Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
1985/02/27 - Agenda Packet
Q791 -0 o 2- 27�-35 ,PC Agenda o' 1 �of 6 t� d Ct�Gk3g0 i - aTY OF * �^", /� �. pG �ao[i14/,.(W� "JiO Cl .a tZ jL.C`/��.'`t(_Y1V(�i }�rrj /v��j� {{'y{ \/ Yp �( \Y.'�''j'�'��� ��I� ai NIT 5 #. ✓`zLt'1i. triiLr 3CThJ4V a �) AMNDA V 1�77 TNEi}NE DAy Ee3ruaty 21, 7985 `,x.08 P.M. K", ,, LIONS PARK COMMIT1i TY= C?3AiTH8 a 9161 BASBEL78 RANCRO CUrCAMONGA, CAM(?RM o- L Pledge, of Allegiance H. Rail Call ,. Commissioner Backer Commissioner'Rempel k Commissioner Chit ei= Commissioner Stout fommiasioner ,ticNiel 111. AniTunceTdents W. Approval of Minutes ' - laimary 9, 1985 ° February 13, 1985 r �` V. Consent Calendar T lee following" Consent Calendar to be routine and non- controversfal. They will be acted on by the Commission at ' _:. ore time withoct discussion. ' It ar` a ha r concern over any i ►n} c� §C it ould be removed for discussi/ A« TIME RXTHNSION FOR 7 DiTIONAL USE PERMIT 5309;- ALTA LOMA BRHTHRRN ,wIJN CFIMST CIgURCH' - The , J development of a 2*800 square feet educatx nal facility for tits Rita Lama Cii�lstian Churn on &.8 a� of land in the ;1 Medium Resideatial District, located at e€ 19th Street - APN 202-171 -31. , B. TIME EXTENSION FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 11793 MULL 91 - h�, USt��o'm lot subdivision of 47 lots on 13,9 ' t, acres in the Low Re�� entfal District (2-4 du/8e) located on'" the east side of AmeiFj'r5 @¢ betvreen Hfghiad anc %tnvn`� APN 1062- 561-04 and 'Xpv`2-571 2-571-14. a" � 14 � rk iS-Sq' �� ��,z�♦ , � r yam tt e C. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT - - REVIEG'F 81 -5 FiGPI - The development of a 5,400 square foot multi -t ,ant industrial. building on a portion of 3.47 $,e�pws of land ,in the General Industri -0istkS et Oubarea 3) ad at rt eao ner of Industrial`���nd F.nron'° B ulevard the n northeast Y D. EN }`IItONMENTAL 'ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT RE d iE PICKEN - To tallow the developtent o€ a reta� i�salesteo .mercial building of 8,040 square feet, located " S on the south side of Foothill Boulevard and east of Vineyard an a�proximatelly .72 acres within We General Commercial district - APN 208-241 -3Q. VL ' .Public Heaeings „r The fotlowinff_items are public hearings in which concerned individuals voice their opinion of the related project. Ptease waft to ba recogn .� by the Chairman and address ihWbomm ssion by stating your _t,dme and address. All such opinions shalCbe ; limited to 5 minutes per individual for each project. � E. ENVIRONMENTAL- ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 12835` - OVERSEAS: REALTY ENTEUVIMES - A total residenVal 3levelopment o --n 112 townhouses• . 9.52 acres of, land in thg Medium Residential District (8 -14 6 /ac) Iocated east of Vineywr-�d Avenue, t 600 feet north of Arrow Highway .APN 209-AI-05, (Continued from L January ;23, 1986 meeting.) F. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSES T AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 85 -01-A (A reg*fest to amend the Genera Plan Land 'Usa.�Iap from Low Density Residential to Industipial Vark for 3.9 acres of located on the east side of `,Ar chibald, between Feron and 8th Street - APN 209-061-1, 2, i 21, 29;,209-062-1, 2. (Continued from January 23, 1985 �r meeting.;.-) t ` G. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PA; CEL h4AP 9079 SYCAMORE INVESTMENTS - A division of 5.519 a. ^.reams af 8 land into 4 parcels in the Neighborhood Co:tllercial `3 Development District located on the northeast corner of Base qty 'Line and Archibald Avenue - APN'202- 181 -27 H. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSM XT PARCEL MAP 9025 - -` �._hAND GOiVIPA - A division of one 1 Acre -into ono p; 1 Y parcel of land in the Victoria Planned Commumlij o��` on the west 'aide of ttiwan Aveaive, north of Base Road - A -, PN 227 '11.5. ow 7 F Q - I, ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIdNAL iiSE PERMIT 85 -04 LTIWANDA HISTORICAL SOCIETY -----A- request to relocate the Ghaffey Garcia pause, a historic; ` landmark, for the purpose of historic preservation and to be used as a musewn sand meeting place for the Historical Society, on one acre of land located on the west side of BUwanda Avenue, north of Ease Dine in the Low Residential District. Parcel One of Parcel Map 9025. a. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84-38 - LYNITED METr'I07?IST GIIURCH - The {' development of a 9,600 square foot Vdllowsi ip Hall and the ' t }} review of a Master 4Plan for the development of a curchlsanetuary €a ` ;ity located at the northwest corner of Church Street and Xrchibald Avenue on about 2.8 aQees of r, Iaind in the Lour Residential (2-4 dWae) Develop�ient Mtriet 1APN 298" - 041 -29. t, X. ENVIRONMENTAL ,ASSESSMENT` AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84-4^ - ORATE The establishment of a: church facility in a 11270 square foot area of an existing 6,560 square foot multi- tenant industtia2 building within the General ` n Industrial area (Subarea` iaeated on the south side of 6th Street and the east side ( l rehibald. Avenue - APN :210 -Q ?- 48.f� L. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84-31 - DNERSIFIED FROP'ERTiES The development 'of an integrated .shopping center of " approximately 118,938 square feet vihieh includes a gasoline` service station, as 'a proposed Ph&se l and a conceptual master plat for future phases. All on approNdme teIp 15 acres lam land "in the Neighborhood Commercial (NC) District . ie' jerally located at the northeast corner, of highland Avepq, r anc haven Avenue - APN 20,1- 271-53. I M. ENVIaONMENTAL ASSESSWNT AND TENTATIVE TRACT~ 1267fk_ - LEWIS The rievelaiiment of 158 single family, detached homes an 23.06 acres bf San4 within tha'Torr.-,Vlsta Planned Community designated %M" and "M ", loeate4"on the south side of Base 'Line Road, east, of Spruce Avenup - APN 1Q77 -09102, 03. ., � N. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND 'DEVtzTcOP, nn, RRViE 1T $4-43 - PLAHERTY - The developm nt I Of 47 NDOG> square foot restaurant on 1.1 acres of lanfla tbi k4tn .ercl&3 District. of Subarea-7 of the Jn�uitried Speei�zd ia�`�a�tczd � on the northeast coiner of:Ilalren t1v'enUe ats� i r itghvrnp'" - Y 0 r VBL Directoes Eeports 0. ` 'POLICY DRTBRIYMATION -� ROYAL CREATIONS P {iS DETERMINATION 8Z"I — LANDSCAPE NURSER�� ' A BUIi,DItIGB. Si�PI,i�S ipT'i`HTN' T.ITii,ITX' COEiIi;3QRS f UL 3.''"a cotti meat This is tit, tfine'`vtd place for the general public to address the ri COM144ss %►n. MiMi to be discussed here are tha5dx,which da not already appear on this agenda. ; :< X . A44omment s•. The N%irg Commission has adopted Administrative Regulations that' se 11 m. YP on adjournment time. Items a b4yond that times they shalt be heard`br__`y with the consent of the commissiom i• rs, a t ��YY s Ai y VIC.3NITY", j( s i c:r x c e SMI'(YI '� � CtlF•LE4C Y: � ;:1*" t 45 San+aA ��. MOB. WX a ,�•� C fyM /AA � GlTf HALL ,� a• t .iHII1L?!i s . MiY♦ x l ♦ .M ••!.'... CbGMOMOA.- OUA&rt 6UUNiY R OIONAL ►AjiK � Mf �tC 37iIORY, a �t CMY CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA . PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES lleguTar Meeting a, January 9, 1985 j Chairman Dennis Stout called the regular,, meeting of the 'G'ity of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at Y.,00 p.m. The meeting was held at j Lions Park Community Center,.. 9161 Base : Line' Roads Rancho Cucamonga. California. 'Chairman! Stout then led In tine pledge to the flag.° ROLL CALL - COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: David Barker, Suzanne Chitiea,` Larry McNiei,, Herman Rempel, Dennis Stout COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Tim Beed7e, Senior Planner, Linda Daniels, Associate Planner; Nancy Fong, Assistant Planner; Flick Gomez, City Planner, Barrye Hansan, Senior Civil Engineer;, Edward Hopson, 'Assistant City At €o�yleys Lloyd Hubos, City Engineer; Dick Mayer, Park�°0roject Coordinator; John Meyer, Assistant P'1 `ner; Janice Reynolds, Secretary- APPROVAL OF MINUTES Commissioner Barker requested -, 400da �t to page 10, paragraph ten, of the October 10, 1984 Planning; = commis :L : -gihutes by adding •special area treatments that Mr. Rich ds wants extended to sail nand owners. Motion: Moved by Barker, seconded by Rempel, unanimously carried, to approve the Minutes of October 10, 1984, as amended. Motion: Moved by'Rempel, seconded by McKiel, carried, to approve the Minutes of November 14, 1984. Commissioner Barker abstained from, vote as he was not in attendance at that meeting. 4 CONSENT CALENDAR A. REQUEST FOR TIME EXTENSION :- PARCEL MAP 3383 - BANKS.- Located on the north side of Base Line, west of East Avenue. B. REVIEW OF CONCETUAL PLAN FOR TERRA VISTA NORTHWEST NEIGHBORHOOD PARK AND - CONNECTOR�TRAILSi Commissioner "Rempel requested that Item A be removed 'from the consent calendar. Motion: Moved by Barker, seconded by McNiel, unanimously carried, to approve Item P of the consent calendar. A. REQUEST FOR TIME EXTENSION •- PARCEL MAP 3383 - BANKS Commissioner Rempei stated that this map was approved prior to adoption of the Etiwanda Specific Plan and requested that the applicant advise future lot purchasers that the area surrounding this property has •, been designated ,a - nigher density. Motion :, Moved by Barker, seconded by McNiel, unanimously carried, to approve the time extension for Parcel "Map 3383. PUBLIC HEARINGS G. f friIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 884 - LEWIS HOMES OF CALIFORNIA division o acres of ann 7nta Z. parceX in t e Terra Vis a Planned Community located on the south side of Terra vista Parkway, east of Spruce Avenue APR 1077 - 091 -02n Barrye Hanson, Senior =Civil Engineer, reviewed the staff report. Chairman Stout opened the public- hearing. There were no comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Motion: Moved by McNiel, seconded by Ciritfiea, unanimously carried, to issue"%:• -_ Negative Declaration and adds the Res- lution approving Parcel Map 8842. 'AYES: COMMISSIONERS: MCNIEL, CHITIEA, BARKER', REMPEL, STOUT y NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS; NONE - carried }* a r Planning Commission Minutes -2-, January4 , ]9B5r. yI D. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ,4 Q_ TENTA -rm ` TRACT 12872 ''.! WESTERN PROPERTIES A total residential 3c 4? eat of 128.apartment unit.' on -acres of land' in the Medium Residential District (8 -14 du /ac) within the Terra Vista . Planned Community, locatkid at the southwest corner of Terra Vista Parkway and Spruce_, Avenge - APH 1077- 091 -02 (a, ortion). Nancy Fong, Assistant Planner, reviewed t�.e staff report; ` Chairman Chitiea stated concern that "'mere may be a problem with a lot of left -over land in the future if the •tracts within Terra Vista continue to extend the density range. , Commissioner Rempel replied that the overall plan cannot exceed a certain number of dwelt -ing units. Chairman Stout opened the public hearing. John Melcher, Lewis Homes, stated that the applicant has been working closely with City staff to assure-that the maximum allowable density wfi11 not be exceeded within the planned community. ' Mr. Melcher concurred viith the staff report and Resolution with conditions. ; There were n commentj, therefore the public hearing was closed. I Motion: Moved by Rempel� by "McNiel, unanimously carried, to issue .a _seconded Negative Declaration and adopt the Resolution approvina,Tentative Tract 12672. AYES: COMMISSIONERS: REMPEL, MCNIEC, BARKER, CHITIEA, STOUT NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE- ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS, NONE - carded. ' E. PARCEL MAP 8303 - CHRISTESON Applicant's} request for deletion of a condition of appr& --1 for as 'division of 13.1. acres in the Oener4j___ Commercial District (GC) located at the noril-rtgest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Haven Avenue - APN 1077- 401 -01, Barrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer, reviewed the staff report. Rick Gomez, City Planner, gave an overview of the Commission's action at its previous meeting. Chairman Stout_openPd the public hearingr Planning Commission Minutes 3 January 9, 1985 it � � Don Christeson,_ applicant:,, requested that the .Commission reconsider its previous decision to delete parcel number five from the parcel map.,, Mr.' Christeson explained that commitments had been made for this parcel and presented the Planning Commission with several examples of how this project would be landscaped to buffer it from view; f Chairman- Stout stated that one of 'the major .concerns with the--fast food use was the fact that it was 'planned as a free - standing building and the` CorcmfSSion was concerned with the view on Navel Avenue, He asked „if the use co It be relocated to another area on the site. Mr. Christeson replied that his corporation had worked on this site plan, for over two and a half years and that there was not another area on the site which, would be compatible with a fast food use, There were no further,commentt, therefore the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Barker stated' he would be in favor of allowing the applicant the Idpportunity to design his project for review by the Design Review Committee. j Commissioner MCNiel agreed that the concern!;, could be mitiPnted - :hroughi design, of the project. Motion; Moved by Barker, seconded by Chitiea, carried, ,,to A the Resolution- modifying PTanning Commission Resolution 54498 by - deleting condition number 17 which prohibited a free standing fast wood restaurant with drive through on parcel number 5, AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER, CHIT,IEA, MCNIEL,' STOUT ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS; NONE ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: REMPEL - carried Commissioner Rempel abstained due to possible conflict of interest. Chairman Stout announced that the following items would be heard concurrently. F. ENVIRONiE'NTAL- ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP '11901 - FAYLIS ENTERPRISES - A division of 10.acre5 of land into 2 parcels in the general-Commercial and Industrial-Area Specific Plan located on the north side of Foothill Boulevar.,, east of Center Avenue - APN 1077 - 401 -28. Planning Commission Minutes -4- January 9, 1.9$5 t 4 ` r' - i G. ENVIkr.'VMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84 *`.37 KELBERT__, PARTNERSHIP - Development of 'a 7,500 'square foot car wast', a gas� 1 e dispensing station, e;d anc,)1lary automotive "fac>> «>ies, on" 2.5 acres of land located at the nor east corner of Center Stret and Foothill Boulevard in the General Cl ;;imercial (GC) Development tl ict - APN 1(}77- t, 401 -28. Linda Daniels, Associate Planner, reviewed the staff report and advised that f' the Design Review Committee had not reached a consensus on the architectural . desigt form or the use of proper materials, therefore the project had been schedured before the full Planning Commission. She further advised that the applicant desired to have to Demolition Permit required under Planning Condition number 2 changed to A requirement for a Relocation Permit. Chairman Stout opened the public hearing. Jim Kelbert, applicant, urged the Commission's approval of this project' Larry Wolff, 9375 Archibald, Rancho Cucamonga, gave an overview of the project's architecture and the reasons for its selection. The ° - were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. CoTaissioner Rempel stated that the applicant's design was dt *tart vP an: =' - agreed that it would not be necessary to mirror the arch itectuk," of the Virginia Dare project. Commissioner Stout expressed concern with the landscaping and, requested a condition requiring a landscaping plan to include trees which skluid provide . ", fall color, shrubbery ad acent to the building and walls which would provide additional screening, id contoured berming along Foothill Boulevard and Center Avenue. He additionally requested that the landscape plan be reviewed and approved by the Design Rcview Committee. Commissioners Barker and Chitiea expressed concern with the checkered pattern proposed on the building's northern and Foothill Boulevard elevations. It was recommended that building materials be restudied and resubmitted to the Design_, Review Committee. Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded by McNieI, unanimously curried, to issue a Negative Declaration and adopt the Resolution approving Parcel Map 8901. - AYES: COMMISSIONERS: REMPEL,,MCNIEL, BARKER, CHITIEA, STOUT NOES: COMMISSIONERS': NONE Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded by McNiel, unanimously carf °`ed, to issue a Negative and adopt the Resolution approving Conditional Use P< *:pit 84- 37,.with amendments to Planning Division condition number 2, requiring a Relocation Permit for the existing single family residence, an additional condition requiring the building materials to be restudied and "esubmitted to the Design Review ,Comittee for approval, and an additional condition requiring the Planning Commission Minutes v -5- January 9, 1985 l submittal to and approva. by the Desrgn Review Committee of V landscape plan with trees which-provide fall color, shrubbery adjacent to i`jhe building and walls, and contoured berming along Foothill Boulevard and Center Avenue. AYES: COM14ISS16NERS: REMPEL, MCNIEL; BARKER, CHITIE.Pq STOUT , l NOES: COMMISSIONES: NONE Chairman Stout advised that the following items would be heard concurrently. H. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND D;SVELOPMENT DISTRICr'AMENOM£NT 84.05 - ,CARYN A Development District Amendqilant to prezone unincorporated territory as "Caryn Planned Community" for'approximately 240 acres of land located between the extension of Banyan Avenue and Highland Avenue on the north -, and south, and between the extension of Rochester and Milliken Avenues on1,.' the east and west - APN 225 - 141 -09" 12 -19, 21 -28, 225 - 151 -01 through 03, 07, 08, through 13. I. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 12642 CARYM - ,A residential subdivision division of 470 lots on 115 acres of lan t whic {iart of a larger master planned community, located betweet' the extension of Banyan Street, and Highland Avenue on the northh and south and between the extension` of Rochester and Milliken venues on the east and west - APN 225- 141 -08, 12- 19, 21 -28. i u. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT CARYN DEVELOPMENT - A Development Agreement between the City of Rancho .ucamanga�an t-fie Caryn Development Company, Kaufman and Broad Land Company, and Marlborough Development Corporation relative to properties located between the extension of Banyan AV° sr and Highland Avenue an the north ,and south, and between the extens%n of Rochester and Milliken Avinues on the east and west - APN 225- 141 -08, 12- 19, 21-28, 225 - 151-01 through 03, 07, <08, 1R through 13. Otto Krouti.l, Senior Planner, reviewed the `staff report and recommended that number 36 of the 'tentative Tract conditions of approval be deleted in favor of following the lan;scaping plan outlined in the Planned Community text, an4 - -.-y modification of condition 39 to require the final grading plan to be prepared in accordance with Ordinance 118 and subject to the conditions of the Planned Community Text. Chairman Stout opened the public hearing. Joe Oiiorio concurred with the modifications to the Resolution ' for the Tentative. Tract and urged approval of the project. Commissioner Chitiea stated concern with the minimum square footage of the dwelling units referred to the the Planned Community text and asked if there' were plans to construct these units in future phast.s. Planning Commission. Minutes -6- January 9, 1985 R Clyde Lane, Kaufman -and Broad, replied that there are no plans to "construct the smaller units in phase one, but could not say at this point whether they would be included in, phase-two or three. - ,r' F` _ Paul Byrnes, 'stated that Marlborough Homes presently does not have plans to construct homes of that size, however felt the flexibility for smalQr units needed to be a part of the Planned Community text. There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Commissioner4empei stated that the design of this project shows a concern for the community and commended` Mr. Di orio on the parks and trails system, He ` was, however, concerned with the 8 -foot high block wall required on Milliken Avenue and suggested that the applicant might want to approach the County regarding changes. hir. Dilorio replied that he was also concerned with this requirement, howeue, would prefer to conduct the acoustical study and then make a 3�termination at that time. - r, Chairman Stout stated that thq;-applicant had been extremely cooperative in making the minor changes desire!,/'4y the City. C4 Commissioner McNiel stated that he would have preferred to see the architectural renderings of ;the project,, which were not available at this meeting, however would rely on the judgment of City staff and the goodith of the applicant. -,1 ,j Commiss•.Ibner Barker stated that the City placed a great Beal of pride in' is ;I design criteria and was concerned with the design of units as small as those proposed. i Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Barker, unanimously carried, to adopt. ' the Resolution recommending approval of Development District Amennment`84.05 to City Council.r Motion: Moved by E7e,pei, seconded by Chitiea, unanimously carried, to adopt the Resolution approving Tentative Tract 12842, with the deletion of condition 38 and rewording of condition 39 regarding the grading plan, as suggested ty' ° -- staff. Motion: Moved by Stout, seconded bi, Mcniei, unanimously carried, to adopt the Resolution recommending approval of the 'Development Agrearr,-t to City Council. �r NEW BUSINESS (J Planning Commission Minutes -2 { - January 9, 1986 h ;= J` V K. ENVIRONMENTAL_ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 84,50 - FWE COMPANY - The development ofd n 81,401 square foot office building on �..5 acres of land located on the\ast side of Center Avenue between Enterprise Street and Commerce, Center Drive -,,APR 210- 391-09 through 15. f Rick Gomez, City Pla��, reviewed �: ,,staff report. ` c Chairman Stout invited public comment. Steve ,;Rimes, representing' the applicant, stated =concurrence _,with the Resolution and conditions of approval. Motion: Moved 'by Barker, seconded by Rempel, unanimously carries, to issue a Negative Declaration and adopt,,the Resolution approving Development Review 84 -50: ti AYES: COMMISSIONERS, BARKER; REMPEL, CRITIEA, MCNIEL, STOUT NOES: COMMISSIONt --RS: NONE -carried DIRECTOR -S REPORIt L. ALTA LOMA CHRISTIAN CHURCH - A, /v ew of outstanding issues regarding CUP ° - un , Alta Loma Christi Chu �h, located on the west side 'bf Sapphire, between Lemon and Orange Stree Rick Gomez, City Planner, advi�d that the applicant for this project had requested a continuance to' the Planning Commission meeting of ' January 23, 1985. Motion: Moved by Chi *Jea, seconded by Barker, unanimously carried, to , contiinue discussion of Alta Loma Christian Church to the rPlanning Commission meeting of January 23, 1985. M. VICTORIA WALLS John Meyer, Assistant Planner, reviewed the staff report. Rick Gomez, City Planner, advised that this item had been placed on the agenda at the request of the Citizens Advisory Commission and if the Commission concurred with the concerns expressed by the CA% regarding the landscaping and perimeter wall treatment-nn the Victoria project, the Commission should direct F staff -to study the issuz P ,., Planning Commission Minutes -8- January 9 1985 : l5, Steven Ford, representing the applicant, stated that the existing wail is np't_T completely landscaped at thk� point and wi';l have extensive landsraping, as required by the City. ,Mr. Fo further stated thct if additional enhancements were desired by the C6ikissien, the William Lyon Company would be willing to work with City staff, It was the consensus of the Commission to direct staff to dev ^,lop definite guidelines for perimeter wails for the Commission's consideration. N. VICTORIA PARK LANE TWLS Lloyd Hubbs, City Engineer, reviewed the staff report. Steven Ford stated that the William Lyon Cow pany was anxious to have the project completed and would be willing to eaoperate with the Commission"s desires. Commissioner Chitiea stated that the Trails Committee W wanted to move the trail to the north side in order to accommodate a wider trail. She suggested that an alternative to acl' °:ave the desired 10-foot aide trail be submitted to the Trails Comm=ittee. Commissioner Barker agreed and further stated that =the trails standards should be utilized. Commissioner Rempel stated t3at the ground cover- should riot be so dense that it would preclude the use by pedestrians walking on the trail. He further suggested that some of the original plan concepts should be retained. Regarding the roadway edge treatment, it was the consensus of the Commission that alternative one which provided for uniform rolled curb edges with a mounded berm area of one foot rise on the south parkway be utilized. The applicant agreed to work with the City Engineer on the appropriate design of this alternative. D. REVIEW OF CONCEPTUAL PLAN FOR RED HILL COMMUNITY PARK. Dick Mayer, Park Protect Coordinator, reviewed the staff report. The Commission expressed concern with the grade of the slopes al the park site and requested that special attention be directed towards reducing the slope as ' much as possible. Motion. Moved by Barker, seconded by Chitiea, unanimously carried, to, recommend that the conceptual plan for Red Hill Community Park be forwarded to the City Council Planning Commission Minutes -9- wry 9. M5_ 1 j" CITY OF AANCHG 'UCAMONCA PLANNING COMMIS ON MINUTES cRegular, Meeting February 13, 1985 - 1; / Chairman Dennis Stout called the , reguiar meeting , of '-the City or= ±,,-ncho Cucamonga Planning Commi-ssiov� to order at 7:60 p.m. The meeting was held at Lions Park Community Center, 9161 .Base Line Road, Rancho Cucamonga, California. Chairman;,Stout then 10, in the pledge to the flag. S ROLL CALL _s— COMMISSIONERS PRES:kk; --wITanne Chitiea, tarry McNiel, Herman Rempel, Deriis Stout COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: E. David Barker ^« STAFF PRESENT: Dan Coleman Seni ^r Planner;` Nancy Fong, "Assistant Planner;,'Aick Gomez, City Planner; Bar rye Hanson, Senior civil Engineer; Edward Hopson, P 'asiscant —City Attorney; cs'rt "Johnston Associate Planner; 'Janice Reynolds, Secretary; Paul Rougeau, Senior Civil Engineer ANNOUNCEMENTS Rick Gomez„ City Planner, announced that the Plannii,J. Commission 7 »ctitote >> would h held from February 28 through March 2. Chait,, :taut announced; jt'' the City's Redevelopment Agency would be reviek_ �. revised conceptual plan for the Regional, Shopping Center . � p P their F6,t_ y 20th meeting. g pR i _ 1 41 l y APPROVAL OF MINUTES o v Motion; Moved, by , seconded by McNiel,- Tarried, to approve the minutes of December 12, 1984. Rem��l }1 Motion: Moved by Mctflel, seconded by Chit,iea, carried, to approve the of January 23, 1941,." `t r"r f UT CONSENT CALENDAR A. TIME EXTENSION FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 1021) -=- BARMAXIAN - A custom lot subd vision consisting of 30 lots on 24. acres of land located on the north side of Almond, east of Carnali -An - APR 1061- 171 -02. F3 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ANO DEV£LOPMEN REVIEW 85 -03 ` BARYON - The .. x- development of Phase .1 -vu7 the, gartonn P aiia consisting of an 8b 0(!'� square '- foot building on 13.22 acres of land in the Industrial Park category (Subarea 7). located at the southwe�l corner of Foothill Boulevard and Alder Avenue - APN.;208�-351 -19. nissioner Chitiea requested that item "All- be removed for discussion. Motion; MoYed'by Rempel, seconded by_McNiel; unanim6u!'7 carried, to approve item "CG" of`the consent calendar_ :: 1 �= A, TIME EXTENSION FOP, TENTATIVE TRACT 10277 - BARMAV IAN 1 Commissioner Chiti.ea rejaesy d than; staff contact the applicapt reSarding the blockage of the Almonc;! &munity frail and discuss ,�6 acplicant's prior agreement to allow fiorsa priv4leges for perimeter, lots. notion; i4oved by Chitiea, seconded by Rempel,� unanimously carried tri. adopt the Resolution approving a time extension for.Tentative Tract'10r77. t PUBLIC HEARINGS Chairman Stout annotated that tile following items would be heard concurrently,' C. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 12832 - LYON `= 2 The development 4f r35 .attached 14 gle famil�r dwellings on .Q acres`iaf. land` .; within the Victoria PlanncV•�aomalunity (Low- Hedium category, 4 -8 'dula ,,), ' located on the north_ sloe ifof Victoria Park Lane on the west sine of Victoria Windrows Loop - API-4z227-371-13l 14, 15, (Continued from ,Jianuary 23, 1985 meeting.) D. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 12833 LYON - The eve opment of 117 attached single fam - dwellings on 14.7 acres,., nf land =' within the Victoria Planned Community 'Low- Mediu;tz category, 4 -8` Wu /ac), located on the south side of 'Victoria Park Lane,. or, the west side of Victoria Windrows Loop - APN 227 - 371.14, 15 and - 227391 -16. (Continued from January-l!3, 1985 meeting.) Curt Johnston, ;Associate P".anner, reviewed the staff report. Chaiiinan Stout opened the, -ublic hearing. 3 f r J r^ Flannil'g Commission Minites -2- February 13, 1985 j I Jim Bailey, representing the William Lyon Company, stated that the applicant had worked closely with City -staff, the Design Review Committee, Trails - Committee, and citizens of the community on the - design of the" tracts. ti15r.- Bailey stated that ,it Is a project of Which the City,co4ld be proud and urged; the Comriissionls approval. r' Debra Brown, 6640 [Mimosa, Rancho Cucamonga, stated concern with the attached concept for the housing units. Robert Rodrigyez, 12356 Thistle, Rancho Cucamonga, also stated concern with 0e attached unit concept. s There were no further comments, therefore- the public`hearing was closed. Comaissiennr McNiel advised that during review of the Victoria Planned Community text the City had r��uested ghat the applicant provide a variety of- Product types to avoid havinL, -0,000 similarly placed houses up and, down a street. He commended the appll6ant for a well designed*.,oject, Commissioner Chitiea ,,greed and further stated that a lot of innovation went into the design`of,#.�e project and its park and trails system. tammissioner Poirpel stated that the William Lyon Corporation had been most cooperative,1n �_ ^,,loping the Viotoria Planned 'Community Into- something which the homeowners and the pity rrill'be pt,oad of. , ate further ttated that housing, of tlt s type is nece!fssr_y in o'rd'er t6 proe'de first -time home buyers the epportunity to purchase 3.home. Chairman Stout stated that the attached units will provide the 4 °Iety needed to eliminate a sea of houses. He also.comnended the applicant' for a well designed project. 1% _ Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Rempei, carried, to .issue a; Negative Declaration and adopt the Resolution approving,•Tentative Tract 12832.' AYES: GON6MXSS?\"E(ERS: CHITIENj RMPEL, MCNYEC, STGUT, NOES: COMMISSIONCRS: NO, E ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:r BARKER - carried Motion: Moved by `McNipl, seconded by Chitiea, carried, to issue a Negative Declaration and adopt th`6 Resolution approving Tentative Tract 12833. I AYES COMMISSIGNERS: MCNIEL, CNITIEA, REMPEL,,STOUT NOES. COMiMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COM?MIS51ONERS: ,BARKER - carried 1: Planning Commnis,xon Minutes -3- February 13, 1995 kill �r E.. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 12802 - LEWIS - The development of 2 single fW'i y detached homes on 41.5 acres of land 1 witt,in the Terra Vista Planned Community , designated Low-Mediurr,;and Medium, 'located on the south side of Mountain View Drive and the ea§tl,�7de of Spruce Avenue - APN 1077 - 0,91 -02, 43 and 1477- 423. -03.., 04. Curt Johnston, Associate Planner, reviewed the staff report. j Chairman Stout opened the public (tearing. j I erry Bryan, representing Lewis Homes, requested an amendment to Planning Division condition number 6 to allow the,opportunity to work with the City Planner on the cap block to be used on the' ^ �_6t:er walls. F., i Rick Gomez, City Planner, stated , that staff" to that l « amendment. There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was Closed.!' Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded by Chitiea, carried, to issue a Negati:Ve Declaration and adopt the Resolution approving Tentative Tract 12802 with an amendment to planning condition number 6,to state that the 'cap block on the perimeter wails would be subject to review and appror�kl by the City Planner. P AYES., COMMISSIONERS: REMPEL, CHITIEA, MCNIEL, STOUT f r NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE C ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER.- - carried Chairman Stout announced that the following items would be heard concurrently. F. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 12922 - LAN BENT.SEN -� A one lot su division map for con om -, ?_j-. purposes ffi7oonj unction with the development of 316 Shultz`- familj units on approximately 18.18 net acres of land in the MH District (14- 24'dufac) located north of Highland, south of Lemon, q�t of leaven - APN 202- 271 -59, 60. 0. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 84 -22 - LAN BENTSEN - 'T eve opme t7of-316 mutt. - am1 y units on 18.18 et acres of an (please ., one of a 924 unit development on 58,3 total acres) in the MR District (14- 7h du/ac), located north of Highland, south of Lemon, east of Haven - APN- 202- 271 -59, 60. Rick Gomez, City Planner, gaYa a history of the past C6mmission and City Council actions, 'Planning Comission tlinutes -4- February I3,, 1985 Barrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer,1 provided the Commissior�� with two alternatives which would amend the �- ngineering conditions, ,�rf 'approval regarding the 26-foot wide sechnAary acc�•ss from the site to H #4n Avenue. Curt Johnston, Associate PTAnner `.recapped amendments to the Planning conditions of approve" requesteq,,by the applicant. He advised that amendments Caere requested' to &*Jition rrus,�&Er 8 to give the applicant more flexibility in the use of materials lzher than block for retaining walls, and should be subject to review, and{ approval by the City Planner. Amendments were also requested to condition`,/9 to change the building setback from the parking lot to 10 feet; staff suggested that a minimum of 10 feet should be required. Additionally, thC= lapplicant was concerned with condition 12 regarding storage lockers and requested that the Commission consider that the storage lockers need not be part of the carport, but could be outdoor storage facilities. Chairman Stout asked i {consideration had been given to the treatment of mail facilities, Rick Gowez, City Planner, replieC that they had not but if this was a_ concern of the'CoRbilission, is would be appropriate , to -add a condition.` Chairman Stout opened the public hearing. bon King,; 9375 Archibald, Rancho Cucamonga, introduced various members of the �.an glen +sen design team. Dbn Price, Craycroft Architects, Inc., overviewed the 'architecture for the project. r Sherry Harbor, Landscape Concepts, Inc., overviewed the project. landscaping. , Lan Bentsen, - applicant, gave a' general overview of the Lan Bentsen Corporation. There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Rempei stated concern -' with placing that muchi,traffic on Lemon Avenue, and preferred to put some type of access through to f�ighland. Commissioner Chitiea stated that the City Council had given 'irection that the project is consistent with the General Plan, therefore has no problems with the project. Chairman -Stout stated that he originally had' 'toncerns with the density and ivM use of thi�( project, however, the applicant had been most cooperative and come up with a well- designed project. He stati ^d, however, that he was concei-ned with the proposed use of oleanders and suriges'ted that.an alternative plant. be used'. He further requested language bif added regarding mail box treatment. l/ Plan,'.', 3 Commission Minutes -5- February 13, 1985, i Commissioner Rempel addressed' the storage locker issue and :suggested that" language should state that storage lockers shill be enclosed ;facilities in close proximity to all units. Mr. � m.ez suggested that the solutions could be worked out and brought back to the 9e)9n Review Committee for review and approval. Motion: Movo`i by Rempela, seconded by Ch4tiea, carried, to adopt the Resolution appoving pevelopment Review 94 -22, with amefidments to condition.8`° requiring the ,decorative mater'ia'l used do retaining walls to be reviewed and:., approved by the City Flanner,.condition 9 amended to require buildings 32, 33, and 34 to be set back a minimum of 10 feet from the parking lot; rewording of condition 12 regarding storage facilities; an additional condition regarding mail box treatment; and amendment to Engineering✓ condition 2.d roe rding construction of a secondary access. AYES: COMMISSIONERS: itEiL, CliJTIEA, MCNIEC, BTQUT NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE FL ABSENT: COMMISSIONES: SARKEk 5- carried Motion: Move a`'by Rempel, seconded by Chitt7a, carried, to" adopt the { �± Resolution approving Tentative Tract 12922, with amendments, to condition 8 requiring the decorative material used on retaiging walls to be reviewed and approved by the City Planner; condition 9 amende4ho require buildings 32, 33, and 34 to be set back °a minimum of 10 feet parking lot; rewording.oF condition 12 regarding storage facilities; an additional' condition: reg riling mail box treatment and amendment to Engineering condil�Aip 2.d regarding construction of a secondary access. AYES:, COMMISSIONERS: REMPEi., CNITIEA, MCNIEL,-STObT NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT COMMISSIONERS: BARKER carried 8:25 a.m. - Planning Commission4:ecessed - 8 :45 p.% - - -,`=anning° Commission Reyonvenod nhairman Stout announced that the following items would be heard concurrently. r pl haing Commission Minutes -6 February l'8 7:985 y� H. ENVIRONM s ASSESSMENT AN9 PARCEL MAP 8891 - GARASICH - A division of T . 24aa ..d of roan into parcels in the Genera d p rc Gen al In ustrial category (Subarea 11) located on the east side of Rochester Avenue, south of 7th' Street - ,APN 229 - 283 -3. I. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL- -9SE.!'_ >�4MLT:84- 39;",,- GARASICH - Thy " development of three buildings of appe&klmato,y' OO squdre f� eet each for purposes of both industrial warehousing ; and administrative and professional offiaes on approximately 1.25 acres of land "located on the east side of Rochester Avenue, north of 4th Street: in the General Industrial (Subarea 13),category of the Industrial Area Specific Plan APN 229yt83 -03. Rick Gomez, City Planner, reviewed the staff report. Chairman Stout opened the public hearing. There were no comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded by';McNiei, carried, to issue a`Negati ^re Declaration and adopt the Resolution approvirl ?'Parcel `Map 8891. AYES: COMMISSIONERS: REMPEL, MCiIEL, CHITIEA, STOUT NOES: COMMISSIONEfiC: NOW ASSENT: COMMISSIONC` .1s, '? =BARKER, carried L Motion; Moved by McNiel, seconded by Chitiea, carried, to adopt the ' Resolution approving Conditional Use Permit 84 -39, AYES,,", COMMISSIONERS; '' MCNIEL, CHITIEAs REMPEL, STOUT NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS. BARKER - carried J. