N •J Vdr VO•• w p^ O C C q P P P y E .� np •O V D E L v p r G C a L 9 � N L 9 N v e Q rc- q V 0 ^ T q= r V �• ._•� G 6r 6 L d d 6 ^' L m 6 D H 6 N H 6 H L N O < Z.:: o V p O 4 m G u m q 4 TI It 1 I 1 I 0 n. S O OS Y v OS G 6 0 ^ a 6 p6� V VS 6 .OJ W O rl CC Dnq D Dd r VV CO W_ V L L 18V V L O V 9 9> y1 V ~ V /V Oa V / XiV iC pyE !�g o` `NN q d qo G q`eea -` Vn� =" YC•♦ VJq 6]t N VV ay � VLG -N V O VEa e? �pL nN 'a �• S• ant PYV =>O° .N OC �JJ C < J L a N N G E -F £ o. c gQw WI d�G G $D pp L V r!n q> /O` VOC€ ^/fV� Flrf 9C Mc N S C�C y C d O C 4 �• C r _ M` J sVr OL Or r CCL /GO�V+ My �C�t+',� =C6 N_ d - `F � C rl `J rl `— y C ^PU - O V L bl ^yC P' •ui� - 0 0 yCLVYr✓VLN V ECO O dP I + A r N a u r G d G u V w� q N V✓ c ib z f �✓ ✓E�4 u i � L •_ u _ ✓b..n�✓L+ ory 'C N- bd �/+ Y C O O V, o •J A V O O O y q- L n L� U q O n � n r `S C u •- L -- _ d C n- •' A F✓ A C d p N nV� q9 LOS LN ✓V n V 0 ^ V ✓� ��qw.0 U L O 90uq F O =✓ E N^ •n V p 4 - E` V O- V m �_ s O V O Y 9 d c V O• Zu d -n._ v -� -_ •�q �O A� q r •qN OLV 4✓ �..• a u �ELd 6dLVV TOOVAOC b:2 �ia n_p_ i n Vu C'�^Gp L a:5 C V n M��r 'gyp 9Lj r V TOd ut d. ° qb _ L L c O CCC 6 •� � a^ V l V+ n b?-> d V O d 9C b E H A C V p - ✓ C n O✓., .O.r pLNl� q r -O- � -��N r w0 J T✓ i ' C b d I b` 6 u J?✓ Q o V `o g✓,_iN+. c L a V q oGy .e c � i u. c „ycsLL c� —N ✓CO 3E Our✓ cdLLC �d'� a.✓rx —J Cd_L�b, -EV�eN "G oc.� ^ p0 Y AE � ✓._rLL z qo no '° c G .� bAr+` L O y G C o - L a ✓ t o y 0 0 Cr V .. d crp ✓ L r= o o n q r - u`F rtM r NO CO > q N EOUr��6 9 . r> w E_ 6L 'y � 9 ✓ZG d uN L n0 qL .VV L+ q a P g O - ✓ r O L i 0U ' C S V C N q L V q . 0 O „ O` ✓ L 6PV E 0 E > O r V E VNyn d wV .. 9 P A O. O qV � O P O^ LOC t VC+r d�L�J�.. OLr ogb'3 V �O✓ C Aq 6= '✓ aE y Cu g/u✓ ONj• 2J LN.V•N � qod OTC, •^•tn . - -. .a OO+CN�T ✓oC dl. O��N VOA N7Ln COa r J r CFnL 6CLgC N C� -55V0 N tea- V.0 c�a �i6 ICJ qV rC y6UaT nLCS� -�a .y✓ ^^ VN LOL NL �L G q�ggw O c d V V q l- VP Vr Y_ J d. q C U' ✓ qU0 q q L ` LO_gV Y - -d -9 c'� •..• OaV� N LyL�rn .r ^ N C C A _ __ _ N •r py O �� O L M d G Y A O n✓ � N { V E TN = \u nLf r C � O �S `� >'a > ✓CO¢EON 9 L�VC�A OLL OVL • T� L•.• O�O� r P V J V V C d W O C � V✓ P },y T d b L C= O y q✓ b r✓ V V V � p N✓ r u 6 - C a a > P QZ C� C P d C V Gy{,+- 0.� -q u Co u uaa•< ✓E O NVZ O J L r c c �O i• N N�� -N..�O �•Ji•y L.GOLLZWOC�02 �•JnL i�0r =r` �LVO L� r`a _N J' 'J O V L •i F•Oi� �C 6Er6 �L[OiOi 6n n -Zw"o NS r 6rV 6VZ AZ^ g °'L <C!•n Jl cl O dT C- 9 �S -�~ aCOV V<NUCOC ar CA�.T•L L � r C Vr qss r yV•.' C n � A O C C i O L L j f -”- V O J V tr ✓ q O q O Z d o L b _ _ O d O O C N C✓ V q V a _ NAT Q V ZVT d- N C q w• - ✓M -O ^O Ou ZL VrOO N V L JV LOO 6✓ ✓ V -E OLO Lq LC✓ c aq V CA> Y C ° r O L EcN q� -coan o.. �V 9 WLCA LE✓ y - -L SO S i �a P c NO o bo �n ..QE �w p✓� M>jgN $a$a o � � +� °w C q b� d a y �� p L G N O q � M Y ✓ Q •ai• L N N ✓ q � L C N` � O O V 0> V l O S N O L y C i y ✓ y � C N �> w y � � Q y y N� N � n V q >,- qE NCO -j0 C 9Nd N¢Cq •' r L 9w V Z LL L r SO _O _ On qW qOq V 'Tp 6NCq S] a 6C C L> y V r b 0' O � v C L r LV. 10 L d A= j .> > P L ✓- O q N d O C 6 q r .✓ G O A G L m V > O L O 'u L£ Y M i q= C .S•' V N V 6L Y _ o. G Z• u AE yS Jn ✓ Cd L9Pb Li G Oti C L C Cyy _TV y r �r t G y V✓ C 6� d- S N S .� f ✓ C V r T O L 0 C r O i a V O u L E ✓✓ O '• A 7 W49 S O C O L „O 6' S= V n Z V ✓�� nO Oi N✓ Cr ingq o P O o N vEio. C` V C C N - N✓ Z POC T'O Vr O"-9 NA CPC d6. C 2L- �Q�O LC Vp 9 � OC >VC LOLL ql AAi�Y C?�L r CC O' C O O q l_V O. -VJC AC9i0 NC =�yG CQZy y= ad '5;= VAV dCU L q y �iJ? �J�M � LL �� V'CNggq�A CdA�'nT 06�L OJ N G CLL q Nuru C CiLLO =A` NBC v. q V - >n �✓ `.r LQV >00 NC NOA. >_ � -,c SC, -.r u0 r rZ p L.`.9 •mob N Nu >y CA LV VO TH_ ��`C C O•- O i0 y� 9 q CQUCV CA CO nv0 00_ V <ar Ot+ CnO N� O O �O VL C G VdP q �O 4V_ ^n TO.V OV YV G qa0•- O Y- C^ TV C 'C at C P g V V L S] L - 7 N N O LL V N OC = • E N r 6 r r T> 6 d A U d_ b u V G C C d N d no c.L•c`+- � Y ce t✓ C"I . C C <6✓6V N- v 6+L V -� 9 C L; `J rl `— M • S m G i ain p °i M V p N I �Y >+ V L i „ St G .O d° iVrL�S yq CV q � • L�.Ces S7U ✓Fr G �J�✓y S T6 N� VNSL YC •diG rV y C L•O/ gEOV Oti ^emu Oq 0'O O _.- l V y ^ ✓✓ d S - r ^� a l mr VrSC NO p w ✓ _ ^^u,�F qP mom✓ r Qi N q N q •�' O V TS - r C !i n W y V✓ d d SS m6 E m D y CL LV TiOn 9V V o 4p i`r - jy _OPN d. �C� C ✓_9 nL C•6 i y✓�L > 'VU ✓ q H C S n qV L G y a Q j� V ^ L' 9 V - C✓ Cq SL 9q �6!J 'i ^ iVyS T �YN °JV u d �SV 2 S� E q •O�qa L L Gj� r 4•] PV V 0p C O L- P aC^ C 6C V d G' C p O NO .Ln td CV L ^DEC y 7 q V � ALY� p"n� 9L Cq�✓ ? N q > r' q O 6 � N ^ p S> � C 2 N V V g N V i O u 9¢ q P� ✓ G C e L w � Y• O ° >+•- L. � U y V y M� C O C c F a N V� SV O.L•tl> VS^ Tye ��q y FSm 40N �� Pr -a0 m �✓ P 9 =m OC Pq SC V �yCVq` CNy CpL 9U L� Vi CC • Y:^ ✓f.^ Jv� m` w 9✓TC 9NN ^6 C3S^ E^ Tr TdV PC10. S= C��'fmP nwJTP CqG - O U q✓ -> V -S C� �NV aNC qy! N✓ NOL V�Y Cp9 O yT ^ _ �. 66m Ou r LfVq r t mOmoi rNa p „c °'r �tE� V^ N q SN 6V�06 6v ram Vy N ^' •NU ` Iz VgVS V•u.✓i Pi � pmgdV G O _ e N V_6Qy i p L ✓ C O y V C ✓ pre S!+.' � O VN O M T d L V CON ✓T t L O. O p- O S i y D ✓ x y p N G V V_ q l ✓D O C y E O O � P d •- � C y L Or ° Uy �- MG SyC� P=�N�i VN PVS C O L L d O+p r q n^ E U L .� ✓ P� V S y G r m O ' a W dnc V ° e✓ Cdr �� a }r_TOO =� =�' -�. l q V ^ 4 q v P U T ) N M> C y ✓ LpE O i � S r 0 e ✓ N P q � D C r g C C� 3 P i O N � C V- Pr N�� L qS ✓r p��L grvN•YC > m V.o -6 r w q C N✓ E y 9 Wq •r d � P �S Y {'} E N^ l C E t g 9 G o q q a lVC P i Nr0 CJL OJCSs -� > ^CTLp =OU•� nq nM p w'ia J✓ m ✓d OC i <pa Lq �4'i= OV yViOCV EE p tr - L Py LH1 P Oi q y VC ° O Ey • 6 �C ✓t Cn9 OL>N! ✓ F G jy NNa✓ C Ly V •"�GC� y9d -°�C � °V yc� L 3� 6L �FJ� Cp °iiCj � `��V i N ✓` O i d .O N - i T O S O l G L C g q O L P S a C V u r a C V Q p r N^ J 6 _ _ pp V Qr p N° °' N k gJV�cN�r dE c q V .a NN N N nq r -iC `�� ✓t V q VZ SL OO F-. q g Jq q _ •'n> p r ihhV N G✓ w qyy n m q'° ° �E W� -v W.;L o a✓ p0• ..�° r da No p t[ ° j M •Li. ✓Orl G�`V �� LL�PL ✓W°'d p E1E yySOPt✓S l9 `pmM mg I QG� = ` N G q° 3PO = C P V d ✓� E E U � N N� VL - y Y q � � N � rr �i V N N •n `- Lrq Jv oii° ��•r.•dy,G rq >o -OCmc W q i "• piaP n LlV VN `yr me. »rou =imp = - ...�Ldue - -✓,. L✓ G✓ t.D 4 N T N V V = 6V g N pry 6 >`O rq G. ry y ;, .y Iz W M LVL VP qd iP P dPd r 09 Cad r L J C N ✓ V L q q q ✓ T a p U r ^✓ P^ c � E N u P vJ. r Q .LL L G 9 O k- � i C d V ^ C� y E 0 d L = q N O O C J d « 0 A N ^ d Y O Q d�L6U COLE O a� yA pq U72 a np OqC Z L • � P 9M a E y 9D J pJT „�C ✓ C O L� l" J q O'Q NO T M V N ✓ q _ N n -,;7 Cy= q 9^ q = m == = P p A D J9Y T...r ..� pN C ^ qD O � PL V � Y d .n p' 9r. r ^✓ N P qr d � d 5q r a-' q o° 9n ✓� ✓.+L�c c erY «uc r Eq �w `.c+Pa..Jir o n er L d D t p O.r E Y C r q V ✓ E d F T 9 n g G 6 Y O f _ r pC Nm :g V q )9 E W 9Q aV)6Pq� dL dOV Pu > 9^ u 6 py S]✓ D� `= R r ` q✓ a V LL J �✓^ 6 � N ^ L r C 6r q J p� 9 ' ✓ A O�° p d J Y Q L ^� V i 6 p M O 9 Dr ✓«� Q•CC J^ ✓P N` N✓ .^ CU N� YN Oq �^�� FTnY L u �` at LV�V ^O ✓Y �Or^« y� ✓d d69 � w as .N C� Y` N L. 6� 6r q✓ y L Eg � nr ^o y w C. dTp CCq a c aaN< � `J" To vi q OC^ a. -.J.p rO OO Sq O� LAY °rV q gLP6 r.�'. N « ^� s ✓ vow ^ c NE VN .7w ^a c �N �o �a,v o- Iry .c d° Qie noc q O 7 OmN LV P� Pw9 .O..cq>rP 9 `� VdP PLN P'✓ �N rrVa�^✓ ^_ PY °�= � d` N LL � V E e ✓ 9 N � � P^ � � C r r^ q P. Yd. qM r0✓ «O4 O LNr G d L� r�0 Nppd aC q`9�Nd bra t , 4 n 9 r d - y Oa u EEO p JpDLLN 65 Z. N 16VD Wtiq WVV �p tJ�pi <� N� Z";M.n c9c � 9 —D u ^oi ^c9 •� 2 °i vL q� ow- v oiy ✓E. IH °otD aee° q d d .r � a rr r � Y.✓ O Z C r ,r MLL9 d 6'6q ^ � OVCyES Y al "O. P l q ry -r✓ir y( y P7� « ° N q n pJVr V C O ^` Cp r0 1�• T^ 6� •d O 1{Lea OL qaL aE9 p� p� r°r Y°.�N u VPy ✓ P ✓�� VVV O O a C C 9 E i N O p D O O C O N S 9 C C pr' Q i q N� ` ✓ N� q V' d � g C r 6 Y O E ^ Y > ^� 6 w` a y r � V Ll ... t✓ LL D V C� O a t y \ \ar1 N` G Q i C e L 3 r C � t 9 3 C_ T r P� O V O✓ ^ 9O GN O� .�� C YC NJW ^• yq M a I r e 9 N O_ L U a q L✓ E^ V d � r t C V a T V N J q 9 J l V 6 9 t r rr ✓ q O V L a D v L G 9 a Y Q P i L S a daLL 9 t NG r. ✓L O Lrmi TO ✓C9 L�^ OC C OO LL W ^ NN .•� qi ^V2T 4'. VV PNO gCiO $ O 9� 5 ° � a q✓ N .. a L 9 d� m � cLa qn °Qr� ✓ sm coo L�ooi c y > pp6 a ylo a_% �� W rOp Op ^_ �•ed g I 1 I cT FyI tao ^d 6I 69 VI rr6LL WCZ 6dYV YL-1 rR pu 4 t -S LLN6 N� vl I"VWL V ^I a1i OI � m S 11 0 * L-1 Cl A L C .+ � T L O r O.+q P^ L O r G o O C .' Y ••• � G`e NjNC C p LVE yr SCE rTC LCLIf °r'e ��r p•MC J9� Ln a �nvwo dM°a bN•`do` YE >. T Fi 7 d^ q� nyP ✓r � ^t`�v a. t+O L i q AyYp _ T= pp O _ q O C L q > D l�.• N M �C!O < Y i b °^ C T r i q r "t; V ^ C Z 09 N y an L 6 r p� `G q� � }' v b y N O W C L n t V D V N • ✓ V L •` N q E v c wc.eo L q c Q N ^O CCO L L b ry O Ps <V V 9` V D 6 C 1•. V cOyn �b ..- ^9D0 N �dn Nr _ 0• N N✓ ° N �C Q � O >< V V O � Q Ep�yq i � A F 6 e b E r 6�L^ D P F Ap` I i'a b C <7 <• E == `� P4 �a CD �V _ 9 tqn� C� •'q>F� dr.e °c .°rr cV-'o c.,, E I rQSc ^JL N ^Oq� L�u q�p ^f CY•tF, gPO�CLC 6I �< �• r a C .V.VL C �j . q24 GNgrE .tn� NV d?