No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1984/09/27 - Agenda Packet __ _. _ _ ..,, , . .. �w _ ��i J ��A<� �. � r�1 L _ ...i•. .-�-" f �� � + :�' �,' f �\� � T r� — }'. 'ti\ \`\� � ` �i � ��r. .,` � '`�.5 4 .�'� �'r. ., t _ r' , �.: � . ' ,:. '. . . + . : . i 1 .-\/. 4.. �. {... '�.. .1\ � \ Y c . . ... ��.•. . . .. � .�. _' ,_,r . 4-% 'd crrY or ` � > RANCHO y� o �'T�.�N7- �1L�;G CC,vIiI�ISsioN, i > AGENDA 1. A 1977 WEDNESDAY September 26, 1984 7:60 p.m. LIONS PARK COMM>lNjTy CENTER 9161 BASE LAZE RANCHO CIICAMONGA, CALIFORNjA A C T 1 0 N L Ply of Allegiance II. Roll can Commissioner Barker X Commissioner Rempel X Commissioner Chitiea X Commissioner Stout -K — Commissioner NleNiei X III. Announcements IV. Approval of Minutes APPROVED 5-0 July 25, 19b4 Y. Consent Calendar The following Consent Calendar items are expected to be routine and non-controversial, 21hey will be acted on by the Commission at one time without discrossion. If anyone has concern over any item, it should be removed for discussion. APPROVED 5-0 A. TIME EXTENSION FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 11804 & 11805 TI�TM - DISC B REMOVED FOR L lO �s development a 76 condominiums on 11.03 acres o DISCUSSION) land located at the northwest Avenues. corner of Highland and Haven B. APPROVED 5-0 B. PD 83-01 - CALIMARK gateCoffgfi�sslcnopens required from Herita a Park to the shopping to provide access gate opening to g Aping center. be a minimu-n of 36" C. ENVIRONMENTAL for handicapped access. ASSESSMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT REYIEty 84-43 - BARYON - The developme11 nt o two 2-story and one 3-story office buildiind totaling 65,000 sq. ft. on 4.1 adzes of land in the Industrial Park (Subarea 7) District located on the west side of Utica between Aspen Street and Civic Center Drive -APN 208-351-21. D. TIME EXTENSION FOR TENTATIVE ' TRACT 11853 - BARRATT. IRVINE DIVISION - A total development of 72 condominiums on 5.71 acres of land in the Medium Residential District (8-14 du/ac) located on the north side of 19th Street at Ramona Avenue - APN 202-171-41. VL Public Hearings The following items are public hearings in which concerned individuals may voice their opinion of the related project. Please wait to be recognized by the Chairman and address the Commission by stating your name and address. AIII such opinions shall be limited to 5 minutes per individual for each project. APPROVED 5-0 E. VARIANCE 84-03 - AMERICAN SENTINEL SELF STORAGE, INC. - t request to reduce the front yard setback of 25 .feet to a mini-num of 20 feet along 8th Street for a 45.546 sq. ft. self-stori,ge facility on 2.45 acres of land located at the northeast corner of 8th Street and Baker Avenue - 207-271-01. APPROVED 5-0 F. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84-17 - AMERICAN SENTINEL SELF-,STORAGE INC. - The development of a 45,546 square foot self-storage facility and 1040 sq. ft. caretaker's quarters on 2.45 acres of land in the General Industrial (Subarea 1) category, located at the northeast corner of 8th Street and Baker Avenue -APN 207-271-01. APPROVED 5-0 G. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PER-MIT 84-27 - BARMAKIAN - The total development o five multi-tenant industrial buildings totaling 60,000 sq. ft., a 70,300 sq. ft. mini-warehouse facility, and a gas staticn on 11.03 acres of land in the General Industrial (Subarea 1) category Iocat= . on the hest side of Vineyard, between Arrow and 9th Street -APN 207-262-44. APPROVED 5-0 H. ' ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 8587 - REVITI - A division a 1.04 acres into 2 parcels in the Very Low T2 dulac) Development District located on the southeast corner of Mayberry Avenue and Rancho Street - APN 201- 111-35. APPROVED 5-0 L ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 8680 - MOHRLS & SEARLES -A division of 3.177 acres of land into 3 parcels within the Low Medium (4-8 du/ac) Development District located on the east side of Ramona Avenue, south of Baseline Road -APN 1077-03I-3. irr,. APPROVED 5-0 J. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TE NATIVE TRACT 12809 - LEWIS DEVELOPMENT COtIPAW, - A division of 100.16 acres of land into 11 lots within the Terra Vista Planned Community for City park purposes, located on the North side of Baseline Road, between Milliken Avenue and the Deer Creek Channel - APN 202-221-142-25. REQUIRED ENVIRONMENTAL Ii. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN IMPACT REPORT FOCUS114G APJiENDMENT 84-03-A - H & H INVESTMENTS -A request to ON TRANSPORTATIONICIR- amend the General Plan Land Use Map from Low Density CULATION; HEALTH, SAFETY Residential (2-4 du/ac) to Medium High Residential (14-24 AND NUISANCE FACTORS; du/ac) on 13.55 acres of land, located on the south side of UTILITIES & PUBLIC Feron Boulevard, between Turner and Ramona - APN 209- SERVICES; AND LAND USE 085-02, 03, 14. ALTERNATIVES 5-0 L. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN APPROVED 5-0 AMENDMENT 84-03-C -VOLBEDA - A request to amend the General Plan Land Use Map from Low Density Residential (2- 4 du/ac) to Low Medium Density Residential (4-8 du/ac) on 4.78 acres of land located on the south side of Arrow Highway, between Sierra Madre and Comet - APN 207-222- 08. APPROVED 5-0 M. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AMENDMENT 84-03-C - VOLBEDA---A request to amend the Development District Map from "L" 2-4 du/ac) to "LM" (4-8 du/ac) for 4.78 acres of land generally located on the south side of Arrow Highway between Comet and Sierra Madre -APN 207-222-08. APPROVED 5-0 N. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 84-03-8 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - A request to amend the General Plan Land Use asap from Medium Density Residential (4-14 du/ac)/General Industrial to Industrial Park on 18.8 acres of land located on the south side of 9th Street and Baker -APN 207-271-04 through 10, 17 through 20, 35, 37, 38, 43, 44. APPROVED 5-0 O. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AMENDMENT 84-03-13 - CITY Os RANCHO CAMONGA - A request to amend the Development District Map from "M;-- (8-14 du/ac) and Industrial Specific Plan (General Industriai Subarea 1) to Industrial Speck Plan (Industrial Park) for 18.8 acres of land located at the south side of 9th Street and Baker - APN 207-271-04 through 10, 17 through 20, 35, 37, 38, 43, and 44. w 4 1 APPROVED 5-0 P. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 84-03 - D - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - A request to amcnd the General Plan Ltaid Use ?..Sap from Medium Density Residential (4-14 du/ac) to Low Mediur. Density Residential (4-8 du/ac) on 15.8 acres of land located on the west side of HeL'man Avenue south of 7th Street - APN 209-161-04, 16, 23 and 210-341-72. VIL New Business APPROVED 5-0 Q. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 84-34 - O'DONNELL - The development of a 91,700 sq. €t. warehouse/distribution building on 4.5 acres of land in the General Industrial (Subarea 11) category located at the northeast corner of 6th and Pittsburgh - APN 229-261-44. VUL Public Comments This is the time and place for the general public to address the Commission. Items to be discussed here are those which do not already appear on this agenda. 9:40 P.M. EL Adjournment The Planning Commission has adopted Administrative Regulations that set an 11 p.m. adjournment time. If items go beyond that time, they shall be heard only with the consent of the Commission. Planning Commission adjourned to Saturday, September 29, 1984, 8:30 a.m. for a tour of approved projects in the City. `I I ITY MAP wrs • � � Mnr.Ic � � CIrAII.Y rChOIYLMK' . • 1 [MAEEE. i �.• ` E a 4 i Uom PA" LITTj MALL • A op r _ or r q 4 � � 2 F z 5 d f 'Y .'UCA�rOx6A-rWSTr tOu.rT oEGrO.0 sA:� ! CMA.IC LiER.RIOxAL Aut►pa' .i CITY OF RANCHC CAA _c��PI_ ���• `�. CTT'Y OF �,•; �,, RANCHO rL'CAi:I�J\Cud PLANNING COLWMISSION E y AGENDA 1277 WEDNESDAY September 26, 1984 7:00 p.m. LIONS PARK COMMUNITY CENTER 9161 BASE LINE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALWORNIA L Pledge of Allegiance 1L. Ron can Commissioner Barker Commissioner Rempel Commissioner Chitiea Commissioner Stout Commissioner McNiel IH. Announcements IV. Approval of Minutes July 25, 1984 V. went Calendar The following Consent Calendar items are expected to be routine and non-controversial. They will be acted on by the Commission at one time without discussion. If anyone has concern over any item, it should be removed for discussion. A, TIME EXTENSION FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 11804 do 11805 - ®LLEN -A development of 76 condominiu:as on 11.03 acres of land located at the northwest corner. of highland and Haven Avenues. B. PD 83-01 - CALMARK - An agreement to provide access from Heritage Park to the shopping center. C. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT VIEW 84-43 - BARTON - The development of one 2-story and one 3-story office building totaling 50,000 sq. ft. on 3.2 acres of land in the Industrial Park (Subarea 7) District located on the west side of Utica between Aspen Street and Civic Center Drive - APN 208-351-21. j, r D. TIME EXTENSION FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 11853 - BARRATT. IRVINE DIVISION - A total sevelopment of 72 condominiums on 5.71 acres of land in the hIedium Residential District (8-14 du/ac) located on the north side of 19th Street at Ramona Avenue - APN 202-171-41. VL Public Hearings The following items are public hearings in which concerned individuals may voice their opinion of the related project. Flease wait to be recognized by the Chairman and address the Commission by stating your name and address. All such opinions shaI1 be limited to 5 minutes per individual for each project. E. VARIANCE 84-03 - AMERICAN SENTINEL SELF STORAGE, LNG. - A request to reduce the front yard setback of 25 feet to a minimum of 20 feet along Sth Street for a 45,546 sq. ft. self-storage facility on 2.45 acres of land 'located at the northeast corner of 8th Street and Baker Avenue - 207-271-01. F. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84-17 - AMERICAN SENTINEL SELF-STORAGE. INC. - The development of a 45,546 square oot self-storage facility and 1040 sq. ft. caretaker's quarters on 2.45 acres of land in the General Industrial (Subarea 1) category, locat.:d at the northeast corner of 8th Street and Baker Avenue - APN 207-271-01. G. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE ERiti 84-27 - BARMAKIAN - The total development o five multi-tenant industrial buildings totaling 60,000 sq. ft.., a 70,300 sq. ft. mini-warehouse facility, and a gas station on 11.03 acres of land in the General Industrial (Subarea 1) category located on the west side of Vineyare, between Arrow and 9th Street - APN 207-262-44. H. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL 10AP 8587 - REVITI - ti, division of 1.04 acres into 2 parcels in the Very Low 2 du/ac) Development District located on the southeast corner of Mayberry Avenue and Rancho Street - APN 201- 111-35. L ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 8680 - Mi5RFJS & SEARLES -A division of 3.177 acres of Iand into 3 parcels within the Low Medium (4-8 du/ac) Development District located on the east side of Ramona Avenue, south of Baseline Road - APN 1077-031-3. r ht J. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 12809 - LEWIS DEVELOPMENT COMPANY - A division of 100.16 acres of land into 11 lots within the Terra Vista Planned Community for City park purposes, located on the north side of Baseline Road, between Milliken Avenue and the Deer Creek Channel - APN 202-221-142-25. K. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 84-03-A - H x H INVESTMENTS - A request to amend the General Plan Land Use Map from Low Density Residential (2-4 du/ac) to Medium High Residential (14-24 du/ac) on 13.55 acres of land, located on the south side of Feron Boulevard, between Turner and Ramona APN 209- 085-02, 03, 14. L. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL FLAN AMENDMENT 84-03-C -VOLBEDA - A request to amend the General Plan Land Use Map from Low Density Residentin'. (2- 4 du/ac) to Low Medium Density Residential (4-8 du/ac) on 4.78 acres of land located on the south side of Arrow Highway, between Sierra Madre and Comet - APN 207-222- 08. M. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AMENDMENT 84-03-C - VOLBEDA - A request to amend the Development District Map from "L" 2-4 du/ac) to "LM" (4-8 du/ac) for 4.78 acres of land generally located on the south side of Arrow highway between Comet and Sierra Madre - APN 207-222-08. N. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMYD NT 84-03-B - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - A request to amend the General Plan. Land Use Map from Medium Density resideantial (4-14 du/ac)/General Industrial to Industrial Park on 13.8 acres of land located on the south side of 9th Street and Baker -APN 207-211-04 through 10, 17 through 20, 359 37, 38, 432 44. O. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AMENDMENT 84-03-B - CITY OF RANCHO UCAMO. A - A request to amend the Development District Map from "M" (8-14 du/ac) and Industrial Specific Plan (General Industrial Subarea 1) to Industrial Spec.-ifie Plan (Industrial Park) for 18.8 acres of land located at the south side of 9th Street and Baker - APN 207-211-04 through 10, 17 through 20, 35, 379 38, 43, and 44. zi P. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 84-03 - D - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA —AA request to amend the General Plan Land Use Map from Medium Density Residential (4-14 du/ec) to Low Medium Density Residential (4-8 du/ac) on 15.8 acres of land located on the west side of Hellman Avenue south of 7th Street. - APN 209-161-040 16, 23 and 210-341-72. VIL New Business Q. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 84-34 - O`DONNELL - The development of a 91,700 sq. ft. warehouse/distribution building on 4.5 acres of land in the General Industrial (Subarea 11) category located at the northeast corner of 6th and Pittsburgh - APN 229-261-44. VHL Public Comments This is the time and place for the general public to address the Commission. Items to be discussed he , are those which do not already appear on this agenda. M Adjoanment The Planning Commission has adopted Administrative Regulations that set an 11 p.m. adjournment Limo If items go beyond that time, they shall be heard onlywith the consent of the Commission. IL . y _ • ti 'VICIN17Y MAP t I j j i t j �.ryr.�.�.�• � j •ram +.�. I • t •� t i I J •• s`j j r ' i i MrIWb � � CWfK111CGWNLL NPRy t I 1 Mil • 1 _ •/ COLLEGE j'�� `� COLLEGE • • B.www ALL ,.•.a F•wT.r..�.�!-• ur.l • e : • • vna. N/ 'L.GOS ..Nw CITY "ALL . 60 t, fit e m Y •• 1F1 CUCL.00UA-CULSt, COUNty RrOFO.LL wLM. / CRTLRIO !RTCRRABORAL LOMORt' 3+ CTrY OF RAW F9O CUCAMOM(`J► S� CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting July 25, 1984 Chairman Dennis Stout called the Regular Meeting of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at 7:05 p.m. The meeting was held at Lions Park Community Center, 9161 Base Line Road, Rancho Cucamonga, California. Chairman Stout then led in the pledge of allegiance. ROLL CALL PRESENT: COMMISSIONERS: David Barker, Suzanne Chitiea, Larry McNiel , Herman Rempel and Dennis Stout STAFF PRESENT: Tim Beedie, Senior Planner; Shintu Bose, Associate Civil Engineer; Dan Coleman, Associate Planner; Frank Dreckman, Assistant Planner; Nancy Fong, Assistant Planner; Rick Gomez, City Planner; Edward Hopson, Assistant City Attorney; Janice Reynolds, Secretary; Paul Rougeau, Senior Ci,. il Engineer APPROVAL OF MINUTES Commissioner Rempel requested an amendment to page 18 of the June 13, 1984 Minutes. He stated that the Commission suggested priority changes which were not reflected in the motion and requested that the motion include the priority changes. Motion:. Moved by Rempel , seconded by Stout, carried, to approve the Minutes of June 13, 1984 meeting with the above amendment. Commissioner Chitiea abstained as she was not on the Commission at that time. f0i:5ENT CALENDAR A. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 84-20 - GABRIC - The development of a 50,972 square foo* industrial building on 2.64 acres of land in the General Industrial (Subarea 1) designation located on the south side of 7th Street and east of Utica Avenue - APN 209-411-06 and 07. Motion: Moved by McNiel , seconded by Rempel , unanimously carried, to adopt the Consent Calendar. Planting Commission Minutes -1- July 25, 1984 PUBLIC HEARINGS B. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 84-22 - BENTSEN LYNNHAVEN APARTMENTS - A review of the environmental assessment for a proposed master plan for 936 apartment units located on approximately 58.3 acres on the north side of Highland Avenue, east of Haver, Avenue in the Medium-High Development District - APN 202-271-59, 69. Rick Gomez, City Planner, reviewed the staff report and explained that the purpose of the hearing this evening was to make an environmental determination and not a decision on the project at this time. Chairman Stout opened the public hearing. Don King, 9375 Archibald, Rancho Cucamonga, representing the applicant, addressed the Conmission. Mr. King advised that the environmental document prepared and distributed prior to this meeting was the third such document to be prepared for this site. He further stated that the Commission has adequate environmental documentation to make a decision now without the requirement for additional environmental ir!fcrmation. Mr. King stated that this project would generate school fees for school expansion and would also contribute towards the construction of a new fire stdiion. He further stated the Sheriff's Department advised that this project would not create crime problems in this area and would not have a significant impact on the Sheriff's Department. Gordon Brickan, 1621 E. 17th, Santa Ana, California, representing the applicant, addressed the Commission stating that traffic noise level studies were prepared for this site and that there are no problems associated with this project which cannot be mitigated. Herman Kemmel , 3300 Irvine Avenue, Newport Beach, California, representing the applicant, addressed the Commission stating that his firm had prepared traffic studies for the enviromnental document presented to the Commission. Mr. Kemmel reviewed the traffic impacts and mitigation measures. Peter Pfeiler, Pfeiler Engineering, 1749 Euclid, Ontario, California, representing the applicant addressed the Commission regarding the drainage and hydrology impacts and mitigation measures for the project. Jahn Futscher, San Bernardino County Sheriff's Department, Rancho Cucamonga Substation, addressed the Comnoi. Sion to clarify Mr. King's statement regarding crime impacts. He stated that `he fact that the 900 units were apartments would not be significant; however, 900 units would have an impact on law enforcement capabilities. The following individuals addressed the Commission in opposition to the project based on concerns regarding increased crime, impacts on schools, compatibility, traffic, access on Lemon Avenue, and drainage. Planning Commission Minutes -2- July 25, 1984 Cathy 9rees, Rancho Cucamonga Daryl Micolay, 6245 Dakota.; Rancho Cucamonga Chary Dodds, 6709 Mango, Rancho Cucamonga James Hill , Rancho Cucamonga John Gandra, 9633 Hichland, Rancho Cucamonga Craig Nelson, 10560 Lemon, Rancho Cucamonga Laura Nelson, 10560 Lemon, Rancho Cucamonga Mrs. Beckman, 1031 Liberty, Rancho Cucamonga Additionally, a petition was presented to the Commission which contained the names of over 200 individuals opposing the project. Don King responded to the concerns of the residents. He stated that those concerns expressed regarding apartments could not be addressed because apartments are provided in the General Plan for the City and this applicant is trying to design this project in a manner consistent with those goals. He advised that this project would mitigate traffic and drainage for the entire area. Additionally, the apartments are 82% adult units and would only generate approximately 40 school childreia, of which only about 25 would be K-8 grade students. He further stated that market studies show that there is a need for apartments in the City. Commissioner Chitiea asked if the thought had been given to working with the coiinercial group next to the project to provide a second access to the southwestern portion of the project. Mr. King replied that this option had been explored; however, from the City's traffic standpoint this would not be desirable due to the location of the freeway on and off ramps. Paul Rougeau, Senior Civil Engineer, clarified that the alternate presented to e the City proposed an access point at the southerly access of the shopping a center; however, an access point at the center access might be a good secondary access. Mr. King stated that this site is a neighborhood commercial center and to put a read through the center would make that particular site unusable as a neighborhood convenience center because there would not be adequate space for parking or good marketing. Chairman Stout closed the public hearing. Commissioner Barker stated that taking into consideration the surrounding properties including the recent change in the sphere of influence to the east he would feel more comfortable if the issues were looked at it in greater detail . He additionally stated that he would like to see other alternatives explored and discussed so that they could be compared and would recommend a focused Environmental Impact Report. Planning Commission Minutes -3- July 25, 1984 Commissioner Rempel agreed with Commissioner Barker and stated that the traffic and circulation needed to be further explored. He additionally requested that more definitive data be provided on how fire and police response tires were arrived at and a comparison of these calls between single family housing and apartment units. Commissioner Chitiea stated that she would like to know whether the fire responses were keyed to exterior or interior fires. She further requested more information on the type of formula used to determine the number of students generated by this project. Commissioner Barker explained that there are standard formulas used by the school districts to determine the estimated number of students. Commissioner MzNiel stated that his concerns were the same expressed by the other Commissioners in that the density is excessive and that traffic is a problem. Chairman Stout stated that he could not make a dec,lsion on this project without the requirement for a focused Environmental Impact Report. Motion: Moved by Stout that an Environmental Impact Report be prepared for this project focusing on the issues of land use, traffic and circulation, and density and additionally should identify other land use alternatives. Motion seconded by Barker, carried unanimously. AYES: COMMISSIONERS: STOUT, BARKER, CHITIEA, MCNIEL, REMPEL NOES: COMMISSIONEERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried C. TENTATIVE TRACT 12365 - LEWIS •- A request for approval of carport screening material and modifications to conditions of approval for same. Rick Gomez, City Planner, reviewed the staff report. Chairman Stout opened the public hearing. Planning Connission Minutes -4- July 25, 1984 Stan Bela, representing Lewis Homes, addressed the Conunission stating concurrence with the conditions of approval. There were no further comments, therefore Chairman Stout closed the public hearing. Motion: Moved by Barker, seconded by Chitiea, unanimously carried to adopt the Resolution approving the use of lattice screening material , to be maintained by the management company, on the end of carports nearest public streets for Tentative Tract 12365. Additionally, the details for the carports are to be included in the construction plans for review and approval by the City Planner. AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER, CHITIEA, MCNIEL, REMPEL, STOUT NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried D. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 10827 - PACIFIC LIGHTING - A total residential development of 294singe family homes on 57.7 acres of land in the Low (2-4 du/ac) and low-Medium (4-8 du/ac) Residential Districts generally located between. Haven and Hermosa, south of Wilson Avenue - APN 201-181-02, 12, 13, 14, 63, 65, 69, and 79. Dan Coleman, Associate Planner, reviewed the staff report. Chairman Stout opened the public hearing. Ernie Reynolds, representing Pacific Lighting, addressed the Commission requesting that sidewalks be required on one side of the street only. Additionally, Mr. Reynolds displayed a slide presentation of other Pacific Lighting projects. He also addressed the grading issue and referred the Commission's questions to Frank Williams. Frank Williams, Associated Engineers, addressed the Commission regarding the grading issue and steep slope embankments. Mr. Williams explained that the grade could not be taken up in 8-foot increments due to the size of the parcel; however, suggested there are other ways to mitigate the situation. There were no further comments, therefore Chairman Stout closed the public hearina. Commissioner Stout suggested that an alternative drainage method could be explored which would drain the lower lots on the south side of the street to the rear through other lots. He suggested that this method might reduce slope heights. Planning Commission Minutes -5- July 25, 1984 K'q Commissioner Barker stated that he preferred the east-west orientation but had concerns with the backyard slope; however, preferred the 12-15 foot slopes to ` the north-south sawtooth orientation. Commissioner Mc Niel stated concerns with the slope heights and stated he also was not an advocate of north-south streets. Commissioner Chitiea expressed agreement with the east-west street orientation, but stated she would lake to see the •ope height reduced by 2-feet if possible. Commissioner Stout suggested that design measures could be taken to break the street orientation east and west along the rorth-south streets. He further stated that the plan appears to be a sea of houses and suggested that different street trees might be used to divide it into four different neighborhoods as opposed to one large neighborhood. Motion: Moved by Barker, seconded by Rempel, unanimously carried, to adopt the Resolution approving 10827, with conditions requiring sidewalks on one side of the street only, landscaping with a theme to appear as 3 or 4 separate neighborhoods. Commissioner Rempel proposed a condition to require the applicant to work with staff on an alternative drainage system to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Ted Hopson, Assistant City Attorney, suggested that the drainage could possibly be channeled to an area which would be maintained by a homeowners' association. Motion unanimo'sly passed. f AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER, REMPEL, CHITIEA, MCNIEL, STOUT I NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried E. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84-12 - CORNWALL ASSOCIATES - Proposed office addition of 625 square feet to an existing church with other minor landscape, retaining wall, parking lot improvements, security gates and storage building on 3.1 acres of land located in the Low Residential Development District located on the south side of Base Line Road, east of Vineyard Avenue - APN 208-593-08. Nancy Fong, Assistant Planner, reviewed the staff report. Ms. Fong advised that an addition condition should be placed on the resolution which would require installation of fire hydrants at locations to be determined by the Foohtili Fire District. Chairman Stout opened the public hearing. I f Dave Anderson, representing Cornwall Associates, addressed the Commission concurring with the conditions and the resolution. Planning Commission Minutes -6- July 25, 1984 Raymond Walton, 7355 Agate, Rancho Cucamonga, addressed the Commission regarding the block wall on the south. side of the property. Mr. Walton explained that he was the 'adjacent property owner and asked if he would be able to utilize the area between the property line and the wall to improve his eptrance. Ted Hopson, Assistant City Attorney, advised that this matter would have to be discussed with the applicant as this issue is a private matter acid is not one the City could address. There were not further comments, therefore Chairman Stout closed the public hearing. Motion: Moved by Barker, seconded by McNiel , unanimously carried, to adopt the Resolution approving Conditional Use Permit 84-12 with an additional condition to the Resolution requiring the installation of fire hydrants per Foothill Fire District. 9:50 - Planning Commission Recessed 10:00 - Planning Commission Reconvened F. EN'JIRONMENTP,'_ ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 84-02-A - 19TH STREET ORRIDOR STUDY LAND USE AMENDMENT - An amendment to the Land Use Plan of the Rancho Cucamonga General Pan to modify the land use designations for certain properties located within the 19th Street Corridor Study area. Curt Johnston, Associate Planner, reviewed the staff report. The following sites were submitted for :onsideration by the Commission: Site 1 - West side of Beryl Street, south of Hamilton Street - APN 202-032-20, 21, and 22. Site 2 -Southwest corner of 19th Street avid Beryl Street - APN 202-461-61 through 65. Site 3 - Northwest corner of 19th Street and Beryl Street - APN 201-221-08- Site 4 - North side of 19th Street, between Amethyst Street and Archibald - APN 202-101-07, 21 and 22. Site 5 - North side of 19th Street, from Ramona to Hermosa Avenue - APN 202- 171-25, 26, 31, 32, 35, 42, 58, 59. 60, 61. Site 6 - Northeast corner of 19th Street and Hermosa Avenue - APN 202-191-13, 14, 23. Chairman Stout opened the public hearing. The following individuals addressed the Commission: Planning Commission Minutes -7- July 25, 198b. Larry Lewis, 6739 Cambridge, Rancho Cucamonga, requested down zoning on sites 4, 5, and 6. Jim Ellers, 10206 Ring, Rancho Cucamonga, requested that all densities be lowered. Mary Dodds, Rancho Cucamonga resident, requested lower densities and removal of OP designations. Jim Reams, Sarratt Irvine Corporation, requested that site number 5 remain as now designated. John Gardner, Highland Avenue resident, requested down zoning on site number 4. Tom Winfield, Robert Group representative, requested no action be taken on site 5 at this time. Richard Dickson, Lincoln Properties representative, requested that no action be taken on site 4 until the proposed project is reviewed. Greg Enthrop, 6791 Berkshire, Rancho Cucamonga, requested sites 5 and 6 be single family residential. Jack Causey, Rancho Cucamonga resident representing owner of site 6, stated that it is not appropriate to ask a property owner to down zone his property in order to raise the property values of others. Bruce Ann Hahn, Rancho Cucamonga resident, requested down zoning on sites 4, 5, and 6. marry Bliss, 6632 Carnelian, Rancho Cucamonga, stated that apartments are an appropriate land use for site 4. Additionally, three other Rancho Cucamonga residents addressed the Commission requesting down zoning on sites 4, 5, and 6. There were no further comments, therefore Chairman Stout closed the public hearing. After review of each of the sites, the Commission directed staff to prepare further analysis and alternative land uses for sites 3, 4, and 6. These sites will again be reviewed by the Planning Comm. ission for possible General Plan and Development Code Land Use amendments. Additionally, the Commission directed that should the map expire on site number 5, it will be reviewed by the Commission at that time for a possible land use amendment. 11:15 - Planning Comission Recessed 11:25 - Planning Commission Reconvened Planning Commission Minutes -8- July 25, 1984 In Motion: Moved by Barker, seconded by McNiel , unanimously carried, to continue past the 11:00 p.m. adjournment time. G. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84-10 - BECK - The development of a fu y automated carwash on approximately one acre of land in the Industrial Park category (Subarea 6) located at the northeast corner of Haven Avenue and Jersey Boulevard - APN 209-142-32. Dan Coleman, :associate Planner, reviewed the staff report. Chairman Stout opened the public hearing. Larry Beck, applicant, addressed the Commission stating concurrence with the staff report and Resolution of approval. There were no further comments, therefore Chairman Stcut closed the public hearing. Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded by Barker, unanimously carried, to issue a Negative Declaration and adopt the Resolution approving Conditional Use Permit 84-10. AYES: COMMISSIONERS: REMPEL, BARKER, CHITIEA, MCN/EL, STOUT NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried Motion: Moved by Rempel , seconded by McNiel, unani^,..-cly carried, to continue past 11:00 p.m. adjournment time. H. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 8550 - WAGNER - A division of 2 acres of land in the General Industrial District (Subarea 13) located on the southeast corner of Rochester and 7th Street - APN 229-261- 65 and 66. Shintu Bose, Associate Civil Engineer, reviewed the staff report. Chairman Stout opened the public hearing. Doug Mayes, representing the applicant, addressed the Commission stating concurrence with the Resolution and Conditions of Approval . There were no further comments, therefore Chairman Stout closed the public hearing. Planning Commission Minutes -9- July 25, 1984 Motion: Moved by Rempei, seconded by McNiel, unanimously carried, to issue a Negative Declaration and adopt the Resolution approving Parcel Map 8550. AYES: COMMISSIONERS: REMPEL, MCNIEL, BARKER, CHITIEA, STOUT NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried Motion: Moved by Barker, seconded by McNiel, unanimously carried, to continue. I. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCLE MAP 8549 - SIMPSON STRONG-TIE COMPANY division of 10.169 acres of land in the Minimum Impact Heavy Industria, category (Subarea 9) located on the south side of Jersey Boulevard, east of Vincent Avenue - APN 209-143-28. Shintu Bose, Associate Civil Engineer, reviewed the staff repo Chairman Stout opened the public hearing. George MimMack, representing the applicant, addressed the Commission stating concurrence with the staff report and Resolution. Commissioner Chitiea stated that the landscaping is around the larger building, while building number two is mostly parking area with little landscaping. Chairman Stout asked if the landscaping around the two buildings would be consistent. Mr. Mid^lack replied that the landscaping would be consistent in style. He stated that the problem is that the bulk of parking area is in front of building one and at the side of building two. There was further discussion regarding landscaping, at the conclusion of which Mr. MimMack agreed that the applicant would improve the landscaping around parcel two. Motion: Moved by Stout, seconded by Chitiea, to issue a Negative Declartion and adopt the Resolution approving Parcel Map 8549 with an additional condition to require improved landscaping around parcel two. AYES: COMMISSIONERS: STOUT, CHITIEA, BARKER, MCNIEL, REMPEL NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried Planning Commission Minutes -10- July 25, 1984 %lotion: Moved by McNiel , seconded. by Rempel, .unanimously carried, to continue. * * :< * * NEW BUSINESS J. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 84-13 - BARMAKIAN - The development of two warehouse distribution buildings tota ing 78,940 square feet on 4.9 acres of land in the General Industrial category (Subarea 4) iocated approximately 250 feet east of Archibald, south side of 5th Street - APN 210-071-50. Frank Dreckman, Assistant Planner, reviewed the staff report. Motion: Moved by ^empel , seconded by Barker, unanimously carried, to issue a Negative Declaration and adopt the Resolution approving Development Review 84- 13. * i * * * ADJOURNMENT Motion: Moved by Rempei , second-id by McNiel, unanimously carried, to adjourn. 11:55 p.m. - Planning Commission adjourned. Respectfully submitted, Rick Gomez, Deputy Secretary Planning Commission Minutes -11- July 25, 1984 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Gvc en�o STAFF REPORT <q > DATE: September 26, 1984 197 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner BY: Dan Coleman, Associate Planner SUBJECT: TIME EXTENSION FOR TENTATIVE TRACTS 11804 & 11805 - ALLEN development of 76 condominiums on 1 acres of land located at the northwest corner of Highland and Haven Avenues. I. BACKGROUND: The applicant is requesting an eighteen (18) month time extension for Tentative Tracts 11804 & 11805, as described above. The project was originally approved by the Planning Commission on October 13, 1982 and expires on October 13, 1984. The maximum time limit that may be ranted by the Planning Commission for these maps is twenty-four (24) months. II. ANALYSIS: Since the approval of this project, the new Development Code was adopted. Therefore, in order to consider a time extension, the project was reviewed for conformance with the Development Code requirements. Based upon this review, the following inconsistencies with the basic development standards for the Medium Resid::ntial District were noted: STANDARD RE UIRED PROVIDED 1. Building Setback Haven Avo_rue 55' 45' Alta Loma Avenue 45' 35' 2. Parking Setback Alta Loma Avenue 25' 14' 3. Landscape Setback j Haven Avenue 55, 45, Alta Loma Avenue 35' 25' 4. Perimeter Setback 25' 201 ,';. ITEM A PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Time Extension for TT 11804 & TT 11805 September 25, 1984 Page 2 19 Also, the Development Code prohibits two-story multiple family dwellings within 100 feet of westerly property line and adjacent single-family residential. Building 2 comprising six units is located between 20 and 120 feet from the westerly boundary. In many cases, buildings have been provided with staggered setbacks from the streets; therefore, the discrepancies represent the "worst case" and the portions of buildings may exceed the new Development Code Standards. In granting the time extension, the Planning Commission must find under Development Code Section 17.02.020 C7 that the subdivision and development of the property pursuant to the approved tentative tract map which was prepared pursuant to the provisions of an early ordinance of the City, and which is in conflict with the Development Code, may be continued and completed in accordance with the provisions of the original approval. If the Commission determines that the above inconsistencies are not significant, approval of the time extension would be appropriate. III. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission grant a twenty-°our (24) month extension for this project through adoption of the attached Resolution. Re ectful" Oubmitted, `r fRG ck/ mez t}/ P er :DC:ns Attachments: Letter from Applicant Exhibit "A" - Location Map Exhibit "B" - Approved Tentative Tract Map Exhibit "C" - Approved Site Plan Exhibit "0" - Resolution of Approval with Conditions Time Extension Resolution of Approval 4=r A 2, alan snS archi Eel t� � CIEO �➢ � 3� CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT. AIDE 2 21984 August 22, 1984 AN PM Mr. Dan Coleman A>:sociate Planner Community Development Dept. City of Rancho Cucamonga P . O . Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Re: Extension of Site :lan/Planning Commission Approvals for Highland and Haven Garden Condominiums (Allen Development Co . ) Dear Sir: The owner and developer of the above referenced project , TT 11804 and 11805 (P .D. 81-09) (APN 201-262-28 , 30, 31 , 37 , 40) , requests that an 18-month time extension be approved by the Planning Commission for the approvals granted originally on November 17 , 1982. The existing approvals expire in October according to our records. To the best of our knowledge: 1) the conditions of the site, 2) the basic zoning considerations in force, and 3) the acceptance in principle of the design concept by the residents of the Alta Loma Garden Apartments, have sot changed since the original approvals were voted by the Planning Commission. Mr. Allen has consistantly indicated to me his desire for the completion of the project. Y am at present starting to prepare working drawings and specifications and Mr. Allen is exploring avenues of discussion with CAL/TRANS regarding the Free- way R.O .W. portion of the project. These matters have all been delayed by economic conditions and other situations beyond our control . Aft 3400 irvine ave M 205 newpw beach, cdit 92660 714 979-8842 a �t C Mr- Dan Coleman City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 2 We request your staff consider our application for time extension and take the necessary steps to put the matter on the next convenient Planning Commission agenda. Please let me know if any more information is required by your office in regards to this submission. Very truly yours , ,( Alan Snapp AES:bt cc: Peter Allen Allen Development Co . Paul Golfos Ron Williams Realty f ;r:; A u r. .LiM z lt 1 �- - III n Iu ❑ i E - rt `` J- 1 _LCMON AV�tQ1E � •�--• �{- `'7' ! !II ^��.J k ""' I.i rl L s'e.' l ae••—ems...:.-�-..:-..er ^•�._-�— ��� �C��p1QII :��rat,--t- �f-1c�`�4,• i' ��� . y Y� I2 Q_�i. ."ARTY �,y P11►9!4 � L \.+i.� � �_..-o�. ^:� HIGHLAND AND HAVEN-, ry i GARDEN CONDOMINIUMS-' �`[71L7QikQ 1If~ly T. r 0 Li Lt T-I -•ss 3_. I F ./���� fti . � LP/IASEI .•1'9�� � r I l VM._s_: In�-,ILQr�-'ni❑ �� 7;•t"� i '=_ �:4..:r•.'e"" oi...... 1` � ���y: �.n�G� k Li i 4Pd�a•.r0 =-..�+ • - NIDNLAND AVEWE �.os+M.ww+T� � •`•��---C/4•V Yfir.r'J°ro� . -- • .. -T k t> NOTM CITY Or lift5 RA1CHO CUCAdIONGA TITLE: s PLANNING DIVIRON EYHIIirr- A_ SG1LE= A5 i' �_ _ - .,`•'���'�'= ..— .^. � ! �..i1 1 it PH --��^- T\ 4 -- �ear� i NORTH clTv OF ITEM: rr lid_ � RANCHO CUCAj'vIO\GA TITLE:_ PLANNING DIVLSIC)lN EXHIRM SCALE- A io 1 phaser `' _ Q� N ••..�t......•...e 2r,f iP,.1...b•M A• K'�..Cf...Q ,../�1�=l' -G/ TI , I N /�'�-NW'. _A 4.0 - ikr 1 / /�f �1j-%,\I���: .Y ® , (;•] y11tiY.L Yu.iVwD� .ww...,,.r'.,� -. .�.-_...,•gym j.'^� - J �i _ � F_,:-`�•"fi=. l�d.i � a D1L-.SC IJI µgo ' •.__ (.l•.t.�rao L•a�. ;:St05e 1� ti+h..p/..<) v -.�.�'-+u..�....w • � y � . Imo' �7 Itl w�y.�i.o Vt M •,�.y '`semi. i •• C -i � '" � - < �.'/1 -s...—.-:•—^ .2 - '2 _ _ -� i'.•r ..,..,o,,,e.....vim. _Im..o. --"--•`I MiGMLAND AVE. �-s.«.o..a «ors.-v— •r v-.w+.•o rio.w,+v V V NORTH MY Y OF f 19o4s 11WI5 RANCHO CUC=VN,10\GA TITLE:TZrAILEMD = PLNINNING DIVISION EXHIBIT._�_SCALE: it ry .• F. A- l RESOLUTION NO. 82-94 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, CONDITIONALLY APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 11804 AND 11805 WHEREAS, Tentative Tract Maps No. 11804 and 11805 hereinafter "Map" Submitted by Peter 8. Allen, applicant, for the purpose of subdividing the reai property situated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino, State of California, described as a subdivision for a totdl planned development of 76 condominium units on 11.03 acres of lad in the R-1 n ad R-3 zones (R-3/PD pending), located at the northwest corner of Highland and Haven Avenues, into 3 lots, regularly came before the Planning Commission for Public hearing and action on October 13, 1982; and WHEREAS, the City Planner has recommended approval of the Map subject to a?1 conditions set forth in the Engineering and Planning Division's reports; and i EngineeringEa dSPlanneingPDivision'so eportsnandahasread consideredcother evidence the presented at the public hearing. o evidence NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does resolve as follows: fSECTION 1: The Planning Commission makes the following findings in regard to -Tentative Tract No's. 11804 and 11805 and the Map thereof: (a) The tentative tract -is consistent with all applicable interim and proposed general and specific plans; (b) The design or improvements of the tentative tract is consistent with all applicable interim and proposed general and specific plans; (c) The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed; (d) The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage and avoidable injury to humans and wildlife or their habitat; (e) The tentative tract i� 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, flow of record, for access through or use of the property within the proposed subdivision. as Resolution No. 82-94( Page 2 (g) That th'Is project will not create adverse impacts on the environment and a Negative Declaration is issued. SECTION 2: Tentative Tract Map No. 11804 and 1180-, 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. Elevations of all sides of all buildings and garages shall be provided in the final construction drawings and reviewed and approved by the Design Review Committee prior to issuance of building permits. 2. Temporary street tree landscaping shall be provided along Highland and indicated on the detailed landscape plans. 3. Trees shall be planted between garage doors. 4. This approval shall become null and void if the final subdivision map is not approved and recorded within twenty-four (24) months from the approval of this project unless an extension has been granted by the Planning Commisslo,?. 5. Directory signs shall be provided at the project entries to the satisfaction of the City Planner, and appropriate sign permits shall be obtained. 6. Details and typical elevations of walls and fences shall be included in the final construction package. 7. The meandering sidewalk on Haven Avenue shall be redesigned to confozm to City standards. ENGINEERING DIVISION 8. Alta Loma Avenue stre='_ improvements shall be installed with the first phase of construction. The portion west of the westerly private_ street connections shall include all street improvements except pavement and shall include a temporary traffic barrier of a design to be approved by the City Engineer. The paving in this portion shall be replaced with hydroseeded crass, provided with an irrigation system and maintained by the Homeowner's Associaton. A cash deposit will be required to provide for the cost of the future paving. A9 r Resolution No. 82-94", Page 3 9. The sidewalk along Alta Loma '.venue shall be adjacent to the property line. 10. Emergency access to Highland Avenue shall be provided with first phase of construction. 11. A reimbursement agreement for the construction. of the east half of the Haven Avenue median island shall be executed per City Ordinance No. 170. 