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 8617 '- CARYN COMPANY - A' division of 07 .79.acres into 4 parcels, a portion of a'Master Planned Community known as Tract 1264g, located between the extension of Banyan Avenue and Highland Avenue on/ the north and south, and between the extension of Rochester and Millr,ken Avenues on the east and west - APN 225- 141 -12, 13 14, 15, 16, 18, 22land 26. Barrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer, reviewed theostaff report. Mr. Hanson stated that the applicant hod concerns regarding condition B,-2 of the City Engineer's Report and had "'requested another option regarding the 'lien agreement required. Staff suggested that it would be appropriate to add "or a Planning Commission Minvies -7 February 13, 1985 in.. �� security shall be posted and an agreement executed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer -and City Attorney". He further stated that the. applicant had -- requested a clarification of condition C -7 concerning undergrounding of utility lines and staff recommended the, addition of language stating "except " along Highland Avenue ". C Chairman Stout opend the public hearing. Paul Byrnes, Marlborough KTmes, advised that the project would not be required to do any improvements to H�ghiand Avenue as it is future freeway right -of- way and had requested clar fictio 9f that condition. 7{{ There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. 1 Chairman Stout stated that it was inappropriate to require the undergrounding on Highland and would agree with the amendments proposed by staff. r Motion: Moved by Sto�.�,seconded by Rempoi. carried, to adopt the Resolution approving Parcel Map 86V with amendments to Engineering Conditions B-2 to state "or a security shall be posted and ,an agreement executed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and City Attorney"; and C-7 to state "except, 1i along Highland Avenue ". AYES: COMMISSIONERS: STOUP, REMPEL, CHITIEA, MCNIEL NOES:: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER - carried' f, K. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 12895 - R.J. SNVESTMEWS - A total residential development of 99 town omes on 9.03 acres of land-In the Medium Residential District (8 -14 du/ac), located on the west side of Baker Avenue, sorth of Foothill Boulevard - APR 207- 581 -57 58,''207 -571- 79. Nancy Fong,, Assistant Planner, reviewed the staff report. Chairman Stout opened the public hearing. Hardy Strozier, 3151 Airway, Costa Mesa, overviewed revised project design. Henry Stay, 8326 Forest Grove, Rancho Cucamonga, stated conce -ns with the loss of privacy, traffic impacts and Baker Avenue, and.impacts. on pftperty values. Don Olsen, 8435 Autumn Leaf, Rancho Cucamonga, stated that this design was a tremendous improvement over the original design; however, had concerns ,vii_.^ the location of garages facing Lemon Grove. Planning Commission Minutes -8- February 13, 19135h^ �i u There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed, Commissioner McNiei stated that this project had come a long way since its orignal design and appreciated what the applicant had done. Commissioner Chitiea,.agrepd and stated that the applicant had listened to the concerns of adjacent rQSidents and the Commission in the design of this project. Chairman Stout stated that this project addresses all concerns expred during review of the original project and is a good example of how an infi'il project can work. Commissioner Rempe,advised that landscaping will buffer the garage units from adjacent existing 6,��mes. Motion: Moved by R,1;mpe_i\, secdWed by Chitiea, carried, to issue a Negative. Declaration and adopt�,' �e`Resolution` approving Tentative Tract 12895, �_,�,�i _ it 7� AYES: (,"J� 'MPEL, CHITIEA, MCNIEL, STOUT HOES: C MMI`5SIONERS:) /' NONE ABSENT: ISSIONF"'8: BARKER - carried \` L. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL. PLAN AMENDMENT 85 -02 - An amen to the Eub ic. Health and SaTe—ty Element to provide consistenri with St'L�_, law provisions of the A1quist-Priolo Act, as amended. Dan Coleman,_ Senior P}anner, reviewed the staff report., Chairman Stout opened the public heart g. There were no comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Chairman Stout requested that the language requiring a seller to potify potential purchasers of property when it is in the Alquist- Priolo S$tcial Study Zone included not only in the Resolution, but in the General Plan text as well. Motion: Moved by Chitiea, secEzt:�Ay Stout, carried, to adopt the Resolution recormianding approval of General Plan Amendment 8542 to the,,City Council.., AYES: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA, STOUT, MCNIEL, "REMPEL NOES: COMMISSIONERS NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: .; BARKER carried y_ Planning Commission Minutes -9 February-13, 1985 a x. CI1Y OF"R,ANC$O CUC'AMONGA STAFF REPORT 0�9 Q a z 19;7 DATE: February 27, 1985 TO: i Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Rick Gomez,,ty Planner ai 61': John R. Meyer, disistant Planner SUBJECT: TIME EXTENSION Fdk CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 83 -09 - BRETHRFN IN CHRIST CHURCH The development of a ?.,800 square foot educational facility for Alta Loma Brethren in Christ Church on 6.8 aI es in a Medium (8 -14 du/ac) Residential District located at 9974 13th Street - APN 202- 171 -31. T. BACKGROUND: The Brethren in Christ Church is requesting a time �. extension for CUP 83 -09, as described above. The proposed 2,800 square float educational facility is designed as part of a master- Planned church complex which includes an Existing 5,800 square foot multi- purpose (worship, daycare) f cility, and an existing structure which serves as a temporary 5fice building (Exhibit The new classroom structure is designed to function as a private elementary school for 100 students from kindergarten through,3rd grade. , A review of the development plans indicated that the Pr-oject is still consistent with the current development standaXds. This project was originally approved for 18 months on September 1983. this time the church is requesting an additional year to enAle them to complete their financial arrangements. This request is consistent with Planning Commission policy to allow a maximum four year approval, with the appropriate extensions. I II. RECOMMENDATIONS: ``Staff recommends` that the Planning Commission approve the time extension through adoption of attached , 1986. Resolution granting a one year extension to March 14 ,f Alarm rig Commssio* aff Report February 27, 1985_x, CUP C3 -09 - Brethren in -Christ Church 4 Page #2 Respectfully jubrtrted, 1 Ric ompz' City Planner +; RG:JM:cv Attachments: ,�etter'lr`^om Applicant • Exhibit +IA" _ Site Exhibit "A -I" - Existing Stieuctures. 118" f `\ Exhibit - Floor Plan_ Exhibit It ", - Elevations Resolution of Ado 3l,with conditiosis Time Extenrd -h Respl�;tion of Approval „ (Al f ,Y� �:Y � 9474 191h Street, P.O. Box 485 Alta Loma, CWamiai 51741 714... 9fi48�?'!'i,N. fiEMPY Pagmdr L Cl _ GO6RC1tt R. EtQGt.E ' ' +4ssaciafie Faatoc ' ;•. t .. January 25, 1985 13 . 7 _ �tr. John R. Meyer; Assistant Planner City of Rancho Cucamonga 9320 Baseline Road Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91130 RE: Conditional Use Permit ,# 63-0 ~ Dear Mr, Meyer: TI—, Alta Loma Brethzen in Christ Church, located at 9974 19th Street, is.,`:requesting an extension of our C.U.P. I 53 -09 for a period of from six (6). months to one (1) year. This C.U.P is due t ire in o expire We need this extension of time to t<omplett� our financial arrangements and to put the finishing touches on the plan's for this building. Thank you for your consideration. in this matter, Sincerely, n. r Gordon D. Engl Administrator n GDE /eh _ t" t� r "Andy+Gadtai6A b rneedS+x totlfsi 3i r PoryhyCt sca s" PJz pia�s440 -- u d T t �1t IMF #?4ASE IV JP PHASE ffi` 4 t t 2i4� �eMS — ns�oy _I TOTA4 2445 PHASE ! L - rr 4- $'xJS' -509' - 4g16� �• •, rs'wt. � ..r - i — CLA551�cx1 TOr^L cZ7 C =a :,. 2c ` In m m cs ca ID i NUMERY ; EXISTING .. PARKING I - } ® FQ rg CITY OF ITEM.. 'RANCHO CUCA1V1C NGA PLANNING D JLSKhN j! YHIBiT: --- _SCAM' r t i NORTH Crry Or, !, RANCHO CUC-k PL����txN fit�'�p IF aa' ! •j Cfa E `.,. sm CITY OF ITEM, i'6.a a.i Ch •V.✓ CANT .4�., I C r PLANNING DIMS CXN EYHIBIT - SCALE- - j TMV now *AM$ �.• � tnurH e��,vnnoa }� n»raa roecr rtecay. ,aa esvt+ews, arF.jN1Mr JOIN 111, .mss 'sr - w aj n f/ „ II F �� RESOLUTION N0. 83 -11. _ A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO, 83 -09 FOR `ALTA LOMA BRETHREN IN CHRIST CHURCH LOCATED AT 997q ^..M STREET IN THE R =1 -8600 ZONE T WHEREAS, irthe 8th day . -'f July, 1983,, a complete application was filed by v Alta Loma Brethren in Christ Church for review of -the above - described project, and WHEREAS, on the 14th day of September,; 1983, the "Rancho Cur`3monga 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 r` Plan, and the purposes of the zone in..which the use is proposed; and 1 2. That the'.proposed use, together with the conditions 4'. applicat,i thereto, will not be detr'imenta'l to the public thEalth, safety, or welfare,,, or materially injurious, to properties or ;improvements in the vicinity; and 3. That the proposed use will comply with each of the applicable provisions of the Zoning Ordinance. SECTION 2:, That this project will not create adverse impacts on the environment and that a Negative Declaration is issued on September 14, 1983,E -_ SECTION 3, That Conditional Use Permit No, 83 -09 is approved subject to t e fo lowing cond;tions; PLANNING DIVISION 1. All Taws and regulations of the State of Califovnia 3 ` relating to Ticensing of elementary- school facilities shall be complied with prior to opening of the school. 2. If the operation of this school causes adverse effects upon adjacent properties, the Conditional Use Permit shall be brought before the Planning Commission for their consideration and possible termination of such uses. ', :�. • Rasoluticn no. Page 4 , ENGINEERING DIVISION /) 19. The. westerly dr;,-ve approach sha Abe completed to current city standards. / APPROVED AND`ACOPTED THIS 14TH 04Y SEPTEMBER, 1983, PLAN NG MMISSION °OF THE CITY, RANCHO CUCAM NGA BY • (f •Dennis L. St ut, Chai an )f" l ATTEST: Secretary of the Planni' NiTisslon I, JACK LAM, Secretary of t`°�i Planning Commission- of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, .do hereby, 0rti," that the foregoing Resolution was duly ani regularly introducedy parsed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. at •a regular meeting of the Planning;, Commission held on the 14th day of September, 1983, bythd following vote -to -wit: f` AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Br?6ER, McNIEL, JUAREZ, REMPEL, STOUT NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NOME 5 ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS;' NONE L 0 rte.: 4 ` }f rY _N1 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMIZmN, APPRUV.;PG THE TIME EXTENSION FOR CUP 83-09, LOCATED AT, THE F10rTH SIDE OF 19TH STREET, EAST -OF RAFIONA - APR 202= 171�31�� WHEREAS, a request has 'been filled for a time, extension for the above- described project, pursuant to Section 17,02,090 B WHEREAS, the Planning Commission eonditlonally gapproved the above- described Conditional Use.Permit 83 -09 SECTION 1: The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission has made the toilowing findings: A. That prevailing economic condi'iions have delayed the construction-of this project. B. That strict enforcement ,of the conditions of approval' regarding expirations would riot be consistent with the intent of the Development Code. C. That the granting of said time extensions will not be detrimental to thec,public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity: SECTION 2: The Rancho�,Cucamonga Planning Commission hereby: grants a time extension for: w; Tract Applicant Expiration CUP 83 -09: Brethren, in Christ March 14 19$6 APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 27TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 1985. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: _ Dennis L. Stout, Chairman { ATTEST:. E Rick Gomez, Deputy Secretary " Alk tee, !� — - -• CITY OF RANCHO CUCAIgONGA C a ST"F RFP ORT / O 1977 :1 DATE: February 27, 1985 TO: Chairmman and Members of the P[anhing Commission FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner BY: Nancy Fong, A ^Istant Planner SUBJECT: TIME EX`TENSIOh- FOR TEiNTAfIt1E_ TRACT 11793r - BLISS custom lot'subdvision of 47 lots the Low - Resident `ai.. District (2 -4.4u; ),a loci londthe ed, east side of Ametlyst between Highland and Lemon - APN 1082- 561 -04 and 1062 - 571 -04.,, I. BACKGROU40 �7-1he applicant is requesting an additional six (6) monR time extension for Tentative Tract 11793, as, described above. Tt�z project was originally approved by the Planning Commission /ion April 322, 1981, and two (2) one year Time Extensionr,`,,ad been granted with 'the finai expiration date beipg z. on Marrh',28, 1985. The Subdivision Mar. Act allows a maximum of 36 months time extension which would permit an additional twelve' (12) month time extension for this _project. The developer is currently in plan check and needs a time extension to record the final tract map. II. ANALYSIS: Tentative Tract 11793 was appiroved prior to the current Development Code. For consideration of a time extension, this project was °nviewed for conformance with the Development.. Code requirements. / ased upon the review, the project has been found to be consistent with the provisions of the Low Density. Residential standards of the Development Code. TII. FACTS FOR FINDING: This previsously approved Tentative Tract Map 12256 is 9n substantial compliance with the City's current General Plan, Ordinances, plans, _ Codes and Policies. The extension of the tentative map will not likely .cause inconsistencies with the current General Plan, Ordinances, Plans,, Codes and Policies or cause public health and safe�y prob' ems. The extension is within the time limits as law and local ordinance._ prescri ed by state (f r` 4 V l ITEM B Planning Com Ission Staff Report 'February 27, 198 TT 11793 - Bliss Page r2/ r) IV RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that .the P anning Commission � grant a twelve, month extension for this:r,� Ject through the < adoption of the attached resolution. Res tfully: mt ed� — Ric Gomez City Planner RG NF.cv Attachments: Letter, from Applicant - ;February 11, 1985 Exhibit "A" - "Location Map Exhibit "B" - Approved Conceptual Grading Plan Exhibit "C" - Approved Tract Map = Exhibit "D" - Wall Site #14 Original Resolution of Approval With Conditions Time Extension Resolution of Approval_ r � _ i<t.. _<a +iRsNC - BLISS OP RTY - -zVELOPXtNT , - t;ca _ ' aronlian Avenue Rancho Cucamonga, Ca.. 91701 !7'4) 989 -4014 February 11, 1985 1t `� CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPAiiAENT ':? i Of RAINUO WCQM;'!:t'. PLANNING DIVISION i i *11NiT ! EVE I'MIENT ()EPIC 9330 Baseline Road Rancho Cucamonga, Ca. 917101 FEE! 1 1 `va - i AiA: ��i4i�sl�illi't2� SU3SECT: i`1�m,e e:,r�ension �o: 'tentative 'Tract tip. 11793; Gentlemen; i an requesting a si.x ` U5> month extension on Traces" ,T- ''11793 which is presently due to expire ,An March 25,,1985, l The Tract was submitted to thta City for clanifec g in December 1984 along with approximately 510,000.00/, n plan ch•_ck fees.. We also spent., e'Veratl months and ! /several thousand dollars revising th� plank to.meet currant City standards. 1 mention the above tiMQ and amounts as proof that we are actively trying to record and construct the tract. Because of the backlog in plan checking, we are still in the plan checking procedure and maybe for A couple of months. i� Therefore, we are asking for the six (6) month extension to that we can record in an orderly manner ', Sin ely Yours, i} Lawrence 0., Bliss LOBdbhs F1 v `. CC: Mr. John F. Mullin Li-ss::. E �� 1 SPA CE XN R- -BSG.7 1`) t 2 i NOITH., CITY O CI-1O CL'CA. '10 NGA TITLE iGp l -NI PLAN INN ISI s DID t} \F u r 1 :.._�_� 4 - .....fir �• �.71' J�' wM6 � �• s°ra 4 � +! f• +`-wasa wsrA halo. ,-n6atl wee4 � J rw ` � _ .fir �. r ? w ' —�V Ir +AO +.•r..,. —.- �! . CNauGE ^_ a.+.+r. - -�._- � �.._....���_.j._��s°+!,^.�.{+ - .,,,,. -r. .4•.713 ♦♦ nsa! .r f N a � M.�! y. ^.'� '�-�-^-�t �' Y • �J Wa J.O.fA 4,loa _ ti• '.A'CCra ONVE .. n"ut 1. F r �il3!!.!'' _ , ✓'�' A'S.a s.fyer ' j WN J A i t MIS ,,,,40 � '""! w+ri .✓ .. A :.- NORTH CITY O rte A� LUM sir 4D CD CRANCE ^.- -^�- -• e � 1 •�.._�► � �Y � ►` CBS 4'pl ! ; � _ I T w crty OF ITENr: i .ANCHO C .,'CANIONGt Pi A:ti'iL` L71'LST?`�T T'itET= ` SCALE- 6-6 f - lL C r 2 - ¢.' �� , ♦��� tit' s t ) ---- "�_ _ � ... Q� COO it •f"•. „`- 7• � � - ( � • •. .. gig t SITE rtcauoil� co.w4rc: orrc ur+,aAC �' - - -_. JJI i aoµu F nnuu.ttL vis:tr.lc, L.ai'S i C4 °.,L'174.7 oF' cy[..tCrxC�.tfa., mac, Glt3) a1d �Y�r tr3 o NORTH' ,�\ CITy O RANCHO C�,'C�,1jT0�•GA ITC�I:. .-°1T i17�3 TITLE- •. U 1 i1 PLANNING DIVISION N ,p . ° RESOLUTIM fX'; 81 -43 j ; A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING CuMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, CONDITIONALLY APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP Xo, 11793 WHEREAS, lerftati�'�Ja Tract Map No 11793, hereinafter "Matz" submitted by Mullin /Bliss,Japplicant, for the purpose of subdividing th} teal property situated ifi the City,�of;,Rancho Cucamonga, Coup of' an Bernardino, State ors= California, described as �! a custom lot ivision of 47 lots on 15,9 acres in the R -1 -10 & R -r -12 zones, loca'zd on "the' east side of Amethyst, betweer..,M4i ji9nd acid Lemon (,APN 1062 - 561 -04, , 1062- 571 -44�: into 47 7•ots, regulaey came before the. Planning Commission ., for hl"aring public a(Ed action on April 22, 1981; and WHEREAS, the City Planner has recommended approval of the'Map subject to all conklitions -set fcrtil-,in the Engineering and:,Pianr�pg D4v':sio6s reports; and WHEREAS,: the Planning 'omezissiq'n has read and considered the Engineering and Planning Divisions reports and has considered other evidence presented at�the public hearing. NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning,Comissioh of the Citr ofiRancho Cucamonga: does resolve as follows: i r . SECTION 1: The Planning Commi!k- oa; makes the-= following z?ndings in regard Tentative Tract 4o No. 11793 and - -the Map thereof. (a) The tentative tract is consistent with al'i;applica6e interim and proposed 96)eral and specific piar"s; (b) The design or improvements of the ten'-, tide Tract is consistent with alt applicable "interim and proposed general and specific plans,Y (c) The site is physically suitable far the of development _, proposed; _type .N� r (d) The design of the subdivision is rot likely to cause substantial environmental damage and avoidably 4pjury to humans and wildlife or.,11heir habitat; ] (e) The tentative tract is not likely to cause serious public health problems; L (f) The design of the tentative -tract will not conflict with ,r any easement acquired by the public 4t large, now 3f ra�ord, for access through o'r use of the property Within t�; s proposed subdivision.,' Page 2 s _ (nt That this project will � of create adverse environment C impacts on the and a Negative Dec.Jaration is isaued.,_ SECTIO3 2: Tentative Tract" clap Na.� 11793, a,,copv,,d tvh his attached ber ^ta, is hereby approved subject to all of the following conditiLns and the attached Standard Conditions; PLA "NING DIVISION �~ 1. 6' high, decorative block wall shall be constructedu long the north and }vest sides of CCW.D well site r14. On the: °r crest side, 'such ,tall shall be setback minimum to of S:1' from the R.T(W, line, and the setback and parkway arseas shall be aOf ro�Hately " landscaped and automatically \,irrigated., A detailed plan, indicating location and de ign of such wi)ls, landscaping and irrigation, shall be submitted for-,approval to the City PTanner to prior final mdp recordation,- 2. A 61 high block wall shall be constr�lcted along the north, east and south property lines q1 lot; 23. ()a the west, a decorative wall or fencingi- -i:pt back an aierage of 2E' from.tha g.O.W. line= shalll erected, and the setback area appropriately landscaped and automatically irrigated. A detailed plan indicating Precise location and design offs such walls, landscaping, and irrigation shall be submitted-for-approval to the City Planner prior to final map recordation: 1r 3. The City shall work with the developer to seek financciaT assistance from the CCWD for the improvements to the well sites. } ENGINEERING DIVISION f 4. Improvement of Highland Avenue shall also include that portion of the strut contiguovr to the CCWD's well site #14. l S. The cost of re-.iju, -ting the Highland Avenue right -of -way and the reconstruction and relocation work for welj site #14 as required by Cucamonga County Water District shall be borne by the developer. ' 6. A refundable deposit covering reconstruction of Highland Avenue shall be required; APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 22N6 DAY OF APRIL, 1981 r . ' PLANNING CCMMISSION OF THE GITY'OF RANCHO CUCAmONGA - •t Pesolution Page 3 P,�chat ~d Dahl, t;nainkan }} ATTEST: Secretary of the Planning Unu ssiori I, JACK LAM, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the city of 4ncho Cuyamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was dull and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Cortmissio of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 22nd day of April, 1931 by the following vote tow wit: AYES: COMIS51ONERS: �Rempel, Sceranka, King, Dahl NOES: COMMISSIONERS: rior'g ABSENT:, COt"141SSIIERS: J Tolstoy / f r A I _ NN y 4 a cu.� O, i0 t LLO r a � rcr � w qa- _ w N G 4 q 9 42 .i0 q Lta 4 G> 6 U_ ... a 'A 6i! a cCS' �. xi 4P. L Cw -.Y 6' Oat: r'a YLI 07 > u G VO a i�0 - Y O C Sf'c SUE �'i L : L Y > 7 L r Nx �> t � 630. E a.A r4 L 4' >t GN C�> +✓ �UN� 4w ha.r ate. C.r :A6 C 24 ,e. d N GN «G.L? -4 i rC i-3' 3!''o v "...9'1 u;. N r R - � `j �' _ 4C� r° N� a. w ca»•+ >p yU 30.9 >tr A ii �. r w€ pO N u o 4 vc q N o > '72 a3N .e ei 4 a' ay s y nay r 1•. lj L.D a s 3 4 3a V ILL • � � � cs ao � � .u+ me 1 v. 4 f aP 7au NtP L 4 =0 LS 4UY a`'+•�� tL 9L- I— `CO3J G Vu > H° 9U yCUIn 4 N 3 > z O 3 A fiats a.0 . s r +s gG �z7 ± �C'M -. 91'6 r+ � GL'6 AA y,. b✓ �.w. 2•'sp4 Cq.�4 . Y a-llaa _ Ca W G Y.YSr3.�r l� 4 a s C x x a a IK _y Viz° w w � K ✓ TZ v = _ w z x V4aLAG p 3y ✓ by � � 5 T TiQYO .CL G F f `��Y d d.' ' V g L t f o obb:h o ., 4 g b QQz o '✓i,c . G arfi~ C3 G 6w. C+ 6�r 6 6PGwwc�OGhu 6.-308 . � i✓ � �4u Qom. ya ci � �i J ., � J 6 C.. Aft clw Cs4�0Q 4�- d 2 2 ham c c E« d dz..- 0 v L � �s m". w w x�✓ c {ate-c " " Cana3id r Q L rc 6 K `c e e Q n.r arrd 8's.`Q o> . .. � Y C L L L+ ® ® w +✓. R Y 4 d vL q + R T G G� C V V� _. � �Qi. b0 � >S p ✓µ a.J9° 6C S4 Q TCG L C xYCO� 4 R CAµ VM b b✓ 4 RL�yM a 322=9 '. F V q� a q.0 W M M L bW y Ya O V a a v wi+i Ca.T +.. M MG✓x{}. O Oru hR . 0 Nd O � W »°pN L-z .5 L }Y DEaT m? J R £ CY F4 D Yn t�L. ,D COQ. ML•'''a c E a o� a 3cg c d o o E`L Nvxe Ad r� J'W � Q O Ud rs�4w ? bg %� O*'_T'✓ piV � S[diP - 4 �_ ou 4L'T Qv �.d 3 � GOC UDxdu � d »�6 •� -e0• q`Pi LD GLg 4L L L N O. •'" p ��•e v LC L.CAC 4 e' ? q'4Ln L° — W 2 6t! € i x C C Y U d R Y 3N Q fi_ j% L•; L C T C L • d D. i OR . j ^ i L b U~ ... v » x S j G6 T» 4 3 d Vr P:- ,tl`4� YID O Y 3 ?y d. N6 46V a Racgrbq CrY Vii• O ?br . a M Owab ' 4R A Q x�QDb V�A N4Y ¢p _ND sYV � .6N. Mi`t C�9 t3 O f., �V.. Q» 6b IY 1�4'u YJA 4GN•V2r?'xN4 OA �.. 3C2..iaLL wa. ��ry I+L WaY t i N th Y H !W • W�1r ` 'at5GFe 3 o� Z v v I ob x x y y I�` ' �+ V 4 �+ dµN VA n nbv v o�g a`,� r rC 3 G a d .PEON. w 4A • •.aC t UC W U,.a L..�.+, r d d CM � 3.3 _ G "r .� 4 4 LU • •..v E C .g .5 b L a L Y : li �D?UiJV D +i u Qc D L P s u`Q C CCV-.tl c ? SLp Q 'r V i1Q_ ' 'DDn C C _ _ i v c c la. n W WO? 4 v� £ 1 D D a q 4 L a`_ c c + B `D Bq SQpp � �S C LMf� a d l P rqq.Y~ a CC ~ O A L a. rr. dd vat ° °' d m� O oo LT snm mu wqCJR 3 3e w°`[� � �>_t� w w L Dx f m �3L U U? »a �Y > > F N Liu D bd 0 U ^.. L .1. .LO x M� �� � �sd L i. -= a ab � � �M� � �gy i i LA� G CCDW ° Guc df v Jy N i3.4 . u Q Q � d G a .fib 6 Q i 4 V V Q 3 Y(� _ vu c Ctr- � �vt i .�] c ct+•`- � p U -I— D pp 4.ge u u iv m4 n nOeU+ D Dw.. Vy O. O T L Y gg LS4 a aQyA U U {. q y d -.�S r r< u dv C.QQe. V V 3L ? ° - d fYx d„ L L2 +°+ •=+�V 4 v >; l'a. F F4 R; d �^ O L` 1 1 4DY�VUiV? L L [iY 4 4b4 ( (��y 1g O ds: L Lr USyuO 6 4 4 d m a a E N d L.r U d 6 4 D D d = w �k Sbi bY` fiddn y G d y NE rP S O R • II L C N d �- n q. r C N.++ Y Vpw y r v9 Cµ t •« ti�4 Ll'i�9 bIPF � Cw°C_ ^f �..,. y db. y 9.z N anD �y9a 3J`yN P do JVG 4 direrE G' xJ�i O.: LW Cb N.°. N • EiY B.. HJ G w� P-41! . x y F ` 1° '° u. o t �� 2bP . a P+ Q..+ ��Ejj y N• C `ice Ui S a Ct R all- V5 dVR d j ~ CCU AW °N4 aL+RC' at LP P3 �'LY y PV 9M'P5 i4 0 °.- ° a r..v >L +,. io'. CE�• .E� .°a p" AB E •va d. Cu �+ �VV L W' KPK"- ?a d�SlL C- G >fL Lw C1N -LM E °V++ CL t°.f� W �'{�. .� 6Nt-.i VI �... -W N:PDv ��Y`L1 LC %` ~d'•J, 4 ValR-t. XI p r V 6 qt1 . Ud7«G- G6 z E A 4 N = A 19 �� :ice ivsL u\ o °u c - i.'. c 1.. c -a • P. % d�: _.y..,._ era. c oy� J - P4•�. S. ., .i L_ a3U�1 tiG _ D dJW 3 6 Cu �l �V' 3 t 4 .0 r 44 O.aa v wy. d i' GJ L `' C ° v c c o } r• - `^: s � e v e F t ,,, ^ J° c� r o y ; L r3 C Yy Zr °�i Cube Bu-,_ CG - rt w =V M� Lu. IC's V ON 11F V_C,'N. C is CVi C£L�6 4.Pv� Ctif P�N.Q O 'b 5.. NG( U?'Oy �G E 73 "•• R � y\ V� �^ F 4 C q2 U Q L 2R. C 9 .fJ y V < tt ` tT l -4°. ( GLE r=p VV 4:4 y Itj b 4 R II: Oa�i 'zi .+ r i U A V � ul ' l � .O 2 L OT.V C C Is 1y L. a V a! •Oi r� 9 �. p 4 `C CN � O AL ` L V • 1�� 2 'Fb C aC 4 J O y �YC YµL q -0: OC1 .00 c�v of O., _ 4 �'9 �0 e• uyOR_ cQ� •O Cu Y U .�. O' Y 'd z �i q as Z q n1 4 N ; AqY O R <I G4 n C q 7R nu d GNl �4 ,fly E 06pp C2`3 r U:Q T G nJ _EE G Ca A p4 pY \[��} n b Lyu�S u�..Gb tea' t XI1 ).4 n L M q • c c.. o? c y y vti sa b €�� n n -H1 -rd � � N C q 9N G L b NC�Yw •ms's N2}A rdy O �Y. N w -� Oi GEG�O 4< G �yu 3n Y O!� may= �b qa L a C y q z-- A J V 3 Y` O y C C G O C M~ n _ y b vl yl � �\\ V N Gyby II _ C O J ` ya Y O.pN_ '� 4 YL n p ..b S ^ q vL n� 6L 4v Fy 9 l J r ^ i R r T :+I w �. `•_� T,C V� w •.- C� Lti 4 C G tl d A Oy ¢GIT.. C� 4V QC � 9 0 C R LQA lOFL L� J L V w�� y l'�^ NA NC O Q py Ci�'' Ty Aq Vl aG0 y ^qW � p4 b wC 4 l7 V M ti� Pj YR N' of IG rz i l° :RESOLUTION NO. .. A .RESOLUTIOi_ OF THE RANCHO CUCA14ONGA PLANNING CO%MISSION APPROVING A ';1E EXTENSION FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 11793" WHEREAS, a re���, has en f *led for a time extension for the above- described project p ant to Section 1.501.83(b) of Ordinance 28rB, 'she Subdivision Ordinance, and, WHEREAS, the Planning orm►issior conditionally approved the above described Tentative Tract-11793. i,T,he'RAncho SFCTION is Cucamonga Planning Commission has made the following findings: J " A.� The previously approved Tentative " Map is in substantial compliance with the City's current General Plan, Specific Plans, Ord lances, Plans, Codes and Policies; and, B. The extension of the Tentative Map will not likely cause significant inconsistencies. with the current Ghteral clan, Specific Plans, 'Ordinances, Plans, Codes a�- ' Policies; and. i ! t C. The extentsion of the Tentative Map is not likely to cause public health and safety problems; and, D. The extension is within the time limits prescribed by state law and local ordinance. , SECTION 2: "The Rancho Cucamonga PIannir,� Coorimission hereby grants a time extension for: Tract Appiicant ,Expirat_ 11793 BLISS March 28, 1980` APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 27TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 1985. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO vL'CAMONGA �l BY: Dennis L. Stout, Chairman ATTEST: Rick Gomez, ,Deputy Secretary- I, Rick Gomez, Deputy Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Ranchn Cucamonga, do hemm,bli` certify that the foregoingc,Resolutian was duly agr regularly introduced g y , passed, i�nd— `s�pted b�C City of Rancho Cucamonga, a� reguT'al,,�meeting on the 27th day of February, 1985, Vike f� ,, the Planning Commission a�cha of the Planning Cammis y eld following vote -to -wit " y� AYES: Y' COMMISSIONERS: }� NOES: CON IIISSIONERS; ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS; 0 C% i IA CITY OF R jNCHO CUCA.MONGA a N Z ca > 1977 DATE: February 27, 1985 TO - Members of the Manning Commission FROM: _ _ Rick Gomez, City Ptarger BY: Nancy Fong, Assistant Planner SUBJECT:- ENiIIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT - REVIEW 84 -57 BUSTER FILPI - The development of a--9, 0 square foot t` multi- tenant building on a porWon of 3.4 ack s o{ land in the General Industrial District (Subarea, 3),,Aocated at the northeast corner of Industrial Lane and F,eroq Boultivard - APN 209- C31 -7.1, I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION; A. Action Requested: Issuance of a Negative Declaration B. Purpose: Construction of,. a 9,000 square foot light manufacturing use multi- tenaA bcra fig, C. Lo -.ation3 _Northeast corner of Industrial Lane and Feron Boulevard ' D. Parcel Size: Portion of 3.4 acres f E. Existing Zoning: eneral Industrial District (subarea 3) F. Ei:stina Land Use: Outdoor storage of equipment G. , S, x�wt;nding Land qsc, and Zoning: � f North f dustrial; General Industrial District South Industrial, Railroad' - tracks, General L-�dustrial District East - Industrial, vacant; General Industrial District ` West Industrial; General ustrial District H. General Plan Designations:: ;\ Project Site - General Industrial f North General Industrial South i ueneral Industrial ' East - General Industrial West General Industrial g ITEM C L Planning Commission Staff Report February 27, 1985 DR -27 - 11uster Filpi 8e I. Site Characteristics; G The subject site is at the southern end of art older existing J industrial lot with existing industrial buildings. This area is paved with asphalt, used for outdoor storage of e equipment and is surrounded by chain link fence. J II. ANALYSIS: Part I of the Initial Study has ber'complsted by the app— plcant. Staff has completed Part II of',. the Environmental z Checklist and found no ;significant impacts on the environment a*V a result of this project. A copy of Part II of- the Environmental Checklist is attached for your review and co sideration.. Upon approval of a Negative Declaration; the City anner- will grant final approval of the project based `upon co .ions recommended by the Design and Technical Review Gomnittvee— `J III. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Commission i4sue a Negativ�claration for DR 84 -57, Res ectfullyted ' --':- i v Gomez. y anner [RG.,NF:cv a; a ir' Attachments: Exhibit "A° - Location Map Exhibit "B" - Site Plan Exhibit "C" •- Conceptual Grading Plan ` -� Exhibi )31 - Conceptual Landscape Plan Exhibit V Elevations r In'-` -dal `o.tudy:- Part 11 0 il„ r 'l f .. ,.ate.,.., �µ'♦al�,, t../ I\'ORTH' Cri'vY OF PLANNIr U DiV EIQi' 4' -' tIBI r• ,. E i `T: SCALE- M1: 1 :1 l ( :.� �'t- Curt -w. Isurz.rhnjw � _ •� gcdsaaw ►u t+o NA M! a • i�/+9. Vu W 4YV4 #.fwMS � r \� S i i t' ! Y � ., ' 1Tf AwtR[S•u >� aou; �11rr.n./wuawwk i r'/l� , . `rvew: � IisriVYwr1M wl - _ tiVi+.6•'.�1�wWt 1�.1. i %'^M1r�wa. t�NS.Ct YtwtW - Ito PIANNING DIV Si t ~� EXHII3F`I'C �' sc�L fl D ) ice} � i }• K,P ♦ 1 r NORTH CITY OF VETM: �I JQ ExapI 'T t ff� L, /l till ij l• 1 ~ / NORTH arr-y' � ` UE&V ,�ry ll: NOTNGA i TITLE " t EXH I�T: � a, ` •rE •'r `. _ CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGd, PART Ii — INITIAL .T3Y EW1RONME14TAL CHECKLIST DATE: .. ... r ! APPLICANT: R l FILING DATE: -- 12-2S e LOG MW PROjiXT; + r i- PROJECT 1'. 1NLVIRMZMNT j, IMPACTS (Explanation of ail "yes" and "maybe" answers are regUired sheets),-. on attadhed;. Y RS ME NO i 1. Soils and.Geologv, 'Will 'the proposal have significant results in, QD R- Unstable ground conditions or in changes in geologic relationships? b. Di=A(Aptions,: displacements, compaction or burial of the soil? c. - Change in topography or ground surface contour Intervals? d- The destruction* covering or modifications of any unique geologic or physical fectures? ` >> e- Any Pdiential increase in wind or water erosion of soils, affecting either on or, off site conditons? f. Changes in erosion siltation, or deposition? S. Exposure of people or property to geologic ; hazards such as eart4,qua)Feg, landslides, mud —` slides, ground faijure,lor similar ha -mards? h. An increase in the rate of axtrartian and /or ' t 3 use of, -any minetalr,resoures? 2. F24MIogv, Will the proposal hnv-# significant results in; a " or endangeted species of plants? q rare page ? YES T 1YBE z:d a. _Changes in currents`r.or the coure of direction — — :_� or ephemeral strgam channei,s? b» Changes in Qasarpt.zon rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and a amount of sur �noff? farz water — c» Alterations to — d• Change in the amount of surface Water is body of w water? a e. fischarge into surface waters, or -any alteration of surface w wateY'guality? f- AIei --r pion of groundwater cbaraccavistics? 8• Charge in the quantity of grouudwaters, " " additions or with_ - drawals or through tntetference veyth aquifer? an QualltyZ Qmantity? � � h. The reduction in the amount, ate ater oth:?- Wise a available for pµblic water supplies? i. Ea;posure of people or property to water,, _ _ ouch_as flooding or sei,chrs? l l'Mr 3• !>< ual3t Will the proposal have sigtificant restats i in: a• 'C'rszstar.`} or periodic air 'emisYions from mobil' or indirect s sources? e �. h. Deterioration of ambient air quality and/or interference with the a attainment of applicable; air quality , -itandards? . .- c. Alteration of local�or regional elivatic conditions." affertin& air movement, moisture or temperature? 4. Biota -'' Flora. Will the proposal have.si,gnifitan.t results in: a. Change in the eysracteristi,cs oi species, including d i lae sity, dis j jbution, or number of any species of plants-r' a as' &, Reduction of tha numbers of any uai ue n�ge 3 xES �M ss La Introduction of new oe,`disruptive specio"� of Plants into an area?': z- 1_,° �� d, Reduction `in potentiai for agricultural _ `,'? production? - l Fauna, Will the Proposal -have signifi in: cant re alts a. Change in the clkaracteristics4of species, includinj divarsity,_;Iistribution, { or numbers o£ any species of animals? b. Reduction of ,the numbers- o> any unique, rare or endangered species of animals? C. Introductior, of new or disruptive species of ` animals into an area, or result in a barrier, :.tonthe migration or moyement of animalsr d. Aeterip al�i,on or removox1 'Of existing fish or, iailtilife habitat,? 'n 5. Pa�,c�iation, Willtha:.g;raposal have sigirif3cant results inr, a, WVU the proposal altAr. *_hs'jlocation,`distri- butien,.density, divexaitj,'or ) growth rate of the human popaZatioa -if an area? ' h. Will to Proposal affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? 6. Saci� o- Econaaic.Faetors. I.n tle-prwposal have significant results iK; ,`. Ji a- Change is local or!GTegional socio- economic ".characteristics, including economic or commercivl �ivers.:ix, tax rate, and property Values" b. Will projec ,costs be equitably sistributed among grodert,beneiiclaries, 3,e..' buyers, tax payers orJ,,roject ,'users? 7. Tared Use And ions•• _Plannine,lConsideta, Will the Proposal have significant,,- esuuits ia? a, A: Zub�sttantial alteration of the present or p;,anneLA, land use �r ( of an area? 'A S) b. confli t with' an deli• -+ P olicies� Y g�.ation's, objectives, r , or adopted' plans. of any governmental entitie_ i' y the qulaity or quantity of Existing �Pnsmptive ' or nos- consumptive Yscre t£on0'1 opportunities? N Page L ,l $. Transtior`t�,tion. Will the proposal ave significant, results YE5 A4�13 N, 0 .1n: a- Generatidn of substantial additional v>2hicular movement? b., Effects on existing streets, or demand for new street constructions, c. Effects on existing Parking facilities, or demand for new parking? d- Substantial ' impact upon exifiting transports- lion systems? e- Alterations to present patte rn s L circula- tion. or movement of peogle and /or 'g s? f. Alterations to'or effects on present an. Potential mater- bor'ne,`rai1, mass transi} or air traffic? g. Increases in traffic hazards, to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? 9. GulturOl Resources. Will the proposal have significant results. in: a. A disturbance to the integrity of arebaeologicalq Paleontological, and /or historical resources? j 10. Eealth. gafety, and Nuisalice Factors. Will the T proposal have significant results, i`n; ,I Creation of any health hazard or hazard? potential ±health e b. Expo sure people to potential heal--,b iazards? c. A risk of explosion or release of bozo doua` substances in the event of an acr_iden.�. d. An lacreese in the number of indivirivais or species of yectar�or pathenogenic " jf organisms or the ex gpsure of _people to such organisms? e. Inrreas in lacing noise levels? f. Ex poo-ura of.people to potenrially dangerous g. The creation of dbjectidnable odors? -- ..�... h' `;fight or glareT �� t I% f Page 5 t^ restbeti_ YES RAM- NO r(, cs, Will the proposal have significant �J�! results in• , a. The obstruction or.',degxadaCion of vista or view? any scenio' +; b. The creation of an aesthetically offensive. -' site? i( " ' c. A conflict with the objpttive ofeignated -,or potential scenic corridors? 12. Utilities and Public Services. Will the proposal have a significant need for na,4 Systems, or alterations to the following: a. Electric power? b. Naturci or'package6iZaj? c. rommunicatsons systems? - d. Water. supply? _ [ e. Wastewater fecilities? f Flood control structures? g: ,'Solid waste facilities? h. Fire protection? i. Police c protection? 9 • Schc;ols? . k. Larks or other recreational Facilities? �a 1v ialnf"�nancc of publ3,c. facilities, including �roads and flood control, facilities *'" M-- Other.governmeuta3 services? �{ 13.. Energy and Scarce Resrsurces. 'Will the proposaa v, If have-significant results in: ry a� Use of substant}al or ,Nce$sive fuel or energ J? b Substantial increase in demand upon existing° sources of energy? + ` = C. An inc,-,-ass in tha demand for development of new sources of enemy? d.,,An increa §e or vespetuation of the consumpcioa - }l of non -teu -1 able forms of error %Y, when feasible ' LL renewable soureej of energy are availv_ble ??:: t Tr Page G YES �� CJ MME .NJ F ;t�� e. Substantial depletion of any �ncnrenewable or`�) natural -: ,scarce : ? � resource. 14. Mandatory Findin s 01 Si ificance. a„ Does the pz'ijeet have the potential to degrade~ the quaiity of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat fish Ppf or " Aldlife species;, caL ,a a fish- or wildlife .popuiatior' ,to drop \ be:.,; self Sustaining Uvels, threaten to . eliminate zw plant or' animal cocatun3ty, reduce the number or restrict the range of .a rare a; endangered plant or animas or eliminate examples (�o)tant of the major periods of 1ifoFnia his or prehistory? li -hoes ther4project.have the potential to achieve :hors -term, to the disadvantage of long -term, 'thvironmental goals? (A.short -term; impact on the Environment }^ is one which Occurs in a relatively.,t brief, defintiie period` of? time while Iong- L term impacts .41 endure well into the future), , e_ Does the project have impaC,tir'which are individually U21 '3 but c0_;ulatively considerable? (Cumulatively, considerable means that the incremental effects of an Ind: project are considerable when vi6ed in connection with the .effects of past projects, and probable f .future projects). J �{ d. Does the project have environmental effet;i' Which will cause ,substantial adverse effect' prn uman beings, either di.,stctly or indir t y? _ IF. DISCUSSION OF E'MRc�3 -10TAL EVAX.UATi02� (i.e„ of affirmative the abol` ?SWer tcr- questions plus a discussion or proposed•Atzgatlon measures). n�,si.: zTZ. LET E_V *IATTTOY o J� ff On the basis of this initial evaluation: Il � T pro find ��! se _ . j' e _ fib; "grope d ct COULD NOr'.h -i,a a sipificant effect e on the zdvironments and a NEGATIVE Md: ,ZkTr ^t +Yfti be j prepared.. T find that although the ptopdse3,g£aje�7catticc have a �s nifieaztt j effect an the environment ; Yhere ails D/t be a aigniiicant effect in this case because the tigation measures ?Yesctiired on er. attached shlet 'have heett added ,xo the roiec DECLARATIOX WILL BE PREPARED. � L: A. 14EGATM, a T find the proposed gxcJect °aa.have a gignificarrjeffect on the ^_nvxnment a.' - a a an EN�YIROikEti� TuuPAGT REPORT is - aired xl ° . � Date Signat'�fx ^e a Title A .6 +r nr r y4", _ �.4: _ _ _'TY OF R"CHO CUCAMONGA csc v►r ISTAFF �i Q `r Vi > , February 27, 1985" ` TO. Chairman and Members of.,the Pianpigg Commissiv'i FROM; Rick GMe;, City Flannar BY: ,; Howard L. Fields, Assistant Planner -SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Ab DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 84 -47 - PICKEN - To allow the" development of a retail sa sycommercial building of 8,040 squar,� feet.,, located on tfr'g south side of Foothill Bbulmrd;�and easf of Vineyard on,' approximately 72 acres within ttie\General Commercial dl3trict, APN 208 - 241 -30 : rr/ I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: %r1 A. Actinn Requested: Approval of a precise site plan and architectural- design, and is,uance of a Negative Declaration. B. Purpose: Development of a retail sales /commercial building of 8,F*O square „feet. C. ':Location: "Located on °the south side of Foothill Boulevat�d' ast —of d d Vineyard. D. Parcel Size: .72 acres< E. Existing Zoning:' General`Cor"rcitl (GC) F. Existing Land User Existing single family residence G. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North - Existing Commercial center, Rancho Cucamonga` ” Plaza, GC o South Approved Multi- Family Residential Complex, (American National). Medium"'Righ Residential o East Existing Multi- Family Residential Complex (Pepperwood), l� Medium High Residential West - Existing Fast Food Facility 'In-N -Out Burger), 77 (S :: GC _D ITEM D ' Planning Commission Staff Report .X rebruary 27, 1985 QR 84-47 - Picken Page #2 Ii General Plan Project S'Ge - Commer-cial North Comercial Southo Medium"�- High Residential (�,4-24 dui ac) East'� Medium - High Regidentia. (14-24 dulac)- Wesf Commercial Q 1. Site Ckaracti1stics: At the present �time the project site is occtlpig'_c��T� --n,, a �V existing single-family residence that Wilt be removed Existing topography is approximately 4 feet'below Foothili Boulevard. grade. The remainder of subjec,� site drains naturally to the south, at a 3% grade. 11. ANALYSIS: A. General - T"� Oroposed deye-l-WOant ii-Ill offer approximately sp" 7 units of leasable c . �Averaging 1*000 square feet fer small, business activities. , The DvoJecti proposal meets the requirements for parking and wil't be �r,�,�viced by 4� shared driveway with the adjace��, fast,food fa6i'��ity, t access off of Foothill Boulevard. j B. Desio Review Committee: Design Review. Pommittee m—.,ber!: review,%V�and ap0oved the dW2n elev"tions. subje(it- to addioona'l architectural tre�'tment to the north, west and eW-,,*levq'jtIons, including adalustment of the-roof element by wralopinglIthe roof arounA the building, utilization of bay windows, J�ulti-paned, wood�_ mKionr, and alternating the window-, fac&, along the front eUv2tion. Committee meibers discussed utfl, izing mate r'ials would provide , a, Hrustic" look. omments involvei�',� dense To.n6scapingl along rear elevai.),� r and I e se ,ps buildin'9 setbac� the rea -to r� to allow pedestriak 'liding orientation a164-bui frontage. Grading Committee* The fol lowing i �Iwds �,4 'ssed by Are discu -CDmittee: the Gradfig Importatien tf 000 CuVic yards 'lessen of fill, in order,,ta the dil I if in geadp, from -11, Foothill Boulevard, and, (2) D' raii i nne led �) the_�' south�.rly adjacent property. The, 6adin�,) Committee has recommended approval of CUP 84-47, SU ect �pecial to S, Conditions on the attached Resolutiop r tive to drainage and finalization of, the Grading Pliar. 4 N 7 Pl:!n airg` Commission Staff Repert Feorudry 27, 1985 0 DR rA7 - Pickett PaQE F D.: Environmental Asi a s�sment: Part I I of the Initial Study has been completed b ^applicant., Staff "has completed Part IY of the .environtnei#al checklist and fou6d no Significant adverse impact on the environment as a result of this i project. VIf the Commiss. on''!mncurs 44th said findings, then issuance of a Negative Declaration ruld be in order. �r III. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: Thpj project Is consistent with the General Plan and Deng apment Cop. The project not be detrimental to adjacent properties or cause significant adverse environmental impacts. In, addition, the,, proposed urge , and site plan, together with the rycommended Conditions of 9 proval "`are in compliance with-the appliry able provisions of Uhe Development Code and City Standards.: IV. RECOMANDATION SUM recommends approa�l of _DR 84-4' through`— . adoption of the Attae%ed Resolution and issuance of a Negative Declaration. J A ResPecs,fully sub%mitt ' : Pick omen, AG:NF:cr �Attachments: Exhibit "A' ".4cation ;lap Exhibit "BU e Site �Plan'': u Exhibit "C" - Gradi'iig Puri • Exhib t "D" Boildfhn t ?eYatY� ^r • Exhibit " E 1andscape_P 1'ap' � . " gitial Study, P r>tis; lJ (a - _ V_ , u 0701-02 o 2- 27-85 PC da a 2 'of 6 _ �JLJ �illa�s i1l�r�rmilael�Jlef�e� - t.lU1 'U f ' ill �f.. _- -JUULJ, _.�1 Lit T' NORTH 9 1..� CITY Or �. � q 7 RANTC C} 4 UCA1VIOI TGA �CG"C PLA.NN[ s. '7ti'I[31T _ �SCALG p t( , r' ,G _,S 1 o . _ a * 1 q • �.. t--- ,yy. �[ � .I : 1 m 1� �5� - �1••Z � }� _ i / yl i o i .(ems r j Nil � o 1 � � � 9 1 - y - � � • 3i� _ [�-4' a _ Z = S Ig t /•!u•M1W ti.r www>V.w `vtaT'N.w :i>•!f> *w�tw.a N�'�� ..TV..0 �wnv �:f./i1�J.i >sT �•. T� 1' .. GOtiOtO . Piaman AromtteCL AIA p ... wr : KMWSG.. V : Via. :• fi-. r' ,G _,S T t=— iTr�•� 3--• • .!RFV. ter 'f , 4 � 94 t.' t • � �, � �� is r xY• i ~ • � ;rE S �� _ �1 of �~ c 1l` to IM y t _ as lyli j :'I t1, f i �• ` �t .f FF 1'�pi pip' rf g �J r t€ Ff {i i} 55 #iqt Eiji i! tiiI i !i s Y tq. t}si iei rir[i i 1LiL p z� SSIlt }� s. 3Fiita [ ,lajt ;€ ,_ �z2 7¢ ipti if tt t °s i9 jt Sri: [l €1 ti € s ! itI'i i to ?- ;xy If f!tiA ai i 2r itr.. f a( �r •.i _ At Iit }r i} t� j� ait Fr ;1 I -A; jl }i€ t lit f e tF F j.. ! it !Y a iai yT s }if i iY €; f fif zs =- € i tt T ilk F� tt +� ?F €ta tai S�€ to i 9 cf t.f fi€hi ii a if s�r tt gg )) �. s5 7'tt r �i- .ia .. ..,.... �.... ............. o.....w. , *s' GRADING PLAN ANACAL aHG�NEeRUCG. �o. � •.« »� .••..m.. .. Ir ZZ t� �: RANCN6 �rA CEN � ,• :�, ," ", ...r.. ,....- ++.�.'r _ S. ..s w...�nw.•aKw i F 1 tl y b Y z n a i s a a Y 's S e * E 4 (may ike s y l got O � J .» � vs IlCIiOCp C'.3 ?QKtIl1 RI�C>IiLOC AM O lit awv, ow. w. �a„ �.w+f.e�xw.v.do'o-+'C�W.gy,+,w.x qty ; Ij+JJ 1 9`�, •� � ( r • ei� �� r � fi P, C *� '• + .mod -1 .0,. C� ®. a .-- T..�....1 fy. ..� I• -_� �• r fig Cb f, MaW t FsCSe 'fwth CA 92tiE0. �• , r �� 81 ombl BMi Flendo ., Nurde- AaaacMtas Chl SYr�ft Horarren tiC•LaMSC.en NWletta 270071 e Rnh A— &W CA 92413 - ADM �. r_ . (7t!)aG -2/Dp i! a ' 1 -F R CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PART II - INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECIMIST DATE.:_ J'— / r= j- I ✓` fF APPLICANT: b61V*A1 C. Y rG�CEr FILING PATE: » - y- 8'5/ LOG XMIBER s JE(/6G� s��ttT A /Z�r�S;�i GS�'.daaE2�! -yam PROTECT•_dstd a.'6; r PROJECT LOCATION:Z--1'_-,e X,,3 .5iy 1ir��' O�'iooTs� G %f�s3 . %P Gr'•�' //'t�l� I. - ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (Explanation of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required on attached sheets). YES MAYBE NO 1. Soils and Geology. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Unstable ground c/,i ditions or in changes in _ geologic- relat�,41iships? f (/ b. Disruptions,, d. s lacements _.. 17 p ,.compaction or burial'of the �l? c. Change in ta2-ograp v or__around surface �r contour ixic als? t/ d. The drsCrnction, covering or modification of any unique geoZogit or physical features? 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? 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: H dralb. frill the proposal have significant results in:; cat� x f. }.. .. �-� Page 2 ,,YES `�34YBE NO a. Changes in currents, or the course of direction of flowing streams, rivers, or ephemeral stream. channels? ?� b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or r'1e rate and amount of surface water runoff? c• Altarations 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 haters -, or any alteration of surface water quality? ✓i f. Alteration of groundwater ebaractgristics ?;, g. i Change in the quantity of groundwa� either through direct additions drawals,, or through interference witan anuifer? .. Quality? Quantity? a../ h, !i The reduction in the amount of hater other- wise available for public water supplieq i.' Exposure of people or property to water _ related hazards such as flooding or seiches? S. Air Quality., Will the proposal have significant ` results in a. Constant or periodic air emissicns from mobile or indirect sources? Stationary sgj—v I �--- b. Deter ;oration of ambient air quality and /or interference with the attainment of applicable air quality s andards? c. Alteration of local or regional climatic conditions, affecting air movement, moisture t. or temperature? k, 4. Biota Blora. Will the proposal have significant results in: 4 &. Change in the characteristics of species, „ including diversity, distributiop, or number of-any species of plants? :? b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare'. o or endangered species of plants? F� r e; -` Tlage YES iftiY$E No c. Introduction of new or disruptive species or' Plants, into an area? d, Reduction in the potential fors agricultural production ?,� Fauna. Will the proposal have significant results t % in; _ a. Change in the characteristics of species, including diversity, distribution, or numbers Of any Species of animals ?' `` b. Reduction of the numbers of'-any unique, rare or endangered species of animals? cr I c• Introduction of'newr or disruptive species of I animals into an areal: or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? d. Deterioration or removal of existing fish or wildlife habitat? v/ 5. PJpulation. Will 1;'he proposal have significant results 1nr a. Will the proposal alter the location, distri- bution,- density, diversity, or growth rate of' the human population of an:a ;ea? ur b. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or create a demand fo , additional housing? +5. Soaio Economic Factors Will the proposal have significant results in a. +Changa in local or, rogional Socio-economic : characteristics, including economic or commercial diversity, tax rate, anu`r4operty values? b. Will project costs be equitably distributed among project ueneficiaries i.e., buyers, tax payers or project Users? 7. Land Use and Planning Considerations. Will the proposal have,significant results in? a. A substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? / AIL b. .A conflict with any designations, objectives, policies, or adopted plans of any governmental entities? } a. An impact upon the glasity or quantity of existing-consumptive or nan- consumative cp recreational Opportunities? '/ i 4 ` J' Page 4 a _ YES :L�YBE NO e $. Trans4oitation 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 facilities, or dexand for new parking? d. Substantial impact upon existing transporta- tion systems? e. Alterations to present patterns of circula- tion or moveuant- of people and /or goods?,-,' f. Alterations to or effects on present and potential water- borne, rail, macs transit or sir traffic? g. Increases in traffic hazards to motor vehicles,�IJ� bicyclists or) pedestrians? 9. ^ultural Resources. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. A disturbance to the integrity of archaeological, paleontological, and /or historical t:?sources? -` 10. Health, Safety, and Nuisance Factors. Will the �y proposal have significant results in: ..a. Creatio'_j 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 substances in the event of an accident? d. An increase in the number of individuals l' or species of vector or pathenogenic A organisms or the exposure of people to such organisms? 4 e. Increase in existing noise levels? f. Exposure of people to P potentially dangerous � noise levels ?,� u g. k The creation of objectionable odors? h. An increase in light or glare? �' JZ Page o (7 YES .* l aE Na 1 11.. Aesthetics.- WikL the proposal hwe significant results in: -, a, The obstruction,I degradation of any sceniv I/ vista or view? b. The creation of an aesthetically offensive a Jr site? ji c. , A ^onflict wrlth the objective of designaeed or potential scenic corztiidors? 12. Utilities and Public:," Services. Will the proposal have a signi£icant_.need -for new systems, or alterations to the following; a. Electric power`? b. Natural "or packaged gas? C. Communications systems? d. Water supply? t' e. Wastewater facilities? f. Flood control structures ?' Solid S. waste s e facilities? h.. Fire prof ctian? t/ I. Police protection? J. Schools? f k. Parks or other recreational facilities ?_s.'_ 1. Maintenance of public facilities, including e� roads and flood control facilities? t/ m. Other governmentg services? 13. EneML and Scarce Resources. Will the proposal have signfzcant 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 development of new sources of energy? - d• L An increase-'or rrrpetuation of the consumption {( of non renewable forms of energy, when feasible renewable sources of energy are available? Page 6 _ \` 'ES ` ME NO e. Substantial depletlon,.of any nonrenetiable or scarce natural resource? K 14. Mandatory Findincs of Significance. E „ a. Does the project have the potent ial to degrade i the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of''fish,or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife "population to drop below serf sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or a`?mal or eliminate 1 important examples of'the major periods of J California history or prehistory? b. Does the project have tFae` potential to achieve ahort -term, to the 8isadvaatage of long -term, environmental goals? (A short -term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively briefs definitive period of time while Song' term impacts will endure well Lito the future). r� ff -- e. Does the projritt have impacts which are individually jimited„ but cumulatively considerablej? (Cumulatively considerable means that ?`tha incremental effects of an individual project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, and probable future projects). d. Does-the project have environmental effects which v;.11 cause substan,ial adverse effects an human beings, either directly or,.indirectly? iI. DISCUSSION OF $IMRON—MMUL EVALUATION (i,e,, of affirmative answers to the above '2uestions plus a discussion of proposed mitigation measures,.___.,,_ G've/E2. �x:sTr�✓� Tdf,Sd��- �'w� d4/!G� C���}�� �".i�� �ir'1S�,u .�- ��r}GL 1�•2.��o.sEd �5?2�rio'1- .dC,zG�'iCG �E 2�c�„G! �%�EriCr(�i S�s'•e y'•ac E sfi "pia �3/y �77-o;s SKrL {+4ca Pf IiJRGG %!� yiLCt��^,r2; 3�ir` f3 /2E�To�cJ.. YyJ«:(�G�/%�f A!=.dYrw/!�E/�* q. 40 h) � - ter— ✓ �.2.e�yX✓.S.¢'G- /.tltL' �- fi+/�i,ti°�"+45,�• �a5/,�C, s v'�t�.5`,r'.rJl✓1� � L�t2c 1 .x`"� rsi�l,. =rte .K.'a c; •,r�*,Sc.. 7'�.r! =r�1rV 5d/�i`f * . . ' r. ?2ge On the basis of- :_this iiaitial evaluation: I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect r` on the environszent, and e 3ZCRTV'Z DECL�RiTiO:S will be prepared. T find that although the proposed project could have a aigct iicart effect an the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this rase because the mitigation measures dest:ribed on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A tiCGdTIVF. DgC�'. 10:1 nLL $$ PB.k ARED. I find the proposed Project ;LAY have a significcnt effect on the envirnasent, and an ENVTx4Y !g qT L*tPr1CT REPORT is required. Datey 5ignac e - RESOLUTION NO. A RESOOITION OF THE P( "T* r CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSIC;J APPROVI� DEVELOPMENT FcEsIIEW N0. 84 -47 LOCATED SOUTH 5IDE ' OF FOOTHILL AND ,EAST OF VINEYARD IN THE GENERAL COMMMERCIAL DISTRICT ; i 1 WHEREAS, on the 19th day of December, 19844;. , a complete " application was filed by Don Pickers for review,of the above - described project; and WHEREAS, on the t',th day of February, 1985, 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:' Tha+ the following can be met: 1. That the proposear=-/ro1ect is consistent with the ,abjectives of the G,neral Plan, and 2. That the propo5: use is in accord with the objective of theeevelopment Code and the purposes of ther,district �a which the site is ;ocated• and 3. That the proposed use is in compliance with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code; and 4. That tftvi proposed use, together with the,,conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties, 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 February 27, 1985. SECTION 3: That Development Review No. 84 -47 is approved subject to the following conditions and attached Standard Conditions: 1. Applicant shall plant dense landscaping to the rear of pre sed building as a mitigating measure in order to'screen the rear elevation. 2. Lesser rear setback in order to provide more pedestrian orientation along �dilding frontage, 3. Provide written agreement from adjacent southerly property owner for acceptance of drainage. Planning Commissimi Resolution February 27,;J985 F. DR 84 -47 Paget Y _ I) 4. " Provide special architectural treatment, !i.e., bay windows, alternating the window face "'to Create in ',x, and ou't's. Provide a rustic look by 4!�ing river' rock facing and multi- paned or wood mullions.) The roof element shall be enhanced ; by wraPpinq and continuing the roof line around the bu lding on 3 sides. 5. Pravtde 6 -foot decorativd block wall along easterly /southerly property line. APPROVED AND A))OPTFD THIS 27TH DAY 0�FE8RUAtY, 1985. PLANNING COMMISSION OF;:THE CITY OF RANChb CUCAMONGA BY: Dennis L— Stoui, Chairman — ATTEST: -hick, Gomez, Deputy L'acretary V _ I, Rick Gomez, Deputy Secretary of the Planninge:tommission of the City of n Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Kesolution was.duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the'Planhing Commission of'the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 27th day of February, 1985, by the fuil�ing'�ate -to -wit, ' AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES. COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: � yh) r . j.,( ��.CC lYCLQM LN Y i•di M...UOtyy MV ire. AN°s0 �� aO �RU.. Nalr. - YGU .Y° a°1 .4i L uM 3 ` �4 O'.VC�YU u in `O, al. L9 �UV n //. ,na d dObN 3a da RF.e aCL�' EAq °U4. •-M ^V E i „ =� a 4° � az '.0 °£. u G si O u,o m Ku.° n d Sd•”" EE � 'd N A aWLaU N AO I� i f .. EME E?Oi�wC xY� `pw �O -a dU C L•3L Y 6NC t� ,pN Nq0 Ot E wood "c° d`a Ls.a. °� me n°.°z c M ° °�o�wmw t O O NC O.+O N ° p N�UiUV 9V ^ C°Qy •nqM �' _ o � =8s'•'e C ,c° o:� .'�. uLY'^ w.r.e i? O `•S^ VNd " co..'`. p4•sd and =6n s.�c «.s c°-.mnm s sw. RZ; y 1% !III N� V - LL VS •+ y w N wt Fi oq rC dduoi� .°.e i A v' cu LL O. `�jo G E U z � z � �� _ •n i e' ,t`'�` � z So lu 1 CiL n .L G ^t 9v.0Y.7C oac ° me ` cnd u ' t °a � %4! T a.� _. 0. NC 1=<NO K°-Ya VIg6 6V 1 anv Nis lei 2 E i1 emu» V Qa°Eq �yc�'r \ yam. a aaa c pAi�oy xo � ^ ^ro orb G•o Gu • . .. a.�q ' ' �wN.f wy NrA �6N qy. . L 7S C � , ,I W � .CwNno 7 t N _ ac�n A _.-�.. ` � �t Aga Vt n n A N C Gaci a n U e X O O ° i N N N,'r a w C EY •O Y Y a G� � aC • yr..b Q.- aD y.<G p pOlV ; lr -QCcA .p °NJ�+° -VaVN- N NL gcML R. a�6 L L V a ;4Z L a �. VL•l -. ON 5 5L.0 V �^ w'y= .7g La (y 4 � r• CI L L V r� n� C 4 A .•' .... e. <` Nr .°.. `i� } }'.+ao° .- a.u.°' �E Nop eery L L.�p �.; Vr °wpN� a a.CC A 0 C'.aM ^ ^RC y d.1NM O X°"vj .cap.�` + +yl d� V VET . L \\W � -d. � �C Q>6Li efrt^.,. 6n: YL. my ti w 9 •1( N � � @ \ Jew: � CQ - u Yo.UG Gr ' Q ' ' a °.pyNG t twrYL C.^1 M.0 1v N NV �G N' LJ r u n n . . '- NOatiE � ' Lyco C Cyr d II ^ ^y Y•�p t].6 T T G aV b.T U.r r ryrEO Aa NI°•V m m.NEV . .. trtLl� iCfi A rLN� 9 C C � AV..� a V x vC ~Cb y y.ox ��- tai - 9 9 F.0 L l- .GrnyLR q y,�dn G NUS N NM La C 41 V O p ^Y woa E n �= aNOW O° g goy u aaVa G Ttit At•;V VN�;., aaY m It � 3 E •. t oV.,c >Na Lao.. aN E¢ l l n z A E I! E bAaq <� N U C CtLC I I YS I V a,YGO �~ C <Olr ~ qtT a 4 d of- 1 'E-- i ab Odlf b0l K.. C LUUt C ^r��(yh., m� L.'n I'o Tt_oq� barY c a �' Ldw ay. o.. -a--= L C ^ ^O 41 aNr µpp ^9r Gp O�s NY r_ by CJJ' hc.: a+d.{A �.�'C dxC +f7 y A O n b L a C G? °-•'4 °i $.i °a.••O Nom*',_. 'NAt1. y dL w 4� aad v. Rsc ,LdE �L W aO�gd L tT1flN^ �CM �.,_ s y r4• O x T A wE n LdCy Ra 't a S a d..GC d Of t+ Q.4.0 ^mod Y.N d.R L >n LC V- — .taN.. Ry. z K:� Y I•.y� .t � N O E p, L 4. 4. ��. W � � U ^ JS �. p w+d'^& jII p4 *•N.,4 ,'� Nd ay r c-'m c. i w bE a saT 1 a O r !01] Oyf q 11 .� stuff ^O " GLwY 4f Y i c! — x a 42 r ' 61n SNW d 8906 KY � eCo'alrifl auk= -+ ih S�y- �i�� iGa n \Vf w- 4,YC f �'I It f/ `I. link .- �. M °I G C a -0Y C [N 6 fL d l� 4b Sf 4..1J t VG t 4 CA ?^ C dr nbd 'GO AL q= VN b ^CX y N2 t- dGi� G +�% 4•.n� SRgd Qs Na 9� _ iMw4nN a. Ate' -, Nay 99 Nrs,,,^ y`+ 4<0.Y Eae i�TO � OM 4y` Ali .oxN -,g a�aa f Lam. nL aC.S.� dS •C . �� dq '. r � d W y G� E 'G tid <p Y Rb 41 s x� r GQ N bu S � 00 iS�= CR�"W d{ ^�Cy„�9tTG xd R 69Ayo o° i� To- �.N 4 Of4.r> L' L L+b C L �.ri s d i n t1 �Lj O V+4aif t: i s d x t REA t4U T aA a... p.° 2d V dY Ni GL Nd16- - a ita xHr dyN � -- G9.N r'•a.x KfJ GO 1- ;x.�A. i 4fCa WaNO G N•.•NC -N d H.- d tY J N 9G GTC IX4 sC °dU° NW.. ,CC ry OC \+• C rb�'i� � A ►m S E 'O r O d d • C y� ...0 rn� � � ' C Y TnELLCLF o0 ^E U Z 0994 C V D Y m. p. q d d u •" O 3 d _ � .b bq m +my..md �YrM1U a»0 FIX ^M � L m 4 tY b� mb N bbd d n 4dm �L ~ Cumi N s °° • C C! C%� � L OI ° V Qb m �r i. 3 7T k OIL u i1 a°, u !Q Pb � zi O � � uc V WGb C 7� GG NT ^S'' �� N� C , CqT N�diCmN .G N ` m��V NE� � •rc MomN Ey '� y� Y� 0...l�byy�y c n�u44 ��tlCT4.r 'SysA d Vd ° IX b cE Oa�y�� yq N 4wwi UIX LDa mN 6.. °�� +�V 6 =. Y L 9A ib9 � O -AN • LC DIE mS ^.q - N O .d C h't°�WL 6fi..� m �6 }.st �dN� LC iL WL:i N . L t°. N� nda E 4pN -.Lq O lex1 VS.S j4 .° u.c CL��4it. M M N' - C' C � v C \�t•� \\ ` LO .li qd u c a.sc A- ~c ♦N?� rp a+ ¢y +r q <b L u N CCCO Ea�u� . A'u LUn � CEOQ C YW dYm. t xL A I'm qa r OY ^Nq « •+.-°. mcN •• i iY ox�. N i;i .-° � N�q ��a. � o u office 9dU- �.•...�. Fy di 9 N „°„ r q y. y L uL EV ACC GV qa Y. 50 O b�04. • Eq O C E NY ti dN Op Vqq L d L a. y g C� m q a� 40 o a Y W' ^N °arE E N+• p6 V 9..�'im G_mLC L N O -3. qPd im cQ- t N 4 N k A N Y a L Z�d C W G L ° 6 L` O 4d Nx� Va A. O 4yb Ya ? 4 " 3 IX�£ y �nm 7u mQO qr q•T LwaL° �M _ - °�+'' c c �N DC =.2 uss� v isu ° °rnNO ..h ,bu u ii "i� OIXC O+C- rOXO 0. ° uV 6tlj. V�iLi�mL C GQ �Oa 4Lq F - G4Gy Ou U 52 .,W ES E La OL.NmI°J N�lu c•o v.ma N M l�?S] 1 +... *,._,........._ .... . __. __., .._ -_ sae, `- 3 Y y m a N N A a 5 4 y 1 }l - C u adi r:V €� Ni mE sc ,O °au• Qm 7z 71 4- �tf .aO G CAO Lek r° aw. y L 2 � q u � E.0 6 • 'a SO y9 ` d6 N OL �` L a 4^ a y -.1, f m .0 � s K4mdAC 4. Yy°• my iyn OQ�^ ��. u � E ~ do '.RV G oOT. +� ° • L� r.¢ ^` .. Cf a C aE t iu yTy i ..9u �3 r` OA w 3 wy • r O m.:� Ola i � C 4 ^' E N.: y M y- � nT. E - to G 'y. CD�.0 ��'y LO++ N IY.K 4CGaON OuYC.. .fOV Oa`•.r,G N C t--- c n L Uf4C •''.6 L =LC� ACC r O^; yC z.0 drn a m d x mo e.a "ri "'anNC N caq� E O'er ur OCO r 9 acr 0° G ±.e m ¢e ��..• �l - � pf 66 °9 aq N�'v nE M r b y O C� 9 COOL C�vuT a N u La L q p =. h yy LL y tl 4u. 6E '•O- �•'4 9 w y c Y h _ a w L L� b uw. •�`� L Eyn L► mV • a'c. y fr.. Oa O d EV m dNU µ�N ddm Via„ ++ aw G�Ol �.0 pON4a°+G Vr� ..G- yy �"J •u L6 +5�1 N° n n Juy G�w M a it v,0 N W Y C Ccuo� 3 nyvY ,oOA } arm Uyyu v- /J� \`l -7... duq�i m Nd9ywN. a °w RQ OLO, E`L tt.CLU 60u U�J.C.RQ '� wA�✓^ e 1 s i •�,`. y M MO.O.OY ai � � y y aM M MM Y. a a E . Z • b ZV:S LO "Big 9 L L O O L Li0 b L w L w rwT y uP y y. 2 22 ^ ^ N.% Y Y Y d h� m O Oh W WN 4�.. 6 6L bet. Aq L b i i L = A N,p Od. A A ALl c c.(y Q T Td o oL �p N NN w IIuAyu .0 Y Yt.d NY� M MOdQ > > Y Y.p�> S S@d3u� Vr Lh 4c « a a vv V'DwwtT. =N O O a ap n � �O . .CU9g dd O OF O La MW = ' 6 64-a+ 4•(J a as N4 ^L(.l rk� V V9 F FV � �4-Y Q Q6N,. J JZ.O Iz d y to R C C N NOlA� y.y�i V O Ovyi�1 d �+10z t 9t W Wy c c�`E� r� d ° @� 9 V W O O V 4 -,Z° L L O O L Nr q Tti a a =e@ L-a E E ca 5 ;1 r° °� T L u O =UL+..M V .. d d O ~ + d u l 'L L t. Y. 4W _ O C V C v yy a \ li y a2 % % 0 01- (f. l � ?..mr W N N N N b I N Z.2 W u .{.7 p °p Zp4 tom° t °uc ME uu � i rnw m A w rW @°r-.p Y� " ° O O br S.,W -1 kY >• t E � au E L aG n sec E io - i jai°. ° ceu •ca m� ., $dam 2�C rY 2N tom '°. p lNS*j�tTY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA G h x 073 DATE: February 27, 2485 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner BY; Nancy Fong, Assistant Planner. SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 12835 - OVERSEAS REALTY ENTERPRI E - A total residentia deve opmept of 1 2 townhouses on 9.52 acres of laird in the Medfi m Residential District (8 -14 du/ac) located east of. :. ; Vineyard Avenue, t 600 few north of Arrow Rfighwa�� APN 208- 251 -05a I. BACKGROUND: On Janu� v 23 1985, the Planning Commissio�r reviewed Tentative Tract 12 35 anal continuV this item to February we - 1985, with the applicant's consent, to allow the epplicant to complete negotiations with the Central Schoot listrict in securing l the off -site drainage e74semF_ejt.- II./ ANALYSIS: According to the developer, the Central School District $oard had reviewed and had" approved the conceptual drainage easements plan an February 20, 1985. A copy of the proposed J% resolution from the School District Board to adopt the approval of the drainage easement is attached for your review. If such document is acceptable, then the adverse environmental effects identified in the Planning Commission report of January 23, 1585, would be mitigated and this projgct could be considered for approval as consistent with the General Plan and Development Code. Also, _attached 7`or your review is a copy of the Revised Resolution and) Conditions of Approval. C, rr 9 III.. RECOMMENDATIUiN: Staff recommends`�that the Planning Commission review the document from the Central Schoc)l District Board and the revised Resolution and Conditions of Approval. If the Planning Commission concurs with the; find ngs, approval of Tentative Tract 12835 and the issuance of a Negative Declaration would be in order by adoption of the attached, revised Resolution and Conditions of Approval. Aftk ITEME _.-..— . _ ..,- .��.'.. .. 1\ ..... .. . tom. ... Planning C fission -Staff Report \� February 27, 19Fi -TT 22835 - Overseas Reajiy Enterprises Page 42 Respectful'y submitted, ick Gomez MY plwmgr Attachments: Lehr fray 1iiCaitt ..-? Proposed Resmiation from Central Se '[ B4,stri'et Staff Rem and Minates ,of January 23, 1996 c` Revised - esolwtion an4 Conditions of Approval cz �17 -� u S t fi South harbor Blvd 6W A Suite Gn Anaheim, California 92605 U.S.A. Ana Tel :0141956 -3lWn Tel .655409 MjSAlI,I Ove a s7 Rea -1t Y,Enierpris'es nc. February; 21, 1985 s � Ms.. Nancy�;`''ong AssistantXl',�t,qanner City of Rai\ Cucarp�a 9320 Basel :L ad,, Suite C ;_ r P.O. Box 80, - Rancho Cum, a 91 t Re: 11tactf,fo��,i289s- �sjkorm Drain Easement " s Dear Nancy? ���� Enclosed plei;I ee .ind 3 copies of a Resolution by the School al School Districtrs Board of Trustees iI icating the BOO-11T%� ' intent to grant us the Storm Drain Easement through ilea Gulch School grounds. ;y w Due to the Educaticm Code r st requirements,, the formal granting of the easement should occur subsequent'to a public hearing on the ~,mtt�r scheduled for March 6th', 1995. Plase find enclosed -=life Agenda. Item of the Board's February _20th,., -1985 meetings, which explains ,e procednxe in more detail.' Y feel confident that we zow l�zve in dace the necessary documents and assurances to 4dequailely address the City ofd._. . Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission s concerns about -h-le easement, and ant looking foxy -ard to obtaining the approval of our Tentative map on Febru7 --y 27. Sincerely pours. O''ERSEAS REALTY ENTERPRISES,INC. c Vai an L. MInassian Managing Director ei n VLK/sm Enclosures.:, „ s .y � C1NT4AI, SCHOQI. DISTRICT G BOARD OF TRUSTEES' AGENDA ZTF-`1 ' Resolution 12- 84-85. Invention to Grant Easement for Storm WAin Purposes to Overseas Realty Enterprises 02I.M ATION: Representatives of Overseas p ity Enterprises presente0i U's fora storm drain through district proprt� at Bar Gulch School at`the F,truary 6 Board meeting. The district`strchitect has reviewed and approl d these plans. Art The granting of an easemens to Overseas Realty Enterprl s for storm drain purposes is necessary be fore construction on the storm drain can begin. ,- Edu- -.lion Code S 1954 - 39544 require that before an easement can be granted, the Board adopt a resolution which declares the Board's intention to grant the easement at meeting, and the. =hold a public hearing at a subsequent meeting before actually granting the easement_ Ten days public notice of tie public hearing is also required. It is recommended that the L-oa d adopt Resolution #12- 84,,84 at this meeting, and then on March 6, 1985, conduct a public; hearing grant, by resolution, I - ' the easement to Overseas Realty Enterprises. J FISCAL 1HPACT: amo=t: S Balance in contingency: S FROM ACCT- TO ACCT. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Resolution #12- 84 -85: Intention to grant Easement to Overseas Realty Enterprises for storm drain at Bear Gulch School and authorize Andrew Carlmark to scsbmitteji n said easement. approved by, Y = E. r. �d meeting Dattz February 20, 1985 ce- q RESOLUTION `iZQ. 1- 2 -$4 -85 RESOLUTION OF THE GOVERNING BOARD OF THE CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT OF SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA - DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO GRANT AN EASEMENT FOR STORM DRAIN CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES; AND GIVING NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON MARCH 5, 1985 WHEREAS', the Central School District of San Bernardino Coun�s now the owner of certain ';fal property in the city of Y i Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino, State,7+f Ca;Lifornia, described as follows�� That portion of',',iot B, as per plat of subdivision of t 10, Cucamonga vineyard Tract, as recur )lernardina 6d in Map °Book 20, Page 44, Records of San County in the City i of Rancho Cucamonga, State of California, S described as follows Beginning at the Northeast corner of-said Lot 13, then South.along the Easterly lind'of said lot 30.00 feet, thence West along a line parallel to the Northerly ling of said lot 30.00 feet, thence Northeasterlyl42.43 feet more or less to the Point of Binning.,; ._ BE IT RESOLVED THAT in the judgment of'tb4 Governing Board, it is ,�a the best interests of the District for an easement t(s be granted for storm drain construction purposes over, under and, upon the above- described property to Overseas Realty Enterprises upon the following terms.:,, The above easement will be granted by the Central School District to Overseas Realty Enterprises without consideration, but subject to the terms of an agreement to be executed contemporTneously with the granting of this easement, a true and exact copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit B. a a a ,. BR IT FURTHER RP-SoL r) that a public hearing upon the questiah of granting this easement will be held in the -board room at 3457 Foothill Boulevard, Rancho CuE, aia����ya. 91730,435P8, , I on March 6r 2989 at-7,30 pip. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the cleiN _of this board 's i directed to post, prior to February 1 25, 1985, a copy of this resolution in three public places in the distract, and to cause 7a copy Of this zesa2utiog to be, published one time in a newspaper of general circulation published in the ciistN; ^,ict for in the county it there is not such a,newspaper published "i,n theodistrict) moth -,ess than five days prior to March 6, 19 as., 4 PASSED AND ADOPTED this 20th day of February,+ 1985, r � by th f llo g vote AYES X NOES Ci ABSENT resi. MetttkFer w er l \ �Z erah A _ _ 2XRl8tT k MAL MC41PTiOM OF EASEMENT. FOR RAIRM PUMSES„ APPlll TMAT TO TRACT l2aZ S l Ap tieseftnt for drainage purposes over those Ctrt ;ip pardai3 of iartl situate fa the city of Rancho Curamongas Cogpty of San Btraardino, state - of'raliiomfa, described as the aasttrly 158.00 See: of Cot 14 and 04 _ 4 northerly 30.00 feet of th* easterly -W.00 feet of Lot is all'ip the CuC m"ea Vineyard Tract,.As per map record,'+ in book 20 page 44 of paps,,, ratcoids of $aid County. Said taseme ,... 7`a strip of la+w4_10.i1O sett r in kidth> the c0tarline of said strip bein3 a+are pArticulariy described _. #$ follow: ail Deginr+ing at #* southwtst COrner' cf Said northerly 3O.Di1 €oft; thence f lx along the W40- hy. IIne of said tasterly 1SS8.00 &*t of Lots 13 and 12 14, lie °07'37 "r; 34.12 feet to a point on,,4 note =tangent �4rvo concave 13 scuttov"teriy M60 f$it, a "rAdial to said point r' 34 ?fears x2037116% Said point being � the TAUS tiin OF BESIKRittS for 15 wle ease ent stnttrliAe being herein described, thente frga said true paint of ,bggion�mj and along Said Cucvt' through a csntral angle of x"f 33'$Z'i16" a`dist ACM of 13.24 NO to the beginning of &'tangent turve is sancave northeasterly having a; radius of 22.$0 feet; theact along said ;y curve through A Central angle of 61'47`51" a distance of 24.23- 1rett + 20 thcrice tangle¢ to said curve SW18'29 "C 264AS feet mgrs or ~lass to + 2I a paint on the *9Sterly Brie of the w.tsV 293.00 f4tt of said northerly 22 34.00 feet, said point 4ein5 distant along said 4asterly lint x0`07 "57 "t 23 6.00 feet from the Southerly line of sold northerly 30.00 fleet. 24 -_ e 2? 3� 3t r F l� p P, o, 's _1,� til I $ e �a ' ^'a��� j ` EXHIBIT B 1` AGREEMENT This Ac}reement is entered into t.4,5 day-of- February,' 1985, by and between Central. Schoolipistrict4. 9457 Foothill ,r Boulevard, .Rancho Cucamonga, California; 91730, hareina4ter referred to as "School-Distrlct ", and Overseas Realty Enter- prises, :tnc,, 300 So Uth Harbor Boulevard, Suite 600, Anaheim, California, 92805, her(jixtaftgr re6erred to as "Dev�looer". Developer is developing Tract x y, 12835 in'the City of f Rancho Cucamonga, California, which tract is war-,of and ad- jacent to the Hear Gulch School,, owned by School ,Dittrict, _'The Rancho Cucamonga Master -Plan of Drainage for the area requires that the approxxmate.east one -half of sai3 Trac'�:o. 12835 be drained to the east of said tract. It is),the desire of the parties to di;.charge said.,drainage across. the School District's property thereafter drain -into the street called Bear Gulch Place, as provided herein. _ The parties desire to provide for thO necessary easements to accomplish said dra ,iage upon the tie_rms and for the considera- tion provided for herein. �= Therefore, for the consideration referred to herein, the paxti.es agree as follows: - ` 1. Easement. School District hereby grants to Developer, . ` their successors an3 assigns, a q permanent easement over, across, and thr ;ugh the southernmo_t.pnrtion of Chair Bear Gulch School property, along a cturse,:ive feet on either side of a..center line which is described, in Exhibit A which is attached hereto an4 n.arporated herein by reference. a) Said easement: 'shall be appurtenant- to the lard described as Tract No. 12835, in the C .y of Rancho Cuca=nga', County of San Bernardino, State of California. y b) Said easement shalt be fpr the purrs& of install- ing, servicing, Nita- taining,, and repairing a. pipe, and concrete culvert of, -the approximate dimensions, of six feet in width y by eight inches in depth," and for. discharging the Orainage from_ said Tract No. 12835, across said School. District's property through said easement, pipe and culvert,: intd'BearcGulch Place, 2. •Temp:- aryEasement. School District hereby grants to Developer, their agents, successors and assigns, a temporary 1 easement over their Bear Gulch School- property, as such may be -`. required from time to time, to install, service, and maintain such drainage pipe_and culvert, and ;to accomplish-the other work, Construction, and impzovements, -as agreed upon_herei� �- 3. -installation anti Re- Landscapein . Developer agrees to�i ( remove such trees and other landscaping necessary to install the drainage pipe and culvert referred to herein; to install said drainage pipe culvert; and to grade and the removed trees and landscaping,, in accordance with a Conceptual Landscape Plan, hereinafter referred to as "'Landscape Plan ", which is attached to the Conceptual Grading Plan dated Janaury 24 1985, drawn by Morse. Consulting Group, which plan is hereinafter re- ferred to as the "Grading Plan ". : .�. EaLK44i:. -K 4. Sidewalk Over Basement. Developer agrees'to install a acncrete , s'idewalk - four feet 'in `w- dth, three inches 4,n depth°; over and along the. said pipe anti culvert, and along the weSL side of the future parking area to `die into the sidewalk system of .... Bear Gulch School, as shown on thet3rading Plan. j S. Maintenance of Culvert-; Developer, agrees that the,: drainage pike and culvert referred to herein shall be maintained i IJ and repaired by Developer until such time as, all Owner's 'Associa- ti.on,is formed to maintain and repair the common areas of said Tract No. 12835, aj which time, Developer agrees to charge and abligate said Owner's Association 'with the duty, xespoasibility, and liability, at tiger sole cost aad expense, of maintaining and repairing said drainage pipe and culvert. 6. Future _Paxkinq GE_ ina.. `.,pevel.oper agrees to grade for a�- future parking area, the portign�af the Bean Gulch` School Property shown , s "Proposed `rmprovemer;tE_; on the 3radiz� plan. Said grading is to b': in accow -danwe with the Grading Plan, t►ie Bear Gulch School Master. Plait, and shall also meet engineer requirements. Said Grading Plan shall be approved by'D s I :C . 7. Grass and Irrigation Svstem. Developer Agrees .'to in- stall an irrigation system in the a�ea graded far future parking area pursuant to Paragraph 6 hereof, and to plant grass: in said area with the crass such as that presently growing an the %Beam Gulch School Property. Said,;ixrigation syst" shalt be tied 1, into the Bear Gulch School irrigation system., -. :. \� S. Shrub Planting. Developer agrees to plant shrc -bs a.;.ang : the West side'of the future parking area, as shown on the ' _17 Landscap e Plan. Said '�i to-�be of the. same variety,as the shrubs Ti6W plant ed on the west,'edc(e,,of the existing.parki _Wf� e SEa_sh Qate. Developer agrees to instill a swinging, wrongbt-iron den feet in V' on, gate, approximately fiff 3.dth,, ,the ,the WeiE boundary of the Bear Gulc'k�chooi p.-eop'ertys, at the I stud- Al-, J end of',' %..')stre4�: in said Trict'Nq. �12835, which gate shall be designed as a "crash gate" to allow access,of emergency veW_cles to and from s4aid school property in acc r q�ance with the sketch the I Grading� Plan. which is,,attaqhed �o, 10. Pedestrian Access. 'Developer agrees to i; qsball*two pedest.Aan access ways throtz1h the boundary, walls. 6Z said Tract No. 12835, OnP, near the crash gate reZ�irred to in !Paragraph 9 abovet and�one near the tid-paint of the easterly boundary line of said Tract 140. 12835* 1� L Construction— The constructipry and other wark reqik&re-4 by this i:�±eement shall be done in &CC6 dance with tne Grading' Plan and the Landscap'ing Plan and shall be accomplished in a prompt and workmanlike manner. All work required by this agreement shall be accomplished no laterlthan'March 1,,,1986 barring any unfbrreen circum4tances,6eyond the control of either p�rty. 12. Developer hereby,indemnif-les and holds School District harmless from any c6sts,-Inlaim liability, damages, or liev". which may result from or may 'se out of the constmction,:instal�',! lation and work of improvement raquiret,by the Agreepent, and the, use and discharge of drainage thru the easement grant.4 herein. -4- 4, ..0 _ 1.3. Cooperation. The partt�s afire to c o�gerate �o accomplish the intent of this Agreement, and agree to reoflri3 this Agxe ^enfi or such other grant cif may asement as e y be ra. quired 'tc .aecompl sh the!. intent of this Agreement. f s 14. Successo r. and Assigr.A. *Phis Agreement, the easement Fontaine Herein, ;and t ��6Visions hereof shall be binding upon, and shall inure tsrtthe benef tlpf the parties'; their Sur.ce's��rs and assigns. 