•a s— Dlb �b �a mac@ � >op � d Pm pb O^ •na 1 VCq ✓n N•+r V< � de L6N O V L r U^ r 9 C N N V Y 1 NgwLO �4^ ie nmvi ✓iru Pp<p NN L I -j e T y NYOV+ P Vf NN 6oYYO Aq O� �yf �r q > ViNUG ^'O a9 C ^Q O 6� � � r q p Y c Y -! • N� N� G� ^(iE E <_•J� L` n'O cLJi� J <� vtM E` cE VO•`aWd OIL C ^JV WI J �^ 6 q 1 1 6' ✓ 6 Y n 6 V �. 6 •C L O L iiDO M I •a N¢ L 4L ^ W Cl C O • m m r q q O y y C q9 q q la G U c P C e P C e N C r J C C C C � O N V .e C y q q N L Y q u r s u 4 b � y V ^ L v` O L Q L L y V Z _ e O Y q TIC S ° q - ` r O b L n d E n i <b nN VC P� fI L[) A L C .+ � T L O r O.+q P^ L O r G o O C .' Y ••• � G`e NjNC C p LVE yr SCE rTC LCLIf °r'e ��r p•MC J9� Ln a �nvwo dM°a bN•`do` YE >. T Fi 7 d^ q� nyP ✓r � ^t`�v a. t+O L i q AyYp _ T= pp O _ q O C L q > D l�.• N M �C!O b °^ C T r i q r "t; V ^ C C `G q� b g E,-2 n n O G v c wc.eo N G 0• N N✓ ° N �C Q � O >< V V O � Q Ep�yq i � A F 6 e b r 6�L^ qr_ �19L•TW EN b �✓r N� �V D 9 tqn� C� Pr \. � Nq O.pV•bn� ^JL N ^Oq� L�u q�p ^f CY•tF, gPO�CLC 6I �< �• r a C .V.VL C �j . q24 GNgrE .tn� NV MPi q -' d O C �• C . Y 22- O V L r U^ r 9 C N N V Y C L �Tq nmvi Np y•J�•TA'v !3 �;e^ ^ O� V•r - i e T as NYOV+ 6y qo Gn -E ^i L p 6oYYO Aq O� �yf �r q C O q p Y c N� N� G� I E <_•J� SI WI J C O • m m r q q O y y C q9 q q la G U c P C e P C e N C r J C C C C � O N V .e C y q q N L Y q u r s u 4 b � y V ^ L v` O L Q L L y V Z _ e O Y q TIC S ° q - ` r O b L n d E n i <b nN VC P� fI L[) Z s.l U Qi 'r9 i C =cd Nd Ny�rb cry �b d b LLdda� .+ o cA o✓ o q✓ _ L L C __ d V y L •q+ O L V O � J L V O� L L Sc a� L L �� p 9 0 � ✓ i m � N � V O C d C N a O Od p1 ~ � �? `� t L a ✓N P�� v d.�N L N� L C w`p 09 �e 9 a , •Vi a°i r S . V I ✓ 6 L C A Iyr ✓ T I I ° V Nqp` O NS !y l.Mj o =�Q o q vA� w Gd SOW L � °� '� V .2 qan✓ > O a w ! ,C/,7gAc CV p✓ ✓yi t _ yi w K25 p� °old we `c c +6v✓ N d •� O N L✓ T 2 L- G= V C✓ ✓ L S Z C d q ° g V V q ^ G L Y ` p O 9 I a p e C I I r N yC G A F L N y O d Pl � ? J O C L �Wp6= A L6 LG 9 ✓� - ✓w y dPN f E V O q ✓Sw � s� x O L w`•• � Pi L O V E L� J Ajy .O.r V �� �✓ q v NN✓ 0 V V L. y� N pd { I y -q _ LO` 6 C C ✓L I1{ J C-0 g b C y t d y I I VN uy �_ 4 N✓ � ��V LP di L • N t G C= N� y d � O. E C 1 _ ry S L C w L a A. ° L M b L E ✓ L N N d V d L E P V E r O •r Y L P G q W ° F r c e N � O • i 9 E L d C E .[ �� N y oLw pLO'� c d iq„ caa ✓b =�i a =o` Fi o_ni �n �� E O G v� b q� � 4(_ L W 6 V V L • V C O. G Q= V y�G S C r e _SP L _ _ OCd p Ec C L. 1• �= � O D q � p W �. G d �` V� � G d � P C N C � N QV 1 ydP C yC SYd a_ L _N ✓ q T _✓ q N L i P °CAP q6 C � ` N L C q SST Nu `� ✓d C d- 7 N d O °LO A V � JO.7^ wuW d i N W ✓ Acyq C `° �� 9 L FA C� ✓ c � e._>. ima .. Ma. �.. ��•m° LLB _'^ _.T. ✓ — �iv�._T. IE L LM ^' ✓✓ Gr p O Y"V G 6_ N I� N O✓ O N N V 6 V✓ O ,� W✓Nty l'V o L � q G� V Cd! A C • n C W �= C P q .• L A Q My O • P ` .°� C '. C pP O G� C I �v O N V L I �NJ r� 6 NO rC � r' � L L✓ t. b •I c L m P a� =cd Nd Ny�rb cry �b d b LLdda� �• w q P O V N L L Sc a� L L �� p 9 0 � ✓ i m � N � V O C d C N a O Od p1 ~ � �? `� t L a ✓N P�� v d.�N L N� L C w`p 09 �e � N a°i co >ONy . «ap ✓ P� .✓ Iyr Nqp` NS !y l.Mj o =�Q d _c vA� w Gd SOW L � °� '� V .2 qan✓ > O a w ! ,C/,7gAc CV p✓ ✓yi t •b"L yi w K25 p� °old we `c c +6v✓ N d •� O N L✓ T 2 L- G= V C✓ N N T V _' q ^ G L j 4 S a Zo p e Pl C L �Wp6= ��� L6 LG 9 ✓� � ✓w y dPN f E V O q ✓Sw � s� x O L w`•• � Pi L O V E Lp !� �� q e u V C N .O.r V �� �✓ q aTi � q p 0 V V N d Od _ LO` 6 w C ✓L I1{ p i _. 2 t d y O V� q V . C �_ 4 N✓ � ✓ � • N t G C= N� y d � O. E C 1 _ ry S L C w L a A. ° L M b L E ✓ L N N d V d L E P V E r O •r Y L P G q W ° F r c e N � O • i 9 E L d C E .[ �� N y oLw pLO'� c d iq„ caa ✓b =�i a =o` Fi o_ni �n �� E O G v� b q� � 4(_ L W 6 V V L • V C O. G Q= V y�G S C r e _SP L _ _ OCd TL O� Ec C V V Ny O „ q p C p a L V •r T V P g y L G y^ G d N 6 V� � G d °P QV ydP C yC SYd NU�•�J P °CAP aW � SST Nu `P ✓d C CV✓L Vl O I L- �Ld SLa JO.7^ wuW _W W ✓ Acyq pp^ tpJ �� t,J FA Wa•�c �c c � e._>. ima .. Ma. �.. ��•m° LLB _'^ _.T. �r — �iv�._T. IE LM ✓✓ Gr Y"V 6MV N6WS� Q u N O✓ O N N V 6 V✓ !•V 6� W✓Nty l'V al C a2 o N 9 L n v i N 2 N a �v � c C q V O ✓ V C N r V •.• y C V � N ✓ C f �d O ` - 6 ^ aN aO � C • A Nq V- A iM T� ✓ C N jN be O C A za sa ^I �i ,& r C i 0 Z u U O O L CL 11 �J T� O� O ~ o O T 49 C p LV M E r C V r�O�G' N9 WJ dr Cam° � rC d d6 H9 Lca t'•9 9I d �9 �e L4r T= O r 0 Z 9 66 �r 1 6JULl �-V pJ prN Gra � {r 0. 6 • • s T� E E 11 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF R,FF®R,T DATE: October 26, 1983 10: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner By: Frank -wreck —,an, Assista "'t Planner si!BJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 11997 - LAt000 - A custom of rest entia su ivision of 19 lofs on r . e the southeast corner of HillsidelRoad andzBeryloStreeto� of land in the R-20 000 APN 1061- 6 ?1 -01. I. PPOJECT AND SITE O_ESCR_ I_ PTION: A. Action Requested: The applicant is requesting &aproval of a tentative tract map for the above- described project. B. Purpose: To create 19 single family lots C. Location: Southeast corner rf Hillside Road and Beryl Street D. Parcel Size: 9.75 acres E. Existing Zoning: R- 1- 20,000, Single FWi1Y Residential F. Existi iq Land UJ 6: Vaunt parcel G. Surroundinq Land Use and Zoninq: Res ia., zoned R- 1-20,000 North South a - Vacant amiQ Parcel, en zoned R- 1- 20,00 R -1- 20,000 East - Single Family Residential, zoned West - Vacant parcel, zoned R- 1- 20,000 H. General Plan Desi nations: ro;,ect ite - Very Low Residential, less than 2 du/ac- North - Very Low Residential, less than 2 du /ac Souti, - Very Low Residential, less than 2 du /ac East - Flood Control Corridor West - Heritage Park I. Site Characteristics: The project site consists o` a 9.75 acre panto use as a vineyard. The site slopes uniso �niy from north to south at approximately an 8 percent 9,zde. Presently there are no exiting structures located on the site. ITEM: N PLANNING COKMISSION STAFF REPORT Tentative Tract 11597 /Landco October 20, 1983 Page 2 II. ANALYSIS• A. General: The applicant is requesting review and approval for the— %evelopment of a 19 lot single family res'.dential subdivision of 9.75 acres of land located at the southeast corner of Beryl and Hillside Streets (Exhibit "A "1. The project has been submitted as a custom lot /tract subdirisia,n, thus precise dwelling unit locations or designs are not required. However, should the applicant decide to develop this tract, precise designs will be required to be approved by the Design Review Committee and Planning Commission.. Presently, the project as proposed indicates that all lot sizes are a uniform 20,000 square feet (Exhibit "B "). Project density equates to 1.95 dwelling units per acre. General Plan density (Very Low) allows foi a maximum density of less than two dwelling units per acre_ Access to the project will be provided 1 "a Eastwood Avenue which extends sout:i :rly into the tract from diilside Road. In acdition, various lots fronting the western portion of the site (facing the proposed Heritage Park) will gain ;:.Cess via Beryl Street. B. Design Review Committee: The Design Review Committee was genera. y pleased with the subdivision design and indicated that the present front -on lot configuration adjacent to Beryl Street is preferred over other configurations. Staff still has some concern over the subdivision design and would like to make them known to the Commission. Although the overall lot orientation and st.-eet design is satisfactory, there is no variation in lot size or width. In the past, the Commission has tried to achieve some variations in tract subdivisions in order to dilute the "tract look ". The lots c'ong Beryl Street are the same width, 92.6 feet, ana just bare'y 20,000 square feet in area. This tract design has provided the absolute maximum number of lots that could be created in this zone and as a result the rural and non -tract look intended for this area of town is not achieved. Staff recommends that the Commission give serious consideration to requesting the applicant to modify the design to incorporate more lot width variations and sizes. this w0U16 most likely result in the loss of one lot. ; the Commission moves in this direction, we would recommend continuance to the following meeting to allow the resubmission of the revised design prior to approval. 