12. installations of a stormdrain pipe system from the westend of ',ita Loma Avenue to the existing drEinage pipe in Highland Avenue including all catch basins shall be required to the satisfaction of the city Engineer. 13. A lot line adjustment with the property to the north shall be recorded concurrent with or prior to recordation of the traf7t map. 14. access control shall be required along Haver, Avenue except at the extension of Alta Loma Avenue. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 13TH DAY OF G;TOBER, 1932. PLA;iNI;tG CO:ahISSION OF HE TY OF RANCHO CUCAMONG:; 411 BY: Jetr zg, Chirp ATTV)T Secretary of the Planning Commission 1, JACK LAM, Secretary of the ?larnirg Co„Mission 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 Cog-mission held cn the 13th day of October, 1982, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Barker, McNiel, Rempel, Stout NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSI0NERS: King A10 o V _ Ya M •i0 9 i J D - •• b v -70 7F_ cL y y C 9rD C ✓ CLr^ a G =<. > 92 .�. Y Y O � C i i C J y -r r p E V L G• O - F is qo L c r.. r y 4 - O V E4 r n_>• O t'a '� i O r L i c d -2 V u = O� -J9L �^ O� ✓ V- OIL) � TN -IL r � _ . w V O L S u< PC.�r C � L M q C 11 J _ C � •r rI i 6 V .l G r P E V >• r 9 4 V N V `I q •$ L L� O «y EY . wd > V •• t.G d LcL4jp wY 2 Y IOLo O uL`.L Vp c arE .n n• > k.J� L r C 7 O n Ve ci oc J S r C C Py jO V•= O p V q V -• .. <i L� C j `= 7r w s- O > C V= V Cr G •.rC _ CV. u �N VO rnry CC V > o «!q V L_V a=Cc C 'J LO-� _J9- o0 _� '�V �✓� Ev ».rr.V �>� �V w d- -•9 P Yr - L JV L r r« Lr 00•• CL C4 L«rJ OLqL �- •dn VLC C.d�. r3` •V^VY CX- i�-m_ VMrO e�_ V•• `��O Nr�o 4 9 } y�!�� Vr .1 rO+_ _V J y -02 o 24 CI c•w r :Sc _ ` -J > _ OnC •nV L,r _ � � r.n � d4L G •Lr�u =� 9 P <y NG Ge vDiG r Wc9 G 4V q v`> O w4 4y� r •-n.r r�4a.r0 V p• O VVi G F.r u 9 •OVJ a _ .� > l V C ...C M >[LS 3 r ..r iLL p•4 r-L V= �` ^ C` _ u_ C L, ^ L = •O `\\^\ •D PP\I c\\1 N r L V G�9 S <O 6 �? I � ` • ? 1 � � �t N N N � ^ �� 1, I N •V 0 4r <. C v c D C. A L 4 9 r C -Z l •u..r a� r P d r O ott L Vq _ oJ L �L• P L= tL.T Pi L4 ..r�u £r jr'• t C-J OC ^ M ^ T V Z >O L fC L „ Lp VL MyO -L <. uC0 5L O ? rV c6 •OL �J w4_ _ O C C� O r I• 6 r=1 G r= •- �/S •n yv i 'q q 2� w�� 4C VOL 6CF M.L.r YO � LCV b � S O �VI JI� �i i co uL S r 2aa0 JM ram- OVVS i o` P9L E V9 • O ' w_S11}'• i V+? V um �n V c « q < ��� � w Gvp V V O ^I I • U\I •" P..• _ O qC L L C i w u py r 01 q r O a J L G '• V C I r O� i0 = iJ Vr •� LVL 4�V V r� _L .• r iy ZZ EL y � < L« � F•i u .a.� �O r« T 'S G 9 V «4 V � t C U 9 r 4 N t�1`CI l' 4I P m 4 L `G RAJ •n _� -� C Gr. .•' = ' O O L r C �•^ a _Q_ •^ C G ..- L HNC Lr _ ..••O..r ^ r « l� i '-' a c 4- L o L u ."e�� se LN,. Jam? = d i E_ s .. >• o �.04 I (\ V _'^ o o�� oc �.:.0, o>, ^y'.•". ee�° > r�� _ F_ coo 4� 0 �2:s C•O- ` vu MSr. ECL OtLP« LUM qL VC ' rF.• qL -S� _ rr V 1� L!' F V i=L �n _ C ••r S .T 4n. • � C `NO ` 4 6tir �C � Tw 6� 6�i Orr r� < V > LO r.� �O Vt ` u r M V_ O N •"• P . D G � O �� � � t � O P C N n • V I • P • V � + V C - I • - rD o e _ 4•c�`?`'!' c e c� .L. e G � � �_ i ao a _`_� c4N-_ y AM w��I V2 1C C r I _ r SJ IF r ` 7 C ♦ C N C O { L O l _ _O C L ` ✓ V. O. � � ` A/ Cl� _ O; G V ' 1- < < I' V•" G OVCr Cwr O nr.., V V L V � �c A 10[ �r — O_•L+= r^� cr S .Vn � np�l Lr r— C9 y V CG .' V rV 2 'p y OC �• �- y? �- _ ` Gqp cMq " ` > � � � V `L i '•' ` z to�- ec Tco �i 541i c^ c c wy L c c� '" o cc i-.�J i u ... •^: ^- : .o .e 'i" '♦ ny n _ v «G c9 o r `Lry c c +yc cc� o'v V e_` G t > a' C C� v 9 ' n r V♦ �_ Q T C.� r_ T u.� > ` - L $ A� > u C y �_ W •.r 4 r � I L i Oar 0 0 r.. . _ _ C O c �_. ` >.D...t a't i ^ a V { = Va I �-- O y L y G M `^ `fit L ~ - mac L� ...N o A $i'-"mac-" ou o ♦� � �� D _- y•'�-.� cE 15 e`Go=v2A' e-e c c n L bu Iy — Lyc GGr a 1 —p MG i=r Vry,e L•c. c L�� V hr. '7•' v _ oy�� G� •o• •' L C- - ..` - - 4i /� - V � L L Ib f' N q -_�.Lv90 ^ i .^ CM N ^- T. C ♦JO VG Ei G •= O VrV _J V OJ4P C VO..>Cw G SSI C6O � c C� G0. Oa Or Lid GlA 9v � nC_♦- L OV P O � yI O ^ S�♦ rL- G 9 � G 1 .- .no- G C � O O G � �V "- O.L G� C L S��� --• _ 4 v V O ^G vrr r Lr2N C V � C r �= _C a Y 4 r � G C O_1 w� L_G O O A L'�N A= > O�y � •^ A p r Y r `C LO D ~aCVP P` V Oa s =� F_.ET_� •^ Vr0 YL E CR _ G V __G a n d �> C-o r _ C O.Y+ V r•l 4 C r e.. c 1. ^L L V ~ F V 'i ^'•' r0`. G Cw L VLr`G VO _ _ON _ C'C-�__ d� .^rrC� '_♦ b r4 - LV7P � >� MO f�r 7`Y VV 9� 0♦-' C'V �f w N q _ C 6V l 7�_ 4 ^ VC LJ r Cr7 � C PV G CV4 OV r a7 f — G T V=� O 94drYL 0?-♦ `O �S_ r♦A Cy CCz4r VCO A9 s 4 Yot c�- s i 4vT .ac'` �r eaoi = CCO � O � pG m�.yr u~.L FQ - L�o�rv� 5Fm L� L t i G r M - O _ O GC ^JC -♦ ♦--, On9 OG 7 w C= = C r 4 r p r O J =1 V � O L_ T V r�♦ . O w - G ✓ C � .V-. L � V ^_ i. o u o ! O 7 U C J C C V- G u 2 P � Y G L�O C� .0.. >� `=r V 4 s =_ r .. L -_ > cr -iw "' •^ u Y- l`'♦? o :.v.n " E a^ i - � .. �-r. `^ v u -� ..L-?N `oL Ac au Y J C � 00 P=CG •= 1 ��L IL-^ G � �~ ` `O COV i ♦.�V � C� Y� O '^V Or i i�d P4•- V LG� � C V42C � GC 'CV L'.O `�r J= C ♦ V L -73- ^ Y h G _ P �♦ r 4_ � G r P 2 ✓• r L C`q j= A �0. 4 w �. C 4 n_ y� '• •n ` >�� :2.c'r �� 6L G V P�� c .rA<v`n CL„ ^= r•o- > cv yr E t Y_'♦ V V \l N Ada C s .L. P C �S Y• ` Y T � " u O O.V- L O J � y •-C - . _r o .- = c �^ 4 Ln• .. - o u4 .cry _ aL _ M - C .L. I - .. " � u .• n o > '•• c b > c d N :._... - o"" - y .�.` c C �`.� o c u ! e c cc c - J - = - cr •.y^= > C .u. .. �_• c`ocn S •"-'. ! ten, i oa _ C� C l+• q -i� L S l •- .`�. _.o. a .- Ig u >.�' ` ` o• y� i.-� a«c c _: ca =_ � _iu •` ! 1 '^ I urn ♦. � C V O a O n� �n d _C_ L O V � � V S J O �P 6 4- 4 Y N = r ��r •O.O M r O C L C- I L S C E c c = = L_ q � .. Gn � .,._ L_ nu _ `• "L.•iGm � - = n 1 I � o. � I I o•$� an - '^ onc• P <, _". e «- c :L coi '- < uw v _ u ! � 1 G «_r 1 11 I -� ✓ i .:� - y Nay o c c o. 1 I 4 L « n a uo cJ.= � n � -ou ` uc c II 1 c =i � �� jL _- DLL ` r� VrV O✓� r!ia �^ O rV .'ftr OI •`. 1 C = - 7 Y � VO-'• > M '�_ « _ � U O V r � 4>� •- „ L� G � � 4 0 0 � L 4 C V 4 -G VG 3CL L �-Qi byres - �• S I I b •`. L �'` •. ` G9 V L^� CS L •'.Jn Vq= Or- 7C �� a 44 4 ✓ tl � c c+d tGi� d.` r'd'' o r o`er �qri �uoVL• v n- " „ E_ G „ u Y Lr� = « I LC.0 27C _ _d30 « ua+ OLVyL VVV uM ym Pn LI ]a' r Cn 2 ` iI{ V_ OV � «•-i• M - « CG ` O•.• LO i VVO✓ OC VI 4C C ___ = P a rV� r•O.• •Li•r q > OSO y n r0•r «y q� nCf ��4�r � E ` p rr•.• «a G n r V. -a « - -7r 40 « 4n"M"r « •n EraV 21 E � b Caa q i I G V_ G LL Or PYO � rrS Yc•'• C4 __ nT0 + L .O•� L GI V.i L « L I ~aL L� « 4T -_. n .. - ;^r u p� mac`._ym cod• _� o� 'o.Y. cj r <• n '`4I c 1 r .4 o= "om - �� o J J _ „i-• O j 0 •n 9 O y -N w «O r « 4 O M Ca V N` O On _ate •�^ TVnE O V-- O-• G L O-.L.rC QY�` VM V }� .• S rw C_ C+�� I 'OHO y.O� V GN 6s �V •Or• � q C_ S� C � � yv �yt L V a Y ✓1 O O G« V ! v 4 4 LV G I • G q � 3 0-. IN cn 4 � _ a � Or =� � v L=- V `� dJ.= -^ .ter• �- - C 4L � - L is - ._ _ •^4"= or _a ao � � � - G- « a � 4.-�C ✓ �L « G O V L r _O C_V ,` V P- y b 7 r c P L V V V a u V E W Y C� i O ^.�'O n Orr O' O _ _ _ 4 Y V L S ± V L y S W «y T_Q y V«4 r r � -p ` � r ✓ _"^-_ _�- _ o c ✓ c c v c' � Fo 4 Y`Yn` Lmf `_.n L � � �_ c c cc � � �� - f�rrOn - 4G i� G< W •n-.a �y0 2 ✓ Vr«p O b OC y _ -E E ler �_ 9 ••Oi �= t n0 4L` Gr_ La CrZ.J` y9 _ - ... _ nab r E �� r-- _co_ud i-� L�aLi` •w qtL « a d • b4 ra o - V 2.2 .4.OM �,' .�G C- ate+ i�p ✓a` it -• � r r > C V CS C•rw �� 4' >pZL w='L.O. � acc �.:Y EC�`C E7�a• � L _9c vc !o �V C =_ < 4iV �J t' •_ `r P -� tC -r..On nr y` p nC T Z 00 0- w n7 V C Pr -• b b_ L_F I_ « 7 •�P_ _ NI - V O V ` ✓ 4 V � o=i �:• . y=_ 4-- � Sin-_- G' s_ .e cam yy L'-L oqq.2 LS -r L .' c ✓ a. -� of `aciY ���.4.. u --rS 4��y r - we -r �� _ C L C < « G L_ 4 r ` C 4 r ✓C S C _r Y_ - w p V V � w a N « _` � L Y 4 n C •� C• -1= � � � « 90' T •[ -r V ' - GG f �_ O` L4.. _ r ✓O _ YO � 4 LC G ..JCS _ • _ _ S = 3 a - C '' 4 OLIO � �� - vOV •n�`V 4-• Cr_ 4Or�4 V � LG O =•'n C.y w ` z .• �' wr L nO « - 4" J_ L; S` CY L- L LvO yC EP r •rn r V C_ p =L � 1 + O « C O V - J ^ =' -L 9 O G_ •-i•«� G_� Y > L 4 U 4 L L n✓ ]• ` w - V I L - A i3 • L ' r� � � � ► - -- - � :�N'" _M L ` O.9n i f � v v `V J ` C m N a ✓�]O O C I .n^h G' .Ln -J q w r i N A .�j M V C, �� V� O .r.. l`J 4 _ _ w l l C u L C � C 4' •-Ji V V a r U � C =� _ C O 'er V 2 L 9 ~ OC.9 OV 4 SVL _- C•y O OVL �JV y4 r �i � �r O Cu �r q4y b Oy .uw V •+ q C .n NJ Cr N }� U LN _ •f VD GI 9 O.LN N ^ 4� C09 � V r0 - J .L. C• v - V.r.. -_O - ... -' V4 rI q= y GCL 9yf � q _V Ir•J9 � t�1 I � O qy .- P _40 L .n C O � r I _4 •i L. P_ l I° N O \ f I r � �= r P U V t O O r N `I rV� C r1 INrj ._r III LNI On _ C .. a_ � q x N'sNil ANIk 7 I _ •' O ` 4 u � � G j V r C I I I 1 ` � J 4 v � q<�. C C u ��G r r J y V O O N G O 7 V Et �`` Cc rV 9i L `u J I .yl ( I �OV C� LW 4V w •• eCPU e~..�� L 4 uP= N C C C - C J L Neu G. C -G V r L y V 4� ` T :q v V am y L L ^.t .. u_ .-` ra � �-c.. �� E G� I np .�..,�� "c-c �� •'v � Lo ur ^ C _ x ...✓ 7 � G = �C I I C 4 C N y �L a C1 G P � J�.-. cn SJG � � � CI . q i0 = V _ I y C =� :. ��� 0 JC rC" Vr •- ^. i l C �_ r V Y 4 P N .-L .r.r •' I �I � i � V `� C r C V 4 N V Y V .:.r C. r d C S =c Z- 2 ;7 G� J V r "• _- a s � f 4_ b `\ P I 1 I 4 311 -1 I 1 Z mI Pr Vrr , A 14 0 C-] G y W _ G C V l •" ~S N • G n V M y A s_b SEE W It O � .•s d aT L "' � O VO._ Ir 4 rOui O.O Ow� T ���•J O >r > �� J �� T V •J V j � M L J u C CVVC "_ _ _ l ql O 4C� t NOG — 0.9 O9•J � lC CTL � G•V Oy�O r� LT y qV Wordy .Vi qTL i_ t C J d —i - A t s RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION, APPROVING THE TIME EXTENSION FOR TENTATIVE TRACTS 11804 AND 11805. WHEREAS, a request has been filed for a time extension for the above-described project, pursuant to Section 1.401.11.2 of Ordinance 28-B, the Subdivision Ordinance; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conditionally approved the above-described tentative tract map. SECTION 1: The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission has made the following findings: 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 tentative tract map at this time. C. That strict enforcement of the conditions of approval ® regarding expirations would not be consistent with the intent of the Development Code. D. That the granting of said time extension, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or mate.-ially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. E. That subdivision and development of this property _ pursuant to the tentative tract map which was approved pursuant to the provisions of an earlier ordinance of the City, and which is in conflict with the Development Code, may be continued and completed in accordance with the provisions of the approval, provided it is completed within the time limit in effect at the time of its approval, pursuant to Development Code Section 17.02-02OC-7. SECTION 2: The Rancho Cucamr,;,ga Planning Commission hereby grants a time extension for: Tracts Applicant Expiration 11804 & 11805 Peter B. Allen October 13, 1986 A lh APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 26TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 1984. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY• Dennis L. Stout, Chairman ATTEST: Rick Gomez, Deputy ecretary I, Pick Gomez, Deputy Secreta-y 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 September, 1984, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ASSENT: COMMISSIONERS: I CITY CF RANCHO CUCAMONGA CAtiroyc STAFF REPORT IC/ 711 1 0 DATE: September 26, 1984 1977, TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner BY- Dan Coleman, Associate Planner SUBJECT: PLANNED DEVELOPMENT 83-01 - CALMARK - An agreement to provide access from Heritage "ark to the shopping -enter. I. BACKGROUND: The conditions of approval require that pedestrian access be provided from the Heritage Park senior citizen units to shopping areas along the south property line, including fencing, security access, and appropriate ramps. Pursuant to this condition of approval , the applicant, Calmark Development Corporation, has prepared an "Agreement and Permit for Access" with the property owners of the Alpha Beta Shopping Center. The agreement grants Calmark Development Corporation and its successors the right and privilege to install and maintain a pedestrian access gate and to enter subject property for the purpose of providing pedestrian e access to and from the Heritage Park Senior Citizen Project and the Alpha Beta Shopping Center. However, the agreement contains a clause that gives the property owners the right to terminate the agreement at any time by written termination thirty (30) days in advance. The City Attorney has reviewed the proposed access agreement in terms of form and content and indicates that the agreement provides sufficient guarantees that access will be provided; however, noted that it can be terminated with thirty (30) days notice. Further, the City Attorney indicates that this termination clause is not unusual and merely establishes the right of the property owners to deny access to Heritage Park residents in the same manner that the property owner has a legal right to bar public access to their parking lot. therefore, the City Attorney has indicated that this agreement represents a good faith effort on the part of the developer, Calmark Development Corporation, to comply with the intent of the Conditions of Approval. ITEM B PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Planned Development 83-01 - Calmark September 26, 1984 Page 2 II. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission accept the agreement through minute action as meeting the intent of the Conditions of Approval . R ect ly i bmitted, i c Got. z ity Planner RG:DC:ns Attachments: Agreement and Permit for Access Proposed Access and Gate Details Exhibit "A" - Approved Site Pian Exhibit "8" - Site Utilization Map Resolution of Approval with Conditions e- P. z RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO: AGREEMENT AND PERMIT FOR ACCESS THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into as of t. is day of 1984 , by and between Alphr Beta Acme Markets, Inc. , a corporation, and Benjamin J. Franklin and Melba R. Franklin, (collectively referred to as "Grantors") , and CAL RANCHO I. INC., a California corpo- ration ("Grantee") . WHEREAS, Benjamin J. Franklin and lielba R. Franklin, are the fee owners, and Alpha Beta Company, formerly Alpha Beta Acme Markets, Inc., is the lessee of the certain real property located in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino, State of California (the "Subject Proper- ty") , which property is legally described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated by this reference herein, and which property is improved as a Commercial stopping complex; and WHEREAS, Grantee is the owner of that certain real property located in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino State of California (the "Adjacent Proper- ty") , "which property is legally described in Exhibit "B" attached hereto and incorporated by this reference herein, and which property is improved or is to be improves with a 233 unit senior citizen residential apartment project;. and WHEREAS, the Subject Property and the Adjacent Property are adjacent to one another; and WHEREAS, Grantee des-zes and intends to install a pedestrian access gate of the Subject Property to provide a convenient pedestrian access to and from the Subject Proper- ty for the owners, occupants, residents and tenants of the Adjacent Property and their guests, invitees and licensees, 4 t and Grantors are willing and intend to gra:,t such rights and privileges as arooided herein; NOW, THEREFOR-"_, in consideration of the premises, and the sum of Ten Dollars ($10.00) in hand paid by Grantee to Grantors, and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto agree as follows; 1. Granters hereby grant to Grantee, its successors and assigns, the right and privilege to install and maintain a pedestrian access gate on the Subject Property and to enter the Subject Property at such location and in such manner as is more particularly shown in the diagram attached hereto as Exhibit 'C' and incorporated by this reference herein, which gate and entry shall be for the purpose of providing pedestrian access to and from and through the Subject Property in favor of and app_rtenant to the Adjacent Property, and which gate and entry shall be for the benefit- and use of tl.e owners, occupants, residents and tenants of the Adjacent Property and their guests, invitees and licens- ees as may be determined by Grantee in its use and operation of the Adjacent Property. 2. Grantee agrees as a condition hereof_ to pay all costs for the installation of such pedestrian access gate, to repair any st_^uctnra'_ damage to any surrounding wall= or fences which may be caused by the installation of such gate and to maintain such gate in good condition and repair. Such gate may be a self-locking gate, with access to the Adjacent Property from the Subject Property via the gate restricted, and requiring the use of a key to enter the gate from the Subject Property. 3. Granters shall have the right to terminate this Agreement at any time and without prior notice to Grantee. Subject to the foregoing, the rights and privileges granted herein shall continue for a term of 30 years from the date hereof, and shall be automatically extended for successive periods of 10 years each unless Witten notice of L t ( termination is delivered by Grantors t. Grantee. Grantee agrees that use or exercise of the privilege conferred herein during the original term or any extension thereof shall not give rise to or create any claim for any prescrip- tive right or easement in the Subject Property. 3. This Agreement and the covenants and provisions hereof shall benefit and run with the land, and shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of all pa.-ties having or acquiring any right, title or interest in the real property described herein, or any portion thereof, and shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the successors and assigns of such party for so long as each such succes- sive transferee retains its respective interest in the property. S. Grantee further Agrees that is shall, for the mutual benefit of Grantee and Grantor, maintain public liZ`'ility insurance against claims for bodily injury, death, nr property damage occurring in or about the Subject Proper- ty or the pedestrian access gate. Such insurance shall afford protection in the combined single limit of not less than $1,000,000 for perscr.al injury and property damage. Grantors shall be named as an insured under such insurance, and Grantee agrees tha` the policy for such insurance shall provide that the coverrge described therein shall not be caL._elled or reduced in amount without first providing (thirty) 30 days advance writtea notice to Grantors. Such insurance shall be primary and noncontributing with any ether insurance. Grantee agrees to provide Grantors evi- dence of such insurance within thirty (301 days of execution of this agreement.C. Nothing contained herein shall imposes any liability upon the holder of any bona fide mortgr3e or. deed , f trust obtained for value which is a lien against all or any portion of the property herein described. No violation of any covenant, condition or restriction herein or provision hereof shall defeat or render invalid the lien of any 3 K 5 C nortgage or deed of t_....t against all or any portion of the property herein described made in good faith and for value. This Agreemenz contains the antire uncle rstand_ag between the parties relating to the rights anC. privileges herein granted, and may not be modified or amended without the written consent of the parties hereto. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreewent as of the day and year first herein;bove written. GRANTORS: Ben)a.-un J. Franklin Melba R. Franklin ALPFA BETA COMPAvY, formerly Alpha Beta Acme Markets, Inc. a Delaware Corporation By Its ATTEST: GRA%=- : CAL-RAf CEO 1, INC_, a Cali_for::ia Corporation By its ATTEST: Q STATE OF ) : ss COUNTY OF I On the day of 1984, before me, a Notary Public in and For saic State and County, appeared BENJAMIN J. FRA1ALIN and MELBA R. FRANKLIN, personally known to me to be the persons who executed tt.e foregoing instrument. NOtory ku�blic Residing In• My Commissior. Expires: STATE OF UTAR ) ss. COUNTY OF SALT LAKE ) On 1 1984. before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared and personally known to me to be the persons who executed the within instrument as and on beha_£ or ALPFA BETA COMPANY, t. corporation therein named, and acknowledged to me that such corporation executed the within instrument pursuant to its by-laws or a resolution of its board of directors. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Notary Public Residing at: MY cOMmi.ssior, expires: STATE OF UTAH j : ss. COUNTY OF SALT L3LCE } on 1984, before me, the undersig , a o Ntary F lic in y.d for said State, personally appeared and personally known to me to be the persons who executed the within instr=ert as and , or beha�o£ CAL-RANCHO I, INC., the corporation therein named, and acknowledged to me that such corporation executed the within instrument pursuant _o its by-laws or a resolution of its board of directors. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Notary P ti: Residing at: My commission expires: S k: = " b"7 f- EXHIBIT "A" PP.BCEL A: PARCEL 3 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 793, IN THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS PER NAP, FILED IN BOOK 8, PAGE 10, OF PARCEL MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF ^•.HE COLTN— RECORDER OF SAID Cou"TY. PARCEL 3: AN EASW NT FOR DRIVEWAY PURPOSES 15.00 FEET IN WIDTH LYING ADjACE,%-r TO AND IMMEDIATELY WEST OF THE MOST WESTERLY LINES OF PARCELS 1, 2, AND 3, OF SAID PARCEL MAP'NO. 793, AS PROVIDED IN THE DEED RECORDED IN BOOK 7112, PAGE 147, OFFICIAL RECORDS, IN HE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORYZA_ PARCEL C: AN EASEMENT FOR DRIVEWAY PURPOSES OVER THE WESTERLY 15.00 FEET OF PARCELS 1 AND 2 OF SAID PARCEL MAP NO. 793, AS PRO- VIDED IN THE DEED RECORDED IN BOOK 7112, PACE 147, OFFICIAL RE- CORDS, IN THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORSI:�_ PARCEL D: AN EASEMENT FOR DRIVEWAY PURPOSES OVER THE WESTERLY 15.00 FEET OF PARCEL 5 OF SAID PI RCEL MAP NO. 793, IN THE COU:7TY OF SAN 8£RNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA. I 7/li/84 V EXHIBIT "B" PARCEL 2 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 5792, IN THE CITY OF 7=;CHO CUC:,":ONGA, COUNTY Or SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS PER :LAP RECORDED IN B00% 59, PAGES 74 ANn 75 OF PARCEL MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY. J.N. 701-002-0 7/10184 P. 7 69 11.0 TW '70 r1 I •t+ //r�- pp u- W% n L— lox t �S F- FAAIVK l' Y�� -�! V1 t� � n•�iti' 1• � i AADMLAn ciscaACHEA ASSOCIATES- INC. t / Archrttcri 0 812-t774 c.cc. °� J Cw 916110 Iatla+ Ydt..5+..+w•SVna 10a 7 !I 2 Spe S, ! 21%g 121 2��2 i ail I ; JAI I, s� 1 � i t fjFRANK RAD,MACHER ASSOCIATES, INC. F= i�p A••t LA1Kiscape Atclne.cts oe••• G,(� n (7541$1;-2771 • 18641 lrcvw sue".S"t 204 .Tw^CA 9'.6l,O "�'•�`^' twtc+ REcD 11AY2 3 TLI�INU WEL Alt. W E-ixx� SNlovr}.1 ►�'J Gl life. Z4 NG G ..... . Z coa s HRoMa-r'- = z!�/�O E�L.14�_ s �'L�UM OFF � i WASFRANK , RAAMACHER ASSOCIATES. INC. raj : UnAsc<sPeArcArtcctc Iz�TJG.+r"�Q /A t w Joaro .. k- NuC! tp:M StrM.5u+le$at . Tuaiwl - 1'iL-i�/� ` O.N� L@ 46 .c���ana t. .�i. cnc. l ORDINANCE NO. 201 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITT COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF P.ANCNO CUC;L%027GA, CALIFORNIA, REZ0:112IG A PORTION OF ASSESSOR'S PARCc,. =BER 202-151-3t DFSCRIBJ As PARCEL 1 OF PARCEL MAP 7,827, AND LOCATED WEST OF ARCHI3ALD AND NORTH OF BAcE LINE, FRC1 R-3/PD TO P.-3/50 The City Council of the City of Fancho Cucamonga, California, does ordain as foilows: S_CT=ON 1: The City Council hereby finds and determines the following: A. -hat the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, following a public heari.g held in the time and mahcer prescribed by law, recommends the rezoning of the property hereinafter described, and this City Council has held a public hearing in the time and manner prescribed by law as duly heard and considered said recomsendation. . S. That this rezoning is consistent with the Genertl Plan of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. C. This rezoning will have no significant environmental impact as provided in the Negative Declaration filed L.rein. D. That the conditions recc^_ended by Planning Co—lssion Resolution No. 83-25, and attached hereto as Exhibit ^A", shall be complied with as amended by City Council action as shown. on Eibibit -S.- SECTION 2: The following described real property is hereby rezoned in the man::er stated, and the zoning cap is hereby amended accordingly. Assessor's Parcel Number 202-151-3b, a portion thereof, described as Parcel 1 of Parcel Map 7827, approximately a.55 acres in size and generally located west of Archlbald and north of Base Lire, is hereby charged from R-3/PD (Multiple Family Residential/Planzed Development) to R-3/SO (Multiple Family Residential,'Senicr Overlay). ((( SEC-IL 3: The Mayor shall sign this Ordinance and the City Clerk shall cause the same to be published witYin fifteen (15) days after, its- Passage at least once in, The Dailv Report, a newspaper or general circulation pub11shed in the City of O,^ar.o, California, and circulated in the City of R no Cucamonga, California. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 20th day of April, 1183- AYES: Dahl, Buruet, Schlosser, Frost, Mikels NOES: None ABSENT: None on D. Mikels, .11ayor i Ordinance No- 201, Page :? >r� A==- Wren M. 8aaserr-aa, city Clerk EXB1'I7 "A" RESOUST.OII N0. 83-29 A RESOLUTION OF THE RANrdG CU=-',O',:GA PLAR7InG CON.M1SSIO:: 111 RECO: :E%0IP:G APPROVAL ',F PLA UED DEYELOMMENT NO. 83-01 FOR 9.78 ACRES, ;NU KEOUESTING A CHANGE IN TF` ZONING FROM R-3/PO TO R-3/S0 FOR 6.1 ACRE PORTIOU OF THE SITE, PARCEL 1 AND 3, SOLELY OCCUPIED BY SEC7i0R CITIc11 HOUSING UNITS OF PARCEL MAP 7827, LOCATED NEST OF ARCHIBALD AND NORTH OF BASE LINE WHEREAS, on the 25th day of January, 1923, an application was f and accepted on the above-described project; and il WHEREAS, on the 9th day of March, 1983, the Planning Ccmmission held duty advertised public herrings pursuant to Section 65354 of the California Government Code. SECTi0'1 1: The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Co-fission has made the following rinoingsc 1. That the subject property is suitable for tb+ ess,uses permitted in the proposz^_ zone in terns of acc '- size, and conoatibility with existing lano Cc in - the Surrounding area. use 2- That the proposed Zone Change would rbt have significant impact on the _nvironment nor the surrounding properties. 3. That the proposed Zone Change is in conformance with the General Plan. • SECTION 2: The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Comaission has found that this projeZT-wIT7not create a significant adverse impact on the environment and recormends to City Council the issuance of a ae gati•:e Declaration on atiort on NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: 1. That pursuant to Section 65850 to 65855 of the ` California Government Code, that the Planning [omission of the City of Rancho CUCamonna hereby L recc.:.,enas approval rn the 9th day of March, 1983, Planned Development .;o. 83-01. 2. The Planning Comteission hereby recommends that the City Council approve and adopt Planned Development No. 33-Cl and the zone change repuest. 3. That a Certified Copy of this Resolution and related material hereby adopted by the Planneno Ccm iSS ion shall be forwarded to the City Council_ rg. Ordinance No. 201 Page 3 EXHIBIT "A" Resolution No. 83-29 Page 2 SECTIO% 3: planned Development llo. 83-01 is hereby approved subject to all of the roiio%: r.; conditions and the attached Stanaartl Conditions: PLAflBI:G CC:•41ISSITI 1. Approval of Planned Development S3-01 is granted subject to approval of Zoning Ordinance Amendment 83-02, Ceneral Plan Amendment 83-03, and Parcel Map 7E27. 2. All conditions of approval applicable to Parcel Map 7827 shall apply to this Planned Development. 3. Approval of Planned Development 83-01 is granted subject to approval of a Development Agreement granting a density bonus to allow the Heritage Park project density net to exceed 37.5 DUJAC and the parking ratio shall not be less than .75 Spaces/unit. 4. All walkway fascia boards within the Heritage Park Pmjecc shall be designed to provide a larger architectural element. 5. Benches shall be provided throughout Heritage Park along Lie sidewalks. 6_ Pedestrian access to shopping areas must be provided along the south and west property lines; details of xhich shall be approved by the Planning Division prior to issuance of Building Permits. (i.e., - fencing, security access, ramping). 7_ Dense landscaping shall be provided along the perimeter, including columnar evergreens and deciduous trees, to screen and buffer the project from surrounding land uses. L S. A detailed lighting plan shall be submitted indicating adequate lighting along Heritage Park walkways. 9. Heritage Park landscaping shall minimize impact from surrounding neighborHood and provide adequate security and buffering. 10. Handrails that can be used as "crab-bars" shall be provided on all Stairxays within Heritage Park. OrG:nan_ No. 201 Page + EB8?3IT "A" i Resolution No. 83-29 Page 3 EINGINEERTNG DIVISION 11. All pertinent conditions of Parcel Map 5792 shall apply to this project. 12- The east side of Archibald Avenue shall be widened as required by the City Engineer to provide for a left-turn pocket to Lomita Court. 13. Construction. of either an AC Swale or cc-b and gutter and connecting paving on west site of Archibald Avenue shall be required to protect the shoulder from drainage erosion fron Lomita Curt to the existing curb and gutter- APPROVED AND ADOPT-_D THIS 23RD DAY OF FEBRUARY, 1983. PLANNING PZ-4ISSION OF TYE CITY OF P.ANC40 CJCA:MN-5A By: �,� :Lv+u7 Jett, ett rey Rrn3, crtai-maa f or the Planning LG.. I551011 i I, OAM LAM, Secretary of the Planning Co=ission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning (o.-m4ssion of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Co=ission held on the 23rd day of February, 1933. by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: C=4ISSIMIERS: STOUT, MCIIEL, BARKER, REMPEL, K.l%G ;;OES: CC"4iSSID:ERS: NO*1E A8SE7:T: C". ISSIO::ERS: NONE S= ..TTAC1::':ZNTS TO r._SOLi:tOd 33-29 riJ aim c4iMI5S1c:7 rMcs. `( `1111111mt1it. " i3 ib Ordinance No. 201 Page 7 EXHIB'T "B" CITY COJ::CIL ACTT-Oil The City Council, in addition to accepting the conditions rece--ended by Planning Commission Resoluticn No. 83-29, added the following items: 1 . Eliminate driveway and parking spaces between Sunrise and Heritage Park located west of the terminus of Lomita Court. Parking spaces shall be relocated throughout perimeter of Sunrise. Provide an "ewer.-ency only" acCESs ]ane, constructed of decomposed granite covered with soil and turf, in place of driveway. 2. Providee self-locking gate with master keylock, for Heritage Park residents; at the westerly terminus of the driveway turn around adjacent to westerly boundary. 6 1-7 SUNRISE GENERAL OCCUPANCY APARTMENTS —, VRTl�T1NR5 i ~r �- � r�� V \ •� S: I •�� I� �I I�' s ' Lr�� L a •' ' � a�I lit,., _;�.�� 4,• G r � �I, y y - i�_ \` 7. �,. HERITAGE PARK ELDERLY APARTN,EN7'S L. lili 1 — II�f� (0.75 a,,r✓,��. col..an.� ✓�-`7 =7-7 1:7 a tCGE55 �J i`'Ot7TH CITY or ITr,I: Q -D RANCHO CHO CUC-� IG\GA tjTLE: 'I U I NNING DIVISION E.XHIMT.- Sr-,:,LE:_� r i LEeEN'.7 C = SINGLE FAMILY twsLi 1 � 1 1 VACANT ° �..� 4xt•Es PLAY r_lr j R-3 �- / rtn, raan isra R-l-s LA VINE ST- Ci:J.p 1-7 --J LJ J R-3 --- R-j-S 30 t LA GRAx7E C I - S.P.R.R. y i vt+A.c:.aat srt..cc s' < C-z I ` Iy ��cFh vauw: R-3/?D\ _ S 1T X LGI:.A � LC12TA C22v� -_ 1. o I Ve o� _ �? ����3 C-1 -,.-3IPD v j ! 0 R-3 R-3/PD Q' Z 1 O 1 v - - ra r A-P I uoxz R-3x,.rxr �_j - `-� C 1 0 O. I t] rater 1 tttt 1 I � n Ca R_3 1-- 1, „r I I PAJM, 1 � h-P/ 1 1 sec 'C' vm BASE ROAD / I R-i ;_..o O i FORTH ® cn,y OF ITEM, R "CH O CUCA1 O GA �:eye �t��- M�f PLC \'?vI.\G Did SiQNT F�Hl�t3= _ALE: .�• R`> CITY OF RANCHO CUCATAONGA STAFF REPORT �" 3� � r O IO �' IZ DATE: September 26, 1984 tgn I TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission j FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner ppg� BY: Nan:y Fong, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW G4-43 _ ARTON - jhe dove opment of two 2 -`ory and one 3-story office building totaling 65,000 square feet on 4.1 acres of land in the Industrial Park (Subarea 7) District located on the west side of Utica Avenue, between Aspen Street and Civic Center Drive - APN 208-351-21. I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action Requested: Issuance of a Negative Declaration B. Purpose: Construction of 3 office buildings totaling 65,000 square feet. C. Location: West side of Utica Avenue between Asnen Street and - Civic Cei%ter Drive D. Parcel Size: 4.1 acres E. Existinq Zoning: Industrial Park (Subarea 7) F. Existing Land Use: Vacant 9 G. Surrounding Lan6 Use and Zoning: North - Vacant, County Court and Professional offices under construction,; Industrial Park (Subarea 7) South - Light Industrial, offices, commercial; Industrial Park (Subarea 7), Commercial East - Vacant; Industrial Park (Subarea 7) West - Vacant; Industrial ParK (Subarea 7) H. General Plan Desi inajions: rcject Site - Industrial Park North - Industrial Park South - Industrial Park East - Industrial Park West - Industrial Park 0 ITEM r, PLANNING CO'HISS,ON STAFF REPORT DR 84-43/Barton ` September 26, 1984 Page 2 I I. Site Characteristics: The project site is vacant and rough graded with no structures or significant vegetation. Street improvements for Utica Avenue, Civic Center Drive and Aspen Street have beer. completed with the exception of drive approaches and sidewalks. II. ANALYSIS: A. General: The developer is requesting an environmental assessment for the construction of three office buildings. Presently, only precise plans and architecture for buildings number one and two are submitted for Development Review. Therefore, a separate development review wiil be required for building number 3. Part I of the Initial Study h%,s been completed by the applicant and is attached for your review and consideration. Staff has completed Part II of the Environmental Assessment and foind no significant im3acts on the environment as a rP-tilt of this project. Upon approval of a Negative Declaration, staff will grant final approval of the proje=+ based upon conditions recommended by the Desic+n and Techri 1 Review Committees. B. Impacts: envelopment of the project will generate additional traff,c and 'ncrease the amount of water runoff from the property. However, these increases are insignificant sine the surrouncing streets and drainage facilities have been iny,.alled tG handle the. project increases. To mitigate the circulation conflict between the proposed development and the Future developments on the east side of Utica Avenue, an area access plan of ingress and egress for Utica Avenue should be submitted to the Design/Technical Review Cor-anittees for review and approval. III. RECOMMENDATION: Based u- site analysis and the Initial Study, thT—project v 11 not c -_se significant adverse imparts on the environment. It the Commission concurs, issuance of a Negative Declaration for this project would be i, order. pectf submitted, rRi R-:NF:jr PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DR 84-43/Barton September 26, 1984 Page 3 Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Location Map Exhibit "B" - Rancho Cucamonga Business Park Master Plan Exhibit "CG - Site Plan & Srat'ng Plan Exhibit "D" - Conceptual Landscape Plan Exhibit "E" - Elev: ions Exhibit "F" - Floor Plan Initial Study, Part I .r Y, _ •11. �v�^..:�jS�t�'Yv� f^'-c•C.i�, �y�-fxe�Y S"4�i�x'lx �Y M�'k+nt�.ft t avk'� s'�1.1 .��?�'�s r•'V.`iv . t "��. J"�s.. ,r s u >z ..�` s F t '�T✓ t'^ fb }f � � � r.:: � - •-�'' r � r.,.Y,:nN x,+•4-'-k.-^ ..�Y-,-.u.,'u.S... ,r�-y 1.-..c'.,4.r Y4�••J+ r`"�An j`C`.�y"�':'��•.., y` i—'�..�•y,;),,,,.+s-.e...�e.'E.:e^'Yst.�,F:ai~'.s..'auw:d':.' �.ud'.....;:1�,, r v. ; � � .; ,,,� J� ;� -�.:t.'!i.Y..:;. ....9�. ° s•i f '... ..moo yz�� c ,�o �,,,� r� �yo,,..-..> ,i�i: oi�S.�...� J- t i EXHIBIT B 1 PROFESSIONAL ` I I RANCHO CUCAMONGA BUSINESS PARK MAST�R`ILAN OFFICES f • PROFESSIONAL COLINTY_cogaTs s� r •�1 �"j 1 OFFICES/R & D CIVIC ENTER _ — �CnrMAttOFFICE 1 -. -151 _I• -Kn - - - i.'7 _•. OKCICE 5 sir^• ��}+ , e GFFiCE i EAINIS \` OFFICE EXECUTIVE CENT 1 .ti. ��11Z1111'lM1 2. , �/^ Jr•:. �I �• '" fj L'� 1 1 —� fl COMMERCIAL' - t i :n Dfl ;;:Pm I K-\•.ART L` ` 1 i LIGHT INDUSTRIAL 1 � iij _ LIP R- A 1k .4 fill V1j fir.. y ` f M1 :, "`� 'r'��,�•t �y It �wy�y G a�YYs mil.. • - r''••��"• `� ' �'+1.`}�': ` •� ..:-rF�in, '...it..- �-� �. ....�. �•l'licl7ntttntl�u f�� f,(n�gl , I a14 . n ``� I,f • , ua�.a •�M : nN rr�(4T�ie.Jt �fFfit�iya--� q �.,.[. �.:I1.ML41A�474i(fi}���.. 1.liA .•.�. ' .. PLC' 11414tTX1 4' 2 �I Ills •ni �- •� . ~� •• �ILl rlr urti 1~�I Ylrll. �-, •r T r a' NORTH 'f. RANCHO CUCAMONGA ,. .' ITME- .e' tl-1 _l, I. �h ICY' Il J I7'•. '... �.. - .. .., ! ..� _ r 1 r-1 ,1.I .q 1 •mil � .. r 1 • r • 16 ,s M -� EAST ELEVATIOR NORTH aTY OF ,. CUCAM r� i♦ .'" '1M i li ■. J : 1 ,�'r�V y„�; !!Il � '"', , 1'I I i _i lj � `� ,�..� � ��, ,. 'ate''•. . , ro Fe ili' I ro { •"•"• _ 1X1 Ft r r € ITTI1 r old ',. '"BB'x.h [ 1 i ! f (�:.�fi!��j`` aE/f�, t_C' i i � 11 i•i 1� � ,. � I r � _ � - L �� `� .7wi z•-t L -Mom• J '. aI ■ ♦ s'. r l ' � � s, `r l' u 'i4Yy" r�nn^ r ' y\�nyt�,41.M y f e � • • • "� t " t• j . . �J M� 4 AV n4 A/ a' CITY %C)IF s J i n � ' PLANNING DIVISION _71 8 CITY 0} Fv=\C iO CUC ,MCr\'GA _TI:ITZnL STUDY PART I - pROJSC1, I-VORMIAT1-ON SHEET - To be completed Enviro. mental ASSe55-.,ient `� bV applicanc- P.eview Fee: S87.00 For all arnjec`_s recurring envisor_•nental review, this i CJr'I^ M1,1St be completed and sabnlitted tD the Devel opaent Re:72EW CO-, lttee tl]r01]gR the c'epart;.ent o_;±2re �?le Project ' lication is ,-,,=de_ - Upon rc.•eio= or this ub011Cat=On, the F'nSiir.^- _mental Analysis Swazi Will rrEDc re Fart 11 Or the Initial Jti:�V_ Tie lievelOp...�. - - Co: r.it_ee will meet ar-5 -a--e aC`, Lon no later (10) days ::efor_- the PLbli than ten meeti, at w} ich tine _r,e arcject is to be heard_ The Co.aitte= will r,.ake one cf three d< erZ.nations- 1) T2is project will lave no �i or.i fi -an envirc-_re^t_Z irmact and e Negative e he- led., - D cla_aca Will be- ri1 , 2) The project -. ill have a sicn;;icant envircu-M-er , l a and an Environmental Impact P.eport w:11 be prepared, or 3) An a��a :ditional information report should be supplied by the app'.icapt civina further informatier. COncernino the prnncsed proj,.ti._ PRO BECT TITLE: Civic Center Office Br4.1ding APPLI.C�\^ 'S 1U;r.E, ADDRESS . TEZEPaON : Bartcm Development 8409 Utica Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91-30 714-987-0y96 IZ-_tf-M, ADDR ES, TELEPHONE_- OF PERSON TJ BE CCI.'TACTED CONCERNING THIS PROJECT: ,lames E. Barton, 8409 Mica Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga , Ca 91730 719-98-7 -0996 a LOCATION OF PRO�-.-_cCT (STREET ADDRESS AND ASSESSOR PARCEL NO_ ) civic Center Drive and Utica Avenue, Lots 2 and 3 of Parcel Map 8568 LIST OTHER _vER111TS hcCESS-ARY F ON; LOCAL, REG�I0%^- L, STATE A\i FEDERAL AGENCIEF AND T?^ AGENCY ISSUING SL'Cri PER?,ITS: Buildina permit , Citv pf Rancho Cucamonga pRn.7EC_D-cCRIPTION DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: Cne 2--story zff ice structure -2�rgr in`atpiy ?n_nnn cnliare Eeet anri nnp +h rpP of r�r 'f- -structure of anproxi.-nately 30.000 scuare feet. ACP.ERGE OF PROJECT 7-R A AN-D SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EY.ISTIIdG r��D PROPOSED BUILDINGS, I, NY: Land is eeual to 3 acres which is ecual to 137,900 scuare feet- - No existing buildings, prcncsed structures are to be approximately 50 , 000 square feet DESCRIBE .:F—E -NVIRO_. _`-PL SE^ ItiG OF TPA PROJECT SITE INCLUDI`G IN='Or^.=15TT_O_�Z ON TOPOGR;AP:Y, PLAT_v'PS (TREES) , ANIi-=LS, ANY CUI;1U-7�L, HISTORICAL OR SCE—X C ASP:C='S, USE 0 SSUR?OTa:DIL,ZG PP.OP�PERT_ES, AND THE DESCRIPT10- OF ANY EXISTING STRUCTUIREES ANM THEIR USE (ATTACH X-ECESSARY S:"E'_S) Exist-inn lard is vacant_ There are no trees, plants animals . cultural or historical aspects- It has been graded per City standards under existing permits _dS]d rh TP lh G Padd- t 1 canqt=ictinn i S Is the project, Part of a larger project, one of a series- of c•U:nulative actions, Vnich alt ouch individually small, may as a whole nave significant environmental impact? ^ nrniact is Dart of a 300 acre master Dlan develooment Dreviously approved by the City of Rancho Cucamonoa- r WILL 71175 ?ROo ';^_T: YES 170 1 . Create a substantial change in ground conto::rs? x 2 . Create a substantial change in existing noise or vibration: } 3 _ Create a suDsta;.tial c^ange in demand for municipal services (police, fire, water, sewage, etc. ) '. x 4. Create canoes in the existing zoning or general plan designations? ?_ 5: Remove any existing trees? =low many?_ 6 _ Create the need for use or disposal of potentially haZardcus !,-.aterials such as toxic su=stances, flaa.:�ables or explosives? F_xDlanatlon of any 1__c ansWers above- - I1d11JRTy1.TI : If the Dro]ect 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 ccrrect to the best of my knowledge and belief_ I further understand t1a t additional information may be required to be submitted before an adequate evaulation can be made by the .Developnent Revic-w Committee_ Date September 6, 1984 Signature• �4P Title Owner _ _- CI;'Y OF RANCHO CUCAMONsA STAFF REPORT C'�a C, O yi S F• $ Z DATE: September 26, 1984 1977 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner BY: Linda D. Daniels, Associate Planner SUBJECT: TIME EXTENSION REQUEST FOR TENTATIVE TRACT. 11853 - ARRATT, IRVINE DIVIS_ON - A total development of 2' condominiums on 5. 1 acres of land in the Medium Residential District (8-14 du/ac) located on the north side of 19th Street at Ramona Avenue - APN 202-171-42. 1. BACKGROUND: The applicant is requesting a one-year time extension for Tentative Tract 11853, as described above. The project was originally approved by the Planning Commission on October 28, 1981 and currently expires on October 28, 1984. The developer is requesting the maximum time extension that may be granted for this map. 11. ANALYSIS: Since the approval of this project the Cevelopment Code has been adopted. Therefore, in order to consider a time extension the project was reviewed for conformance with the Development Code requirements. Due to the density of the project being 12.61 du/ac, the project is being reviewed against the Optional Development Standards. Baser. upon this review, there were two areas found to be inconsistent between present Code standards and the approved plans. These inconsistencies are described as follews: 1. Interior site boundar setback to dwellino unit: The present Developme�:c Code requires a minimum -foot setback from an interior site boundary line to a dwelling unit. The project has 5 instances where a setback distance is 15 feet. This is the worse case in the project. Other setbacks proposed between a dwelling unit and an interior site boundary vary between 38 feet and 22 feet. These 15-foot setback locations are identified on Exhibit "C" of the staff repor'G. 2. Under the Optional Standards of the Development Code a solar energy system for the residential units domestic water needs is required. Although the units would be pre-plumbed for a solar energy system, the solar energy collectors are not required with the original approval in 1981. ITEM D ,f, PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Time Extension - Tentative Tract 11853/8arratt September 26, 1984 Page 2 These two inconsistencies in the past have not been considered by the Panning Commission to be significant and if corrections were made they would not alter the appearance or function of the project. The Commission does have the authority to grant a time extension under Deveiopment Code Section 17.02.020 C-7 for a map even though the project may not conform to present Code standards in total. - Staff would also like to note that this particular tract and land area was not part of the 19th Street Corridor Study. III. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Division recommends that a one (1) year final extension be granted by .he Planning Commission. Respectfully submitted, RickjGemez City Pl�mner 1 IG:LD:jr Attachments: Letter from Applicant Requesting Extension Exhibit "A" - Vicinity Map Exhibit "B" - Approved Tentative Tract Map Exhibit "C" - Detailed Site Plan Planning Commission Staff Report - October 28, 1981 Original Resolution of Approval Time Extension Resoluticn of Approval .r •r� August 22, 1984 City of Rancho Cucamonga S 320 Baseline Rcad P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Attn: Rick Gomez Planning Director Re: Tract 11853 19th Street & Ramona City of Rancho Cucamonga Dear Mr. Gomez: Please accept this letter as Barratt Irvine's written request to extend the referenced Tentative Map for one (1) year commencing October 24, 1984. Due to the preparation and discussion of the 19th Street Study, we dec;ded not to proceed with the Final Map. Now that the Study has been completed, we cannot complete the map in the time allotted. Therefore, we respectfully request a one (1) year extension. Should you have any questions, please call the undersigned. Sincerely, BAR TT SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA, INC. Robert A. Hukee Vice President Planning & Engineering RAH:ik BatB#t nw=D:vmom)7752Skypark Bou)evarci, Suite 160,Irvine,Caliiornia 92714,(714)250-0440 Contractcrs : icense No. 402424 n .� TENTATIVE TRACT NO 11853 SITE UTILIZATION AND RADIUS MAP I I I \. \N <.M�••.t O�1 I 1 I ' �1. wRRf.•n �Rt � i `. ' l\Qil 1 -1 CITY OF ITEM: TT Ilg�3 RAINCHO CL'Gr jN,I0\'GA, TITLE: yIClVllfll 111a� PLANNI\G DIVISIU�I E\i itI31T: ���~SG+LE : D4 R.1 IL.], Oil � 1 t r i G� i 'ORTH CITY OF ITEM: R�\Cg-10 C,LC..�-�\,10,NGA TITLE: $c�bdid tii IrutO PLANNING DIVLSI(-)N EXI-IIBIT-- !�G SCALE- p! b 5 I TYPICAL UMT CONF sK'URATgN 161M.UlC•RJ t :e �•..� RECREATION ARER ....�. AREA �NifalzF- .-% ?! —BUILIMIS NUMBER RCCSTR•w f.AOZT•wC�-{�{=——� -� •. _. • - - j ,*cTreMIw STgEEr -V V NORTH CITY OF ITr\1: RANCHO CL'C1�I0XGA TITLE=S.