15. Law. Th. Agreement zLid rhp p�ov�s�oTMs here sball be interpreted .and governed by tie provlsl of the law of y •. the State of Ca lornia. 15. Attorney's Fees_ zn any diaVute concerning this 'Agree- ment, or the P -r visions hereof, the prevailing_paxty . to any litigation`,or, arbitration shall be entitled to ;their seasonable attorney's fees. iN t1ITNESS'11s3EREOE the parties hereto have executed this. r„ Agreement on the day and year first hereinabbve set' forth. OVERSEAS REALTY ENTERPRISES,INC. C$NTRAL SCHOOL[}?.�TRTCT ' By B (Acknowledgnent) G � L L , PUBLIC HEARINGS A. ENVTRONMENfk-, ASSESSMENT ;{ND TENTATIVE TRACT 12832 -- LYON - The development of 135uattached single family dwellings on 16.9 acres of land within thaw Victoria Planned �,�pmmunityy (Low - Medium category, 4 -8 du /ac), located on ',the :north side of Victoria Park Lane Qn_ the Nest side of Victoria�Windrbws Loop - APN 227- 371 -13, 14, 15, I B. ENV_ IRONM�NTAL ASS2SSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 12833 - LYON - The develop lent of 1,7 attached single T' i'ly dwellings on 14. acres of land withinp7the Victoria Planned Communi y (Low - Medium category, 4 -8 du /ac), located, on the south sid4 of Victoria Park Lane,- on the west side of i Victoria Windrows Loop - APN R-311-14,115 and 227 - 391 -16, Rick Gomez, City Planner, advised t;haS�the applicant for the above Tentative Tracts requested a two week continuance` -by the Planning 0Jmmission to allow time for preparation of revised plans. Chairman Stout opened,the• public hearing., There were no comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Mukion: Moved by Barker, seconded by Rempel, unanimously�_ried, to 'continue Tentative Tracts 12832 andY12833,,Lyon, to the Planning Commission meeting of February 13, 1985. °� l C. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 12835 - OWL REALTY ENTERPRISES - A .total residential development of 112 townhouses on 9.52 acres of land in the Medium Residential District (8 -14 du /ac) located east of Vineyard, t 600 feet north of Arrow Highway - APN'208- 251 -05. ` Nancy Fong, Assistant P`fapner, ,reviewed the staff report ,,and presented a revised Reso utign for the Commission's consideration. Ms. Fong advised that the Resolution had been revised with direction by the City Attorney and contained a condition regarding condemnation proceedings. __. Chairman Stout opened the public hearing. Wartan Minassian, representing the applicant, stated concurrence = with, staff report and revised resolution, Chairman Stout expressed concern with approving the tract on the condition that easements are obt.ained from the school district. 'If the easements cannot be obtained, he stared that he was .,not comfortable ;with the City pursuing condemnation proceedings against another public entity. He asked the G applicant if it a continuance would be acceptable, thereby allowing the applicant time to meet with the :Central School District Board to reach a % decision regarding the easement. �a Planning Commission Minutes,; -2 January 23, v � ` `ti Mr. Kin'assian „replied that the applicant,wduld prefer"a favorable derision of— this tits, however, would accept a continuance. c� There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Ted. Hopson, Assitant City Attorney, advised that this is not a unique ., condition and is ore which is used in order not to i�P� development f= occurring when e developer bf one pie ,:edf property nee Fto get something across another ece of property. He pointed put that th' condition re�!uires the developer tO pay all expenses -incurred "by the- Citj(--,, hrxuld condemnation proceedings be N'equired. r Commissioner Rempel stated that there are situations in the'City where this�1 same type of condition was imposed, and if staff--and ' the City Attorney are - comfortable with the condition as proposed, did not see the need for '.a continuance. It was the Consensus of the remaining Commissioners that decision on the project be continued until the applicant has an opportunity to ,discuss obtaining the easement with the Central School. District Board. Motion: Moved by Stout, seconded by Chitiea, carried, to continue Tentative Tract 12835, Overseas Realty Enterprises, to the Planning Commission meeting of February 27, 1985. AYES: COMMISSIONERS:' STOUT, CHITIEAi BARKER, MCNIEL NOES: COMMISSIONERS; REMPEL< ABSENT; COMMISSIONERS;` NONE carried. ;l1 Commissioner Rempel voted no stating that he would be in favor of, approval= D. E WRONMENTAL ASSSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 12319 LEWIS) - The det,el ent of 274 single family attached units on 5 acres of land wi'if �i- the Terr Vista Planned Community (Med /76 Residential category, 4 -14 du /ae), loco at the northwest corner; of Terra Vista Parkway and Spruce Avenue - APN 10 1- 02 -02, 06. Curt Johnston,,' Associate Plarrme , reviewed the staff report. Chairman Stout opened the public,_ eaS�g. P Berry Bryan, representing Lewis Ho es, s fed concurrence with the resolution and conditions of approval. Elanning Cattenission.Minutes -- JanQar 23, T985! 're CITY 'OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA MEMO RAATDd.1Z9Y c:. 1�0 � Z DATE: January 23, :1985 u 5977 k TO: Chairman and Members of th P arning Commission FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner _ i1 BY:� Nancy Fong, Assistant P1 er�� SUBJECT: ENVIRONMEN7AL 'ASSESSME'IT AND TENTATIVE TRAT 12835 OVERSEAS REALTY ' ENT RPRISES - A total ',Wsidential developmen f 2 townheuse�z p�� 9.52'acres of land in the. Medium Res .nt-ial Dis�nict (8-14� du/ac),-,, located east of/ Vineyard Avenue, ± 600 feet north of Arrow Highway; c.P014 208- 251.. -05. BACKGROUND: Staff has recommended that Item "C" (Tentative Tract 12835) be continued, witt theapplicant' s �o= ent, for - •'thirty (30) days to allow the applict to complete negotiations with the school district- for securing theloff -site drainage easement, - a ANALYSIS: The�City Attorney has previously advised staff that all. necessary dray ^;age easems -rts should' be required up front, prior ;;approval of tX project, to avoid condemnation proceedings by the Ci= on behalf of the developer. Hence, the recb mendation of continuance by staff. Upon further review of the Subdivision Map Act, the Ci; ._ Attorney has further advised staff that if the developer agrees to pay all the City`s expenses should condemnation; proceedings �e required, which has been added as a condition of approval,, then:-the adverse environmental effect has been mitigated and - )this project is consistent with the General Plan and Development Code, l�erefore, this project could be approved per the Subdivision Map Act. Attached for your revieir "" 'f) is a copy of. the Resolution and Conditions of approval reflecting the 1 above requirement. o RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission review" the revised .attached Resolutions and Conditions of A- pproval, which includes the condemnation finatting requirements, If the Planning- Commission concurs with these additional requirements, approval of Tentative Tract 12835 and �the issuance of a Negative Declaration would be in order by adoption of•,,.4e attached Resolution and Conditions of 3 ,. Approval.. RG:NF :jr Attachment: Revised Resolution �R' �: ♦d i.+ i 11VV qty, L #�4 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA CUCgaiQ DATE; January 23, 1985 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission > 1977 FROM; Rick Gomez, City Planner BY: Nancy Fong, Assistant Manner SUBJECi': ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACTh2B35 - OVERSEAS REALTY ENTERPRISES - A total residential d velol -pment of 1 tov,ahouses o-n-9-75-2 acres of land in the Medihm Residential District (8 -14 du/ac) located east cf Vineyrd "Avenue, ± 600 feet north of Arrow) Highway APN 208- 251 -05. ,r BACKGROUND: This item was scheduled for the 'Planning Commission's review contingent upon the applicant obtaining a drainage easement from the adjacent property owner to construct a storm drain. The applicant has been unable to obtain the necessary dr-,hage easement, therefore, Staff recommends that this item be continued for thirty (30) days to allow negotiations for the' easement to be concluded. Attached is a letter from the Central School District with intention to :grant the applicant a drainage Easement. ANALYSIS: Approximately, half of the project site is required to drain To east pursuant to the City's adopted Master Plan of drainage. In, order to! control the drainage and prevent_ possible flood damage to downstream properties, a drainage easement wind construction of a storm drain facility is required on the adjacent school property. - ' The Subdivision Map Act (Sec. 6616.2, page 39,,2985 Edition) states that a local agency (the City) cannot refuse approval of the final map beZAuse the developer cannot fulfill a condition requiring improvements on property which he does not control (in -this case the storm drain on - adjacent property). The City would then have -to cond qn (at the developer's expense) an easement for the proposed storm dra'�: Tht, Attornev has advisrd Staff thitt naromcary A".innno- o5ecmcn c Shnn7rP fps- �... RECOMMENDATION: ,, *f recommends,', that Tentative Tract 1r35 he continued, with she applicant's consent, thirty (30) days to allow the applicant to complete negotiations for the 4iement. If the applicant does not consent to continuance, then 'it is recommended that the project be denied per the attached staff report and findings. �pect ly submitted, T We ner s ent Letter from Central' School District l =17 4 ADMINISTRATION Central School DI str1ct 3oht,aU,tt �t� ►�ent - ;�.. 9457 Egbtbitt 81u1evard C iZ9nCi q Cucamonga; CA 91730 / (7 i4) 989 8541 AssFstant Sepertntendent Rarsanne +' .tssistan�Supettntendant. BusSness Seivlcps f} + c Jarr�.ar y 17 1985 ' , 9 �i + rtr, Richard��omex � l //J 2'i LT Pty! }Ck,U fi1JCIlCER �j ,:5�it!II7Y�Ei'$t4fijlr�T EFi City Planner City of Rancho cucamongcl ! JAN, x �r P.O, Box 807 Rani ho Cucamonga, California 9I730 � �Lsli�jil,�3�I�r�l�I� s `r Dear Rich, Repres.,,ntativeS of Cent rai` .choal� district and bverileas Realty Enterprises, Inc._ have met to discuss an easemF`�ior' a storm drain through Boar Gulch School for•' tracti� The purpose of these meetings has been to workauti "e details of the Construction of-t1AS storm drditl. 1j Pending resolution of these defalls, -it is the intention of district staff to recommend to the Board of Trustees that the easement for storm drain purposes be granted,to Overseas Realty. Of course, final approval rests With the Board of Trustees but we do not forsee any problem with the ,board's approval of this - -, easement. 'l Please feel free to contact me at"70- 989 -9396 if You have any questions regarding this situatia Sincere!'"` Andrew E '' Carlma% -%l , princi�a� ` Bear Gulch School W. AEG /id cc. Mr. Vartan L— Hinassian Mr Gary W. Dokith ROAR9 of xatqsreEs kxwrnceY� rtb fsm eta #e.&Wright Richar1 tuber dot j :cfES tr etvly ti t Ftesldegt ,fir --- ---� =- --� CUY OF RANCF(0 CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT }I 0 DATE: January', 23, 1985 19777 TO: `,)Chairma��, and Members of the Plaon%q Commissiap FROM: Rick Goj:, ez, City Planner,, BY: Nancy Fling, Assistant Planner SUBJECTS ENV_ IRONQIENTAL ASSESSMENT WD TENTATIVE TRACT 12835 0V R ER.t R L , ER Rfi, - A total residential development of 1 townhous - on}9.52 acres of land in the Medium �Iesidential District (8 -14 du /ac) located east of �. Vineyard Avenue, t 600 feet north of Arrow Highway - APN 20845145. it I. PROJECT AND SITE bESCRIEL?TON: A. Action Requested.: Approval of site plan, elevations and issuance of a Negative Declaration. B. Purpose: Construction of 112 townhouses. C. Lace ion: East side of Vineyard Avenue, i 600 feet north of Wr-&w I 'Highway, Exhibit "A". D. Parcel Size: 9.52 acres. E. Pro3ect Density: 11.8 du /ac. F. Existin lonin : Medium "Residential District (4 -14 du /ac). G. Existing Land Use: Vacant. H. Surrounding Land Use an(� Zoning: North- - Vacant, Medium Residential District, South - Vacant, Single family homes; Medium Residential District t East - Elementary School,.vacant Medium Residential District. West Vacant new townhoras under construction; Medium Residential District. I 6-LV, NI PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TT 12835 -. Overseas Realty Enterprises January 23 1985 Page 2 a I. Gene il Plan Desi nations: - ro e�,t Ate - Medium Residentia'. (4 -14 du /ac), Master Plan., Overlay District. %= North - Medium Residential (4 -14 du /ac ) . ,_ South - Elementary School, Medium Residen'cial (4 -14 du /ac), East -, Medium Residential 4-14 du /ac . ;..West - Medium Residential �4-�14 du /ac). J. Site Characteristics: The subject site is vacant and siop::s gently to the south at approximately p- ercent to 3 percent.. „2 Vegetation Consists of an avocado tree in the middle of the site, a couple of large trees to the east, and eucalyptus groves to the north and south property line. According to the developer and`4 horticulturist consultant, these trees are in a "serious state of decline ", and cannot be saved. (See letter ` "'from Richard G. Maire, Horticulturist, and Addendum to Initial Study, Part 11. II. ANALYSIS: A. General: The proposed development consists of 11i two -story townhouses and two -story stacked flats, with a net density of 11.8 dwelling units per acre. The unit sizes proposed range from 971 to 1,3791 ft. One plan is a single level plan (26 units) which is s�-�,;ed into two stories, the remaini kE three plans (86 units) are -two-story townhouses. units are i�eanged around four main parking courts. The proposed elevations are of contemporary style with-an .ample variety of architectural treatments and details. The recreation, area is centri.�Jy located with greenway linkages throughout the si`e. The main` " access to the project will be provided from Vineyard Avenue with an additional emergency access located in the northeast corner of the site, B. Design Design Review Committee: The Design Review Committee has reviewed the project and found that the overall site plan arrangement, style of architechure, and open space areas comply 3 with the Development., Code. The Coi ittee has recommended approval of the (,'project prnvided that the fallowing improvements be made Which the developer has agreed to: I. Other types of roof materials such as concrete tile _ shall be used instead of the proposed asphalt shingles. x 2. Special, treatment shall be provided along Vineyard Avenue, at project entrance and at the � recreation areas, and to be in a unifying theme. D Ll c" \ PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT' 'TT`11835 - Overseas Realty Enterprises Janu�`ry 23, 1985 Page l 3. Dense landscaping shall be provided to buffer the guest parking that fronts on Vineyard Avenue; and landscaping shall be provided between garages to softenpthe long corridor of garage- streetscape: C. Technical Review Committee: The Technical Review Committee has reviewe rt d the project and determined that th "the recctrmended conditions of approval the ;project tc consistent ?---Ah the applicable standards and ordinances. D. Grading Committee: The Grading Committee has reviewed the project and determined thaw the conceptual grading plan cannot be approved at this time due to the developer not having obtained the nefessary drainage easement from the adjacent _school property. Under the current City's Master Plan drainage system, haif of the project site is required to drain toward the, east through the, -\constructin of the required storm drain facilities. E. Environmental Asses smentt _,Part I o, tFe Initial Study has been completed by the applicant. Staff has .ompleted Part II of the Environmental Checklist and determined "that the development of the subject site could expose people and property to water related hazards, such as flooding. However, this could be mitigated through the =struction of storm drain facilitin�-1, accgr-dng to the City's Mastew Plan drainage system, Since tH developer at this time is unable to secure such drainage: -7 easements, staff has determined that adverse environmmejntal impacts could occur as .,a result of this project and a Negdtive Declaration. cannot be issued. III. FACTS FOR FINDINGS• The proposed use, building design and sif^ 4 plan, together With' the recommended Conditions are in compliance with the applicable provision, of the Development Code and City standards. However, the project will be detrimental' to adjacent properties or cause significant adverse environmental impacts without the construction of the required storm drain facilities to mitigate the potential water related hazard. The project is inconsistent with the General Plan and Development Code in that storm drain facilities are not provided to dispose of surface water runoff. V. CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised in The Daily Report as a public hearing. In a.ldition, notices were sent to, al F property owners within 300 feet of the project site idivertising t public hearing. To date no correspondence has been rece'• d , :. regarding'the project. we w , a/ x Ci . Planner NF " R�•:ns ti _ l Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Loc;ltionlL4nd Use flap Exhibit "8" - Sil,LEilization and��tataral Features Map _Exhibit rC" - Plan 'Exhibit "D" - 1,- Aative Tr'ac't Map o Exhibit-, "E" - Detail;:d� Site Plan " Exhi�r'it "F" - Conceptual GradinggPlanr ;; I Exhibit "6 °t - Conceptual°tandsape Plan 1 g Exhibit "H" - Eleyations (5) Exhibit "I" - Fiver Plans (4) Cxhibit "J " - Streetscape of Vineyard. kverf} I -ij tiel Stu`zy-, Part Ir tr; - �r Letter from Horticulturist - Richard C. Maire Resolution d Oeniai_ - a �. P PLANNING COMMISSION'' STAFF REPORT OVggrs " Pago! 4 V. RECOMM814DATION: Staff recbmmends that the Planning Commission• deny' s s' Tentative Tract Map 12835 by adoption of the attachgj>Resoluti.an Re °ectf y omitted, ....... ' r e LU .., M r MH� GC " a FC c LM m r y S ' l 4U �w; it �.. � �• i 4 jl TENTATIVE TRACT NO, 12835 fj IN THE CITY OF :HAtiOHO CUCAMOMOX l If Hit WAN r � r� - _ _ � aatpeef�i`rliiiiiitafiay • - r .A S,r. � rte• + � ' -.` � -� r � iF-1 s per` +�+.s�•�,- � " 62 Y ! r `� " N •vs sir. mod'' "�. � .•.�b �l`.. _ { v 180. •520 agYitfprR4f i� ; ap LEGEND OYEM AY 01$TNOT ROUNOARY •••�•••+...... 80UNOART OF TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 12035 DRAINAGE AREA HOIAVOARYY ORAWAGE 2 AREA NUM9Ep DRAINAGE AREA ACREAGE. " Rye 1 ;RJR,i H CITY OF Tti%d ECHO T CAMONGA Tf ftE- PLA(`iNING .PXV- S OM y, TENTATIVE,,,,., TRACT NO. 12835 ,i' =i'aa_zn °1 #M ��irx?o ltd Tm my OF i4AH6i K WCAMOMGA, �, u,_, bBldpr, lgTFg. - ` al w .. F :•}n Q ipt! �' OA ri n.snsnwwe.xnwaef E+ t' Y t+r .-.+- s..•wnf!±wrr k"'' �` � � r .F.:�� �Si:tli +�.� � U.11 E i torn f ,� n mncu.as�TS�tnaer { �1(��rkdD `� �8A'i�uT ±+irfr►uw E � �E�SDFAS� +nsn `ti PAM AY J socsax�wbx�aaa.ws.eca Cdtr'SCIL77HCGRdUP NTOM oew�rflwb>F+Itaw+.wtoe ±�} �„f41 ,..rrw ��. m. KANr r T PC' 1I' iNU I3ItjlSIflii LXHIBI`F ea �f�ID F s` u too p i C i� to "' � ' i � i" _ " —� a °r �acM�rY�YWSm r .•1,t , # •11, '- t . � "_• + � - t t � ! J. ! tl ..•.•Y.,•. «nci m.eaAe c s] - 4 fl!Llrrif, ? clJ ••aawme]ne. a � •' x u•A arria•w]irn �..1 - AREA ' •i ]t n•ot]••ar • f � i flECPEAYgN ARG age WIAJOR ! —j i_ - ]wrou]I�.a • n•. - - �-yi naesrMU]cdrF Ylca 7 PROPOSED YAJpAIXfPP g, ' !�?}Jis, f9,51JJY 9!lCH1H) „..•Y.,.•ei�.•...r <. F ]1 7. %8'J9iH�f I J %. ARROW. NJGHWAY i O 46 &7: 1RC> .c%� . w „�^• .al.... war. N` DRTH CITY OF tTEtic: x LANNIP�G DI7 VfSl(),N Ti3IT i =- _ SCAT E - y 1 a�� 9L•�■ ■i��.li t ate! • �! ��■ No I TM Y. KOWA �F"mMu�t 4p.i1 u g •■L r��ft� -ai � I � �L�i z r � f � '' ea oil o 4 �� J w\4� !iII •7� 1�& }�I�1�B� ^i �I�II.MrI7�1 }1t1t ' swam �M + . #' p 4 `T +Fi =_ to \(pp�� — �� _ �e,rw1 +-' --uae■qte. .� ®A7�' x ' all ® �- ]iR'f}EiR 34glSillft 11111111y1f °91 � ..� +f s41 ®F m4119APfP �09f9�1A11111E11lIrliIlLMt1t� I ,r �j SI BLOG.30Q B SWE - BWG.200 r r.� I�'ORTH CITY OF ITEr'4I =,1f, $�A1'' 0 C T ONGA TITLE: F PL �T f I1�.� Ds` ISIO�\I s ii131T t � SCALD = e/-- — ;s A U SLOG. 100 & 200 -- tz IV J5 Ime a vim, it �a 1 +�.�. A ✓_ "`1��'= SME BLDG. 100 \, NORTH : +. ' ' 4 rUCAMONGA TITLE, z3 of I'LAIWN.� � IIIVL�IfON ` k E,(HIBrr- SCALE h, G REAR } MATH CI'T'Y OF RANGD cu, joxGA PL J / y U cam' ) LJLL�ll 1 NORTH j CITY OF RANCHO CLICAIMMC-A. two- PLANNING I VI5IC`,T W 7i „ 1 � '�' art � , • tD aes s• f,: L s MkT i _ CUT OF PIANNFF'� r JAS {p \, � ' DAN I ELI A �f !f ASSOCIATES ARCHITE.TURE AND PLANNING 3MCAMPNSMM SUIM210 NEY{'MCEACN CN9Tv6o M0645-3w IJ - REVISED INITIAL STUDY (page I-4) City of Rancho Cucamonga Overseas Realty Enterprises, Inc. "Daniolian Associates Job No. 84047.03 January 2, 1985 Phase Phase Phase Phase � Ta I 2 1. Number o 'mult - family family units 28 28 r 2$ 28 11/2 . 2. Date proposed to begin May 85 " Dec- 85 `June 86 Jan. 87 construction ` 3, Earliest date of Sept- 85 Apr.. 86 Oct. 86 May 87 occupancy 5.11, Model # do� Tentative` of Bedrooms Price Raa e A - 2 BR 70,000- 2 BA 75,000 Lj 5 B - Dual MBR 78,000- 2 8A 99,000 9 8 7 26 C - 3 BR 84,000 2 -1/2 BA 90,000 7 iQ ,, 9 X1 39 i D 3B-R+ ; Al Country Kit. 91,000 2 -1/2 BA 94,000 8 6 6 4 22 TOTALS 28 28 28 ' ` 28 Il? f } llncluding two model buildings (8)units). city OF RANCHO CUCAMONIGA I - I?1ITT_AL STUDY , T ENVIRONMENTAL CF_ECKLIST DATE; APPLICANT: � S • __'� �'i�% ! LOG NLfiLBER: -409,1 AI5 cGYi�� F l 1 - r) ' PROJECT, Ila VA9_)fixk�s•. ;- PROJECT LOCATI911:�',c7G . _ ENVIRONMENT AL IMPACTu (Explanation of all slyest` and "waybe" answers axe required on attached. -, sheets )'- YES WBE NO 1. Soils and Geolo�g. :`Will the proposal have e, significant results in: a• Unstable. ground conditions or in charges in geologic relationships? elf b. Disruptions, dispi,acementy; compaction or burial of the soil? c.; aChange'rin topo graphy or ground surface contour intervals? d. The destruction, covering or,nod;;£icataotz of any unique geologic or phys:` ^.;� features? e: Any potential increase in wind. or water erosion of soils, affecting either on or off site cenditons ?` f. Change- In .erasion siltation„ or deposition? f a. Exposure of people or properryto - geologic ,hazards such as earthqua `ka,' landslidasgad- Slides, ground failure, or similar hazards ?' h. .,u increase in the sat cf .extra :.. *_iron end/or, use of and mineral resource? 2. Hydrol. W' -1 the pro'- -sal have si.iificant results in. f' - - -r 7 Page c! l YES MAYBE NO a. C Changes in cur,rents, or the courses -of direction og flowing streams, rivers, or ephemeral stream channels ?_ b. 0 0h4nges in absorption rat es drama a'� , g patterns, ar the raze and amount of surface dater _ c t titer tions to the ourse,or flow isf` flood Waters Page 3 C YES MYBE No c. Introduction of new or-disruptive specie:: of vlants into an area? d. Reduction in the potential for,agricultural ^' - .production? Fauna. Will the proposal have'significant results in: a• Change in the characteristics of species, including,diversity, distribution, or numbers of any species of animals? t — b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species,r�f animals ?, c.- Introduction of new or \ \diikruptive species of w animals: into an area,' or ress't in a barrier to the migration or moveftent a_=�animals? _ d. Deterioration or removal of exis lg fish or wildlife habitat? 5. Population. Will the proposal have significant results Inc a. Will she proposal alter the location, drst bution,.densitp, 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. Suci� o- Economic Factors. Will the proposal dVe significant- results in: a. Change in local or regional soaio <ecanomic characteristics, including economit'oz , J commercial diversity, tax rata „'and prcperty, values?� b. Will project costs b ^- ,3istributed amozg project beneficiaries; =3. e., buyers, / tax payers or project users? 7. Land Use and Planning Considerations, Will the proposal have significant results in? { a. U subgtanzial alteration of the present or ` planx.,.A land use of an area? (`b A conflict with any resignations, objectives, policies, or adopted planvof any governmental ' entitiesF' c. An inpaci upon the qulritY or quantity of ,� ! existing consumptive or noh- consumptive �� �� tet�atYonal opppstamities? x u- subs..ances in ire event of an accident? d. An increase in the wimber of ;individuals or species of vector or pathenogenic organisms or the exposure of people to such organisms? i l sw i e.. Increase in existing noise levels? f. 7xposure'.!f people to.potentiaily dangeIrous ioise levels? '! g. The creation of objectionable odors? h. An increase in light or glare? C/,`, Page k YES MAYBE No ' 8. Transportation. Will the proposal have significant results a. Generation Of substantial additional vehicular } movement? f b, Effects on existing streets, or demand for it new street construction? V C. Effects on existing g parking facilities, or demand for new parking? fir' d. Substantial impact upon existing transporta- tion systems? " ., / e. Alterations to present patterns of circula- tion or movement of people and /or goods? V� f. Alterations to or effects on present and potential water- borne, rail, mass transit or air traffic? S. Increases in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? 9. Cultural Resources. 'Eiill the proposal have significant results in: a. A di -sturbance to the integrity of aj cological,' paleontological, and(or historical resources? 10. Heclth, Safetv, and Nuisance Factors. Will the proposal have significant results infj 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 µ subs..ances in ire event of an accident? d. An increase in the wimber of ;individuals or species of vector or pathenogenic organisms or the exposure of people to such organisms? i l sw i e.. Increase in existing noise levels? f. 7xposure'.!f people to.potentiaily dangeIrous ioise levels? '! g. The creation of objectionable odors? h. An increase in light or glare? C/,`, t\ Page 5 YES MAYBE No 11. Aesthetics. Will the 7r,419sai have significant results in-C, a. The obstruction or degradation of any scenic vista or view? b. The creation of an aesthetically offensive site? ✓ a. A conflict with: ;the objective of desigrat ;,d or potential.sce'nic corridors? c 12. Utilities and Public Services. Will the proposal have a significant netd for new systems, or ' 41terations to- the following a. Electric power? % A v b. Natural or packaged gas? c. Communications systems? d. Water sapply2 l t., e. Wastewater, facilititzg? _ f, Flood aontroV vtruct::res? g. Solid waste facilities? ' h. Fire protection? i iL Police protection? j�. Schools? k: Parks or other recreational facilities? 1. Maintenance of pudic facilities, includingi roads and flood control facilities? m. Other governmental services? 13. EnerRp zsnd Scarce Resources. Will the proposal { have significant results in; » a. Use of 9,_3ostantial or excessive fuel or energy? � b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy? c. An increase in the demand for'development of d new sources of energy; >. d, An increase or perpetuation of the consumptton of Lion- renewable forms of energy hen feasible ,= , renewable sources of energy are avei able? ' t.l Page 6. - �J _ / YES MAYBE No e. ,Zubstautial depletion of any "nonrenq�-,"'.e or !' / ;'scarce natliJ:;2l, resource: 5 14 - Mandatory FindinRa of signifiia,;ze. y a. Does the project haire the tertial'to degrade t €' kke quality 62 the envir= ent, substanCia�Zy reduce the aiabitat of fish or wildlife species, causO a fid4 or wildlife population to 'drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to F eliminate a plant de animal community, reduce £' the number or, or the range of ;'I rare or endangered plant or animal or elimii e important examples of the major peribss of Califorita hi$tory or.prehistcry? b. 'Does the prO3'� havpCthe potential to achieve /� short -term„ to the disadvantage of Tan environmedtal goals? (B, short-term imac� tln the / g � environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief; definitive period of time while long /' term pacts will..eddctre well into tho future). �,/` V.._ _ 11 r- c. Does theproject have Impacts which are li Individually iismited, but cumulatively �0 tonsiderableZ (Cumulatively Considerable means that the incremental effects of an int ividi�ai ctroj(%,�:t are considerable when viewed in connection vith the effects of past:`projects, and probable future projects). d. Does the project have environmeatal effects which %rill cause substantial adverse effects an humbn beings, either` directly or_!lbdirectly? ._ ---�- ZY. thSCUSSION OF LIIVIilyJ2iTtE23TA% EtrALUATICN (i.er of affirmative answersote - -� 1 the.a')ove questions plus a di.scussiou of proposed mitigation measures), JJ ,*/Ij c - c t LL�' -, IN- v Page 7 III. DETERc1hA. ION On the ;�basis of eUs,initial evaluation: r; i—"' I find t proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the eayironmt, and s NEGATIVE DECLARATION twill be pz'u�a = >,L - 1 find that although the proposed project cou *.`d have a significant effect on the ttivironment, there Will not hs� a significant effect Z� irx this case because the mitiigmtion measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. .A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED. j--� I find the proposed project MAY haie:a significant effect on the enVirnment, ant an ENVIRONMENT IL ',ACT REPCRT is required. Date atu a e„ T tle l�r ; r r ADDENDUM TO INITIAL STUDY; PART Ii 2c, Hydrology The construction of this project will increase the amgvnt of p aved surface art which Uld result- in an increase Ill..' tKe amount of decrease in - surface water; runoff and a° the ab *"Tian rates,,'' However,fhe drainage for this handle \ proposed system pro* ec will �t this grease. The developient of the Cite cc�uid sxpose people and b property, especially downstream nrt;perties, Ito floodi However, ^. this could be mitigated through the construction orb stonm drain µ' facilities Wo Mndle the surface outer runoff. Q. ; 4. Biota fa), (b) and (c „ _s The development of this project will introduce and add new plan. species to the site, which will provide for.a`diversity. However_ `'aF the development the site will, the �,val of the nortberar and southern ' eil�ptus windro ;, I'2 large trees to the east side, and 1 largo �LM4 -Wo tree ir; Dial e Rkhord - G;"Mofee CansuhSrxr flor►ic�lsutist 9i4•D Redding Woy ! U?lond. i'i191786 �_ 7.14- -3835, Fir., Vartan Minasslan Overseas Realty Enterprirses Ins.. 300 So. Harbor Blvd. Suite 600 Anahe�ne Oaf ��H05. Dear qtr. Mlnasslan,`" Lf your request I evAltated the trees on the property near .Arrow and VlzmeY . The treo. are a Zuoalyptus.vasriety that was use -a tensively as a wtud, break when^ this urea was planted to citrus The lath "name for this `:fee is Eucalyrtus �labulus. The trees' on the north and south perim -Fors, or the property are in a serious state of deslline. There s`a considerable lie -bank and it is my oplaion that it Would bm advIseabl e. to ressove them. They will be a hazzard to peopll°e and structures due to' the potential of breakage. They have been known to cause serious damage due to falling branches* Evsn if prunned bask the n tro . d naves be an asset to the property. The same `hr+ldr -'_ ;rm* for the two large trees on the east sic3. < s - The large old t1o'a An the center of the., property towards the Vineyerd side to aza Avocado. Growth habit inalcates It is the variety Fuerte. _ I 'strongly feel it is mot wo -eth saving either since it would be a nusance in a track due to its sge, its suscptibily to root-rot, breakagg and fruit-. 'swoop. I hope this answers your irg7,;iry. If I cen do anything further for you please i~ *e1 free to contact. =41 ®w�yacatrre craasu:c citai�d. M�tlre Orr ING 10� 19uY.tS21g HOrti City tZEI` at^i 1..' 0701 -02 o 2 -27 -$5 PO Agenda 3 .of '6 1 RESOLUTION NO. A RESJLUTION OF THE PLANNIN`6f' COMMISSION OFj THE CIT`d`OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ;CONDITIONAL, APPROVING TENTtTIVE TRACT MAP NO. 12835. ` WHEREAS, Tentative Tract Map No. 12835, hereiiiafter "Map ", submitted by Overseas Realty, applicant, for the purpose of:, Slubdividing the real property situated in the City pf Rancho Cucamonga, County ofiSap Bernardino, State of California, described as a residential subdivision of 112 units_ consisting of 86 townhouses and 26 condominiums an 9.5i -acres of land located et, the east side of Vineyard Avenue, ± 600 feet north of Arrow; Highway, regularly came before the Planning Commissipn for public hearing -and action on February 27,'1985; and WHEREAS, the City Planner has recommended approval of the Map sdbject to all conditions set forth in the Engineering an3 Planning Division's reports; and F i WHEREAS, the Planning ;; ,Commission has read and considered the Engineering and Planning Division's reports and has considered other evidence ' presented at th6,'publ;t hearings - NOW, THEkEFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does resolve as fdllowsc " `tire SECTION 1: The Planning Commission ra :yes following findings in, - regard to 'tentative Tract No. 12835 and the,�ap 'hereof: (a) The tentative tract is consiste :'r Ye 7th the General -Plan, Development Code, and spetifln; plans; (b) The design or improvements of I;W ' tentaitive tract is consistent with the.Oeneral Plan, De"elopment Code, and.,.:specific plans; <. (c) The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed, : (d) The design of the subdivision is not likely t! cause substantial environmental damage and _ 4vZdable injury to humans and wildlife or their habitat; (e). The tentative tract is not likely to cause serious public health problems; jf) The design of the tentative. tract will not S..infIic� with any easement acquired' by the.. public at` large, now of record, for access throu46 or use of the property within the:rprop,+sed subdivision i .b - s c : Resolution No. TT 12835 - Oversee Realty Enterprises Page 2 (g) That this project will not create adverse impacts on the environmenty,�And a Negative Declaration is issuey It SECTION 2: Tentative Tract Map No. 12835,, a�tcopl of wh r is attached, hereto, is .hereby approved subject to all of the ft�lTtrr:�g 6n'ditions and the attached Standard Conditions: =S PLANNING 'Dlil ION tl. , 1. other 'types of roof materials, such as concrete tile, shall be used instead of the proposed asphalt shingles. �( 2. Special landscaping treatment shalt be provided along Vineyard Avenue, at project entrance and at the recreation areas, and to be in a unifying,theme. 3. Dense landscapeqg shall be, provided to bufft the guest parking C:,hat fronts on Vineyard Avenue; and landscaping shall be provided between garages to soften:_the long corridor of` garage- streetscape. 4. Any signs proposed for this development shall be designed in cgnformance with the Sign Ordnance and shall requira a separate application and approval by the Plannin*n�5?V;sion. 5. Texturized `- pavement shall be provided to the entrance of the project. 5. If no centralized trash receptacles are provided, all trash pick 'up� hall be,for I'Adividual units with all receptacles shielded from public view. 7. The upper unit of the two - story stacked `flat shall have a prii._te open space of 150 square feet. 8. Separate garages shall be provided fay the two stacked flat units instead of sharing a 2 -car garage. 9. New eucalyptus windrows shall be provided to the northern and southern property boundary. ENGINEERiU DIVISION a 1. The west side of Vineyard Avenue shall be widened to accommodate left turn lane Jind required 'transition ' taper to lhe satrsfactiom of the City Engineer. o o M Resolution No TT 12835 - Overseas Realty Enterprises Page 3 2. The accumuiated drainage from the tributary areas shall not exceed the Capacity of the existing Bear Gulch street, A storm drain pipe may be needed -:to accommodate 100 -year fiow from subject property to Arrow Highway. A hydrmlogy >report shall be required to make this determination. Easements for off -site storm drain facilities shall be secured prior to recordation of the final map,.of issuance or building permits, whichever occurs first. In the event that the developer is unable to secure the off -site drainage easement and has requested the City's e;gndemnation process, the ;developer shall pay for :111 expenses of ;each condemnation .,per the `5ubdtvisioh Map Act. 'J 3. ;The subject property shall drain at, ,least one half of the area toward Vineyard Avenue. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 27th DAY OF FEBRUARY, 1985. c;� a PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCH�71jCAMONGA r) BY: Dennis L. Stout, Chairman ATTESTt, Rick Gomez, • Deputy Secretary I, Rick Gomez, Deputy Secretary of the Planning Coniiission of the City -'of-- ( Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that tote foregoing Resolution was duly and @ regularly introduced,, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of, the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a / regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 27th day of February, 1%,85, by the following vote -to -Wit: =? AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: i It f�✓ . ,k�, �A . hl L 'P pO i`1 c P d 01 •FM p— er Oyy EE O ^<>Lp n S y Ln E b y ••.. S n 6 YO N 6 d p � O N L E q IIC C EE pd • y 9 0 i O d p L A p u I A (i _ pd =rOAOw - 4 i v Y d a• 9 N y E d 'd.D db ONL O O. p c S Yyq p b g. Q u , m o q y. n Y „O, A O p1U N� LLW P CSG pIC M� ^j ;AV NN 4pzA C. _Np� .OAOLy b. nnNG Y "u �VOU1S "' H /.t> YL' 1�1YC.m L O1�O n yljy n�yVa ^C AOw yEEN �I A ~ ^d�f 04�q a+u.> Vyp i.a <�a a u -pY Iv.yF� b nvre pry :- ukha�y Cup by OL LO.a+� bsi CEN cq� pVN b 3<Li M• Ep9uy� C�V NCad+,ng bNd ^bL np �.we�� NO �tib • Cw..O E""OLCpL 6d4p". G C N EY F� � =YA 3a0 CI >yl .-.M•. C�dp�� 60N 40L.N.EO dyd c��� !e�cN 4�+. Cn • i. d E 6 lL p y A b C N ... oo d. r0 - p1 ao it d n dq' v 3 C C ^b o' °d pc.,,N b•�o <I pc-� -9 2— b an -ep qtr o' ° '+ ac o ��<c, ma6^p O1c nt y�Y��y Ot�p n� DOdw d' >^O. if 1nEN��IU L E? Lb qiO L��V Ya-°• VYnb nyON Yaya O e7r U ;C my°IIrN NdC N IGLLOGy V "a-f IL. <LLL 1 �,y EE C..L •`II a dYKN� d ^ AOt Y b b.Y:J�: ny O` d. V n Np «^AI OF W N.p� •„ " o o w. bfN L ' E ,C yy lPCaN U b d' .-. y' .^ ¢t>7�< dM3 V n nr�.. ert A COAN3 �L6L6t) �I o p •r cy � �pGtA f ai y^ V _ � Ct S b o^ Ern• • � y n'. w E u T' 3 _ • p0 �^- U 27" OVC ud, o and Ea � QcbA t Np y d p E O N L r h S 'gym a"O 1w Y 2: 3> N d O " r d 4. ,4 U p p 0.m PY YN,C • " Z 60..3.y.. ? eys C _ _ F==. e• .. �.. Hi u v.02 O 4 f,� � L L 3 p D.r Ex pNL.Oi.+: � r � Aa nRp^ Edv dQa u °c°a °M oaf ua r rn�E ¢ R L ,o U° ° ro d U dry 4 r Oy ru Y 2 ^.gip n.�p40 dM aY °y n.0 wn V A E En n.O AdY H P O 'C^Sn +CO ^ 6 � Z iW L rGO G R 6 d� R °� .G •� e�"a Nµ dT YY L 4 01 A E p r LOO R ` ,0. Y i w Ln A y ^ L!t �p in Tp �A THV RrG L M3Z wN b. aG Gr 9.aza _ °'cG deg u a9 q 4wa C .q L VY' a..yOdSWdaV.� ^ ^�O TCL.L aN �yii R t ^ G �O S K YF. C 'G d Nom°' LN4 W O.O� r �EOC.im .dO.O,+yt., ld ^UV =w.. R gg L Z L wtV �"�4 .f°iN M,�E, a Y o. yM D wY G-9. ivy^ _ .u41Y YNaY. 1- AN yq'Wi:'L6 'Q Oj Of ^2d N.Ld �E N w aw 'n � S O L 0.^ a G a� r � ° �' O g w m =• 0 C u nM n C v L - j z.;: R r d^wre v °V c�rT rs ° 'a;A2 -4 > °L et r- °- Lz o: c LLp cwV VY4u0N 42k ruti _ a wRO3 ec^ 6 G ^gcl��^u6^ awO L pp4 6mwm j T diy Try w. .2z;,2 na uo0; in r.4� R h eT c N ,u `psi ^t O d "—s UW.c Y w - nd 3- 5 _ «n ° 3 �°- Fiyo arcH gaaAi w.� Z.9 w d�T E ML o . Q�{� 'O Ag.'ett ^_,,. i! # N Z C ayi .O � i+ OTO p V�♦ O _ CCY n O O MY C r ��'tlL ? wu u.E dew V: tTa w d > ti `G.GOE w L Y RR w wTG ad '�G cYC 30A °^ Ly wi +6n N O �O °t'.00 uNC ~4, > u; Gw.yt EQ4 U Qw° a0 °n yn b.