11 1 E PLANNING CI, :JLMISSION STAFF REPORT Tentative Tract 11997 /Landco October 25, 1983 Page 3 C. Deveto ment Rev'iea Coke, +ittee: The Devel^prnent Review Committee was primarily concerne with slope protection and recommended that slope protection and channeiized improvements be required :jntiquouS to lots 14, 15, and 15 in order to assure flood control protection. In addition, the Development Review Conmittee recommended the installation of full street improvements along Beryl Street, Hillside Road, and tF,a rawly created Eastwood Avenue - Improvements will include curbs, gutters, pavement, drive approaches, and landscaping where appropriate. D. Growth Mana ement Committee: The project as been reviewed by } e Growti Management omam ttee and has been assessed a total of 35.7 points ender the Residential Assessment System, tthe exceedinc the threshold limit and can be considered by Planning Commission for apprcvai. E. Trains Committee: The Trails Comemi� tee has reviewed the tentatiL;e sub ivision map and recommended ",,at the z0 -foot equestrian trail a:;jazent to the southerly property line be will allow for extended to Beryl Street. This action (1) increased police surveillance, a:id (2) equestrian accessibility to the future eques�-ri-+- oriented park (Heritage Park) located to the west. F. Gradln L;;mmittee: Due to the nature of the project, a custoT of /tract suo ivision,, grading will be minimal consisting primarily of street grading. Dwelling un ;,:s wit'i related 5uild;ng pads will not be provided with this development. The Grading Committee approved the conc ^ptual grading Elan subject to approval c€ a fine; grad -ng plan and ail -equirements for custom lot subdivisions. G. Environmental Review: Part I of the Initial Study has bz2n completed by the applicant. Staff completed the Environmental Cz2eckiist and found no significant adverse environmental imp„cts related to the development of the proposed subdivision. If the Cc,rrnission conrurs with these findings, issuance of a Negative Declaration would be appropriate. IV. CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised for public hearing and environmental review in The Daily Report nee°spaper, the preperty posted, and notices were sent to property o mers within 300 feet of the project site. To date, ro correspondence has been eceived either for or against the project. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Tentative Tract 11997 /Landco October 26, 1933 Page 4 V. RECOMMENDATION: it is recommended that the Plannirg Commission con uct a -public hearing to consider public input and elements of the project. If after such consideration the Commission concurs with the findings and conditions of approval as recommended, adoption of the attached Resolution with conditions would be appropriate. RespWc fully submitted, Rick c City Planner RG:FD:jr Attachments: Exhibit "A" - EXhibit "B" - Exhibit "C° - Initial Study, Resolution of Location Map Site Plan Grading Plan Part I Approval 11 0 �J �� \�i'r 1 *ali � jI V I R •- b � r, I frc[/�/ Ifll,�� 4" ? wGRFnevlr '� R�I� // • `�M' I � `s �J/ � � 1 �� .Cn• aaw i rav)r 0 alrNr nrCr /JD / � , I la COJ rin< /lr CpJI�P'R' V rR�N O , =l ICrrC/M l4NNl � ' I a Q � a \ o / NORTH CITY OF rm%l: RAI\CW CLCAN'IO\GA Tm F: PLANNING DjTvMQN EXHIBIT- f=- SCALE= LJ .I pQi r r V. •v6 Yi�O 1 Y.l. 3 ,GZ�O? Y ht I I :' 1 � tVOC�DO XJK I r NORTH CITY OF RANCHO CUC,AMONGA TrTU PLANNING DID rb9aN EXHIBIT- SCALE- CITY OF I,�\CHO CUCA,NIO \'GA PL.AI` NL'G MISk7N +C V `\ C A EXHIBIT- _ ' SCALE- � c CITY OF RADICHO CUCAMONGA INITIAL STUDY PART 1 INFORI�ATION 1 completed by Review Fee 0 Environmental Assessment For all projects requiring environmental review, this form must be completed and submitted to the Development Review Committee through the department where the project application is made. Upon receipt of this application, the Environmental Analysis staff will prepare Part II of the Initial Study. The Development Review Committee will meet and take action no later than ten (10) days before the public meeting at which time the project is to be heard. The Corenittee will make one of three determinations: 1) The project will have no signi- ficant environmental 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 on repinforma- ort L should be s'pplied by the applicant giving tion concerning the proposed project. T PROJECT TITLE: Tentative Tract 119P7 0 APPLICANT'S NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE: Landco Deveio ^meat. Inc. 150 South E1 MQU110, a NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE OF PERSON TO BE CONTACTED noire= CONCERNING THIS PROJECT: Frank Williams of Assoc t 3=6 East a ' TA 91764 (^ 191 s�'Q LOCATION OF PROJECT (STREET ADDRESS AND ASSESSOR PARCEL NO.) Southeast corner Bervl ;venue and Hillside Road APN 1051 -621 -01 LIST OTHER PERMITS NECESSARY FROM LOCAL, REGION -i1I., STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES AND THE AGENCY ISSUING SUCH PERMITS: nivsion f u 1 FS ate. W '` °— " ei F; rP P hI� reno r hy_�lif ec d 'on system v Z by Cucaaon a County Water District an i ma a di oosal system anrroval by rho � ra na ri¢g,QL' 1 W -te_r O a i v Control Soar3. I -1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 0 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: p'viaion of r',�Z4a? °rry =nto 19 residual •i Go ri rom hon<in� v to r,e�r ACREAGE OF PROJECT AREA A20, SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED BUILDINGS, IF ANY: Project area 9.75 AC .0 r h sold for custom lot develoom nt. No structures are Provo < -.ed at this ti me. DESCFIB^ THE ENVIRONMENT-kL SETTING OF THE PROJECT SITE INCLUDING INFOF.MATION ON TOPOGRAPHY, PLANTS (TREES), PANIMALS, ANY CULTURAL, HISTORICAL OR SCENIC ASPECTS, USE OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES, AND THE DESCRIPTION OF ANY EXISTING STRU_TURES AND THEIR USE (ATTACH NECESSARY SHEETS) The•ProDerry in '- li ' - "'- - - ___ from north to sou.'.h at : 7% – 8% rade. There are no existin structures on the >ite. ronerty is bounded on the north by single family residential The on the east by an umim roved`flood ^Qn'}�c channel, heDemenstflooducontroln and Beryl Street. ---7-77-77=7777;7 7� Is the project part of a -arger project, one of a sem-Jes, of cumulative actions; which although individually s may as a whole have significant enviro..mental impact? 910. 0 HWA E 11 WILL THIS YES 210 X 1. Create a substantial change in ground -- —' contours? X 2. Create a substantial change in existing noise or vibration? X 3. Create a substantial change in demand for municipal services (police, fire, water, sewage, etc.) ? X 4. Create changes in the existing zoning or -- general plan designations? X 5. Remove any existing trees? How many?. X 6. Create the need for use or disposal of potentially hazardous materials such as toxic substances, flammables or explosives? Explanation of any YES answers above: Ih ,pORT�?+T: If the project involves the construction of residential units: complete the farm 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 aTeyurther understandtthat additionaly knowledge and belief. information may be required to be submitted before an adequate evaluation can be made by the Development Review Committee. a1Date �Li Signature d Title 1-3 RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION The following information should be provided to the City of Rancho Cucamong Planning Division in crder to aid in assessing the ability of the school district to accommodate the proposed residential development. Name of Developer and Tentative Tract No.: Specific Location of Project: 1. Number of single family units: 2. Number of multiple family units: 3. Pate proposed to begin construction: 4. Earliest date of occupancy: Model y and n of 5. 3edrooss Tentative Price Range PHASE I PHASE 2 PHASE 3 PHASE 4 TOTIT I -4 E 11 Ll E. RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, CONDITIONALLY APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 11997 WHEREAS, Tentative Tract Map No. 11997, hereinafter "Map" submitted by Landco Development, applicant, for the purpose of subdividing the real property situated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino, State of California, described as a custom lot residential subdivision into 19 lots, regularly case before the Planning Commission for public hearing and action on October 26, 1983; and WHEREAS, the City Planner has recommended approval of the Map subject to all conditions set forth in the Engineering and Planning Division's reports; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has read and considered the Engineering and Planning Division's reports and has considered other evidence presented at the public hearing. NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does resolve as follows: SECTION 1: The Planning Commission makes the following findings in regard to Tentat a Tract No. 11997 and the Map thereof: (a) The tentative tract is consistent with the General ?'an and specific plans; (b) The design or improvements of the tentative tract is consistent with the General Plan and specific plans; (c) The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed; (d) The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage and avoidable injury to humans and wildlife or their habitat; (e) The tentative tract is not public health problems; (f) The design of the tentative with any easement acquired now of record, for access property within the proposes (g) That this project will the environment and issued. likely to cause serious tract will not conflict by the public at large, through or use of the subdivision. not create adverse impacts on a Negative Declaration is Resolution No. Page 2 SECTION 2: Tentative Tract Map No. 11997, a copy of which is attached ere to, is hereby approved subject to all of the following condit:ans and the attached Standard Conditions: PLANNING DIVISION 1. The 101 equestrian trail and drainage easement (south property line) shall be extended to Beryl Street for the purpose of equestrian access and police protection purnr_.ses. ENGINEERING DIVISION 2. Adequate slope protection and /or channelized improvements will be required along the easterly property line to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and County Flood Control. 