�Fdi PLANNING DI%IISK '\ ILM IIG1T= "G�• SCALE: D co r" — CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA cucn 40 STAFF REPORT O� O OCTOBER 28, 1981 Ul ^� > 1977 TO: Members of the Planning Commission i FROM: Jack Lam, AICP, Director of Community Development BY: Curt Johnston, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PLANNED DEVELOPMENT NO. 81-01 TT 11853i - AMERICAN NATIONAL - A change of zone from R-I- 8,500 to R-3/PD for a total planned development of 72 condo- minimum snits on 5.71 acres of land located on the north side of 19th Street at Ramona Avenue - APN 202-171-42 ABSTRACT: The applicants have submitted development plans and a tract map for the above-described project in order to gain consideration for approval by the Planning Commission. Approval of this project will neces- sitate the approval of 4 intergai parts of the project; a Negative Decla- ration, the rezoning of the site from R-1-8,500 (Single Family Residential ) to the R-3/PD (Multi-family Residential/Planned Development) zone, the site plan and building design, and the tentative tract map. The project has been reviewed by both the Design and Growth Management Review Committees and has passed the Residential Assessment System. Staff has prepared a detailed Staff Report, related Resolutions, and Conditions of Approval for your review and consideration_ BACKGROUND: The appiicant, American ;National Housing Corporation, is requesting approval of their proposal in order to develop 72 condominiums on 5.71 acres of land located on the north side of 19th Street at Ramona Avenue (Exhibits A, B, and C). The application is for a Planned Develop- ment with a density of 13.6 dwelling units per acre. The project site is in the R-1-8,500 zone and General Planned for medium density residential (4-14 dwelling units per acre). The project site has two existing residences which will be removed or demolished. Thy property slopes uniformly from the north to the south at approximately 4a except at the north property line where the southern boundary of a steep knoll exists. The site is a former citrus grove with Eucalyptus windbreaks along the east boundary line. Approximatley 91 trees u of various types will be removed with 11 Oak trees to be preserved. The surrounding Ian( uses and zoning is described as follows: PD 81-01 (TT 11853) Staff Report -2- October 28, 198i LAND USE ZONING North Existing single family residence with R-1-8,500 Foothill Freeway right-of-way approxi- mately 150' to the north. South Single Family Residential R-1 East Church and Vacant Land R-1-8,500 West Vacant with approved 200-unit apartment R-3 complex ANALYSIS: The project is being developed in accordance with the State Subdivision Map Act as well as the City`s Subdivision Ordinance and Zoning Ordinance. The proposed zone change is consistent with the General Plan. All setbacks, building separation, height, parking, and open space require- ments in the Zoning Ordinance will be complied with. The project will -include 12 six-plex structures. Each structure will have four.-2-story, two-bedroom units and two one-bedroom units (Exhibits D and E). All units include a 2-car attached garage. Thirty (30) addi- tional guest parking spaces are provided throughout the development. Texturized pedestrian crosswalks have been provided as shown on the site plan, but Staff recommends that additional crosswalks and a texturized entry- way into the development be provides: to form a continuous pedestrian system. Recreation facilities include a pool , spa, and 2 play areas for children, one with an improved tot lot (Exhibit F). Two points of access have beer`, provided into the project off of 19tn Street; the main entrance at the southwest corner, and an emergency access at the southeast corner. Full street improvements will be required along 19th Street, including dedication of 21 feet of additional right-of-way. The interior road system meets the minimum design standards of the Zoning Ordi- nance with 26 feet curb-to-curb. The streets, landscaping, and open space will be maintained by a Homeowners Association. The preliminary grading and drainage plan has been reviewed by the Grading Committee and riven conceptual approval (Exhibit G). - Landscaping will be provided throughout the development in accordance with standards and policies set by the Planning Commission (Exhibit H). The applicant proposes to install landscaping with patio fences along 19th St. The fence setbacks will vary from 26' to 45' from the face of the curb on 19th Street. Staff recommends that the maximum height of fences here be 5 feet. Alsc, additional landscaping treatment will be required to buffer the grade difference between the street and building pad Clevations. b8 P. D. 21-01 (TT 11553) Staff Report -3- October 28, 1981 37 Blue Gum Eucalyptus trees exist along the east project boundary and are slated to be removed by the applicant. Staff recommends that they be rerlaced with a species of Eucalyptus more suitable to residential land use at 15' on center. Detailed landscaping and irrigation plans will be submitted to the Planning Divisinn prior to issuance of building permits tc assure compliance with these conditions. The Design, Review Committee reviewed this project finding it an acceptable style for this area. Detailed colorec renderings, site plan and building material samples will be available for your review at the Planning Commis- sion meeting. Please find attached Part I of the Initial Study, completed by the applicant, which discusses various environmental factors relative to the project. Staff has completed Part I1 of the Initial Study. No adverse impacts on the environment due to this development have been found. If the Commission concurs with this determination, recommendation of a Negative Declaration would be appropriate. CORRESPONDENCE: A public hearing notice was advertised in the Daily Report newspaper on October 16, 1981 . 28 public hearing notices were sent to sur- rounding property owners within 300 feet of the project site. To date, no correspondence has been received either for or against this project. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission conduct a public hearing to consider all matters relative to this project. If the Commission concurs with the findings of the Staff, adoption of the attached Resolutions with Conditions of Approval would be appropriate. Respectfully suT-'tted,t� t ... 1 JACK LAM, AICP, Director of Community Development JL:CJ:cd Attachments : Exhibit A - Vicinity Map Part I - Initial Study. Exhibit B - Detailed Site Plan Resolution approving Z.C. Exhibit C - Tract Map Resolution approving Tract Exhibit D - Elevations map with conditions. Exhibit E - Floor Plans(2 sheets) Exhibit F - Recreation Center Exhibit G - Conceptual Grading and Drainage Exhibit H - Conceptual Landscape Plan Exhibit I - Phasing Plan *T1 RESOLUTION NO. 81-128 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF P.ANCHC CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, CONDITIONALLY APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAC .1853 WHEREAS, Tentative Tract Map No ",3, hereinafter "Map" submitted by American National Housing Corporation, applicant, for the purpose of subdividing the real property situated in the City of Rancho Cucamonaa, Countv of San Bernardino, State of California , described as a residential development of 72 Condc�mir.ium dwellings cn 5.71 acres of ?art', located on the north side of lgth Street at Ramona Avenue -APN 202-171-42 into 5 lots, regularly came before the Planning Commission for public hearing and action on October 28, 1j8_; and WHEREAS, the City Planner has recommended approval of the Mao 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. N01.1, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does resolve as follows : SECTION 1: The Planning Commission makes the following findings in recard to Tentative Tract No. 11353 and the Map thereof: (a) The tentative tract is consistent with all applicable interim and proposed general and specific plans; (b) The desian or improvements of the tentative tract is consistent with all applicable interim and proposed general and specific plans; (c) The site is physically suitable for the type of devel- opment proposed; (d) The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage and avoidable injury to humans and wildlife or their 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 larqe, now of record, for access through or use of the property within the proposed subdivision. ;r D to Paae 2 (g) That this project will not create adverse impacts on the environment and a Negative Declaration is issued. SECTION 2: Tentative Tract Map No. 11853, 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 design and material of the patio fences along 19th Street shall be restricted -to a maximum height of 5 feet from the finished grade of the building pad. The design, of the fences shall be subject to the approval of the Planning Division., prior to issuance of building permits. 2. The iandscapE treatment along 19th Street shall be improved to incorporate mounding which steps up to an low profile natural rock walls, as a means to soften the grade difference between the street and the building pad elevations. Details shall be in- cluded in the final landscape plans. 3. The Eucalyptus trees on the east property line shall be replaced 15' on center with a species of clean, fast crowing trees compatible with residential land use. 4. The continuous interior uedestrian circulation system shall be improved with additional texturized cross- walks at key locations and at the main entrance to the project. 5. The meandering sidewalk al -)ng 19th Street shall maintain a minimum distance of 2' from the curb, except at the drive approach. 6. A director,; shall be placed at the entrance to the project subject to Planning Division approval . 7. All ground floor units shall have a contigunus 225 square feet of patio area. 8. The tot lot shall be contained within a defined area through design features such as landscaping and earth rounds. ENGINEERING DIVISION 9. Revision or reconstruction of intersection drain. at Ramona and 19th Street shall be done peg- Cal Trans standards and policies . :1"rI i� t1 us., ` Page 3 .. .. 10. Vacation of Ramui;a Avenue north of 19th Stre -t shall be accomplished prior to recordation. 11. Flood protec;:ion wall shall be installed along east property line to protect structures from overflow of Alta Loma Channel . 12. A joint use driveway agreement shall be made with adjacent property owner to the west. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 28TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 1981. PLANNING COMMISSION OF TH ITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: f 7e King, Chairma J r � Sec' ary 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 28th day of October, 1981, by the. following vote- to-wit: AYES : W-1,�111ISSIONERS: Rempel , Sceranka, Dahl , King NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Tolstoy �q _ e " O Y - n. S nL r . n _ _ _ o, - n � x u : — — o � �' . SL• o .cep i '� G n.__ o «— — 72 Iic�� � n _ [ � G L10 «C OO n 9- 9u 6 _ CL700� y > C 9O_UC OC 7' O YP 7 « J G � vy2V6�a O �� d09 7 J «.- V C J t y- M - P J r 0 Q y L L- 0 .1 « e �� V .^ T C C 4 7 'i e v � V 'r - « O p �• n v — �u s�i0 Ln? 9 a_i L v «.'•.. V s u V n v � o CC t � J 9n l � L CO.G ! 9 4_O N G4=vq _ L= �iE Omani V9 y C C� NG G9 ✓Ot0 N Cw WCIC L .f - � �<-_O« O � > r0 «uT �orc �I LN � N N N N N N N K ® o c e o 's o _ c d•• r � o _ _ ZZ cu em C•C r Y C t dL G f� bn O• lC0 _..n 40 O 4 4 {lI 9 � - >6 Z T « O`O J N L d� O V i c G'•q ! E V"J' l"•]• O "i t O= O V 6 e p' ^j y� '—I `o"a' _� —� ` = u_• c �� v «oL =`o �4-"�Lda F �I O �I « � - _Jr - � G� V ��• _ t C T Lw� f/ C �7 LOC7 � 2 � J Oi Y( C ' O r9__« a G.+ V 6 L ROO a 0 FT.• >•V=1 _ Lr Y N �� _ N• O O � _ b O _ ` 4 _ -J r c o. l+.]: C,^11 u G >C O „ _ 'Li•+ -- nPi � � c�fCi ��"O C F `L V �- �� � n_. C O 9 __ M G o`o o G ' o q 1Z L _ P« •n r L9G wrr _ O C� Pb «4 Y roJill iiiiiiiiii C j rO VI C 4w 6-n G.L... .L.i Ku0 C.lw .n qw � 4 _ r __ C' N n• Y• �O N D i3 rC •- = G r 6 G � � _ C - d i zo _« C• o V= < •n^ C G « = '` C� .e O O O 1' c C G .. - L n .n q L co • O e 1-I` C C.V V t > O•- T v _l. « .-r. I p C LV C O J V L O C_ O O C.O. U •l ^ G C C C .n_ Y ` .qu 1' y-� .� L = � n �N � ^ o� � `+ `•- J 6_ P' a -_ - � 4 G C =^I c L « C. oL w « - � V L .•-. - O O•+^ 4 u c-+'' _'- 4 - - L' C p E .-4.�` y 4 -t t « ' y - ^. n :. c O _ a_ qc..- � c - - ••"- _Gp ce «1 c " c � I '.. c Lor u rcv c c �' � ��rro � . , G „4 C q O� Or 'S ��• C O VUu p b � C LCC ri tiro «� Conn �" >• Jc-- T'�Cc . l G - -]_ -� C' : U.-. O L.J - - •- O J V P `•' �`V O`V C .n ^ 2 p •n.- C S C C G O r q G > V } N `c, _ G (V - _ +•L V_ _ q -- � _ -Lc- - moo -... «.' L'.-i.•' -cL -mac _�. - ,e-? uc J_ .. V c c o U p �_ .-.'C �q -_J E-J 'O _= _ LO i C V-3Nq- >LL - •^ - ` � .n r .V.._ C i� C •n ` .E _V c' - ...r yo'u __ cLr `-"-.- ur ' __ -•'-Pc o.`__L ou - -_ .Oi - r O _ O. -"n -^ « - O C _ _ V ✓ 7 L ` ` V V o r _ _ L k '� ?= « 7 7 q C v _ G V _ i 4 u L ✓ _ ; L 4 L _ n 00� O \O r C V_ _ O V „Q-E `« - L L V4 ..•4q_ O � V- cT - � lO �O ....q OyC CO 4�• VCJ n7 w a N O •.-.C.- C = _ _4 C_ r Q ...'Q C_ v _ C 4 O V - _ .n � V M L C L O - O u _ _ u.-J f L .. ...G _ - E - •. .V- q V - -� j -_ L- 4 � y •_N L 4 0 •n 'J V > S r L-. O _ _ C q __� N c'o � - � cam ? _� �._o __ _ - - " c c - � .^,_- u.'. i -ci .•.� L = oL ^ - q L G j•n G 4 -J _ _ ' J�. _ _� «9 `V O' =v_y « O •� C 4 Ly C L w _ > O ' P n r V_ t2 9 O _V _ C _ 4 U_ •n .Gi ^ - ' > « r` V «� C- N •" � _ ` J .n '• CN Lem CO .•.. CO C •��� rC 44 rn»�2 a✓_ .n -O � ««_GV � P O+ - fj SS Pnl, p C LLJL _- V - _Lva - � I 1 L 14 _ - c� \o _ - = C P 4-`V e• u �.--. n � \ v �- �'L .di. W C L N 1 V ` a V.L.. wG.5 < _ ; -O ✓9 .n 4 .n 4 G -•y d « u C r C C L O r �. � C r-. _^I _ ` �v V r i '� � _ l - Cy O.4 _ O V 4c0 .r. - � ` V v - 9 P.I _t j7 r O•- C 40V f - Q n _ r f q D r,y :'v u _ � _.- c .•.o. P « E -L Y i•n � s a L aY. „�_� LA. c _.. r•u `o .J. r_`r, dGr -c = � �' ' cuL > � ul ` - � a .p' = � « -- � C O A _V.. ` • 'n O « _ a "_. L-.V V -- T V 4 A� L .. � I I � > I ' �c�� L o5 '".. r,. _ Ar `cam 1' '"� 0 " 7"'= '^ 0 - 3— � o^ c CJ c .� •• u'd'V 4 c0 'c •> O CL L t� O .n G _ O C C .,,. C• _ .-. O C U u J A _ r� T7 �� 9 V O " ✓ 4 Y V � v 4 O A � A V r _ •^,LJ T 9 1 V q T4 _ ✓ U O C ✓ h i� cn t 9 Q VC uV.^ s ` G.j 4 _•e..^`� _ ,c V` V< C `� ` O O J oec u eN-�� ..`= o- =� AP ¢ �c � ` _ ec• _ P Eo c. - c - vo au F[ n = - cca _ro _ - - •- " cl -tea Lg rn •-. �-.. G � _ G r � C' U G C L''I C_ C P 7 r j y^ V G ? C G O O y a � l E V r _ YL �� Ci �Y. 4^ t.Lr .:: .I ❑�eo < .. � L �vLuu cvv�.L-, C.:v � �o =.i cpi �..}:b.'.� •�_'� CI ry N r. _ _ L v I ,s Ln -- 4 r C r= C O_ c d s r O C I C l < � ✓ ` O r I I 1 _ T V O - - a• .n V C I V L .: - C_ S .a y� • y' O 4 u I I L V C _ •- C � 7 D C 4 C V O 7 u V •]t C• V I I L • r _V ' V _ C c V 6 V C ; V T ! n r � V� O Y P' • C 9 I - V C f� � �M VC r c n ` U V C .-- V-w .�. d j •n V V.a v I -f V -•' i- W l Q l�r CCVO' a ` 2 •'• 4 -u Iu IO ' I I � •ra > Q CC -Or CU G r _J n C v �' _ � � [• 4 u '.J„ •^ C •Vi u V 4 V � I I O u <. _ r� _u d � _- 'l Y r V OI 2� � O r O C J C V .n.. J n n C � .. O •! y d C V C. t• L y �VOi L '4- `fir•V a `' = 9 G i r � L r t ` I C O -a u V I u 0 O L 4 `••ce v_0= c] 4 c .., vT,, y (IL - ^ � oo _- e - a j 9c ]may .., `• U •n cI <, u OJ_ .i_ G♦ _TO \ •Cv 1 OU 'Jl r� � 2 � `• <• C CL� 4 `I P V � Oc0 Vuy uC 05 b > y ^ Lr _ V _VJ S nU U O � U-•_ C ,-,� � LrG 1V £ ` T V` Zz ' ! � � N •7 C Yf •p -� -- r Q E u Z. is >•c <c' � = <' u: a - NI I I 1 fc�c cr`m N$ o P o.=?:� 9 V 7 ` 4 l T-__ � •n C u C V 4 1 w p :W - O O _ O �• }�; C T'.• ;t p c' uuE VLu L - O -rS0 •r'l` q� -V L ,da O V � ` V V G ccr '^= L� ! a`o .>.s v °•= •^ y .. c. L Lvo uu or � r _ •" �= u _ X n.L• eEa. ;=W •^� car = V r.V. L un T ~` I C VLC.- bVOV V r s •� 4r O �71 ucr mL.. o 4 " . yL_ a: - 077 cc•� c o - cc.a c zu c I I i cu _ 9y_-� c-.c � •" o L '`�i _ _ n ' .•� o � mac_ --_ ? -c - t'co p 0 >• C4 Vo `= =� 4 n. r i� � � � 1 I t - - i- c �= r y r= _ P•^ a _: - .. 1-I��' a a.�o c y,,;o.- `u V S a - �r r_ o u - ._ �I ,,. e E r 1-¢ t a _ ., r 2 _ _ ,L, jam•'-_. d n •`r• � r l � O I •O.• c.P F C 4 - a O " C 4 �!1 _� <' V i, •+y., � C � �� '_ � I ,� it u c it r •n V c V v P y P 9 C 2 •n a 16 v o " r_V� _ T C -V•:] GG � =ram a - T t;G 024� � O CJ.V CO' CG „ l µ �UV C Yi'iV , NIA o cL.. ` oc -_o c _ r- C9 ry d Vv Sr ^'OCO 1 cv c: oar `_� G - 4_�� .i.. .• or _ _ - _ 4 r _ �'�NO GT V94i — c4- 3.` V oc - � � I I I _ oq •. -q o..-.. b D t? RESOLUTION NO. 81-128-A A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION, APPROVING THE TIME EXTENSION FOP. TENTATIVE TRACT 11853 WHEREAS, a request has been filed for a time extension for the above-described project, pursuant to Section 1.401.11.2 of Ordinance 28-B of the Subdivision Ordinance: and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commissiop. conditionally approved the above-described Tentative Tract Map. SECTION 1: The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission has made the following findings: 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 Tentative Tract Man at this time. C. That strict enforcement of the conditions of approval regarding expirations would not be consistent with the intent of the Development 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. -le Tentative Tract Map may be granted an extension of time as author-;zed by Section 17.02.020 C-7 of the Development Code. SECTION 2: The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission hereby grants a time extension for: Tract Applicant Expiration �53 Barratt-Irvine Division October 28, 1985 APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 25th DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 1984. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Dennis L. Stout, Chairman ATTEST: Rick Gomez, Deputy Secretary Resolution No. 81-128-A Page 2 I, Rick Gomez, Deputy Secretary of the Planning Commission of t i City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution +,as duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Plannin! commission h<<d on the 26th day of September, 1984, by the following vote-to AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ;' `. 19 CrrY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ��cvyoMc STAFF REPORT N /o t9'" C C F � iZ DATE: September 26, 1984 1977 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner BY: Linda D. Daniels, Associate Planner SUBJECT: VARIANCE 84-03 - AMERICAN SENTINEL SELF-STORAGE INC. - A request to reduce the front yardsetback of feet to a minimum of 20 feet along 8th Street for a 45,546 sq. ft. self storage facility on 2.45 acres of land located at the northeast corner of 8th Street and Baker Avenue - 207-271- 01. I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action Requested: Approval of a variance. B. Purpose: To allow the reduction of the required street yard and dscaping for the development of a mini-warehouse storage facility with caretaker's quarters. C. - Location: Northeast corner of 8th Street and Baker Avenue. D. Parcel Size: 2.45 acres. E. Existing Zoning: General Industrial (Subarea 1). F. Ex-,sting Land Use: Vacant. G. Surroundin Land Use and Zoning: North - Rai road Right-of-Way, General Industriao. South - Southeast corner of 8th Street and Baker Avenue: Single Family Residences, R-1, (City of Ontario). Southwest corner of 8th Street and Baker Avenue: Commercial Convenience Store, C-1 (City of Ontario). East - Vacant, General Industrial. West - Vacant, Low Residential (2-4 du/ac). H. General Plan Desi nations: Project Site - Industrla Area Specific Plan. North - Industrial Area Specific Plan. South - Southeast corner of 8th Street and Baker Avenue: Residential - Single Family (City of Ontario). Southwest corner of 8th Street and Baker Avenue: ITEM E PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Variance 84-03 - American Sentinel Self Storage, Inc. September 26, 1984 Page 2 East - Industrial Area Specific Plan. West - Low Density Residential (2-4 dufac) . I. Site Characteristics: The subject property is presently vacant with no substantial vegetation existing. The property is bounded on the north by the Atchison-Topeka and State Fe Railroad, on the west by Baker Avenue -and on the south by 8th Street. The parcel size has a frontage on Baker Avenue of approximately 71 feet and a frontage on 8th Street of about 1,291 feet. II. ANALYSIS: T.-General : This variance is proposed in conjunction with CUP 84- T7 also on this agenda. Approval of the variance application is necessary if the project is to be developed as shown on the attached exhibits. The subject variance requests a waiver from the Industrial Area Specific Plan (ISP) for a reduction in the required street yard landscape setback on 8th Street. The ISP requires that an average 25 foot landscape area, as measured from the curb, be provided in this area on 8th Street. The applicant proposes a minimum setback of 20 feet, as measured from the curb, with a maximum of 22 feet. State Law, as well as the Development Code, gives the Planning Commission: the authority to approve a variance from development standards when circumstances inherent to the property (i.e., shape, size, topography) would create undue hardships. Variances may also be granted by the Commission when strict enforcement or interpretation of the development standards would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary hardships inconsistent with the object-ves of the Development Code or Industrial Area Specific Plan. With this particular development and site there does appear to exist adequate justification for the reduction in the required landscaping. The configuration of the lot is fairly unique and unusual when compared to other lots in the same General Industrial category. The property has a frontage of about 71 feet on Baker Avenue at one end with the most easterly lot depth being about 81 feet. The length of the property is about 1,291 feet. These dimensions differ significantly from surrounding industrial lots as well as lots commonly found in Subarea 1 and other General Industrial subareas. The lot depth also differs from the minimum standard of the Industrial Area Specific Plan which requires a 150 foot depth. The application, therefore, of the standard of the ISP pertaining to landscaping for this particular lot would seem to be an extreme hardship. y � a x-` PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Variance 84-03 - American Sentinel Self Storage, Inc. September 26, 1984 Page 3 With the requirement by the Design Review Committee that dense landscaping materials be provided, a dense buffer can be accomplished so as to minimize the impacts between the residences and the project. The Design Review Committee felt that given the shape of the lot, that this waiver request was justified. 8. Environmental Assessment: In conjunction with Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 84-17, Part I of the Initial Study has been completed by the applicant. Staff has completed the Environmental Checklist and has found no significant impacts as a result of the project. If the Commission concurs with these findings, issuance of a Negative Declaration would be appropriate. III. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: The reduction in the required street yard setback on 8th Street, in conjunction with the proposed use and building design, will not be detrimental to adjacent properties. Considering the unique dimensions of the lot, strict interpretation of the code would result in practical difficulty. In addition, the granting of this variance would not be considered a special privilege. IV. CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised as a public hearing in The Daily Report newspaper. Notices were sent to all property owners within i0 feet of the project site and notices were posted on the property. To date, no correspondence has been received either for against this project. V. RECOMMENOATION:ThP Planning Division recommends that the Planning - Commission appro•ie Variance No. V84-03 by adopting the attached Resolution. Rgspectfully•submitted, Rick' Gomez' City Planner RG:LD:ns Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Location Map Exhibit "S" - Site Flan Exhibit "C" - Conceptual Landscape Pian Resolution of Approval M C w x LU i ARF�A'IAl:� rysxKl 'pz . t + xx • s1 a Q area 2 i p r i rti Ott � AT & SF R.R. 0 3r . Sth 5u81E+rt SITE p1 a lllltl1 I! Yr v^'1,"ism, ,.1� �{ ♦ `"wl:'+i�f r 1 c O .t NURlH CITY of iTE;\I: v 8y-03 RANCHO Cuc IN/10,N,GA TITLE: lxrRrloH rnAP PLANNING 1DIVtSIC?:',1 EXHIBIT- � 4 ' SCAi_[ •�--_�•�- � lRwif AiOK if O. �- �yy� -Y�bCw � . A V V F. I�'ORTH CITY OF ITEM: N RANCHO CLCAMO\TGA TITLE: SUE PLAN PLANNII\r-, DIVLSICkN EXHIBIT-___SCALE: T.90 L/lily •q.��'��..�� - -�—_-- • .may -- i 75 1 n V V NORTH CITY OF tTL\1 85F D3 RANCHO CU AMONGA TITLE: cony-PMRL, LANosc'AAS f�nF PLANNII\'G DIVLSiON EXHiBrr.- _G SCALE -- _ � 6 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING VARIANCE NO. 84-03 TO REDUCE THE REQUIRED STREET YARD SETBACK AREA FOR CUP 84-17 LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF BAKER AVENUE AND 8TH STREET IN THE GENERAL INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT WHEREAS, on the 27th day of July, 1984, an application was filed and accepted on the above-described project; and WHEREAS, on the 26th day of September, 1984, the Planning Commission held a duly advertised public hearing pursuant to Section 65854 of the California Government Code. SECTION 1: The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commniss:on has made the following findings: 1. That strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of the Development Code. ® 2. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property involved or to the intended use of the property that do not apply generally to other properties in the same district. 3. That strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same district. 4. That the granting of the Variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same district. 5. That the granting of the Variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. SECTION 2: That this project will not create significant impacts on the environment and that a Negative Declaration be issued in conjunction. with Conditional Use Prrmit No. CUP 84-17 on September 26. 1984. P E Resolution No. Page 2 II Pp.' vYtD ANP, ADOPTED THIS 26TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 1984. PLA.14NING. GOM11MISSIGN OF THE CITY OFF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY• ` Dennis L., Stout, Chairman M ATTEST: Rick Gomez, Deputy Secretary I, Rick Gomez, Deputy 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 September, 1984, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA �gCQA OV STAFF REPORT f Oil }I S Z DATE: September 206, 1984 7977 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner BY: Linda D. Daniels , Associate Planner SUBJECT: EENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL. USE PERMIT 84-17 - AMERICAN SENTINEL SELF-STORAGE INC. - The development of a 45,546 square foot self-storage facility and 1,040 square foot caretaker's quarters on 2.45 acres of land in the General Industrial (Subarea 1) category, located at the northeast corner of 8th Street and Baker Avenue - APN 1 207-271-01. Related File: Variance 84-03 - American Sentinel Self- Storage, Inc. I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action Requested: Approval of a precise site plan, architectural design, and issuance of a Negative Declaration. B. Purpose: Construction of a 45,54b sgttare foot mini-warehouse facility and a 1,040 souare foot caretaker's quarters. C. Location: Northeast corner of 8th Street and Baker Avenue D. Parcel Size: 2.45 acres E. Existing Zoning: General Industrial - Subarea 1 Category F. Existing Land Use: Vacant G. Surrounding Land Use and Zoninq: North - Railroad right-of-way, General Industrial South - Southeast corner of 8th Street and Baker Avenue: Single Family Residences, R-1 (City of Ontario); Southwest corner of 8th Street and Baker Avenue: Commercial Convenience store, C-1 (City of Ontario) East - Vacant, General Industrial West - Vacant, Low Residential (2-4 duJac) 1 ITEM F PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CUP 84-17/Sentinei Self-Storage, Inc. September 26, 1984 Page 2 H. General Plan Designations: Project Site - Industrial Area Specific Plan North - Industrial Area Specific Plan South - Southeast corner of 8th Street and Baker Avenue: , Residential, Single Family (City of Ontario) Southwest corner of 8th Street and Baker: General Commercial (City of Ontario East - Industrial Area Specific Plan West - Low Density Residential (2-4 du/ac) I. Site Characteristics: The subject property is presently vacant with no substantial vegetation existing. The property is bounded on the north by the Atchison-Topeka and Santa Fe Railroad, on the west by t3aker Avenue and on the south by 8th Street. The parcel size has a frontage on Baker Avenue of ap2ximately 71 feet and a frontage on 8th Street of about 91 r II. ANALYSIS: A. General: This project was submitted in conjunction with variance 84-03, also on this agenda. Approval of the variance is necessary to develop the site as proposed. The waiver requested involves a decreased landscape setback on 8th Street. The proposed mini-warehouse development would involve the construction of single story storage buildings and a caretaker's quarters. There would be one continuous single story building abutting the north property line, adjacent to the railroad right-of-way. Single story buildings will also face into 8th Street, but these will be individual structures separated by landscaping and screen walls. The use of the property as a mini-warehouse is a permitted use in the Industrial Area Specific Plan (Subarea 1). It is the residential use of the caretaker's quarters which requires a Conditional Use Permit to be approved by the Planning Commission. B. Design Review Committee: The project was reviewed by the Committee and has been recommended for approval. The Committee was particularly concerned with two main issues. The first issue dealt with the need for extremely dense landscaping along the 8th Street frontage and the Baker Avenue frontage. The Committee felt this was necessary so that a view buffer could be provided between the storage facility and the surrounding residences. �`'-QL PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CUP 84-17/Sentinel Self-Storage, Inc. September 2A, 1984 Page 3 The second issue involved a concern over compatibility of architectural design of the storage facility with adjacent residences. In addressing this, the applicant is now proposing a mansard style tile roof versus the originally submitted flat roof. The applicant is also breaking up the elevations of the buildings facing 8th Street by using recesses. The Committee also recommended to the Planning Commission that favorable consideration be given to the variance request invoiving a reduction in the front yard setback. C. Technical Review Covxnittee• The Technical Review Co.-,nittee reviewed the project and determined that, with appreva'. of Variance 84-03 and with the recommended conditions of approval, the project is consistent with the applicable standards and ordinances. The Committee noted that the only item remaining which needed correction was an increase in the drive aisle from 26 feet to 28 feet. This is rc-quired by the Industrial Area Specific Flan standards pertaining to loading areas and drive aisles. This would also allow temporary parking on one side of the drive aisle without imnairirg emergency vehicle access. A total of 50 temporar, parking spaces could be provided this way. These 'cinporary parking spaces, in addition to the 10 striped spaces, would meet the parking needs for the facility. D. Gradinq Committee: The Grading Committee has conceptually approved the preliminary grading plan subject to the proposed development accepting any runoff from the railroad right-of-way blocked by this development. E. Environmental Assessment: Part I of the Initial Study has been completed Ey the applicant. Staff has completed the environmental checklist and has found no significant adverse environmental impacts as a result of this project. Staff would, therefore, recommend that the Commission issue a Negative Declaration for this project. III. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: The proposed use, building design, and site plan, together with approval of Variance No. 84-03 and the recommended Conditions of Approval, is in compliance with all applicable City standards and ordinances, the Industrial Area Specific Plan, and the General Plan. In addition, the project will not be detrimental to adjacent properties or cause significant f adverse environmental impacts. r A t �- 3 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CUP 84-17/Sentinel Self-Storage, Inc. September 26, 1984 Page 4 Aftk IV. CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised as a Public hearing in The Dailv Re Dort newspaper and notices were sent to all property owners withn 00 feet of the subject site. In addition, public hearing notices were posted on the property. V. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission issue a Negative Declaration for the project and approve Conditional Use Permit 84-17 by adopting the attached Resolution. -Pe t i'visubmitted, is G , z City Planner RG:LD:jr Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Loction Map Exhibit 'V - Site Plan Exhibit "C" - Conceptual Landscape Plan Exhibit "D" -• Building Elevations Initial Study, Part I Resolution of Approval s A cc cc w 5 Ul a y .: ARR t , O O Q � r a 0 j subarea 2 f • Ory,cc Fk- 0, :X aW AT & SF R.R. 8th_ Su�FGz soar I I a r ��•���� boundary ;�:,rt., . .�,,. �-•d V V NURTH CITY g ITL\i. CUP 8y/7 RANCHO CLCr1NI0lN TITLE: G044riOn #WP PLANNUI C DiVLS10\t EXf iIrjT~ : SG�[ E- S - � • -- ZtA]�(fIZOIC_S?f0. V�.�. kwlY�w1 r n NORM CITE' Or ITEA 1: GUP 84-1-7 RANCHO CLCAMI aNGA TITLE: strE PLaN PLANNIIN'G DIVLSICkN EXHIBIT: uB� SCALE: "- ;Y, i z NORTH CITY Or ITEM: cvP CTV-:7 RANCHO CUCAMONGA TITLE= Profic I AAIW qPE Pl#N PLANNING DI SIGN EXHIBIT= ..� SCALE- N l _ i V NIORTH CITY OF CUP 4?4-17 RANCHO CUCAMO\GA TITLE- 0111WI & PUrw rivn►e,- PLANNING DIVLSIOIN EXHIBIT: •.b SCALE, r- 7 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, this form must be completed and submitted to the Development Review Committee through the department where the project application iE made. Upon receipt of this application, the Environmental Analysis staff will prepare Part II of the Initial Study. The Development Review Com.tittce 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 mz,',e 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: /n(.71n :^ra P4 L46•11;-A APPLICANT'S NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE: i44; : J u: f. ur.r. a;Cr1 •- (dr3) a4 -(;:got NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE OF PERSON TO BE CONTACTED CONCERNING THIS PROJECT: J?0G,:;7- C. O 'Lc_41C'f IkJVI !-1 :41)(f-!�4FL- (-Ui:iGGFf — 'fi7n= TCr '1�1 — tea— ZOC{ LOCATION OF PROJECT (STREET ADDRESS AID ASSESSOR PARCEL NO.) LIST OTHER PERMITS NECESSARY FROM LOCAL, REGIONAL, STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES AND THE AGENCY ISSUING SUCH PERMITS: &N,:t+°aRc 05i 9c if - ('try G1:f.,7RWCApr C.UCApL.a•Jt�Q �11 rhnJCE " -• •. I-1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: _ Sn�.2�� �CI,C/ n�t�✓l sue. - �• ACREAGE OF PROJECT AREA AND. SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED BUILDINGS, IF ANY: 9. 6 ] G/'Or5 .4G��C-� l=t 51'127-T SOtti.AZE F '7' 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) : 11=/� /; ii A41 %. u�EJJ :-.^. i l_uirlf AIJ A7/1D.r :% : %llk.T1AFc.i,/ it=i h/Ct'Y_ /7//iL'FX'4 l=Ni• 'r7FFtF i� /SL /�,�/' A2�L •/i('7�- f!✓JrJ yC T7,r(- !-//3. �cJQ i.,.: o•,Fn,Natt F, Y/rt%ZF 41-f' /✓0 J'4F//.-S nr 77,'&-Fn. /r rbrL=l•-,ii: i.1.= l..iJ- T71LY'•= /.K.F /n JfNi/�'/t ./Jil/�iT�?fiT� r7fr`/t'i /r'/lc' 111/.• /.l ct.7i. >r L /Jl• f l r i/ yyc �i // G�GFi kh2 4 rr/l rJeoy�r'J7 'i li F i ///r✓!i/'/J•�4NC/r•!�i OIiJ��7lT�Js u.ff=9 /PS s=cJ:L�v/� = nJIJ/�Ti� Fig!! .LvLU,i,"YIIA�, aJ1<c Fr>./• 2r/9Us yifr/ 50-1-`ir Ft1/' �cc'it n^/ Jfii / /JA l✓C� i /Z fJJJrA�/r �{!- 1. Ai /f r//J7t��LIl%Eye //J Ti! J✓' F',Yi' T/�l< "7Tl/�/T'A/!°�r o/c /'i/t Fes'"�/J %/i /.¢'•-T Ab IAfCit� 1T' lLT/fPcf6/� wrJrr:'� �:;5c••i!'/iF! /.,./Q G/<•r.7Fzt../ �/,SCa ,,� , 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? I-2 F- �� t r r WILL THIS PROJECT_ YES NO X1. Create a substantial change in ground contours? X2. Create a substantial change in existing noise or vibration? 1� 3. Create a substantial change in demand for municipal services (police, fire, water, sewage, etc. ) ? X� 4. Create changes in the existirg zoning or general plan designations? 5. Remove any existing trees? Haa many? 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 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. /�1e' e Si gn atu��. ?2r1ez Date re Di3G7�,T E• � . Pr2dl Title I-3 iY . RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 84-1.7 FOR A 45,546 SQUARE FOOT SELF-STORAGE FACILITY AND A 1,040 SQUARE FOOT CARETAKER'S QUARTERS LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF BAKER AVENUE ANO 8TH STREET IN THE GENERAL INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT WHEREAS, on the 27th day of July, 1984, a complete application was filed by American Sentinel Self-Storage, Inc. for review of the above- described project; and WHEREAS, on the 26th day of September, 1984, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider the above-described project. NOW, THEREFORE, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission resolved as follows: SECTION 1: That the following findings can be met: 1. That the proposed use is in accord with the General Plan, the objectives of the Development Code and the ® Industrial Area Specific Plan, and the purposes of the district in which the site is located. 2. That the proposed use, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. 3. That the proposed use complies with each of the applicable provisions of the Industrial Area Specific Plan. SECTION 2: That this project will not create adverse impacts on the environment and that a Negative Declaration is issued on September 26, 1984. SECTION 3: That Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 84-17 is approved subject to the following co^ditions: PLANNING DIVISION 1. A 28-foot drive aisle shall be provided between the rows of single story storage buildings. 2. Variance 84-03 shall be approved by the Planning Commission to allow a reduction in the required street yard landscape setback cn 8th Street. F- /oZ 3- Extensive landscaping must be provided along the 8th Street and Baker Avenue street frontages in order to provide a buffer between the project and the adjacent residences. 4. Roof material shall provide a shake appearance on both the storage buildings and the caretaker's quarters, in compliance with the requirements of the Design Review Committee. ENGINEERING DIVISION 1. Adequate provisions shall he made to control and direct flows from the north, southerly through the site and around buildings, to the satisfaction of the pity Engineer. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 26th DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 1984. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Dennis L. Stout, Cnairman ATTEST Rick Gomez, Deputy Secretary I, Rick Gomez, Deputy 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 September, 1984, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Ot .nq - - �.Mr _� •OqC _t •Jo 2 v. c+a� co ca mcu V - ` 2coc - a�� mC �- _�� nc �7✓ 02EV y CJ n�� a �: q� o� o.� c_ 0 4s r "• E �oq ✓ : n � Yam O Lu• �r � VOPV 9✓_.._ GT6 C r •j0 id V� LGO �>� T L _. ✓ OJT`O V�.ticn Or-c - � yEc V._� VGyyD NEN C c J 4 R� R d r O V O r• C O V E c y 7 O n.r > n V J U "•r-� u Er'OM Cr CEO-`J �'0. �4 _ ov s'-� o✓ a Rq- 'L- G .�ne w.0. -n c o o E c'� u T= a c g O J .D r on•O.� ` V�� x _ = C j=-V•O•• c - iq a - „ ✓ 4 .o. ` v My c+ _ o d.a. V ➢.�.r✓3_ N 9✓v•o�'-°_9_„L`ncv 7�yJ"0--.-_Occ 7�y�➢Lr_y4Ed_`�✓v0a„n_�.yOaru.-0nOo.r c�_c_r�G�oO.•�-�q_aJ oo9tS_oi.•.D 0r>�ooCG+6-_l="cV_=-'➢aco"-�`-Y„w 7-�-c4q�jDe^E�40n��r�w •naP�-�D-V•> o➢-„gMG`.y�Oo•EnoC7�.-o oV.->.O�n. •^ -✓rOGaV-rV`uf✓qo• v✓d(o4_n1 v4O JE�n`Ecco_,Cc,:r➢-_Ou-DVU-T-rr_-g.amow J✓✓Ccv4Oo- O•-J0G=G L�<✓.�c_--c-�rO-CO>c LqOacu„ r q v P V� - V� y✓y V _ G- M r i G G`cV�N TO n" -LU- n VVO cu OV L=F� O '.pG C✓L- _ M= QQ q 00� fC-D4c M-CQV - ��� V •� � .' �C6 E<� pjN r C O q � U4V -cG „✓- J✓ y F „V „oc VEOLdJ Op4P O •' G cu i S� YVOC >OiVF r� pUCwD V�� n.rq d � C1VC nC� q✓ O 9»rJ O a r 4 L�J- ` V � s r r d �n V � V V V O� O V d ✓n l.P•J G��•Y O Y _ •n l ` � � c V O D d v_ _ _ 6 O- - „- c 0� C 9 G O S q 2- =� ^ O�SJ •� ¢ 6 •rn� V✓ i Q O a m �c v.4. n L 6 w Gc G V m ` ��� 2 �V G y •d- R✓ i • � I •1 o vDy� .•oo \ c i O i- " E '2 • Z n ,` n p „ O O (jgyGt „ W . V T5 7 O �I J\I G �! d � � � ➢..r L C' j Q V O-V•� G V p �! o` � as � : � � � qo Gar✓ o � -e � �� �� 9 � M n� c C O O O q O� V•^T G`�p V O n FY q .� Gq ✓Or Or - dr Y V qc 6 q a✓ V J L•J O t O L c g V'L N r rao a n � � " i•.. der -'c� „ • _ � z � � SC EI • • N a � c 0 C T 4 L P O Y N O V L l V t! fj V CV �< V.F� PUF r<_ " �� CCU q VOi LGV LV9 • • � C �� q N 4 O l G�d OC i -F l- r0 c i P �_ � q a G qv- 0r7eo� y 4od r= �- o "G d d+- c <Goq V� =�-0v �rngVVV O'i i u �O ` i�? t LNLOIG 7�t m� Vr- � ONF L� LO 1LD _ d O J > • p u51 L V L_ _ ✓ 'J �_ GQ C L O O_ q y q L ytj q � N•.r_ L d �r L G i` F O- 0���r g C r O O Z.. 4 'v v 7 T C!- C O N V U i Q q r V n N c N N d c «%�O r^ ..�Yoj QNVG ar Mc�= Eu yr�r _ GFVr Lr .nV �J L « Ly �L6 • Pt C L '^ 9 �^O qGI`�G�O V = C �_V qGO Crvd '_e0 =-q VGN YVa G C.V qVV C q N O NG` VC <=V <'1 -rJ NL O = gY 09 � C d✓r d� p C U r C C > <-.r r q O v l O O� V V r L iq 4r r o 0�+ 4 J v d iNc c �2 ooN Pp :oc g o G«moo par.',P ^oy Gc qeG-�= LY<< c CC c 0„ M V C O N C L c�Er CS' o 22 r 'rFL -=p9 Gf Q r G y - Z pc < OGu Qr Mp < tf wL.m _ n N GF rTP 04 y- q oc r GV �yG LC Co O t�.nr�rpLru� �L L"'. 0 = tJS- CVrQ G6 - T N �- q V Tqu c �O - F Lem ate. - E V L o ` a S- pN - Q tutr N LGV CLr 49�G q V y 4 9 G G qq w� .La" LY q� E o ^«N GNc ate. iiCpi qJ d cq N r o.. L..- 'e- ccQ d 44 0 .L.n` L.y - c .L.= f-- � '^� c� q i Nd o- «G No wL_?r 072 V V C C C C O ` L-O � Pr qr aP pC�C raC �C P� _ GV GO O C N C 10.5 E '! G _ q -- p V c o J y-`-L n O O p � TM cVY 9P Gar L. d -jG07-i r C� C e V —i C v V < L y N u g r N C <. q4 V LOjV Cu -JG V=- u < JVY GpV VN► L - q ^ LwP C- _ aJ C� LM y0' TVU iV4 c CO O,9'> L c vET00� gpaod " E> Lq QiH = > � G L_OL L � 4Y ' G.y_J �C Nq Nr n` �� C L4 gLpP tiO - 40r � �- '� E LL � Y � CCG lcSLVc "J.'L_n T cF OFi T L H r O L L G L L G C C • G< L r OL G L VL > : w41; ? Or L Q q q > r V FT T 4 o V M G -+G O V Y Gc «- r N¢ -L w 0 ce r�"yQ T6 «YQ � M1 m P C N � 1 � ncan �d Nro � 9V�r �:•�D F vn� =rd Cm�� 11 n y C > V w l V ? Zo 7 • Pj —L V q O QC >.Ol ✓ Vq S9O L� a C �(6( q V _OCn Yy�J MC �— r�Ca — C p V C OUD GI09� O O bVPC'J �DrO `� «Dq S—O r` 9 O P= N Vri .w qq L nr~r � ar✓ ry � "' qP�c > > v c..v rqm qv dd N=_� �✓ — ` N4— Lid --C 7 O •O.r d a — P'^ r Ern q L N c W — �0 0 oL �.v Yogc aL dbNQ ` cy'_ w r r ern ->N.� od as ce mac-- mod _ _ �o�` ov � o— N u�a< ` � c Ndr crcagc uoY•va. u L.. � _ e' o v_ =_ 9 .^e4. ar— L—'_ rc o N q a� ��=b �o d •: c' r S C `Pr rVgO.� '. ONE q � b� aaL. � P q`` ✓7r _ = t qC Vi CNC1 w rU V 4 _f `LO ' =✓ q y 'Jq Van - rq �`> q•r ^ C 0 C C VY V02 u. E — = r7 gOT.Yi. — Tdgp � O L r L v V D v 7 C V ins bG e > Y or4r b'o �PO=00 nr _ _ C� V•y d_O"� yY G O� V V q o _ C € O._ .�i Y V L V 9 ` b O V w NW '!Yi wVi a.r= _✓r N O y—9 <V• 2NVV <q� pn 6V 1rOq O.M � Na Y� N M q 'j J� J E� rp� 0� C P •� � i V P V V I � o Nt y c uar a L 4Vpu � qb o. a— ✓ N N 0= � i n� d C` ✓G A S y' � u 6= `N r•f�f C ..y.1 C C —P b l .L.r 6r 0 N E r L✓ d 0 V = d p LI Y.. �� a olc ••� � Cr Er e.p. V•a dNa- � • pq ✓ D 6Y c� r Q= OI q q � _ d•+ 9.G V p•n r p � ` r M O ✓ V O TI n� � O rL nP —✓ rrOA�O Q—Cq r I^ L— C` O L V C V7z. �� • V O a•E N^~v _qrT n�GL q4 Ny O1V y✓r q�N — d gCN."' V C✓ -dT b� .rw —� e �I �(' `✓ a4i qn l«d✓ = aCr r �i�GC L CV4AG q41! n�� nL L u •- �� .V,.M t' 00 = V— s UrsC✓ `q � V�' O ` O.N O CI T Q C r ` q n V✓ q 4 V C 0 a C O C_ D c N \ 4 r.1 V O `1 _ ✓ C ✓ V O > M� V q q_ O n� � _ > ION _ q � N� —•o c N �`r .. _ .+ y_ q v✓ Y ."L v q V °' I r " r n L• o Vi O.�` wp YV YC.`.r � = CVy NN U r�� QdQ V1O 6) C C r L•r P n � �r Gr✓ r r r a g V C ��J •r V 9 C \ � V •Li•1 l�� y 0 9 Y s T >`O l — d 0 P P V `Zc U ✓=i` . M r d r q ` cc= r — n c_ ✓ > V n � O V r 4 N r U r M L �`. oot r d - r ` rI — cm Win '• OIL✓ cC �= LP P VO _L�cb vJi Y. ^_ Aa � c C ACV d u •' pv d _,♦:� `,Lb,_agc s�-m mac.♦ �� •JAL♦. ion `c Z of oaa � _`♦ u � a ~ ' °i- va j9 v Vow m o n o z.-.•'n � c o •r.. °' E 2 a "s °' •r7 V E� q J _ L N J — • =O a V n r L— _ O r q` YN `L..•Ly 'C'♦r� U m � L GV ^ P Oq '09V i U 7 G r �— V O g V P r O` V J J• F Ca p — �� O V - r p r F r N - T � J a 6 ^n G '�La.• ul � mL � n°'gnd Po`•E •• e _ YV =n -•_ c � a« W �' oY co Y_� _' caq T �q E� �� _ ^+ aL♦ci ci °c'� o q G W nT r Or ..` .O V�rp 0. G �—♦ V d !O Y ? �—�S n. W yC b ._J a-qy O > -C a Y7 qr yy � rV l-• ni CL c `` uY �3 nu: veu ac vz ::` •'�•'.'_ •' 40 u rE9 � g'•O'•C�� H >•^mod N 'O^ C cO YT — -• Cu� ar N d o q P n N Y N e ^�aoi.. '^ E �.•• .,: —'`cu m �.tpi r is or 5^� '0 �a:a c `Q .-.�•`yW —qz-P of .°s. Nc. PPw P� _ .� om o.Y Lq V• C -�.—_ LAN.._J q l •ri•� F. q r .J. 9 s C � � �. N � Y N rN N) 10 ^VVV 1J -fJdL 9CVq N ` O�� •NCE � d dG - Ce= N VI Ga1rN 6�9.Yr V r� V O _ U O 1 6 V 8 W M O W V V j y y q .. nGx ar � m a yO r .L.♦ 4 Y �r P .O N> q O V E L 2 —.L.•C r dLa � C•— O G T9 -•q r c c Y Crc OL T� 6 his•Jn V V Jr6 C O.:s Y OcO d c— fdj C Ed c N T V b Y L J- aQ g •p. Q Crr rvV ^� N y O j O C Pit n r I L r V L 0 q O N OOO •..• N 2 •^ L �r .r G 6 > d Y r O E q�•r q U O g p C L N G G W i C C P "O r N« q N d O V J ^ d • r i N p0 VQ ElY uN D0p VP7 i C P4-' y -� CEgN i q r a q 9 c�yy z _ 'J Vr-- n p•lC -• N O n- � Y L n r C -• _ S � n l _g 4� q 4=V O`er C C i w wx0 O Nj� _O a�i n a c SV b O yi L n�N _�� Cp rY Oa NP qq ^ GC V -a -1 n:5 •n C N D L O n ��W a.-y V w Q S O V y ' P V L C �♦ r } «On R « q « O E 'J 4'2 6 P P L C T- �O r T C Y V � O V V PN O -• l V -T ��� .O.r- Yr yO � yqr 'Or -G ` ct .L.• 'Q � d="' 3wr N P..• PE L_ __ n NG+�� r `0 VO L 'O0 GqT _ C V.5 t 6 G O V y O r L > V O _ ^ T�L E r•O� q� �� O V. Qx O. Yr•V ^ ♦ <6r n f I f f SLWMO. rqO 4 N n � � N n f N •p 1 �I � C ' C lVO• �i ^ VN � LINLL q V •� � t i � V 00 a` y vN CJ = I •-? ` N �a� o o.v o L c e, E q e .v O t 9 COV �aV • � NV �9j0 _ q � r � =V _] y C Cam] _ .