= qYL 40 c. r 4° Ai rM w. ^ ° • 4. C .R.. Lug a Q 4 C G d A b 'O G ^ ° L O b W G A w V't3 O j .n F C L R .-. W L o p u - 3"A LyQ �� E4 K2° L �t °4 LU Y .COMB EV4 Vdp> VO`o 04 ZCO U. E YyQC 9 ^C U.gL ° RO L.00fT O.00 G pO�w Y O w ' °LA40a 'Y GUTS Ot �,{ YE �u N.RA Ys°. T n V z :O br0'nr 6V�Ya R u E d r n R° D✓ E C w ` O.YA Pr +�MY wCR tr""tgQRp EYa QR.C'+ a U t c�' SS/ 111 omi� coy° > aum a'ol tl1 �'aa F e tau � 4 N M t YL 4u;� 6 V G A OIRO LION' G X4.0 u b ROy�- . d aa,,°pII G .0 9NL c - ucd.LV d R g a N O Y b ti- ..� �bL�C1L .a r+✓ON 9A NNy/y iL�.6 C L m 4sc EY,y w _ 2 9dr' .i qn .t�U wh -dq � O L Oa N4� M Cq b pC. IIaCK .. O d E U N �. E L C L 1YVN ». L c a N ,,,, d ++ o. t N- L n: 'iu s dL xda. u. "T'e e �; N uAn n °3v c F� i cNy ^a.N OL. O•U T.S ». d Y L4C dy d d•-•�n Fm �Z �gOj� _N. d�O� � en C N OdOC O b y W K 6 b> j N 2' G d QI �.: " ll A C� y> .» b C C•,y 4 Q o d LT 4 > G.r•+ S w G ^010 4�KNa NO- q�L O��CN 4. C 9 °a:M at O'C� 4H c o Noa+ FL di- i Ld.. g NrR for ° o mIF d cg1OC d.Q a 'm ruu Tt:- qw aal a v C n. l d u ♦ 6 4~ a Tn N RAF d i Q a 0' b' [iL 1l. 0 A t y N C 2� z ri- .4- 0ZY4 °' C Ry.Y � N4 Y N. C d.01 M aYn to T r I s c0 .^ m CIl1ShVd SR.._OG 4U 4.0 H,RUyi FNLYM N R S3+L- ..1LEY CCC qr ti cn I G Q�° .5 -z-f; g) -t 08. gaL.r 9Li Cqn f "� t r6LN bN. ` 'y �L bid RS -� : Ay R^ �9 Lm�u C4T 4q �C'c^E ^p S..NgxOh CY. i b =2. 7C OId m. b� ry100 �.Nr .O« OLN 1. C Rd Ry4 i ° L� a Nm a .- N oc od rnu ° bales » � al dN 4010. CNq iy .. Nu UdcR 4Q °t. ^p�au r LIT 6i R .G C m CY. 1t0 C a.� L �.r 49010 xd�tY.p qutY � K �qG 4L. b NC. RF L _ a+4 ad qb Vp ^ pC rAT P .Np d O a 3} N d. •p as b O L 3 ..C.. °` � 6 » L R uN °' w 2qq on aRi °R i.dca. -Fia BVko roo rD" . cF u Tp..,n a� d m nN u -,,. `Q. MM q u c rn q`'O 6~ O L,1yYl�N �.+ C �W OQL aTd M ♦u ..C.µ° _4 !- GY.6 �L OGL Zin KK.74.ir d d `NL _ - "dON C b N q» 6Z; ss i Vb dqA Ldt p,e uti �� qa o. m qII «. m.. a �c .r «. uu •- euo> N" udv o n> F bi c a u�k . vN�m ° W � O L ..q c wL X . H y C`V d p CNN W mc.°Ac .: °. bm CL «qwv ca.D tE �n•^ W 6 mom^ q G ,uNNY E ` jd' ado V T q y ^.iC d S Oq b «4 > dG, uq -•-" t0. GN at TN ya i A CJ ^ t 79 b4 uE mL'E Ad oC �€ a'c o V U^ n a Lm N gala. �aru v. Z W A SEE m O'19pWN} c L V�AE N V i NN N~ Y m CLbC y °UN g A @c C.N. bNwd W 6V bd i OyJdj S �_ G =UO wN.EO. OOL adm C VVTw QW b « R E S. d V arn9 Lm Ny tL q 04 ° .r0 Lm + ATd t « °y LN E u .m¢ ^ '° ti O m �L1WL ` b�dt�i LLv n�L L L L9 -°91 Cp CE J NQ'�O bb WU. UN GH y T V 7II GA�6Y GM m=_ •VOCC �� L N U �Y ydR C C. y� L. i ° AD y mt Jaia m a G'd ¢F3v y a° ��T CCrZ �i�,__. wQG vt a aO E Nia� N N qo o J CON _b d . O d Ry., ° b4g0 N� ERa 6L C ° a rv6 y° Lr Y tl MAN Z,9z2 ACV _ Od NtEf 4� •� N� ooL Y G£6 V �9 N� LO Nd ti � 9a'r Nail Lh O C rG Q�pC ^ rid ^ LL V Vp EOC O � dCy . O cGdC YV NFU... CmE y vp Na` O O K �> N _ O e.. O • C _ �� �. AY° JJ Y Ld k 6b Z. aZ+ arQ ��W.m 0 x =dui c ici rn ag wdgp c 19 F C V G M ii° ~ Vs 4 ° E E d S qay. cu 'C" N O � Uo om «. +i > � �i 6 �.:AU u wEX 4cd V O !"N T O tE FG 6w R� F C« 1�dL V L {Jq c 2 LILh L l�qq b'. M b N pGj q �ru O.dr� Cp "� iJ 1 .N Ld4� y i } n ar L air.` a ic.ci +°- � • a c .. cnaa_ ia+^' .�'au ro ..,qvc� y: a. ✓. aO ."" r ° � < v.. c°fi �gtts. c�i ww`.:��s n� .ar >„v,» ,rt N. Yd- Gd F q C. gga Ng2ia Q �d E...g arQ 2w ACi qL L G rd 4. Y Ni OV! 1. k AdJNNaL wwa�L d•� vy Nw. Ny mA Sp.. NL qQ iqr� qW C C °H dX� +tip YJ r Lq tro �� 4�'KL fsV4I4 auk. E'td.. �NA Sd C,t 4V1.. to t a` ro L 6 A wi N � iIILC� C QYa d. >'g F" Ld L � d°� W r � °�C. @Qma ,•.y4fi'y�Ot ��� 'Cy °maw. �NS iV.- ^a >1m w tda. 94'V4.. Oi «A w�y'OZ dT sLFprw C Sti Q .rC -�Cr ^C i a 4 q CND a C ZZ VtA 4. qby 9k q.yRA v%d�p Qw.vr k'°p�a.'C Eq 117 K 0'9 s°}.ae,u NY NC 5iv. -. s.�L Cpw"' ".b�db Ga� V"�9 �i4A bg >t Ham•.. abe -G A.. r. Ci G a a ^�'' C .°�.�. C yY 9. 3 E q N ZZ; b-3 V » r i..;r uyv p A u.,., a aµ u }4 CC>i4W�V 4 q.G ZOV'C Vgfl`� E w�LaYyL jG rpjNQa tTw Caa Nr.r �'q N� aa,2.20 u anb ��"�' CU 34ES�N -. 6°b >Ve.4NS.MC C +•+E .tip Z yy 4R.lf �a a ✓t 4'ONM 4ggp OA... '1a L- 00�-.d w• G d 5 E.+Lu.aieV. -KQU VO DS1k '' Tom. a�8m ya-tN " t Q U. }n awry. K A V VI C N2 V � f � ijf L '.e+irjt w S7 :� s N O 04 GL E D. O'L «°u No -20 � .. an N sN x o Y:, vN ay b� m d OL: Ny.. �4 •q pM y�.a...s- �N q.J .ai, Hn � .c ,N � 6CA NWT GL�b� �_ N , 'C^c• W C = yR '� Cil � y r O .a V =cv g LA li O« q b � c c W y y N S �� y cN IIld - V vy EC � EE c < NV « pqY qE «�N 9 « cy y N` s LLA L b? an C° « r i« W � A v O a i y W AU L A O•q ' qp di Eu Lys p Nn. c` 2 as CN L u V u o un o N Iz 111 «c Y 99W T« LN V O L1:d � LCO:. d� OO d C 9 « Y' O N �� E A 3 N' Oci C° 6 U y D• 1�•�� I �1`�ry� q N G � P �q �.��7p1t► ri 1 /� N O 04 GL E D. O'L «°u No .. c «w d p 0 0 d N y W yp� dart L p� pM y�.a...s- Hn � .c i..1 M 6� r O .a V =cv g q LA 9 y ^ vim... 6 v .ate EE.oi- n N ny q ate. I � EE c L¢Y'q d O a i y AU L A O•q 2 ; A d% U p u o un o N Iz 111 f1 i 1 v A oao - r � L BE u •. fl �f. r.LQ Il (\ t` a4ud Aw al+ � r�CU La C u'.. 5119 M q N T Y N p.Ym q _O u N q CL L ^m NN i c� p N 4T d �orc a V T M t N 4^ q yYN E qp WY .�Y AN �° 4 S� aa 4 .rte A3 tom.E 44YC 2W G1� ♦V.w GYM .Cq Kut -LqA A ^V D'A. / �. AA KII. VW6 Sti �r. \ f ! RESOLi TION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION DENYING TENTATIVE TRACT 12835 LOCATEQ AT TN� EAST SIDE OF -,-, VINEYARD AVENUE, ± 500 FEET NORTH OF ARROW 4IGHWA'Y IN THE MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT WHEREAS, on the 21st day of November, 1981., a complete application was filed by Overseas Realty Enterprises for review of the above - described project; and WHEREAS, on the 27th flay of February, 1985, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission held a pubic hearing to consider the above- described project. THEREFORE, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission resolves as follows: - SECTION lr That the Planning Commission makes the following " findings in regard to Tentative Tract 128�5; 1. That the proposed use is inconsistent with the Absolute Policies yf the,Development Code in providing - adequate drainage, /acilities. 2. That the tentative tract is likely to cause serious public health problems as a result of flooding.' 3. That the design of the subdivision and improvemen,.w: likely to cause substantial environmental damage; and 4.. That this project will create adverse - impacts on the f, environment that have not beers lmi'tigat�,.d. f` SECTION 2: Tentative Tract 12835 is hereby denied basedObn- inconsistency with the provisions, intent and'purpose of the Development:_,Code, which was adopted to implement -the goats, policies, and objectives of the General Plan; and environmental effects that will cause substantial,,advers6 effects on people and property. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 27th DAY OF FEBRUARY, 1985. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMOVGA BYE Dennis- L. Stout, Chairman =i ATTEST: Rick Gomez, Deputy Secretary - 60 Resolution No. , TT 12835 - Overseas Realty Enterprises January 23, 085 1� , Page 2 i r v , I, Rick Gomez, Deputy Secretary of the.. Planning Commission of the City of'—' Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution, was duly arid, regularly introduced, passed,, and adopted by the Planning Commi sion of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning CoLhission held on the 27th day of February, 1;986, by the following Vote -to -wit. AYES, COMMISSIONERS: NOES.," COMMISSIONERa ',: ABSENT; COMMISSIONERSz'" ,r r Y. Y 9s ITE14 F � ; i 1i CITY OF RANCHO CI7aMONGA STAFF REPORT a t DATE: - = `February 27, 1985 TO: Chairman and Members of the Punning Coinissiot FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner BY: Lisa A. Wintnger, Assistant Planner _. SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 85.01- A - RICHAR9S - A request to amend the :Land Use Map of the General-771—an ,an from Low Density Residential to Industrial Par, for 3.9 acres of lasted located on the` east side of Archibal(; between Fero6 -and 8th - APN 20.9-061,1, 2, 21, 22, 29; 20D`t? -1 ,2. i s. ABSTRACT:. A General lan Amendment was requested tl change the land use designation tram Low Density Residential to Industrial Park for a,1.2 acre 16 at the southeast corner of Archibald and Main (see attached report). The- planning Commission directed staff to study the proposed land use change in terms of an expanded project area to include the project site and other parcels to the north and east, and determine tre appropriateness of the prop1sed change for a larger area. At this meeting, the Commission Will consider the land use change and determine if the project area is to be expanded. Ii. BACKGROUND: At the January 26, 1985, Planning Commission meeting, a request was.-considered for a General Plan Amendmene-'- fr4m Law Density Residential to Industrial Part; for a 1.2 acre site located on the southeast corner of Archibald and Main (see attached report). At that time. the Commission expressed concern regarding the advisability of amending the Land Use Map of the General Plan for a 1.2 acre area. Staff was directed to study expansion of the project area and land use compatibility of the proposed change with on and off site uses. III. ANALYSIS- A. _Project Area:' The expanded project area which was examined by staff includes seven parcels located on the east side of ArchjbalO. "between Feron and the AT o and SF railroad right 6f-way, divided by Main Street (see Exhibit A). The area north of Main Street Consists of five parcels with three single family ITE14 F � ; Planning commission Staff Report . February 97, 2985 GPA 85 -0114 - Richards - Page #2 n O homes, a neighborhood market and vacant land. The area borders by single family homes to the. east and is approximately 1.4- acres in area. The General Plan designates the land use as Low Density Resi'd�ntial, as does the Development District designation. The two parcels located south of Rain which °equal 2,;8 acres consist of the Gust", AIloss site which was originally proposed for •the- �V�enerral Plan Amendment`'and a vacant, parcel owned by the Santa Fe Railroad. Bordered on the east by single family .homes and the south by the railroad right -of -way, the area's current General Plan and Development District designation Is Low Density Residential. In examining the merits of changing the General Plan Land Use Designations for these &bas, it appears that the proposed Industrial Park use would be i inappropriate for the area north of Main Street. The existing residential uses conform with the Low Density designation although the commercial use is non- cbnforming in nature. Single family development closely borders the eastern edge,, and ,the lot configuration and area (1.4 acres) , would limit development of industrial park uses. The area south of Main appears to be more appropriate for industrial park uses. The two parcels make . up a , larger area (2.5 acres) than was.- originally proposed for the General Plan Amendment and the proposed land use change would not conflict with any, on -site uses. The eastern boundary of the area is sep4rated to some extent" frr-n ,existing -, residenttAl rises by the undeveloped right -of -way for Reid 9-treet and would be impacted somewhat less by the proposed industrial park use than by the existing forge activitiesq Tt�erefore, staff recommends that the, project area under analysis for the proposed General Plan Amendment include the two adjacent p.`Lcels east of Ar ribald and south of Main (APN 209- 062 -01, 02 ). B. Land Use Com atiblr'r : The proposed change from Low t Density Residential to Industrial Park could impact surrounding uses through additional traffic, noise and changes in ae.tthet c character of the neijhborhood.�;'' N� Planning; Commission Staff Report February 27, 1985 -� -GPA 85 -01-A - Richards r Page #3 owever, ne Industrial Park designation is least intense of the indust'ial uses and a :probable Ji _ reduction in current levels of noise, emissions, 'and vibration could be anticipated with the elimination of- ';" ^' V;e forge. Residences facing the project site on Main would experience most of the impact, shculd the property, develop as an JndustriaV� Park use. "It is possible that some of the noise currently experienced from the railroad right -of -way could be 'auffVed from . the ne�gh. h prhood by future development of , h2 project' ( t_ site. ,t Retaining the Low Density Residential designation`' could expose new residptia'l development to high levels of noise from Ar.0tbald _and_ i<ho. railroad -and_ `< i _ - waula" ar avr "- continuing, �p('tW% -n` of the forge as''a 4,-, legal nonconforming use. 'With the current land use designation, it is = unlikeiy that''new development will occur on -site in the near futures ; IV. ENVIRONMENTAL i ASSESSMENT: The California Environmental Quality —that Act requires whenever there is evidence that a sign ffcant impact may occur, an Environmental' Impact Report must be prepared. Staff feels that the`'requested General Plan Amendment " could result in some impact in the areas of Circulation, aesthetics, l,health, safety and nt,,isanca, s discussed xn' the Initial Study<�ttached to the pt-e0aus ;,tiff report ,A :�ever, none of the impacts discussed a, q�•e would be ,cansideed a significant adverse impact which 61,04 +got be mii1,gated through,,: n T_ tha desi4n review process when a propo�pd- DrojeA is submitted. Therefore, feels staff that no further envircn!nental analysis at the Generai Plan level is` merited. Fuether environmental review at the project level should include ,a fu5I d scu.?sion of impacts and mitigation measures proposed in thee, \areas of circulation, aesthetics, health, safety and nuisance. V. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: Sh9ufd the Commission, upon examination of the General Plan Amendment, decade that :the ch.inge from LoW v�nsity Residential to Industrial Park would promo:? the land use goats and polic :ras of the General Plan and that this Amendmert% would) not be mate; ialuly detrimental to the adjacent properti.ps or would' not cause significant edverse impacts' as listed under U6 Environmental Assessment, the following are the findings that are necessary on approval. 0 j 'Planning Commission Staff`,Aeport = i February 27, 1985 GP 85 -AI -A k Richa.ds Aa§e # Amendmant__..dnnc�nni- con�1 {�+ w;tSLi�h��end =t} ¢ Policies of 10i General Plan. 8.. The Amendment promcites goals of the land use e'%nent. �I C. The Amendment w,hold not be 'materially injurious or detrimental ,6 the adjacept_properties, c VI. COkRESPONAERCE: This item has been adO%.rtiypd as a public hearing n The Daily Report newspaper and notfCis were seat to «11 property" � ; o +zt�t�i 300 feet of the boundary of the.`: pro used ro eta r o dot `o p P p 3 �, 1• e� n� correspondence ha s been received, VII. RECOMMENDATI09: Should - the Planning Comnissiorf ft,`grmine that the Facts for Finding of approval indicate that the land use chance zs_ap!!rr rit' +won the 2_parcels adj ent to''t?re railroad, adoatzan _zsf }' t[ai ac�ie� �liesaTu ion af- Approval required. In add {lion, the applicant Will be required to file a Development District Amendment `o chi .-n athe DD designafi:ar, -fr'um AMU "L" to'7ndustrial Specific Plan ''%ndusYr;al Park. Should the Commission wish to deny the Amendment, a Resolution- of,Denial is ` also attached. Reuect:'uli ubrAtted, 1 Rick Gomez` } �J C ty Planner , RG:LW:cv Attachments: Exhibit HAA - Project Area Map k January 2v 1985 Staff Report F� Tnitiei Study t Rasa' ution of Approval Resolution of Denial tJ, i�. n. A� LL lu AvoAmo ua o 5. r oo — OE 'a ,I` u VA 1' ^ — IY Or cumik"C'A c13CAMO STAFF REPORT, d0 V � 9 1977 DATE_ TO: Chairman 'artd Members of the Planning Commission FROM: click Gomez, City Planner' BY: Lisa A. Winingr,r, As:iCtant Planner. f SUBJECT: EXVIR01VMENTALla SESSMENT AND GENERAL PLA" AMENDMENT 85-01 - A - RICHARDS - A request to am6nd the- L. -Use Map of the General Plan from Low Density" Residential 'to. Industrial Park ft 1.2 acres of land located ort' the sois+heast corner 'offi.,;�chlbald and Main - APN 09- 061.01,. - I. ABArRA�,. A General Plan Amendment ls._reoLLaster to_cmn —n a the rand- __- use uesggnaticn from Low density Residential to Industrial ` Park far' a 1,2 acre site located, on the southeast corner of ( Archibald and Main. The applicant wishes to ceasf, the current nonconforming use as a forge and sell the stru6ture for a by an 1 electrical contractor as office, warehousing and {torage facility. The Commission will d.termine if the proposed change , is appeopriate,in terms of scope An'd land use compatibility, II. BACKGROUND: The applicant wishes to develop a. light industrial user a ,2 acre site located on Archibald Avenue near. the North Town area. The cristing industrial activity will be discontinued �o llow the prol:nsed office, retail and storage use by an 0ecurical contractor.,,—,( -{ The c�irrent General Plan and Development Oistr=icedesignations of Low Density Residential do not permit the proposed use." The existing case, a foundry, is currently nonconforming in nature. Consequently, a General Plan Amendment is requested to change the cUrrent Low Deisity Residential designation- (2.4 du/acre) to Industrial Park. The purpose of this meeting is to evaluate the proposed General Plan Amendment and any possible alternative land uses for the pra;;ct site. 111 PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action Requested: P.mend the General Plan Land Use Map from Low Dersity Residential (2 -4 du /acre) to Industrial Park. (` PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT GPA 85 -01 -A - Richards 1 January 26, 1985 Page ;:2 ' B.- Location: East of Archibald Avenue, south of Main Street. C. Parcel Size: 1.2 acres D. — - EAisting_.DaYEi l�t1�?r _- 119�c+p� = n�ai.rrrci iun: - -LpW— U11:51 Ly -' ^ _ Residential E. Exists Land Use: ' "Metal Forge F- .: Surrounding Land Use and D�V�*,ov,���.4j� `xict besignatons: North- - Commercial and Residential ,,�rensity,' Resi dkAti al) ij ( I South - AT & SP Railroad right -of -way and Residential, 0 (Industrial Specific Plan) = East - Vacant and Residential (Low Density Residential) West - Commercial and Industrial (Industrial Specific Plan) �Q G. -` Surrounding General Plan 6tignations• < <- rco�^tfi = Tots Density Residential`_ South - General Industrial - East - Low Density Residential; West General Industrial H. Site Characteristics: T)-d project site is bounded on the south by the railroad ni"ht -of -way and on the east -by ,meant parcels. A 9,000 squarfoot metal building located on the southern portion of the site houses the existing industrial- use. Other site feat ;)res consist of a small outbuilding, paved parking areas, several eucalyptus trees, and other shrubs._ -_..- IV. ANALYSIS; A. History; When the General Plan was adopted, the Town „North :ea, roughly bounded by Archibald, 26th, Marine and,-8th Sjreets, was considered to be distinctly single faily residential in nature and received, a General Plan .4esignation of Lowy Density Residential. The Custom Alloys forge anel the neighborhood market at the corner cf Archibald and Bain thus became Nonconforming uses.. B. iRe s.on for Request. 'f The project .applicant wi rre, o .ease operZtions as a forge and sell the structuF`cor` -`as warehinuse and storage space with 'limited office�Iwm,.” as acti0ty. Since the •= .proposed use differssignificantT�y � _ *.he current nonconforming use, the General Plan Amend�nen'�_ �� has been requested = to, permit the proposed use. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF: REPORT, GPA 85 -01 -A - ,Richards January 26, 1985, j Page #3 \\ C. General l lan Ladd Use Goa A and Policies: The ,;e Citing land use :iesignation Jof tbd project, site and the' - surrounding_ neighborhood - is,Low' ensity Residential. The Genet°a1 Plan Ae Crites the r,aw Density Residential designation as'- rt iZed. by.single farniiY; homes ... appropriate where p, evail,_- .,d where the level of services, including roads, /and shopping recreation are not sufficient to,justfy a higher density." rn' comparison, the industrial Park designation requested by the applicant; is defined in the General Plan as "grouped cottcentr "-? ns of industrial and research and development offices, organized along major thoroughfares K, on the peripher of the Industrial Area ". y The general P1 an"' states that opportunities should be encouVaged__ :ko mix different but compatible land and ,uses activities-11w the City, and that land rises must be organized I to avoid creating nuisances among adjacent uses._- In :... _: ddd].t10tC i.'�- _.i'+e�.trtnlier%�i.n_ i. ku_ fltiien2aemeeEir _,t*nrtt.._.3ne!__. Chet-- - -._ T . General Plan that nonconforming uses shall graduaily be aliiwinated where possible and replaced with •'uses'Jthat are E� consistent with the existing General Plan designation. { D. Issues for Consideration. Two major issues arise in- ( consideration o thislproject. The first issue is that of 1 Compatibility of the proposed land use with 'the existing surrounding land uses. The current industrial use; while separated to some extent-from most of the residential use in I the area, is clearly incompatible with, the 'single _ family homes in the area. The operation of a forge with attendent noise, emissions, vibration, traffic, and aesthetic impacts is inappropriate in close proximity to homes. been allowed to This use has cont::ae as a nonconforming us� trn7y because'*-"—' it was in operation prior to the establI hore of the Cow . I Density residential designation. The J�� proposed industrial ,park, while a 11ess intensive industrial use th#p the forg ,would pose vbime of the same problems in terms of traftj� noi3e; and aesthetic quality. Since the existing sl�rt,,ZIure would remain, albeit it +,a different function, no significant improvement would 6 occur in screening or site design. In addition, the parcel size -of 1.2 acres is too small to allow development of additional industrial park uses, then' 6y limiting 'the scope If o. addit�'onal development. '_ The second major issue is that of the size of � parcel's for ;t which General Plan Amendments nay be considered. While the i PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT GP7A 85 -01 -A - Richards January 26, 1985 Page A4 City has no formafi minimum' lot size for= GeeraI' Plan Amendment consideration, past City policy, dictates that areas to be amended be deftirFa by logical physical or other boundaries, and that all roperties in the immediate area welch have similar °characteristics be given .similar consideration Allowing amendments for parcels which do not — " +"•Ecv�wnu..iti__Iaarl t_ n _a e _cp��= Znnina u cit�dtipil ' tiere'small pieces of land" scattered throughout the City .. _ bear land use- designations which . create inconsistent patchwork patterns of 1- and'use, ` Based on the above factors, -,staff feels that the General Plan Amendment as. proposed is not appropriate for the project site. However, the si'te's proximity to the railroad right -4f -way and associated 4'i sances, to Archibaid,;Avenue, end overall trends of developmm4ent in the North Town area, suggest that the Low Density RdkML�tial development may not J)e the optimal ultimate land us? for the;,site either. This tevort will discuss alternatives 'For land use of the project s.; which consider land. , use compatibility and, site constraints: ;< V. ALTERNATIVES: I sidering ^- aTT£ern�ie^Tn�iises project site, it is apparent that t� a]1 siza of the site limits the ,scope of any use. In dr8er to discuss alternative „ uses, it is necessary to maximize the area under consideration to( determine if, the site may be linked to adjacent }. dperties to forma larger, more logical project boundary. - Exhibit "Bu shows the area fronting on Archibald between Feron and the railroad right -of -way which is either vacanf or sparsely developed. " This area differs significantly from the single family character of the North Town °neighborhood and forms a logical area of consideration for changes in land use. Two basic land use alternatives have bean considered for the expanded project area under discussion. 1 Industrial Park: The site's proximity to the 'railroad �r--4nFrtraf -way and the lndustrial Area as well as -its location aldAg' a major thoroughfare appear consistent 'With the s *Jpical Industrial Park use. However, incompatibility i1th { surrounding residential uses would again be a problem. Even with An expanded project area, the scale of the project wo41ld create a very small Industrial Park. In addition, the parcels are owned by a variety of persons and gaining ownership of a sufficient number of parcels for an integrated development wduld be 01f icult if not impossible. 'I z �l P, k z L , , PLANNING COMMISSION - ,'�'�IAFF REpazr 'Richar.0; GPA 85 -oil - January 26, 198t Page #5 ✓ �1.' 2 Medium Density Residential (4 -14 du/ac): Like the Discovery Townhomes project dust fiorth of the project area .a medium density residential project would maT)tain the predominantly residential nature of the � ,4 white, a buffer from creating Archibald Avenue and the r�aiiroad r %ijht -of -way. This land use would be more compatible with existin ig residental uses than the mirrent or proposed land uses. However, proximity to the railroad right -of -way 'could expose residents to railroad and .automobile noise whch,would require mitigation throfJ9h site desigp and barriers A1sq, problems exist1t1 Tterms prodeci scope an parce owners elf - - - -T incorporating existing' circulation would also be . difficult: u Since the Medium Density Residential designation allows' a range of 4 44 dwelling ,units. per acre, the Development District designation could fall rnto'. the Low - Medium "(44 du /acre) °or Medium (8 -14 dulacre) catygo�ies. .Oependino on j the number of owners w.lshing itrAoin i(Zether in developing their properties, the Commission coYld'aet:ermi" at a later date if tl-.a project scope ,justified a Law - Medium or Medium designation V1. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMi; +.y T1)e California Environmentai duality Act requires thaw A .ever there is evidence that` a significant - - -- - -- �mpac� -tray— ciccor�arr�nvironmenza �mpacz - -rceFnT�= ni�:rst oe-` - ----= prepared. Staff feels that the requested General Plan Amen&,snt gas proposed could result yin `some impacts. in ,the categories of ) kcio- economic factors, -Ig"�ruse and planning considerations, - circulation, heal,14'.�- safetS� and nuisance factors, and aesthetics. Par'Cl of the atta -hed Initial Study discusses each in these � potential detail. impacts pis suggested onq&), it additi env ronme t , anal ntai�analysis- would N be necessary prlov, to approval of "she amendment as proposed. VII. FACTS I FOR FINDINGS; Should the Commission, upon examination of the Genera.. Plan Amendment, decide 'ghat the change from Low Density Residential would promote the land use goals and purposes of the General Plan, ani that this Amendment WDUld not be ' materially detr4ental to the adjacent properties or wound not cause signifi nt adverse impacts as_ listed under the sessment�the Environmental A following are the findings that are _ necessary on approval: o �l 16 / PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF - REPORT GPA 85-01 -A - Richards January 26, 1955 - .. Page #6 A. The Amendment does not conflict with the Land Use Policies' of the General Plan. B. The Amendment promotes goals-'of the land use element. C. The Amendment would not be materially injurious or detrimenta! -�o the adjacent properties, VIII. CORRESPONDENCE: '}iris item has been advertised as a public heaving in The Dail Rp oft 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. IX. RECOMMENDATION, Based an the analysis of the Land Use*Policies - -'" °--= tithe° »Q�>n?an stafft recamrnends denial of the Gene�Ll Plan Amendment os submitted. Shou 3 @ bT (ITSSstin tat�ir�u =�v��s der — - the alterrratiand uses discus�;;ed, direction should 5e given regardinr� the naiitfE of farther study of land uses in the project _ area. The Commission has several alternatives for action. 1. To approve the General Flan Amendment per the attached Resolution of Approval. This alternative is no� recommended. 2. - To deny the General Plan ,Amendment , per the attachi� „- 1 Resolution of Denial with n6, further study. This would" .confirm the current Low Density Residential designation. 3. With applicant's consent, to continue the amendment, and to e Staff with. specific direction as to the scope and type of anti t se" ta^ ae=ara x��y w d— hrounht_._ -;haCl --for_; Commission action, (Should the applicant decline to conseyt to the changes -in the scope of the amendment, it would be appropri 'Ate to deny this request and to initiate a new amendment for review during the next General Flan Amendment cycle.) Respectfully-submitted, Ri Gomez, City Planner i RG•LWcv Atta_rhments; Exhibit "A" - General Plan and Development District Map. Exhibit "8'r - Expanded Project Araa Map Initial Study a. Resolution of Denial Resolution of ApprbvaT CITY OE' RANCHO CUCAMONGA -- PART YI -- INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST i; DATE :_harm r''17, 195 J APPLICANT:,f'% Tllyds �: FILING DATE: LOG NUMBER: _15W11V i'- t� PROJECT: PROJECT LOCATION. - I. ENVIRON*iENTAL I1ALS r T (Explanation of'- u I "1 �`JS ))and "mayb)e" answers are required on attached f sheets). )I i' YES MAYBE .140 1. Soils and Geoloey. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Unstable ground conditions or in changes in % geologic .elationshtps? )( b. displ;cements, compaction or - -- buria:, of the soil? C. Change in too a h " g P $x P Y or ground surface - - contour intervals? - -- d. The destruction, coveriz3.9 or modification of any unique: geologic or,gnysical features? �( e. Any potential'+,acrease in -sand or water erosion of soils, af either on or off site conditons? f. Changes in erosion siltation, or deposition? .+ g. Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mud- e slides, ground failure, or similar hazards? )( > h. An increase in the rate of extraction andfor � A y use of any mineral resource? ✓ 2. Hydcalo *." Mill the ��iralsosa2 have significant results in '- / Page '2 YES'- MAYBE No a. Changes in currents, or the- course of direction of flowing streams, rivers, or epheperal stream channels? b. Changes in ab rption rates, drainaj ;e patterns,�;� or the rate aid amount of surface waiter - runoff? .. c. Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? U, Y f\ d. Change in the amonpc >• of surface watizr in any body of water? e. Discharge into surfii'�;e waters, or any alteration of surface,' Ater quality? f. Alteration of groundwater characteristics? _.. g. Change in the gLantity of groundwatl:rs _ Qither through direct additions or 0ith- -< drawsls, or thrt" gh interference with as uai3t ,-_ Quantity? h. The reduction in the amount of water other - wise available for public Water supj� lies? t' i. Exposure of People or property to water related hazards such as flooding or,',seiches? 3. Air Quality. Will the proposal have siloifican't- results in a,ronstant or periodic airtemissions ];Tom mobile ; <ar i,adirect sources? =- - ationary sources? - b. Deterioration of ambient air quality an or interference with the attainment of applicable { - air quality standards? c. Alteration of local or regional climatic conditions, affecting air movement, moisture or temperature? k. Biota Flora. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Change in he characteristics of species, Includin g versity, distribution, or number of any spec es of plants? b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, Tare or endangdrad species of plants? F Page 3 YES MAYBE N0 C. Introduction of new or disruptive species of plants into °'- an area? x d. Reduction in the potential for agricultural production? Fauna. Will the proposal have significant results _ ins a. ange in the characteristics of species, naluding diversi distribution, or numbers of any species of an s? b. Reduction of the numbers 6f any unique, rare or endangered species of a�4mals? x c. introduction of new or dis4tive species of animals into an area, or Y ult in a barrier to the migration or movemeFt of animals? X d._ Deterioration or removal of existing fish or Wildlife habitat? X 5. Po_ puLation. Will the proposal, have significant results In: (' �i �_- a. Will the proposal alter the location, distri- �- : diversity, or growth rate of ` the .human population of an area? - - -_ -� C a b. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? 6. Soc3o- Economic Factors. W£11 the proposal have significant results ins a. Change in local or regional soc£o- economic characterj� tics, including economic or commerci,4 diversity, tax rate, and property values? X _ V. Will project costs be equitably distributed among Project bene��ia.ries, i.e., buyers, tax payers or projecb 7. Land Use arid'planninz Considerations. Will the — proposal have significant results in? a. A substantial alteration of the present es i planned land use of an area ?' b. A conflict with any designations, objectives, Policies, or adopted plans of 4 any governmental > entities? j( a c. An impact.vtwn - the qulaity or quantity of o. existing ods g umptive or ron- �consum on-consumptive o recreational opportunities? •� it s Page 4 YES MAYBE No 8. Transportation. Will the proposal have significant results ix a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? b. Effects on existing streets, or demand far new street construction? C. Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand fo"ew parking ?' d. Substantial impact upon existing transporta- tion systems? e. Aiteratians,;ta present patterns of circula- tion or movement of people and /or goods? x f. Alterations to or effects on present and potential water - barn, rail, mass transit or air traffic? X S. Increases in traitic hazards 'to V�torf vehicles; bicyclists or pedestrians? 9. Cultural Resources, 11111 the proposal have i 4ft signi, -' cant results in; _ C a,. A disturbance to thilntegrit� cf archaeological, paleoutological, and /or historical. resources? -10 _Health, Safety art Nui� ante Factors. Flill the proposal have sin3iioanrresuzc`s a. Creation of any health hazard or potential health — hazard? b. Expczure of people to potential health hazards? c. A risk of explosion or release of hazardous,^ substances in the event c£ an accident? d. An acrease in the number of individuals or species of vector or pathenogenic = organisms or the exposure of peop a to such - organisms? A f. Exposure of people to,potential:ly dangerous noise levels? Fj g.- The creation of objectionable odors? ' h. An increase ,in tight or glare? 1= -1�5 . �� Page T _ YLS v� gSEp Il, Aesthetics. Vill the proposal have t significan -. .�* xesults in: . a. The obstruction . or degradation of any, scenic vista or view?,.' b. The creation of an aesthetically offen$jvt .� site? c. A conflict with the objective of designated or potential scenic corridors? 'S 12. Utilities and Public eritieas. "gill the proposal have ...�... a .51- gn_.fieant need for new systems, or alterations to the followi-Ag, a. Slectxic poser ?, b. Natural or packaged Zes? c. co=unicattono systems? m d. Water supply7 a e. Wastewater facilities? f. Flood control structures? g. Solid waste facilities? Fire protection? ...�.... i. Police protection.? t t, Ools k. parks or other recreational facilitieat 1. Nattitens c? 0.4, public facilities, including toads and flood 'eon of - facilities? ;. M- Other governmental services? l3, gttery and Scarce Resoureas� gill: the proposal have si$nzficant xr�su3.ts inc -_._ a Use of substantial or excessive fuel or energy? b. Substantial inct -ease in demand upon etisting Bources of energy? n An increase is the demand for development of new sources of energy? "x _ d. An ar ��e�tuatian of 4h� of nna- renewable forxs a - *;;er-�Y4 yhen feasible., y renesable sources of eu� rgjf are 8v i [AHy •2 �' - z age'; YFS :MAYBE 140 e.T Sins ant3a l y3eplet scaxce nattr.al resaut'ce? \ T 14. Mandatory FtndinQs of 5in3�r�anee. 7` ' a. Does the project have the potential to degrade :1 quality of the= ,the e=ironment, sub'�tantially reduce-- -the-, babitat of fish or wildlife species, cause a fasts' "T wildli €e population to drag below self susttaini#i levels t g . 1r2eaten to t eliminate a PJA# oar ani"i ca,,, unity, teduce 0111-Dumber or' restrict the attge of ;are or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the ,major periods _of- California,Isistory ar,prehirrary? _ b. Dues ;the prof e;.t have the' pore stial Ca, ac xiave short -term, to the axsadvai4tage of long -term, n ervironmental, goals ?, ''(A short —term impact Ott tpe environment is one which oecut in a reLia ,.�iI brief,: definitive pekiod q�time while term impacts Vill endure we 1 into fine Aliture). V c.. Doss the project have \�npacts which are Individually limited, t�, xt cumulatively v j considerable? (Cutrtulatively a:ansiderable I meawt that the incremental effects of an individual project �Ye 4=siderable when viewed In connection with the effetts 0 past p;- ;;sects, and probable future projacts). 4- Does the PrOject have enviror&,ental effects' which will cau3e substantial adverse,_ffect5 . on human beings, either lirectly or ZI. DISCUSSION OF ENVIIIONMEN?AL EVALIYATION {ir:s:, of aafirmat3.ve above questons1us a discussis answert "£Q.' Cthe of- Vaposevi mitigation measures). '�r t :a Page I. —J./ 111. DETEILMINATIoN 4,! On the basis of this initial evaluation: EJI find the proposed project COULD NOT h• }ve a signifkcant effect on the envirocuuent, and a NEGATIVE DEeZ RATION vilf ba prepared. 1% I find that although the proposed project could ve a significant EfZe i e - t�±a en`LironmenLF these will not be •a s — gnificant effect; in this case .because the � i :,z b mPamirES dese rse, r on -ar. r j attached sheet have been adJed to the ;project— AZiavn¢ i __ DECLAI�,�fiION WI2�-,BE PRVkRED. , I find the proposed project MAY have atsigni.ficant effect 6h the envirnment, and an1WIRO MENT IMPACT �i?RT is required. Date_ ;e Signature '.I 1 " Title j, „ 4t _ C: + u II. DISCUSSION OF FNVIRONMENTAt I EVALUATION MI IGA I T TON MEASURES =' Population - The change from a residential to industrial land use would alter the location and distribution of housing planned for the North Tcwn` area and replace it with a nonredddential Use, thereby. altering planned population patterns. However,,, due t,[ the scale of the project, no significant impacts on population tends will be-experienced, 'No mitigation measur's are required. Lard Use and Planning Considerations - _Sin.e the proposed projectIs a General Plan Amendment,., it represents a departure from 'the land use of tl,e site and surrounding area. Should the General Plan Amendment be approved, the,, - j:ollow ng mitigation measures . will he required at the 'project design review level. — _ 1. Adequate 'bufferingY between the prvjrot szte,_and surrounding residential uses shall be incorporated .in the s%4- pjana : 2. Siting of -,the industrial, park ..uses shall minimize impact on� - adjacent ltses in accordance with the general design guidelines of the Development Code: Tranp22rtation - The warehousing and storage activities could create additional levels of traffic 'On Main, Street and Archibald. In addition, it is likely that new parking facilities would be required on-site. Additional traffic could" represent a�azard to vehicles and pedestrians in the area. However, these impacts `,ill be mitigated by the P71 lowing measures, implementing the design riew process. 1. Access and�culation shad M designed to provide a sd�Ge and effi ,yen �sl�stem on and off -site in accordance ;with Section 17,10 06d of the Development Code. 2. Parking areas shall be designed to minimize visual disruption, noise and 'tight -and glare'through the use of walls, location, �.