3. All lots facing Beryl Street are required to have hammerhead or circular type driveways. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 26TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 1983. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Dennis L. Stout, Chairman ATTEST: _ Secretary of the Planning Commission 1, JACK LAM, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and ad,;pted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 26th day of October, 1983, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: CCMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: E Ll 0 O O O - O rz b V e i 6 0 7. u H �t O W m 6 V „ ` O r a d 0 C V J d_ y C O C as D q L N ^_ P V — oc v i �a �N C ^ y 8 n� T c C V C E E 6 N N 6 a O 1 UG C V O V V N r oy S No Y > N n � a �C« dL LO � V G°• L J O 9 y O• A L9N Y — d J A G d L N� r � o_ n c ✓ 9 q�j O d G d q q «TP O « c � -c b O- A r G w N T � a ^ c. u n cN> d J o aAn aPq � Y 4 d ^ = J L y 9 N C L O y ~ c va> V Aa N 0. �i APO q C y N r J � a 7 O N V as d >^ V � L •YOy a V A V ^ Y O V J « L V G V N L l O C •Ln C N A P A > G- Mr r L ° �•i O✓d N9 �- P— 9P�� r C d �v ��� qL0 L A G 9A C L d O �•'^ ✓ J � ` n 4� r ` q Cv r O 6` V Vy L L r ib O>.d ✓ ""c A niE r O � N. � A G= C O • C« T Q Pc OF YAW NAl dwEN C'VC i yd0 J '.aa Z �JC vcgw° .6r qD `02. Qvd .n u,GQ _ s yrn C Y N O CC9 9 C C O A r T V�J4 J E 'O `DEL — ^G a ^6 •=i•✓ d�> dT^ a �w •rl rcJ V —A i a a..°..T.y A` V Oq�•rC yn d26 C�p4.l a?y An ^6N O >l4 `qC n�� VV VYV o� r J C � •N+ c � _ • r nL Plt •t >O EE q? pq � „O A N� r• V A = p O P P ` ti NvN _ A N �- ° _ ^ �� nom.✓ G' v LOd p N :W5 — C2 L N L N a N R M C p r O q V O C r ^ C LnPC OCyJ 6 ^O o`�n O «Cd Py�a l9 ^M d •L a O.� .OA \. ap0 L —OO C9N NOC JO« NyjL —AV CF ^� J>•n— C C J O P >• V y G 'O r • N A Y a S] ^ —O •L.• c� E LL N •L.• y o T N E a 2 C ^ G d 6 O t d .�. •` VG np0� N ON�6 � NO O O �^ S� G PP V10 « off.` qLd! �� � y ✓�- V ^CC r 6<LT - ✓ h C N %' �°.+°eyG °E•O ^a ^ � n` l0p qd �"- 6 OLn 6 6V LNG a' <.`e •`a A 6N� O 60AO7 G Va ^ V C r� > �.. M C G F, S eV C d O L CTMV C m P O 4 y V GCNq � —.W «CVV OC O O O - O rz b V e i 6 0 7. u H �t O W m 6 V „ ` O r a d 0 C V J d_ y C O C as D q L N ^_ P V — oc v i �a �N C ^ y 8 n� T c C V C E E 6 N N 6 a O 1 UG C V O V V N r oy S No Y > N n � a �C« dL LO � V G°• L J O 9 y O• A L9N Y — d J A G d L N� r � o_ n c ✓ 9 q�j O d G d q q «TP O « c � -c b O- A r G w N T � a ^ c. u n cN> d J o aAn aPq � Y 4 d ^ = J L y 9 N C L O y ~ c va> V Aa N 0. �i APO q C y N r J � a 7 O N V as d >^ V � L •YOy a V A V ^ Y O V J « L V G V N L l O C •Ln C N A P A > G- Mr r L ° �•i N. I O•�� d C t q� G 9A L L d O �•'^ �L y L n 4� r «py Cv r O 6` Vy L L r ib O>.d ✓ ""c A niE .6r LO _ ry«� 6dY C N O CC9 Z C C O A r T J E y✓ O a �w war• i a z �Li yn Zo L V �•..i C✓ VJ6 n�� VV VYV o� r J C � •N+ c � _ • r nL Plt •t >O EE q? pq � „O A N� r• V A = p O P P ` ti n•°+ _ A N O S C d` N N :W5 C2 i C CCO F y �! 6<LT O•Nn0 ✓ h C N %' AO ^a m A O V V ✓ O y ^ V C r� > �.. M C G F, S eV C d O L CTMV C V O 4 y V GCNq —.W «CVV OC ^� N✓^ L V J O Vy C yJ 9 N V py�I EI > q F' Cp C q P C V O L C O L O L N N N iO y C ' �i ti y I O Q N. C Z y U CI L: d A o ^o m �E cc..•° -" q u• q N V G E C r L r r °' d O C L - � N� N ✓a. C G <, C 0 C O �u ` y Y?� O N a� ✓. p .°NO O .r V 0 O f N G 9 iJ J N - •�� y+L ` a �" °wc n- NVFrnc� � O n u .7Z ° N V E � V u L - L N N Y Or�VVOVO -�L ° r_ u •.� Sq_ '.� uu_ t u •O.r 06��VV ^V 1 _ °s,2 C <V Gq FuJC �n� u.P✓.�� � -O.gr9 •V T' �O ° . Y °:J `<u ✓7 EC °✓arL'G -l•U OIL - iO C ^Arr EEN�oV V a•�c � o c._r c ra a r tEaa ^o ooc 'u :eN orai ^cr r r^ os } N C O. c f`orNa V' u Y G N- C L r <- u v �j 6. V 9 l L L G Q V ✓di ac'f •°w '� <.+° � a -- .L. .:.- ^E'M •r i.G °nL ^N•� �d °rU °2,<aO D WODU L Fca U°` O'Z eUTA n C ^CG Chu ✓MO�O•Q,VV SAC O ^V VVw.OE._G P Y �� N L aGV „dNC V __6L T C° O. u J u d C W d r > C O. L t ..s N o r rj q u A A O O� • N_ c°TOi o J C a c G qPL C E Go Q -Z:5- c y .ce P =C ^o coon Ar�o _ ua G rrn �iL °A�° °.°. ^�nc •. C c'L���gc ��r__aLC.E� ia��r.�7+"ois�t n u N a.` a N° V ^ N N° a C G a '^ r O• 6 C q � r L O V 9 TH - N °^_i C ^ u • U C N G l r 9 r` N u O � L V C A =� u E P9 i N J V J M O N` y y ^ N _ t M 6 z--z- Y J A O N L60 n6 0• ^SN°NLr^ l k UA O.0 ZN S- -NL i 6OM GC QE O < q O CV� d C•- A C �LC�N 90Ta Y V aCO� _T _ V� 7S C L�N•L.. OpG JO ZO L N ^� A -uCY � aaq_ ioo c.°. °`q cc•,zt °cr vAi � ae5ai � � � y p `= E C N °• u r n C GA a C r p A -- - O � C C C• q i^ E° C G ^ L g ` 'A NF ^J9 MQNV PC ML wQ A u °Jqd q�C tl C LO .Ln� qW 60C V C � An V: -0 -C p O I L O W E = V y N -Z Y V A-•a id A' ° =su rGC ov ^ w dr�c �o vcgvco a✓: J �r 6OV C L �� Wa'] ^99 �Nd K V6 O CAS^ p GNr V�PF anZ _ 6 .� P C =TO'JU - C C QOM N CLVC NS iur C' Z dP CnOC W e r Q L L C q fJ ^ IC L D A R E L q n^ T O c I- O.r •J M y_ �� O O ` C L •+ O � V v P- u NCq Q6u6V - N 6� Wrr Nq QV CO.a ” IN«Na lz u C) C�Pd rL C�`J ♦C n�� ^_ �� C <✓ C ^^ A� �CAr �:� DJ6• .APL y dVfTO M6 ` SL LJ GCn �d C i P <�L „� �rN� 19 L O O A ^:� S Y o nd. n• C V • A O �_ L L d ✓ ��Jy ✓V S NO Nqi liC NC V W ^� LO L. �6V^ •^n NO �dOOC .L+ �ur ^o ✓—U q „i= An ?� yL ✓ _rO � � _ ri • O Y _Olr_ q C SC�L S^ OiDT NCNG L> O d]-N �t L '� ANAC ✓2 N PLO _ ✓O d O. Nd F O O D LG ✓� U'd GS 6C STO C_WA V_ .T �✓� AS >ll °Gn L G. ^� TV 09 NOCC pp OpN Q VV a`C r ^ D � S 6 l C ` `_ q F r^ C• Y � N •n ` � y C t d > � rc9 r^ c u A °O c N� o ��'y ✓�✓ -o ... 2 s•,N JY^ opa ° m ^D ✓L Np y� LT+yic V S PO d^ °��✓ ✓�L OC r N ^CA�� LN vd N9GY L� LC LVA � r0 7O rf q> rVA6N YNq „✓ •CdfC C6✓LP P „• U GN Q S =C C N VS •`gin C ' TQVA � ^S °G l0 p•r ✓L A L � O T_•' L^ ° i` SC�gf. `• y L d N G L <c r� NOC V` S d V O. V ma d N f ^ ✓LA C � O 6 Jr �r LO A•r Aw CG OAV �T QCr PpN V qv qC ✓V .^CTC O ^r GN OO CS ✓r d` ^C+_A�P OL1 N'_^✓2� N(A(��O V =r TCC .� >l C ALCO 9L L SEA C q TDq G Nl pA N G 4 S p J`� q•r A9T N✓ T V Tad �O G E ^ N r 6 c 2 E N ✓ten rNdC` •n d^ N T o ^✓ ^`d u Pq.r `^ dL_AT ' YL gw-Cd q V� `CC Y� OgSCC A `✓J Np 6✓' CL .Vn✓✓✓ ✓ O ^9 L_•L NO`V Gy VfS NC N O C ^✓ ``y �aM ^W N �. ^✓ jq�. L> y ac c W N o DV✓ q 6A�Od 6 ("D✓ O �' �• N i LL .c n N Qbc u�✓ pL oa v •e`.m ;o °c rnoo. ✓P P�cc OC sq acq_ �° PO >✓ a -,S 4 A d d� V U V✓ N • O G •Li. y O� M � d L V _ A d6L 4 •r Wd0 ut ^+G f N �.AV wMi p✓ C O '"_.d �� VC ���iA id_.'• •CVO dN O _C O`„j rO 6 ^VN �L L ✓u^ .G✓ E O�[.NPNL V V✓ N 49i O A 6'aPC S 9 LNa> O ^^ J_ VAN � NO 9 NA C L L C ✓P`�A` V O� d_ <O N� ' r � L A C r✓ L C L N N✓ y° O �_ 4 ' > L� O p� q P �. LN N L� ° °O KC > ^4G•4 OA � '� =v6N Ad CQ �> O `� P^ N M N d A C N M O O O A L_: O' L N ✓> G✓ C ✓ A � � L N 9 T ✓ ^ ✓ -.� p w✓ •L V O✓ 9 ` d A .� D N^ L C }✓ L ✓d OC 6�0. .7'. V�CrV` ^Oy^ L'O O vAV AC. GC O N �5�� ^d9_✓OnAL✓ NCp TGNVOA E N � V m � F Y� � O� ` ^ r r m •n i�� T< LO i n. C d ✓ <� A q C G l 2 L 2 J✓ C ✓ V O L d a� a N C O C p° L ° A A A d L P N 9✓ u cc` L �= �`, �c -^bo°N g ^ usn`A�o r ON ^^ ^^ N— A •L O ✓VF > _ „• a A N q =A d = ^ AC y(r PO MV O O G G PY L C ` O C V b p N ✓ V A C.L n ✓ y A ` e 2 i ✓ p^ ° O .Li. Dr S L✓ O A~ H N A S Y✓ V � V`V pTN✓ NZ =V rLOSLCY FV 66P gL= V NrAC ✓✓ V d A`•'v c LO r ° A r� d yAy c^E rNA°,� V _l•` apt✓ O. N � N GT OCC N L^ MG`V ✓O ✓.`r `d�P LddNO 1R OpC� VVVN _ °p� r Au•rV �✓ L JL ✓VOdy � r✓SO P2iOi °i �nO E?E nP�CON O r C �� �y1 S _ y r N E Y •J i`° y� q P P d _V r 6 • t y � N N G> L �• Y O V d A d A C N N N O ® O y�j f..i ` V L N ` ^` E n i E � V V V r J A N 9 4 ^ 7 ° L U C✓ T� V r J L�� 6C `V o. ^✓ 6 G h _ N (•f � I1 N •O 1 f W C) Z Y V v O L C r 3 N N •0. O' O 0 C EM O dl W 1 V ~ 1 a G O O O O G d Rn C g s ^ 6 O �i t 0 4 V rvI C i A c 1f oN �v by D T t V a, o U C .°v o r� 0 0 C O 6 M d �W V P� 0 o Yf W W CqI 6 1 A b e 9 ^' 3 u y v ` q C b 4 � V C C V C a E G ,n c a✓c 6^ � y ✓ v ^ TJ N Mio V Q ^ Tb� C � p rnE� d V � u E i N ✓ C C q _ � 9 L' ✓ p Na ]1Cg D.- r 4 a N r ¢O E r ✓ d U 57 ` Q E' 9 jam= Nnd y G � .fin d ✓_ N ° C y]n O d q ✓ C ° oa4a w � > u 6V✓ e m v d n° o N � E r o ✓ C u O .YO ✓ C q V O C q q L d N Q Ti 4 q CR O 4 n r 4 u � U L 4 C 4 C TO c ^ V 4 C O Wcd i c v P � L C ^u q � O V q 000 v 4 n c ' V 9 bec L t q 9 z > L W L T >- G _ ^ C a q O V O 0✓ c Ru V C. 6 d C -].oL r6 Ru O q W 'v i x V C A L O 6 A 6 C V O p _.