•O. OY O i =L BYO C� -C V Sq �n rT�r EV EEO V-. P - .O Lcy L�•G'T 7r '•a2 C CC 4C }y�CL nL j 9 •9 -J � > C r L r C A U ✓ l T V Y L G V d N 72 E A d 9 C C n�' �Y C C O a `✓ Y O�C � C ei oa_ Yc c_ i— c``_ Leo « q Ku ` cN c •'..L'�r `o V O V9 <q 0:.0. 6L6 6y� 4q 6VY WT O Veo N6 JCL E 14 P V• •O O r N LO `a4 .. ��q� o_' c+� too cq o¢o cry • Y n L 2 d 1 V N v Gc V eTC� Vcvf� ctd� E ✓C� <NO _VVm >b L6 yL 9 q OVA Z990 r' G p � C` C _ dy VE P 4 w P�p¢ V �• L CEO l Y a •• �� �c v c ..r d o a i L.. rc s. r".`¢ '�'� �oY• cco+' o- q Yqe ^n =.c. q L G- c v ac= q no cL�r Nq rd c` uza�= ao «o a 0 = �C.•^� GGoa v�LOi q6 ....US «ram qC �� c q _N L. Nr •n y q T o LO •p = aC qY VAp 9CO1 L=VC ' y .r •"'.'yL QP pN ¢ c Lqo �'�w .G. e'• e cob_ n�� _ao 'c e,^ a� a :. '^_ L `Vr, u L n•_• o_ qyN� Nr�Y c Ly. vN Gn N E _ q r o Yo_L= G q N c= o � oo �L c p— - o V V o r o J N E ^ ¢ 6 V^ G O¢ e V d - c s ¢_ Y q 40 -� o q -cia cN •'y.9 9 Y. r= ¢,P C Lq c¢n N•-' O� GYa" c �r�� � 4 _ EM L T q O" P .�r � G N � P�V✓� m� 4 r r'a Yz L L_O ' >� 6 aP0? l q � pLl LPC MgrE L� w� q T P ---ma r•� O C =V N 0 V Y P p.1.. G O J Y q GCS POV V.e q �aN < q O O ¢+ E� •rmOV < CV yO PO OI a yF Q q T Gi a c .Y O � d�e_ .n O c a e r✓ V✓ •a J c p' r �' 6 M •Vj � O O C L tf V y r d P M < c a q N •• .e L r C y _r T r = N a V G� N O V Q V ✓ .VOs� L L ace G o �✓ C L G' O O y C V ✓a U L T u ' U GCL ✓ V L O N` t? V >• �r Y P c C N O V V c r V P d i E' 6 O u•O LV 00 LV O r T �u � iaa C� `JG `O � c c q r a V O V •V � s � y y L L O 6 .. �' qV rc cqp v LLr ccy L iZ: ooy do MN c G4 � P` �� TO•nr a NO �� _ L CiV F •e � c a._r •n y0 Y� W _. V C L W' G! C � W O D `� A � E C Y1 TaP EL Lu T� ?Vy q a� i ✓� v Gr.On c =0 u_O V W C.' MO u •" Oc4 NN u^ CI 9q " � Lc VN _ Oc vW V V g O r V q ✓9_ O V_ O .V..C N V �'` V V Q L.�� n C L V V� a c 9 W 9 u I O G L✓e O V .V. � 6V L� W✓ .nL LU >' O. 40! pI _ L c I VO a0y L d 9 a yI �a "'�•� < 6•n < �Oir JS O O r r h C O d � aJ ` TwNC p V u� O.r rW V � ✓ GUV �'O_" � Q a „ i C L w L O .p� C W ••v ` �Fa V CM L v L ='' ✓ _J4✓wL O T r�✓O 9'J V N L L T T o cYo ✓ Ln v G^o a."raM o. a = Jo.c� ` 'o P N✓ V� a PC QrV CO q ✓ Gp •n V ~ CCc c_W nW u c L G E P ~ V .n YQ V O `er a-a 'L � { u O � V C' q 9 = = u l C •'• 1 o I 2 ' w � ✓_ _ 5 rG N¢ a O � O � � Tt2� q a C O '•� t r✓ C \ 'c P ✓ .n S G— _G `� � O .U.. 9 L V T_.Tr_ O L y + , p < ` ' ✓L A E V L L c L C c O t62 y E V V r O C Li. 4 `r vr+ V a � � =• + \I ni � w t.; ' L �L � V r 0 D O q r a� V A a c � c _ 9 N V U y P V� �CL6 C b O 2 L C G V n V J C 9 p y L V V O^ Y r T a c a • �C � ! 6JlOJa e F^ C9 r N C ` -Es c q o VV d� S d Vd r.0 DY .V �S =JW w 6 r L ^ V V 6 =U C r G ` « •Ln Y �� i q V c y {E i O1 _ '"� u a bw• o f aaa « n m >N o. o c O V > 6 ^ L b O N V r F V P 90 � OL O �^ qw �b wj V� CdP L 9 O C V C O L V O r 6•M =Y V' F «i. V 0. r r�N O_ I O= V >• ^O� r� ^= 6� �.,�q T M r 4 ^L V V d V 11 9 V C r J V r > V y p Q r„1 CITY OF RAINTCHO CUCAMONGA Cy1CAM01C9 STAFF REPORT yy it i DATE: September 25, 1984 19T" TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner 8Y: Dan Coleman, Associate Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84-27 - BARMAKIAN - The total development of five mu ti-tenant industrial buildings totaling 60,000 sq. ft., a 70,300 sq. ft. mini-warehouse facility, and a gas station on 11.03 acres of land in the General Industrial (Subarea 1) category located on the west side of Vineyard, between Arrow and 9th Street - APN 207-262-44. I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action Requested: Approval of site plan, elevations, and issuance of a Negative Declaration. B. Purpose: Development of five multi-tenant industrial buildings, a mini-warehouse facility, and a gas station. C. Location: West side of Vineyard between Arrow and 9th Street. 1 0. Parcel Size: 11.03 acres. r E. Existing Zoning: General Industrial (Subarea 1). F. Existing Land Use: Existing lemon grove. G. Surrounding- C Land Use and Zoning: North ondominiums; Medium Residential (8-14 du/ac). South - Industrial; General Industrial (Subarea I) . East - Industrial; General Industrial Rail Served (Subarea 2). West - Cucamonga Creek; General Industrial (Subarea 1). H. General Plan Designations: Project Site - General Industrial. North - Medium Residential (4-14 du/ac) . South - General Industrial. East - General Industrial/Rail Served. West - General Industrial . ITEM G Environmental Assessment and CUP 84-27 - Barmakian September 26, 1984 Page 2 I. Site Characteristics: Project site slopes to the southwest at approximately a 2% grade. The site consists of an existing lemon grove with a eucalyptus windrow along the south side of Arrow. J. Applicable Regulations: The Industrial Area Specific Plan permits multi-tenant industrial buildings, mini-warehouse facilities, and conditionally permits gasoline service stations in the General Industrial category (Subarea 1) . Ii. ANALYSIS: A. General : The project consists of the fcllowing uses: A. Auto self service station B. Multi-use tenant buildings C. Mini-warehouse facility D. Vacant future building pad The use of consistent building materials and architectural style has been utilized to provide a unified architectural theme to create a single unified development rather than four separate projects. B. Design Review Committee: The Committee was concerned with providing a unified architectural theme to tie the entire project together as a unif W development. In addition, the Committee has worked with the applicant to resolve concerns regarding screening of the mini-warehouse facilities and service station activities, and providing adequate landscaping throughout the project. In response to the Committee's concern, the applicant has prepared a revised site plan, Exhibit "C", and revised elevations, Exhibits "F, G, H and I". However, the revised elevations and the building material samples indicate that the applicant is proposing the use of three different exterior building materials for the multi- tenant buildings, self-ser-:ce station, and mini-warehouse buildings. Therefore, Staff recommends a condition of approval requiring that all multi-tenant buildings, mini-warehouse buildings, and the service station be constructed with the same exterior material to provide a consistent unified architectural theme throughout the project. C. Environmental Assessment: Part I of the Initial Study has been comp;eted by the applicant and is attached for your review and consideration. Staff has completed the Environmental Checklist and determined that no significant environmental impact will occur as a result of this project. ":: G a PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Environmental Assessment and CUP 84-27 - Barmakian September 26, 2984 Page 3 1II. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: The project is consistent will: the Industrial Area Specific Plan and General Plan. In addititin, the proposed site and building designs, together- with the recommended conditions will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare. IV. CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised as a public hearing in The Daily Report newspaper. The property was posted and 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. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recom..ene-s approval of the Conditional Use Permit through adoption of the attached Resolution with Conditions and issuance of a Negative Declaration. R pectf ly .,submitted,I G ® City Planner IRG:DC:ns Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Location Map Exhibit "B" - Site Utilization Map Exhibit "C" - Site Plan Exhibit "D" - Landscape Plan Exhibit "E" - Grading Plan Exhibit "F': - Service Station Elevations Exhibit "G" - Multi-Tenant Building Elevations Exhibit "H" - Mini-Warehouse Elevations Exhibit "I" - Vineyard Avenue Streetscape Elevations and Sections Initial Study, Part I Resolution of Approval with Conditions i'. (_1 I a ox °C ARROW * 0.0010010a0a00 oO 1000; 77 -� 0 00 y O subarea 2 3 I O AT & SF R.R. 0 8th_ •�•� ��••��•��city boundazys��•��� CIRCULATION a mAiLS/ROUTES '120' R.O.W. 0000 Pedestrian �,,.�•••� Creeks & Channels !OW R.O.W. 0000 @00 Bicycle mmmmm� 8V or less R.O.W. ` .i(�(� Regional Parky RAIL SERVICE v -!-}-}-}-}- Existing !�9 Bridge 1-1 Special Streetscape/ Proposed w as Landscaping oo .access Points I�'0R I"H O 400' 800' 1600' CITY OF ITE.%1: RANCHO CUCAMONGA TITLE: twgnizz— PLANNING DIVISION EXHIi3IT= ALE: •m" ;" r U • � Mel ,a '' • • •, .... .�✓. afar�. I . '�� -I-r 1!734 i I r i i Z I RCS ARROW �L i t a y ! v ac y t{Q QN _ s Il o t 2.O K:K ff+crt f•.K .n I -O.r J D � / � - � 5T4EET-:- • .VIN Fi STRE t, , \ 1�MTH CITY OF ITEM: C�� asq Zc7 RANCHO CUCAMO\GA TITLE: 51 T , LM LJoZ# fi N PLANNING D.-\1L90N EXHIBIT SCA.L.E- ••� its r CL 1 41 13 rl Ot Ks A^3; � �• � F° Imo— , 7 yew 7�°r• u�€ 1 �dan `�eo ww ............ s� _t NORTH CITY OF ITF—\t: r 77 RAINCHO CL'CAZ-101 TITLE: PLANNING DI'\r!SIOy EXHIBIT- Ci SCALE. � 4 1 • • 1 O� � 01 • 3. �'Oj r n - ' fl , 1 [•, 1 , 1. .r � ti Aued .uoo TV m n2 Wl A t ram• � :i '�`�--��--F_ -`+� I I3\:�v r y� y) jt 3� y i-- —� —�.-�� '� fir.-• - 1 ;.a' �a r ® ••uedwo ■ Wc�""�✓Y 4 an�r+Poet F Ail s Rol 4 LU IL r � I J�, _ �b jaw � y • 40 , .. c r, -. ieitatTi\E t" J e 1 ,I A'. 4 t 1 ® 4 1 y f F T y i 1 _ i. ♦.r 4 K: 1 1 1 a J �9 `1 4 l ' 1 . 1 1' • � I s .. K. �soo wouy 4 �.+PcSaan Z h I AueclWoo OL d di 0 u 1 � u w ti a r lip- . 141 711 V I c i �q'pp i � a � /} � � � '�� j :lei ' .'::: ..•' '�T � U� Zy i Z�' i WT. P i . t . CITY OF RA14CHO CUCAMONGA INITIAL STUDY PART I - PROJECT INFORMATION SHEET - To be completed by applicant Envi�:onmertal Assessment Review Fee: $87.00 For all projects requiring environmental review, this form must be completed and submitted to the Development Review Con=, ttee through the department where the project application is made. Upon receipt of this applicatio-i, 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- tio. concerning the proposed project. PROJECT TITLE: Vineyard Kest APPLICANT'S NAME, ADDRESS, TE IPHONE: The Barmakian Company/Andrew Barmakian, 9375 Archibald Avenue, Suite i01, Ran—Tc o �ucaAonga, Cam,g1730 - 7-3084 -- VA EE , ALDRESS, TELEPHONE OF PERSON TO BE CONTACTED CONCERNING THIS PROJECT: kr:drew Barmakian (same as above) 714-987-3084 LOCATION OF PROJECT (£TRF.ET ADDPESS AND ASSESSOR PARCEL NO.) South west corner of Vineyard Avenue and Arrow Renate APN 9207-252-44 LIST OTB-�R PERMITS NECESSARY FROM LOCAL, REGIONAL, STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES AND THE AGE14CY ISSUING SUCH PERMITS: Local Building and Safety - City of Rancho Cucamonga az PROJECT DESCRIPTION DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: Proposed Development of 11 acre site for auto self sorvice station, multi-tenant use buildin;s and mini warehouse sac, Ity. ACREAGE OF PROJECT AREA AND SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING A:ID PROPOSED BUILDINGS, IF ANY: ll acre/480,555 s.f. site; 153,000 s.f. proposed building. DESCRIBE THE ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING W THE PROJECT SITE INCLUDING INFORMATION ON TOPOGRAPHY, :LANTS (TREES) , ANIMALS, ANY CULTURAL, HISTORICAL OR SCENIC ASPECTS, USE OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES, AND THE DESCRIPTION OF ANY EXISTING STRUCTURES AND THEIR USE (ATTACH IECESSARY SHEETS) : The site sioo.:s 2% from North to Southwest. Existing lemon grove. broua wel 1ng animals. No cultural or historic aspect, remainder of past citrus industr'. The adjacent properties are vacant, hi¢h density res, ent,al or industrial/commercial type structures. Is the project part of a larger project, one of a s=ries of cumulative actions, which although individually small, may as a whole have significant environmental impact? I-2 U 1'i r L � l WILL THIS PROJECT: YES NO X 1. Create a substantial change in ground contours? X 2. Create a substantial charge 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 plain designations? X 5. Remove any existing trees? How many? ±800 X 5. Create the need for use or disposal of potentially hazardous materials such as tox4 - substances, flammables or explosi >es? Explanation of any YES answers above: Site is existing Lemon rove. In proposed site design, intend to use as many or exastino trees as oossio e. IMPORTANT: If the project involves the construction of residential units, complete the form on ttie next page. '.:ERTIFICATIO14: 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 Develo Ce t Review Committee. :,ate 5;18/84 Signature AWA , ® Title A chitec 1-3 C- 11 r- t 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 accommodate the proposed residential development. Name of Developer and Tentative Tract No. : Specific Location of Project: ~ PHASE I PHASE 2 PHASE 3 PHASE 4 TOTAL 1. '_dumber of single family units: 2. Nwmer of multiple family units: 3. Date zroposed to begirt construction: 4. Earliest date of occupancy: r Modes and # of Tentative 5. Bedrooms Price Range I-4 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE RkN%Ci,O CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 84 -27, FOR AN INDUSTRIAL PROJECT LOL ':TED CM THE WEST SIDF OF VINEYARD, BETdEEN ARROW AND 9TH STREETS, iN THE GENERAL INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT WHEREAS, on the 26th day of September, i984, a complex;, applicaticr was filed by the Barmakian Company frir review of the above-described project; and WHEREAS, on the 26th day of September, 1984, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider the abova-described project. NOW, THEREFORE, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission resolved as fol lives: SECTION 1- That the following findings can be met: 1. That the proposed use is in accord with the Gerer.1 Plan, the objectives of the Development Code, and the purposes of the district in which the site is located. 2. That the proposed use, togethcr with the conditions applicable thereto. will of be detrimental to the - public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. 3. That the proposed use complies with each of the applicable provisions of the Devel3pment Code. SECTION 2: That this project will not create adverse impacts on the environment and that a Negative Dec:aration is issued on September 26, 1984. SECTION 3: That Conditional Use Permi` No. 84-27 is approved subject tT the following conditions: PLANNING DIVISION 1. The vacant pad located at the northwest corner of Vineyard and 9th Street shall be .emporarily seeded and irrigated if graded with the balance of the project site. G%7 CUP84-27 Page 2 2. A combination of landscaping, berms, and low profile walls shall be provided within landscape setback areas to screen parking and gasoline pumps from, Public view within ti_2 multi-use tenant industrial and service station area. Berms shall be undulating with an avenge height of three feet and a maximum slope not exceed 3 1/2.1. In addition, 'landscaped berms shall be provided against the mini- warehouse screen walls. 3. All perimeter wails and mini-warehouse screen walls shall be split face vertically fluted block. 4. The following materials shall be used on all buildings to provide a consistent, unifying architectural theme throughout the project: either Split face block along top band of buildings, with spl -;t face vertically fluted block along bottom of buildings, or sandblasted concrete along top band, with vertically flute(i concrete along bottom of buildings. The intent is that all multi-tenant buildings, mi.ii-wareho :se buildings and service station buildioq be ..rr,structed with the same exterior materials. 5- Convenience 61rectory signs , ;vi exceeding four square feet in area, shall be provided at a;l entrances to the multi-use tenant porti ,)n of the project to the satisfaction of the City Planner. 6, A uniform sign program for the entire development shall be submitted to the Planning Division for renewal and approval prior to issuance of building permits. The intent is to provide a coordinated signing program of wall and monument signs as a r single project- No more than two (2) monument signs shall be permitted on Vineyard per the Sign Ordinance, exclusive of convenience directory signs, and service station pricing signs. ENGINEERING DIVISION 1. Site is required to drain to the Cucamonga Creek channel via existing stub connection in the channel . A permit from the San Bernardino County Flood Control District will be required prior to construction of the storm drain connection. 2. Site shall drain through the mini-warehouse westerly driveway to a -atch basin and minimum 18 inch pip-3 into channel. r,�sa �s CUP84-27 Page 3 APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 26TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 1984. PLANS;ING COMMISSION OF' -.`HE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Dennis L. Stout, Chairman ATTEST: Rick Gomez, Deputy Secretary I, Rick Gomez, Deputy 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 September, 1934, by the follcwing vote-to-wit: (!` AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: CW!" J SSIONERS: ASSENT: COMMISSIONERS: �R- ' ✓— - V T " T V _ c L w 0� n 9 y O — C? O J •J Q _ d G — ~ P' g C 7 C O 4 «r✓ '�� O C• p G -- U '7 E— _ c t— V r i T �= ¢= ' 0 4 E — '• E.L L V O 4 F t-' n i O q•� _Q L N r � •^V tO c•LI ¢9 f — � j G M ±0 7 c— c V.n r ry� T00 � • SC� _n •_ Vn Per— 2 r q `ri• d c -J � ¢�— C M L «" c O ✓ C N—{J _ � ` G` C V nU V•�— r � L bCu>� Nn • PQ --' � O =_ — Ou � dc I TO -lr — _ r r• — EOCV j ._r O�, i�a QVG Pry �� _ L— V ^ e o0•� ^41 2_ T_ OO n� cT u >� � y b•O•r ^J✓� - 7 VVC I�7F .. G -V O c L 'V V - ✓✓— V V U O b.G• p n� _ L r— � �... j P a t'V r c.�. Nra�ur3 �_ o � Vc ✓ b N7c—O GnG 'VCV c � T✓ �= ja✓ >� ` V�qN OL 1.—...i c_'E] •ca CO «�' Q.� cc•+.• p= � nNC r � ,a O O ✓ y✓ O' •r0••Oi• — y A r J G r ` ✓ O d« �_«y—�L✓ nL evc - d+ o � « p_ r_ y = �r✓a "• on '^ oCu1- moo•` ¢.. � c=tic_ 'nY •_j r coM c��N �`o ,c^-v oo• � o.�. ":- ECO o¢ '� — « F •a era .• �V -- FV� r; �� G—� ' a•aySL GL Cie V� c00 « ' L n�`6N '� e0 np 0 � L' P A N ✓ T) O . P S Py V N L P N_M. ¢_ _' 7 _J � P—7 'V C ai p „ 4 C y C i C — n � q ee O w V.� � T yQy•u M 'r�l V _9 �=a _ r9�.7 VCPVO « Tc 'q— ` C ?v nC OL «'eau PC NL 4� 0-' �O V� � V ' d'Or q0� LnG= � « P >•� ¢V�. c O� = c « a� N....LO e b ` Tu n— P✓ — VC�N r �v0 J¢��O _ 61=.� an dam✓ nq) 4 �— O _ L L � O y0=`L _ TL � __V c p`O cW9 -q C«i LOcr •Li• p.r'OL t.O. b � cN'__ d o «cb Ncc nnLyO GdbG VC4 Ei� OTviG L •pe� '� VOC > cn4✓ -.V L' «O y—pT _V6yCEVi rCIgP O9N'_J ? =a C « L «J V G y 0 « O r ✓I « O O __n « 'f O a ✓` •r N N V O «` N L V l✓��' V V 9 �r r 1— v 9 n O 2 •n L C d ^O �� s V � V d_� _« «�•N..�� ✓ C 9F -zi p O: V i «rV 2 pn G— LOOV nE— y 1 6 O 9 O r L n 1 n y 4 g n L O � e OO � py E" G r099�1 r v j Z _L o V yN O.E .✓n� Oc`i V q _ c � —� ■ 2 ra J 9Ne n i cc i�od q� L «G I O .3 P «O C O N G C t r V r L d � � O q O V Y 1 � ✓¢ =� a-- p j �_ � S .I � � Vp� � � W CC��_•n— V� try— _ V l.. ` V • IL Y V V C c G w q•[i .O. b 4 b «W VI N • b � i M JO C• ^� V N i � zo v din w a oN T uo� mad c�v �. q r t O L E p ' r G _O✓ C — C >a O ? _� P G G q' > O w w G~ q _a V ✓ n T V n r 9 ' G C N _N C•� G G O N y V n C S O C C Y•gd'N o✓eFe c.^ Y' o`.o ., "$ u •••� � .:o "_ b$ •"vq _ �� N_.'• OP V9 a•L_ Or N— {VAV q ONN t � OG OGl NNdP .. �t Oy L � �✓ >c uGj— M�' 3 C^ q n•.> q •^L CVy�J O ✓ P u V V w U n G' Q > d� 0 q C q G rt'✓C ✓ r O _•�dc L_`o? _._T rN ` - ` NqN > No � �aa- � �F— L u O Q L G O. i0 E .. C M V q L G ✓p `_E � C� � q V G' V GCCx✓d ` ipT— O— Gy� n. ><..a O w 4 L` '^t G? V •" G U C O d x L Gp V O L V O C y V u N La w _ •G` Y `V' _ G ^ V c O C G C ci 9C F nOq � yL �` O .�C� VV •—i• -J Vr— n T 7 V N V M 7 y— � C N y `� L x N �✓� — c \• G se E G' dN Tr oa I� uG' � cr e � -✓ car " •Gd, E^y r✓G G?tea O G O w N� n ~� r— N V O ✓ > d q c L N r d 0�— G• T C � i V l� ` ✓ •o y G C c O G C •O L p d C q p n� N r T v 4 =_—✓ N T r N H M g L l G Y..•9 Q yl I y M r G .9 9— `' 6.Vi• Vu_ O GV Ng UYLVC— NJ V y—t EYV Nd Na NU dr ... G •✓ M i r C— u d C C M u g a d C O V_ O C+T V q✓ G✓?L••e — r Oq iC .w ooG Nu >✓- i - x ` a✓� uc L-• ^. < LG c of �s2� cS— q� V _ n = >. O q2c-V..r`C� VV G �✓ — SW Nq✓ P q '^V > CVgC_ yr b J`✓ PVNO ar J L NC 6 •� V'N VQ ✓ q` V q d P V >w V — C c 72 •� P Y C p C ti O w ^ O Y 1 P V ^GV CC qq_ C u� V•piUV ' itgt Gla = �09 V VgOQ G��' 0=qv p Vv G� •- daF_ C V— NrHNrI LLn dV � 6VMw OCL r �I1 1 ^' ml 1 N' j V• b i i I u 1 N �� `� C VAN Cr 9 •�G 'i�O9 �dCV VVIn L_ d >yVP O �O y 1 q S 2 C� ! O r 9 �•'� C p O �= r� � e>, � 4 _ oaw= >rY✓ N :t << o qb >•GV qL SO —� SbLV � Gr CiF E✓ J L C r 6✓ G'^ V L O � — ✓N �_ C r ✓4_ N V V b✓M r N�' ` ' � a _F g L \ q 2 C C C V T S.G G 4 r� V V ✓L L � _ _ 6 r — = yc `o„ c' ..�� oc � c EVTv�✓ o -�-^ o �� q V V cNF V Gq -z `✓ 9d dP� rG � ✓V —C q✓ N01 ^L `•O.• 6q— 9FpN — V G N� 'i— 9 E N V� C � L V C M �— l' � >V✓ N`a— C O „ O m✓ V •C tea,✓ O YS L u ✓^. OA n'C`• - 2` Nn Cw qL L ✓✓ N'G^ C GF OO. C qO ✓ O JN ` p � V \tP yO O q O N� • O q� V y g V �V r M •'v � U L t v ! dLM Q✓✓ _ c wd- 'f' wGi-v �. 2 L- cLc NNu`a '^mac bir- G O S t O T d J 4-- x C v— C — V G P L > l � T E r C O✓ O O n E — d w M _ > V Y 6 G q c q V C C� O tY.. q n y r wN• w C P L C 9 L O N C ♦.y C T W n V w—• C i G L C C C C — C G � 4 'v b G' C •'? - c �_ o_ bqb _ o _r ° Tr av ou .c c�� iucrN -.o N da=•:: -Gr. aT z + gG� = c$nG' n v"ae ' tFGd tiG � V GLC _u0 CG L 6� CG � Gq V•r +Cu dt w V2� nOP� � � N TUC'� IVVNC L.O �.— _C -OS >aLV CSVW V .! t✓ �j N S� C y �C✓ L q V N w y.p n u O\.r Y N \N V V V > V � w C O r q A y• ^✓ �^'— G C 4 O .Ow V a � �C C - u � u Q aLOi = q •cqi c_.a.—.. i v G C i N S <.�— �—• P . O— V E � iaGc ✓o p1 <— W� �� �._ c• > o < oov -� e c� > ' � E �� q � 9L �� � as Y� oL c G�•v ✓ V,V _ _ — y � —� _ Gb G yfJ n' adsM p ` G✓C > � 7E _ _ py V4 _ �.L.. G.�Ci� aC�✓ � — ~ NG 6"-Na ••�9 6V t V PCL ,LL Ou — d Y c e .-� �C a n ti E.•G p I Gay i c 'vbC' =.,N- = Z P. i'=a _= oo rater 2 r No F L L V •Q �"'l y J.q 0 O T'L"� N V� u' ., n Y`O 6 C Y q J C v V r� Y S c r_"� r6 a>r � � wLn LJC`C C > Q �'- � a G•J V� r Vr q cn p b .^n=76r G9 Orr Cq � L_ L Pa W G a. q jai q s q �" ca a� �.n „_ L _ Lr r-:v roo i voq cur err_ L T r� r M r r rr Ja =v c.i N^ •O Y .,, __ r No_ L av : - = q .,, aL '' .J. 0 UC rnv rL'q� J 4C r N d r'li O G dVY r uj VOV � cr N d r a„ G=c PO.r Tr. M� a` yr L� O Oar ` C � PnC.n ON Gda� n L� 4d NV6 Nr rP V cq -j dL0 vr... q 7q r =LVL wL > nq ^' r.-. qLm •� ie�u = e _q .. qr _' cqr r•^ Jq ra9Vr C OCO` � d= NCU w wai P 'JSCO NOOr .e 6 of 2,nVd 6T+ Oa 6� WO4 aw �Ny y� Va+ w q rr � C0'r,c VCV arr. Q O I H�� r C; 9 i q L O T O C O O c P y C c r z a O L� d a Nr a 1rq a_ N rrr �C Pd qi d l J[ r C C O.�� N2 M O baLL C. _ V y=y .Ln ^V O• _ vC w r =" r Or rL a= VC r6�V Ur VAC `N VN 4v O.cm r E E SC ibL > ^i,ur Ev�� cd rn=_�- r • `e re 01 CV q_ V �Lr Vy IZ .rn9 �j ay qr pC rr � qr N LO ri aV, Jra rr�grW cO w i r'V NI N ,a FL c •e > N L dVCCLr VqM aP pW= C q O b,r OTC O O Gv `�N V� Vr yr M 9� raO.e CUGN 4� c� � C� JI Vat T ^p .7i,1 v^ _Ti d Or O_ 00 YJ= _ a" C wv YI r q J V ON CYOq LJr9V n Q �� q0` �rC y n7 ry� c yyOCO LCGC�L c ,rnV � L�� .L. r 'p M r_q V N� q d S". C > G' N U N q q_ O g g 3� E�.L... � r e m w �q q q • N` �Y1C aPl q � Vr cr O��V wLOIC V �^ = iV LL qI V aLJ „ N Nw _' LL ^ 'J r-.q PG". OW` IIGV iaC • NV ..n0 CO G �N C ` P 4CUV 04 �Y .L.vYe EL _b v ac— i�v c✓ c i aei uiv� ��ra _ c�a do �."' d.n Tw o`a � br N MO � NZ R N d 0 >� yl G� L Z...,v�yC qrr� C C +• VG !' qqL. d zl CI I � V r40 ` V4 PV _ L DV -'—O LLO 4_� - r N fJ •n �j D O q� Wcc `ZoL � d r i _ U V q •a y 0 1 ` N C O •`n C 9 1 r 0 L V— V L V N v C 'C� > ? P • 9 6•C V > u q C_ C' V N`• S `P I d O P` N Y L u ' c aY Ell �' �•V u L G _ L c q= L r � r O g t _' ul JGL WN S� O N 'rI GL VD WN7 yVV �G •J�C1 6r Q' I ycc� V c L q O Q S C O= r� C�� r• i G ^ I O N L r C L� IrL p4 �q G ^ N� E•�.rGO N— L � C L I V � r' TS G C4C r` _V L— LrC C^rUi Co 40 — LE L I GyV.l vy Ccr L u y c 4 c-• rL '>o NY — SL a ccc•c o .c, •ecd aq_ = � o -�; _ Il' o r 4_ '= _ C i T'r _ .�..• C•` V 12•r,V 1 V C �� V`•r _C Tv SO ONGV _� T� q _OrEC i CJL C V � -ci 4 _ z � ` Cc FO 1 _rVc C ^r Vc Pr IVIC p4r J V c' c• O V C_ O C E 4 c T O 4 •�• O I G' O `• D V. rlE 1 6 V r V �< O.r 6 � n NI = « L V C q J N c � � •n O� c .V. V N .Ti 6a /��a �� O I I q I1 q > n ✓ Ca i =• V V t�N q ZZ2, W V d c S « •7 c c ] G g N O tN 7` l - n P O O 2 =L L � O � gOVp yWn = V `� .-i•6 CL > y .�- O u - u• I 'I = � q.�C c i y d q ...• C. y y V W G Y y qm I � �_� � s '.' NLc � c� c•� n ? F .. .N..G� . � M� I _ � �- ram � L G mL r= •^cicam ` q oa2f LJ- VO L` c0 ` Q` n > •Li• dV dl W ' PNS- = 0 O L �• � r _ E _ • tiI m m P O o , 3 9,Lt 2 432 « og L c u` q yq W oP^ `cd•`ao eac c.d.r Pq q �^ G baEy y cn cJB _m s`� Pn d P 9 q = L � O w �CGO .dPeaCC yqq « L ^O•<� p0 L > - C q r V�.`6 LV�^ L�OVa rQ.Ca gEOal oqi C•e q ? d^=4_ C y�y q T? q t O p O c L ...Y q �b T R V l b� r q V P M d ��= d >a •J � r c� a q 4 wq.O t n c ` Cd"•�c NnVe Vq .�r•rr qnE `C'•�9..� 'yc q V - C q r•' .• L L G N i -� p• a a � ,a� oi `''ys"'! c `m`= q a�� >o a o�• Fq L.N. c ecr .cp rq our y ada i �«., « _' c E �E «E � ' dYr� O N cv n0'• �O� dGV C�> aN 2 Z ,pa fJ �J o e C C n c o C T .• 6P ' yq �GO c O� aC••' O qa C _ L jC 5 «•d� .L�.�%a.d-c Vi G•«•• ^= L j � N C G�> C •di V � G Q P O J L • q� 0 a G P C N Q u� =� q C P N O .Oi ate. O wqJ• O N N= zz P - .mac v ndv> o .J+ Teq>v q__ .. Ny•.•!+E✓ _ � PCV bM q NV'JN� < q4p 06�-E^ WCaV < OV VO Pq �� } qT f N V J ra✓ _ _ a �'_ 9 ✓ n � qCn• r qL M d' ✓ 9 G d N N • r c C q 9 V l y V c✓ n l > .0 O V C V V _ r q d C V J� J O �..• T G L V Ti= O ✓ C lPr CN UG - -eT ��V OLC dl ' G 4qd � y - �Or 9 r✓ h� � __ � r9 aL > V c v., ry .L. J tN✓ d0 o u dm _ I w` G `a m_ � n �.°. j q 0 m L E c u vr:• V C _q a L — � ✓A c y N � �� O 6 U O C _Cz l✓ n> n a c c _ d _ � O G_w � q N q C a�. t l n L �b � V � l T l �� OI ✓ O n l N - m C n - q W rL VL�"O" Of rC Vq 40Ji � rLO VG OL W G✓_4 u V P 7 P V'�P - L N 9r .�` ✓ �`r G ` ��T O q C Cr =� GO r� O� OL c✓-J O ` C - d V _� r .- J am✓ Y N L C •`I Q V G d Nd rywV d I L. CwV J � � 2 `"• O O m �GVw Lu O O ' � � ��L M?igP 9 P •^ VlV .V.rY y LOE go` rt o J. L ` Gr _ O c o gT✓yL•� r n c � cu o u � i _ eG� Gc eT= o a •�_ n• — � v i � o O, n— � �. A E na q o75 Pi c E c.= � X �� ✓ I c Lac _ -�_ _ M q _ iLa i— u � i C GL L c' L S N3 �� � - ` � _ ACV C- OE✓ L c _ q� C ✓ I I C L C C c U. o f - ! G C l r C d zcO N l ✓ c� -\ X q C ✓ N f r � _�_V nq pp c c ` au yo a c V'J NL'an p- Q V C I G _ l ` P i � Jw uL ✓ t V � 3 T 6 V I E LNV NpW 4� 6 C M NO✓r N'O q y O y� = O N b •L c N i p d Q I D \rr c GN• � ' p N V c b I+I y V O V r l n `r r L y p ' L C 6 J V D n 1 � 1 T, 1 C p Q y d j d P c V Q O G q r V V a ` P N 6 p• O' E �. a d r r « G L •Nevri= " b y 20 _PV "• ydG•rq = d ob -� __ J ��. a— � e V�r i C- d r r o O V V` •� p V N • ap• �.T. V` _ 7C IG - T j a qd ed c N: �� •^ E � � Iy ~ n b CL N` V' rO �� « l 4 d=� ou Ow —.• O2r ro .�•. F •^n — q Lnq y � p� —.5 d d `ov ���• � m i M.T• j— �. , L t O•rw y N i V r_ y J •yV y T 9 q i d V-f V •gyp v 5 O� 6� � 7 C O C A N G� •i0i � C O G V r G < p • � I 1 �1 1 NI � `� � i OI ^ N 0 s CI-rY OFpRA RANCHO CUCAMONGA c�,�iyo S��L�FF REPORT `�9- J p I-- DATE: September 26, 1984 J> 1977 i TO: Planning Commission I! FROM: Lloyd B. Pubbs, City Engineer BY: Barbara Krall, Engineering Technician _ SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 8587 - PREVITI - A division of 1.04 acres into 2 parcels in the Very Low du ac Development District located on the southeast corner of Mayberry Avenue and Rancho Street - APN 201-111-35 I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: I A. Action Requested: Approval of Parcel Maps. ' 8. Purpose: To divide 1.04 acres into 2 parcels in the Very Low (2 ® u/-ac Development District for the purpose of building a single family dwelling. C. .Location: Southeast corner of Mayberry Avenue and Rancho Street. D. Parcel Size: Parcel 1 0.52 acres Parcel 2 0.52� acres I�54 acres E. Existing Zoning: Very Low (2 du/ac) Devlopment District. a F. Existing Land Use: Parcel 1 - P:cisting single family dwelling Parcel 2 - vacant G. Surrounding Land Use: North - existing single fa:.,ily South - existing single family East - existing single family West - vacant. H. Surrourdin Gennrai Plan and Development Code Oesi nations: port - fiery ow u ac) DDevelopment District South - Very Low (2 du/ac) Development District East - Very Low (2 du/ac) Development District West - Very Low (2 du/ac) Development District ITEM H is; . f PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Environmental Assessment and Parcel Map 8587 - Previti September 26, 1984 Page 2 I. Site Characteristics: Parcel i contains a single family residence; Parcel is vacant sloping approximately 2% to the southwest. II. ANALYSIS: This Parcel Ma dividing 1.04 acres of land into 2 parcels is located on the Very Low r2 dulac) Development District at the southeast corner of Rancho Street and Mayberry Avenue, south of Hillside Road. Parcel 2 contains a single family residence-fronting on Rancho Street; Parcel 2 is vacant. Street improvements for Mayberry Avenue and Rancho Street with the exception of a street light are existing. Local equestrian trails, as shown on the attached Map, will be provided. The portion of trails on Parcel 1 is to be constructed prior to recording the Parcel Map. Trails on Parcel 2 will be constructed at time of building permit issuance. Parcel 2 will be graded to drain toward Rancho Street as shown on the attached conceptual grading plan. III. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: Also attached for your review and consideration is kart I of the nitial 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 rs;ult 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. r V. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission adopt the attached reso ction conditionally approving Tentative Parcel Map 8587 and authorizing the issuance of a Negative Declaration. Respec fully s bmi ed, 11 �j GLBH'B jaa Attachments: Map - Tentative & Vicinity Resolution City Engineer's Report Initial Study ka r� I R ' . t"'a Y 2�P• $i= tc 25p5 to a 4 $ ��i o�wE�3 g� i T e�,'u' �. - � i�c;�� W pp ter.. � fi ik i capp is � �8 � ,�Y �i.. y4 (WH}••` . j 1 ikr act "'A o _ ly �C Q 2 � J�fi • y • Q�• ¢gip c� ¢I1 }- •�R 'yf' ` •' �� -ice ;jl ; l.;�l ti n w 44 �Wa Iyy �s ; ► I I L i 4` { �� 1Pa>•s� i ..,, R`.; ti 1 PROJECT 1 SITE �i . i CITY OF RANCHO CUCA��IONGA title; P.M. 8587 l _O --_ �� Iz ENGINEERING DIVISION A VICINITY il1AP T L + page - 'Y-� �1 .A •. a .: l'I ~ 1 !�,,`� 1 r ) y v i1 l I 1 L - '•� e_Zh .PARCEL - -� Z2.7a7 S tb 1 Fan.i i r 4Y , 1111 Y � t j�1 1 =Ise title; `i CITY OF RANCHO CUC�.,�IONGA p AENGINEERING DIVISION p *+ s987 1977 VICINITY MAP � IT Page xs t CITY OF RANCHO CUCP2MONGA INITIAL STUDY PART I - PROJECT INFORMATION SHEET - To be completed by applicant Environmental Assessment Review lee: $87. 00 For all projects requi_ing environmental review, tnis fo,:n 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 St,.:dy. The Development Review Committee will meet and take action no later than ter. (10) days before the public meeting at which time the project is to be heard. The Coacr"tee will -hake one of three determinations : 1) The project will have no signi- ficant environmental impact a.id 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: TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO . 8587 APPLICANT'S NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE: ( 7141 987-7788 -1AMFS P _ PRFVITl 70313 Rancho Street , Rancho Cucamonga , CA a1710 _ NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE OF PERSON TO BE CONTACTED CONCERNING THIS PROJECT. Gary T . Sanderson , c/o Linvil7e- Sanderson & Assoc . 95S r ow 11, Cute , ul a anc o uC-camonga , California 91130 i _ � LOCATION OF PROJECT (STREET ADDRESS AND ASSESSOR PARCEL NO_ ) 10313 Rancho Street Assessor ' s Parcel No . - i - LIST OTHER PERMITS NECESSARY FROM LOCAL, REGIONAL, STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES AND THE AGENCY ISSUING SUCH PERMITS : None T_1 PROJECT DESCRIPTIONI DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: BEING A DIVISION OF PARCEL 3 AND THE NORTH 12 FEET OF PARCEL 4 0= PARCEL MAP NO . 3574 , P . M . B . 36/ 18, IN THE CITY OF RANCHU CUCAMONGA , INTO PARCELS . ACREAGE OF PROJECT AREA AND SQUARE -FOOTAGE OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED BUILDINGS, IF F7Y: 1 . 04 GROSS ACRES THERE- IS A 2 ,200t SQUARE FOOT HOUbE ON THE W S LY SITE . 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) : NATURAL DRAINAGE IS TO THE SOUTHWEST AT APPROXIMATELY 6%. THE USE OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES TO THE NORTH , EAST , AND SOUTH IS RESIDENTIAL HOUSING. USE TO THE WEST IS VACANT , _ AND AN EXISTING SITE FRONTS ON A FULLY IMPROVED STREET ® RANCHO STREET WITH CURB , GUTTER , AND FIRE HYDRANT PROVIDED . THE WESTERLY HALF ( PARCEL 1 ) IS FULLY IMPROVED WITH HOUSE , TREES AND LANDSCAPE . THE EASTER HALF ( PARCEL 2 ) IS VACANT . Is the project Part of a larger project, one of a series of cumulative actions , which although individually small, may as a whole have significant environmental impact? NO I-2 N'I 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? 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 projE-:t 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 inforsa=ion required for this initial evaluation to the best of my -'_ility, 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 bemade by the De lopmer_t/'Review Committee. Date 7 —Z 7 "py Signature Title OVN�R 1-3 K 8 RESIDENTI_,L CO`:STRUCTION The following information should be provided to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Division n order to aid in assessing the ability of the school district to accomriodate the proposed residential development. Name of Developer and Tentative Tract No. : Specific Loca�ion of Project: PHASE I PRASE 2 PHASE 3 PHASE 4 TOTAL 1. Number of single family units: 2. Number of multiple family units: 3. Date proposed to begin, construction: 4D4. Earliest date of occupancy: Model T and # of Tentative 5. Bedrooms Price Range I-4 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PARCEL MAP NUMBER 8587 (TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 8587) LOCATED ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF MAYBERRY AVENUE AND RANCHO STREET WHEREAS, Tentative Parcel Map Number 8587, submitted by James Previti, and -onsisting of 2 parcels, located on the southeast corner of Mayberry AvenuE and Rancho Street, being a division- of Parcel 3 and the North 12.00 feet of Parcel 4 of Parcel Map 3574 as recorded in Book 36, Page 18, Records of San Bernardino County, State of Californ;a; and WHEREAS, on August 2, 1984, a formal application was submitted requesting review of the above-described Tentative Map; and WHEREAS, on September 26, 1984, 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 have been made: 1. Th-it the map is consistent with the General Plan. 2. That the improvement of the proposed subdivision i; 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 er:,ironmental impacts and a Negative Declaration is issued on September 26, 1964. SECTION 3: That Tentative Parcel Map No. 8587 is approved subject to the recommended Condit�ions of Approval pertaining thereto. H Its APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 26TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 1984. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY• Dennis L. Stout, Chairman ATTEST• Rick Gomez, Deputy Secretary I, Rick Gomez, Deputy 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 September, 1984, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COvAISSICNERS: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA RECOMMEHDED ,CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL LOCATION: Southeast corner of Mayberry TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO: 8587 Avenue and Rancho Street DATE FILED: 8/2/84 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: A division of Parcel 3 NUMBER OF LOTS: 2 and the North 12.00 feet of Parcel 4 of GROSS ACREAGE: 1.04 Parcel Map 3574 as recorded in Book 35, ASSESSOR PARCEL NO:201-111-35 Page 18, Records of San Bernardino County, State of California rkr�ct**7r�r*irict**,r,t*f-,t**#kit*rr*,t*,tie*t*�,rt. t***�t**intt*ict**int-t:tirxx:taF/Hc***i-�rl-kic-:c***�,t DEVELOPER OWNER ENGINEER/SURVEYOR James Previti same Linville-Sanderson 10313 Rancho Street 9587 Arrow Route, Ste H Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91701 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Improvement and dedication requirements in accordance with Title lb 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 map. 2. Dedication 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: 5. Reciprocal access easements and maintenance agreements ensuring access to all parcels amid joint maintenance of all common roads, drives or parking areas shall be provided by C.C.&R.s and shall be recorded concurrent with the map. -1- x �a 6- All existing easements lying within future right-of-way are to be quitclaimed or delineated on the map per City Engineer's requirements. 7. Easements for sidewalk for public use shall be dedicated to the City where sidewalks meander through private property. Surety 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 Parcel 2. 2. A lien agreement must be executed prior to recording of the map for the following: 3. Surety shall be posted and an agreement executed, guaranteeing completion of ail on-site drainage facilites necessary for dewatering all parcels to the satisfaction of the Building and Safety Divison prior to recording for and/or prior to issuance of building permit for Street Improvements Pursuant to the City 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 ;nap and/or building permit issuance. I. 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 building permit issuance for Parcel 2 Curb & e- Drive Street Street A.G. R-e ian Street Name Gutter Pvmt. Walk Appr. Trees Lights Overlay Island* Other Rancho X X X *Includes landscaping and irrigation on meter -2- K �3 n 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. X 5. Street improvement plans shall be revised 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 ISM or less fronting the property shall be undergrounded. 8. 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. 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. Undersidewalk drains shall be installed to City Standards. Drainage and Flood Control 1. Private drainage easements for cross-lot drainage shall be required and shall be delineated or noticed on the final map. 2. Adequate provisions shall be made for acceptance and disposal of surface drainage entering the property from adjacent areas. 3. The folicna ng storm drain shall be installed to the satisfaction 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- 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 prior to issuance of building permit. 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 will be required as follows: CalTrans for San Bernardino County Flood Control District X Cucamonga County Water District for server 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 the 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 constructor. X 4. Sanitary sewer and water systems shall be designed to Cucamonga County Water District standards. A letter of acceptance is required. 5. This subdivision shall be subject to conditions of approval from CalTrans/San Bernardino County Flood Control District. _ 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. _4_ R is z. r• X 1. The Mina 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. X 8. Local trails shall be provided in accordance with the Trail Plan. 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 by the City Planner prior to recordation for Parcel 1 and prior to building permit issuance for Parcel 2. 4. 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. 1' CITY Of RANCHO CUCAMGNGA LLOYD B. NUBBS, CITY ENGINEER by: N Ito CITY OF RANCHO CUCA_TMO�NGA C,_ICAM�1 STAFF REPORT AOL lid >;, F >DATE: September 26, 1984 '� F t " TO: Planning Commission FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer BY: 3arbara Krall, Engineering Technician SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 8680 - MORRIS & SEARLES - A division of 3.i77 acres of land into 3 parcels within the Low Medium (4-8 du/ac) Development District located on the east side of Ramona Avenue, south of Base Line Road. I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action Requested: Approval of Parcel Map. ! B. Purpose: To divide 3.177 acres of land into 3 parcels. Parcel 2 ® II to be the site of Tentative Tract 12772 approved by Planning Commission on September 24, 1984. C. .Location: East side of Ramona Avenue, south of Base Line Road. D. Parcel Size: Parcel 1 2.682 acres Parcel 2 0.275 acres Parcel 3 0.220 acres 3.171 acres E. Existing Zoning: Low-Medium Development District (4-8 du/ac) . F. Existing Land Use: Parcel 1 - vacant ' Parcel 2 - existing single family Parcel 3 - existing single family G. Surrounding Land Use: North - vacant South - existing single family East - vacant West - existing single f gaily homes. H. Surroundin General Plan and Development Code Designations: North - Low - u/ac Development District South - Low (2-4 du/ac) Development District East - Low (2-4 du/ac) Development District West - Low (2-4) du/ac Development District TEM 1 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Environmental Assessment and Parcel Map 86EO - Morris & Searles September 26, 1984 Page 2 1. Site Characteristics: Parcels 2 and 3 contain single family dwellings. There are some abandoned thicker, cages and citrus trees on Parcel 1. The property slopes at approximately 21" in a seutheastcrly direction. II. ANALYSIS: Morris & Searles, applicants for Parcel Map 8680, are requestng a division of 3.177 acres of land into 3 parcels to provide separate lots for two single family e :eliings- and create a parcel which will be a portion of Tract 12772. The tract was tentatively approved by the Planning Commission on September 12, 1984. 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. - RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission adopt the attached reso ution conditionally approving Tentative Parcel Map 8680 and authorizing the issuance of a Negative Declaration. Respe tfully suomitt d, LBtI:BK;j as Attachments: Map - Tentative & Vicinity Resolution City Engineer's Report Initial Study M (n I I LL V� Yz __ Q \ ~ 9tl?tee 1� is „R • . r 13 �. ,r- Y r • v o r CL q- —_ ...Jn a.c•wu— 9�ni�.Y• r. vFalna�__ Er -L Ml H.^gyp/ J ,jj777 rr11 { "1li TIff S - ItM E ice" !il `�catro CITE' OF RANCHO C ' � 'itle; P.M. E680 ENGINEERING DIVISION VICINITY MAP Page. T' I , i i, ���-�... _ '''_f r_J :: ...• .=�!:.^__... t ;� mow`— '.- , ...... mLnL Jlrs i I'- wit I I ; �.. I 1 y •r _ <"t I ( It? I I .1 --1 -r• rp, �� ' •[. ..� �• ��. - I }f, I o IL NORTH CITY OF T1:� \CHO CUCALNIO\GA TiTLL: PLANNING DIVOON El"FiI1�iZ:_�SGLL£= - RESOLLP',ION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PARCEL MAP NUMBER 8680 (TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 8680) LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF RAMONA AVENUE, SOUT,� OF BASE LINE ROAD WHEREAS, Tentative Pa-cell Map Number 8680, submitted by Morris & Searles and consisting of 3 )arcels, located on the east side of Ramona Avenue, south of Base Line Road, being a division of a portion of the Northwest 1/4 of Section 2, Township 1 Seth, Range 7 West, also a portion of the South 1/2 of Lot 6 of said Section 2 as recorded in Map Book 4, Page 9; and WHEREAS, on August 22, 1984, a formal application was submitted requesting review of the above-described Tentative Map; and WHEREAS, on September 26, 1984, 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 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 tee proposed subdivision and improvements will not cease substantial environmental damage, p-lblic 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 September 26, 1984. SECTIP% 3: That Tentative Parcel Map No. 8680 is approved subject to trig recommended Conditions of Approval pertaining thereto. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 26TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 1984. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY• Dennis L. Stout, Chairman ATTEST: —Rick Gomez, Deputy Secretary ` I, Rick Gomez, Deputy Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonge, 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 September, 1984, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: f CITY Or RANCHO CUCAMONGA RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL LOCATION: East side o= Ramona Avenue, TENTATIVE PARCEL NAP N0: 9680 south of Base Line Road DATE FILED: 8/22/04 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: A subdivision of a portionNUMBER OF LOTS: 3 of the Northwest 1/4 of Section 2, Township GROSS ACREAGE: 3.177 1 SOUth, Range 7 West also a portion of the ASSESSOR PARCEL NO: 1077-031-3 South 112 of Lot 6 of said Section 2 as recorded �n Map Book 4, Page 9 DEVELOPER OWNER ENGINEER/SURVEYOR Morris & Searles Lois V. Pasik Ca]-Land 2950 B-1 Airway ^. 0. Box 2989 P. 0. Box 1376 Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Pomona, CA 91769 Claremont, CA 91711 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 map. X 2. Dedication shall be made of the following rights-of-way on the following streets: _ 33 additional feet on _Ramona Avenue additional feet on additional feet on 3. Corner property 11ne radius will be required per City Standards. 4. All rights of vehicular ingress and egress shall be dedicated as follows: 5. Reciprccal access easements and maintenance agreements ensuring access to all parcels and joint maintenance of all common roads, drives or parking areas shall be provided by C.C.&R.s and shall be recorded concurrent with the map. -1- X 6. All existing easements lying within future right-of-way are to be quitclaimed cr delineated on the map per City Engineer's requirements. 7. Easements for sidewalk for public use shall be dedicated to the City where sidewalks meander through private property. Surety 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 recording for Parcels 2 and 3. 2. A lien agreement must be executed prior to recording of the map for the foliowing: 3. Surety shall 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 recording for and/or prior to issuance of building permit for Street Improvements Pursur-nt to the City of Ranch Cucamonga Municipai Code, Title 16, Section 16.36.120, the subdivider may enter into an agreement and post security with the Cite, guaranteeing the required construction prior to recordation of the map and/or building 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 imprcNcmerts: Prior to recordation for Parcel 2 and 3 ur e- Drive Street Streeta san Street Name Gutter Pvmt. Walk Appr. Trees Lights Overlay island* Other Ramona X X X X X Z *includes landscaping and irrigation on meter -2- 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. 