• =_ _ landscaping, etr., Health, Safety and Nuisance Factors - Increased traffic and loading /uploading activities could create .an increase in the existing noise levels, which are currently much higher than would be created by residential uses. An increase in light and glare could be caused by the additional traffic and lighting required by the light industrial use. Project review at the technical and design review stages serve to minimize noise and light and glare impacts to an insignificant level. Mitigation measures, in addition to those described above are as follows: Operation of the industrial, park use shall rompply Frith' the performance standards of the Development Code Section 17.10,050 for noise, Tight and glare, smoke, maintenance of open areas; vibration, fire' hazards,,,, outdoor storage, air quality and odovs. n } Aesthetics - Continuation of the site in its current state represents an aesthetically displeasNY�, con dition to the 'surrour:7ing, areas. The_char,�Ze to Industrial ,,could allow continuing use of `'the existing building'With no site -: improvement. However, development of the vacant parcel would require design reviev which`woOd emphasize an aesthetically, pleasing design for the site. �. Continuing use of the Custom Alloys building would not represent an increased aesthetic impact upon the neighborhood, it would�contnue the current level of impact, Specific mit-igation "measures required at the design review ,level try the City are: v 1. Site design; shall conform with the building design standards of the Development Code in terms of design theme, scale, materials and colors, signing and screening.; 2. The proposed: industrial Park use shall conform with the general design_ standard of the development Code `for 'site plan'`design of industrial buildings in regards to building orientation and landscape/open space. t i t RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE ' ADDOPTED LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE RANCHG CUCAMONGA C$EN,,,L PLAN WHEREN, i)the Planning Commission ha, held a'duly advertised public hearing to consiWr all comments :n the proposed General Plan Amendment 85 -01-- A. " NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that: the Rancho-Cucamonga. Planning Commission does hereby approve the following amendment to the land u §;.element of the General Plan::; SECTION 1: The General Plan Land Use Map be amended as ,shall follows: APN 209- 061 -01 and '02 currently designated as Low Density Residential sham be changed to Industrial Park for 2.5 ' - acresh of land `located on the ,southeast 'corner of Archibald and Main: r: SECTION 2: A .Negative Declaration Is hereby adopted for this Genera, Plan Amendment,""based upon the Completion and fineings of the Initial Study. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 27TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 1985. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA I BY: Dennis L. Stout, Chairman ATTEST :' RICK Gomez,Teputf Secretary I, Rick Gomez, Deputy, Secretary of the P1anping�- CommisiNon-e the_ City of Rancho Cucamonga, do 'hereby certify that the c4regoing Resolution was d __ rpqularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission field on the 27th day of February, 1985, by the following vote -to -wit :, AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS :` ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: I� RESOLUTION N0. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSIOV,, OF ,THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, DENYPG GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 85 -01 -AY WHEREAS, the PlanniMyCommission h6,\! a public hearing to` consider said amendment; and, WHEREAS, the Ptannij Commission has fully ' considered public testimony requesting amendment ;7nd, WHEREAS, the PlannRn9 Commission has found that the requested amendment is in conflict with the: land use policies of the,,Cenaral: Plan and does not promote the goals a4ai- ,objectives of the Land Use Element. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planting Commission denies General Plan Amendment 85 -01 -A to eiiend the General Plan:,,Land Use Map from Low Density Residential to Industrial Park located on Assessor Parcel Numbers 209- 061 -01 and 02, approximatel° .5 acres of land located on the southeast corner of Archibald and Mato. APPROVED AND ADOPTED-'T IS 27TH DAY OF FEHRUAkY, 1985. '!A.NNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: aenni tot if, L. t, Chairman 1' l ATTEST: Rick Gomez, 0epLi, Secretary I, Rick Gomez, Deputy Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby cert-afy that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed,"and adopted,,by the Plannina�;Conxnissian f�lf the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meet ng of the Plann ing Commisstan held on the 27th day of February, 1985, by the fallowing vote -to -wit: :,_� - - - - -- -,AYES: COMMISSOYERS NOES: COMMI�SIUFtER�; �m �x,`3 ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ``- -- � �4 CITY OF RANCHO CUCA.MONGA STAFV REPORT „a z DATE: February 27, 1985 � : q P. e.. 1977 TO: Planning Commission FROM: 00yd B. Hubb,s City Engineer II 3Y: J�arbara Krall, Engineering Technician SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENT ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 9079 -- SYCAMORE INVESTMENTS - A divisions of 5,519 acres into 4 parcels in the Weighborbood /Commveal Development District -)located at the northeast corner of Archibald Avenue and -Baseline Road - APR 202- 181 -27 I.' PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action Requested: Approval of Parcel Map, B. Pvr o:,e: To divide 5.519 acres into 4 parcels for the deV�lopment of a shopping center approved as C.U.P. 84 -13. C. Location: Northeast corner of Baseline Road and Archibald Avenue. D. Parcel Size: Parcel 1 1.559 acres Parcel 2 - 0.547 acres o Parcel 3 - 0.801 acres Marcel 4 - 2.612 acres Total 5.519 acres - E. Existing Zoning: Neighborhood /Co[mnercia;. ';' Fc Existing Land use: Vacant. G Surrounding Land Use:- ° North - :Apartments. South - Shopping Center: jF East - Vacant. West - ShoneLng Center. H. Surrounding General Plan and Development Code Designations: North - Medium -High 14 -24 dufac Development District. South - Neighborhood /Commercial (NC) Development District. East - LoW- Medium (4 -8 du /ac) Development District,«, West - Neighborhood /Commercian (NC) Development District: ITEM G ti tca . k I. Site Char ^actt_ristits; The site is vacant sloping from north to south. II. ANALYSIS: The purpose of this .parcel map�is tocre;�separate pa►^ceTs ' =` for th`e-`°diff'ereat uses app; owed' for =`°, ' site by tWP1C„ning Commis ion as C.U.P. N� 84 -13 on November Z£3, 19$4. Parcel` I is a builing containing r atl shops. Parcel 2 is a fast food rest��ant. Parcel. 3,4s ' a service sf,ation. , Parcel 4 was master planned, `but no specific plans, were apprcv�d. Curb, gutter and street paving for Archibald kvenue" and :Rasaline Road ware constructed with Tract No. 11797. The remaining improvements will be completed upon the development of each parcel. „ III. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: Also attached for your reviews 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 fiend investigation, Staff found no adverse impacts an the environment as a result of the proposad.suodivision, IV. CORRESPONDENCE: Notices of Public Hearing have bean sent to surrounding property owners and placed in the Daily Report Newspaper. Pasting at the site has also been completed. v V. RECOMMENDATION It is r*commeoded that the Piann %t!mission adopt_he attached resolution conditionally approving Tentative Parcel Map 96� a`nd authorizing the issuande of a Negative Declaration, , Respectfully submitted., o S LBH:B rd T ' Attachments: Vicinity Map Parcel- Map x. Site Plan Resolution ` Engineer's Report > Initial Study a i PARCEL =MAP N° 90797- OgNSnow�lotrt, Ya:ReAL »#L ar tMt wNeudxv P�rcr pi.r�s ra6,,l.[[ORq'�ai'w A - MAr'f 1120.tor, KNLL )Oiodwf•ii ►Tf.)t•)7JMr)�•µyq M[Wt Ntvf l.IUN4f KbL/RStfS, IN thE-CITY OFR4kN 0 G(ICWONGA,COUN?Y W SAN KRNAl;i o, AiE OF CALIFORNIA ,OATtS 0 5cni6t•xDd �^ s P'..fC'�r�%ar'.we�tinuin *iY 4114 LOA I 1 c. i PARCEL h Z .ee r ^ILI 1 AM ENDED P A w E. ;_ fl p tai' n l. � r.►'KGLL i Q s �. ltrw.wy $2 i3h. it3a�3i t .�,�.. �. •rsi ein � t ro. ,� s F'`ARe4i... 4 J i (naot �.y `rb fl:vi H� fP t 1rRYIa1S6p`(iy, !"` PKE�r _' ''` aA, eiiu at�iTaNRia.K4)»r�y��++.ut4 I! a sx oN�vidaM", ensv fe" c"Kawt -Soo # 7d n, cxuF '1 "jai ±IQN.fQKi,,�Fa.CHeGA1.t (�,Z4F6A� '� `. tiw�ie4�a4ss "��� ;tllkjG -2i34 a Ar sr 11 d-140' -aka , c 3I1 F � YY. 4 � �` tl• r� � � � a ca ,uy. ,rxw `) .i.4h✓Y�+{ilWya +w.P��Sw �... 1i °� CITY,,OF RANCHL CUCAMONGA INITIAL STUDY R PART I - PROJECT,.-INFORMATION SHEET To be completed by applicant Enviro�ental AssesSment Review Fee: For all projects requiring env iironmental review, this farm must be /tompleteci and submitted to the Development Review Committee through the department where the Project application is made. tFgan receipt of this application, the Environmental Analysis staff will prepare / Past II of the Initial Study. ',tiThe_Develogment Review COmmittee will meet and take a °ition 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 Declaraticn will be filed, 2) Tko project will have. -a significa;it environmental impact- \?and an Environmental; Impact Report will be prepared, or 3) An additional information report should be `stippli.ed by the applicant giving further informa- tion concerning the proposed project. COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT • PROJECT I TITLE: NEC BASELINE ROAD & ARCHIBALD AVENUE APPLICANT'S NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE: SYCAMORE INVESTMENTS 4770 CAMrUS DRIVE, SUITE 220 v NEtVPOR ` 3EACH. CALIFORNIA 92560 NAME, ADWItESS, TELEPHONE OF PERSON TO BE CONTACTED CONCERNING THIS PROJECT: MR. JACK TARR x LOCATION OF PROJECT (ST -'=T ADDRESS AND A;StkS%kPR P'AR&E L No,) NEC BASELINE ROAD & ARCHIBALD AVENUE- 0202-181-27 - LIST OTHER, PERMITS NECESSARY FROM LOCAL, UGIONAL, STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES AND THE AGF-NCY ISSUING SUCH PERMITS: BUILDING PERMITS —• CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GI<ADING PERMIT--- CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONG ------- EEEE� ra �, A . kr y � PROJECT DESCRTPTIO:? ACREAGE OF PROJECT AREA AND.SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED BUILDINGS, IF ANY: ± 5,.44`ACRES PROJECT AREA. APPROX. 43,592 SQ. FT. OF PROPOSED BLDG. AREA. i DESCRIBE THE F?VIRONMENTAL SETTING OF THE PROJECT SITE INCLUDING INFC>RMA ION ON TOPOGRAPHY,.:,PLANTS (TREES), ANT_MALS, ANY CULTURAL„ HISTORICAL OR SCENIC ASPECTS, USE OF SURROUNDiI.�G; VROPERTIe.S, AND THE DESCRIPTION OF ANY EXISTING STRUCTURES AND THEIR USE (ATTACK NECESSARY SHEETS): 1 THE SITE -.IS PRES TLY VACANT WITH THE EXISTING TERRAIN SLOPING DOWN FROM SOUT TO ORTH. NORTH OF TH SITE A CONDOMINIUM PROJECT IS UNDER CONSTRUCTION. EAST OF THE SITE EXISTS A MOBILE HOME PARK. ACROSS BASELINE. ROAD TO THE SOUTH AND ACROSS ARCHIBALD AVENUE TO THE WEST ARE EXISTING S�fiC7PPING' CENTERS. a- Is the project part of a.larger project, one of a series • " of cumulative actions, which although individually small, may as a whole have significant environmental impact? 241. ' NO. Co-7 `% „f WILL -"THIS PR03'ECT' .YES NU X 1. Create a substantial change in ground contours? X 2. Create a substantial change in existing Y noise or vibration? R 3. Create a substantial change in demand for municipal services (polse,'fire, +cater, sewage, etc.)? X 4. Create changes in the existing :toning or general plan. designations? X 5 Remove any`'.existing trees? How mane X 6. Create the need for use or disposal of Potentially hazardous materials such as toxic substances, flammables ar explosives? Explanation of any YES answers alcove: ZMPORTA,< If the p=oject involves the construction o : residential units, complete the form on he next page. N.A. CERTIFICATION. I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits rare -sent the data and information rec;uired for this initial evaluation to the best of my abilityt and that the facts, statements, and information prevented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. I further un3erstand that additaanal information may required to be submitted before an adequate evaluation can be made by the Devel-r. anent Review Committee. SY _ l+ VI ST14ENTS Date, _ Signature SACK TPIiR Title ' GENERAL PARTNER ti. RESOLUTION NO. - A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY: OF, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PARCEL MAP NUMBER' 9079 .(T,ENTATIVE PARCEL 14AP NO. 9079)y�= LOCATED ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF BASBLINE'ROAD AND ARCHIBALD AVE4UE WHEREAS, Tentative Parcel Map Number 9079, submitted by Sycamore Investments and consisting of 4 pdreels,. "__,;,sated on the northeast corner of Baseline Road and Archibald Avenue, beitig a division of 5.519 acres into 4 parcels for the deve=lopment of a shcppiO, center approved as C.U.P-..84 -13; and - VRREREAS, on February 4, 1985, a formal a( ~4Ication Was submitted r requesting review of the above - described Tettative Map" and WHEREAS, on February 27, Iasi; the .planning 6u-missiun held a 'duly advertised public hear`ii,; rpr the abA�re- described map. NOW, THEREFORE, THE RAN CN4 LJC 7i0NGA PLANNIY-'COHMiS SION RESOLVED A5 FOLLOWS: of SECTION i; Thai the following findings ha ?..ie been made: 1. That the map is consistent with the General Plap„ --,� {Z 4 G. Th at the improvement of the proposed subdivistio s ° = consis nl with f;ie general Plan. ; ,Y 3. „ That the site ,is physarally 'Suitable for the proposed dev,iopment. 4. That the Aroused subdivision and improvements will - - - not cause suhstantial envirinmental damage, public `..' health problems or have adverse affects on abutting i property. _: ;ECTIOK 2: "that this project Will not create significant adverse environmental -impacts and a Negative Declaration is issued on 'February 27, 1985. SECTION 3: The Tentative Parcel Map,-No. 9079 is approved subject to the recommended Conditions of Approval pert�"g thereto: - APPROVED AND AIQPTED THIS 27TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 1985. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE�CL. OF RANCH _"=AMONGA BY: Dennis L. Stout, Mairm an Y s; ATTEST RickGomez, Deputy = ecretary, lJof I, Rick 'Gor�iez t�Deputy Secretary`. of the Punning Commission of the 'City „ Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby a-ertify, that the foregoing Resolution was duly and r, regularly introduced, passed', Citq.of Rancho CucamongA, ayc a and �dogted by y the Planning Qwmission of the � regular meeting'df the Planning Commission held 1` on the 27th day of February, 198 by the ,'allowing vote -to -wit. AYES: CQhfISSYONER5 `:`. (�` WES: EQMMMIONERS° ABSENT: COMMI556NERS u .a 77 k ^ {� CITY OF RANCHO C!I.C�,ONGA t ! RECOMMENDED` CONDITIONS F •% •, �� APPROVAL J LOCATION: Northeast corner of Archibald TENTATivE PARCECMAP,--N0* g(YI9 Avenue and Baseline Road MATE FILED; February A 1985 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: A division of Parcv! 2 " _ NUMBER OF LOTS: 4 of Amended Parcel Map 6651,; re^orded in GROSS ACR[AGE: 5.51/ C? ' J�f f Book 92, PacLes 36 7 of Parcel Ma County. ASSESSOR PARCEL NO: 202- 18i -27'� of San BernaYino State of Cal ' �braii DEVtlOPEd; OWNER ENGINEER /St1RylEYOR Sycamore Invest—,nents SAME G Bare Stryk -r t477e Campos Dr Ste 22.'+ 1a22 ,. Fnurth St. Ste 206 New Bch CA 92660- � Santa Ana_, CA `92701 Improvement end dedication requ ,cements in accardasrce 14AiIIh Title 16 of the i,unicipal Code of the City of Raxncno Cc`amonga include, biW may not be limifird tip, the following: ` A. Dedications and Vehicular Access 1; Dedications shall be made of all interior street rights -of -Walt and all necessary easements as shown,on the tentative map. 2. Dedication shall be made of the following right of .gay an the following streets. additional feet on ,"--additional feet on f addit�pnal, feet on _z 3. Corner property line radius will be required per City Standards.,:. 4. All rights -of veh%cular ingress and egress shAll be :dedicated as follows: except for two.. openings on Archbald, and openings on Baseline two X b. Reciprocal�accessr, easements and maintenance agreements ensuring access to all ,parcels and � roads drives or joint maintenance of X1.1, commpn parking areas shall be prgvided by 'C43R.:s V and shall be recorded concurrent with the map Ali ly 6. Al existing easements lying Withir. future, right -of -way are to be quitclaimed or delineated on the map per City Engineer's requirements. ' 1C 7. Easements for "sidewalk for public use shall be dedicated to the City wherr idewalks meandFr through Private property, 4 B. Surat X 1. Surety shall be posted and an agreement executed to tide satisfaction of the City Engineer and City Attorney', guaranteeing completion of the public improvements prior to . building permit issuance at the time of development of each parcel. ii 2. A lien agreement must be execaed,,prior to recording of the map for the following: One -hall; median island on Archibald AvfeJnue and Baseline. 3. Surd t,,y shall bn 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 C. 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 map and/or building permit issuance. 1. Construct full street improvements icluding 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 with'n a 40 -foot wide dedicated right -of -way shall be constructed for all half- section streets. X 3. Construct the following missing improvements; ti Prior to building permit issuance at time of the development .of each parcel J Curb & A.C. Side - Drive Street Street �.C. Median Street Name Gutter Pymt. Walk ARpr _Trees Lights T3verlay Island* Meanderin X X X LienAamt Archibald Meandering X X i Lie n Acmt * Include., l andscaping and irrigation on meter ff 1 = �. -•�Z _ � ova_,, X 11. Concentrated drainage flows shall not cross side alks. Undersidewalk drains shall be installed to City - Standards D. Drai na a and F 1� Con___, trul , { 1. 'Private drainage° easements for cross -lot drainage shall be required' and shall be delineated or noticed art the final :X 2. � Adequate provisions sha�il be made for acceptance and disposal �J of s4 +rface drainage entering the property from adjacent areas. t� 3. The fallowing storm drain sha jf, be installed to the of the City Engineer 4 N-ior to recordation of "the map, a hydrologic an 4ra,7�riage study for the project shall be submitted to the City Encf�neer fur review. 5. A - drainage detention basirt per city. Standards�j shai(` be constructed to detain increased runoff x 1. X X 4- P Prior to any work being g performed in the public right- of -Way,;- fees shall be paid and a an encroachment psrmif 'shall be obtained from the City Engineer's Office, in addition t -J p to any other X S Street improvement plans shall be revised by a Registered Civil prior to issuance of ,an encroachment permit, 6. D Developer shall coordinate, and !here relocation of a an ' — X 7, E Existing lines p , 12KV or less fronting the property shall be undergroun.ded. X 8. I Install appropriate street name signs, traffic' contra l si nsj striping and markings with locations a and types approvecrby tv, City,Fngineer. Street �lrght locations, as regbired, qra to be approved by the Southern (,alifornia Edison Company end_ the C City of Rancho Cucamonga. Lights shall be on decorative poles� with underground service. 10. L Landscape and irrigation plans -r shall be submitted and approved by the Planni Division p prior t E. Grading X 1. --Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with`the 'Uniform Building Code, City Grading look 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 Califrrnia to` perform such work prior to issuance --of:- bui l di ng permit:' 3. A `geutogical 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 byy the Grading Committee and shall be completed'fr,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. F. General Re Q uiremets and Approvals X I. Permits from other agencies will be required as follows: CalTrans for San Bernardino County Flood Control District X Cucamonga County Water District for sewer and water San Bernardino County Dust Abatement (required prior to issuance of a grading•,)ermit) Other , X 2. A copy of the Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (C.C. &R.$) approved by the City Attorney is6required prior to record4�tion_ 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 a^pprgval from CalTransjSan Bernardino County Flood Control District.: X 6. ��. Approvals have not been sezured from all utilities and other interested agencies involved. Approval of the final map, will be subJ &t to any requirements that may be receive6 front the °* n X 7.., The filing of the tentative map or approval 4f' same does not guarantee that sewer treatment capacity writ be available—At the time building permits are requested. When building permits are requested, the Cucamonga County eater District Will be asked to certify the availability of capacity. permits . will not lie issued unless said certification is'received in writing, 8. Local and Master Planned Trails shall be provided ire accordance. I with the Trail Plain. A detailed trail plan 'indicating widths, maximum `t.lopes, physical conditions, fencing and weed control, in accordance with Cii'�y trail standards, shall be submitted to and approved by the City Planner prior to recordation for and /or prior to building psrmit 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. Iz X 10. At the time of final map submittal, the `following shall oe submitted. Title Report, traverse calculations {sheei?s), copies of recorded maps and deeds used a�' reference and /or showing original; land division, tie 1�otes and bench marks referenced,. -, X 11. Reciprocal access and drainage easements for the benefit of all parcels shall be noticed on the map. X 12. A prlvat�1�drainage easement of adequate width shali(�e provided along tW`' ast property `Tine of parcel 2 for the benefit of. Tract 11797 to the north. CITY OF RANCHO Ct1CA_MNfA LLOYD B. HuaBS, CITY ENOINCER < by. Q 6-13 f CITY OF RAPaCHO CUCAlWONGA G CAM STAFF REPORT r, 0 O' DATE: February 271 1985 E z 5: TO: Planning- Commisson 1977 FROM: Lloyd B Hubbs, City Engineer BY: Barbara Krail, Engineering Technician SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 9025 - R.C. LAND COMPANY' - A division of one (r —acre into one 1 parcel of land in the Loll Residential District located on the west side of Etiwanda Avenue, north of Baseline Road - APN 227- 111 -05 I. PROJECT A'0 SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action Requested: Approval of Parcel. Map. B. Purpose:. To create a one -acre parcel for "the relocation' of the Chaffey - Garcia House C. Location:: West side of Etiwanda Avenue, north of ^Baseline Road. D. Parcel Size: I Acre. E. Existing Zonine: Low Development District (2 -4 dujac). F. Existing Land Ilse: Vacant. G. Surrounding land Use: North'- Existing Church. South - Vacant. East - Single family home and vacant land. West - Vacant. H. Surrounding General Plan and Develo went Code Desi rations: North -;Low Development District 2 -4 du /ac . "— South - Victoria Community Project, East - Low- Medium. West -- Victoria Community Project. I. Site Characteristics: The site slopes in a southeasterly direction. Vegeta =f on consists of grasses and a row of Eucalyptus trees on the property frontage. ANALYSIS. The :purpose of this parcel map is to create a I acre parcel to be the site for the relocation of the Chaffey- Garcia House. The development of the site is on tonight's agenda for approval as Conditional _Use _Permit No. 85 -04. Improvements fo` Etiwanda ' Avenue will be required at the time. of development of the parcetl, ITEM H III. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Also attached for your ,review and _consideration is Part I of the :Initial Study a, completed by .the applicant. Staff has completed Part II of the Initia� Study, the'environmental checklist, and has conducted a field investigat,on. Upon completion 'and res ew of the Initial Study and field investigation, Staff found no adverse impacts'on the environment as a result of the proposed subdivision,,, 0 IV. CORRESPONDENCE: Noti,,'�e� of Public Hearing have . been sent to surrounding lk property owners and placed ir.the Daily Reportwspap�r. Pgsting"at the site has also been completed. 5� V. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission adopt the.; it attached resolution conditionally approving Tentative, Parcel Map 9025_,;,, authorizing. the issuance'of a Negatite Declaration. Respe'tfully.submi ed, LBH:B ra Attachments Vicinity Map Parcel Map ` v Resolution City Engineer's Report ; Initial Study �C �r o t, t _ -j �i� .��:� _� ;,�,. TEM ` ,DECE14SER. 1964 PE � SN[tT5 PARCUM IN THE CITY OF RANCHO C "CAMO jj( aiSO C1AT, [NC1XEltf N SIt ElSt £ 5TAE[T . a.tNCw•utNOtX4 BEtNfi A UIVISIAtI OF A PORTION OF LOl" 9, OLOG`,{'J', ats tsttsnt ETIWANOA COLONY LANOS,�AS PER PLAT RECORDED IN GOOK 2 OF MAPS,PA�a Z4, REOQRQS OF SAN .BERNARDINO COUNFY,;, %CALIFORt ;IA.. I ,w k�.aFR�A'nwfc X. /'r MY iAVT2`/6'R�Tfr � OM f�a ,tt^t1.T±` •. t,N a jnn': VIRI 4 sra.EFf --��rs aat- �r.no /FR T}C 1N.w 1f CC °i ( iL x vr.JUJ..ran f t •iw�refrrC= i �. \\ S f t • Y• �kkyeaq wAM•e6•wln A^ Z ` ���\\ n I"f�%%Ayu 4{ � • SLiMYFh1FJ �tOrFS .. c• =ltieLwt M,J Q� 3 /arRCCL r _ /6ttfSYat(4,,,`/ .,. 2 Tatr LrXrL^LAYf Gr'f�T�NYaI. ice' ���` r�.ek¢ ru wrrmia ije. ut/ 0 ws rrArsa ur'sr...r exa.cu• t � e I. a• �J �xr r -r� r+Rar _ '�, AYIlO arMll N I�=wKf - O � CJr'rf• exr�rr saurcrpr'S JC M'+Yk iDF�YS '4 1 m Aim >t { � a� Jv rt�_�w�lsrs•w rrn- rf•.�•.v ra+i as wm .r.• n..rq...., mTi. � a. (I�. �� � HASE` 4/N R D e T( � Uc / o rri r• r /EYr rya ` f � nr crw ati- t rtr EN'S IRON ` NTA.L REVIEW ' INITIALSTUDY 1977 PART I % GEARAt j' r_ For all, project =., requi�`'Ing environm-,ntai review, this form must be completed and suiiraitted td the Delopment Review COWIttee through tf,2 aepartmertx where r the project applicatit.-ris made. Upon recelipt of this, appl catit' the t Planning Divisitpn staff will prepare Part IF of the Initial Study and make recommendations-to Planning Commiission. The Planning Commission will makieone of three deter�rinationsy t3) The project will have no significant environmental �,mpact and a Negative Declarat on will be filed, ;project will 'have a significant environmental impact and an Enxzronmen �l ; impact Reports will tae' prepared, or (3j" An additionalznfarmatun xeport should be supplied by the applicant giving fur�;her informatiar�,cancer%ing fih1 proposed project. Date Filed _-- Fabruary 8 9gS , Project Title- parcel Mare 9[l.?S �' Applicants Name, Address, Telephone. nZ�C. Land amnanv (,� �`1 Name, Address, Telephone of Person To ge Contacted Concerning this Project: Location of Project« and the Southern Pacific Railroad Assessor's Parcel'No. "r, ;i v List other permits ss necessary from local, regional, state and federal .agencies issuing such permits: and the agency none ��. 1 1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Proposed use or proposed project: rhaffou Garcia House historical house will be moved onto °syte. Acreage of project area and square if any footage of existing and proposed buildings, ' One Acre Describe the envirc;imental setting of the on topography, soai stability, project site including information historical or scenic aspects, land use of esurroundin nimals, any Cultural, description of any existing structures and their use rQ�tachs'nec 'necessary, sheets Ve etation on the site consists of grasses "and weeds. A 'rtv of Eucalyptus � trees exists behind the, rock curb. This site slopes gentl In southeasterly — direct #on c� : --- _, Is the project part of a larger � {^i 9 Project, one of a series of cUmulat.4e actions, which although indtyjdually sma17, may as a whole have significant environmental impact r ,f , 11 a v,v�f r WILL THIS 1PR03EM YES NO 1.' Create a substantial change in ground contours? 2. Create a substantial change in existing noise of proy c vibration or glare? 3. Create a substantial change ih demanci, for municig4l �' G services (polite, fire, water, sewage, etc.)? 4,, Create changes in the axistirig Zoning or General Plan designations? 5, RemT4e any existing trees? 'low many?� 6. Create the need i^& use or I dlsoosai of pctontiall'* , u hazardous materials such as Aoxk substances, flammables or explosives? �^ Explanation Yof any YFS answ. s at ve (attach additional sheets if necessary): 7. Estimate th`_Y;dmount �f sewage and solid waste materials this project will goneratig daily- D. Estimate the number aal auto and'trdck trips project:. generated daily by this 9. Estimate the amount of grading (cuttt g -and filling' i-enored for t� project, in cubic yards:— _ is "I 10. If the project involves the conttructiott""�df "resic?ential unit., r`Y the form on the next page. i' ar�rrete "'A CERTIFICATION: I hereby cartifY'that tie statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data' and t1formation required for this initial evaluation �o the'best of my ability, and that the ;acts, statements, and information presented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. Z further,.uaderstand that additional information'may be rem• d to r be7 ,submitteC -Viffare an adequate evaluation can 6e made r anr�3n Divfsion. g; Oates Signature 4fXG 'e, . . J { - RBIDENTIAL'CONSTRUC7i(SN Ire folk-tina information, should be.'prouidad to the G7t Planning Division in order the Ci Y,�f Rancho Cucamonga to aid the school abi'I'ny to accommoda-�i the proposed residential develo'" , t in.-assessing veloFershalre required to; secure `-! " -hers ft`om the school district for. accom�madating the "increasfd number of students prier to issuance of 6� uilding i - permit's. Name of Developer "arid T1,ntative Tract Nom; Specific Locon,r Project: _ PHASE": I PHASE g' MASE 3 PHASE 4 TCYTAL 1,. Number d"'. single — I family omit r �/ 2. Number of muiiple - family units: 3. hate proposed to - begin r 9 � cGnstrustlan. �.' j' 4, Earliest date �f oncupanty: Model y and itmof `tentative _ 5. Bedrooms A,rice_Ran - r, -. r;` KSOLUTION NO. i� A RESOLUTION OF TffE PLANNING, CO.:MISSION OF THE CI OF RANCHO C'XAMORGA,,CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PARCEL MAP NUMBER 9025 (TENKTATII�E PARCEL 14AP NQ. 9'02;5j, LOCATED ON THE HEST I SIDE OF EfIWANDA AVENUE, "NORTH OF BASELINE ROAD WHEREAS, Teatative Parcel Map.. Number 9025, submitted by Et, C. Land Company and consisting of 1 parcel, located on the west. side of Etiwanda Avenue, north of Baseline.Road,, being a division of'a po"60�n pf Lot 9, Block "J" Etiwanda Colony �landi -- as ,,recorded in Book 2, ;Rage 24, Records- of San Bernardino County, State of California; and WHEREAS, on F.abruary 12, 1595; a formal application was submitted r\ requesting review of the. above - described Tentative Map; and WHEREAS,. on' February 27, 1985, the�'�Pl,anning Commission held a duly advertised. public hearing for Vie,- `jove� described map. NOW,.',IaEREFuRE, TiCE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING'COMMISSION RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: That the :following findings have b. ': een made,. Aft 1. That the map is consistent with the Ge7,ral Plan. 2. That the improvement of the' propo,47 abdivision is � consistent with the Genera'! Piano K >_ 'That the site is physipall ~'for the proposed development. 4. That the proToszd zubdivision and improvements wi1F not cause- substaptl >l envirornpental dam ger public } aalth rrgblems or ht*ve adverse affects 'Jn abutting property SECTION 2-.-, roject will 'nod: create significant advet-se eaviromental mpacts and ( 5,Ac jitive •Daclara,ioti is issued on February 27, 1985. SECTION 8s That. Tentative Parcel Map No. 9025 is approved subject toy the recommenaea conditions of Approval pertaining thereto. -- A!-?ROVED AND ;uOPTED THIS 27THI DAY OF;FEBRUARY, 1985. F fi PLANJINC: COMM3'�SIOF` OF T4E Ci1Y 00 RANCHO CUCAM('Ni4 ,', %!+ BY �r Iv Rick Gomez Deputy f� cis z p Y ut Secreta�j Y, Rick Gomel, Oenuty Secretary of the Planning Commissiort of the'fCity ref Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby, certify that the foregoinj Resolution�,yras dtily and regularly introduced, PcS &_°d, and adopted by the Planning Corteni�sion "of the f ` an t of Ranshq`rucamonr�a, it a regular meeting,-.0f the Planning Commission held on the 27th day of February,; 1985, by the following Vote -to-wit. ;.��/ AYES: C'OMISS;IONERS: 'fr NOES: 'COMMISSIONERS. "J !� ABSENT: ;GOMMISSIONERS:� l % l �3 i t ; ...71 J CITY or n4i CHO CUCAMONGA RECMKNDED CONDITIONS OF APPRC7AL , ) �. LOCATI04: best side of Etiwanda Avenue, TENTATIVI��PARCEL MAP 310;25 North of Baseline Road DATE FILE.;-: Febru4r°v 12, 1985 LEGAL UESCRIPTIQN:A division of a'Portion ` NUMBER DP LOTS: -i. --- of Lot 9, Block "J" Etiwanda Colony Land^ GROSS ACREAGE: 1 Acre as recotded in Book e, Page 24, Record! of ASSESSOR PARCEL. N0;.227- 111 -Q5 San Bernardino County. State of Cali ornia r ie*i: *ichatx�e*k *ie�kFxite* its' k* kicjk�kici: �tk* kirittt�k9ratkir *ic*�kir�*iF *�F *'*ir:, ski :k^k #ickiezt�n}YA�hk�t�kot*k 0 DEVELOPER O'MER ENG_.'lEER /SURVCVOR,,, t, f; Etiwanda - .Historical Soc. -�- 41111iam LvowTo. _ ° Associated Engineers - 'Attu. Jim Clark .Q. Ba, L 8540 Archibald 'AyenuN _ 3i6 East "E'' Street , Etiwanda, CA 91739 Rncho Gucanonga, CA 91730 ntaria, CA k7fi4 Improvement and dedication requirements in accordance iti� Title Y�� of the e Municipal Code of ache Citynf pfancho Cucamonga include, but may nod bo limited to, the following Dedications and Vahicu%arAccess Dedications shall be made ;,f all interior street rights -of -way :,and all necessary. Easements as shown on the tentative map. ;� X 2. Dedication shall be,made of ttie following rights -o} -way on the fuilowing. streets;. ry 4 additional feet on �Stlwanda Avenge > -- addit•: :1141 feet on additional fee *'on 3. Gorne% property line ,;radius will be required per City , Standards. 4. All- rights, of vehicular ingros4 ai�q egress sh as follows:. all be ded dated 5. Reciprocal access''easements and maintenance agreements ensurinc access to all phrcels and f joint maintenance of all common L i roads, drives 4x. tarkiny aromas shall be provided. by C.C: &R,s and shall be recorded cot,lcurrent with the man.' AW r ii 6. All existing easements lyinq within future right --~n of v are to be�quitcl aimed delineated .or on the mao per City Engineer- - requirements; 7. Easements for sidewalk for nuhC', use shalt be dedicated to the City'where "sidewalks meander through pri~wate property. B. Surety !� r. 1. Surety shall be `posted and /an agreement executed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and City Attorney, guaranteeing completion of th1 public improvements prior ;",o recording for and /orrfbr to building permit issuance foc 2.''` A -lien agreement must be execu }d prior; to recording of th'c =rhea, for the following;_ �� f i J} 3. Surety shall be posted and an agreement executed, quarl� teeing ! completion of all cn -site drainage fdcilites necessar i dewatering all parcels to the satisfaction of the 8dilgjnq and) Safety Divison prior to recording for and /or prior to issuance of buiidinq4:permit for C. Street Improvements t ' Pursuant to the City of Ranch" Cucamonga Municipal ;Code, Title 16, Section 36.36.120, the subdivider" may enter into an agreement and post s. urity with the City guaranteeing the regu >red construction prior to recordation 1 of the map andfor building permit issuance. I ,Ponstruct full street improvements including; .bu± not limited. j o, curb and gutter, A.C. pavement, sidewalk,' drive approaches, parkway trees, and street lights�on all interior,)strAets. f t ® 2. A minimum of 26 -foot wide pavement within a 40 -foot vide dedicated right -of -way shall be constructed all for section streets. - ur X 3, Construct the following missing improvements: Prior to.,buitding permit Issuarce. �. M Curb & A.C. Side- Drive Street Street A.C. Median Street Name Gutter Pvmt, Walk Appr. Trees Lights Overlay lsTand* Other Etiwanda repair X X x X *Includes landscaping and irrigation on meter Auk ,ii X� 4. Prior to any work being performed in the public right -of -way, fees shall be pa:d and an,eneroachn.ent permit shall 'be obta%ed from the City En-,lneerls office, in addition to any other. �;Iermits requ��`�r Street imprtvemznt Oans~ shall be , prepared bey v Regisie eu =- Civil Engineer and approved by tte City Engineer prior to issuance of an encroai vne`id permit, De%�epoper 'shall coordinate, and where � rocessary, pay for. the reldcAtioWl of any power"" popes., or other existing 'public, utilities as'necessary. -• 7, Existing fines of 12KV or less frontie,q *he crouert,o shall be undergrounded -.. 7 - Install appropriate street naps-., signs, traffic control,, signs, #ripxhg and markings with locatloos, an�.��ies approved by the City Engineer. ; X g. o'Street light "locations, as required, are`to "be approved bR;�"y.the ! Southern California ,Edison Company aftd the City of ,jcha jCecamonga. -, Lights shalt be on - Acora -tine 'poles- v th, undergrougd service. `l ` X 10. Landscape ,and irrigation ,plans"�lraT be submitVW to and Aft approved by the Planning Div'icion. prior° to the issuance of b"Idi, g permit. I X U. Coricentrated drainage'. flows .shall. not cross,. sid,walks. Jndersiiiewalk dram shall be inns fled to f. y Standards. �l J V. [lraincge and Flood !Cants cT Prmte drainage easematrts` for ;e.06= -lo`�+ draipi(�:: shall "te l requi'r'wd and shall b4 de)�!nIaated or noticed on the f 4n l map-, - K S. ' Adequate provisions shall be` de for accap ancd aid disnosap of surface drainage entering tkh praperty from adjacent areas,. i . The ;ollowlrg storm drain shall ; be ir_stalpeci ia` the satisfagtion of the City Engineer r 4. Pribr`to recnrdation r of the Map, a dr ydr�rpu ie anand ains study for t, a P, j%t .shAT ;W sulimiSftei� to th CitY Fsicfineerr for review. S. A drainage ; detention basin per City Standards' shams be' � constructed to detain, increased rdr4off v �2` 73, ✓` E. Gradir�q ANk X w Grading of, tie subject property shall be in accarda ee with the, r Ur��fornt'u7lding_Coda, City Grading. Standards a(d accepted°; ; grndirg p1lactices. X A soils .report 'shad be prepared 'by a qualified engineer `licensed by the State of Califorr�'. -ta perform such work: prior to- issuance of building permit:? A, gcoio�ical report shall be prepared by ,(:qualified,- enctinear or -- geo ag st and submitted at the time -'of application cr g siding plan »heck. 4,. The final gr �d%3 plan shall be subject to review and approval. , t+y, the Grading Committee and_ shall" be t:`ompletedr, prior' to recordation, of the final :abdivisian map or issuance of building permit whichever comes first„. Final grading plans for each parcel 61e to be 'submitt'ed to the 3�:ilding ,arid Safety, Divisiat for approval,;3prjar to Issuance of„ bu }`tdin� permit. F. General Re qu rrements and Appro vals X _Permits ~dill other: - agencies 441 be ' required as follows:. CalTransl for r' San 5ekprdi_n0 I0_Unty �o'o Contra istrict �- Cucamonga County Water District `for sever and water San Bernardina County Dust Abateient (required prior to I issuance of a grading permit) 1 Other° 2. A copy of the Covenanfs, Conditions and Restrictions (C. C. &Pds) approved 4 the City attorney is required prior to recordation of the map. ,: _ . X 3. Provide all utility services to each lot including 'seWet-age 1 �Yater, electric power, gas and= telephone,prior: to street rtructon. X 4. Sanary sewer and dater - systems shall be designed toCtl Coougn 't Water District sti dards. A, letter. -of ac qp n9s 5. This sub vision- f shall be subject to conditions of ap rtl wl from CalTrans/San 3lernardino County-Flood Control District. X S. . Approvals havbi not. been; securer; from all mtiliti °s and rat er cc interested agencies,Jnvolved � provaT of the final map WM bI�,suhjett to any requirements that may be received fv�dm hem FfT__ 3 a i`1 -4- 7* Th�,r'filing of the tentative trap or apprpval of same does not gu'rantee that sewer treatment capacity will be available-,at the ;ante building permits. are requested. c; Where building permi are requested, the Cucamonga County' Water aiistr'ii will be ' asked to Mrtify the availability of capacity. perstite will hat be i skcpd unless said certification is received• :ia writing. 