`'z E �VS �- O L L T� O O J V u40>- V •ua ✓ O x o uGZ O N G C R q p�` d a ✓ L d A q d Tom' 9 C- LJ V C V AFB q G L C V W 4 q d ot.L.ao " v � < O y C 9 V caycc GO� V i i�r ✓�G P N 1 C L C qYr 6^ a.� n O w O � c vc ^d W R" " n c C � N C L u N �9a L Y N q v3 n Ru q_ rO l Q N � O L P R R y C r O r p 7 t Uti O O.^ V - C q O O ML ° ✓ c E 04 =v - O 9 C V O T O O E U v� o A 1 d 4 d E r q O v v � T u C d R V � q q i1O �°- M V ✓ R V C q.OrC ° -u c C 6= V O M q q C V ~p L°uu� O ^ u ``r 1 p� N q q ✓ n.O 9 C rJ Q" q E ^ r q •1 Ci U dP LdP �O10 Ol= -` V6^ y ✓� Ir C V C T � n .. u p ^ T G y m V V L C G ] V` T V ✓_ L C N N V N f` N d_ p ✓q o yn .�.� Fr u. �� _�'.r gYSi L^ O..d. i.i V .°r bW �p d� T9SmSC 6u w°rdVW n ✓N `d r nVV06� ^q = L]l�ud uL uC✓ pd Cam. q yL � L6d N9 L L_= l V C V O V9 O x _ Vq_ C ^n9l G' 9p' ✓[�[_ N>_76 d DLO �JY P2 �� .% ^LU✓V ^C _ <NCW d b� 9 RAC V9 '^E`' ✓W`^ - IC.CMV _ -W C ON LP dN Np `fi Gm y�q�� 0`u✓i °o. oggTb q v YW.n P P`-'N �.✓ oN .°. -,t P TcN .°-- V � Y �O A O i C l O u'^ N n 6' C C�✓� N WNO WVV.� 76 V'O n3QY 6PV RUn�uN 6Cq�0 N ✓ N O. Va I WI r 3 N N •0. O' O 0 C EM O dl W 1 V ~ 1 a G O O O O G d Rn C g s ^ 6 O �i t 0 4 V rvI C i A c 1f oN �v by D T t V a, o U C .°v o r� 0 0 C O 6 M d �W V P� 0 o Yf W W CqI 6 1 A b e 9 ^' 3 u y v ` q C b 4 � V C C V C a E G ,n c a✓c 6^ � y ✓ v ^ TJ N Mio V Q ^ Tb� C � p rnE� d V � u E i N ✓ C C q _ � 9 L' ✓ p Na ]1Cg D.- r 4 a N r ¢O E r ✓ d U 57 ` Q E' 9 jam= Nnd y G � .fin d ✓_ N ° C y]n O d q ✓ C ° oa4a w � > u 6V✓ e m v d n° o N � E r o ✓ C u O .YO ✓ C q V O C q q L d N Q Ti 4 q CR O 4 n r 4 u � U L 4 C 4 C TO c ^ V 4 C O Wcd i c v P � L C ^u q � O V q 000 v 4 n c ' V 9 bec L t q 9 z > L W L T >- G _ ^ C a q O V O 0✓ c Ru V C. 6 d C -].oL r6 Ru O q W 'v i x V C A L O 6 A 6 C V O p _.`'z E �VS �- O L L T� O O J V u40>- V •ua ✓ O x o uGZ O N G C R q p�` d a ✓ L d A q d Tom' 9 C- LJ V C V AFB q G L C V W 4 q d ot.L.ao " v � < O y C 9 V caycc GO� V i i�r ✓�G P N 1 C L C qYr 6^ a.� n O w O � c vc ^d W R" " n c C � N C L u N �9a L Y N q v3 n Ru q_ rO l Q N � O L P R R y C r O r p 7 t Uti O O.^ V - C q O O ML ° ✓ c E 04 =v - O 9 C V O T O O E U v� o A 1 d 4 d E r q O v v � T u C d R V � q q i1O �°- M V ✓ R V C q.OrC ° -u c C 6= V O M q q C V ~p L°uu� O ^ u ``r 1 p� N •1 y i q' V C Q � V � T W' W ` o � NNgo +-� �vn? "•gym =^ L° a� °.per aL. c I .s N P ` OU ¢ n V U° O. •'r u1 b =a 0 0 T q n W� Q Iq OY r V ! C ^ 4 r W Yl °L `O •d•.f L ° �� L I N E o i m a i r_ i L 9 U v �fjcp�� °_.^u �w `" 'c a i� _P y I Ua� ETC 4, �� N Vr •^ ti L Nq�vE Oq U. NN NY PGD) [�..N V1 O.i- O�•CO� ^O V� V^L FO E, rP S Cr N— Y(J LV �qY VE Cr` O W it cvC�N `� O L ti V q .a N 6 2 L W <a I att GV— Ln 60i WI qO. •^ _= o a V.r m •'f C C � � N , m PiC ra> D... .N Or QOO � � ✓ U r O C ^a E q• O L.dsci v� m >`o rE ^ PGUSm O V VS. S C 9 g POr N LC iLC •JUL`a EO^ VVL`jS `q O N i j C� q^ GN •"a i'� O d Ge w ZE L _ L V p E O r T.Oi j q= M •- = r S C .r N C r. C P .. L P d0�0 py0 r .Ob PO Ot O I 5y O d eE .j N CN �� •SON Oc L �Ov YpO {p...a V a n_ o S. L fy Nar= .rN C'Ldr NG NI UN d C qO° U O r• C• N r • I d ^ M ^OyO VrJ `J q�D Z Ca n•PC 4q� < qC q sn� w� r^ q q P OI N q N lC `C VV UPr L dO�C _yI Ca C oY _ V' �NU ° °b q` NCp Ow TAO �JJS OV.�r U.r �• T� .eQ q =1 qi y O C � m a Oi O• ri -1 • W' J I. C C O O O � d V q a Cq G o ao y q q w a 9 P i I v I O 9 I L EC L C• V 4 V m q s r N � r m V T d 6 d V ` v` 7 R O � m N _ e m q ` a� q a 6 i 1 O^ O L y I O m m I V O O I q V nM O V_ l L M 4.1a i 0 V •n Q i d �O�LV. dL •N+•T+O� ` =oV �u O d L dbu � i PV O T _r NQ W L ..• N L ` O •� L ^ d 9 O Z � N Y= N L J W G__ G° C � n V� L V � 9 • _ 6 L ^J O' � O 9 4• A 9 V O _ � _ r N O N •� L b� _ r C y C w p' M N C i °., cad raocm °' c `A"�`. � � c H�u✓iS o Nc.N.. A _A i 9 y 7 _ �pOrjN M W O E � ✓ •c I N 1 W d •r y i= rr r i N� 2 r_ n PQ � O N � C 4 _ A __ =r a C d >� •_ N ° L .� y rFs _O a l r N d � d I I NO r C y n. roL- s'• VC i a __ CLN •L. T L •A.._ 6� Q 9 L j % P O > L� q y C N 6 r i q •°.. W C .°.. p 9^ «� � =`c s r ° J ems'•= `.+ ' o q d_ •n l � °° d°o J _ O 6 I SC_N- Oq a� W _ C cf 4;1 li e d O n- 2] _ 6 O d O O LV C O O A �"� Q �"• V G n d r i N ^ a ° r •n O C d J U I b - A � 9 L Q F I i• u^ w AvJ•� I C � _^ ✓ 9 1 _ L V j d P W_ 9 V •d. •Ln W� n� d bNrq C C ' J Ip oon cv$�.y '�dcu �V° «c °•Oa - =cj E i 4V t 9 d p � - � _ O e v y O n ✓• - n i N_ r _ �9 Ad NO G •.�TOr GVW - 00 i P j O Q V 'any J�� A9 M S �C� _ a d A w I N ✓," � � N a `r n^ � cj aN c Ao c•' J E` N ✓� be qE` Nid E Pr dy Gd W� G I d 06➢pd F •" I I Pa ` ✓na p N _ C l W5 d LW L L j •'iY <i G `c u_c c cL N � ° dV0` ^L <•B d .Ld. d O d G6 �yl I' A° q •_ y C G Ta O C A � uVi � O •L.. V W r y �r A E 90 •+ V C G C.. t rG I V S� ✓O C C e r��°. n � r O O. A C N V I i O W i «I ✓ r 9 L N ° r P n Y rb C r� v-„ y _NL' I I cep LI r OP 9rl - >9 E 6 V NpW A N NOrO OI na P 4V C O C �v O7 d (1W i L L .-•� I ^>� __� q N n90p r V y P 1 \IrL O.✓•. LLI � SWE VV I I rW- 9 dA y dOV 722 P` •WUl r ^•V b�V TV 'ceI Fvi � •LIN.�r .L-:. a nN c j c 2. �.L. a d M o <� W Nl i•f 1 =� O I � `MII N \`' VT ` O �O�LV. dL •N+•T+O� ` =oV �u O d L dbu � i PV O T _r NQ W L ..• N L ` O •� L ^ d 9 O Z � N Y= N L J W G__ G° C � n V� L V � 9 • _ 6 L ^J O' � O 9 4• A 9 V O _ � _ r N O N •� L b� _ r C y C w p' M N C i °., cad raocm °' c `A"�`. � � c H�u✓iS o Nc.N.. �pOrjN M O E S O n W d •r y i= rr r i N� 2 r_ n PQ � O N � ✓ L a C d >� C L .� y O L1� d a l r �� N O L _J A N 9 V D✓ N j r C y n. �- � A C- > o L O 6� Q 9 L j % P O > L� q y C N 6 r i q •°.. W C .°.. p 9^ dTCV � b r •"•y aC J r Q YL q d_ •n l i 6•°.r N� V O J DOL O 6 C SC_N- Oq Ci9� W _ C cf 4;1 li e d O n- 2] _ 6 O d O O LV C O O A �"� Q �"• V G n d r i N ^ a ° r •n O C d J U I b - A � 9 L Q F � i• u^ w C N I C � _^ ✓ 9 ` � _ V j d P Y V J Ip oon cv$�.y '�dcu �V° «c °•Oa - =cj �.d 4V C ✓r 9 No •N �G J �. � ✓nL L G _ • P� N_ r _ �9 Ad NO G •.�TOr GVW - 00 P j O Q V 'any J�� A9 OA•n S �C� r° �- i rtc a N a `r d L � cj aN c Ao c•' J E` N ✓� be qE` Nid E Pr dy Gd W� G I d 06➢pd F •" I I Pa ` ✓na p N _ C l W5 d LW G T?d OC 1 Or dV0` ^L <•B VC O 96d tAArA _AJ G6 �yl P_ S ` nL1 �i Ta O ^>. Ci C Q O •L.. _ C d .Li•A y �r E 90 •+ V C G C.. rG Nn V S� ✓O C C e r��°. ��o^ i `uu o L �a c= "•P yr= iP rb P P r� «N d _NL' cep - �V E 6 V NpW 6r NOrO �•f NV 6�� 4V V9 p� W•+NLLV 33 El E Z Y V D i- a 11 9 O V C N r ej v c� 9 G Gfl ^I of V' Si �i �i b i E 0 M E a O C N 0 Y r 6 n o b V O C d L a � ^o z c No u E � n_ VC �Yn sy O V d O a '11 r I I u l d d °r II Y .. d N 6C ✓mss � c v d v= i� EW L nn Q�9 i c 4 O Z- i 6 C T^ `! C O C r Eta 9 rj V. O^ y G U G O i O N C C N V Cf ° cL v o c _a, c. v'' c V G f1l oo d^ T 7 OO�U V O o'er cL y N O C y J V G n �P t C r d fl J L a Q T K r c O w y rJ � N = y c d n,e O � r G i M �•L..r G c •^ � c v Y LS yL oNJ N cem •oc ai 9 V V L N l N M V r V ^ G 'r y yCrr O.CJ 7J O ^N `O,7 1 `4N 9 O V C N r ej v c� 9 G Gfl ^I of V' Si �i �i b i E 0 M E a O C N 0 Y r 6 n o b V O C d L a � ^o z c No u E � n_ VC �Yn sy O V d O a '11 r I I u l d d °r II Y .. d N 6C ✓mss � c v d v= i� EW L nn Q�9 i c 4 O Z- i 6 C T^ `! C O C r Eta 9 rj V. O^ y G U G O i O N C C N V Cf ° cL v o c _a, c. v'' c V G f1l oo d^ T 7 OO�U V O o'er cL y N O C y J V G n �P E El 11 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: October 26, 1983 TO: Planning Comm4ssion FROM: Lloyd S. Hubbs, City Engineer BY: John Martin, Assistant Civil Engineer SUBJECT: AMENDING MAP FOR FINAL MAP NO. 1_2090 - U. S. A. PROPERTIES - An amendment gent to the various smal � contic: inium ots to the arger models and slight modifications thereby to the open space, being an northeast corner ofnArch bald and Fercn development 1 d �nAPN 209 - 051 -01 the I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action Requested: Approval of amended map. B. Purpose: To adjust lot lines. C. Location: Northeast corner of Archibald and Feron Blvd. Parcel Size: 9.2 acres. E. Existing Zoning: .oesidentiai. F. Existin ^, Lard Use: Residential. I, Site Characteristics: The site slopes from north to south at approximat ey a grade and is being developed. II. ANALYSIS: The developer has found that none of the smaller units are eing sold and has requested permission to eliminate the smaller building plan thereby changing the lot lines of seven lots. IV. property owners and placed Public n lthe been sent Newspa er.o sPostingsat the site has also been completed. ITEM 0 Amending Map of Final October Lo, 1983 Page 2 Map No. 1209G - USA Properties V. RECOMMENDATION: it is recommended that the Planning Commission consider all input and elements of the project. If, after such consideration, the Commission can support the recommended conditions of approval as written in the City Engineer's Report, then adoption of the attached resolution would be appropriate. Respectfully submi Attachments: Map Resolution i 11 c 7 0 i �GA� AVE TYPICAL SECTIONS ?: LOT ADJuISTMAM# CITY OF cTEea: RA.