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. 6. Developer shall coordinate, and where necessary, pay for the relocation of any power poles or other existing public utilities as necessary. X 7. Existing lines of 12YV or less fronting the property shall be undergrounded. X 8. 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 Southerr. California Edison Company and the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Lights shall be on decorative poles with underground service. 10. Landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Division prior to the issuance of building permit. X 11. Concentrated drainage flows shale not cross sidewalks. Undersidewalk drains shall be installed to City Standards. Drainage and Flood Control 1. Private drainage easements for cross-lot drainage shall be required and shall be delineated or noticed on the final map. 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 satisfaction 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- 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 gracing plan sha'1 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 prior to issuance of building permit. 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. 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 County Floods ontrol District - X Cucamonga County Water District for sewer and water X 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 the City Attorney is required prior to recordation of the map. X 3. PrI-vide all utility services to each lot including sewerage, water, electric power, gas and telephone prior to street corstructon. Y. 4. Sanitary sewer and water systems shall be designed to Cucamonga County Water District standards. A letter of acceptance is required. 5. This subdivision shall be subject to conditions of approval from CalTrans/Saa Bernardino County Flood Control District. X 5. 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. -4- X 7. The filir.; of the tentative map or approval of same does not guarantee that sewer treatment capacity wilt 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 Plan. 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 by 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. X 11. Utility services, serving each dwelling unit, must be wholly located within the confines of each occupied parcel. Verification of these utility services must be provided to the Building Division prior to recordation of tha Map. a CITY OF RANCHO CUCAT40NGA LLOYD B. HUBBS, CITY ENGINEER by: -5- !- P.M. 8680 CITY .OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA INITIAL STUDY PART I - PROJECT INFO'.RMATION 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 prefect application is made- upon receipt of this application, the Environmental Analysis staff will prepare Part II of the Initial Studer. The Development Review Comnittee will meet and take action no later than ter. (10) days before the public meeting at which time the project is to be heard. The Committee will make one of three deterainations: 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 intonation report should be supplied by the applicant giving further informa- tion concerning the proposed project. PROJECT TITLE: Parcel Map No. 8680 APPLICANT'S NAME., ADDRESS, TELEPHONE: Morris & Searles, 2950 Ainaay Avenue, Suite B-1 , Costa Mesa, co 712 /957-9292 NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE OF PERSON TO BE CONTACTED CONCERNING THIS PROJECT: Ed Greer of Cal-Land, P. 0. Box 1376, Claremont, CA 9,711 714/946-9 24 LOCATION OF PROJECT (STRIE—ET ADDRESS AND ASSESSOR PARCEL NO. ) East side of Ramona Avenue, south of Base!. A.P.N. 1077-031-3. LIST OTHER PERMITS NECESSARY FROM LOCAL, REGIONAL, STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES AND THE AGENCY ISSUING SUCY. PERMITS: None known at present. I-1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: Create two parcels, one for applicant who is purchasing for development See Tract^'o ]2772 and one pdrC2 - Or record owner to retain. ACREAGE OF PROJECT AREA AND. SQUARE- FOOTAGE OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED BUILDINGS, IF AINY: 3.34 acres gross, 3.18 acres net. The houses on Parcel No. 2 coil gin _ 1 sq. t_ a s .e s on arce wo. contain + sq. t. o ui �nqs are propose WIL", Lnis—rand aivision. DESCRIBE THE ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING OF THE PROJECT SITE INCLUDING INFORMATION ON TOPOGRAPHY, PLANTS (TREES) , ANIM??S, ANY CULTURAL, HISTORICAL OR SCENIC ASPECTS, USE OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES, AND THE DESCRIPTION OF ANY EXISTING STRUCTURES AND THEIR USE (ATTACH NECESSARY SHEETS) : The site contains 2 houses, 2 sheds. and man abandoned chicken cages. ere appears to a no cu turai , historical or secnic as ects on this site. Birds an smallrodents may inhabit the area. T000aranhv is consistant, s ooing southeaster y at 2" Existing land uses of Surrounding properties: to the north, vacant; to the east vacant dno citrus grove; to the south and west sinale family homes Is the project part of a larger project, one of a series of cu-nulative actions, which although individually small, may as a whole have significant environmental impact? No 1-2 WILL THIS PROJECT_ . YES . . NO - X 1. Create a substantial change in ground contours? X 2. Create a substantial char noise or change in existing vibration? X 3. Create a substantial charge in demand for municipal icipal services (police, fire, water, etc. ) _ X 4. Create charges in the existing zoning or general plan designations? X 5. Remove any existing trees? now 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: IYPORTANT: If the project involves the construction of residential units, complete the form on the next page. r 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 bresented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge an3 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 Signature-,. / � v Title Consul taut ci I-3 r1 _ /J- CI3Y OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GVCAh1rJ�_ STAFF R.EPuRT Iz DATE: September 26, 1984 I> TO: Planning Commission FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer BY: Barbara Krall, Engineering Technician SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 12809 - LEWIS DEVELOPMENT COMPANY - A division of 00.16 acres of land into 11 lots within the Terra Vista Planned Community for City Park purposes located on the north side of Base Line Road between Milliken Avenue and the Beer Creek Channel - APN 202-221-14 & 25 I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action Requested: Approval of Tentative Tract Map. B. Purpose: For the purchase of 110.16 acres of land by the City for City Park purposes. ® C. Location: On the north side of Base Line Road between Milliken and Deer Creek Channel. D. Parcel Size: Nine 10-acre lots Ono 2.235-acre lot One 7.795-acre lot. F, Existinq Zoninq: Terra Vista Planned Community. F. Existing Land Use: Vacant. G. SurroundiVictng Land Use: North - oria Planned Community South - Terra Vista Planned Community East - Terra Vista Planned Community West - Terra Vista Planned Community I1. ANALYSIS: This property is the future site of a City Park within the Terra Vista Planned Community serving the entire City. An agreement between Lewis Homes and the City for the purchase of the property was approved oil May 24, 1984. The property is being divided into lots per this agreement for conveyance to the City. .: ITEM d din:' PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Environmental Assessment and Tentative Tract 12809 - Lewis Development Company September 26, 1984 Page 2 The agreement also provides for installation of public improvements at appropriate times. 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 em ironmert as a result of the proposed subdivision. IV. CORRESP)NDENCE: 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 recommended that the Planning Commission adopt the attached resolution conditionally approving Tentative Tract Map 12809. It is also recommended that a Negative Declaration be issued. Respectfully submitted, LSH:BK-jaa Attachments: Map - Tentative & Vicinity Resolution PROJECT SITE 921 S�RR LFA LGI? /i \ � , M i m i / j M LM M NC I MXF/ H M LM M P LM ^ LM J Lm MH :f�ofs*uw. M ■mcb� { \ JrH �p� �� 4 JrHLM L&A I P p ♦ LF1 Op S' 4f V E OP � i RC i,SH �.j, H ♦ E h1H M LM Op @` M ��/'a P H I pia . I f Op `... 6 I -co OP MFC Mo MAC Ho itle• CITY OF RANCHO CUCA��IO\GA t ' ® ?ty TR. 128U9 �, Gz ENGINEERING DIVISION VICINITY INIAP sn N- page mul .� 3 f CITY 'OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA INITIAL STUDY PART I - PROJECT INFCR!-M TION 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 staff will prepare Part II of the Initial Study. The Development Review Cc...mittee 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 informa- tion concerning the proposed project. PROJECT TITLE: Tentative Tract No. 12809 (City Park) APPLICANT'S NAME ADDRESS, TELEPHONE: Lewis Development Co. - 985-0971 1156 N. aocntaln Ave. , P. O. Box 670. L'plan , CA r NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE, OF PERSON TO BE CONTACTED CONCERNING THIS PROJECT: Kay Matlock, 946-7514, same address LOCATION OF PROJECT (STREET ADDRESS AND ASSESSOR, PARCEL NO. ) APN's 202-221-14 and -25; 11150 Base Line oz (Bouncec by base ine, eer Creek, SPRR, Ana LIST OTHER PERMITS NECESSARY FROM LOCAL, REGIONAL, STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES AND THE AGENCY ISSUING SUCH PERMITS : None appear to apyly in this case. This is not a map for deve opmS enc purposes, a..2 nex, item. x-1 a � , PROJECT DESCRIPTION DESCRIPTION' OF PROJECT: Subdivision of 100.16 acres which the City of Rancho Cucarnorga is acquiring for nark use_ The lets created by this r..ap are connected with the Citv's iinanc_nq or the land acquisition. ACREAGE OF PROJECT AREA AND SQUARE =DOTAGE OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED BUILDINGS , IF ANY: 100.16 acres net of certain rights or way as shown on the :aaa There are no existing structures. DESCRIBE THE ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING OF THE PROJECT SITE INCLUDING INFORMATION ON TOPOGRAPHY, PLA14TS (TREES) , ANIMALS, ANY CULTURAL, HISTORICAL OR SCENIC ASPECTS, USE OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES, AND THE DESCRIPTION OF ANY EXISTING STRUCTURES AND THEIR USE (ATTAV' NECESSARY SHEETS) : Topography: 2-3e aentle slope, north to south. Plants: Existing grapevines. No trees oasite_ Land use: Vineyard. ® Surrounding land uses: Residential to the northwest; residential under n costruction to the southwest and at a Portion of the south boundary, all other surrounding Property is vacant or in vineyard use_ Historical, etc. . No sicnificant aspects according to the Terra Vista Conununity Plan EIR. J Is the project part of a larger project, one of a series of cumulative actions, which althouch individually small, may as a whole have significant environmental impact? This land is a portion of the Terra Vista Planned Corununity (PC 61-01) , for which a master EIR has already been certified. I-2 5:c . WILT, THIS PROJECT: YES NO x. 1. Create a substantial change in ground contours? x 2. Create a substantial change in exist ing noise or vibration? x 3. Create a substantial changes in lemand for municipal services (police, fire, water, sewage, etc. ) ? X 4. Create chances in the existing zoning or general plan designations? X 5. Remo%e 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? Zxplanation of any YES answers above: _MPORTANT: If the project involves the construction of residential units, complete the form on the next page. CERTIFICATION: I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and information required for this initial evaluation to the best of my ability, and that the facts, statements, and information presented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. I further understand that additional information may be required to be submitted before an adequate evaluation can be made by the Development Rev4ew Committee. LEWIS DEVELOPMENTCo. Date AUCTUSt 30, 1984 Signature By Title Authorized t gent 1-3 � b L i- i l RESIDENTIAL CONSTRTJCT'IOJd The following information should be provided to the onga cam City of ?RanchoCu Planning Division in order to aid in assess' the ability of the sCucam district to acco.:.-aodate the proposed residential development. Name of Developer and Tentative Tract No_ : Specific Location of Project: PHASE I Pf?71SE 2 PuzSE 3 PHASE 4 TOTAL I.- Number of single family units : 2_ NtLxber of .^.iultip'.e family units: 3. Date proposed to begin. coast--Uction: 4. Earliest date of occu,��ncv: Model and = of Tentative 5. Bedreoms Price R:_nae I-4 37 �y RESOLUTION 1110, A RESOLUTIONi OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMQNGA, CALIFORNIA, CONDITIONALLY APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP No. 12809 WHEREAS, Tentative Tract Map No. 12809, hereinafter "Map" submitted by Lewis Development Company, applicant, for the purpose of subdividing the Veal property situated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino, State of California, described as a division into 100.16 acres of land into 11 lots within the Terra Vista Planned Community for City Park purooses located on the north side of Base Line Road between Milliken Avenue and Deer Creek Channel , regularly cane before the Planning Commission for public hearing and action on September 26, 1984; and WHEREAS, the City Planner has recommended approval of the Map subject to all cond?tions 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 tentative Tract No. 12809 and the Map thereof: (a) The tentative tract is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, and speci `ic plans; (�) The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed; (c) The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause substa,;+ial environmental damage a^d avoidable injury to h i:;nc and wildlife or their habitat; (d) The tentative tract is not likely to cause serious public health problems; (e) That this project will not create adverse impacts on the environment and a Negative Declaration is issued. �t.c SECTION 2: Tentative Tract 12809 is hereby approved subject to the fo;lowing: (a) Improvemepts for Tract 12809 will be completed per agreement dated May 24, 1984 between the City of Rancho Cucamonga and Lewis Development Company. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 26TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 1984. PLANNING COPRNISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Dennis L. Stout-C hairman ATTEST• Rick Gomez, Deputy Secretary I, Rick Gomez, Deputy 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 September, 1984, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: J9 CITY OF RAN-CHO CUC AMONGA STAFF REPORT c. cA,tra (_ F4 z DATE: � September 26, 1984 T0: i9:, Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner BY: Lisa Wringer, Assistant Planner _ SUBJECT: ENVIROMMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT o"4-03- AINVESTMENTS - A request to amend the Genera] Pfan Land Use Map from Low Density Residential (2-4 du/ac) to Medium-High Residential (14-24 du/ac) on 13.55 acres of land located on the south side of Feron Avenue, between Turner and Ramona - APN 209-085-02, 03, 14. I. ABSTRACT: A General Plan amendment is requested for a multi-family project in the North Town neighborhood of Rancho Cucamonga_ The requested change is from Low Density Residential to Me-lium High Density Residential. The Initial Study prepared by staff outlines several concerns which could be of significant environmental impact. The Commission will determine if an Environmental Impact Report is required and, if so, what the scope of the environmental assessment should be directed toward. II. BACKGROUND:SUN : The project applicant, H & H Investments, intends to build a residential project consisting of 316 condcminium units on a 13.55 acre site ir. the North Town area. The proposed projeco would have a density of approximately 23 units per acre. The current General Plan and Development District designations do rot permit the proposed density. Consequently, a General Plan amer.daiert is requested to change the current Low Density Residential designation (2-4 du/ac) to Medium High Density Residential (14-24 du/ac). The purpose of this meeting is to determine the environmental impacts of the proposed General Plan amendment. III. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Act 2 Requested• Review of the Initial Study to determine the scope of an Environmental Impact Report for this project. B. Purpose: Approval of a General Plan amendment from Low Density Residential to Medium High Density Residential C. Location: South of Feron Boulevard, east of Ramona D. Parcel Size: 13.55 acres 'r ITEM K PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT General Plan Amendment 84-03-A September 26, 1984 Page 3 3. Initial Study: The completed Initial Study is attached for Your review and consideration. Part I has been completed by the applicant and comments from Foothill Fire Protection District and the County of San Bernardino Sheriff's Department are attached to the Initial Study. Part II includes the environmental checklist and staff analysis of the environmental concerns. These concerns include: - hydrology; population; socio-economic factors; land use and planning considerations; traffic; recreation; health, safety and nuisance factors; and, utilities and public services, as outlined 'below. Hydrology: This project lies at the terminus of a drainage channel which drains onto the project site, surrounding properties, and streets. The project site is located within a 100-year flood plain per Figure V-5 of the General Plan, and is potentially subject to a 1-foot depth flooding. Construction could have a significant effect on the drainage patterns and the rate and amount of surface water runoff. A drainage study is necessary to analyze the impact of the existing flooding condition on the project site and the impact that construction of this project would have upon the surrounding area. Porul"tion: This project is located within a predominately residential area characterized by older small single family residences. This proposal would result in construction of 316 units at approximately 23 dwelling units per acre. This is a considerable increase which would have many impacts related to land use compatibility, socio-economic factors, circulation, public service capacity levels, etc. Socio-Economic Factors: This proposal will result in constructior of new duelling units with a tentative price of r $75,000. This project may have significant in-pacts with regard to the local socio-economic characteristics, including economic diversity, tax rate, and property value. A marketing/housing study should be prepared which analyzes the impact of the construction of this project upon these characteristics. Land Use and Plarninw Considerations: The project site is centrally located within a predominately single family neighborhood. This proposal would change the General clan land use designation and zonin from Low Residential (2-4 du/ac) to Medium-High Residential �14-24 du/ac) . This proposal would result in the construction of 2-scery multi-family units; whereas the surrounding neighborhood is prcdominately single story, single family residences. Therefore, this proposal will substantially alter the present and planned land uses. An analysis should be prepared of the land holding capacity of the site and the compatibility of higher r.ensity, multi-story residential units adjacent to single family residences. � a . PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT General Plan Amendment 84-03-A September 26, 1984 Page 2 E. 'cxisting Oevelooment District: Low Density Residential F. Existing Land Use: Vacant G. General Plan Designations: Project site - Low Density Residential- North - Low Density Residential South - General Industrial East - Low Density Residential West - Low Density Residential H. Surroundino Land Use and DPvelooment District: North - unior High School (Low Density Residentiai ) South -AT&SF Right-of-way and Winery (Industrial Specific Plan) East - Single Family Homes (Low Density Residential) West - Single Family Homes (Low Density Residential) I. Site Characteristics: The project site lies at the terminus of a drainage channe . The site is located within a 100-year flood plain and a small drainage course traverses the site in a ® north-south direction. Vegetation consists of a rcw of trees along Feron Boulevard, scattered trees throughout the site, and assorted grasses and weeds. Feron Boulevard and Main Street Provide direct access to the north and west boundaries of the site. IV. ANALYSIS• _ A. General: The California Environmental Quality Act requires that whenever there is substantial evidence that a significant impact may occur, an Environmental Impact Report must be prepared. The intent of the law is to provide full public disclosure and allow full and complete consideration of all environmental impacts. Informed decisions can then be made which consider project alternatives and mitigation measures to lessen potential impacts to an acceptable level . Staff feels that the requested General Plan amendment could result in significant impacts to the scope of future development, the character of the area and the socio-economic composition of the existing community and other impacts. These concerns are outlined in detail in the In'.tial Study. 'Ki_ PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT General Plan Amendment 84-03-A September 26, 1984 Page 4 Transportation: Based upon the trip-end generation rates used in the City-wide traffic model , this project would result in 2,500 daily vehicle trips. This compares to a total 648 daily vehicle trips under the maximum allowable density in the existing Low Residential Development District and General Plan designations. This project could significantly affect the existing streets and create a demand for new construction or widening of existing streets. A traffic study should be prepared that analyzes the impact of this project upon the existing street system. The project site is located across the street from a public junior high school and along a school route for children walking to the nearby elementary school. This proposal could increase traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicylcists, or pedestrians. Health. Safet , and Nuisance Factors: This proposal could create potential traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicylists, or pedestrians. The project site is located within an area characterized by high crime rate associated with juvenile gang activity. In addition, the adjacent railroad line which carries freight and passenger traffic generates periods of high noise levels. The project site is located in an area with existing and future noise contours of 60 to 65 Ldn per Figures V-7 and v-8 of the General Plan. Utilities and Public Services: This proposal may require significant new construction or alteration to existing flood control structures to accept and divert water from the existing channel to the north that drains onto the project site and floods surrounding streets and properties. This proposal will result in construction of 316 condominium units that could generate students which could create a significant need for new school facilities or aiterations to existing school facilities. This proposal will generate substantial increases in traffic volumes on streets in the area that could have a significant need for additional road maintenance. Mandatory Findings of Significance Based upon the completion of the Initial Study, Part II - Environmental Checklist, and the comments above, this proposal may have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment. In addition, this proposal could have significant impacts regarding the potential to achieve short-term PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT General Plan Amendment 84-03-A September 26, 1984 Page 5 aujectives to the disadvantace of long-term environmental goals. The proposal could have significant impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable when viewed in connection with past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects. This proposal could cause signficant adverse effects on human beings either directly or indirectly. V. CORRESPONDE4CE: This item has beer, advertised as a public hearing Tn 'ne Oai v Reaort newspaper and notices were sent to all property owners within 300 faet of the boundary of the proposed project. To date, no correspondence has been received. VI. RECOMMENDATION: Based upon review and preparation of the Initial Study, star as determined that this project may have significant adverse environmental impacts. If the Commission concurs with the findings outlined in the Initial Study, the Planning Commission should direct that an Environmental Imapct Report be prepared analyzing the impacts in the areas of hydrology, population, socio- economic factors, land use and planning considerations, traffic; recreation; health, safety and nuisance factors, and utilities and public services. Respectfully submitted, Rick Gomez City Planner RG:[W:jr Attachments: Exhibit "A" - General Plan Map Exhibit "B" - Development District Map Exhibit "C" - Site Plan Initial Study, with attachments ,. General Plan THE VINE ARD(:S H & H INVESTMENT LTD . PROJ. 8498 MEDIU _ LOW . G O i ramNNE Ma � . . j 500 ' RADIUS MAP 9900 FERON BLVD . CUAL1014GA IUV(TTER &Assomw 6 erchitectur0 & piac v ii g .242 c+A.r-uB omre c,^m e79-2ai NEWMAT eeww.cw spo o K io Development District THE VINEYARD: � H & H INVESTMENT LTD . PROD. 848E M 1 -- Fit/ 3 ' FERON o a Ir- � / L: 2-4 OU / 1, C RADIUS MAP ® � / M 8- 14 OU/-AC 0900 FERON dLVO , CUAMONGA I. S. F ., I ' OUSTRIAL SPECIFIC PLAN w: OK1� QAT&ASS� ES ancNtecture P, pi g 4242 CA&4" QiVE t7Me k _ T } 7• J - r ■ Q �. � ej � z ri./ �• ci _I w � •I II I � 1 1 � b N LU ® < III I Itr'�"1 "iii` a a 11 J `t cc u � u T C +.I � -/i]Ye��;L r♦��� \{j} II I I I i %Lj ':1 � ^ " � o ci n ' ¢ m - y G C LLIaim --�fl3'•IE V -T--r}�_ __ - _ O 'o < = S W ¢ W V Q = C E �■0� S z =_ u ► s < < ¢ r r CITY OF Ri,?JCHO CUCA_M0NGA INII.IAL STUDY PART I - PROJECT INFORMATION SHEET - To be completed by applicant Environmental Assessment Review Fee: $87. 00 For all projects recuirinc environmental review, this form must be completed anal submitted to the Development Review Cor.,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 Ce-t-tittee will meet and take action no later than ten (10) days before the public meeting at which time the proiec;_ 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 b_ 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 inform_ tion concerning .the proposed project.. ® PROJECT TITLE: THE ylDayAq APPLICANT'S NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE: HYATT PROPERTIES INC. 27782 E1 Iazo, Suite A, iauu �a Nicuel, C� 92677 (714) 831-6892 NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE OF PERSON TO ES CONTACTED CONCERNING THIS PROJECT: GLEiI H T AND 27782 =1 Lazo, Suite A, La auma Niguel,--•- — ._ _ _ CA 92677 (71S) 831-6892 LOCATION 'OF PROJECT (STREET ADDRESS AND ASSESSOR PARCEL NO. ) SOUTHEAST CORNER FERON - 209-085-001-002 LIST OTHER PERMITS NECESSARY FROM LOCAL, REGIONAL, STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES AND THE AGENCY ISSUING SUCH PERMITS: I-1 k9 • PROJECT DESCRIPTION DESCR'PTION OF PROJECT: Project involves upzonir_g land from iow-density residential t o medium-hich de v d � ' a1 . Prot will irvoive devel onment of affordable conr3nmi n l m..; (annrox_ lY6 linit5) and Senior�iti.zen housira (an oc ] Sn Units) . . ACREAGE OF PROJECT AREA AND SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED BUILDINGS, IF ANY : Acreaae of nroiec� an v;, acres. No existir= buildings . ^-o. _matel•r 13 DESCRIBE THE ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING OF THE PROJECT SITE INCLUDING INF0R2^-.TI0N ON TOPOGRAPHY, PLANTS (TREES) , ANI='-ALS, ANY CULTURAL, HISTORICAL OR SCENIC ASPECTS, USE OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES, AND THE DESCRIPTION OF ANY EXISTING STRUCTURES AND THEIR USE (ATTACH NECESSARY SIiEETS) : Tonogranhv of site is relatively flat covered with sma-11 t,and Grasses Ssrrounaina area Dredominantly residantia� , sh Seasoned single fa^iily homes located to the nor^hwest and along easter : nronerty boundary. Multi.nle family residentiali to :nest of site on Gaffer of Archibald Ave . and Fe-on q�vd ed Cucamonca. Middle Scool located idr-ct •v nor�h c Ran Blvd . Surface drainace on site runs ceneraii%• on r" on Southern boundary of site borders ATSF Rai. lroadt^-ack T,hP st_ vinevara on the soutt side or railroad_ a is a Is the project part of a larger project, one of a series .•a Of cuulative actiens , which although individually small, may as a whole have significant environmental impact? No I-2 10 left WILL T_TiIS PROJECT_ YES NO X 1. Create a substantial change in ground contours? R 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 genaral plan designations? X S. Remove any existing tree? Hca many? - X 6. Create the need for use or disposal of �J_ 1:.. potentially ` azardous materials such as toxic substances, fla:mnables or explosives? Explanation of any YES answers above : Project - 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 m ability,y lity, and that the facts, statements, and information presented are true and correct to the best of nu knowledge and belief. I furth=r understand that additional - information may be required i-u be submitted before an aaequate� ' evaluation can be made by the Development Review Committee. � - 0 Date _`3^ / l�'Y Signature Tiele Project Manager "`> 1-3 _ . , C RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION The folly wing irfor7,-,a on should be r _ Planning Division in order to aid in�assessangotieeabilitvCity fofatleysCucamonga district to accorn:nodate the proposed residential development. Name of Developer and Tentative Tract No. : Fivatt ?rcper,;e-, Inc. SDeC1fiC Location Of Project:_ Southwest corner —.ron Blv d . and Turner P%A-SF 1 PHASE 2 PHASE 3 PH ,S'n 4 TOTAL L i. Number of single fan-i1, units-0 0 0 0 0 2. Nur,ber of multir, Seniors Seniors Condos family units: 00 Condos 90 73 73 326 3. Date p1QLosed to begin construction: 6/84 4. Earliest date of Jccupancy: 11/84 Model # and 4 of Tentati•:e S- ?edrecr,+.s Pric -Range A Seniors 1 BR 1BA S37 , 500 A Con-los 1 1 BA 4S , 000 B - -0n:c ? BR 1 3/4 BA 51, 000 C 3 BR 2 BA $57, 000 .or..o 1- 4 CITY OF RANCrr10 CUC_`0NGA PART II - INITIAL STUDY -YVIRON.f=NT_,L CHECKLIST DATE: AG, �r9f FILING DATE: 3�/f F4 LOG \'L?MER: PROJECT: a-�- 01 -03 `A, PROJECT LOCATION:_ I. ENVIRON?MNTAL I'VACTS (Explanation of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required on attached sheets; . YES }14Y?E NO 1. S.,ils and Geoioev. Will the proposal have signi=icar.-t results in: a. Unstable ground c:)nditions or in changes in geologic relationships? , b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or burial of the soil? X C. Change in topograpry or ground surface contour intervals? d. The destruction, covering or modification Of any unique geologic or physical features? X e. A:.y potential increase in wind or cater erosion of soils, affecting either on or off site ccnditens? X f. Changes in erosion siltation, or deposition? g. Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mud- slides, ground failure, or similar hazards? •( h. An increase in the rate of extraction and/or use of any mineral resource? X ?. 3ydrolo�y. Will the proposal have significant vGsu'_ts a: ?age 2 YES 'L4Y3E \0 a. Changes in currents, or the course of direction Of flowing streams, rivers, or ep eieral _streaa channels? / b. Change- in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface water runoff? c. Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? ! d. Change in the amount of surface water in any body of water? ✓ e. Discharge into surface waters, or anv alteration of surface water cuality? f. Alteration of groundwater characteristics? S. Change in the quantity of groundvaters, either thrcugh direct additions or with- drawals, or through interference with an aquifer? Quality? Quantity? h. The reduction in the amount of water other- wise available for public water supplies? JZ i- Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flco-aing or seiches? 3. Air Quality. Will the propoeai have significant results in: a_ Constant or Feriodic air emissions fro= mobile or indirect sources? _Stationary sources? -- b. Deterioration of ambient air quality and/or interference with the attair=ent of appli- able air quality standards? / c. Alteration of local or regional cl°.=atic ✓ conditions, affecting air movement, moisture or tarperature? 4. Biora Flora. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Change in the characteristics of species, including diversity, distribution., or number of any species cf plants? b. Reduction of t1,e uumbers of any unique, rare or endangered specie^ of plants? l k 14 -�- ?aee J YES ?iAYBF \0 c. Introduction of rew or disrz;ptive species. of Plants into an area? d. Reduction in the potential for agricultural Production? L Fauna. ;:ill the proposal have significant results in. a. Change in the characteristics of species, including diversity, distribution, or numbers of any species of animals? Z b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered sp%cies of animals? c. Introduction of new or disruptive species of animals into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? d. Deterioration or removal of existing fish or wildlife ;:abitat? S. Pcvulation. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. trill the proposal alter the location, distri- bution, density, diversity, or growth rate of the human population of an ar=a? -_ b. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or create a demand for add-tional housing? S. SOciD—Economic Factors. Will the p-oposal have significant results in: a. Change in Ioc.sl or regional vocio-economic characteristics, including economic r co--erciai diversity, tax rate, and property values? b. Will project costs be equitably distributed among project beneficiaries, i.e. , buyers, tax pavers or project users? 1/ i. Land Use and ?lanni= Considerations. 1111 the Proposal have significant results in? a- A substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? — f. A conflict with any designations, objectives, �i policies, er adopted plans of anv governmental — entities? c. An impact upon the qulaity or quantity of existing. consrmptive or non-consumptive _ecrez�cioaal opportunities? Pace 4 Y£S :L-%Y3£ N0 8. Transuortation. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? b. Effects on existing streets, or demand for new street construction? / c. Effects on existing parking facil'ties, or _L _ denand for new parking? d. Substantial impact upon existing transporta- tion systems? e- Alterations to present patterns of circula- tion or movement of people and/or goods? f. Alterations to cr effects on present and potential water-borne, rail , mass transit or air traffic? g. Increases in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? -� 4. cultural :Zesources. T:111 the proposal have signiiicant results in: a. A disturbance to the integrity of archaeological, _ paleontological, and/or historical resources? 10. Fealth. Safety. and Nuisance Factors. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard? b. Exposure of people to potential health hazards? c. A risk of explosion or release of hazardous sulstances in the event cf an accident? d. Aa increase in the number of individuals or species of vector or pathenogenic crgani..•.s or the exposure of people to such organiss? e- Increase in existing noise levels? f. Exposure of people to potentially dangerous noise levels? / q. The creation of objectionable odors: h. An increase in light or glare? Pate YES '"-?YSE `0 11. Aesthetics. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. The obstruction or degradation of any scenic vista or view? b. Tne creation of an aesthetically offensive site? c. A conflict w_ :% the objective of designated cr potential scenic corridors? 12. Utilities and Public Services. Will the proposal have a significant need for new systems, or alterations to the following: a. Electric power? — / 1 b. Natural or packaged gas? c. Co—uricatiors sysre:s? d. Water supply? ✓ e. Wastewater facilities? Flood control — structures? g. Solid waste facilities? h. Fire protection? i. Police protection? 3 . Schools? / r k. Parks or other recreational facilities? 1- v--;ntenance of public facilities, including Loads and flc-)d control facilities? m. Other governmental services? % 13. Enemy and Scarce Resources. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Use of substantial or excessive fuel or energy? b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy? An increase in r%e demand for development of new sources of energy? d. An increase or perpetuation of the consumption of non—renewable forms of energy, :hen feasible / renewable sources of energy are available? 17 ?age 6 YES N.AYBE No e. Substantial depletion of any nonrenewable or scarce natural resource? 14. "andatory Findirzs of Siznificance. / a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to liminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods -if California history or prehistory? b. Does the project have -he potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? (A short-term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of time while long- term impacts will endure well into the future) - C. Does the project have impacts which are individu"lly limited, but cumulativ_ly considerable? (Cumulatively considerable means that the incremental effects of an individual project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects o£ past projects, and probable future projects) . J d. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? ZZ. tIe above_ OF _VI3t0\�'x1TF? EVALIIATZON (i_e. , of aFfirmative answers to the nbovE questions plus a discussion of proposed mitigacion measures) . k �8 Page 7 III_ DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: 7--1 I find the proposed project COIILD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLaD.ATICrl will be prepared. _ I find that :although the proposed project could have a significant f effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect L_J in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the pro. ct. A NEGATIVc DECLARATION w:LL BE PREPARED. I find the proposed project MAY have a sign-f41a effect on the envirament, and an �VIRO%=T DTA T�RFORT rs r quired. fPf. V—� ;JTJ ature tle is 1g INITIAL STUDY PART II - GPA 84-03 2. Hydrology: (b) (c) (e) (i ) - This project lies at the terminus of a drainage channel which carries water from a drainage area of approximately 620 acres, as shown on the attached exhibit. Runoff from this channel presently drains onto Feron Boulevard and flodds the project site, surrounding properties, and streets. A small drainage course traverses the site in a north/south direction. The project site is located within a 100-year flood of=in per '=figure V-5 of the General Plan, and is potential iy subject to a 1-foot depth flooding. Construction could have a significant ?S-fect on the drainage patterns L,d the rate and amour;: of surface water runoff. Further, this projec` could expose property to flood hazards. A drainage study is necessary to analyze the i-npact of the existing flooding condition on the project site and the impact that construction of this project would have upon the surrounding area. Specifically, the drainage study should propose mitigation measures. The study should also analyze drainage impacts if the City's toaster Plan, of Storm D.-air, system is not installed prior to construction of ti.is pr3je_ -. 5. Population (a) (b) - This project is located within a predomiately residential area characterized by older small single family residences. This proposal would result in construction of 316 units at approximately 23 dwelling units per acre. This is a considerable increase which would have many impacts related to land ust compatibility, socio-economic factors, circulation, public servive capacity levels, etc. Construction of this project could significantly alter the 1pcatiGn, distribution, density, diversity and growth rate of the population of the area. 6. Socio-Economic Factors a This proposal will result in constructi— of new dwelling units with a tentative price of $75,000. The residents of the surrounding neighborhood have historically expressed a desire for construction of affordable housing for low and moderate income families. This project may have significant impacts with regard to the local socio- e::onomic characteristics, including economic diversity, tax rate, and property value. A marketing/housing study should be prepared which analyzes the impact of the construction of this project upon these characteristics. 7. Land Use and Planning Considerations - The project site is centrally located within a predominately single family neighborhood. This proposal would change the general plan land use designation and zoning from Low Residential (2-4 du/ac) to Medium-High Residentail (14-24 du/ac) . This proposal would result in the construction of 2-story condominiums, whereas, the surrounding neighborhood is predomir-ateiy single story single family residences. Therefore, this proposal will substantially alter the � oar is. Initial Study Part I General Plan Amendment 84-03 Paget present and planned land uses. An analysis should be prepared of the land holdino capacity of the site and the compatibility of higher density, multi-story residential units adjacent to sinale famili residences- S. Transportation (a) (b) (c) (d) (9) - finis proposal would result in construcion of 316 dwelling units that will generate s+ebstant al additional vehi:uiar and pedestrian movement. - Based ,Pon the trip-end generation rate: used in the Citywide traffic model , this project would result in 2,500 daily vehicle trips. This compares to a total 648 daily vehicle trips under the maximum a'lowable density in the existing Low Residential zoning and General Plan designations. The area surrounding project site and the street system were planned for low density residentaal uses. Ramona and Feron are designated on the City's Master Plan of Circulation as collector streets with a one-way capacity of 600 vehicles per hour. Turner Avenue is planned as a secondary street with a one-way capacity of 1150 to 1300 vehicles per hour. Therefore, this project could significantly effect the existing streets and create a demand for new construction or widening of existing streets. A traf, .c study should be prepared that analyzes the impact of this project upon the existing street system. -his traffic study should take into account the approximately 450 dwelling units approved within a quarter mile radius on Feron and Turner and potential peaK mornina hour traffic conflicts with 40 the adjacent school. The Project site is located across the street from a public junior high school- and along a school route for children walking to the nearby elementary school. This proposal coul-' increase traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians. The traffic study should propose Potential mitigation !measures for these hazards. 10. Health, S,-feiv and Nuisance Factors a This proposal could create potential traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicylists, or pedestrians as discussed under =8. (b) The project site is located within an area characterized by high crime rate associated with juvenile gang activity. This proposal could expose a large number of persons, to potential theft, vandalism, and life-threatening situations. (e) (f) Proposal would result in short-term inc. eases in noise levels because of construction activity. In addition, the adjacent railroad line which carries freight and passenger traffic generates periods of high noice levels. The project site is located in an area with existing and future noice contours of 60 to 65 Ldn per Figures V-7 and V-8 of the General Plan. The General Plan designates the project site as "conditionally acceptable" for residential uses subject to a detailed analysis of noise reduction requirements. Necessary noise insulation features determined ds a result of this analysis should be in,luded in the project design. K a.t Initial Study Part I General Plan Amendme-t 84-03 Page3 12. Utilities and Public Services f This proposa may require significant new construction or alteration to existing flood control structures to accept and divert water from the existing channel to the north that drains onto the project site and floods surrounding streets and properties. The City's adopted Master Plan of Stcrm Drains tails for the construction of a Sturm drain connection to the existing channel to the north that would continue south to the railroad tracks and-westerly to Archibald Avenue. Presently, there are no drainage easements or agreements for the construction of this storm drain out to Archiraid Avenue. (h) The impact of this proposal upon the need for new fire protection systems or alterations to existing services is unkno.tn at this time. (i) This proposal could significantly effeect the need for additional polic_ protection services for public safety (see discussion under 10 b). (j) This proposal will result in construction of 316 condominium units that could generate students tirhich could create significant need for new school facilities or alterations to existing schoal facilities. (1) This proposal will generate substantial increases in traffic volumes or streets in the area- that could ha•re a significant need :or additional read maintenance. 