8. Local and Master Planned Trails shal'i'be provided in accordance with the 'trail Man. A detailed trail plan inditatinq }is, wydt , maximum slopes, Physical coedit' , fesscing and need coitrnl, in accordance rrby City trail 4 arils, shall be submitted to and approved by the pity P� Weer prior to recordation for + 7s5 ,�A dfor prior to bui:ldinxi permit tt$nCe br 9. fNrior to recording, �,IdeposTt shall be posted wSth the City covering the estimated cpSLt ; F . cpi2+3t 7CSn ?A .. { r2 Under Assessment aistrt�vll anion ��2he n °wl,y created Parcels, �= It?. At the tithe of final map "�mittal, the f0loldnq shalt be submittedi Title Report, '��uerse calculations (sheets), copies of recorded maps and deb used as 'reference and/'or Showing originaT land division, -Je notes autf bench, marks referenced.' _ J `;7t? 1 a1 r, CITM (IF RA14tilo ('t r, MOO B. "MBS" by. i Ftiwanda Historical Soci�t Proje.it Description -- A request on behalf of the Etiwanda Hi,starlCal Society to relocate the Chaffey- Garcia. House, a City Historic Landmark, to a one acre paxcel (Parcel @ of Parcel Map 902,5), located oh the west side of Stiwanda Avenue, north of Base Line Road, in the low» residentiij- ,digtrict, The Purpose of,.:rl,is xelooatfnn is for the preservation atf47 }:esioration of this historic entity, Upon restoration, this site will be use4i4s a museum for the 1 display of bistoric artifacts, Iand as a meeting place for Society; *Jie Etitaartda Historic Aft Praject Background `he ChafPey- Garcia ttouse{ designated by the City Cc x as a City Historic �azdmark .March 4, 1981, currently sips on a site within .he Lewis Homes Terr Vista Plattned Community. The City Council, wishing to encourage a program of community Stiipported historic pveservaidon and awareness, approved thes_lelocation of this historic entity to a oile acre site to be donated by the wilitta Lyon Company,* This Conceptual apprtival by`Councii was granted on March ai, 1484 - subject to tk�e following cti ndi- Lions: t. T'ne psapezty will be dot'ated to and vested in the name :. f the testy« 2• tNtershlp Of the project (q } taffey- Garcia House) improvements male ana /or. at•'tached thereto, shall be vested solelit and irrevocably in the name of the city. 4 3, A %.?ecial use permit between the City and the Etiwanda,Histovicel _ Srgietg (proponan�ts ox ' the restoration project) bet," develop',; giving 11the Society responsibility For project rep.urati�n> phis agreement waa• approved fay Caunci],houamber 8, 1984, { ITEM I ,.r t CITi OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA MEMORANDUM Date: February i9r 1985 u a a'/ To: Members of the Plannhg Commission U Y` 1977 From- Bill Haliey, Community Services Director �h 9y: Mary Whitney, Com==ity Services Coordinator Subjects Environmenta.L Assessment and Conditional Use Permit 85 -; f nemo� jIS /S5 ., Planning Commission re: Chaffy - Garcia Mouser Sta ff Comme ha City Cnunt$Y has previously committed to this restoration:j?roject through writtet agreement with the Etiwand,a Historical' Soa,iety,, a copy of which is attached. 5- �� ,l Y Tcheyagrl),ent with the William Lyon Company for donation of the property- 3s; t� y undergoing lec�al.xeviet�. It i3 anticipated that Council ori11 zev the acXeienY at their March 6 meeting, izt- Lewis ffom�ts.has consented to let the house remain at it until March 20, current location 'i ? If the Commission aiProVes the Condit:U;'Aal Use permit and Negative Declaration, the house vUl 'be mod�d on or about March 7� with phased restoration to begin .sh4^rt,X ' thereat: . If Y can supply admit.$onaY nfoxmati.on pri01 to your meeting on the 27th, Please contsrt ane at pity gall, `I extension 213. f tj c o 1 PL- Eli Y l�i NME 1 l� L .I E- . A. PLICAF IO . Imo" STUDY - p I 1977 GENERAL For all projects requiring duVironm.ntal review, this form must be rgmpleted and submitted to the Development Review Committee through the department where the project application is made. 'Apon receipt of this application,, the Plan.iny- -,;ivision staff will Part rrpea; a II .af th Initial Study and hsake ~er'Mmendations to Planning ommission,. The Planning'4'ommission will make one g of three determinations: (1) The project w�►+� � have no significait environmental impact and -.ra Nff ative Declaration will be filed, (2) The project will have a signMc�9i environmental impact and an E�vi- ronmen al Impact Report will be prepareli � or (3) An additional informat��on report Should be sup ?lied by the appiic::nt giving further inforimation cgn -)./ g the proposed project. Date Filed: 2 -13 -85 �. Project Title: Re+lnrarinh n$ ILL- rhiffp�r rarr;,�Hee,cp Applicant's Name, Addles , Telephone: City of Rancltn Cucamona Name, Address, Telephone of�Person-,To Be Contacted � Concerning this Project. Bill i7 v , gcto�— Diary Whitney, Community Services Co:rdinator Location of Project: 71.00 Etiwanda Avenue (Tentative address issued by \, - Jerry Grant, Ruildinjr Official) Aidessor's Pq: cel No.: 227 - 113 -05 List other permits�,aecessary from local, state ,and federal agencies .and the agency i ng ;o s�x:h permits: City'' Building; paimi t ' C Cucamonga County Water District permit -- n c � r. 4 -PROJECT DESCRIPTION -, Proposed a..e ar prop d project. Site to be used for 'relocation of fh- Chaffey= Garcia House, n City%Stpric,, Landmark.- House to be restored and u's'.� as a museum. . 7 Acreage of project area and square footage of existing and p,oposed buildings, if any:__ 1 acre site. Proposed buildink is snnroximately 1600 square feet Describe the environmental settino,,of the project site including information con topography, soil stability, plants (trees); lane animals, any cultural, historical or scenic aspects, land use of surrounding ;'properties, and the description of, any existing structures' and t4ir use (attach necessary Sheets ); ; —Church is located on adjacent property to the north: Other st:rroundin)�.: _ property is currently vacant. Land use for surrounding properties is low_ residential. Proposed site covered with nativo grasses. - - -- l: Is the project part of a larger project, one of s series of tiumulative actions, which although individually small, may as a whole have significant environmental impact No AML } ILL r; "THis PROJECrz' YES No Create a substantial chaPS,4 in ground Contours? % 2. Create a substantial change in existing noise of produce vibration or glare? _..,: x `t '3. Create a substantial change in demand for municipal services (police, fire(- -qater, sewage, etc.)? X'V 4. Create changes in the existing zoning or General Plan designations? - " S. Remove any existing trees? Now mane 6. CrFx %e the need for use &I disposal of potentially ha4trdous materials such as toxic substances, flammables or explosives? „ x F Explanation of any YES answers above (attach additional` sheets if ngca f }; :c :- �— VW 7. Estimate the amount of ewaga and so�jd waste materials this prarjact r will generate daily: lone _ 8. Estimate the number -or auto and truck trips genOjted daily "by this projectz g- ltr -t� S. Estimate the amount grading (cutting anti filling) required for this protect, in cubic yards. Mnt acto -r estimates IOOU IQ.r If the project involves fife Oonstr lfctlon .of r$540rntial &tits, complete the form on the next pag#e, , �} CER7Ti ICAiIOtit I Hereby" certify that the statemen & furnished above and in L' the attached " ibits present the data and `infor *von required' fora..�kr s initial .evaluat -P;n to the be "st °of my ability, and -th'�t ,ti:M facts;- statements, and ioformatigi) presento� -Are true and correct to tt•. ;E t of my knowTedg and bdliff.• I further understand ghat additional inforjiatipn may:. be required to V' .'.submitted before an adequite evaluation, can ire`" made by the Planning %. Date. Signature' C a" Title iaratauri�ra S`e�vice5 Tiapaxnt � RESID____ E_ .Lt1NSTr2UG7i,�i The following information,f�should be provided to the-.Itity of Rdncho Cucamonga Plannin} Division in order to aid the sGhog7 district In assessing their, ability to accommodate ed residential development. Developers are -required to secure letters from the school district for accommodating the C; increased number of students prior to issuanc�;of building permits:, Hame'of Developer and Tentative "tract No.: Specifia Location ;of pmject:. ' PHASE � r N4SE 2 PHASE 3_ PHASE ; TOTAL 1. Number of single I family units: 2- of multiple faint i.1 units: i n 3. Date proposed to begin construction: 4. Earliest: date of occupancy: .; of Tentative - 5 8e°lrocros Price ftanoe NO APPLIrIABLE w! , . X -__-- z 0701 -02 o 2- -27 --85 PC Agenda o 4 -of 5 f :e. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PART 11 - INITIAL $TUDy ENVIRON=TAL CHECKLIST DATE:. 2 -13 -85 .AP'PLICANT: City of Rancho Cucamonga t FIFING DATE: 2 -13 -85 LOG NUMBER; PROJECT: Relocation of the Chuffey Garcia House PROJECT LOCATION: 7150 Etiwanda Ave.(tentative address issued by City Building EN I. VIRONMENTAL IMPACTS facial. (Explanation of all "yes" and J1maybe'' answers are required on attached sheets). YES MAYBE NO 1 Seils and Geol_gy Will the proposal have significant results in a. Unstable ground conditions nr in cba:t , ity , geologic relationships? . X b. Disruptions, displacements, compactr,4 o, burial of r_fie soil ?, X r c.' Change in topography or ground surface * —ntour f'tervals2 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?. X f. Changes in erosion siltation, ar deposition? r X S. Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes, landslides,:,mud- i slides, ground failure, or similar hazard`;i? a X h. An increase in the rate of extraction and/or ; Use of any miuerala,resourcji,'- � X 1 l , 1` l k 2. Hvd .aoay. Will the:proos� sal - have significant re*jults in.-, ' age 2 u YE5 Ii4iBr NO a Changes in currents,'or -the course of direction - of flowing streams, channels? rivers, or eRNemeral stream b. Changes in absorption e rates,, drains g patterns, or the rate and amount ") Q`; surface Water runoff? X C. Alterations to the course or flow of flood �. waters? a. 4. Change in the �oun•t of gµrface water in any body of water? e. Discharge into surface waters, or any alteration of surface water quality? X f, Alteration of groundwater characteristics? X. g. Change in the quantity of groundwaters, either through direct additions or with- -; drawals, or through interference with an aquifer? Quality? Quantity? X h. The reduction in the amount of water other _ wise available for public Ovate*_- supplies? X I. Exposure of people or praperty to crater related hazards such as'klooding or seiches? X 3. A2r quality. will the proposal, have significant "r results in: a. Constant or periodic air �missiori frodwtobi.le \� or indirect sources? Stationary sources? .X C b. Deterioration of k")ient air quality and /or Interference with Ae attainment of applicable air quality standards? X c. Alteration of local or regional climatic conditions, affecting air movement, moisture Fl or temperature? —X 4. Biota Flora. Lull the proposal have significant results In: a. Change in the e;3taeteri.41cs of-species, Including diversity, distribution, or number of any species of plants? Xf Reduction of the numbers of any unique, raze or endangered species of plants? Y�4 I'age 3 YBE !10 c. Introduction of nev or disruptive species of plants intu j an area? _7X �€ d. Reduction. in the potential, for agricultural production? Fauna. Will the proposal have significant results in a. Change in the characteristics of species, including diversity, distribution, or numbers of any species of animals? x b. Reduction of thc. numbers of any unique, rare or endanrjired species of animals? X c. Xntrodu(ition of nev or disruptive species of ani3±als!'into air area, or result in a barrier to the.rIigeation o;., . movement of animals? :f d. Deterioration or removal of existing fists or wildlife habitat? 5. T?opulat,Lon. Will the proposal have significant results ina Ask a. Will the proposal alter the locati�T 1 distri- bution, density, diversity, or grow4 rate of the human population of an area? X ` b;. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? X 6. Soci� o- EccrMie Factors, Will the proposal have significant results in.' a.. Change in !31 or regional socio- economic characte'ristic' including economic Ur commercl l divetzity, tax rate, and property v'alues? ;,( X b. 11ill project costs Se equitably distributed among project beneficiaries, i.e., buyers, tax- payers or project users? 7. Land Use and Planning Considerations. Will the proposal have significant results in? a. A substantial alteration of the present or r planned land use of an area?,r ._. J b. A conflict with any designations, objea.tive"S, p` policies, or adopted plans of anq governmental entities? C- An impact upon the qulaity or quantity of existing, consumptive or non - consumptive recreitional opportunities? � - - Page J 4 YES 1NO P_ Transnortatiorn: Will-tbe proposal have significant 0 �J results in: a. Generation of substarEial adoltional vehicular movement ?� X b.°.Effects'an existing streets, or demand for l new str_et construction? X. c« Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new patl;ing? X d. Substantial impact upon existing transperte•- . tion systems? X e. Alterations to pr,2sent patterns of circula- tion or movement of PaaPle and /or goods? X f. Alter <ltiansf, /b,or effects on present and potential' water borne, rail, sass transit or air traffic? = X g. Increases inJiraffic hazards to motor vehicles, w bicyclists a��. pedestrians? 1} X 1 I 11 9. Cultural Resources. till the proposal have significant results in:` C, a. A disturbance to the integrity of archaeological, paleontological, and /or historical,resources? s g l0. Health, Safetv, and Nuisance Fact s. 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? c. A risk of explosi ?n or release of hazardous substances in thi event of an accident? X d. An increase ir.2he "nv :ler of individuals or species of vector or patnenogeric organisms or the exposure of people to such organisms? X e. Increase in *,,`t'ing noise levels? X f. Exposure of people to potentially dangerous noise levels? g. The creation of objectionable odurs(_� X h, An increase iii' light or glare? r --�- -, X ..j r Page YES MAYBE -tvp 11. Aesthetics. -Pill 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 v > site? X c. A conflict with the objective of designated or pot4atial scenic corridors? e X 12. Utilities and Public Services. Will the proposal have a significant need fo: new systems,'or ..ltzratlon-' to the: follow;. ng: a. Electric power? I X b. Natural or packaged gas? X C. Communications systems? X 1c d. Water supply? X e. Wastewater facilities? k f. Flood control structures ?., X E. Solid waste facilities? " X h. Eire protection? X i. Police protection? -. J. Schools? X k. Parks or other recreational facilities? X 1. Maintenance of publii. facilities, including roads and flood control facilities? X m. Other governmental services? R 13. Energy and Scarce Resources. Will the,'`proposal have 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 demand for development of new sources of energy? _ X x< s�. An increase or perpetuation of the consumption ;.. of non - renewable forms of energy, when feasible c renewable sources of energy are available? ti Page YES bfAYBE No e. Substantial depletion of any nonrenewable or Aft _scarce natural resource? v X 14. Mandatory k`lndin s of Si nificance, a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially redone the habitat of fish or wild�i #e;,sjieties, cause a fish or wildlife population to�drop below zelf sustaining levels,.thteaten to eliminate a'plant or animal community', reduce. `the number or restrict the ran`re of a rare or endangered plant or .animal or eliminate .important examples of the major periods of ealiforuia history or prehistory? X 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 *rime while long- , term impacts will endure well into the future), c. Does the project have impacts which are Individually limited, but aumulat ,vely considerable? (Cumulatively considerable means that the'iucremental effects of an Individual project are;- P- pnsidarable when viewed In connection with the,,- effects of past projects, and probable futorajsj eats) :, d. Does the prej--ct hae environmental effects which will cause substantial.,F,.� erne effects an human beings, eiti, r s 1' ar indirectly. ? 7C rr. DrSCUSSWN of ENVIRfltifiE>;.ig EVA2ve�C Q;2 i.e., of affirmative answers -.Ca the above questions g?us a discussion of proposed mitigation measures).: ,A Cc 8Y -&o City of RancF,,p ucamonga California JUL ._�P,EEM ENT "r iF THIS AGREEMENT "is entered into in the Cif�y a Rai ;:±`Cucamonga, State of California between the City f Rancho Cucamo' X ago* hereinafte�� called CITY, and the Et%warda H%storical Societg, a California Public Benefit Corporation, hereinafter called SOCIETY, IT IS HEREBY AGREED AS FOLLOWS: WHEREAS, the CITY wishes to taster and encourage a program of Community supported historic preservation and awareness for the Lenefit o£ the 0 City's present and future residents; and WHEREAS* the SOCIETY also shares the City's goal of community historic preservation and has signified a desire and willingness to undertake:.thi. restoration and operation of the Chaffey- Garcia House, a designated City Of Rancho Cucamonga, Historic Landmark: IT IS NOW THEREFORE AGREED As. FOLLOWS: ij FIRST The Parties hereto agree td the followi.ng.definitions., A. The "pRoiEC2"` shall mein the Chaffey - Garcia House and the site on which it is located. B. The "COUNCIL" shall mean the r'ity Council Of the City of Rancho 4u6amonga. The Council is the Governing Body of the City. C. The "DIRECTOR" shah mean the Director of Coo Imi� sr, vices, or his designee, anti �rized by COUNC`CL to represent the CITY in matters pertaining td,the Project. The responsibilities of the DIRECTOR shalt include`jbut riot be limited to the following 1. Coordinate on beillf, of the CITY all necessary ry meetings -- between the CITY and the SOCIETY. =. ^; 2. Review and approve for disapprove);; subject to Council review, all restoration plans, working drawings, and specifications submitted, by the SOCIETY to. the CITY relative to ttie PROJECT. 3. Provide; liaison between the SOCIETY and CoUNCIL, I Commissions and CITY agencies, as appropriate. SECOND; The Parties'' reto agree to the following conditions: ARTICLE I —CITY A. The CITY shall provide an unimproved site for relocation of the PROJECT thereon. x B. Ownership of the PROJECT, improvement mane or attached thereto, , >; shall be vested solely and irrevocably in the name of the CITY' ws c� 4 a s��� nab&""" t Page 2 I Chaffey- Garcia Agreement ID/30/84 C. Improvements to the PROJECT by others, will 11,.4eemed Asdonations to the CITY, or as donations to the SOCIETY if given to the SOCIETY and not reimbursable by the CITY unless contracted for by written CITY agreement executed prior to such improvements, D. Provide assistance to the SOCIETY as appropriate in the view of the CITY. A%MCLE II SOCIETY �.. The SOCIETY shall prepare, or have prepared„ plans and /or working drawing£" ardfor specifiGdtg,ons, to a level as may be required by the CITY for any and all work connected wigs t;e PROJECT,, when, in the view, of the 0ITY, such are warranted in the public interest. Planslj" working drawings end specifications, When required by twee CITY, will be submi.t�,ed, reviewed, and approved (or disapproved:] prior to tYSa cam - ncement of any depicted work. Plans and 'specifics ons will be property of the;.CITY after the B.ROJECT hr{ pen completed for purposes of record and reference,' { B. The SOCIETY shall be responsible for the development and proper maintenance of the P:iOBECT at all times during the term of this agreement. The 86CIETY shall use the } project for,historica2 museum purposes, such as displaying of h1storical artifacts, memorabilia, acid tH.e provision of tours and lectures as the SOCIETY shall deem appropriate. Other uses, such aS bazaars, weddings,:} private functions and commercial activities shall, be subject to the Policy guidelines of tht CITY regarding use of CITY facilities. D. The CITY shall have no obligation to the SOCIETY for funding of project improvements or maintenance and operational costs f:annected thereto. ' E. The SOCIETY acknowledges the title to and jurisdiction of the PROJECT to be vested w,,th the CITY. ARTICLE III - TERM A The term of this agreement will be for twenty (20) yeart, commencing upon the first day of the month succeeding approval thereof by the COMCIL. B. The terms of this agreement shall be renewable by the SOCIETY for an additional twenty (2tl) Year period at the conclusion of this term. r ^1 I?agr, 3 Cha ey- Garcia Agreement 10/30/84 AiMCLE IV - AMOUNTING RECORDS ' A. The SOCIETY shall maintain a method of accounting, open to inspection by the CITY, which shall to the satisfaction of the GTY „correctly and accurately reflect the gross receipts and df,sbursement of the SOCIETY in connection; with the pROJECT. B. Ini!ome. and fees di'rived by the SOCIETY from the use of the PROJECT shall be used for historic restoration and devgior - -gnt purposes, in connection with the PROJECR'y and, the maintenance and Cperation of the .PROJECT. Any income in excess of the foregoing will 'be committed to'activities of the SOCIETY in connection with furthering the historic presesvati.on efforts within the community of Etiwanda. ARTICT V - GENERAL IDENTIFICATION A. The SOCIETY agrees to indemnify., defend and hold CITY, it's agents, officers and employee from and againlst any _ and all liability of any nature whatsoever, including but *}ot 1f1 limited illness, bodily injury, death, orrany claim connected witn, either di,rec:tly, or indirect3 ; �e PROJECT JI during the term of this agreement. =i B. The SOCIETY'shall reimburse to the CITY the cost of an Insurance rider on the CITY insurance policy of coverage for insuring the PROJECT in a manner as described in -A- above, if feasi4je. if not feasible, the SOCIETY shall maintain at it's own expense k,*general liability policy, secured through a carrier acceptable to the CITY, in the minimum amount'of $300,000, and will name the CITY as additionally insured, ` ARTICLE VI - MISCELLANEOUS A. It is understood that SOCIETY restoration of the PROJECT is subject to the avkilabil.ity of funds, and therefore the PROJECT may be divided into phases at the discretion of the SOCIETY. B. This document may be modifiel only by further writk---n agreement between the parties hereto, and such agreement�-.hall not be effective until executed by both the SOCIETY and,' CITY. x.� iz -z Page 4 Chaffey- Garcia Agreement 10/30/84 IN WITNESS THEREFORE, The CITr and the SOCIETY have anused that this agreeme� to be executed an the day oft/ CITY of RANCHO CUCAMONGA 1wTikfrAl3DA HISTOF2ICAL SOCIETY j! Jp. Mike� or Fzes,Ldi nt _, a I) ^ n Bevezly A ttieet, City Aleck Sberetazy • �_ a`• ldfd /t�' jt Date --�—/ _ Date r i ,U i _.L.... 17 " � RESOLUTION NO. �. A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 85= ° 04 FOR THE RELOCATION OF THE CHAFFEY -GARgA HOUSE TO AN AREA ON THE WEST SIDE OF ETIWANDA AVENUE, NORTH OF BASE LINE ROAD (TENTATIVE ADDRESS: 7150 ETIWANDA), IN THE LOW - RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT. i WHEREAS, on the 13th day of February, 1985, an application was filed by the City of- Mancha Cucamonga, on behalf of the Etiwanda Historical Society, for review of"-the above described project; and WHREAS, on the 27th day of February, 1985, the Mancha Cucamonga Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider the above- described project. NOW, THEREFORE, be resolved by the Rancho 'Cucamonga Planning Commission as follows: SECTION is That the following findings can be met, I. That the proposed use is in accord with the General Plan; {' the objectives of the Development code, and ��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 lirjurious to., properties or improvements in the vicinity. 3. That ttie proposed use will comply with each of the appiicab3 -- ..visions of the Development Code. SECTION 2: `r4hat' this project will not crease adverse impacts on the environment and that a Negative declaration is issued on.February 27, 1985. SECTION 3: That the .Corditional Use Permit. Ha. 85 -04 is approved subject to the following conditions 1. Approval is granted for the relocation and restoration of the Chaffey- Garcia House on a one acre parcel (Parcel I of Parcel Map 9025). In ,addition, approval is granted for use of the restored house and site as a museum and meeting II place for local historical societies. 2. All conditions of approval for Parcel Map 9025 shall apply. 3. All conditions of approval shall be completed priar� to occupancy, unless otherwise indicated. ` 1�4- . I 1, n Resolution No.., V CUP 85 -04 4. install 'str t and parker Y 'improvements, per ltiwanda Specific �P46, includingg'< t not limited to, sidewalks, street trees, and ground cover, and permanent irrigation �S system and repair of broken rock and curb and gutters. 5. A detailed site plan shall be submitted for review and - - approval by the City Planner. 6. ,) Expansion or modification of the use or;:�;structure shall require reapplication;`;for modification to 'this Conditional Use Permit. 7. All signs shad require separe 'application 'nd approval by the Planning Diy�sion prior to�lnstallakiun /� Said signs shalt reflect the historical ch-M- t r � 'the Chaffer- Garcia douse. S. Appl,;+tt shall 5ubrn1ns to the Bui'Iding and Safety Divisior ,for review and obtain any necessary permits in accordance with the Unif�fm Building Code. �h 9. Provide compliance w the Uniform Building Cods, for property line - cleara�ps considering use, area and fire- resistiveness of existing buildings, SO. Existing building(s) shall be made to comply with current Building and Zoning regulations for the intended use. 11. Existing sewage disposal facilities shall be removed, filled and /or capped to comply with the Uniform Plumbing Coder and Uniform Building Code. 12. Underground on -site utilities shall be removed, filled and /or capped: to comply with the Uniform Plumbing Code, and Uniform Building Code. 13. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the Uniform Building Code, City Grading Standards and accepted grading practices. 14. Water and. sewer plans shall be aesigned and constructed to meet ree4v- rrements of the Cucamonga County Water District (CCWD), Foothill Fire District, and the Environmental Health Department of the County of San 'Bernardino. A letter of compliance from CWD will be required prior to issuance of permits. O l� Resolution No. CUP 85 -D4 r Page 3 k ' rte, ,- L` APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 27th DAY OF FEBRUARY, 1985. r: PLANNING CDMMISsm OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Dennis L. Stout, Chairman ATTEST: Rick Gomez, Deputy Secretary I, Rick Gomez, deputy Secretary of the P'lmiiyg Commission of the„ City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby - certify that the"Toregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning 'Commission of the City of Rancho - Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 27th day of February, 1985, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: . ,t i w l IL Resolution No; { CUP 85.04 Page 3 _ -- „� 0 APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 7th DAY OF FEBRUARY, 1985. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE C.TY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA } y BY: r Dennis L. St6ut,- Cha7rman % ATTEST: L1 Rick,Gomez, Deputy 5 ecretary 1 s I, Rick. Gomel, Deputy Secretary of the Planning (Omission of the City of Rancho rucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing,,Resolution was dry and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission �1: the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular`meetlnq of the Planning Commissio:�elcf on the 27th day of February, 1984., by the:�q?lawing vote --Q -wit: ' AYES: COMMISSIONERS: f li NOES:.. COK.',iSSIONERS: ABSENT„ COMMISSIONERS,` ,, v v; r` RESOLUTION NO . f " A RESOLUTInN OF THE RANC,40 CUCAMONGA _ PLANNING 'COMMISSION APFRO'JING CONDITIONAL ,. USE PERMIT NO. 85 -011 FOR THE RF_OCATICV, OF TrE CHAFFEY- GAVCIA HOUSE TO AN AREA ON,;THE WEST SIDE OF ETIWA14x)A, AVENUE, NORTH OF BASELINE RO tV (TENT2� �-WE ADDRESS 7150 ETIWANDA)} IN TFiE', OW- RESIDENTIAL - DISTRICT. WHEREAS, on the February 13, 1985, an application was £ilea by the City of Rancho Cucamonga, on behalf of tb.e 'V— Uwanda Historical' Society, f6. review of the above described project; Iad WHEREAS, on,the February 27, 1985, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider the above- described project. NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the Rancho Cucamonga planning Commission as follows: SECTION 1: That tHt follmAng findings can be met 1. That the proposed use is in accord with the General Plan, the objectives of #:-Development Code, and_, the purposes of the ' -fie district in ±bidb site is located. 2. That the proposed use, toget -aer :iti, the conditions applicable' thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to zoperties or improvements in t-ne' vicinity. 3. Tbat the ,proposed use will comply with eae,,of the applicable provis.ons of the Development Code. V, 4 SEC4. That this project Will not create adverse impacts on the enviroilmen ff .hat a Negative D 01� -anon is issued Feb_nary Y985. on 2'7, SECZa .+ That the Conditional Use Permit No. approved'subjecc tuthe following conditions: 1. Approval is g=ranted for the relocation and restoratio7 of the Chaffey- Garcia House on a one acre parcel (Parcel '1 P.M. 'In of i)9025). addition, approval iFtrgranted for use of the restored house and site as a museum and meeting - :,,ace for local :historicai societies. 2. All conditions of approval for Parcel Map 5025 shall apply. St, 3. All conditions of approval shall be completed prior to occupancy, unls ' otherwise indicated.., 4. install str .',' and parkway improvetaents,_ per Etinanda Specific Plan, including, but axok limited to, sid #ivtalks, street trees„ axtd ground, cover, and permanent ixrivation sj� tem and repair of broken ro a,1$ . curb and gutters,, r f ( y { D. A detailed. riite p�3n shalt he submitted, for revies�p.,7d apprgyal by the City fanner. V 6. Expansionll'or m�odific3ti.gn of the use` orJ$txucture shall require seappliontian for modification to this CIenditiona7. use Permit. z _ 7. All signs shall require,sepa'rate application and approval by the.planning -- Division prior to installation. "Said sgns;a11 re£lect;,the hi:starical character jjoi" the Chaffey- Garca Haase. 8 }nt shah su�amit plans to the Building Snd Saf0ty Division for review and i7srca _r, any necessary permits in' acnordartoe with the Oniip rn ,ui]dixtg Code. 9. Provide aompiiarce with the Uniform ', gilding Code fs3sc prgperty line clearances considering user area a.nd f1re- reaist --nesa of gsistinebuildi.naa. 10. Bfcisting bu.ilding(sX `shall be made to comply with Current Building* „and fly Zoning regulations for the intende,.use. t� 11. Exfsting sewage disposal facilih ;,es shall be remltvMO# fills�d and /or agpe3 to comply with the Uniform Piambiixg Cover and Uniform Ruilding C.Sde. 12. UndergrounrI on -site utilities are to be lo,Cated a;td shown o;# b,ilding, y plans submitted for buildin g pesn tt application. r, 13. Gradin g of `the sib ect j pro *erty shall "be is accordance 'Fih the Uniform . t Building Coder City Grading Standards and accepted grading pract -4ces. ' 14. Water` and sewer p, n.s shall be designed and constructed, to mec+t. requ irements of the Cucamonga Counlay Water District (CCWD), roothill'Fite' D�`,strict and the t viroiimental Health Department of the County of-,an, Bernardino. A letter -of compliance �*om CCWD will be required prior to 'P issuance of permits. =M Jf 41 r7 .., CITY OF P"WC O C'tJwA.Nia.NGA. STAFF �c�4o JRE )R DATE: February 27. I485 � > 70: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner gY: Howard L. Fields, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: -ENVIRONMENTAL MSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84 -38, i1liITEp i4EiHODIST Cr_RCti - �{�e daveiopment of 7_91-606 squ_ a cast Fe astt: Hail grid th( review *f,, a Faster Pltn for the developme »t of a churcr�sanc #uaz'y facility locatc -d at The`- northwest corner of Chuctu ':y� fat -it Archibald Aye -hue on about 2.8 acres of lard irr she Low Resider Y i" {2 -4 du/ac) Developm -ent Distrirt .- APN X00 - 04'-2. IR p..uJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION. A• ct7_ nrr Re uested� .Approval Of a master site Plan and architectural design, and issuance of a Negative Declar�tian. B. Pur tree: Development te of a 9,600 SA;�are foot fellowship h�tl x °nd review of a master plan for a church sanctuary fellowship . C. Lam:atibn: n: Northwest corner of Church Street and Archibald A due D. 2arcei afire: 2.8 acres f. F.xistinq ton rl Lour Residential f24 du,/ac� s J F. ExisLaAd'„ Church G. Surrounding Land Ose and 2onin North - Existing single -fame y residences, Law Residential {2 -4 dta /ac} South a (2-4 2 Orr' 'single- family residences, Low Residential Cast Orr' Existing single - family residences, Low Residential j 42-4 du/dc) West a Existing single family residencest'Low °Residential 3 AOL (2 -4 dulac) ' g r,` PLANNING COMISSION Si'AFF REMT - Con. iticnal Hs,-- Permit 54- 30/United Methodist Church \� t February 27, l 1 1t Page 2 H. General Plan Desimrat�ons_ o3ect Site - Ldw 14kitten'tial (2-4 do /ac) North - Low Residential (2-4 dole-c) South -- Low Rcs rdeutial {2-4 dv/ac) 4 East Low Residential_ (2 --4 du/ae). Wiest _ ' Resident's 7.; d?_lF. I. Site Characteristics: \'he existing tapO 'a /', , the s ►1�� site slopes gentry froa Atlrtil to Sduth at 2 perdegri gr . existing United Hetbodis Church and associated, i = facility occupy a portion of the subject site. An extstlrag single -- family residence, which will be deamlished prior to any construction activities, occupies the site for the proposed � FelloKship Hall. 4 Ii. POLYSIS:' A. General: Tire ArWosed 9,5Q square foot fiellawship Hall is part of a master plan, which will ultimatel plare fall ciur,Cra facilities on the subject site...' Phase I gill; consist of the Fellowship Hall, adjacent to and north of the existinq cbxTh, and will oc , - ,.-#he central locat;j ,-- oi: the mas=er plan. The Fellowship RAIl is desi -as;!Iarge multi -use building comprising both offices any#, -, gjmusium. The proposed 29 parking stalls, together wifl the existing 36 stalls, will proyide adequate parking for ease i.. Pha.le II eavisions the caast7ntion- .of the future church , sanctuary immediately to the proposed Fellowship Hall, and will p mvide an cdditto l 48 parking stalls. In total, 102 parking stalls will be prodded at the time of built. \i R. Desi n,4ev#ew Comaittee: The Design Review Committee members discussed the =Watibility of the proposed Fellowship Hall ti with the existing united methodist Chruch. They. recce revisions in order to continue dominant ardritectural eleamts of the historidal church to the aft Fellowship hall (W.W gr °), thereby providing a uniform design these.. fut-tham—m-e, "e C itte-e receftoended aft additional elevat%.,on the fate sanctvf #y,,, so that all future building prowls will tie ; together 4 ,4equately. Tiie applicant responded by,1p ld3rq' additional �ciritecturai, bwtme rt to the Fellowship Hal, (Exhibit 'IG�, reflecting.thP Cawitf.ee %s concerns; however, the Committee could not reach, a consensus or the revised 4es*1 elevations. Therefore, this asps $till require fall P i CammisSioa determination. ,.�, PLANNING COMISSION STAFF REPORT Conditional Use Permit; 84-38/United Methodist Church February 27, 1985. :\ Page 3 -- I� G. Tectiini Ceview rcrxfttee: The Technical Review Committee Etas reviet'�he proect and has recommended its approval subject to fill, protection measures incorporated into building design and fffelent water capacity and access' for fire fighting.4equiP"t and vehicles. D. Gradin Cdewittee: The Grading Committee reviewed the conceptrga gradin Phase I (Fell MP Halll of project proposal revisions The minor recommended revisi its to the grading plan would bring j� into canformance 7th City Codes and Standarw. The Grading Committee has. recommended approval of CUP 84 -38 subject to conditions 'regarding drainage and formal approval of the final.;: grading plih. The grading activities for Phase II aAressed in tftts submittal are not E. Environmental Rsses§ment: Part I of the Initial Study has been c6i Ietel by the applicant. i Staff has Completed Part II of the Environmental Checklist and found no significant adirerse impact: on the environment as a result of this project. If Cometisslon concurs with said findings, 'issuance the of a Negative Decl4ratian !could be in order, III.. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: The project is consistent with the ,Generale ,Plan and Development Code, The project will not be detrimental to' adjacent properties or cause significant adverse environmental impcts. In addition, the proposed use and site plait, together with the rScormended conditions of approval, are In compliance with the applicable provisions of the Development Code and City standards. rY;. CORRESPONDENCE:., This � is item has been advertised in The Dilly Report as a public hearing. In addition, the property 'was oste_ and notiC�s advertising the public hearing were sent fo i property owners within 300 feet of the project site. at f/ correspondence has been d e: no ' received regardThg the -pro- e��': ' V. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends a faidl of Conditional Use Pe"m� � �-:' �ihrough adoption of the attached Resolution n and ( issuance of a Negative Declaration. i� RJspectf Y submitted, � Ci y Planner 7 �3 �� -i ....�:;..r V ' PLANNING COMMISSIOU STAFF REPORT Conditional Use Permit, 84 -38 /united Methodist Church February 27, 1985 L, Page 4 Attachm s: Exhibit "A'" - Location Map Exhibit oa,- _ Site Plane Chibit'' "C"" - Streetscape ;! Exhibit !'V - Bui'rdmg Elevations Exhibit "E" - Floor Plan & Landscaping Plan Initial Study,: fart II ; Resolution of 1 Approval J - v Adak l /' F _ _ L Ai- r 4. .. Lx• t ,' � y �F:il t - crillosm ` nIORTH IT T #TEN'S, t. Gf°H'L ` - -3+ x i�L1�I1`I TITLE: •t/ l%� D� i(} EXHIBIT =�� SCfiL� � ri su x' CHUR i 1 Q t `f` 4 ° [ � i [ P IIMTE'C;"eEYN00i4T Ct1V8CH "I"i RH2�vttl3 cSVE.. a rccxasurxxcack . IiJ balwtl rC/pf M. wR. s i 1 Q t `f` 4 ° [ � i [ P IIMTE'C;"eEYN00i4T Ct1V8CH "I"i RH2�vttl3 cSVE.. a rccxasurxxcack . IiJ .. b" �� \. t,. r 2 � �� � '� O ` . ;,. - - � W. � �'' �` _-�, t , �� �� �\�` l\ � � /; 6�/� �� ,. it .w •� 1 i � '� r � ;�?' - , �'� ��� � � _ -._ t` .., �� .,� ..P � � �R ,�i' ` ;� . __� .,.,, � � o �' .. c '"� �. �`� `�M Q 1 ti I S it z i, _ d I'I ml t e UN7m METxoasr CH TAO AmcxlsACO avIL, d!ii�Ll IAM YCAA. ei c p, r i to iL a9C:� _ '- •`y q 0 c 9 n s c A , a c _ • s.�... ci ��' �7 {j^ okaE.sat.� �'� �efcfl�� r.4 �bfiiNi:#b'oaeiA 1� m 0 �.ncrce.rs at. s ltW[� l�t�, t Y' � rn. � �[s e�m�► jj C� r. ppL3� �w:a•J�a1i�� �� t�i� o'rir�.fai I TW_ CITY OF RANCHO CnCA%,0NGA PART IZ - INITIAL STUDY /l ENVIROMMNTAL CHEMIST DATFr r6, APPLICANT: e7 .fAw�/tIG. FILING DATE:_jd�ec e2LE1G NMLnk'R. GCt PROJECT: PROJECT LOCATION: I. REgRONMENTAL IMPACTS `Explanation of all "yes " and "'maybe " answer "re required on attached YES MAME No 1. Soils and Geoloev. Will the proposal have significant results in; a. Unstable ground conditions or in changes is geologic relationships? b. Disruptions, (displacements, compaction or burial of the-40il? w \� c. Change in topography or ground surface ` contour intervals? d. The destruction, covering or modification Of any unique geologic or physical features'It 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? g. Exposure of people or,aroperty to geolop3e hazards such as earthquakes, landslidea,"mgjY slides, ground failure, or similar hazards ?" ,,✓� \\ h. An increase in the rate of extraction and /or use of any mineral resource? 