\CHO CUCANIO \'OA TrrM -E£ ZevW -rlI P PLANNING DIVISION Ex�- Brr � SOLE: 1; L L Ll 1/ V NORTH RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE AMENDED MAP OF FINAL TRACT MAP NO_ 12090 WHEREAS, Tentative Tract Map No. 12090, hereinafter "Map" submitted by USA, Properties Fund, Ltd., applicant, for the purpose of subdividing the real property situated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino-, State of California, described as a residential development of 128 townhouse dwellings on 9.6 acres of land, located on the northeast corner of Archibald Avenue and Feron Boulevard into 145 lots, regularly came before the Planning Commission for public hearing and action on October 27, 1982; and WHEREAS, the City Planner has recommended approval of the Map subject to all conditions set forth in the Engineering and Planning Division's reports; and WHEREAS, said map was conditionally approved by Resolution No. 82 -102 on October 27, 1982, said conditions remain unchanged. NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does resolve as follows: SECTION 1: The Plae,cing Commission makes the following findings in regard to Amend Map of Final Tract No. 12090 and the Map thereof: (a) The tentative tract is consistent with the General Plan and specific plans; (b) The design or improvements of the tentative tract is consistent with the General Plan and specific plans; (c) The site is physically suitable for the type of development p--(nosed; (d) The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage and avoidable injury to humans and wildlife or their habitat; (e) The tentative tract is not likely to cause serious public health problems; (f) The design of the Tentative tract will not conflict with any easement acquired by the public at large, now of record, for access through or use of the property within the proposed subdivision. I] APPROVED AND.ADOPTEC THIS 26th 5AY OF OCTOBER, 1983. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: pennis L. Stout, Chairman ATTEST: Secretary of the Planning Commission I, JACK LAM, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, Co 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 an the 26th day of October, 1983, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ASSENT: COMMISSIONERS: E 11 E l El CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: October 26, 1983 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Rick Go�aez, City Planner BY: Curt Johnston, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 83 -19 - VILLA - The eve opment of eight T8 apartment units on a �-) sq. ft. lot in the P. -3 zone located at the northwest corner of Rancheria Drive and Tapia Via Drive - APN 207 - 122 -07, 08, 09. I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action Requested: Approval of a site plan and building elevations 8. Purpose: Development of an eight unit apartment building C. Locate tion: Northwest corner of Rancheria Drive and Tapia Via Drive D. Parcel Size: Approximately 23,435 square feet E. Existing Zoning: R -3 (Multi - Family Residential) F. Existing Land Use: Vacant G. Surround2i2.2i Land Use and Zonin : Nort - South - Apartment complex, Single family zoned C -3. residential, zoned R -2 East - Single family home, zored R -3 R -3 west - Single family and apartments, zoned H. General Plan Designations: ra ect ite - Me- . esidential (4 -14 du /ac) North - Medium ential (4 -14 dt /ac) South - Low Residential (2 -4 du /ac) East - Medium Residential (4 -14 du /ac) West - l.ow Residential (2 -4 du /ac), Medium Residential (a -14 du /ac) I. Site Characteristics: The project site is currently vacant ind no significant shrubs or trees exist on iiie property. ITEM P PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Development Review 83 -19 /Villa October 26, 1983 Page 2 II. ANALYSIS: A- General: As indicated on the attached exhibit, the project consists of one 8 -unit building. Each unit is provided with a double car garage with access off of an existing alley along the north property line. The project was reviewed by the Design Review and Growth Management Committees and received a favorable rating. The following sections outline the actions by each committee. 8. Design Review Committee: The Design Review Committee requested a number o -E, sons to the project including providing a uni,or: E- c`iitectural trim around windows visible from the s'reet; minor revisions to the Dutch gable roof structure; r:-reasing the size of the front patio on the south side of the buildings; providira wood frame stairway and balcony enclosures; and adding architectural treatment tc the garage for consistency with the apartment building. With these revisions, the Committee determined that the project design was compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. C. Grading Committee: The Grading Committee approved the conceptual on -site grading plan as submitted. D. Growth Management Committee: The Growth Management Committee reviewe the project and etermined that with the recommended conditions of approval, the project is consistent with all applicable standards and ordinances. D. Environmentai Review: Part I of the Initial Study has been comp ete y t e app icant. Staff completed that Environmentai Checklist and found no significant; adverse environmental impacts as a result of this project. If the Commission concurs with these findings, issuance of a Negative Declaration would be appropriate. III. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: The proposed project, together with the recommended conditions of approval, is in compliance with each applicable provision of the Zoning Ordinance and is consistent with the Gene al Plan. In addition, the project will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. Iv. CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised for environmental review in fie Daily Report newspaper. 7 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Development Review 83 -19 /Villa October 26, 1983 Page 3 11 V. RECONMENDATIGN: It is recommended that the Planning Commission ccnsi er a Tinput and elements of this project. If after such consideration the Commission can support the facts for findings, adoption of the attached Resolution would be appropriate. Respectfully submitted, Rick Gomez City Planr,= RG :Cu':jr Attachments It, 11 Exhibit "A" - Zoning /General Plan �iap Exhibit "B" - Location Map Exhibit "C" Detailed Site Plan Exhibit "D" - Illustrative Site Plan Exhibit "E" - Building Elevations Exhibit "F" - Conceptual Grading Plan Initial Study, Part I Resolutions of Approval with Conditions ISM GENERAL PLAN Foothili in � lk= CFFrZ Arrow ZONING Ll NORTH CITY OF RAINCHO CUCAMONGA Tn-LE- rg*Ie►t PLANINING DNISION EXHI6IT -:A: SCALE: "e W 1 O u f, I E.I. .- SAN BERNARD'"C) C4 Cori L OF RAN" CUCAMONGA PLANNNG DIV ION tam 75 �r I I I i I t O 76 � 77, �J 70 D —l.. 1S_ n Por. Lot 5 J R) 70 69 s Por. Lot 72 yr d a� s� �sso Nufal I ITE%4 =i�1� —e�i TPI'I.E- EXHIBIT- wVw_ ---SC- ALE° ---- OR NORTH El E CITY OF rrE�� =rte- �t -vpa RAINC D C CAMONG� i Tm.F: PLANNLNc LxvEIOi.t EXHiBrr- 'G" LD - 1 � � I I III I r� -z NORTH El E CITY OF rrE�� =rte- �t -vpa RAINC D C CAMONG� i Tm.F: PLANNLNc LxvEIOi.t EXHiBrr- 'G" LD - E CITY OF !� RANCHO CuCimMONTGA R-k NNING MrOON NORTH IT'r.4i= TITLE° : _ _ , K MX �%Ara EXHiBM '�"_-1!1?"_ — The so( EGG ✓4T /O.(/ CA57 EGG ✓�7 /opt/ E�,d//EST STN EGE ✓.�T/G�/ CITY C►� RAN ctA -L -C IONTGA PLANNING DIVEM Fit so 4/> — 146WA7/1= / nT-.m: 7. 83 -Iz -y k TmE: sup ems w EXHIBIT: -a- $G ;LE: 40 1 Ll C I I i I I � I� I :i �I �I f II II ca�lt l•IF T I r� l / / CITY OF RANCHO CHO CUCNNl0N`GA i / 3 r Jt-� s � I 7 .i7.,tl� •� ;WeRii� MIAMI CITY OF =.ANCHO CUCA -MONGA INITIAL STUDY PART I - PROJECT INFORMATION SHEET - To be completed by applicant Environmental Assessment 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 :..ade. 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 signa.- ficant environmental 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 informa- tion concerning the proposed project. 11 PROJECT TITLE: BIGNT UNIT TWO STORY APARTMENT BUILDING 0 APPLICANT'S NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE: 9t3 -330 -7465 WALL MASTER CCV. ANY/ R:CRARD P. VILLA NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE OF PERSON TO BE CONTACTED CONCERNING THIS PROJECT: WALL MASTER COMPANY, /RICHARD P. VILLA 426 TLIRNBULL CANYON ROAD. CITY r .. C --330-746.-2 LOCATION OF PROJECT (STREET ADDRESS AND ASSESSOF PARCEL NO.) WJrHFYTA V27VE WD TAF' -A VIA. RMICH0 CO -ONGA, CA- LIST OTHER PERMITS NECESSARY FROM LOCAL, REGIONAL, STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES AND THE AGENCY ISSUING SUCH PERMITS: I -1 11 a PROJECT DESCRIPTION ACREAGE OF PROJECT AREA AND. SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED BUILDINGS, IF ANY: ACREAGE: 23,435 A!:F A QA DESZRIBE THE ENVIRONME14 -TAL SETTING OF THE PROJECT SITE INCLUDING INFOR24ATION ON TOPOGRAFHY, PLANTS (TREES), ANI. 