14. Mandatory Findinas of Si nificanc,2 - The California Environmental Quality Act CEQA requires the city to disclose, consider, and when possible, avoid or reduce significant environmental impacts_ The City is required to review whether this proposal will have significant impacts upon the environment. If there is substantial evidence that this proposal may have a Significant effect on the environment, the City must require the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report. Further, if *_here is any doubt, or if there is disagreement between experts over the significance of an effect on the environment, the City shall consider the effect as significant and require the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) . Where any of the conditions listed below occur, the City shall find tnat a project may have a significant effect on the environment and thereby require an EIR. Based upon the completion of the Initial Study - Part II Environmental Checklist and the comments above, this proposal may have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment. In addition, this propcsal could have significant impacts regarding the otential to achieve short-term to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals. The propsal cr d have significant impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable when viewed in connection with past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effectc of probable future projects. This proposal could cause substantial adverse effects on human beings either directly cr indirectly. lc as i FOWHILL FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT P. O. Box 35 6623 Amethyst Street Rancho Cucamonga, CA. 91701 (7 14) 987-2535 April 5 , 1984 Dan Coleman Associate Planner City of Rancho Cucamonga PO Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga , CA 91730 Refs:-ence: Impact of Project 84-03 This project will have a significant impact on the Fire District' s ability to provide adequate service. it is estimated that the proposed project will generate an additional 49 alarms annually. Mo.: : information on the project is needed tc determine if mitigation measures must be taken. Si cerely, .. ..................... ... Jim W. Bowman Fire marshal rbm (. LATER-OFFICE M E "3 - DATE April 2, 1984 F ,.;.:i .:. ..;, FROM John A. Futscher, Captain PH "i7; ;rr ;5;:�:r,�:'fN7CEPT,,l ON'E < `Rancho Cucamonga Sheriff' s Station Aaw6 6 1384 TO Dan Coleman, Associate Planner Aa F!d City of Rancho Cucamonga i SUBJECT PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN A1-1END1,1ENT 84-03 AND ZONE CHANGE - HYATT PROPERTI1, Our Crime Prevention Unit has examined the proposed project for the south side of Peron between Turner and Ramona. It is our finding that, while there is no factual basis upon which to as,"- :or a Negative Declaration, we do anticipate a demand for increased police services if the project is approved. Our experience indicates that there will be a higher degree of domestic and neighborhood-type disturbances in a medium to high density area than in a low density area. This is generally attrib- utabl,_ to the restricted privacy afforded in medium to high density housing. In adcition, the project' s geographical proximity to the home of our host active street gang , would result in' a need to increase patrol the area to prevent the senior citizens from falling prev to that criminal element associated with street gangs and to afford them some degree of freedom from intimidation by their mere presence. Jiamh ,'. l$1367-000 Aw. 1/77 L 1 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGASTAFF REPORT G�cAnrcl C, DATE: September 26, 2984 ls'' TO- Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner BY: Lisa Wininger, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: EENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLPN AMENDMENT 84-03C - VOLBEDA - A request to amend th.! General Plan Land Use Dap from Low Density Residential (2-4 du/ac) to Low Medium Residentiai (4-8 du/cc) on 4.78 acres of land located on the south side of Arrow Highway between Sie ra Madre arid Comet Streets - APN - 207-222-08. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AMENDMENT -0 C - VOLBEDA - A request to amend the Development District Map from "L" (2-4 du/ac) to "LM" (4-3 du/ac) on 4.78 acres of land located on the south side of Arrow Highway between Sierra Madre and Comet Streets - APN 207-222-08. I. ABSTRACT A General Plan Amendment and Dev2lopmen. District Amendment is requested for a 28 unit single-family attached residential project located south of Arrow Highway and west of Comet. The requested change is from Low Density Pesidential to Loh-Medium Density Residential .. Staff has determined that no significant anvirenmental impacts would be caused by the proposed project. The i:ommiskion will determine if t`e proposed change is appropriate in terms of land use compatibility with the surrounding neighborhood. II. BACKGROUND: The project applicant intends to build a residential project consisting of 28 duplex units on a 4.78 acre site south of Arrow Highway near Grove. The proposed project would have a density of approximately 6 units per acre. The current General Plan and Development District designations do not permit the proposed density. Consequentiy, a General Plan Amendment and Development District Amendment is requested to change the current Low Density Residential designation (2-4 du/ac) to Low Medium Residential (4-8 du/ac). The Planning Commission will determine if the proposed change is appropriate in terms of land use compatibility. sc ITEMS L & M PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT GPA 84-03-C - Volbeda September 26, 1984 Page 2 III. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action Requested: Amend the General Plan Land Use Map and Development District Map from Low Density Residential (2-4 du/ac) to Low Medium Residential (4-8 du/ac). B. Location: South side of Arrow Highway -between Sierra Madre and Comet Streets. C. Parcel Size: 4.78 acres D. Existing General Plan Designation: Low Density Residential E. Development District Designation: Lou Density Residential F. Existing Land Use: One single-family home and orange grove. G. Land Use and Development District Desi nation: North - ingle family residential Lo:r Density Residential) South - Single family residential (Low Density Residential) East - Single family residential (Low Density Residential) West - Single family residential (Low Density Residential) H. Site Characteristics: The site consists of one old stone h=e in poor condition with the remainder of the area covered in orange trees which are no longer commercially cultivated and are in generally poor condition. The site is accessed from Arrow Highway along which a row of mature cypress trees is located. IV.. ANALYSIS: A. Historv: When the General Plan was adopted , the area of which the project site is a part was designated as Low Density Residential in accordance with the prevailing land use of the area. The subject parcel was not subdivided as was the surrounding land and remained as an orchard with a single- r family residence until the present. B. Reason for Request: The applicant has indicated that the Low Density designation would not permit development of a sufficient number of units in an appropriate price range to make an infill project of this sort financially feasible. Consequently, the applicant is requesting a change to Low Medium Density Residential . PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT GPA 84-03-C - Volbeda September 26., 1984 Page 3 AML C. General Plan Land Use Goals and Policies: The land use policies of the General Plan support infill projects on vacant residential parcels providing that the proposed density would not be incompatible with the surrounding neighborhood character. The applicant is requesting a change to Low Medium Density Residential. The General Plan discusses Low Medium Density Residential in the following- manner: It would be "appropriate within Low Density areas to encourage greater housing d-;versity without changing the single-family character of the surrounding residential area." The intent of the General Plan policy is to provide the opportunity for use of Low Medium residential density in areas which have smaller undeveloped parcels which are more difficult to develop, with the provision th?t infill development would be compatible with the surrounding character of the neighborhood. D. Issues and Alternatives for Consideration. The most signficant issuT a invo�ving this request is the lard use compatibility of an increase in density in a single family residential area. The alternatives for consideration are approval of the General Plan Amendment for Low Medium Density Residential or denial of the Amendment, thus allowing the General Pian designation to ® remain Low Density Residential. Another issue for consideration is that of amending the General Plan designation on a parcel which is smaller than five (5) acres in size. Although the City has no specific parcel size designated as the minimum for which a General Plan Amendment may be considered, the approval of a General Plan Amendment tia small sites such as the subject property may set a precedent for additional General Plan Amendments requests in the future. The neighborhood in which this site is located is in one of the older areas of the City. While most of the neighborhood housing stock is in good or fair condition, some homes are beginning to show signs of age and the need for intensified maintenance. The City's housing rehabilitation program recognizes this part of town as a target area for rehabilitation funds in order to preserve the quality of the housing stock. In addition., substantial public improvements such as streets, curbs, sidewalks and streetscapes are now in the planning stages under the Block Grant Program. Finally, a park site is also being discussed for the area, for possible Block Grant Funding. It is expected that the concentration of public investment, in conjunction with the right kind of new private development, will have a strong and positive effect on the entire neighborhood, encouraging individual private maintenance and rehabilitation effects. The decision the ® Commission has to make is whether or not the proposed amendment PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT GPA 84-03-C - Volbeda September 26, 1984 Page 4 is consistent with the overall strategy for the neighborhood, and which of the following alternatives is apprepridte: _ow Density Residential : The existing low density residential designation wo+.ld limit the development of the sites to 4 units per acre, „gist likely in the form of a conventional single family subdivision. Under the newly adopted development standards, the minimum average lot size would be 8,000 sq. ft., slightly larger than the surrounding neighborhood developed under the 7,200 sq. ft. minimum. The existing designation would thus show the development of a compatible land use. Low Medium Density Residential : In theory, this designation would provide for a greater range of dwelling types, including single-family detached dwelling units on individual lots, duplexes, and attached units. Because of this range of dwelling types, there may be potential for creating land use in compatibility with the surrounding single family Low Density Residential character. However, in practical terms, current City policies in the Development Code regarding density transition and neighborhood compatibility would limit the density on this site to approximately six (6) dwellings to the acre. This would result in single family homes on 6,000 sq. ft. lots, or duplexes/attached units not exceeding 6 du/ac as outlined in the Basic Standards of the Development Code for the LM District. This greatly reduces the potential for conflict between the existing single family development and the proposed designation. Through the use of proper design controls of architecture and site planning, such projects could be developed in a single-family residential character compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. E. Environmental Assessment: Part I of the Initial Study has been comp by the applicant. Staff has completed the Environmental Checklist, Part iI of the Initial Study, and found no significant adverse impacts associated with the proposed amendment. V. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: Should the Commission upon examination of the General Plan Amendment and Development District Map Amendment decide that the change from Low Density Residential would promote the land use goals and purposes of the General Plan, this Amendment would not be materially detrimental to the adjacent properties or cause significant adverse impacts as listed under Environmental Assessment, the following are the findings that are necessary or, approval; PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT GPA 84-03-C - Volbeda September 26, 1984 Page 5 A. The Amendment does not conflict with the Land Use Policies of the General Plan. B. The Amendment does promote goals of the land use element. C. The Amendment would not be materially injurious or detrimental to the adjacent properties. VI. CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised as a public hearing in The Daily Report newspaper and notices were sent to all property owners within. 300 feet of the boundary of the proposed project. To date, no correspondence has been received. VII. RECOMMENDATION: Based on the analysis of ,:he Land Use Policies of the General Plan and the Env—.rjrmental Assessment, Staff is recommends approval of the proposed General Plan Amendment and Development District Amendment based upon the policies governing density transition and neighborhood compatibility in the Development Code and General Plan. Shouid the Commission approve the request and approve the General Plan Land Use Map and the Development District Map, the following is required: Approve attached Resolution amending the General Plan Land Use Map from Low to Low Medium and the accompanying Resolution amending the Development District Map from "L" to "LM". Should the Commission decline to make the findings necessary for approval of the Amendment, a resolution of denial is also presented for your consideration. Respect ly submitted, }� •r R i c#C z City Planner RG:LW:ns Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Development District Map and General Plan Map Exhibit "B" - Site Plan Initial Study Resolution of Approval of General Plan Amendment Resolution of Approval of Development District Amendment Resolution of Denial 1 (VA i!` .S I S •.- Fes_„ ( _ ! • I �/----- ;--.-... -:_ Aw kd Xf —� — Lo La =M mot? - _-- 5 _ \ I sT Ro G:L x �_ moo•� -�`b � s -- 1lluS i •t1'E fs I Lb� f 4 i �Q FT, f' L. i 41 ilzl.. i v la 4A Fl MY1 W •—F `t rrx [1 — J -� SITE i N 3 a [] 4,71 G' Cir � t 1 O � 0 � fir•ISAX — 43CID CID ARROW ROUTE c ��• CT .a - - �o"CID z � l CITY OF RANCHO CUCA.MONGA INITIAL STUDY PPRT I - PROJECT INFORMATION SHEET - To be completed by applicant Ervironmental Assessment Review Fee: $87. 00 For all projects requiring environmental review, this form must be completed and submitted to the Development Review Committee throuch the department where the project application is made. Upon receipt of this application, the Environmental Analysis staff will prepare Part II of the Initial Study. The Development Review Committee will meet and take action no later than ten (10) days before the public meeting at which time the project is to be heard_ The Committee will make one of three determinations: 1) The project will have no 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 inf orma- tion concerning t-he proposed project. PROJECT TITLE: S! APDLICANT'S NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE- Z:F—:' V p L,B EOM W nJ�M,p.s NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE OF PERSON TO BE CONTACTED CONCERNING THIS PROJECT: LOCATION OF PRP37ECT (STREET ADDRESS AND ASSESSOR PARCEL NO. ) LIST OTHER PZRMT_TS NECESSARY FROM LOCAL, REGIONAL, STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES AND THE AGENCY ISSUING SUCH PERMITS: 8? 1I_n ) ta'G f�f<PnR'�T^�+.t-r' Cit`T r of el at, I-1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: ( ,D //.d 4.XF $lL`Ia- M S ACREAGE OF PROJECT AREA. AND SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED BUILDINGS IF ANY: �/ gt7a DESCRIBE THE ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING OF THE PROJECT SIT: INCLUDING INFORMATION ON TOPOCRAPHY, 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) : S/7-4f bS A W5h%,i2/n o G n'► pT � A42 XZ:5 Are—s aM TrljE- S/T h—�Fk-J 577/Ve7 S7—a2 U rVR4 r 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? 1-2 WILL THIS PROJECT: Alft YES NO 1. Create a substantial change in ground contours? Z- Create a substantial change in existing noise or vibration? _+Jz 3. Create a substantial cha^ge in demand for municipal services (police, £ire, water, sewage, etc. ) ? 4. Create changes in the existing zoning or general play. designations? 5. Remove any existing trees? How many? 7R£�S /-f4s€' A/--"7- "' Aa Nrt}.1 A 6. Create the need for use or disposal of Potentially hazardous materials such as toxic substances, flasables or explosives? Explanation of any YES answers 5�. ��� above: )'�GG�5 c 51 ►�•) G t�Lca.iv A.tJ » 2ot�i GAZ7-v IMPORTANT: If the project involves the construction of residentia_ units, complete the form �a the next page. CERTIFICATION: I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present thc data and information required for this initial evaluation to the best of my ability, a,td that the facts, statements, and information presented are true a..,d 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 Deve lopment Review Committee. Date L♦ % /3 y f� Z 2t Signature —� Title Lf/ h �e, ts�', Ti�/io r _ i RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION The following information should be provided to the City of Rancho Cucamonca Planning Division in order to aid in assessirc the ability of the school district to accommodate the proposed residential development. Nar..e of Developer anc Tentative Tract No. : S WV pt) -@w� _ Soecific Location of ProjC: t: tea" 7 A4ZR,bty F2, o PHASE I PHASE 2 PHASE 3 PHASE 4 TOTAL 1. Number of single family units: 2. Number of multiple family units: �- 3. Date proposed to begin construction: os 4. Earliest date of �o occupancy: p •V Model # and A of Tentative 5. Bedrooms Price Rance 7 ea I-4 i � CITY OF RA.Nclio CUCAMONGA PART II — INITIAL STUDY ENVIRO E%TLL CHECKLIST DATE: August 28, 984 APPLIC N—,: Pete Volbeda FILING DATE: July i3, 19&7r LOG 1\LMER• GPA 84-03-C PROJECT: GPA 84-03-C PROJECT LOCATIO%:S/Arrow Route, E/Sierra Madre I. EtiEItiO=r\TAL IMPACTS (Explanation of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required on attached sheets) . YES MAYBE h0 1. Soils and Geoloev. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Unstable ground conditions or in changes in geclo-.ic relationships? b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or burial of the soil? X c. Change in topography or ground surface contour intervals? X d. The destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? X_ e. Any potential increase in wind or water erosion of soils, affecting either on or off site conditons? f. Changes in erosion siltation, or deposition? _ X_ g. Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, =vd_ slides, ground failure, or similar hazards? _ X_ h. An increase in the rate of extraction and/or use of any mineral resource? X Z. Y_draloey. Will the proposal have significant results in: Page 2 YES `LyYB= NO a- Changes in currents, or the course of direction, of flowing streams, rivers, or ephemeral stream channels? x b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage or the rate and amount of surface Ovate. runoff? x c. Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? d. :hange in the amount of surface water in any body of water? e_ Discharge into surface waters, or anv alteration of surface water quality? f. Alteration of groundwater characteriso:ics? g. Change in the quantity of groundwaters, either through direct additions or with- drawals, or through interference with an agxiif er? Quality? Quantity? x h- The reduction in the amount of water other- wise available for public water supplies? x i.. Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding or seiches? x 3. Ai Quality. Will the proposal have significant results in: a_ Constant or periodic air emissions from mobile or indirect sources? x Stationary sources? b. Deterioration of ambient air quality and/or interference with the attainment of applicable air quality standards? x c_ Alteration of local or regional climatic co:ditions, affecting air movement, moisture or temperature? x 4. Biota Flora. Will the proposal have significant results In: a. Change in the characteristics of species, including diversity, distribution, or number of any species of plants? x b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare X or endangered—,per ies of pla ems' - Page 3 YES MAYBE No c- Introduction of new or disruptive species of plants into an area? -- X d. Reduction in the potential for agricultural production? X Fauna- Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Change in the characteristics of species, including diversity, distribution, or ncabers of any species of animals? X b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of animals? X C. Introduction of new Or disruptive species of animals into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement Of animals? X d. Deterioration or removal of existing fish or wildlife habitat? X _ S- Ponulatioon- Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Will the proposal alter the location, distri- bution, density, diversit-.. or growth rate of the ;Luman population of an area? X b. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or create a demand for additicnal housing? X 6. socio-Economic Factocs. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Change itc local or regional socio-economic characteristics, including economic or commercial diversi values? ty' tax rate, and property X b. Will project costs be equitably distributed among project beneficiaries. i.e. , buyers, tax payers or project users? _ X 7. Lard Use and Planninz Considerations. Will the Proposal have significant results in? a. A substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? _ x _ b. A conflict with any designations, objectives, policies, or adopted plans of any governmental entities? X _ C. An impact upon the qulaity or quantity of existing consumptive or nen-consumptive Wecreational_opportunities? .Q/ Pace 4 YES M'AYB= NO 8. Transportation. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? X b. Effects on existing streets, or demand for new street construction? X c. Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new parking? X d. Substantial impact upon existing transporta- tion systems? X e. Alterations to present patterns of circula- tion or movement of people and/or goods? X f. Alterations to or effects on present and potential water-borne, rail, mass transit or aii traffic? X g. Increases in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? X Cultural Resources. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. A disturbance cc the integrity of archaeological, paleontological, and/or historical resources? X 10. Health. Safety, and Nuisance Pacrors. Will the Proposal have significant results in: a. Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard? X b. Exposure of people to potential health hazards? X c. A risk of explosion or release of %azareous substances in the event of an accident? X d. An increase in the number of individuals or species of vector or pathenogenic organisms or the exposure of people to such organisms? X e. Increase in existing noise levels? X f. Exposure of people to potentially dangerous noise levels? X g. The creation of objectionable odors? X h. An increase in light or glare? X 'are S YES 11. Aesthetics. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. The obstructio: degradation of ary sonic vista or view? b• The creation of an aesthetically offensive site? C. A conflict with the objective of designated or potential scenic corridors? 1=. 7Jtiiitles and ?ublic Services. Will the proposal have a significant need for new syste=s, or alteration; to the followirg: a. Electric power? b- Natural or packaged gas? c. Co=unications syste--s? d. Water supply? e. Wastewater facilities? f. Flood control structures? g. Solid waste facilities? h• Fire protection? i. Police protection? J . Schools? k. Parks or other recreational facilities? 1. Y.aintenance of public facilities, including roads and flood control facilities? M. Other governmental services? 13. Ener¢v and Scarce Resources. Will the proposal � have significant results in: a. Use of substantial or excessive fuel or energy? b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy'- c- An increase in the demand for developaert of new sources of energy? d- An increase or perpetuation of the consu=Ption of non—renewable forrs of energy, when feasible fi" renewable sources of energy are available? ?age 6 YES MkY35 NO e- Substantial depletion of ?ny nonrenewable or scarce natural resource? X 14. Mandatory Findines of Sizr_ ,±fie, a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? V A b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? (A short-term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of time while long- term impacts will endure well into the future) . X c. Does the project have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (Cumulatively considerable mea^i that the incremental effects of an indi.*idual project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, and probable future proiects) . R d. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? X II. DISCUSSIOt OF ---- IRMZS` �TAL EVALUATION (i.e. , of zffi=ative answers to the above questions plus a discussion of proposed mitigation measures) . See attached Page 7 III. DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: ?'—l I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect y,X on the environment, and a h'cGATIL_Z DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in tbis ease because the mitigation treasures described on an attached _et have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATIO:i WILL BE PREPpaED. I find the proposed project MkY have a significant effect on the envir-sent, and an ENVIRON"= I`TACT REPO. - s required. i Date p„nr,c �q�4 Signature City Planner Title 4 . ATTACHMENr TO INITIAL STUD:', PART !I II. Discussion of Environmental Evaluation 2) Hydrology b. An increased amount of covered area associated with a higher density project may affect absorption rates and the rate and amount of surface water runoff. 4) Flora - a. Develop—ment of the site as a low-medium project with 28 units as indicated on the site plan would cause the removal of 401 citrus trees. They are, however, in very poor condition. 7) Land Use and Planning Considerations b. The proposed project requests a change in the Land Use Map of the General Plan and will require an amendment of the Development District. ..:. 8) Transportation b. The project if developed per the submitted site plan, will require construction of Edwin Street. e. The continuation of Edwin Street, per the site plan, may alter the patterns of circulation by opening a path between Arrow Route and 9th Street. /jai' - 19 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONG.4 PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 84- 03-C - VOLBEDA - REQUESTING A CHANGE IN THE LAND USE DESIGNATION FROM LOW RESIDENTIAL TO LOW MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL FOR 4.78 ACRES OF LAND, LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF ARROW HIGHWAY BETWEEN SIERRA MADRE & COMET - APN 207-222-08 WHEREAS, on the 13th day of July, 1984, an application was filed and accepted on the above-described project; and WHEREAS, on the 26th day of September, 1984, 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 Amendment does not conflict with the Land Use Policies of the General Plan. 2. That the Amendment dies promote goals of the Land Use Element. ® 3. That the Amendment would not be materially injurious or detrimental to the adjacent properties. SECTION 2: The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission has found that this project will not create a significant adverse impact on the environment and recommends to City Council the issuance of a Negative Deciaration on s September 26, 1984. r NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: h 1. That pursuant to Section 65850 to 65855 of the California Government Code, that the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga hereby recommends approval on the 26th day of September, 1984, General Plan Amendment No. 84-03-C. 2. The Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council approve and adopt General Plan Amendment No. 84-03-C. 3. That a Certified Copy of this Resolution and related material hereby adopted by the Planning Commission shall be forwarded to the City Council. - 0 Resolution No. Page 2 APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 26TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 1984. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY• Dennis L. Stout, Chairman ATTEST: Rick Gomez, Deputy Secretary I, Rick Gomez, Deputy 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 September, 1984, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: 4 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION RECCDIMENDING APPROVAL OF DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AMENDMENT NO. 84-03-C - VOLBEDA - REQUESTING A CHANGE IN THE DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT DESIGNATION FROM LOW RESIDENTIAL TO LOW MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL FOR 4.78 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF ARROW HIGHWAY BETWEEN SIERRA MADRE AND COMET - APN 207-222-08 . WHEREAS, on the 13th day of July, 1984 an applir:cian was filed and accepted on the above-described project; and WHEREAS, on the 26th day of July, 1984, the Planning Commission held a duly advertised public hearing pursuant to Section 65854 of the California Government Code. SECTION 1: The R. Cho Cucamonga Planning Commission has :Wade the following finaings: 1. That the subject property is suitable for the uses permitted in the proposed district in terms of access, size, and compatibility with existing land use in the surrounding area; and ® 2. That the proposed district change would not have significant impact on the environment nor the surrounding properties; and 3. That the proposed district change is in conformance with the General Plan. SECTION 2: The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission has found that this project will not create a significant adverse impact on the environment and reco,,mends issuance of a Negative Declaration on September 26, 1984 . NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: 1. That pursuant to Section 65850 to 65855 of the California Government Code, that the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga hereby recommends approval on the 26th day of September, 1984, Development District Amendment No. 84-03-C. 2. The Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council approve and adopt District District Amendment No. 84-03-C. 3. That a Certified Copy of this Resolution and related material hereby adopted by the Planning Commission shall be forwarded to the City Council. v Oj�7�1 - ate Resolution No. Page 2 APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 26th DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 1984 PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY. OF RANCHO CUCA•iONGA BY: Dennis L. Stout, Chairman ATTEST: Rick Gomez, Deputy Secretary I, Rick Gomez, Deputy 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 September, 1984, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA DENYING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 84-03-3 - VOLBEDA - TO AMEND THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP AND DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS MAP FROM LOW RESIDENTIAL TO LOW MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL ON 4.78 ACRES ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF ARROW HIGHWAY, BETWEEN SIERRA MADRE AND COMET - APN 207-222-08 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider said amendment; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has fully considered public testimony requesting amendment; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has found that the requested amendment is in conflict with the land use policies of the General Plan and does not promote the goals and objectives of the Land Use Element. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, chat the Planning Commission denies General Plan Amendment 84-03-C to amend the General Plan and Development Districts Map from Low Residential to Low-Medium Residential at the location of Arrow Highway between Sierra Madre and Comet - APN 207-222=08. ® APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 26TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 1984. PLANNINo COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Dennis L. Stout, Chairman '— ATTEST-_ R� z, Deputy SecretaFy I, Rick Gomez, Deputy 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 September, 1984, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: �r CITY OF RANCHO CUCAAIONGA GI`CAti10 STAFF DEPORT �?° `�c9. Ui; DATE: September 26, 1984 197 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner BY: Lisa Winirger, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 84-03B CITY OF RANCHO CUCAh1ONGA - A request to amend the Genera Pan Land use Map from Medium Density Residential (4-14 du/ac)/General Industrial to Industrial Park on 18.8 acres of land located on the south side of 9th Street and Baker - APN 207-211-04 through 10, 17 through 20, 35, 37, 38, 43, and 44. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT ENDMENT - 36 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ---A request to amend the Deve ooment District Map from "M° (8-14 du/ac) and Industrial Specific Plan (General® Industrial) (Subarea 1) to Industrial Specific Plan (Industrial Park) on 18.8 acres of land located on the south side of 9th Street and Baker - APN 207-211-Oe ;hrough 10, 17 through 20, 35, 37, 38, 43 and 44. I. BACKGROUND: On December 7, 1983, the City Council directed Staff to prepare a report on land use alternatives for a study area located at the southeast corner of Baker Avenue and 9th Street. At the January 4, 1984 meeting, Council reviewed the report and expressed concern regarding the compatibility of planned Medium Density Residential with single-family homes and with General Industrial adjacent to Medium Density Residential uses. Presented with alternatives, the Council stated that an Industrial Park designation for the entire area in question could be the most appropriate in terms of land use compatibility and aesthetics and directed Staff to bring the proposed change before the Planning Commission, along with an analysis and staff recommendations during the General Plan Amendment review cycle in September. II. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION• A. Action Requested- Amend the General Plan Land Use Map and Development District Map from Medium Density Residential and General Industrial to Industrial Specific Plan/Industrial Park. B. Location: Southeast corner of Ba'%er and 9th Street. "' ITEMS N & 0 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT GPA 84-03B - City of Rancho Cucamonga September 26, 1984 Page 2 C. Parcel Size: 18.8 acres. D. Existing Development District: Medium Density Residential and Industrial Specific Plan/General Industrial. E. Existing Land Use: Single family residential ; vacant. F. Surrounding General Plan Designatien: North - Medium Density Residential ; General Commercial . South - Industrial; General Industrial. East - General Industrial . West - Low Density Residential . G_ Surrounding Land Use and Development District Designations: North - Attached single family residential , Commercial (Medium Density Residential/General Commercial) . Scuth - Vacant, Residential and Industrial (Industrial Specific Flan). East - Industrial (Industrial Specific Plan). Nest - Single family residential, pre-school (Low Density Residential) . H. Site Characteristics: Vegetation consists of residential landscaping, scattered eucalyptus trees, weeds and grasses. Existing homes are 20 to 40 years old in fair to good condition. III. ANALYSIS: A. History: When the Industrial Specific Plan was adopted in 1931, the western half of the project area was designated under the General Plan as Medium Density Residentiai. The eastern half was designated as General Industrial/industrial Specific Plan. This was done to preserve the residential uses in the area and to provide a future buffer of Medium Density Residential between the Industrial Area and the residential uses (existing and planned) to the north and west. B. General Plan Land Use Goals and Policies: The Land Use element of the General Pan states that the City shall "encourage opportunities to mix different but compatible land uses and activities", but also to "organize land uses to avoid creating nuisances among adjacent land uses". Under the Land Use descriptions, Medium Density Residential is designated as a compatible adjacent use to Low Density Residential. The Industrial Park land use is directed by the General Plan to be organized among major thoroughfares and on the periphery of the Industrial area with convenient access to public transit. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT GPA 84-033 - City of Rancho Cucamonga September 26, 1984 Page 3 Industrial Park occupants are generally labor intensive office uses, while General Industrial Uses range from light manufacturing to offices. While the Medium Density Residential use may be compatible with existing residential uses, the General Industrial use is much less compatible with either Low or Medium Density Residential. The major issue involving the request for a General Plan Amendment is land use compatibility and additional environmental concerns as outlined in the Environmental Assessment. Regarding land use, the change to Industrials Park would create a more consistent pattern of uses if the entire area was incorporated in the Industrial Specific Plan. The :iajor concern would lie with the compatibility of Industrial Park uses with the single family residences to the north and west, many of which access directly from 9th Street. Under the requirements of the Industrial Specific Plan a 45-foot building setback would be required for office and industrial park development which is adjacent to residential uses. This wou id serve to buffer the industrial use from the residential uses. The requirement of a Master Plan® designation for the project area would ensure compatibility between uses an site and minimize conflict with off site uses. The Master Plan should include a discussion of drainage, circulation, parking and access, and land use transitions. The proposed General Plan Amendment and Development District Amendment could allow the continuance of the existing residential use as a non-conforming use while developing some or all of the remainder as Industrial Park. Whether or not the homes remain, new development should be designed to be compatible with existing uses to the north and west. Approval of the General Plan Amendment and Development District Amendment will require amendment of the Industrial Specific Plan to either create a new subarea or annex the project site to an existing subarea with an Industrial Park designation. The specific development standards of this subarea should consider appropriate buffering on the south side of 9th Street. The alternative to the proposed change would be to deny the request and maintain the existing designations of Medium Density Residential and General Industrial . From a land use compatibility perspective, development under the existing land use designations would allow the development of Medium Density Residential (most likely condominiums or apartments) adjacent to General Industrial uses (,manufacturing, etc.). This could create a less consistent pattern c€ development and the likelihood of conflict between uses. Furthermore, the PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT GPA 84-038 - City of Rancho Cucamonga September 26, 1984 Page 4 transition between Medium Density and the existing single family development would also create the potential for incompatibilities. C. Environmental Assessment: The Initial Study has been completed r)y Staff and no significant adverse environmental impacts were considered to be associated with - the proposed project. However, tw3 environmental concerns were noted and the following mitigation measures are suggested should the project be approved. Drainage: Although development of the site as Industrial Park will not significantly increase storm run-off, some increase in run-off will result from the increased ground coverage. A drainage Master Plan would be required when the initial industrial development for the area is proposed. IV. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: Should the Commission upon examination of the General Plan and Development District Map Amendments decide that this change wcuid promote the Lard Use Goals and Policies of the General Plan and would not be detrimental to the adjacent properties or cause significant adverse impact as listed under the Environmental Assessment, the following findings are necessary for approval: A. The Pmendment does not conflict with the Land Use Policies of the General Plan, - B. The Amendment does promote the goals of the Land Use element, and C. The Amendment would not be materially injurious or detrimental to the adjacent properties. V. CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised as a public hearing in The Dail Re ort newspaper and notices were sent to all property owners within feet of the subject site. In addition, public hearing notices were posted on the property. To date no correspondence has been received regarding this project. PLANNING COMMISFION STAFF REPORT GPA 84-03B - Ci :y of Rancho Cucamonga September 25, 1984 Page 5 VI. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the Amendment to the General Plan and Development District Map as proposed, with the condition that a faster Plan be required prior to development to address drainage, circulation, parking and access, and land use transitions). It is also recorrmnended that Staff be directed to initiate an Amendment of the Industrial Specific Plan during the next review cycle. The attached resolutions of approval are presented for your consideration. Tectf y ubmitted: mPlanner RG:LW:ns Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Land Use Map Exhibit "B" - General Plan Designation Exhibit "C" - Development Districts Map Initial Study City Council Staff Report - January 4, 1984 City Council - January 4, 1984 Resolution of Approval of General Plan Amendment Resolution of Approval of Development District Amendment ✓ i - i ` Y / rt L � DUPL�ES""""'��.Lf_'-.•.•--.-. � mil/ s FAI,?ILy SIN&t� F.ftllLy A � y6,egL l,v I it----�-GCSE lYk1C�4s�Sc1 L EXISTING LAND USE i RE I Ali: LDvt/ DENSITY I - ���• • - . . RGL*' � -------------------- > LyOI�SfJi/r3V !fl16R%rL 1ND4v5rR/fFL b Low va&N50ry GEN0 1- /NDr7zlm 6 nt fi' �� .✓' � f/ z r �' y} r i ss�S�.:��ria1• GAENERAL PLAN PE516NATION5 W/° - � S'CC- I•" n i r ,00 J / ®� SAW (� ihS•+�ly%����./� �5 Y� £4 y' 4 .f � .. 3SKL1 -3i�s�tas-�rsal a - - PEVEW P1111 MT 05TR BGTS l„ 79/D' 8 ( CITY OF RANCHO CUCAiIONGA STAFF REFORM Ch s � '- OI 0 F � Z UI > DATE: January 4, 1984 197: TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner i BY: Frank Dreckman, Assistant Planner- SUBJECT: LAND USE ANALYSIS - 9TH STREEl AND MADRONE AVENUE ABSTRACT: At the direction of the City Council, staff has prepared the follcwing study designed to determine the most appropriate land use for the area approximately bounded by Arrow Route, 8th Street, Baker Avenue, and the County Flood Control Corridor (Figure "A"). Specifically, the primary stud% area surrounds the intersection of 9th and Madronc (parcels 4-10, 17-20, 35, 43 and 45). BACKGROUND: ® Existing Land Uses: The area surrounding the intersection of 9th Street -and Madrene Avenue presently consists of a variety of land uses which may ultimately determine and influence fu Wrp land use designations within the primary study area. n_ :, ;ustrated in Figure "B", the study area is presently pent- cu with a variety of land uses which include: A. Detached Sirqle Family Residential: Existing single family residences are primarily located on the southeast corner of 9th Street and Baker Avenue. In addition, a tract of single family residences are located contiguous to Baker Avenue, south of 9th Street. Lastly, as illustrated in Figure "B", additional single family residences are scattered throughout the surrounding areas. B. Attached Single Family Residential: (Duplex units) Phase I of the Orchard Creek development, ocated on the north side of 9th Street, between Baker and Madrone Avenues, has recently been completed. Currently, grading for Phase 1I is underway. Ultimately, the tract will comprise 54 duplex units. C. Commercial : Existing commercial activity consists of the Cask and Cleaver Restaurant complex located on the northeast corner of 9th and Madrone. Although not fully deve'�^Iped, the site will eventually support 10-acres of related commercial and office activities. CITY COUNCIL STAFF RE T Land Use Analysis - 9L„ St. & Madrone Ave. January 4, 1984 Page 2 D. Industrial : Existing industrial development consists primarily of limited light industrial and manufacturing uses which are scattered throughout the study area. As illustrated on Figure "B", many of these existing uses are surrounded by vacant parcels which produce an underutilized industrial area. The area is currently zoned General Industrial and lies within Subarea 1 of the Industrial Area Specific. Plan. General Plan Land Use: The Ceneral Plan and Industrial Area Specific Plan have designated u timate -and use designations (Figure "C") within the primary study zone ,which include: (a) Medium Density Residential (8-14 du/ac), which could ultimately support single family, duplex, zero lot, and multi-family dwellings; and (b) General Industrial, which could support future industrial activities which may include manufacturing, assembling, fabrication, wholesaling, heavy commercial, office uses, etc. As outlined in the Industrial Area Specific Plan, the General Industrial land use categroy functions as a buffer between low industrial uses (commercial and residential) and heavy industriai uses. However, existing land uses within the primary study area and surrounding area may ultimately influence or dictate a more appropriate sand use which may be better adapted or more compatible with both existing and future uses as shown in Figure "B". Issues: The main issue involved with this study is to determine and establish land use designations which are compatible with surrounding existing or proposed uses located within the primary study area. Specifically, the study area should function as a transition zone between differing land uses (i .e., C :neral Industrial, Residential) while remaining sensitive to the immediate neighborhood. Policies: The following is a description of policies related to three land uses (Residential, Industrial Park, General Industrial ) which may be appropriately located within the primary study area. The appropriateness of the land use designation will depend on the inter-r-etation of these policies as they relate to the assets and liabilities of each proposed land use alternative. The Council needs to examine and compare the proposed alternatives against the current City pc- icy listed below in an effort to determine the appropriate land use within the study area. General Industrial : Presently, the study area is split by two iverse and uses (Figure "C"), which include Medium Density Residential and General Industrial. As outlined in the City's General Plan, General Industrial land uses are typically used as a buffer between low intensity irdustriai uses and heavy intensity industrial uses. In addition, the General Plan encourages General Industrial uses, specifically warehousing and distribution, west of Archibald within the study area. However, where adjacent to residential uses, the General Industrial use should be designed for office use exclusively. 