'NSALS, ANY CULTURAL, HISTORICAL OR SCENIC ASPECTS, USE O. SURROUNDING PROPERTIES, AND THE ATTACH NECESSARY ~SHEETS): EXISTING STRUCTURES AND THEIR USE (ATTACH u Is the project part of a larger project, one of a series of circulative actions, which although individually small, may as a whole have - ignificant environmental impact? NO. 11 I -2 WILL THIS PROJECT: YES NO is NO I. Create a substantial change in ground contours? NO 2. Create a substantial change in existing noise or vibration? NO 3. Create a substantial change in demand for municipal services (police, fire, water, sewage, etc.)? NO 4. Create changes in the existing zoning or general plan designations? NO 5. Remove any existing trees? How many? NO E. Create the need for use or disposal of potentially hazardous materials such as toxic substances, flammables or explosives? Explanation of anv YES answers above: IMPORTANT: If the project involves the construction of residential units, complete the form on the next page. CERTIFICATION: I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits presant the data and information required fo= this initial evaluation to the best of my ability, and that the facts, statements, and information presented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. I further understand that additional information may be required to be submitted before an adequate evaluation. can. be made by the De:-elopment Rev�eww Committee. Date JUNE ,1983 Signature RI&iARD P. VILLAIWALL MASTER COMPAk Title OWNER 1-3 N RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION The following information should be provided to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Division in order to aid in assessing the ability of the school district to acrDmmodate the proposed residential development. Name of Developer and Tentative Tract No.: GALL MFSTER COMPANY Specific Location of Project: RANCgERIA DRIVE 9 TAPIA VIA, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA. PRASE I PHASE 2 PHASE 3 PHASE 4 TOTAL 1. Number of single family units: 0 2. Number of multiple family units: 8 3. Date proposed to begin construction: 9/83 0 Earliest date of occupancy: 2184 Model € and # of Tentative 5. Bedrooms Price Range 2 $500.00 0 I -4 0 8 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCA14ONGA PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO. 83 -19 LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF RANCHERIA DRIVE AND TAPIA VGA DRIVE IN THE R -3 ZONE WHEREAS, on the 24th day of June, 1983, a complete application was filed by Richard P. Villa for review of the above - described project; and WHEREAS, an the 26th day of October, 1983, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission held a meeting to consider the above - described project. follows: NOW, TEEREFORE, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission resolved as SECTION 1: That the following can be met: 1. That the proposed use is in accord with the objectives of the Zoning Ordinance and the purposes of the zone in which the use is proposed; and 2. That the proposed use, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; and 3. That the proposed use is in compliance with each of the applicable provisions of the Zoning Ordinance; and 4. That the proposed project is consistent with the General Plan. SECTION 2: That this project will not create adverse impacts on the environment and that a Negative Declaration is issued on October 26, 1983. SECTION 3: That Development Review No. 83 -19 is approved subject to the following conditions and attached Standard Conditions: PLANNING DIVISION 1. Each dwelling unit shall be provided with a patio or deck at least 100 square feet in size as per the current R -3 Zoning Ordinance requirements. Revised plans shall be approved by the Planning Division prior to issuance of building permits. 11 Resolution No. Page 2 U1 ENGINEERING DIVISION 2. The street improvement pions shall be designed to carry surface water runoff generated from the project westerly along Rancheria Drive to Grove Avenue, or a full street cross gutter shall be instaiied by the developer at no expense to the City along Tapia Via at Rancheria. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 26TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 1983. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY Dennis L. tout, C airman ATTEST Secretary of t e anning co:01ssion I, JACK LAM, Secretary of the Planning Cnrmnission of the City of Ranch; 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 26th day of October, 1983, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: 1 u fU 0 L d am- ° J^ A O P` . Q 6^ r 0 ? _ PY C d O r N M C A . V O 9if m CON NOj 7dy NCiLr bt Y - L• P� O {a 4� U L 4uD^ = E eD.v TNT i c O'L°„S.Yn ON ^6 J O N� COC9 J nv_E O�`� opEO� ypE�O `app V N •r O O m G Y O 6 S 6 L 6 < O O. V El Z O i S G O O u � o .r G O N 0 O 1' .n `o W N �o n ° G J 0 r z u ¢ OBI L -I e ` ofO C Z1 6I ~ 6� L d V q G O Z Y V O � V `M h •• =a O o. G F T c n N q -`-P •-y p,d �O r0 'J6 7 6 .•� � � P Y W r T O L Y^ O O 1 q Q q Y ✓a D' �c vY �a"io o c`c ob° deu • O C _ � Pw > l O V N ✓ •p° qLN� r MJ q 9Ld n J A N^ Pr N U J ° ✓ - G C-J ✓,D V• V O � i G O O t= y P q F y O N C = ¢ 2 �LN� qC) TO VC N� .c o• a - L O A p, D C • T C •... O Giy q0 aT Npd FLd� CC VSO ��.� °O u ° yqm b` bN2c V2 a N C O L •� q Q N 7 I> U O q` 9 P o Y 9 D •rm GD rO•N �w0. rtNC tr7 °D Q ¢ oI ^� do doN co s ao c�L.r Jai i O � CV Tr T9 V C n q e C D i D O o O O q d d L •O V C° 9 9 O! c D q - c �- V 9P� _�9 • 6.O+ LyN aD QO t q` aQ� OL O.q J ✓E 6�0 TL i �Np `O qy] ,COO c d ✓ 6 d � 0 ✓ n C C ''_L J - = IFZ o0 9 CV CdOI l •� T A —D 9 6 V 9 O C Lo N dr t1O� F � p ✓o m� csc ✓ Y ` 7 c a s o d V � � V y 9 9 O Y 9 q O 60 q N ^L p - 6 O N S A O y 6 V ��G ei OP O � VV 0�9 P 2r N- Y ACV -= O ✓ Sn C .Ne q ✓ N d Q L. y C N` .� O d � L V O r � C 4 _P ✓ 4 O O N V ,� > C V fje90 OO � VO.V �'6 L0. 9 O Y p699 VEV iVI O N 0 6 V P j j J n - ✓^ N D � ✓ N9D c c -E D ' O J ✓ r 0 ( J N� V A y 0 � � (0. ' aim yF+.N.�.d., � �iq D Di qS a a'.J� a OY C a a q C �• q 4 - d d L q 0 0 6 •On• O C - y C P O Y9 - O O 6 ^r C Y - 0 C- O - -.L O.r✓ PO � t t0� • q 4 O. � P y, a • q D N 4 � El Z O i S G O O u � o .r G O N 0 O 1' .n `o W N �o n ° G J 0 r z u ¢ OBI L -I e ` ofO C Z1 6I ~ 6� L d V q G O Z Y V O � V `M h •• =a O o. G F T c n N q -`-P •-y p,d �O r0 'J6 7 6 .•� � � P Y W r T O L Y^ O O 1 q Q q Y ✓a D' �c vY �a"io o c`c ob° deu • O C _ � Pw > l O V N ✓ •p° qLN� r MJ q 9Ld n J A N^ Pr N U J ° ✓ - G C-J ✓,D V• V O � i G O O t= y P q F y O N C = ¢ 2 �LN� qC) TO VC N� .c o• a - L O A p, D C • T C •... O Giy q0 aT Npd FLd� CC VSO ��.� °O u ° yqm b` bN2c V2 a N C O L •� q Q N 7 I> U O q` 9 P o Y 9 D •rm GD rO•N �w0. rtNC tr7 °D Q ¢ oI ^� do doN co s ao c�L.r Jai i O � CV Tr T9 V C n q e C D i D O o O O q d d L •O V C° 9 9 O! c D q - c �- V 9P� _�9 • 6.O+ LyN aD QO t q` aQ� OL O.q J ✓E 6�0 TL i �Np `O qy] ,COO c d ✓ 6 d � 0 ✓ n C C ''_L J - = IFZ o0 9 CV CdOI l •� T A —D 9 6 V 9 O C Lo N dr t1O� F � p ✓o m� csc ✓ Y ` 7 c a s o d V � � V y 9 9 O Y 9 q O 60 q N ^L p - 6 O N S A O y 6 V ��G ei OP O � VV 0�9 P 2r N- Y ACV -= O ✓ Sn C .Ne q ✓ N d Q L. y C N` .� O d � L V O r � C 4 _P ✓ 4 O O N V ,� > C V fje90 OO � VO.V �'6 L0. 9 O Y p699 VEV iVI O N 0 6 tr7 °D Q ¢ oI ^� do doN co s ao c�L.r Jai i O � CV Tr T9 V C n q e C D i D O o O O q d d L •O V C° 9 9 O! c D q - c �- V 9P� _�9 • 6.O+ LyN aD QO t q` aQ� OL O.q J ✓E 6�0 TL i �Np `O qy] ,COO c d ✓ 6 d � 0 ✓ n C C ''_L J - = IFZ o0 9 CV CdOI l •� T A —D 9 6 V 9 O C Lo N dr t1O� F � p ✓o m� csc ✓ Y ` 7 c a s o d V � � V y 9 9 O Y 9 q O 60 q N ^L p - 6 O N S A O y 6 V ��G ei OP O � VV 0�9 P 2r N- Y ACV -= O ✓ Sn C .Ne q ✓ N d Q L. y C N` .� O d � L V O r � C 4 _P ✓ 4 O O N V ,� > C V fje90 OO � VO.V �'6 L0. 9 O Y p699 VEV iVI O N 0 6 l •� T A —D 9 6 V 9 O C Lo N dr t1O� F � p ✓o m� csc ✓ Y ` 7 c a s o d V � � V y 9 9 O Y 9 q O 60 q N ^L p - 6 O N S A O y 6 V ��G ei OP O � VV 0�9 P 2r N- Y ACV -= O ✓ Sn C .Ne q ✓ N d Q L. y C N` .� O d � L V O r � C 4 _P ✓ 4 O O N V ,� > C V fje90 OO � VO.V �'6 L0. 9 O Y p699 VEV iVI O N 0 6 U 11 j °O °� `� ✓ ow iD «'. E "�N +Nqs + q—°i} T _ q .d..'c W d 9 J� A q L ^" q 4 q ✓ N G 7 � N G= V l N N x yq N =+ Ldd AV L C r qNS JO U «d FC tom_ V9�^ W'�Aw- N✓ SO.NyL�- O� S _1`e Viv ICT ECN E�qd L«ANV OV.V N pGU•r q Z L ✓ A E d e V c N J V D •� o O c ^� C G r �_ a .� Ll C d _ NLD6 Lj�V � ND C_d9 qN �laOV1_9r• Y�� y d � r T « '^ � '° d TA E •. O> O r S F b N 9 A Gv Y +O VOO' 9Vi a.L..LL �.? PV_ gCLL L �..�.. +EC .✓ Ord 2 r qn q L c w C 9 O ^ C A E L g S q A✓ = C r J L • f D � d r� u T g N �� S 9 C j u O N Y E L A g o O ✓+ = L I O •� y 9 c C L L N ✓ 2 O _ g W O C 6 d 60 _ L A N N E O L 6 9. V d'.O_ C d 9 N W I G V q q +✓ d 'O E M +a NgLLAiO + d y L P ✓ rNO�r 9 + d O N_ uOGL O'�L q'�!LL C�pGa pD grrdd_ N� L Nn «6 91] �C L.