7I/o -to CITY COUNCIL STAFF RE4 T Land Use Analysis - 9th St. & Madrone Ave. January 4, 1984 Page 3 Industrial Park: Industrial Park land use policies relate primarily to providing low intensity industrial uses which include office/administration facilities, research and development laboratories, support businesses, commercial services, etc. Industrial Park areas are typically located in areas of high prestige value (Haven Avenue) and are characterized by developments which offer an attractive campus-like environment. In general, these areas are characterized by a high employment density and strict design standards developed to protect land uses within this designation from other development which is inappropriate due to either function, appearance or environmental effect. This land use is sometimes used as a transition between residential and higher intensity industrial uses. Medium Density Residential : Building intensity at the high end of the Medium density range 8-14 du/ac) is typically more appropriate adjacent to parks or open spaces, along transit routes and major secondary thoroughfares, and near major activity centers such as shopping centers, entertainment areas, etc. In addition, Medium Density Residential land uses typcially serve as a buffer between Low Density Residential areas and areas of higher intensity commercial activities, and areas of greater traffic and noise levels. ALTERNATIVES: The following is a list of alternatives designed to provide a comparative analysis between the alternatives and policies listed above. Alternative 1 - General Industrial (existin condition (Figure "D") : Alternative proposes expanding the current In ustria Area Specific Plan land use designation of General Industrial (Subarea 1) into the current residential land use area. Assets: o Could provide a transition from adjacent commercial and residential uses to other general industrial uses if the study area is restricted to office and administration uses only. Liabilities: o Most General Industrial uses such as light and medium manufacturing, assembling, fabrication, and wholesaling, would not be compatible adjacent to existing or future residential uses. o Existing R-1 single family I':= becomes non-conforming. o Design and development standards are less demanding than those of residential or industrial park designated areas. CITY COUNCIL STAFF R� T Land Use Analysis - 9tn St. & Madrone Ave. January 4, 1984 Page 4 o Minimum parcel size for the General Industrial area is one-half acre. Other land uses require larger minimum lot sizes. The General Industrial one-half area policy could produce piecemeal development. o General Industrial land uses and built forms adjacent to residential and commercial land uses will provide a harsh and abrupt transition to lower intensity uses. Staff Comments: If Alternative 1 is chosen: (a) a master plan should be required for the entire primary study area, which will ultimately be designed to coordinate drainage, traffic circulation, and access points, in an effort to provide continuity and compatibility within the study area; (b) only office and administrative uses shall be allowed within the primary study area; (c) special design standards shall be employed ;landscape buffers, architectural controls, etc.) to ensure neighborhood compatibility; and, (d) a General Pl.,n, Development Code, and Industrial Area Specific Plan land use amendment will be required to place various _land use and design restrictions or, the study area designed to assure neighborhood compatibility. Alternative 2 - Industrial Park (Fiqufe "Dhl - Alternative 2 :could change ..the and use within the primary study area from General Industrial (Subarea 1) to Industrial Park. Assets: o Provides an effective buffer between residential and General Industrial land uses. o Stiff design and development standards assure neighborhood compatibl*"ty. o Industrial park land uses such as office, administration, research and development, business support and commercial services, are typically more compatible with residential and commercial land uses and provide a subtle transition from one land use to another. o Provides an attractive activity node which would work in concert with co=ercial (Cask & Cleaver) and higher density residential activities to the north. o Minimum parcel size within the Industrial Park category equates to two acres which helps discourage piecemeal development, or conversion of existing residential dwellings into industrial uses. �/D- /•n- CITY COUNCIL STAFF RE( T � Land Use analysis - 9L„ St. & Madrone Ave. January 4, 1984 Page 5 o Industrial Park urban forms (architectural, height, bulk, form, detailing, etc.) provides an effective transition between Residential/Commercial uses and General Industrial Uses. In general, this use is more compatible with Residential and Commercial uses. Liabilities: o Industrial Park uses are typically located along major streets where high exposure is desirable. o Existing R-1 single family becomes a non-conforming use. o Industrial Park areas are characterized by a high employment density which ma_v cause excess traffic congestion, noise, etc., within the study area. Staff Comments: If Alternative 2 is chosen: (a) a master plan should be required for the entire primary study area which will ultimately be designed to coordinate drainage, traffic circulation, access points, and urban design guidelines, in an effort to provide continuity and compatibility within the study area. In addition, various design standards should be designed to assure neighborhood compatibility by regulating architectural height, details, building forms, site planning, etc.; (b) uses should be restricted to office, administration, or other low intensity uses; and (c) a General Plan and Industrial Area Specific Plan land use amendment will be required. Alternative 3 - Medium Densit Residential (existing condition Figure "D" • A ternative wau change the an use within the primary study area from General Industrial (Subarea 1) to Medium Density Residential (8=14 du/ac). Assets: o Provides a buffer between single family residential land uses and low intensity industrial uses. o Medium Density land uses are compatible with existing single family and duplex units located adjacent to 9th and Madrone Streets. o Residential will be located adjacent to existing and future general commercial activities. Liabilities: o Conflicts with existing and future General Industrial land uses which are generally of higher intensity than Industrial Park uses causing a harsh and abrupt change in adjacent land uses. o Existing parcel sizes and configurations may produce piecemeal Medium density projects which lack continuity and neighborhood compatibility. �o -i.3 CITY COUNCIL STAFF RE' T Land Use Analysis - gL,. St. & Madrone Ave. January 4, 1984 Page : o Existing R-1 single family land use becomes a non-conforming use. Staff Contnents: If Alternative 3 is chosen: (a) a master plan should be required for the entire primary study zone which will ultimately be designed to coordinate drainage, traffic circulation, access points, and urban design guidelines in an effort to provide continuity and compatibility within the study area. In addition, various design standards should be designed to a,sure neighborhood compatibility by regulating architectural, height, details, building forms, site planning, etc., (b) a General Plan and Industrial Area Specific Plan land use amendment will be required. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council review the staff report in an of jrt to determine the most appropriate lard use within the primary study area. The City Council shall then direct staff to draft any associated General Plan, Development Code, and industrial Area Specific Plan land use amendments as deemed necessary. Respectful l / su��itt2d,� Rick GomezU�J City Planner \\-/ RG/FD/jr Attachments 1` ' /' � i �.�i . ri ■ i Ci y�y �. i .'.� .�. ' � •t,.n• 1 ` .: v ........i..- ,1...,: .v., ' � O �� �� . 1 � Q � �;. Y /•. X'. ,,. )`:. � — - .. '� , � � ice, , Y ..J ,..,� ,. r t� 1. . .1_. 1 1 1 1 �.. .!7 ! 1 I � I .� � . .... .. sYrrvvt �y;G _ ---7z -_-.-_-.- 77N Al - - s NO � n a /0: � 7 0 9 io 17 G yy 4 o J s a �t rat Gcrn�-�z�c.�• 1. 1_Up -/6 n l C! NP -I T OW @ 8 C A. J 51" � I I _ y s asIPs �aCN �) 5i J� t• � � I� VG IQ S r, awn i s klo s A— k 4 City Council minutes January 4. 1981, Page 3 Mayor Hikels opened the meeting for public hearing. :here being no response. the public hearing was closed. ACTION: Mayor Mikels stated the Item will be continued to the meeting of January 18, 1984. 6. CIS: MANAGER'S STAFF REPORTS 6A. FONTANA RESERVE AVNEXATTON. The- San Bernardino County LAFC is seeking (15) input tram Fontana. Ontario, and 'Rancho Cucamon=,a regarding the future divislon of the Kaiser Steel Preserve. Staff report by Rick Comet, City Planner. Mr. Wasserman state.i that LAFC has tentatively set up a meeting. Staff will notify Council whin it has been ci-nfirmed. ACTION: Council concurred to continue this item until after the LAFC meeting. 69. I.A.%'D USE A`1ALYSIS - 9TH STREET AND MADRONE AVENUZ. At the December Ith (L6; meeting. City Couacl2 directed staff to prepare a special land use study designed to determine optimal industrial and/or residential land uses within the planning area bounded by Arrow Route, baker Avenue. Bth Street, and the County Flood Control corridor. Staff report by Rick Comer, City Planner. Mayor "ikels opened the meeting for public input. There being no response, the open meeting was closed. Mr. Buquet stated he brought this up at the time of the Development Code hearings. His concern was while there was housing on the northeast portion Char is presently under consideration for R-3, he felt there would be some problems with an R-3 dea`,gnation in there because thete would be an incompatible use up against single family housing. another problem Is there would be general industrial backed up against that. He felt Council should Look at an Industrial Park designation. That it would be more aesthetically blending with the neighborhood rather than a general industrial designation and would also protect the houses already there slate it would be a long time before this would be developed. He favored Option 2. ACTION: Council concurred that this should go to the Planning Commission for public hearings with Alternetive 2 being their preference and to come back to the Council for final approval. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORTS Mr. Dougherty stated he had nothfag to report. 8. COUNCIL BUSINESS There was no business. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA INITIi%L STUDY PART I - PROJECT INFORMATION SHEET - To be completed by applicant Environmental Assessment Review Fee: $27. 00 For all pro ccts requiring environmental review, this form must be completed Review nd submitted to the Development Comm,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 : 1) The project will have no signi- fa.cant enviro=eutal 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 ianfor.naticn report should be supplied by the applicant giving further informa- tion concerning the proposed project. t PROJECT TITLE: Geniral Plan Amendment 8403-8 APPLICANT'S NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE: P. City of Rarcf c Cucamonga O. Box 807 Rancho ( JCamonGd California 91730 NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE OF PERSON TO BE CONTACTED CONCERNING THIS PROJECT: Rick Gomez City Planner Citv of Rancha Cucasanoa '714 non-1851 LOCATION OF PROJECT (STREET r0:7DRESS AND ASSESSOR PARCEL NO. ) Smith Street between Baker and Mad one APN 207-271-4,5.5 718 9 10 17 38,19 20 3 ,37 38 43 a4. LIST OTHER PERMITS NECESSARY FROM LOCAL, REGIONAL, STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES ADD THE AGENCY ISSUING SUCH PERMrTS : DeveloPm.ent District Amendment r I-1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT ti r=nO Y?1 01a11 AT.Pn(imPnt if rP,...+..a-.i t(1_2MPTI(i i�1P I and ��[P M P F 11 -'91m '� [iT [l (�Pntial/�:PnPYaI �i Indu[trial to TnrinoYY: 1 c ACREAGE OF PROJECT AREA AND SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED BUILDINGS, IF ANY: _E=j= t araa _ 1R R AfrPc Fvi -t' i� ij 'i �c cinnlP -,,mil- rp,5ldencac. DESCRIBE THE ENVIRONMENTAL SETTItiG OF THE PROJECT SITE INCLUDING INFORMATION ON TOPOGRAPHY, PLANTS (TREES) , ANIF-'kLS, ANY CULTURAL, HISTORICAL OR SCENIC ASPECTS, USE OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES, P*ID THE DESCRIPTION OF ANY EXISTING STRUCTURES AND THEIR USE (ATTACH NECESSARY SHEETS) : See attached. r c Is the protect part of a larger protect, one of a series Of cumulative actions, which although individually small, may == a whole have significant environmental impact? i :: I-?. WILL THIS PROJECT- YES NC X 1. Create a substantial change in ground contours? X 2. C,.eate a substantial change in existing noise or vibration? 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? Row many? Possibly 20 + X 6. C:-eate the need for use or disposal of trees potentially hazardous materials such as toxic substances, flammables or explosives? Explanation of any YES answers above : IMPORTAUNT: If the project involves the construction of residential units, complete the fcrn on the next page. CERTIFICATION: I hereby certify that the stat;--nents furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and information required for this initial evaluation to the best of my aLi lity, 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 gabmitt before an adea;:,: - e evaluation can be ,:lade b the Deve onme y _ Review Committee. Date 1ueust 22 1984 Signature b Title Clty Planner Z-3 Environmental Setting- Tcpo� - project site is located on the alluvial fan and slopes gently in a southerly direction. Flora/Fauna - On site vegetation consists of various common domestic vegetation associated with the existing homes and eucalyptus trees and weed materials scattered on the vacant parcels. Animal life coi:sists of domestic pets and assorted rodents and birds. Surroundino Uses North - Multifamily homes, Cask and Cleaver restaurant, elementary school . South - Two single family residences, an industrial building and vacant. land. 'cast - Industrial uses including television, transmission towers and tree farm. 'West - Single family residential tract and child care center Existino Structures APN: 207-271-4,5,6,i,8,9.,0,17,18,15,37,38,44. Single family residences, generally 30+ years old, in fair to good condition. Includes associated landscaping, auxiliary structures, etc. APN: 207-271-20,35,43 - Vacant parcels with scattered trees. `" Nla - a3 CITY OF RA.\CHO CUCAMONGA PAIRT II - ISITIAL STL"DY F-%% 'IRO\�k:4iAL CHECKLIST DATE: APPLICANT: 1 /% FILI::G DATE: y� pp LOG \b^SER• PROJECT: PROJECT LOCATIO`:- :5�' fl�: I. EtiC'IRO\"LEtiT:;L 1`L ,CTS (Explanation of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required on attached sheets) . YES :LAYBE NO 1_ Soils and Geolozv. ?fill the proposal have significant results in: a- Unstable ground conditions or in changes in geologic relationships? X b_ Disruptions, displacements, compaction or burial of the soil? c- change in topography or ground sufface co-:tour intervals? d. The destruction, covering or modification Of any unique geologic or physical features? X e. Any potential increase in wind or water erosion of soils, affecting either on or off site conditons? f_ Changes in erosion siltation, or deposition? Y, g. Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mud- slides, ground failure, or similar hazards? h. An increase in the rate of extraction and/or use of any mineral resource? 2. Fivdrelogv. Will the proposal have significant results in: Page Z YES '!9YBE _6 a. Changes in currents, or the course of direction of flowing streams, rivers, or ephemeral stream channels? b- Changes in absorption rates, drainage patt:rns, or the rate and amount of surface water runoff, c- Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? X d. Change in the amount of surface crater in any body of water? X e. Discharge into surface waters, or anv_ alteratic- of surface water quality? f. Alteration of groundwater characteristics? g. Change in the quantity of groundwaters, either through direct additions or with- drawals, or through interference with an aquifer? Quality? Quantizy? h. The reduction in the amount of water other- wise available for public water supplies? )( i.. Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding or seiches? X 3. Air Qualitv. Will the proposal have significant results in: a- Constant or periodic air emissions from mobile or indirect sources? K Stationary sources? b- Deterioration of ambient air quality and/or interference with the attainment < ' applicable air quality standards? .1 c. Alteration of local or regional climatic conditions, affecting air movement, moisture or temperature? _51- 4. Biota Flora. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Change in the characteristics of species, including diversity, distribution, or number of any species of plants? b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of plants? ?a£e 3 YES `L5Y3E _O Aulk c. Introduction of new or disruptive species of plants into an area? d. Reduction in the pot:, 'al for agricultural production? y Fauna. Will the proposal have significant results in.. a. Change in the characteristics of species, including diversity, distribution, or -=.tubers of any species of animals? k b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of animals? c. Introduction of new or disruptive species of animals into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals"_ d. Deterioration or removal of existing fish or wildlife habitat? X 5. Population. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Will the proposal alter the location, distr bution, density, diversity, or growth rate of the human population of am area? �( b. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? 6. SOciO—Economic Factors. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Change in local or regional socx..-economic characteristics, including economic or cotaercial diversity, tax rate, and property values? x b. Will project costs be equitably distributed among project beneficiaries, i.e. , buyers, tax payers or project users? X 7. Land Use and Planninz Considerations. Will the proposal have significant results in? a. A substantial alteration of the present or Planned land use of an area? — b. A conflict with any designations, objectives. policies, or adopted plats of any governmental entities? V — c. An impact upon the qulaity or quantity of existing consumptive or non-consumptive recreational epport_n1it_es? / ?ace 4 YES MAYBE No 8. TransDOrtation. Will'the proposal have significant results in: ' a. Generation of substzntial additional vehicular movement? Y b. Effects on existing streets, or de--and for new street construction? X c. Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new parking? k d. Substantial impact upon existing transport,11- tion systems? X e. Alterations to present patterns of circula- tion or movement of people and/or goods? f. Alterations to or effects on present and potential water-borne, rail, mass transit or air traffic" g. Increases in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? �( 9. Cultural Resources. Will the proposal have significant iesults in: a. A disturbance to the integrity of archaeological, paleontological, and/or historical resources'. 10. Health. Safetv, and Nuisance Factors. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard? v b. Exposure of people to potential health hazards? )( c. A risk of explosion or release of hazardous substances in the event of an accident? X d. An increase in the number of individuals or species of vector or pathenogenic organisms or the exposure of people to such organisms? X e. Increase in existing noise levels? k f. Exposure of people to potentially dangerous noise levels? X g. The creation of objectionab?e odors? h. An increase in light or glare? X page YES 11. Aesthetics. Will tY.e proposal have significant results in: a. The obstruction or degradation of any scenic vista or view? b. The creation of an aesthetically offensive site? c. A conflict 'with the objective of designated or potential scenic corridors? X 12-• Utilities and Public Services. Will the proposal have a significant need for new systems, or a erations to the following: a. Electric power? �C b. Natural or packaged gas? k c. Co.�unications systems? k d. Water supply? X e. Waste:•ater facilities? x f. Flood control structures? g. Sol"-,-' waste facilities? h. Fire protection? k_ i. Police protection? v J. Schools? _— Y k. Parks or other rec:-eational facilities? 1= 1_ Maintenance of public facilities, including roads and flood control facilities? M. Other governmental services? 13. Enercv and Scarce Resources. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Use of substantial Dr e%cessive fuel or energy? x b. Substantial increase in demand upor. existing sources of energy? c. An increase in the demand for development of new sources of energy? i d. An increase or perpetuation of the consumption of non-renewable forms of energy, when feasible renewable sources of energy are available? /JI/0 � ?aSe 6 YES !IAYBE No e. Substantial depletion of any nonrenewable or scarce natural resource? 14. Y.andatory Findings of Significance. a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community; reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistorv? b. Does the project have the potential to zchieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? (A short-term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of time while long- term impacts will endure well into the future) . X c. Dees the project have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (Cumulatively considerable means that the incremental effects of an individual project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, and probable future projects) . T d. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? II. DISCUSSIOV OF rN%IRO'�`LvtiTL cLVAL,UATION (i.e. , of affirmative answers to the above questions plus a discussion of proposed mitigation measures). Page 7 ItI. DET_? On the basis of this initial evaluation: 0 j; I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant�C- effect 1 cn the environment, aad a NEGATI:i DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a sign=ficart effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effec': in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATI'JE DEC!--'LRTION WILL BE PREPARED. r--; I find the proposed project IMAY have a significant effect on the envirrz=ent, and an ENVIRMI-TENT IMPACT q=PORT is required. rates� 4-Ti e tle i II . Discussion of Environmental Evaluation Poouiation b. Approval of the proposed Genral ;'l :n Amendment nd Development District Amendment will impact the existing housing on site by causing it to become nonconforming in land use. The nonconforming tatus would subject the the residential use to increased restrictions irdance with the re- quirements of the development code. 7. Land Use a,b. The requested amendments would create a substantial alteration in the planned land use for the residential portion of the site. The change from Medium Density Residential to Industrial Park represents a significant difference in visual quality and land use, particularly to the residential areas to the north and west. The industrial areas to the south and east would be less affected. In order to ensure land use comaptibility, the design review process wi'� -, , evaluate site design and architecture to create a compatible development. Af�a -31 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION gECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 84- 03-B - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - REQUESTING A CHANGE IN THE LAND USE DESIGNATION FROM MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL/GENERAL INDUSTRIAL TO INDUSTRIAL PARK. FOR 18.8 ACRES OF LAND, LOCATED ON THE SOUTHEAST SIDE OF 9TH & BAKER - APN 207- 211-04 THROUGH 10, 17 THROUGH 20, 35, 37, 38, 43, & 44. WHEREAS, on the 15th day of July, 1984, an application was filed and accepted on the above-described project; and WHEREAS, on -the 26th day of September, 1984, the Planning Commission held a duly advertised public hearing pursuant to Section 65854 of the California Government Cade. SL-;TION 1: The Rancho Cucamonga ?lanning Commission has made the following findings: 1. That the Amendment does not conflict with the Land Use Policies of the General Plan. 2. That the Amendment does promote goals of the Land Use Element. 3. That the Amendment would nit be materially injurious or detrimental to the adjscent properties. SECTION 2: The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission has found that this project will not create a significant adverse impact on the environment and recommends to City Council the issuance of a Negative Declaration on September 26, 1984. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: 1. That pursuant to Section 65850 to 65855 of the California Government Code, that the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga hereby recommends approval on the 26th day of September, 1984, General Plar. Amendment No. 84-03-6. 2. The Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council approve and adopt General Plan Amendment No. 84-03-B. 3. That a Certified Copy of this Resolution and .related material hereby adopted by the Planning Commission shall be forwarded to the City Council. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 26TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 1984. ,i/o - 3 � PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY• Dennis L. Stcut, Chairman ATTEST: Rick Gomez, Deputy Secretary 1, Pick Gom>-z, Deputy Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify. that Vie foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Plannin3 Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Plan-ing Comniss:on held on the 26th day of September, I984, by the following vote-to-wit• AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Pl d - �3 I RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMUNGA PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AMENDMENT NO. 84-03-3 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - REQUESTING A CHANGE IN THE DISTRICT DESIGNATION FROM MEDIUM RESIDEvTIAL/INDUSTRIAL SPECIFIC PLAN (GENERAL INDUSTRIAL) Ir TO INDUSTRIAL SPECIFIC PLAN ( INDUSTRIAL PARK) FOR 18.8 1 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED ON THE SOUTHEAST SIDE OF 9TH & BAKER - APN 207-211-04 THROUGH 10, 11 THROUGH 20, 35, 37, 38, 43, AND 44. WHEREAS, -r }he 15th day cf July, 1984 an appiicacioji was filed and accepted on the above-described projE-ct; and WHEREAT , on the 26th day of September, 1911`4, the Pl;,-ping Commission held a duly advertised public hearing pursuant to Secti -.t a5854 of the California Government Code. SECTION 1: The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Cormiss':.n has made the following findings: 1. That the subject ;property is suitable for the uses per itted in the proposed district in terms of as _ss, size, and compatibility with existing land use in the surrounding area; and 2. That the proposed district change woela not have significant impact on the environment nor the surrounding properties; and 3. That the proposed district change is in conformance with the General Plan. SECTI')N 2: The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission has found that this r--oject will not create a significant adverse impact on the environment and recor-,mends issuance of a Negative Declar?tion on September 26, 1984. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: 1. That pursuant to Section 65850 to 65855 of the California Government Code, that the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga hereby recommends approval on the 26th day of September, 1984, District Amendment No. 84-03-B. 2. The Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council approve and adopt District Amendment No. 84-03-8. /Y �/� _ 35 Resolution No. Page 2 ® 3. That a Certified Copy of this Resolution and related ® material hereby adopted by the Flannin_a Commission shall be forwarded to. the City Council. APPRGVED AND ADOPTED THIS 26TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, i084. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Dennis L. Stout, Chairman ATTEST: Rick Gomez, Deputy Secretary I, Rick Gomez , Deputy Secretary of the Planning Commission of Lhe City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the Foregoing Resolution w�ks duly and regularly introd ized, passed, and adopted by the P tanning Conr.ission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held c,n the 26th day of Septemoer, 1984, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: ® NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: CITY OF RANCH0 CUCAMONGA �`0CLcnmrc�c9. STAFF REPORT iZ DATE: September 26, 1984 ly" { TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Rick Gomez, City Plsrner BY: Lisa 'dininger, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASKS MENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 84-03D - NTY OF RANCHO CUC;MONGA - A request to amend the Ge..era. F ar Land Use Man from Medium Density Residential (4-14 du/ac) to Low Medium Density Residential (4-8 du/ac) on 15.8 acres of land located on the west siee of Hellman Avenue south of 7th Street - APN 209-161-04, 16, 23, and 210-341-72. 1. ABSTRACT: A General Plan Amendment is requested for a site located on Hellman Avenue south of 7th Street. The requested changa is from Medium Density Residential to Low Medium Density Residential. Staff has determined that no significant environmental impacts would be caused by the proposed change. The Commission will determine if the proposed change is appropriate in terms of land use compatibility. II. BACKGROUND: This action was initiated by the Planning Commission who a'rected staff to prepare a General Plan Amendment for the properties located west of Hellman and south of 7th Street, which �. are currently designated under the General Plan as Medium Density Residential (4-14 du/ac) , tut are located in a Low Medium Density (4-8 du/ac) Residential Development District. The 15.8 acre site I located rear the southwest corner of the City is currently vacant except for one single-family hone. The site is located w(!st of a tract of single-family homes which are designated as Low Density (2-4 du/ac) Residential. Because of concerns relavive to compatibility of existing and proposed uses, and for transition of density, the Commission directed Staff to evaluate the poss-,bility of amending the General Plan Land Use Designation of the subject property to Low Medium Residential. The Commission wished to j evaluate the Mediu- Density Residential land use desicnation in J terns of land use compatibility in order to determine if the site is suited t.)r Low Medium Density rather than a Medi Density designation. The current General Plan Land Use Designation differs substantially from the developed property immediately east of the parcel. Consequently, a General Plan amendment was requested to l change the current Medium Density Residential designation ;"--'-". du/ac) to Low Medium Density Residential (4-8 du/ac). ITEM P PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT GPA 84-03D - City of Rancho Cucamonga ® September 26, 1984 Page 2 III. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRI^rTION: A. Action Requested: Amend the General Plan Lard Use Map from Medium Density Residential (4-14 du/ac) to Low Medium Density Residential (4-8 dulac). B. Location: West of Hellman Avenue, south of 7th Street. C. Parcel Size: 15.8 acres. D. Existinj Development District: Medium Density Residential . E. Existinq Land Us?:_ Vacant and single-family residential. F. Surrounding Laid Use and DeveZo ment District: North - vacant and Industrial Industrial Specific Plan) South - City of Ontario, (vacant) . East - Single-family homes (Low Density Residential) West - City of Ontario, (single-family homes) . G. General Plan Desiqnations: Aft Project Site - Medium Density Residential Nert: - General Industrial South - City of Ontario (Low Density) East - Low Density ' .sidentiai West - City of Ontario (Low Density) H. Site Characteristics: The project site is bounded an the west y the Cucamonga Creek Flood Control Channel and on the east by Hellman Avenue. The northern three parcels are vacant with scattered eucalyptus trees, grasses and weeds, while the southern parcel is occupied by a single-family dwelling. T-V. ANALYSIS: A. History: Although the site was originally occupied by several single-family homes, the only remaining struc�ure is on the southern pare=l an the southwest corner of 6th and Hellman. 8. General Plan Land Use Goals and Policies: The land use element of the General Plan describes Medium Density residential development as °allowing, a wide range of living accommodations ranging from conventional single family detached units to single family attached units. Building intensity at the lower end of the density range would be appropriate adjacen� to Low and Very Low density residential areas. Building intensity at the higher end of the range is considered appropriate near parks and other open areas, along transit routes and major and secondary thoroughfares, and rear activity centers such as recreationcl centers, 13braries, shopping centers, and entertainment areas. The Low Medium cater_.pry is characterized by residential densities somewhat greater than the Low Density PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT GPA 84-03D - City of Rancho Cucamonga September 26, 1984 Page 3 Residential group. The Low Medium Density would be appropriate within Low Density areas to encourage greater housing diversity without changing the single-family character of the surrounding residential area. The Low Medium Density is generally developed on small3r parcels that are more difficult to develop within Low Density residential areas, with the provision that the development be compatible with the- surrounding character of the area. The major issues involving this request are the land use compatibility of the proposed General Plan Amendment and the additional environmental concerns as pointed out in the environmental ,assessment. Regarding land use, the project site represents a relatively isolated location for Medium Density residential development. The Low Medium Density residential designation provides for a more gradual transition between the project site and the single family res;a�-ntiai developments to the east and west. The Co mission's alternatives for land uses include the current designation of Medium Density Residential or the proposed Low Medium Density Residential designation. Low Medium Residential . This designation would provide for a range of dwelling units, including single family detached dwelling units on individual lots to attached townhomes. Because of this range of dwelling types, an,J with density limited to 8 du/ac, Low Medium Density offers land uses compatibile with the existing single-family Low Deeisity residential character. Through the use of proper design control of architecture and site planning, the project site can be developed and designed in a single family detached residential character compatible with the surrounding neighborhoods. Medium Density Residential. Under the current General Plan designation of Medi,;m Density Residential, density could range from 4-11 dwelling units per acre. Although it is possible that the site could be developed at a density more closely resembling that of Low Medium, given the size of the project site, it is more likely that Medium density development would be oriented to multi-family attached housing. This crz�ates the likelihood of lard uses conflicts and neighborhood incompatibility would definitely exist. C. Environmental Assessment: Fdrt I of tine 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 impacts with the mitigation measures attributed to the proposed amendment. The following is a summary of the environmental effFcts and measures proposed s' #)uld the project be approved: PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT GPA 84-O3D - City of Rancho Cucamonga September 26, 1984 Page 4 Allh Drainage: The portion of the project site located adjacent to Hellman Avenue and the entire southern parcel of the project site is located in an area of 100-year flood. This site has traditionally experiences flooding, although it has been Improvementsreduced by Avenue. Major f loodcontrol oimprovements ouldmonga kbea required nd mto develop one or all of the subject parcels. V. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: Should the Commission, upon examination of the General Plan tnendment, decide that the change would promote the land use goals and purposes of the General Plan, and would not be detrimental :o the adjacent properties or cause significant adverse impacts as ; fisted under the Environmental Assessment, the following findings are necessary for approval . A. The amendment does not conflict with the land use policies of the Genera' Plan. S. The amendment does promote the goals of the land use element, and C. The amendment would rot be materially injurious or detrimental to the adjacent properties. Vi. CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised as a public hearing CORRESPONDENCE: The Dail Report newspaper and notices were sent to all property owners within feet of the boundary of the proposed project. To date, the attached correspondence has been received. Vida. RECOmM-IDATION: Staff recommends approval of the General Plan AFPndi ent�as oroposed. Should the Commission concur, approval of the attached Resolution amending the General Plan Land Use Map to Low Medium Density Residential would be appropriate. Respectfully submitted, Rick Gomez City Planner RG:LW:ns Attachments: Exhibit W - General Man Map Initial Study Planning Commission Staff Report - October 4, 1983 Correspondence Resolution of Approval of General Plan Amendment 4 I t i General I and Development District � IN Subject Propertli .' 1 l�Of s1-1 : MEDIUM L .': •� / err! Ilttl dr NDUSTRIAL ISP VP 01 _ f r . / ,..�' .. '�... _ .__. �. � � .. •., a .' s CITY OF RANCHO CUCA 10NGA C, atirpl STAFF REPORT ���� C DATE: October 4, 1983 :i > TO: Chairman and Member- of the Planning Commission FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner 1 BY: Curt Johnston, Assistant Planner- SUBJECT: STAFF REPORT NO. 4 - DRAFT DEVELOPMENT CODE MEETING OBJECTIVE: Tonight's public hearing is a continua- ! of fff workshops which began on August 16 for considerat;on of the Draft Development Code. As the fourth workshop, the objective will be to review the Draft Development District Map and discuss ve detawill b the basic and optional development standards contained within the revised section of Chapter 4. Tha memo discussing Chapter 4 is attached at the end of this staff r_port. 1 II. SArKGROUND TO DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS MAP: The nevelopment District Map ustrates the proposed an use esignat:ons, or zones, to be estab]ished in conjunction xith Th caegoraiesl f th D ment Code. are designated on the map in place of the current zoning e , meclaOsesvief]iopmteint Disft rRic1t s Ma;�"C-2 C-2 replace s "Zoning Map" Soth changes are provided for consistency with other approved land use dccuments such as the planned communities and the Etiwanda Specific Plan. A discussion of the land use categories and associated issues is provided in the following sectirns. After approval of the Development Code an offir'ial land use map h^uk will be created in conjunction with the Development Districts Map. The map book wiil be provided by transferring ;and use designations directly onto Assessor's Parcel Maps. This will eliminate any confusion as to the exact location of district boundaries. In addi`1-ion, the book can be constantly updated as revised AP maps are prepared by the Assessor's office- III_ DISTRICT CLASSIFICAT?�;:5: H. Resi ential : The residential district boundaries shown on the Development Districts Map, as with all other categories, follow the Genera] Plan designations to the extent possible. Slight variations occur in order to follow existing property lines wherever possible. k- NMI 0 S.t STAFF REPORT NO. 4 ( DRAFT DEVELOP"TENT CODE October 4, 1083 Page 2 As discussed at previous workshops, Medium Residential range was narrowed in the Development Code to permit a density range Of 8 to 14 dwelling units per acre versus 4 to 14 dwelling units per acre as shown on the General Plan. Therefore, if property shown on the General Plan as Medium is also designated on the Development Districts Map as Medium, development of the property within the 4 to 8 dwelling unit range will be precluded. In light of this, the Commission may determine that. some properties shown as ;4edium on the General Plan may be Tore appropriately designated as Lora-Medium (4 to 8 du/ac) or. the Districts Map to reduce potential land use conflicts. The Low-Medium category of the General Plan permits conventional single family homes, zero lot line units, and townhouses. The intent of this category is to encourage greater housing diversity without changing the single family character of the lower density residential areas. The Medium category of the General Plan (4-14 du/ac) permits a wider range of housing types from conventional single family homes to multi-family apartments and condominiums. This wide range :pas proposed to serve as a buffer between low dens;ty residential areas and areas of higher density , commercial areas, and areas with greater traffic and noise levels. Properties which may be more appropriately designated as LM versus M are shown on Exhibits "A-V. Whe-i reviewing each site, staff considered surrounding land use and zoning, parcel size and shape, topography, traffic and circulation, and access. B. Commercial/Office: The disricts in this category include Neighbor ood Commercial (NC) General Commercial (GC), and Office Professional (OP). OP is shown or. the August draft of the map as AP, but will be corrected with the next draft prepared. The most significant boundary changes from the current zoning map in regard to OP include the west side of Haven south of Foothill (currently M-1) ; the northeast corner of Base Line and Hellman (pre-zently M-1,R-3, and AP); and the west side of Archibald, north of Base Line (currently R-3). The commercial areas designated NC and GC on the Development I Districts Map are very similar to the current zoning map. The r; most significant change occurs along Amethyst Avenue, north of Base Line. The current zoning in this area is C-2, R-3, and M-1, so r:�visions are necessary for conformance with the General :"Ian. STAFF REPORT N0. 4;- DRAFT�� 0".0� DEVELOPMENT r October 4, 1 g83 � YT COB.. , Page 3 C' P_-n�Space: This category includes Hillside Residential, Open. Space, Flooe Control, and Utility Corridor. hillside Residential an4 Open Space areas are designated in the Hill section of Alta Loma where the natural terrain ern development potential, lir :t Residential occurs at the northwelargest ast g st op�tiPof Hiils;de Of Almond between Sapphire and Turquoise. City• nGrtf The Flood Control areas are designated along major stern .rain channels, drainage courses, retention basins owned by the San Bernardino Flood Control DistriLt and roperty utility corridor is shown on the map runningOne through the Vitoria Planned Community. no D- S ecific Plans and Planned Communities: includethe Industrial Area cPlan These categories Plan, Terra Vista Planned Specific Plan, Etiwanda Specific COmmunity. Land use development isiguidedand by those documents, therefore the Development District Map refers tr the individual plans as a whole, rather than list the land use designations. One revision to the Industrial Area Specific Plan boundary is recommended. The site is l Avenue ocated on the east side of Center , west of the Deer Creek Channel, between Footh;li and Church. Several buildings G:.Ied by Data Design Laborat exist on a portion of `ye site ories which is designated on the General Plan as Industrial Park. Considering this area is the only industrial property in the City outside of the the boundaries, inclusion in the Industrial Plan will appropriately ISP Provide the necessary development staa] Plan After approval of the Development Code, the Industrial Plan will be amended to include this property. For consisted_-y with the General Plan, the designation will be Industrial Park. While the industrial Olen, Et- 'Wanda Plan, and Terra Vista Plan appear as solid blocks of land, the Victoria Planned Community is broken up on the Development Districts Map. The breaks where specific Planned propert ,es were not included in ethe han lan'ise map use designations are based on the Generai P E. Overav Districts: The Overlay Districts shorn on the August draft of the Development Districts Map include Master plan, Senior Housing, and Mobi'a ' Home Par . Based on previous Planning Commission consensus tl.e Mcb ll Home Overlay District Will be eliminated and an Equestrian Overlay District will be added. The Equestrian Overlay District will include property in Alta Loma designated Very Low Density Residential on the General plan. STAFF REPORT NO. 4,,- DRAFT DEVELOPMENT CODE October 4, 1983 Page 4 One senior housing overlay district is indicated on the map. The site is cur,•ently being considered for development by Calmark and is located on the north side of Base Line, west of Archibald. Reaarding the Master Plan Overlay District, each area shown on the General Plan as requiring a master plan will also be designated on the revised Drat Development Districts Map to be prepared after the C0Tnissi0n 's review. In this way, the master plan requirements will be clearly identified to prospective developers. IV. SPECIAL COr:SIDERHTIONS: The General Plan land use map designates public facilities. including existing and proposed schools and parks; civic ;:;;!s such as t;.e Community Center and Fire Stations, the Foothill Freeway cor -, the Red Hill golf course, and Chaffey College. Spectric Lev.,lopment districts for each of the above were not created . Rathcr, the uses are contained within the various land use cate;tiries of the ueveloµ:_nt Code, and the sites were designated with land use categories siwilar to surroundin-, properties. If the Commission determines this is appropriate, no changes to the Development Districts Map are necessary. V. CORRESPONDENCE: One letter has been received to date requesting reconsideration of a proposed district classification. As shown on Exhibit "E", the oae acre parcel is loc?ted on the south side of Base Line Road, just west of Victoria Park Lane. The owner is requesting a change from Medium Residential (8-14 du/ac) to High Residential (24-30 du/z;.). Property to the south and wast, within the Victoria Planned Community, is designated as High Density Residential . To the east is the southern terminus of Victoria Park Lane and the proposed lakes. The Genc:*al Plan indicates a neighborhood shopping center at the site with High Residential to the west. When the Victoria Planned COnnrurity was approved, the neighborhood shopping center we; relocated to the north side of Base Line, Based on surrounding land use designations and the location of Victoria Park Lane, staff recomrends that `he subject property and the small parcel immediately to the north•sest be reclassified as High Residential . Res ctf liy-s-ulmitted, Rick omPz City tanner G:CJ:jr Attachmentr AN t .w '. i is LO 1 ?� 132 unman mmumnou IN �. 7 r ua• ► UAW s, L7 Sp NORTH CUCA y t _ Y } j t' 1� t*' u +.�-:7,�` �>,tYY13kIc2d,iti�Izli ° � r s n� L :Y; t � _ . • •w is y a \ Y YY Yip_ Y r f a •i '. COZi[TSCD Ow a\ of D . . .69KNQ * [' 54YA: NIL 2 J \� W 1 � _ 11 1 a Ala(:g lzr C+w•i in�(`1 1 w u � • s yr 1.06 n n > a � e Co.Swva Seely •[9x.ws D�:e Ja •• - T 5 P>- I`_ r NORTH e�a.z�o fmf P..IbrN.m(IVMv CITE' OF ITF%I- 01STAcr5 AAA R C i0 C.TCNA'IONC'A TITLE: L A.fs M , Aqscr4�e'e .urn PLANNING i7ItrISI0,N £l'I IIP�IT= .�-Z.) SCALE-_ 4 4@��� � September 19 , 1984 City of Rancho Cucamonga City Planning Division 9340 Base Line Road , Unit B Rancho Cucamonga , California 91730 Reference: General Planning Anandme_nt 3403-D Dear Sirs: As owners of the property in question, we are very concerned that you are considering down zoning tt:e property which would require us *o build ail- single family dwellings, at best , or. the 15 acres. Whez .e purchased the property at its present zoning of medium density residential our purchase prices were based on our ability to Mild more units than you are sugq,-�stirg. Please carefuzly consider our proposal for apartment units in a pl,.nned community recreation oriented deveJ.opraert. We feel that chi= s:iil ;,lend yell with the adjacent industrial , coutmercial , and . resent residential zoning. Respectfully yours, CEDAPALA CORPORATION DOVETAIL PROPERTIES Mr. and Mrs_ Jess Groomer Lazr- DeCrona Owner/Representat" e LD/js It r f <Y w QQ a •■�.'W^^ •fly, i�'/: ■Y ��h.. • i ••AN ;ems .� pun r ,+ elm �` mil.; �:' •-_�,;� *;'l �' C a •`i. �r��{sue ,�ti , ': 1 y �VL �20 �• s 7 IS 1 • Y • i 1 t 1IVA CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA INITIAL STUDY ART I - PROJECT INFORMATION SHEET - To be completed by applicant Environmental Assessment Review Fee: $87. 00 For all projects requiring envirorinental review, this form must be completed and submitted to the Develop.:.ent Review Committee through the department where the project application is made. Upon receipt of this application, the Environmental Analysis staff will prepare Part I_! of the Initial Study. The Development Review Committee will meet and take action no later than ten (10) days before the public meeting at which time the project is to be heard. The Co . ittee will make one of 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: General_ Plan Amendment 24-03 0 APPLICANT'S NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE: City Of Ran Fo Cucamonga, P.O. Box 807, Rancho Cuczmonaa, California 01730 NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE OF PERSON TO BE CONTACTED CONCERNING THIS PROJECT: Rick Gom i v Planner_ (1 LOCATION OF PROJECT (STR=ET ADDRESS AND ASSESSOR PARCEL NO_ ) West Of Hellman Avenue between 6th and 216-341-72. 2pg LIST OTHER PEP.MITS NECESSARY FROM LOC;L, REGIONAL, STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES AND THE AGENCY ISSUING SUCH PERMITS : I-1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: t o o r f r Ma rQM Madir ae nUse e 1Ui `l2l— ACREAGE OF PROJECT AREA AND SQJARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED BUILDINGS, IF ANY: l•i R �.croc nno c ' l red h0 DESCRIBE THE ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING OF THE PROJECT SITE INCLUDING INFOR*SATION 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) : The project site is bounded on the west and sGuth b the concrete charnel OfDar t?It I, �nnna Book anri clnnoc +l /l T al �_ucalyptus wlndrrnic tv raerse the nnrt---- nnrti nn �f ho cite nn the western bot nddry and ntor Of the c '0 4:1 th Ire— in nanoral�� condition Tha renlai n jor of tho c -t c p nr cr tt atrppq and various aracc_c and lJae�c c17RRtll tn!nTNr DDfl Dcn—>rT t7n rh reSiden lal - cc:, to 1 fr ar + Ja . itv of Ontnrir) Fact• residential and y2rant_ edpct• single farm l recirlential � 1" . .c d— EXISTItt , USES- _ APN �Oo-1F1_na It �� gran ❑D : o) f dml l V rPcl rionrp Is the project Dart of a larger project, one of a series of cumulative actions, which althouch individually small, may as a whole have significant environmental impact? No. AWL I-z WILL THIS PROJECT: YES NO y_ 1. Create a substantial chance in ground contours? 2. Create a substantial chance in existing noise or vibration? ._ x 3. Create a substantial change in demand for a:unicipal services (police, fire, water, sewage, etc. ) ? A 4. Create changes 4n the existing zoning or general Dian de;:ignations? 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:unables or explosives? ExDlanation of any YES answers �aiec' con above: r l IMPORTANT: If the project involves the construction of residential units, complete the for:; on the next page. CERTIFICATION: I hereby certifv that the statements furni. hed 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 , state information presented are true ments, and 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 :.lade by the DeJelopm. tlReview Committee. Date- Signature ��--- Title_��ty pl�nnar 1 I-3 r r CITY OF `.,CS?0 C C_`?ovGz PART 11 - INITIAL SiZ^J? ES'VIRO\?:-NTAL c-?EC:KLIST / IV4 APPLICA:+T• GJ�I �1 7)a�t�! FILING DATE• LOG NU'_`3ER: PROJE G�,04CT: PROJECT LOCATIOti: ��� J��Gf/� // 'r cI �f I. Er%rIRO% NTAL I112PACTS (Explanat'_on of all "yes" and "mavbe" answers are required on attached sheets) . YES PL4Y3E NO 1. Soils and Geolocv. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Unstable ground conditions or in changes in geologic relationships? b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or burial of the soil? C. Change in topography or ground surface contour intervals? X d. The destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? x e. Any potential increase in wind or cater erosion of soils, affecting either on or off site conditons? y f. Changes in erosion siitation, or deposition? g. Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mud- slides, ground failure, or similar hazards? x h. An increase in the rate of extraction and/or use of any mineral resource? X 2. Hydroloart. Will the proposal have results in: i. Page Z a- Changes in current. Y—=S XA BE ofaflowing stre ,s ,ri✓erse orurse or direction. `0 ephemeral stream b- Changes in absorption or the rate a-rid amou rates, drainage patterns, runoff? r of surface water c Alterations to the course or flow of flood _eaters? -- — Chan d. odygofiwateroa=cunt of surface water in anv X e. Discharge into surface waters, or any alteration of surface water quality f. Alteration of groundwater characteristics? X 8- Change in the qua- X either through di_ y °f Broundwaters, drawals direct additions cr with- a c ? �r through interference with an qui_er_ Quality? Quantity? h- The reduction in the amount of water other- related wise available for public water ater oth i Exposure of people or property X related hazards such to water as flooding or seiches? Air uality_ Will the proposal ha�•e si �results i_.. gr.ificant a- Constant or Periodic air emi or indirect sources? ssions from mobile Stationary sources? ioration of b- Interference with the air quality and/or inter air Sunlit the atta-lent of applicable Y standards? o- Alteration of Ioc'I or regional clinat X conditions, a£fectir climatic g air regio aovemeat, moisture or temperature? 4- Biora x In: Will the proposal have significant results a. Change in the characteristics of Including diversity, distributionspeciesLI: , of any species of plants? • or number Reduction of �pecie numberses Of of any uniq.�e, — X orendangered plan-.ts? rare Page 3 YES KAYBE NO C. Introduction of new or disruptive species of plants into an area? X d. Reduction in the potential for agricultural product-ion? X Fauna. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Change in the characteristics of species, including diversity, distribution, or-numbers of any species of anim--Is? b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of animals? �K c. Introduction of new or disruptive species of animals into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? X d. Deterioration or removal of existing fish or wildlifa habitat? 5. Population. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Will the proposal alter the location, distri- bution, density, diversity, or growth rate of the human population of an area? b. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? �( 6. Socio-Economic Factors. Will the Proposal have significant results in: a. Change in local or regional socio-economic characteristics, including economic or commercial diversity, tax rate, and property values? N/ b. Will project costs be equitably distributed among project beneficiaries, i.e. , buyers, tax payers or project users? -.K 7. Land Use and Plannine Considerations. Will the proposal have significant results in? a. A substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? b. A conflict with any designations, objectives, policies, or adopted plans of any governmental entities? ]/ c. An impact upon the qulaity or quantity of r� existing consumptive or non-consumptive recreational opportunities X Page G - YES "_4Y�E g0 is S. Transoms n, Will the p-oposa_ have significant results in: a. Generation of substantial add_-ional vehicular movement? X b. Effects on existing streets, or demand for new street construction? )C C. Effects on existing parkins facilities, or demand for new parking? X d. Substantial impact upon existing transporta- ticn systems? X e. Alterations to present patterns of circula- tion or movement of people and/or goods? JC f. Alterations to or effects on present and potential cater-borne, rail, mass transit or air traffic? x g. Increases in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? X 9. Cultural Resources. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. A disturbance to the integrity of archaeological, paleontological, and/or historical resources? X. 10. Health. Safetv, and Nuisance Factors. Will the proposal have significant results in- -. a. Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard? X b. Exposure of racple to potential health hazards? c. A risk of explosion or release of hazardous substances ir. the event of an accident? r �( 3. An increase in the number of individuals or species of vector or pathenogenic organises or the exposure of people to such organisms? 1C e. Increase in existing noise levels? X f. Exposure of people to potentially dangerous — noise levels? X g. The creation of objectionable odors? X h. An increase in light or glare? X �-o? J Page 5 YES PtAY3E NO Auk 11. Aesthetics. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. The obstruction or degradation of any scenic vista or view? X b. The creation of an aesthetically offensive site? c. A conflict with the objective of designated or potential scenic corridors? X 12. Utilities and Public Services. Will the proposal have a significant need for new systems, or alterations to the following: a. Electric power? b. Natural or packaged gas? c. Co=unications systems? X d. Water supply? e. Wastewater facilities? f. Flood control structures? X g. Solid waste facilities? X h. Fire protection? X i. Police protection? X J . Schools? X k. Parks or other recreational facilities? 1. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads and flood control facilities? X m. Other governmental services? x 13. Enerry and Scarce Resources. Will the proposal- nave significant results in: a. Use of substantial. or excessive fuel or energy? X b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy? X c. An increase in the denand for development of ` new sources of energy? k d. An increase or perpetuation of the consumption of non-renewable forms of energy, when feasible renewable sources of energy are available? x ?age 6 YES ?".AYES `IO e. Substantial depletion o: any nonrenewable or scarce natural resource? Y 14- Y.andatory FindiUs of Sicnificance. a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal cotaunitq; reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? (A short-term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of time while long- term impacts will endure well into the future) . _ c. Does the project have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (Cumulatively considerable means that the incremental effects of an individual project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, and probable future projects) . V d. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? _ X II. DT_SCUSSIOV OF ENVIRON, MN-'TAl EVA?UATION (i.e. , of affirmative answers to the abcve questions plus a discussion of proposed mitigation measures) . Page 7 III. DETERMINATION On the basis o " this initial evaluation: I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATI:L D7rLAPATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant { ! efiact on the environment, there will not be a significant effect �--= in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED. I find the proposed project YXI have a significant effect on the envirament, and an ENVIRON ANT I>TAC .?EPOhT sOA .equired. Date 46; tas M 7 'T 4,,ature Title r iI . Discusstion of Environmental Evaluation 2- Hydrology i- As indicated Dn the 1984 Federal. , Agency (FE;.:A) Flood Insurance Ra . .1 ncy Management Ofr the project site located the portion Avenue and the entire southern par ° Hellman an area of 100 year floodin located in experienced flooding aithou°h ithhas 'beeJnareducedtbyna7ly improvements to Cucamonga Creek and Heilman Avenue. Major flood control improvements would be required to develop one or all of the subject parcels. 5. Population a. Although the project site is currently vacant, under the Medium Density Residential designation, development could occur at a density of 14 units per acre. Under the proposed General Plan designaticn of Low Medium Density Residential, the highest density allowed would be 8 units per acre, thereby limiting the potential increase in residential population. In addition, the low-medium density creates a different pattern of development than the medium density, generally with a single family attached or detached product, rather than the multifamily product associated with the medium density. A.11 of the above impacts can be adequately mitigated through the use of appropriate design controls and site improvements , in order to safely and attractively develop the property under the proposed density y-4 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 84- 03-D - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - REQUESTING A CHANGE IN THE LAND USE DESIGNATION FROM MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL TO LOW MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL FOR 15.8 ACRES OF LAND, LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF HELLMAN AVENUE, SOUTH OF 7TH STREET - AFN 209-161-04, 16, 23 and 210-341-72. WHEREAS, on the 15th day of July, 1984, an application was filed and accepted on the above-described project; and WHEREAS, on the 26th day of September, 1984, the Planning Commission held a duly advertised public hearing pursuant to Section 65854 of the California Government Code. SECTION 1: The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commissior, has made the following findings: 1. That the Amendment does not conflict with the Land Use Policies of the General Plan. 2. That the Amendment does promote goals of the Land ® Use Element. 3. That the Amendment would not be materially injurious or detrimental to the adjacent properties. SECTION 2: The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission has found that this project will not create a sicnificant adverse impact on the environment and recommends to City Council the issuance of a Negative Declaration on September 26, 1984. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: 1. That pursuant to Section 65850 to 65855 of the California Government Code, that the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga hereby recommends approval on the 28th day of August, 1984, General Plan Amendment No. 84-03-D. 2. The Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council approve and adopt General Plan Amendment No. 84-03-D. 3. That a Certified Copy of this Resolution and related material hereby adopted by the Planning Commission shall be forwarded to the City Council . APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 26TH DAY Wr SEPTEMBER, 1984. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE PITY OF: RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Dennis L. Stout, Chairman ATTEST: Rick Gomez, Deputy Secretary I, Rick Gomez, Deputy Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamongc, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly intioduced, 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 September, 1984, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: — 'CHO CUCAMONGACI1Y OF RAN, C 7gcnaro'4r STAFF REPORT cl �° F� lie DATE: September 26, 1984 19 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner I BY: Dan Coleman, Associate Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 84-34 - O'DONNELL - The development of a 91,700 sq. ft. I warehouse/distribution building on 4.5 acres of land in the General Industrial (Subarea 11) category located at the northeast corner of 5th and Pittsburgh - APN 229-261- 44. I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action Requested: Approval of site plan, elevations, and issuance of a Negative Declaration. B. Purpose: The development of a warehouse/distribution building. C. Location: Northeast corner of 6th and Pittsburgh. D. Parce' Size: 4.5 acres. E. Existing Zoning: General Industrial (Subarea 11). 1 F. Existing Land Use: Vacant. G. Surrouraing Land Use and Zoninq: North - Warehouse/Distribution.; General Industrial (Subarea 11) . South - Vacant; Industrial Park (Subarea 12). East - Vacant; General Industrial (Subarea 11) . West - Warehouse/Distribution; General Industrial (Subarea H. General Plan Designations: roject Site - General Industrial . North - General Industrial . South - Industrial Park. East - General Industrial . West - General Industrial. a:':: ITEM Q PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Environmental Assessment and OR 84-34 - W Donnell September 26, 1984 Page 2 I . Site Characteristics: Tha project site slopes to the south at approximately a to 3% grade. This site is undeveloped and is covered by indigenous weeds with no structures. J. Fpplicabie Regulations: The Industrial Area Specific Plan permits Warehouse/Distribution uses in the General Industrial Category (Subarea 111J. II. ANALYSIS: A. General : The proposed architectural concept indicates the use of concrete tilt-up buildings with horizontal medium sandblasted bands and reflective glass office entries. The building is rail served from the east, therefore, the loading docks Face Pittsburgh Avenue. To provide a strong office statement on the corners of the building, the wall and glass panels have been angled and inset for architectural interest. B. Design Review Committee: The Committee reviewed the proposed site plan and eievations for conformance with City policies for industrial buildings and Special Boulevard character for 6th Str;:et. The Committee was concerned that the originally proposed elevation for 6th Street did not provide the desired architectura: design quality for 6th Street as a major Special Boulevard. Therefore, the Committee recommended that vertical sandblasted bands be added to the south elevation along 6th Street and that a special landscape treatment be provided at the intersection, including accent trees. The applicant has prepared revised elevations, Exhibit "F", which indicates the vertical sandblasted bands on the south elevation to break up the building mass. C. Environmental Assessment: Part I of the Initial Study has been completed by the applicant and is attached for your review and consideration. Staff has completed the Environmental Checklist and determined that no significant environmental impact will occur as a result of this project. III. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: Project is consistent with the Industrial Area Specific Plan and General Plan. The project will not be detrimental to adjacent properties or cause significant environmental impacts. In addition, the proposed site and building Signs, together with the recommended Conditions, are in compliance with the Industrial Area Specific Plan and City Standards. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Environmental Assessment and DR 84-34 - O'Donnell September 26, 1984 Page 3 IV. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve this project through adoption of the attached Resolution with the Conditions and issuance of a Negative Declaration. t;c If ly ubmitted, ' Gy Planner RG:DC:ns Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Location Map Exhibit "So - Site Utilization Map Exhibit "C" - Site Plan Exhibit "D" - Landscape Plan Exhibit "E" - Grading Plan Exhibit "F" - Elevations Initial Study, Part I Resolution with Conditions z LU FIG.IV-99 Y t JI N subarea 10 cmCue.AMOw 920'RO.W. th ® low R.O.W. 88'a Iw R.O.W. iIAL SERVICE 451TTRAILS/ROUTES l 0000 Podestrilm • • s • sioscls y � area 13 �`� J M, ,; ► G m /C� .� of O e� • o' P .w uk./ ukiktv _�••�•� Gwka i g�b Brbciqp ICccaas votft 2 Fim Stab= K 9: hA U 0 m NORTH CITX R�i�CHO CUC ,,mo.NGA ,T PLANNING DIVLSION Etil- Urr.�-SCALE. -- fll t I fl r 1 i I u i r \ 7T% STREET I .� F7 4 .. . ... ... . IF, IT- Iru.. . i L C( , COILFF 1 :mac LE �• - - r � c, t ti r• j ;r j I 6T14 STREET — I i , � ' ? SITe NORTH CITY OF ITE\1= $RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING DISTL9Q\T EXHIB!r- T2 —SGLE: Q-S �1 � y :11: IIITlIIIi�; iill-! illl ! ! I 9 a , 1 _ � -- LA i 7 ia�ais Fu.xJB 1 PROJECT BLJMMAFiY . aura�anw aeca.►cwa atoa MaA' a.1.700 as PT-CMOaO I 44L71Y SiF?14'i a.000 tile + 44.700 CaaJ, M.000 CwJ P4pKIN0 n.an, yes cs«/4 as CC,,r, iia aTy3 PARWJP,a"Ovr"a Ci w4 ti Cxnu,. 97a ain.J , 1'ORTH CITY or �� �- �.. RAINCHO CZ.CAjNj0.X I rE�I- T TITLE >PL,iiWING DIN''ISIOEN EXHIBIT- G scALE,_ t �•� a I A L� � � �ti r _ t` i y ova 1 '1 I I n ' I ( � a•-•. n • rw I - RpRp..v :M A' �Q< lf��• • 7. Rryc !s Y C, ' R R R O D - v � '1 • ♦. MUM t .�} �T ��, r"al lam• L.� Cl ri rl 1J{. rl It ; i �� I�IEll I IpT� I I ':�I`i�! I` •�Sef/ �� ell rk • '' i All ah 04I ; I IN r /• 2 FORTH CITY OF ITEM,: ` - A RA\'CHO CUCAdIO\'GA TITLE- PLANNING DIXTMNT EXHlBrr:--L4F.- SOLE= +•f�fuvuoaw r�uw,wO�v wofu�i.nffrt� df1111,a7 7V.d1Cf.3x. IL i ` r J1..OW 1'1'1� OM�Nf.d 1 tfi ES t 1 •( fp}j �e f t •� nvitmanc _ -Fl Q- at 0-4 3 1 , � 1 1 P � 1 , 1 , 1 L Tr IM; lllq� III I �mlill 1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: Construction of a 91 .700 s.f concrete tilt up -enclustrial bui76--ing. ACREAGE OF PROJECT AREA AND SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED BUILDINGS, IF ANY: Project area: 4.5 acres 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) : Subject site is part of the original 75 acres purchased in 1979 by P.C. lndustri 1 Comnaiyr and vibegapippnilg dayeloped as tha Panrh Cucamonga Distribution Cpntpr- khirh Pr:'PP tl;a hac 875�000 c f rd Occupied spare in a mastpr plannod inditc'.'rial daV.P�.O•�YtiB•77t. Presently, the cita Jr, rnvprpd with f.t]YR grape vinpc and hae an nthpr distinguish , g fpaturFc _ r - ' 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? 1-2 h } CITY OF RANCHO CUCP_M0":GA 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 fora must be completed and submitted to the Development Review Committee through the department where the Project application is made. Upon receipt of this application, the Environmental Analysis staff will prepare Part II of the Initial Study_ . The Development Review Committee will meet and take action no later than ten (10) days before the public meeting at which time the Project is to be heard. The Committee will :lake 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: Rancho Cucamonga Distribution Center APPLICANT 'S NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPhONE: R.C_ Industrial Company,C/o O'Donnell , Brigham & Partners/Soutnern, 3505 Cad�liac Avenue 0-170 Costa Mesa. CA 926'L6 -- 7i4) 556-9930 NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE OF PERSON TO BE CONTACTED CONCERNING THIS PROJECT: James R. Westlin R.C. Industrial Company. C/o O'Donnell , Brigham 8 Par no n, 3505�Cadillac Avenue 0-110 Costa Mesa, CA 92626 -- (714) 556-9930 LOCATION OF PROJECT (STREET ADDRESS AND ASSESSOR PARCEL NO. ) N/E/C of Sixth Avenue/P=t}sburgh Avenue A.F.N. : 229-261-44 LIST OTHER PERMITS NECESSARY FROM LOCAL, REGIONAL, STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES AND THE AGENCY ISSUING SUCH PERMITS: N/A G: f -f� r e Z+-LL THIS PROJECT: YES NO X 1. Create a substantial change in contours? g ground X 2. Create a substantiai change in existing noise or vibration? X 3. Create a substantial change in demand for municipal services (police, fire, water, sewage, etc. ) ? 4. Create changes in the existing zoning or general plan designations? X 5. Remove 4-ny 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:(i ) Transformation �an' active vineyara into graded building pads invTv3nqcut an ii grades necessary to provide for ground level and dock high capabilities IMPORTANT: If the project involves the construction of residential units, complete the form on the next page. CERTIFICATION: I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and information required for this initial evaluation to the best of my ability, and that the facts, statements , and information presented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. I further understand that additional information may be required to be submitted before an adequate evaluation can be made by the Development Review Committee. R.C. INDUSTRIAL COMPANY Date 7/19/84 !y gnature — '•' ` /Donald S. Grant Title Anthnri�ar' Ci9n-turn 5 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO eUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO. 84-34 LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF 6TH AND PITTSBURGH IN THE GENERAL INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT WRFREAS, on the 26th day of July, 1984, a complete application was filed by O'Donnell , Brigham and Partners for review of the above-described project; and WHEREAS, on the 26th day of September, 1984, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission held a meeting to consider the above-described project. NOW, THEREFORE, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission resolved as follows: SECTION 1: That the followina can be meet: 1. That the proposed project is :onsistent with the objectives of the General Plan; and 2. That the proposed use is in accord with the objective of the Development Code and the purposes of the district in which the site is located; and 3. That the proposed use is in compliance with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code; and 4. That the proposed use, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be ditrimentai to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. SECTION 2: That this project will not create adverse impacts on the environment and that a Negative Declaration is issued on September 26, 1984. SECTION 3: That Development Review No. 84-34 is approved subject to the following conditions and attached Standard Conditions: PLANNING DIVISION 1. Provide special landscape treatment at the intersection of 6th and Pittsburgh including features such as, but not limited to, accent trees, annual color ground cover, and concrete monument sign. 2. Specimen size trees, 24" box or larger, and berming shall be incorporated into the 6th Street landscape concept to soften the building mass. 7����� APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 26TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 1934. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY- Dennis L. Stout, Chairman — ATTEST: Rick Gomez, Deputy Secretary I, Rick Gomez, Deputy 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 loth day of September, 1984, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: I ELM SC ri. y. O•�U > p ..di� q nL Cn L'�y J C y� A� C: CJ n T J f C O G n N C O N V 6 rye OCE O� i ra0i?n c Y aTj c 'ram 9qC > n - VEu�'J � GrCV j .�rOq � q= J nVnr pqN LL..'D L ww -n dcmoo 3 d=2; qnc Lit. . � � a ..a`y�•A D u c '� —> n p I� u� N 9 � 4«.) O LArVGN r DVM V N.yP pd cD P o_ O r r •. _�. p00 �' V 'YVV 7G,oO VNr � W N % O T O.� VSr✓ Y Vu� � �r �'� = `^ NUJ ^_ c -£ O^ 6.�� � y [V L 6n V_-`' u '-aY Ou GC� Vd qt� pGi.y. LN 9�M vj � P^� O � � N.r OC'`N Gpd jG dqT �¢� C? yN O � NYv � �i� yp9 •O.. O V A c C=C T V r �^6 M L 7 � r d E Y v w i N P O G ^r A _ d r r CCA N d «•V.I 'r Nr >.G..� NSr� VI Y .nn r N t00 ^^ N«ter Op 46`VJ S .Dn1A I� OI OOG C Qw�YrI GO 0 rL pr pV 6 6G6 s 16I i o tf a =-d -Z PN l o ra A _D Hc r D L^^ r cG _ E W rVj « OA9�� 6 1 L ri1 .wp yJ«Np L^�OV q p V � T5 c LG• q Q= p `C S.n O { V Z, O c p N O m�• � c �d 'e Y •- C .Y. ` d AO GA Or.�� c a 6 V O Jd r9E � na O Y N P C O W u^r V Nei c .�i 4 s o E 1 C v 1 G «y y w cr d00 •�� rM'- rLn a` L.rJG' C- .•� - - - - =� C - -L' LT y= ugJi � a �� N r L�n e .= m.• p.. « _ -, q L P O o L V r N L O� •.r G 7 l �� � L L�� 0 � � C U r O T G ' r C �-�J V Su`•F pr Liie- pG« C' ` �.� a�aTi . -LC .• O V� 40N CN� c r� y O Gy= a' m n LL oq v 'cccr N�o u .-`chm—L -- � � o�o G< P a. ! > N L q nr `�Lr. -]g q •L.. E 1A «y L y U_- C C. L J,. a� O R L u 'n t « L4 L u �- lV.•.. u Or� u = P�E j� V � w f�rrr�� P C'�.Y •`.•� R� Y -� CL J T u V ci rLA 0~ N q H ✓C 7= i q C ^ L J V S G r J A =L «L=Oo V r=i. Z9 FL q— VO ViZ W•q..=0 CJC - u'•� O W L±Gr LVL • 4VW • _ - C — _ C. �,C G T a C w q U p— o 'dv � «L '' co�c..`. � cr„ .-•C L O � utr.6j g40rf -• b_ 2rN C' _ •V.rrjU'VN qF CLAD= C6rl —_ V V9 C L.=•.— �q� C L V u_ N r •Jn rAn l I L rLn u V 4 6 wSr C O C i C L E-• S � «4-.— G W — 2 OC QJ GV Q.Lr �ZO 69W 4] b i; rr � 4 A . q P �= R r L •Lv C` V 4 d O i� = G L w Q l i j Z = `r W O RV ArV rN� gC �'M _L r=i.-• CR « C C A ifV L (O G 9RI O.. 2 r-•ryN ` Gd_ 4 .- •TvjA E �C YLOi ` LGO « CVC�C. GLyO R ' g v^R q^ � C•L vVi V G ~ CAW_ rO - L i Cj OV VTr -9 V V q L q� 4 C L ar _ u q V.• u w.J _ q w N C C Q � _ L' C l r rAi « q L C _J M` i w V C •- 4 «w _ d P n a.- w G.� C i g r O s O.Oi ` •r n �C OV .O �rq ROC Lr Z! .. rtw4Gr n` -r0 AW uL - qW GO! VLCQ =00E _ O'O V q C 4 `r J r V L q Q •...y c O w.. P G 6 G O V r NCG 6f JG Cr; uzz-_r p' u O w C iSC i --.. V - i - rr4L..� V „ O I C ry N u t C 9 r r C P V 4 V w L R C V l f G 0 9 V Q O�9 L O C N V� Lsu JrE rL9 CC' C'L.r'V r-rr. __ -_b ««W!A - .• VC_ -_'O qOV SO'F. C- uSr ; ^ « O «4 Q^ rLV CV=T� So N i d u _c > C T E 0 o.O. �� 9��_C q Vw > MP CL qi V_ = L N -� u -G urCP` c RLO .a �-� G � J_ 6. R V ` L.-•`+ �''= C C. C R V 6 « --r •' i C_ •r C� q L �_ r 6 R >" C E G V _ gJ G PG LO LC _u Lr _ LY C• C < � _ .. �- Yr GL C - V 2 J q N C - ✓r - �_ - V � .. V W U V C L Or - G` 4 C' G �-•LS 4 r CV r rGr aL qL_ N ~ « «WW « C JOB 'T� � L_p- c zcW cor' c��rc iA A _ oema G c o !q� c..—_ R r9V r• c4R i '�GOd C ___ u aOC LqL R�9 > gadE = y ` AT -rQ� wG LW L .O L'w N LCRCC� O.R Cr Q-16 � Cd it CC '�4 P _ •>- _ -^ C G G p 6�i •+i�"• c = F o c i A n�•O.a i J - C�. �M i V�.0.. r L r p^ L V I Z C.- ` Y V•oi "• r' �.r n:. i`�......1111J1� L ' o °'.. b _iR - O��j >-6 u 9 91'a_l NgpE C OCc\`nlj ~ N+V nL l_N CV. La] L � La qT � P P � q la VO C •/7 V G S a r b C+ d G M•da T y._+ = O v - a O N P Oi Tr O� L V V S�O n -• L 9 =c Njci N � q L ar n �� >.✓ -� pMa� ePP t .....Vn O G^ 9 a U+ ✓q q G ✓ G` q E y ` L 9 ., d r V V n- 7 yPN N9+ gw- d gN O p G ✓ p^ y L - V O �_ - W�C L ✓90c Cr+ C9 E GAWE 1:JGq q ` D• YLr✓ b✓ � u' J �� � J � bi PMd LO•C F G q W✓✓'r BOO 9 J p_✓ L Vcm^�G � C"q=G to �OGi Gva.I. u c ui canC dpn v'y . 900 j=C✓ N'"� yq= LJ lc ` N VN•V� � E�� LObs•n v •n Y„ N p J 9 P V P - N O •J.r q C ✓ r L L L dd N qyM NI � i ~ ✓ C46N g P V 0 � iG^ 6✓ P 4PP w•O.r AS 6 OTr ` C VN P64 O n �� C O C P✓ N O V 9«v T O V O > L c ✓ r p E C y g N N AL`` rC✓✓� L pN✓ C P Y 9 � P J rL NZ q L G • b A� I+ V G G �p g O T N ]Cn•V q 0 ay4UM uPi 6>•?�O V poE �N pLr >�b p C •�C - 1 x C6G i. 6 P 0�O G+ n✓ > >'P p C0 l' C V L q�v t G b V q •.O C I i O A � L N N N-^+ � q•J 9 c a �� n✓✓ .r j r P l r d✓ e r C V G r`T q N O.t..Liu NL > JS C CJgCw •rY ._W ✓ Nr G q r V^ O C p i•`u d T N G d V G b b- p L C O r 0-✓ b 6 nN q+O n 4 V V.O 4 6 M � N a Y•Ln vni N q Z J- J L b- '�^ ! •1 O. 6 O C =mo t O a S s q 2 D•✓a t C O ^� L+ NJ - p r d t O V P ✓+ 4 L q G�' I v �• V On == _n u N Yn ^C� �wA JpM 9�qt _CG O�Q AP O r i n W 6 g i 6 L -r y r b `• G, C C �� 6✓ NO• N O< ✓L n= CC` %% n� Vr �bb0 GN dN qp Ci r.(rj �� O pOY yr✓ � Cr N✓ VOPd `u✓ia- � � pq �j q� E q i^ •� p 9 y `a T M 9 L <q i C+ P •-_N „ O •Lid C`• 02 C b0 •N cG� �•Lnp b � e A +� NY ✓ l0 b ^iC =� �+�9✓\. i A •bid Lr Sb Py p� V OC �N O �9 G AO Q 32 O = L N 4 p a N "z g C C V 1 9 b Jn V G 4 � � N^ -✓� 000 + oP` OV•-• AWN rb �) L". V : ✓ ` G C `. G, f F? n P M✓V N c !� N _G P b a r = 4 r S,r ••' d O i O•n 6 M O w n �p q O �i '" `r '" 9J� �= L .Gu i^ b` -OLVL qn � _ _s �.•� o-Z bN- na rnV GM n� Si qu �-Gp�` qcc oa' � coo 00 t, O N� I� �L P rS •JiyNV Cam- PC - NO N� G iGJN � G 94 qPG IF c >a V -Z N Opp O `-- L C V r +VJI u•pNa CL"�_C q �'C V A OG qO L V C 9^r:.] C p I O O _ N GM G,O CO LrV r dO �: +r0 N ALrG q� ^b C GG_n- VT fq ^ 9 -_q V •✓w S a✓ y > g.2 V�'M N L A p j ✓✓ b ✓iO.Ji N G q q q l M P b0•` N _q_ �r- V N•nbLpI 9V G I } L QLJ y C C p Q j N N n_d �� l � T_ •� N N g P� N � b b A 9 O P nV 9 N � Or rLy•' V 'L Cp J i O _ P P V 6 a C C = p �� � L V N q_ "•✓ ` P w-� lV"�r q _I l l ��` •�i` 9 : T at0 _ 40+ C�Pb pV "•C SN d qi O O•'• l b N � Z O l•` a✓ c c j b y.L ^ ` E O.`L" w . Y CpN � GN tV Qb HOM+q O� tMp9 Wb•Jw06I N+ N9N < M- 2N � HNL . � N1 /•1 V 14 9011( i Ills i " = C Q2O •fq O�LV dC 76' lC+ P dPV� HI .r r N N �• n — •�u �' .'• G J •n Y u C T N �r r •' C r q L V o m 4� � T �� i = n• � � w - = ro a = P` e y(V�jCr���` U' �V O` C o a• i r V O N � � ^J G G � q` V M = C L y q u q u C 4' .J ? t � WI van ••r=y GOT-W � .c oo '> d —N = of wq r Y C C D N dE T � =r � '� G .s d 4 r •� PP o " "e D'�r •• c If VLOY Jq �. C •^` O YJ dd V D q` e-' N 4 N U q N r O —O q I � C d •_•• d u q J _= V c FyEP Y �I • CC =LM P.Ou . i� 00�4 —u V tN N C 'u dt �964q L � pv ` CO M_ d dq rJ�VL rN N � VWt 6 >6G YV.N 6�5�6 N "J NOF 90 L l�— Y N n V o W ti V u V V � p UL• �p 2 6 i OI G N C N mM . V = Oy q y •J C b .N i ___ L V oL u cosa � Nu 4 O =r q E r C 06 Pv n co 14� ` .- q�$'� ram'" eL'17 n Fo v 1 Vy q � O�4 �`6e N Cq nne L I .J Or rn CYC 9 � � _N M r • V b r O Cr 6� O -L.. s ^y r'.i a c. � � c. i`o b o = - 1{Y:'• W Du c o � .i tea+ cp wo ae� Oi i•-' Cc� N E J C� i h �.rV o c� �� MIID o4 °•_ =` a_ o 'ram` � � dc e � e. p v. E p p L_ �`� >.O.rr ..O �� L V S an ` 6J Lei PN O �•.c t t L �=L 'J.C.�. `C VI O1� P�L �=p qC •' O.U,C — ¢e 'JC LiC� L pS > C V ' V �� � 2 Y Y✓ V � q �C p r p I I I I Y L W N p �1 1 f•f _ N O N 0 i I .m. I .•.� bV __e �� v` .L 21 pq u._6 `y T m o � e T •• V p •_ _ O _ o o G � v P q`� L v `� •. � m ma � irm c= •� � v er = c N- ter ' x•- c --_ � ' Gi E •O 9 � q Lr 6� N NL � l �••r� Vy� C L O b 6 L 4 V ^G V 2_ L i V d V •Nu m =^ E V x V �N it � mC9VE CTG mL Ei '. `6 CO `G r.x ua e V a b- N Gq ` p E v� o i N u � ii i, •' i� er Ln VO 6T ¢.O•LVQ 6Vy dq GpL IJx pl tVJ.La.0 N6 Ql N Pi I e LO .. o l G Qib V p� •• c`oc - ei.T. ono c.= v'�L eccPpN iL L � o•�.r yr` yGr yp0 gdOCry N c c � � � TPp �4N c?_ mE ramie rp ovbc _ Lcr LCNr V � P -e L o i.'.vi •m.- _ � o�ci Le �M aa �b LG v o me L m L v N m'.o Sb< aL do •m+N` c` OV=o to L r V E m¢ m rpp� eab- b _ =�V 'V-r L=o Oa NL� ._.. EOad i✓ �' EL OLO .".•..m ESN L �.L• ' b P T°• i u G` evr ' mutes mia u2 C`c.o. re a q m ' N c a' b.r G y Vn- L .rL.0.0q G « •O" ^qE �_ ry 4L yp x qGq� OLLL� L=Vdm Lm. N NULN_` po L r O r > L V Q✓ a � 'bto f �4rG f6�- ' O.Vv ��OO 6.n m C m u g r N�O C\N r i v O ` •r r c N V_rLL ` Vu CI UG O V_N ONNVL _ _G N r G V G N O � uQ � up r= Oc' N G�60i .prO CV VGO Gib Li w J � G _ ��L O b G e.Lu� � • N T G U N G O¢ m U 6 _ 6q �� C•,G GrC LLgVTb bi. r C a o N G w c 0•0• c��r� _r_q^ r U L V� G E a G� O.� M .� 0 >� O r C r r GN Y .n "•�V Y y 7 J N L S� r0•a mY�_ yyJVx GC'PN Ca'" bV2 � m i y L a Z. C O M g y <I C uq P ! NO_C)m r JOG rm Npm Ct. mL `a. mE C •. — L G M =p_i_y r •J N 1 9 O ^ V O V= P I b dG� � q V JO Gm C.•>. OY T90 ==rC N—Z `n" Ca_ r� t1l1{ e O�Cl V 6 O < VrY �-� 6 y • • • � Q b � N 1 -• o^ a ♦..+ �.. T y aP ^vvo� N � Y � � - .`..v �� =� Ci � �� r O q c L V C ` ~' V ✓ L `�q � � l � Y PLM` ._. G✓. y y L I v C V OL P � L' C O S N C _ _ V �9 l � L _ �oN _ T LIP �V Cu i^ 1V yC ^ 6' OL J O ar0 q 4 Enj d •O^W U — q V I S.- r L N V� y � V � 'aT LOI ury V Lr OJ dLQ py TW 6�✓ 4V L� W "Vi d Oq 9 Li = I U'`� 0p� V rV q r N V 3 6 V y N Iz1 a G .rn O L N d N y Y b d Y ' r• `u P— O L � � � 0 0 O L } ^L �MY L rOY GP vG c � I � s oc �' �.r r •e q t d� NY ca' v 'v rq oqo, � u NyY b L .0.. K Vrp Uy p` O � b rr0 } dT c Llu = L nM� rc ` o.r Y T o � Yq _✓I ( rrc iml. 0 L 'O= 4 a yams' o` q -_ __r _ q G C r n p C ` y O � - LOB Q y q N rl� Cc— L r o ^• RL q c c : oy c ..o a 1 a v ua r rL nn b Y N b _V r ✓ Y N `r o r 11T C 1 E G N f I�IY•Q-•r- 1 V 9 r O q V p I C L �L + r E 1 p r L J nN v pa o � r 4 • � c I � c - 6JV n �i c e_' � .��. a� v o• >y V �� on is cd a M a a o_ c c 40 Qj .ci Y_ 9 V V � V• > L y i q O M b L E V I air f ` n z f 15 d9 q p � Ld Ld Or. ril � d� Ve0 ` lV ` qy C 6 WG < 6 ` N o CITY OF RANCHO Cf:CA-V10\GA �► 'G CG1LISSIOC; `NL\ Nr WEDNESDAY 197: September 26, 1984 7:06 p.m. LIONS PARKS COMMUNITY CENTER k 9161 BASE LINE {. RANCHO CUCAMIONGA, CALWORNIA E L pledge of Allegiance I L Roll Call Commissioner Barker Commissioner Rempe: Commissioner Chitiea Commissioner Eltout Commissioner MCNiei -- III. Announcements IV. Approval of Minutes July 25, 1984 V. Consent Calendar The following Consent Calendar items are expected to be routine p +' and non-controversial. ney will be aci.ed on by the Commission at (t one time without discussion. If anyone has co-cerr, over any item, . y it should be removed for discussion. QA. TIME EXTENSION FOR TF'?fATNE TRACT 11864 & 11805 - ALLEN -A development of 71, ^andomimums on 11.43 acres of land located at the northwest corner of Highland and Haven Avenues. B. PD 83-01 - CALMARK - An agreement to provide access from Heritage Park to the shopping center. C. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 84-43 - BARTON - The development o one 2-story and one 3-story office building totaling 50,000 sq. ft. on 3.2 acres of Lnd in the Industrial Park (Subarea 7) District located on the west side of Utica between Aspen Street and Civic Center Drive - APN 208-351-21. ii=: WM1 D. TIME EXTENSION FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 11853 - BARRATT, IRVINE DIVISION_ - A total development of 72 condominiums on 5.71 acres of land in the Medium Residential District (8-14 du/ac) located on the north side of 19th Street at Ramona Avenue - APN 202-171-41. VL Public Hearings The following items are public hearings in which concerned individuals may voice their opinion of the related 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. E. VARIANCE 84-03 - AMERICAN SENTINEL SELF-STORAGE, INC. - A request to reduce the front yard setback of 25 feet to a minimum of 20 feet along 8th Street for a 45,546 sq. ft. self-storage facility on 2.45 acres -,f land located at the northeast corner of 8th Street and Baiter Avenue - 207-271-01. F. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84•-17 - AMERICAN SENTINEL SELF-STORAGE INC. - The development of a 45,546 square oot self-storage facility and 1040 sq. ft. caretaker's quarters on 2.45 acres of land in the General Industrial (Subarea 1) category, located at the northeast corner of 8th Street and Baker Avenue - APN 207-271-01. G. ENVI::ONXENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84-27 - BARMIA AN - The total development of five multi-tenant industrial buildings totaling 60,000 sq. ft., a 70,300 sq. ft. mini-warehouse facility, and a gas station on 11.03 aces of land in the General Industrial (Subarea 1) category located on the west side of Vineyard, between Arrow and 9th Street - APN 207-262-44. H. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL il4AP 8587 - REVITI - A divi:ion of 1.04 acres into 2 parcels in .he Very Low 2 du/ac) Development District located or, the southeast corner of Mayberry Avenue and Rancho Street - APN 201- 111-35. L ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 8680 - M RRIS & SEARLES -A division of 3.177 acres of land into 3 parcels within the Low 9iedium 0-8 du/ac) Development District located on the east side of Ramona Avenue, south of Baseline Road -APN 1077-031-3. J. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 12809 - LEWIS DEVELOPMENT COMPANY - A division of 100.16 acres of land into 11 lots within the Terra Vista Planned Community for City park purposes, located on the north side of Baseline Road, between Milliken Avenue and the Deer Creek Channel - APN 2G2-221-142-25. K. ENVIRONMENTAL ASS£SS:vIENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 84-03-A - H do H INVESTMENTS - A request to amend the General Plan Land Use Map from Low Density Residential (2-4 du/ac) to Medium High Residential (14-24 du/ac) on 13.55 acres of land, locatee on the south side of Feron Boulevard, between Turner and Ramona - APN 209- 085-02, 03, 14. L. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 84-03-C -VOLBEDA - A request to amer_d the General Plan Land Use Map rom Low D=_rsity Residential (2- 4 du/ac) to Low. :decium Density Residential (4-8 du/ac) on 4.73 acres of land located on the south side of Arrow Highway, between Sierra Madre and Comet - APN 207-222- 08. M. ENV7RONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AMENDMENT 84-03-C - VOLBEDA - A request to amei:d the Development District Map from "L" (2--4 du/ac) to "Lb " (4-8 du/ac) for 4.78 acres of land generally located on the south side of Arrow highway between Comet and Sierra Madre - APN 207-222-08. N. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 84-03-B - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - A request to amend the General Plan Land Use Map from Medium Density Residential (4-14 du/ac)/General Industrial to Industrial Park on 18.8 acres of land located on the south side of 9th Street and Baker -APX 207-211-04 through 0, 17 through 20, 359 37, 38, 13, 44. O. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AMENDMENT 84-03-B - CITY OF RANCHO UCAMON A - A request to amend the Deveiopment District Map from "Mr (8-14 du/ac) and Industrial Specific Plan (General Industrial Subarea 1) to Industrial Specific Plan (Industrial Park) for 18.8 acres of land located at the south " side of 9th Street and Baker - APN 207-211-04 through 10, 17 through 20, 359 37, 38, 43, and 44. L'gC.r_ »En P. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 84-03 - D - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA -• A request to amend the General Flan Land Use Map from Medium Density Residential (4-14 du/ac) to Low Medium Density Residential (4-8 du/ac) or 15.8 acres of land located on the west side of :'_ellman Avenue south of 7th Street - APN 209-161-04, 16, 23 and 210-341-7 2. VIP. New Business Q. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMEI.T RE.'IEW 84-34 - O`DONNELL - The development of a 91,700 sq. ft. warehouse/distribution building on 4.5 acres of lr-nd in the General Industrial.(Subarea 11) category located at the northeast corner of 6th and Pittsburgh - APN 229-261-44, VPPL Publie Comments This is the time and place for the gerernl public to address the Commissiom items to be discussed here are those which do not already appear on this agenda. IS. Adjournment The Planning Commission has adopted Admb;istrative Regulations that set an 11 p.m. adjournment time. If items ao beyond that timt, they shall be heard only with the consent of the Comr fission_ �;I. e "VICINITY MAP ' a r '- r-- e : FIYap. � � • N�.y./. CMYK(nCGCSYI..Pn, i n 1 wn � I CFIcf6r � Z• �--- =�3 COLLCCE 1` � • —J.,' ./l fgnT.n f. ti �I s • II j � i • • Vm.1eFJ� C`/ hrau.. v.\ a: � � 5 � . i � • i A / II lOM$ OIN.{4 CITY "ALL I �� � � //w•1.�•+�••ti��Y MYLYY/Y/Y/�• YIO.I / w L a41_ J ® Ts T C VCIYO. \•GUTSY/ COYYfY •EG�ONIL V•Y/ / • )j`• (IN7,Iw1O INlENNNTIONIL II20091 CITY OF RAnCife CLWAMONrA d .