�D L= 9C _�`�DLp_�Vlgr SL�� qV „O L OLLC Wp A9 gO r VOO• Cq q O NN qL �`A LU a_V ✓9EE MLr qA OJLLy OgA t Y� +.LO d�C ly'Y..r ^N L�r c Ct O� .. M' n �YfL N� (� 'y-^ C✓ N L � � A V l � V� r Cdr L �LL L✓ d N���q r P O 04 a 29 •O V C y N dA •� _ Oy NP O LL _ D d C O✓ VO > d � �O C QI � U T A PG U P O N V q O y W d d N d d U 4 C N u d ✓ D j O y •� z' CCd °—�e cw�n =Dic y -d_oq 'a'N`• + L „ oq�_ c nc L q✓ � WoCCC >`AmE L.`e� Yb_._ +9 sr L `'' = VTNiL NN.. r o oMr ��Wr' oN✓ «9 —p✓o N ✓� c_ NC __ d ' J -9C OL �� Y N L9O y •� L F✓ L r � r L U L M 9 _ G� M r+ w F C Q E✓ 6 O 2 6 ++ 2 N L ✓+ V A GC j 4d. A Y+ L Y( 6 9 N Mt` O _ 0 dT � C_ q S6 •�9�r9 � r�'dN 90TN d a d � � A L✓ � o ✓ — .YO .vv y f..l o o` ✓ ✓b_ Los beo iZ°r_ oa O 2 N u na+d« e n d T q L C A 66 q E 6�r zz d Y d 9 b F. r W d l— L P G O� ✓ J d 'Oy s ar NL «er+✓�, v .`o� —' c e E aLi ^� n�C ✓ �Na C uv NL >9.0.• T 6 WL'w0 L_O SL lW �dOC9 liC P+ L'NCC L L G ^NLQ NO GPb Ew.N NO^ ✓ w A_� u r X199 �.L C« d« N G l I d O y P d d +� r� a F V i P C ✓— C, N �D `p on ✓ N L O n C S J E 9N� 9 •P. •Ca`�C� �9 dN DV 9 «y« U6 y ✓ O C? 6' •� 6 A g N N O 9 O E G✓ ✓ y G j G V t c d c 9 F O r L> C 2 UAL d 9 q 'z- P t ---2 � C 9_ 6 G C O . C d Gq _ d CCU NqN «p�C LC P CLOd D L_ L C. q J_ b T C_ _ q � ✓ q q a a E L ✓ p tcc o. ^•L• a�o.c J y�pr = L'„9_ggo .°�„^ d.. N a• L✓ =.!E O� O � tL9 _ O N V d d A L q . O q ✓�.CeV d C C� n d V > 9 d N2✓ PV �pC r ✓nNNO�n ✓_ ^N dC > dS0 C O r q i � 9 � C� d V D� G O d O S O✓ r u ^ O C40 1CO P O? T o AOdA O O _ C VO9✓q i9dc V �. N N u q Z FOIn� QdCw N T �� u b 6 ^M O — —_ E � V 9 ^= g O � T 7 6 d N V 'd d G j V u`• V O T _ ^ N J ✓yi ✓= ^ L L O F. M_ o OV Uq VL<LC �yd u CG+ q < — ND Nq <V «b'L 96d Ar P� .INCA (q ✓4V 4N� N 6LL W +r+ C V U 11 eT ANA' V° SJdq�O w6 C` O da p�C �•'U� 4 L ''ate y FN C .°••.� „ Nd � v r-. A EJi�i c �°° Aa✓ L LN :_n >.mo $ o✓ rpd `o Vy O J ^p a•m w ash` ° >v di �L cc° _n v Z U a a`� L r N ^�� � J q a^ d ✓ C �^ ` `L t^ ✓ A r O L N n V T� 4 .n C ✓ S T A O. _° L O O V r A A U � T V a V, N^ V O� V p L N q ✓ n W O. C' 0 4 i 7pp C O L T✓ J PP V a.Lr 6 n S gjz5 i r r _ A L c V `naC r✓ •' p L N D ✓ NC d V dd�r. LO Ava �-� ^N BOG ` p ✓ C ^` F✓ C Y N b A N J j` C a V' .CC r^ NuTiO +� 9L a >. °d>.2 ✓ae NONC QG c0 PN L 9NE N PO a Y A y�� >U _ _V ✓OGIOC .rL N r A� U L C r C G^ J q V a l V C p✓ `� q✓ ✓V J C ` O d C Tab.. O j✓ Cyr- 9 T VV A6M = APM C `C O vE C�9 P� ✓G LN.Vr. dL vV V6q da,A �„ ^�t9 yNLC n_N j� �r -tOO � A CL_9L° °9 P9 -JC ✓V V.rdo� CN✓ CL ✓. r.Li ✓ P A L P c O C P^ E �>av Q o cvc� �u va a:�°„t� 9�� dLq °a.T T�'a c�4gn YP� Lc ° :. _ -• .. c� ANda 90 ad c `r A ^C .°o OIL PyCV �°r�� ✓^EJ O-�+J VP CC CA? °^ O✓ 09G .✓i.W w' AA NO ° ^A ^C= WC �Ay v V TY.N .Vi.✓r✓ aVf_• pV CN J C LV >?C ='Zi C Ld J dw Q 4 e O 6 6 m O 5 F aoAO c ✓P aarac e,o e° oa AL a �o A Pno. O< °sv' va,A a �cc.Le c.e nN usAa° `a ✓vu.L• e c 4 N`Y n o` v.givw Aug ° ° • L a"i p... = O r p✓ VC° rrrAE -✓d° t ° tC�N^ -� o N ✓r ✓^ p^ p L Na ✓ll ° ° °r E ✓o.°. Pd aS ^N a M J o,cwL OO V `° N A t' L C ^� 6c Cg9 O� C v LVa> .L.. �uCPPc A A O O � - � V n P J a N N _° ✓° y 4 � .r � O d °_ C L C° ` P� P ✓ S N O W C � C= T A y � d O C V O C A C • .n O O C A P` � �.✓i p� UNVO✓ V> a =r. pd9rn v T — ✓ ✓ ^R'9 M A E— c n N v_ P .e o d ""O N Y c Cdr Y A= c g nOYC d Cl ^O 9 � .L• Yf �6 £� V O �W YC � 6pCN d�G�aW�OV� ✓O n q ✓p —yV.O 9 na LPgOL a "C .0 V 6 .JOr V...�� NAV.✓ LL a. A N OVO C n NV_✓ .C�� TrpO �`N L� MCP ` dCNa,pq FY 6• �9 CN9� ��V• ✓ CV NN•.d L 9�yV14 _•w S� ¢C PYxO ` eOd S� 6'L •�LJ✓ Cp Ay a va dd L✓ C A ^ V A` T °C V d N Y d V a O`= U C L O n F_ T p O O Y A ✓ O C N^ 6 d N y, i °✓ aic L A^ O rn ^ ✓A oa+o PQ P✓ a ` da�0. N✓ L S n q '�^ A C _c d•...c r. L A N Q C f r E d ✓° a � coy o` � O d o L✓ O ^ T � y� N A A C q _n N V A a N l � o i n✓ u _ O .Vn V N O L C L A V f- d ul d P a N N N C ✓✓ y e y U A r� O✓f N C P N ` ti Y L A� �r LOp � .a � M -.pL T O ^ aVi d ° a' °Pw N A d r C✓ U ^Gds i Y V N med Y O C i V V .. oN� � ` e_...Ya Nei. t O L ✓`° aa'' rn ^ � ✓ ✓v `P : ✓vL` Er° FE ` v.r ^o ° °fi d O V�r PPa � d✓ E E V � M ^Nro . _ 4 > C✓ N ` O ua°,.d �r > ✓d ^✓Y✓ CYf- CN ✓ is w NO b�o°Y °n irn�A:f E E �. �+As Y i � Y L J.a V a 9 d O L✓ O✓ C✓ 4 d i w` ^^ Q N L N V d d d_ N ° a Q N `yb1 NN E 4) P -• -av —a P L aL - cLUa• a.P cc -� a LP oc P c dod +. L' = a o_ Pda cs u yq�Ga' D L— u6� LW�L yd ON CO =P••O W V i A _ S m •r J O V i• > p zN�L•'LpU GPgG O OA C O^JC VD auiq ✓• V n0 Y C9C U c� Wi -C ruN LL O PV L a•O v d0 q p 4C ••O.OV � C� LU 99 �[ 'Tq S�q q�C 'J ✓ r N m � ^O P O DCd 9 � D C q 9 L p M V q D y y L�� Y d N y C T E q O G ^ O 9 •rn P•`if T� � d u p= =JL GL yry D -•9 'd ..y ° CD'pn m °f °`u e. P Niy ^o d � 09 ... p n`�naAL o✓ c� �o`f_� ° u a qc Trn OTP °an. d rs°�iD .La m O L O d C r = ^•r r_ 9 ✓ l O ^J L O 9 D ^• q r v c y � � P L n� N L� P V D 9 ^ N A _ Y O O✓ A N` O J ^ V L w Am �__ 61_ VLd r p� y 0-•EO ��_76 N •v 9 V N 9^ O� r 6 C` ^ C I C S •^ $ NL r V L Ld V 6 V j�J S O `� 9A g G y�N �L •n � 5N D ao NV O_ pp0 .y ^P a o�N _ v NI d �dc om•,;9 Le qc �° � T� r -qqd o � PLLi• Pr w u �= ad,Lo d N d y L C C ° FFGG i N L✓ P_ v99 � Q �� �l^ d L ICY ^N d_OY ✓Aa O -t lN�L4 O N ` 1 A yC^ O ^ 6 V ^� n Q FF C_ V � 9^ •Oi• O_ •r j J V 6 6DfrN L' p` 6 9 O N _ J pVL � N W C A O WVU ^ �6 L O L L L U•Op2 <Y <PV 6V^-O NI N N f Is • N f '9 Y A N A y L d 9 ✓ ✓ V r � r n C t L fr O � y 0 __ Y V V -_ d V y C C 0 O J` N N V m V y 2 1 9 a y ^ O � N O d <O >✓ LVl - ^_ _ CVO dL ^0A r N O 2 q C ` y N C ` _^ V V � CY �•� WAN C t d l J— N ` L r P d q N 1=r A O N_ G y I 9 n d V V � O pPp E V q A O � O d V Lp > y y •^ O b. y p0 •yi• V W ✓� 7 L 1.., C � A L• vc_p o =� °° E ov 23: }� ^ au ✓m4i Z N O y p, W O t O V O Q r .- W' d _ G L Ve L G W c T' v IC � 9 F. W S V✓ •� N N _ L _ y` :1 O V c 2 ,� y P` O O d D ✓� �� t ✓ Y V Cp'_ O � t L N�Wy = ^_� �OW pL ✓A LVi �.-.V d " VL mL T" I ^99 asNQ 9A °pm zk oAo of° _cm m o y 56 d -J > 6 `✓ L P L L L r G' y y j^ r W NA u r 9.- O l u� d YLV d` N VNr •° ^_ NN o A w° YCq _d 22:5 N ✓=�? O A. O 9 o y e;raaN TOE Oy �. VV PNO �V•yi•�O F ^^ Vr `O .-� _c Al' 6 .r / p �A C .O.rd Ay QL nlr C• N •pa O O d�0 P E Q O 6 V 6 < m U G L r O pO L d V N TE L 1-t 6 p N L y V'- T aLl P O • i 9 W O F W > 6 d r V r 9 L r G O.✓ 6 L I - tr N O. �! 1L-UW 1� fy ul E 2 S r -f� 9� E 4) ✓ YNi on c ° L D L - O` ✓ C I I 1 f 9 � V ._ � J � O d � r •O.r U E C � S] r✓ I I t 1 G� Cv •d eV C -4.. r O I l I N ZEE goo eM O 1 i O • w � Q V y � y �• M .e e L D L L o w .- ii. d V tl L 4 J O. ^ d F✓ n = L' T ✓_ ^ O d � G V n� • C „Q = .nG iL E v 2 I 'yes 1 P I q F Or O V_ Y•e C O .J dr l .0 n I I i��i^ taw Nm cex �e mYCOa do myE car Y I I NeLIO N9` 6- V V O 9 y T C i O O T V P V` ` `. O w ✓ L' y c .• i v d c i L a ._ d .+ 2 L✓ i c i .O I .p u I I 'N.'t °d° 3 V�d T"= N =Y N. ✓d'jY. J ✓ I atr �sl� _ 'O V O ✓n ✓I `✓ter✓ EO LV 6_w P- O ^C9 we0 �� Kam= 4•w ry{ ✓P= _'J ✓� 7 I y` O - -L✓ JJ6 a d� F` VI N N C� NrI U(] 1 ! q 6e 1 �w Gi di �V� tie 60i wi YI WS°..K 6L OJ •^"I W I {�i �� �I o z PLC w T O✓ C V v c{ P O N d =`_ Ore O•- !Ow CO q O GwL C E 4 P r v y P O w L✓ V n z• n ✓ i C L� G t- C v G P N d Q� L I r. SN? ZOQ d0 do i�V LSOd�v W} n` i u n n N C w r L L 6 0 L M C q n P e q` C F O- ' L` V O .r• e � I adr_ o c eoJ L c ci cy -w.c a ==. y i i dr�E c.:s a.�yi V rrc w2 i�N C`w� ^V✓ Nd C� dy' `C �r O� O 2 G �P`O nn0 V � "' eG J`C ONaO O� w 000 aC d ` CS iy ."•e wn° i L >� ` -drr✓ °- N w r ^^ Cy ^ 49T vn l rOr O Le6G vOrOi P`n r� nNr N ✓.aLJ N� VI nU n I I O' C rogr d�V e�D di cvL `o evLC c. 4G �✓ I� �= « ,Gi ° P 111 eCP� 4ui CPGNL - a n L cMe ✓E wI r. i N O L o v _ _ d c• -2.57, r C m G i V. d G. P c c r, o •,n v O- C P v c C c N ' I E V - V - N V= > 4 ^ 9� y` n✓ V E d L w ✓ C e G 1 S 1F GVC> ._•O M' -\eP ` - ^N = EC�L` VI - I' rL G O nq �- � V NVO✓` C O an -Er WOaL 6o VO pie O� Cl f _ � 1 �r in 6 � D V C V 71 cI 00 O� i I Lw V9 14 e• I WI J 11 0 9 A Ara A r V = O p V C O C V� y 9 t C— d'= p 4' ✓ I 'P = ° oI ° c. no A o yv z✓ PY1 o s N ^ u cd+r_ q o� Gp � 1 ♦_�� 6nN D 2 NI . - -Y -N �O v 0 `Gp ° O ^dS02 � VrN 6L pdP N 6'JNM ° M ` nVL L° r Y P P V O. r° E ✓ d � i y nFS N ^ — L rrr 'N p ✓� �q LGi —_ \y" 9 .✓ N �L a N IO d 6 n^ r N d q d L r d r >— Va ^� dA 1r� % pnb 102 S Cc M d A � NJq 2\": r N` —+ 6 t r e bb o cvi �nr p— icwc as9 _ d r i V✓ n ° V� g P L r C N p � Q W 6— V C C U N r1 C i v O a ^ 7='0 r 'SMC aC A O V NV `t= C Qi ` O.edO art 1V LV? n y•J0 q[J =d N LV� ^_n C p CppW- eL t � Q�A � �.r.. OL NJ' n d CE ✓'n Vr 00 C.-nTE y qu 10 N.J'l nP0` C> N= l ✓ pN` cL'DrW d_ j1rV OG ^d>n ^` t_V >q �d °V m'q ` dO ^LA TT Gy'! rAP —WEn O7V CLC Ld �qMO d U� ynG GIN T` ^i -� Q V q ^W NG VQO✓�= rq L ✓ C C O y1 L G= C n• \.l T1 Zn C IE 6 V Nn\JA^ 1Li1 6wM Oro NN{.J prr 6V 6— W✓ N L iJ V 11 0 1 v J •^9 O i d 11 III d I\ O eJ.. u q V C N V u M L I V � O •� ` E y ' d y I� 4Cd q ua� r O L W I y� y dY V2i 4 9- j p •eu I I NV -CP. V E I c •nom c -� d0 0` c o .. � .. a o� N a' � L � • o qp V I S_qq CI r 6e O,c LcU� c C A- nF •n0 r� V Eaa ud l- - L.ed I d vaoie aVV, c� d yv�a I L.y.. -d ny e -� �1 ` \Vjt Ij