2. ; iiySaloAV. Will the propo,'gli have sigz.ficaiii , �� u_ - results in: I page 21 YES tL4iCd, ^ ^. NO cnrr" a. Changes in currerc�. "or the course of, d» ' .eetion — " of flossing streams; rivers, ar ephC. Ai stream channels? wr v' b. Changes in absorption xate's,' drainage pattern? ± +, , or the rate and amount of surface water lunoffi - f C. .Alterations to the co47 se or floc of flood • Waters ?.: d. Change in the amount of surface vzter in aW body of water? e_ Discharge into surface waters, or any alteration of surface eater quality? , 1. Alteration of ground" teL''.charac%eristics? .� g. Change in the quantity; of grounds:aters, either through direct additions,r with- drawals, or through interfererce, with an aquifer? quality? Quantity? \ ,� h. The reduction in the amount of water other- _ wise available for publ' water supplies? I. Exposure of peopie or property to water y related haza2cLq such as flooding or, seiches? -'- ✓' 3. Air Quali;v. Will the proposal have sigaifierlt results in: a. Constant or periodic air emissions from 'aobile" ,. or_.#.ndirect sources`t.., �. Stai4gnary sources? --- b. Deterioration of ambient air quality and /ax Interference with the attainment of applicable air quality standards? c. Alteration of local or regional climatic j conditions, affecting air movement:.,' moisture or, temperature? Biota Flora. Will the proposal have significant results P, In, a. "Change in the characterise cs of species, ` U Including diversity, dist,�bution, or number of any speciet� of';plaats? I ,s - - - - -- - - -tion R - - Reduction o the numbers ;fan unique, or pni`angered species of & ants? rare l Page 3 "L YBE Ntl l C. introduction cif new or d1sruptive spe.:iefi of -- plants into an area? d. ?eduction in the potential for agzculturai production? Fauna. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Change in the characteristics of species, including diversity, distribution, or numbers of any species of animals? b. Redaction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of animals? c. Introduction of new o:: s=ssrupt.ive species' of _ animals into an area, or re -iu?. ,t,,3 -x a barrier to the migration or movement of'animals? y _. d.,, Deterioration or, rgmeval of 't4ortkng fish or y� ' wildlife habitat? r r S. !Nation, Will the proposal have significant results in: a, Will the proposal alter the location, distri. l buLZni, densiri, diversity, or growth rate of the human population of an area ? -% b. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or 1 create a demand for additional housing? C,y ' 6 Socio- Ec6nomic 'Factors. the proposal have significant results in: a. Change is local or region? socio- economic i characteristics, Including Including economic or commercial diversity, tax rate, and property values? r b. Will project costs be equitably distributed among Project beneficiaries, i.e., buyers, t tax payers orproject users? ;. 7. land Use and Planning Coisii3drations. Will the I propsal have significant results in? a. A. substantial alterati,jn of the present or b planned land use of an area? b. A cotflict with any designations, objecr_iv" policies, or adopted glans Oay governmerjal f, -, a } x°.ntities? � a -ALL c. An impact upon the ulaity pr quantity - -- - � -C` _ eX2;SrXM9 —O ve or non-c nsumptive recreational , C f� opportunities? Ij Page ``4 d. 7ansoartat on. Will the proposal have zignifican -t - re�ults -inr a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular yam, Mevement? b. Effects on m /sting streets, -or demand for new strrnStrllCtion? .•_ c. Effects on existing parking facilies; or ` demand for new parking ?. = d. Substantial impact upon existing transporta- tion systems? e. Alterations to present pattefIas of circula- tion or movement of people and/or goods? f. Aiteratiosis to or effects on present and — Potential water - borne, rail, mass transit or air t,.sffic? g. Increases in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? 9. Cultural Resources. Will the proposal 'save significant results in: ` a. A disturbance to the integrity of archaeoloaical,�, paleontologi�'T"i�,_ and/or historical resources 10. Health. Safety,. and 'Nuisance Factors. Will the propail have significant results in: a. Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard? b. Exposure of people to potential health baza,ds$ c. A risk of explosion or release of hazardous substances in the event of an accident ?,,, h d. An increase in the number of individuals or species of vector or pat:enogenic organisms or the exposure of people to such organisms? ' e. Increase iv existing noise levels? 1 a f. Exposure of people to potentially dangerous noise levels? r' g. Thy creation oftoo�ectionable odors? M t/ ° p_- ff== -•; An increase In light or glare? , �� 7 Page 5 11, Aesthetics. Will the YES :SAYBW NO ' proposal have significant results in, a. The obstruction or degrad vista or view? ation of any scenic b. The creation Of an aesthetically offensive site? c. A conflict with the objective of designated or potentia? scenic corridors; 12. Ptil'ities and Public Services. Will the proposal have d significant :need for new systems, or alterations to the 'followin g a. - Electric power? VJ b. Natural or packaged gas? ✓/ c. Communications systems? _ d. Water supply? e. "w,asrewater facilities? —�! f. Floa$ control structures? ✓ g. Solid waste facilities? h. Fire protection? 1. Police protection? J. Schools? k. Parks or other recreational facilitiep? 1. Maintenance of public facilities :'including roads and flood control facilities? M. Other governmental services? 13. Energy and Scarce Resources. Will the proposal have significant results in: a, itse of substantial or e-ncessiVs fuel or energy? J b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy? c. An increase in the demand for development of r new soLrees of energy? _ d. An increase or perpetuation of the consumption of non- renewable farms of energy, when feasible ' *'�i1eVa61e_.aourea ..� ,•arAV �r?Y au_a3Zah7_a9 L Page �fl cal YES MAYBE NO, e. — Substantial depletion'of any nonrenewable or scarce natural resource ?' ✓ 14. Mandetory Findings of Si n #ficance. 0. Does the project have the pot :e;4t �aJ to degrade w the quality of -the environment; substantially =quce the habitat of fish or wildlife species, 1 Ca )e a fish or wi?dlife pcpplation to strop bL3C w self sustair.,.ng levels,_ threaten to eliminate a Plant or animal community, reduce I the number or restrict the range of a rare q endangered plant or animal or eliminate Y important examples of the major period. of Ca11;.vrnia history or prehistory? b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short -term, to the disadvantage of long -te vs, environmental ,:goals ?- fA short -term impact: on the environment; is one which occurs in a relatively brief, defi,titve period of time vhile long- y ';term impacts will endure,well� into the future). p! a. Does the project have - -impacts whim' are individually limited, but cumulatively i $� considerable? '(Cumulatively considerable means that the increme-tical effectfi of an.',,� indivI nn Gal projects, are considerable when viewed in coection with the effects of past projects, and probable future projects). 1/ d. Does the project have environmental effects - which will cause substantial adverse effects c±n'human, beings, either directly or indirectly? II. DISCUSSION 01' ENVIROt NTAL BPALUATFON (i.e., of affirmative answez*'.W' the above questions Plus a discussion of proposed mitigation Measures) ye- '.�e....,...iA•�.:ia......3t _.. ...4�tV_:1., r.eb .. ur.- - r „_...a_. ,?lt,� i ?age 7 IEI. DETER'2INATION On.the• basis of this initial evaluation. f Z I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the, environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will*,,ae prepared, i find that althou k the proposed g p P pro��ct dbuld have a. significant Li effect on the environment' there �til7rnot be a signifcant`effeat In this case because the mit3gatiof /�measures described on an " `�.ittached 4heet have been added tw.khe project.- A NEGATIVE D EGL�4RATION WILL BE PREPAREr�, f, ' I fir, the proposed pjKOjeCt ff y have'�a .signifi.cant effect on the envimnment, and an 771RONWM T IMPACT REPORT is1requi-red. � Date sigitature t _ , Title r yy: `1 "� � t t a RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE FE.RMIT NO. 84 -3B FOR UNITED METH6DIST CHURCH LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER. GF CHURCH STREET AND ARCHIBALD AVENUE IN THE LOW RESIDEN1 fiL OIS TRIG� WHEREIa on the 9th day of January,1985, a complete application was filed by United Methodist Church for review of the above - described project, and WHEREAS, on the 27th 'day of 1=pbruary, 1985,.the Rancho cucamonga{ Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider the �bbve- described project, NOW,. THEREFORE,,,(, the, Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission resolved as '�ollows: ri SECTION 1. That the following findings can *cannot�be met; 1. That the proposed use is in accord with the General Plan, the objectives of the Development Cade, and the purposes of the district in which the site is located. _ l` 2. That the. proposed use, together with the conditions applicable. thereto, *01 not be detrimental to the ; public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the - vicinity.`- 3. That ^:he proposed use .complies with each of the, _ applicable provisions of the Development Code, ` SECTION 2i� That this project, will not creQte ,adverse impacts oti 4 e_,._ environment and that a Negative Declaration is issued ofi February 27, 1985, SECTION 3: That Conditional Use Permit No. 84 -38 is ,approved subject to the following conditions: 1. The master plan .for the entire site is approved in concept Precise design and site plun' review will be rir uired for all proposed future phases. 2. Tite applicant shall utilize grey, or similar compatible color, for stucco columns and archways. 3, Special %andscapingtreatment shall- be provided s1 ; along Church' Street and Archibald Avenue (i.e., mounding, rockscape, clustering of trees, and meandering sidewalks) per City standards. l t ` �a S S ' Resolution No, - CUP 84-3,a Page 2 c 4. Trellis work shall be extended to tie into existing church. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 27th DAY OF FEBRUARY, 1985. PLANNING COMMISSION Oq,!THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCA14ONGh,, t} PY. Dennis L. tout, Btaiman _ ATTEST- Rick Gomez, Deputy Secretary ` I, Rick Goinez, 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 * day of *, I9 *, by the following voted -to -wit. AYES: COMMISSIONERS. NOES. COMMISSIONERS; i ABSENT: =' COMMISSIONERS; .c i i i �� I �e u`c`° F+m O 6 ;n�YgV C° °� 1fy Y•G L.eLU yC °3�Oap°i'°4� ,� N Rt LET LV _�.... f6iy ° C6�.m.6b..., lGi Sbq 00. gVC tnCyV°. byY�.. °, YgLgO ° CY b �ga'.Y EC =«s. _ ?R= caSc~ CVO+°o }NC Y 1 Cy4 EA n 1e Y&. g b \.1 O 6 nII Mm N i os,sa$u EaY°_q�a . bOB NN .- ji�b esr b LN N p'p4 T •! D SRR V. �, C b L �° ��b._ -. i• CM O�� J�. - � a¢°'a °'a •j. L ..� LoLPw LO.Y �a ` .�,C S• 4.. w L'c^yYp Rm GCpWQVO. NCC9 V. YN G°nOCp O. �j Yu Cg4Y `�jn .'i f s.YZ.3w ea� _� •gy.Y,as .. • n b0° a2° � i ° q�° � b W '�ii>r C<p -�4U'4 �+ L..V� OY�� V N� yO� . 6NYeGaINL4S� ��ii O gam -�i`.' M CM+• °' n M. Z VL+Y- ui+ U. 44�y 0 Owl e g�j 14 G.r N J ��q N as Y Y Cw.L 1r IIV I$w ; °�y ?? 5sa e r w f� , °O s >SOV u t K • ® N Ny a t. °U.. D O c` i v °y ga irk g- O c 3N em46 4Y4 i.t ca c ww n apO n u « E Qo e l °CY .a- t--- 9 W 6 a 4 4b qp a�yy q �i�� r w 3 Cyr Y° aEy v Vy „ y J n v C ° ° L ° u 4 w O • Y = O F Z T <S a • • � q yO� Y iiA � _ N NI +p yj y qJq 1 * i� 1 � •. _ �j � �L! d� „� `� (J Jam. ,_...b._ tL 'J 1, `O^ '' fjr n 'e.�. P•dU'!S .. yL �^ R C A VPL ti.D A n c .OdC � ._V\ C S.AG Oti..�y C.'OS. fr �`� O O Y p �Ca Yf`.Sw �pC• nA��,,ppO 9Y6 °�,A A Pu yN ^.0 VOfASbYasO�• N O.V Vim. ERR >N rn O � P � ^L yf��D! Z ieY1~O Vy NC �,n;Siy 'VP, igg9rN 1{Yf: a AV9 GAd a. 9uC > �Ra V h iO _ 4° Z . x Y ~ JP YT�t nN n O kuy 0 3 n iQ� '' xL wi� NL TTO Yt a g>N . N . '.0 o4J gg 'G n 'pp CO Y V i Dt( ® 5M •0 � L V � x 4 S K ^� cm V u •i '^ :.g q - IIyYV 1• ~ . ,u C O\ l •.^ � � #C �A� iL na UN >VY ^x�n L�U4 II s.d2� &per c ° oa cam. VicO JN. n'!i�h Y°C. v. .oia. 'a 4G1" IIC yL A X @4 ° .�� '. u mR'�� FOd sr3,.�•'a t�� 4Y.0 >.°- d'^ � Ce >T L O CX 6 O T V V N E VY� y L .Cn O• n T g 4 C `� o U • �yl O � C M H g C:A Cy.M Nhj. 'flA ^^ ~q" yIIV N >AG"VZ YC+C >P .Ytg.M C �P o Gn4 N^ �K. GZS yy.� 4 SNYYaE 4 Z- N B> rggv:Y ° __ - cy +�aYJ m r Y H N tY iay0 LU 5,— V Q o a• mayN V Ny P. t U a ..E > ° °w Mai €w yi .ago E�,_4,' L�Y�y Yn Y nA1 $cVE -_jL4 q� V =A� }va LO a¢i 4Y Y cy°P� ( aNS m Ryq LOf '^L4yy'p � yYd y0� yg¢ YC V 3 A V La t gY Sb4V1 dSC C'1 n'06 y.• n. �lf'i UL✓p. c CIIG O�OC' � vb {6 LXCzE V tz Vim Zy MA i tt >i tcNU V. p NN Veufp a XaCOCy Ny kX SN nci iY 4[AOe HVnV�+w O. plyµ e.�ys Ytwr^X 84 T Da G t >L �G +C >)Li..l '1CrN0 u�.� QYw.>a • 1 N 4` €, pMC V>f mow. 4 'OQ TV F•IIC y - _ L9 O~ 9q� �y`p L NY CM b . a�NXOa pC_ � �� s��yy• VO�'Gi Y�.�+�" • $ yL ��.i.. ppy8O n.Y L awvL.0 LaBR 4.1 S= a�n'�ayf GAVr. N °6a �yi i.lL LO O nOR b.v sK ~� °9O n n latC Vim%_•.. g�aO O?hVVd�� E. NGC �3 Oy Vyp a O 9,4-. m �Y nPNay' >fw YN4C(. E M �F +qU CC }Y.y Hi'l kp L ="^�'t1 �y YII� � i ' qW .ter° O V O i N •t A C. L.Q L� ^ uID Ofq Naw Ottamiyy ' nt NYO x�o oc lY�O ,j C yAd It s uvL !r �rCC1l �• ni, ��A. ..�¢� ua-S Rn� OCII O' �3CpNy`,' P Yp V2Z4 uCGp6 �e� LQ OrM O q+•dx �� yrR t U� X yL 'y ro ,pg `yC G00 °c Y4 d0 �T � J: M=4 �y NC�4 A II�� v > +' AYL Yom•+ >r= ° 4 Lyt C ��EnD O� �u FU.O N&C N �tf e,, .:; ° O d °� 4 V.°� b a� Yn ���� V3ss$•�1 'L �2� > r Ny �O F.. x LO GV� NU V -. V V tOa be}A.L G`O'yN Lti dt P Y♦ n ufC T II q Mc �LC�rNViA YE CySII"�r ��QOq C OY.,y"' i•a ° G ' Cn. VO �A ay°i U �4°Ci II CCUy n U ^� �YdtOY CAS O° TGCIIq��i 6� A CEY GGGG LL> 4 Vpp` DLO �"' }C�II 4YGw R. • \ r 4 OI�VZ d•OM � L .'n L �`UL V T ?Qn AY>a. ,V V[i i 6 #Vriy I D, L'�i'NO.+CrO+Np V1�S YY ..OIy�QQFN A.Cn+ H,r-2- HrCiR <AL p 1 H N II r Cl V1 D40�66 C�.rcr M jimpv Rw iA t m 4D� :+.V.�b 4ftd L E L N > Vy�✓ t }•Db d C 4�� F C•mD.i pi .Q L' -C �'U.> ydi U D b Y J C. C. . V. L 'C R06^ UtlY 3bYY UNNO -� Ryrsdi; `Q` AC4. N ii 4om c bpiD VCV IIVm i u� VOA �'1y LCD bCLL '�mY00 V ciQII U� w r� aC bey Ybya nRY �: L L�� -0 6 RQ� F=.ts- q Dt ^.R II4YR tlC 4qu R. `i _ W. z - LD yOtOtl C �p4 i7 mR� 4� SC ^=.. c tlF.3 �N �phOi 4J, ,lei T L4yN. yc6]. -.0 F GN �yMY mNS ~ A D Rm� dq�. T,Y E� Yk atYadM�yCk Y a L r c R IIN2C 9b G-�6 C C > m { C 9 Y Ult! y : N :�a r qq v�p . 4a g.D- a L bY. . � N �mB 2wLwN ^ sN 7 XY �I€ Y s!a�i. C br i r�tl 9y�0W Y ,y¢L L E ^y ttJJAm as py0 C �v 4hµ^ yY/ O` iI_TOU . �GY� r � +r `� O oCq d ^� � +IgyM dtl t(�aaOT ��y igaY l g �� aMN Y a js�tt'VA 34 p�D YZV^Qm ycQQ V Y N N N O ? S H -- �!+ YIId` CLC c N m gnd offom Z U tl G.� � W S Ny p m e Y�NM oD °m'o .s` 4u'L R N COCC00 CyT�'tC R4L.y��V. YL ^` 9 /Am'a. LLM6 60,80 a+b �Wo Ow~4 �Ly�C II� rt+YL11 C3 • G1d 4 m 5''r Sti t!.5 U �Lb -rc. tl >II �O �N C It Cb �CV 40 / NM1yI •! •�% dCS O. w.. CCS ^aw 4LL N>�Q O h 4. HC aVU boL b1: _ •Q E W � d yVC T q C a3iyY.� -y bqG ~ ECY NN di iCiUt Nr" > >C 1.2 ♦.i iLU ` RW.p Y 00 V�LL'N Y �W u q tIIISNYY .2 4d 4.'O�6N f Smi Vacs N N m �i ICY .JL 6�. YOC 6G .. IIaw. � d.� i 4 � �YYCw +O'.i C.6 mbC m4.aaL a..O�g OYm�+4 A.ORO' K L C�a+ ois CD m N � u 06 ,C✓ � i C c c a NLiC O• «.•c`a• Kq Cu HOC nN AHOY�4 xt f u qr a a6 �- R �C Ym 4 40. q,1 t�a� m~ 6bpi�' L: DLy4 h 4 MTm` E4.md✓ aCaO IIA_�I �.Y �N<Q qT. iiN y� N R V4 c 2T w_ 4^ ppP 9T y -� Oc E OOme�. �a� Z/s'..�y �� D+ ? �N r G R.II C3 b Ou �w Ld Cm L"c qai CRS pp €& \Y IIVn a >R v Rst b >aL�s Lp^ n,�ir.'`d <.b N •�•+�., Ny �F >m c W �= �m M.O �. Nc ri c�y .C.Vn..b L ap�Y G uqNK 4L O Sr4 Ate, t. i 3._ OC�«t m`� 4ti/Ftlb ��C,� Lnx C Y• `dR ', 4 U ap w Y N• O a' Y - A gIIk A C 4 :40 G � C R r L YIL Y Q � �, a""•�. m4.Ld �Clc CNU>i G.. �uN> Y.OM ,Ly � rib VR OaT mu Obe m U b> �,t _N GOL ci O.p >Ntl Oa4� C »R�3 N4C d.ub Y U V 'Al COwb�. Ly Y K� p L y L g Y 4 t 3tr `�y�CIIY Ny d '.: A1AIA16u6u6R F 4 .• �II Vtr GII F �i.. C mY Cy V um °y. i a 4�✓� Mr L Yna� •^•`Y„°. ma.m$ z « °' r"' r O m V O ��Y w44 Lb `�... _ a. i G N V t 0 C o. > V O. EN OR �� >y ...� d UYY µ 4LY p 4a. ♦N.i.. � p Y r Qtl Ym 4 tibti wO am LMip�8 y e C L Y4 O1 YAK tl>R i ��` Y Y p, SQb !-0 - 4V 4� tigN+G -A +f NG WYK04Z - N +vyigM 6N� SNC YMi N E w / ri 11 oc iy A r Y m Y N ; w N �• 4 w _ ~ L H Z � O�Y4 =r:NVN ODie �q VCS wCmY C EV u a NT Y+?N'.E $ GsfaRrNY �6^ r.4 Na G .y.G pgp@,, rU�Y t G O AY /✓ �. O ^ ;RU AyLQ.yN RL 71! . G$CrbN., ap My� >O A M 0t Y `1 p O CN - G K N. v Q R H DC 7 ZZ b a OLN1L e TE.;- A - ' Z N _O iiA bpp YL .p 1aY�Y }� Y4.NV� t wLQi.Y b�6d 4a: rn C bC44n6 N S+ Gilp W V W.4UOi SS.p G to NX7 VpY ^N ' CM v u r1 Y � �.� t ♦Y tV LOS a w 4!4 01 M G ♦. NC 4 b zz q( 4 34:2 o yY. R -^ ' ,ubt� fi pp tj.Nty VIL p` i1 Y„CQ„ Y W a .. 2 DS �` G :R ' ' Vauu+ i r�q Y Y� � R Cd � � �O L • Q •V. C V G 2. Cif ' b C . a. f •„RS c. vu. a» ��� °,f g9« Nw i 4 ocwa�. u. o - RG a vWUN V R Y V YR n QC w V• W � Y/1 �p gCpL ` t CF 3 !AA= y � � G' p V pw r O.E G� pq a. rQ C a•R.t G C �ppO�. p "o ° ErM ++ 4i �ry u « G =« ...C' Rey y'�W•OT �. �u RLL w�V Cmil '. ny gR try +OY J.- 4. r D qw Cn Ci VRR CVL_ .rvY tt YY. Lb p4pG T Y 40y VIO= . q�a4 O ... k7-L. C 'A C V Lt �� l6pp!�En 4 NQ4G H L SL44nr r"�4 ff y ..0. 4^' G w q. C.^ AQ ZL • yt Y ' NQY u��ii Y.� O •Z pA� gaS0 °Y O ^� NL -2 '. �4 tl L i~�O @tl ♦C NdL G3 q6�s @9 Oy ^O VO� 3 qC�� V p.p. C pytl Y4N tlY +4 Oa + s°+ d ay.ZbN w,4Ynga La T^ cZe-C aasur yOY CL4Y —j"z YNy OS Yd`q y •}o. eie c O tlrSVL4 N°ao� madp ° 9 a EGG 6.b bV � 4 fi T 64 at* g C..O% q a44 GT O� <: 9. Z a~' y,�a•-as= Y4 .�N 4N p? O Ko YO @ aG 9'C+OII4 • gg0'O RP:CL p�H L 4,2 LO @as. 4-,.'1'. 6.Y d'e ti1VVN+' ° C tl4 IIE �%� Q,ar uN H 9 q ~• _ �..� .. 777 o � � � �' v v as N NCr.N' � cY v t tea. o °C • •aL a Z ZIP. a .!%. • d R R L 44 C r.-. �p - 43 d 9 9 a a a Y> O 1 1C N NHQ.Ra�a3ty C c � o•�-ii or i - 4 9... a @ •O ° ° � �o� ='" s s�o iN+u .N+u de a• " "� °�.. 2 2.V ..Y ` Nw Y �p ` � N •�• Y Yc N N1a ad d4 NY N Nca �Am N N.t B t tl /t C CZ . .�4 . .5. @yC Q O YOl } C C,y. y ' '. -L u=o a <@ 6 6M444 K KYr+ 4K <C.i W�F O a LM E EP �1 r S l d � � Z Za N N C q q glM Yp b b ^ ^ L Y Ye a6 ' '.�. C16N� a aN YI i. Ol „ y V „ P A6 a � �rqy,� = �g'G a4i C!9i�4p L Lj 4o2 C 0 Y N E t a ~ W Fy Vr r -u BI I � DitA� Ya µT6. a N W� c` N v.l L L b C4 • qqN Lam. L N P � � v a i. ¢Ty-K DX »� R m y p pc y X Q ins yVL°� ESE C. ga w Y Rt Z.d Cwt+ �W D,q ° jYi? M C� L O r4M it ge G iy S M1w Y €a mq Y � �C ° y y E Ds a� V U °P ZZ C Gu ~wL IIY.Pdq M7'4 �� R Y.Q � uY O V'aw+ � IILN wd O gi C C 'ai G R P y y 15 ap ,b C xix i t s ..R yrr C P A w � ^� !� u_�$ w� p W A 3 iC•r Im. n GW - A� L q V qY Yy f ��. RY Oq c dRW d L� LQ t cif °TrC y= ° QO DM.Y _T Ny Day � �..CC..E L V iV 3 d LT4 G R 1-�'`p g z C 0 Y N E t a ~ W Fy Vr r -u 1 .2-0 BI I p Ya µT6. y 5 u� �a W� c` N v.l L L b C4 • qqN Lam. L N P � � v a i. ¢Ty-K DX »� R W r.'3r X ins yVL°� L C. ga O c P.ct �W D,q Z-V S+w- Lam) L O r4M it ge G iy Wy� 6 R� cC U Y Q Y S V ~ E Ds a� c � G. .b.. � C... M7'4 1 .2-0 BI I p y L L b C4 • qqN Lam. L N P � � v a i. p »� R 4y W yVL°� L C. rwtiV O c P.ct 3 Y� D,q Z-V S+w- 4 RL L O r4M it ge G iy Rrpy R� cC U Y Q Y M Y6 ~ E Ds a� G. .b.. � C... M7'4 gi C C 'ai G R P y y 15 ap ,b C xix i t s ..R yrr C P A w � ^� !� u_�$ w� p W A 3 L L b C4 • qqN Lam. L N P � � N3YY ~x' 1. Y�� ~� i. ZUm »� R s. w uc �+ c P.ct M Y6 ~ E Ds a� G. .b.. � C... M7'4 gi C C 'ai G R P y y 15 ap ,b C xix i s ..R yrr C P A 4�. Ry.� � ^� !� u_�$ w� p W A iS t+r O N V iC•r Im. n GW - A� L q V qY Yy f r r'' s L •. V � t d nL aµs wucC o4yytl= . r 1 AIL sc u. .•9 e. N N e L aYir - /�� � O o � � O � u ACJ9 ° CY C C9 V C a Lt C ' VVG ,:Y �9 •Ya. � � U < .Er:. Yy .'iii ..° ^' ,°..pq L AL E NVpY Lp a^ o GS ypC Y �Ln °L� AL N u Yom 4r YQ X. Nu ;e+ F: tiara 4N� X94°. Cam» C� YCU°'Cj� CO 6y �' N '• 4s c... N u. a K c, r� a - 1 i\ v e oz, 44 ID .G..a !��^!irjRg. 'y�!$�,..J�iye, E!'li..h:'r «�... •.�'4fi4_�r" n .. � . � �� r v .iYYily ?a 9 CITY & RANCHO CUCAMONGA $TA1 ° REPORT �►1 T a, $ z t a' DATE: February 27, 1985 1977 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commissfiort FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner .' BY- Dino Putrin�,;' Assistant Planner Y SUBK"'T: ;� ENVIRONMEN`fAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84 -42 ORATE The establishment of a .church facility in a. ,c70 square foot; area of an existing `5,560 square foot multi- tenant industrial building within the General.' industrial area (Subarea 4) located on the so-oth side of 6th Street and the 'east side of Archibald Avenue - APN 210- 07 -48. l I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action_ Requested: Establish a church -use wk thin a multi - tenant industrial building. B. Purpose: Provide church 'facilities for the applicant's congregation. C. Location: 9373 Archibald Avenue, Suite 504, D. Parcel Size: 5 acres E. Existing Zonino: General Industrial' is F; Existing Land Use: Multi tenant Irdustrial - (Archicenter),' G. 'Surroundinq Land Use and Zonin f fort General sud trial Subarea 4) , South - General Industrial,°(Subarea 4) East - Vacant,, General Industrial (Subarea 4) Best - General Industrial (Subarea 4)/Industrial Park (Subarea 16) N. General Plan Resignai:ions: Prole -It Site - General Industrial North General Industrial South General rhdustrai v East y General Industrial ' PL4NVIH6 COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Conditional Use = permit 84 -42 - Orate - Fpbruaryf27, 1985 Page t I. Site Characteristics: The proposed use is proposed within a , single unit r�-)i a multi- building mult i- •tenant industrial complex center (ArdrScenter, see Exhibit "d") The tenter consists of eight (8) detached multi- tenant buildings. The entire site' parking availability is approximately 175 spaces. 1j " H. ANALYSIS: A. Back-ground: In September of 1983 the Planning Commission approved the establishment of a Moose Lodge in the - easternmost unit of building number 600 (see kxhibit "P). The Commission limited this use to 40 parking',-,,?aces and required an automatic,, review bf the application in tw (2) years (September 1985). B. GeneraTr; The proposed church use is is to be located ih Vie easternmost unit,.-' 3 f building number (see Exhibit "B ").- The ° major- issue ireiated to institutional uses located within industrial areas is 'compatibility with surrounding tenants in terms of parking availability.; The parking area for building` 500 is directly south of the building. The available parking spaces to be shared by the four units in building 504 and flour units in building 400 ir, twenty six (26). Existing tenants currently U this complex have traditional dayti hours of operation. However,.; the Moose Lodge occasionally serves breakfast to its members on Sunday mornings at the same time c the proposed church use would hold services. The available parking spaces for the Moose Lodge are located on the adjacent north side of and logically west of, building 600 (26 spaces4't north and 14 spaces west) and would not conflict with the" church use. The required parking spaces for I the proposed church use is approximately 32 spaces based upon seating. The parking area- to the southwest of building 500 could logically be designated `a as additional parking for the proposed church facility. It appears that since the parking areas for buildings 500 and 600 are distinctly separated, the parking impact would be minimal, during overlapping operating uses, between the ; existing Moose Lodge and the proposed church facility. In general, institutional uses within industrial buildings are permitted for a limited period of time, typicaTly two (2) years. in addition, most institutions utilize these structures only on a temporary basis, pending relocation to a perma"nt site. Lastly, previously approver} institutional uses have located in industrial park areas which ar e required to prayide ' a higher, parking ratio, thus reducing th risk causd'oty overlapping activities. i B` t ; I PLANKING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Conditional Use Permit 84 -42 - Orate ° February 27, 19S5 4; )) Page 3 f C. Environmental Assessment: The proposed project has been determined -to be a categorical exemption 'a(Cm ifornia (Environmental Quality Act guidelines, Section 15302, Clas\. 1) - in which it will rot have a significant effect on ` he environment and which shall., therefore, be exempt from:..ihe 4 provisit?ns of GEQA. III.: FACTS FOR FINDINGS:,," The proposed project is consistent with, the Industrial Specific Plan. ii ►e Oropored use, togather with the recommended Conditions of Apprava-1, will not be detrimental to the public health or materially injurious to-_ properl ies in the vicinity. a 'J l ri IV CORRESPONDED +E: "This item has been advertised as a putil1 -c heari /,a in The Da�eport newspaper, tfi� property posted, and notic s were sent Lis property owners within 800 f4t,of the project site. "o date, no correspondence has been recieved' either for or against ' this ro eet: /1 p 3 .` , V. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Cornn 6s +jon approve Con ltional Use Pe snit 84-42 ,through adoption. o � the attached Resolution with Conditions. 1 Re ectfu bmitted,;, Planner \ ; (RG:DP:ns G _ li Attachments: Exhibit "A° - Uidinity Map ' Exhibit "B" - Site Plan Exhibit RC" - floor Plan J Resolution of Approval r q ZI 'ff t1 s i x t .a }; / V E C7 :aoa 6 r 03 S 4w c i.00 ftQS AC VA i Lift 20 " .. � ft. PKA� - a'7 0 i &l. 13sCwA P 4 .IFM 7.7EdC 1 0 ; 7 t9 1 != SAN "BERNARDINO i MRTH eli,Y CAF >r 1TF.:St Cuter -- C1 RANCH O gU(;k'1� 0NGA 'T ITiE: V1ctt�,i PL INC; 13WI�IQ�I E�C%iIBIT= /� �� y � SGAIt .. ` S. �l I - I - oo - � x it xo •` �� s ,, � 1 f Y NORTH CITY rrEM- CQP RANCHO CUCAMONGA TrrLE -�T� PLkNNI ING DIN'ISIOV i.YT ltt3tT= '' `i =' ALE .mss �l t►AT r+e•DTesy ibar+tCCC _`'• J 'I?= (��Mtiv.eras e+a `•� • .d7 9 1.. 5i.i .�`I •` '� jy Pte. • � � '• k �3. J i,.r. .� i T �E� -C.Y7. .o,,aro!„tF.�w.4 r•� �t i ��•' i .. i t h 1 � �IM':•N^+IW 4fet.4- Ni � n I! a k I F .:y MalbLfCGiRdCtLL A0. _ �� •'�+' � KY.• 'ullcs(arrssarc #urcc) • I r t y- I r ii7511L -%411 `,� I St �y •Ilnenal � ?-M 1,504 MRy g V4 '• ivD 1 <Rq b • .. �� "mow _ "d •� #�'J ^.4t1- �r••�_yt 1S;6r• ri f �•�� ri ° V oa ..a _ FORTH Ci i i O I\7 -Iii reel! I TITLEt PLANNING rISiUA j EVCHIMT: t' s ALE. .4 5 RESOLUTION NO. A RI jOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLA :ANG COMMISSION , APPR'MNG CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 84 -42 FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A CHURCH FACILITY - LOCATED AT 9275 ARCHIBALD AVENUE, SUITE 504,- IN THE GENERAL INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT WHEREAS, on the 18th day of December, 1984,: a complete application was filed by Jim Orate for review of the above - described project; and WHEREAS, on the` 27th day of February, 1985, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission hel&) a public hearing to � onsider the- above- described project. NOW, THEREFORE, the Rancho Cucamxrnga Planning Commission resolved as follows: } SECTION 1: That the tol lowly findings can be met; i 1. That the proposed Use is � n accord with the General Plan, the objectives oft_iha Development Code, 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 v� injurious to properties or improvements, in the / vicinity. 3. That the proposed use cumplies with each of the. \ e I appliCdble provisions of the;Devel.opment Code..` SECTION 2: That Cotditional Use Permit We. 84 -42 is approved-=- subject to the following conditions: 1. This Conditional Use Permit shall be reviewed by Planning Commission after a 2year period. t 2. Large group meetings may occur only on weekends and after 6:00 p.m. on weeknights.`' 3. No institutional activities will he permitted which exceed the available parking or cause adverse effects upon surrounding businesses. Should any problems arise, this Conditional Use Permit shall be i brought back to the Commission for reconsideration. �. CUP 84-4 �( Pak 2 4. Public assem'Ay or other laYige group meetings shd not occur diAl S� ch time Is all Ugifdrm Buildinq z7 Code . and TitTe 19 of thei State fire Marshall's Regulations have been compli`d with. 5. Any t�uture exp' on or `on ensification of the use shall require a msdificAtionjjof this Conditional Use Permit. APPROVED' AND aDtfPTE .tHiS 27ChDA'I OF FEBRUARYS IBS, a PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE''CITY OF RANCHO �UCAMONGA BY; Dennis L. tout, .Chairman AfxEST: Rick somec, Deputy Secretary j i fi fr I, Rick Gomez, Deputy Se etary of the Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby that tCommission anning Commission of the City of certify the regularly introduced, passed, and adpptedj foregoing Resolution was duly and by the Planning Commission _GAF the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular muting of the Planning Conmissiod'heid _ on the 27th day, of February, 1985, by the ;jfollowing vote -to -wit; AYES; COMMISSIONERS; NOES: COMMISSIONERS �. ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS i. �I ; L 'j - l� CITY OF WTCHO CUCAMONGA i vcA ro T A71F REPORT Y o 0 DATE: February 27, L4g5 TO.. Chairman and Members of the Planning, Commission 1( FROM Rick. Gomez, City Planner i BY: _Dan Coleman; Senior Planner SUBJECT:- ERVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT M0 COND "iTIONAL USE PERMIT 8431 - DIVERSIFIED PROPERTRS - The deve opment of an integrate shopping center.of approximately 118,9%% square feet, which includes 4 qaseline service ,statiof, as a proposed :,4se.,I and a conceptual —master plan foil- Future phases, all on -abaS acres of land in the Neighborhood Commercial (NC) n,�,trict generally located '4t the northeast corner of Highland Avenue and Haven Avenue - AP 201- 271-53. f, I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: 'L A. Action Requested: Approval— of site plan, elevations, 1�nd l issuance of a Negative Declaration. `l 8. Purpose Multlln�ase development of a neighborhood shopp�n' Eoter. _> a C. Location: East side of Haven between Highland and lemon. D. Parcel Size: Fifteen (15) acres. E. Existing Zoning: Naghbailrood Commercial. '+ J F. Existing Land Use Vacant. Surrounding Land Uss and Zoning: North - Single family res dentaal Law Residential. South Vacant; Low, Residential. East:, Vacant; Medium -High Residential. West - Vacant,; apartments, service station; Medium s Residential and Nerghbarhood Commercial. H. General Plan.='°ns anations: c 4. 7oject ite �retisyborho0 Commercial. Borth - Low Residentialll South Low _Residential. -� �t East Medium -High Residential. West Medium Residential and Neighborhood Commercial. % ITEM L PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF WORT Conditional (Ise Permit 84 -31 - Divers ifIeQ `,. _ _ February 27, 1'985 ` Page 2 I. Site Characteristics: The project site is vacant and slopes to ;l the south at approximately 4 to 5% grade. -_ A sparse east -west Eucalyptus windrow traverses the middle of the site. j It. ANALYST ` A. General: Access to the shursing center will be p; ovided via the new signalized intersection 'at Alta Loma Drive with F proposea temporary access'to Highland Avenue for Phase It The ` shopping center will be anchored by a major grocery store that will suppopt a variety of retail shops, 30,000 square feet of : restaurants, and a service station. Phase I construction wilt inciude..a majority of the northerly 11; -acres of the site. B. Issuei: The first issue regardinq to site and lacement of =the buildings 'relates to edestr"aLn o ertation ; and amenities.' Tile General Plan encourages pe estridi�'fbicycle orientation versus automobile orientation for the neighborhood shoonng centers. To implement these policiis, the Development Code shopping center criteria were developed to require that "vehicle and pedestrian access is- coo- dinated and logically linked to provide a comprehensive circulation system.° Further, the Development Code ,requires that neiyhborhool, ' shopping centers be "planned- as a group ---� organized uses ano-' structures." The proposed site plaii, -Lx ibit "C% indicates five satellite buildings along Haven Avenue. A pedestrian linkage is provided frm the main project entrance on Haven Avenue through -the parking area to the retail shops, then 1 easterly to connect with the Lan Bentsen apartment project. ." series of three playa areas have been provided at various , vocations within the eenter. The si'cond issue is whether the urooasecf architectural design s cnnSi_stent with the objectives of the General Plan armf - Ueva%Atment Code. - Both the General P` ) an" Developmen%�Code policies and design 9, dLi -_fines mhas� i strong ar,, textural character within �teighborhood shopping centers. The Development Code states That, za recognizable design theme shall be established for each building. That thike shall be one which creates a, harmonioes-. building style, forty+, size, ` color, material and roof line, t it relates to surrounding existing developments,/ planned or Individual structures shall create and enhance a high quality and lia_onious community ; appearance.' The prop;.sed elevations indite the use of those design elements familiar to Southern' Cal fornia shopping center S deign, such as, machine applied exterior plaster, and canopy overhangs with concrete tile roof materle,,,i In addition, river J rock, good, veneer, bay windows and other afthitectural details - have been added below the canopy lire,: ,4 J SY` PLANNING WISSION STAFF REPORT Conditional Use Permit 84 -31 - Diversified - February 27, 2985 Page 3 - - c \` C, Design Review Committee: The Design Review Committee hat' reviewed this project on two separate occasions and expressed concerns regarding the significance of , ;this shopping center based upon location on a Special Boulevard and future freeway visibility. The following is a summary of the main issues and applicant's solutions: Site Plan: A major pedestrian fiscal point 'ould be provided by creating a large plaza connected to smallax, plazas. Smaller plazas should be emphasized in terms of pedestrian amenities and human -scale design. Solution: Applicant redesigfred storefronts ,to orient towards provided pedestrian features (W4L�, seating, shade trellis) Pakin_= A landscaped entrance statement should be provided by eliminating parking on both sides of main entrance drive and \• expandj!!j pedestrian linkage from Haven. Solution: A;r¢li cant— - �iainated' some, but not ail parking spaces along ma,ii�rfihe—. Pedestrian linkage expart ed to 15 -25' in width: Building Locations :, Corsbine buildings or group them ,,to eliminate multiple satellite buildings along Haven which fragment site plan. Solution: Plaza `provided between, two buildings',north `main ,of entrance and between Pad #1 e-4 building to the south. No buildings combined:` . Architecture: Create a strong architectural theme using rustic materials e.g., storie, wood), variable storefront setbacks, and roof heights, details (e.g., paned windows, bay windows, l,jhts), and colors. Solution:. Storefronts underneath canopy redesigned witl) river ' rack and deWlin,g. Signs: Stq"riteria for center, except ma4or ten0ts, should be of�a generic style with a single letter style and color. Solution: Applicart proposing no uniform letter style',and A' four °color palette (simiilar to Gemco Center program PLANNING COMISSI4N STAFF REPORT Conditional Use Permi} 84 -31 - Diversified February 27, 1985 Page 4 D. Grading Committee: The Grading Committee hail significant concerns regat�l ng the proposed cut a , fill of the site that would create s(gnificant sl pe heights oit the south side of „ Lemon Avenue and at: the southeast t.orner 'of the pr ,)ject site. Further, the proposed retention basin located in tS� southerly portion of the site was not considered acceptable from an engiineerirn a :d drainage standpoint and therefore nas been eliminated from the grading plan,`, Exhibit G. Phase I _ construction Vould be acceptable from a drainage standpoint if exi sting, floss in Haven Avenue north of the project were taken off- at, the Alta „Lma basins. This would permit Phase I drainage onto Hagen Avenue. cRegarding t ,developmenG_q Phase II, construct?on`'will require ibstal_,�tion of the `master,; planned subdra' -t or.an acceptable altercate drainage solution.` The balanc, of the undeveloped Phase I should drain into the adjacent master planned storm drain to be installed liy the adjacent apartment project. Based 'upon the Grading Committee's F , input, the Design Review Committee approved the cut and fill sly a heights subject to condition for dense landscaping tre merit to soften the appearance of the slopes. - E. Env4 rnnental Assessment: Part I of thdr1nitial Study hks been complte ed by the app cant ;` staff has completed Part II of the Enviroi,pental Checklist _aria determined that although the proje;W` could: t,-le a significant effect on the environment in k terms �Q+f drainag' and traffic impacts, there would not be a significant effect in this case .because the mitigation measures described: on the attachmert, t4 the Initial Study will be required as Conditiow ✓t Approval to the project,, If the Commission concurs wi li" said findings, then issuance of a Negative Declarat. "-i=would b- ;,Warder. III. FACTS FOR FINDINGS' in cons eAng , :the proposeG C.Jnditional C `" Permit, the Panning '"ission must make the Findings that the proposed project design acrd site is consistent with the Development Code and ql-neral :Plan pa's {ties described above for neighborhood shopping centers. "Further�� the>proposad development, together with - the Conditions-.of Approval, m412it not be detrimental or cause signi'- =rcant adverse environmental Impacts, - -_- - IV, � i2RESPONDENCEt This item has been advertised in the Dail -y- "Report newspaper,: the property posted, and notices were segt � property , owners within 300 feet of the project situ To date, no correspondence has been viii' or against this project. — s , n PLANNING COMMISSION S`t'AFF REP4RTii' ,:C"ditional Use Permit 84 -31 - Diversified February 27, 1985 Page 5 o V. RECWMENDATION: If, the Planning Commission can support the Facts � for Findings,Fa Resolution of Approval with Conditions is attached i fors, your con?_I ration., However, if the Piannin ion C q ormtiss cannot support the Facts for Findings, then the project" should be denied° ns ncons =Ti nt. with the Development Code and General. Ply 4o tit J` R(, J 1y dub jitt4d , ' � a R''clt mez O 1 , ty lann`er,., ,. ns : ,2achments- E;IOit "A" - ,Location Map d Exhibit -8" - Site iii i Ii. at�Un Map f Fxhibi: "C" - DL ailed Site Plan - Exhibit "D", -Landscape Plan Exhibit "E"` -Plaza Details ' iExhtbit '!F" - Lighting Plan 6hibit 'G" - Gradfng;3Plan Exhibit "G -1 -.Grading Sections . Exhibit "H" -1- Hydrology Map "I" ,Elevations Exhibit -- ,Exhibit " J" - Starefront Elevations_ Exhibit IV - PerspertiVeSL and .Lemon Avanue Section , Initial ;Stud;;, Part sl Resolution of P,pproval , ?� YC✓ , L J .�Y� _ 1 x �x t� L �i .. Irll�lli■1��lil i� ����:��,� n r. s�� � - �t ss _ .., Illiii �1/ � '° ; ° Ilrl F H�"� � ili � � '� II y� �i � '4 r� � �`5`5���� %�,. ::5�:� - ' --- - � ■rat tisia3r �! �� �a�_4i � rr ■ C' ®Q r .: == .. `1 ��,.1. y �a �i iS iii- �! �: .s:.�. it ul � �� � � S�' � r17 _ 333 . r • « > ' � 1 'n rr {t S► y ! �.� sr ar •R , t �.cica..cw� p. 1 i' �' ul' .lr f � i r .,.. f �. .. 1 == `v � � S„"�1�- 76s^,.IF�3 C►4 �I��CMQ dYW 4TLV11,d�i V/lltYto '�4`v'uWa MN,: � � i -. 'M �/A1i133N11At3 179YNY xi7Y14tLt7gYN: 06[ fcia�v L ?'•i' �n 2% : v am"', ,ussi s� y' s+rw.ayv 1,� l' a�avcw✓ � �; I// �it •2. _ t; 3�([ � � mot• �" NU ajej �g- f ! d 1 1; o --sa.v , •» Y 7 1 i f• Y 1 t � g P n fa its y} - � '�•- q�L"' '�,�� (L ' .�.' �4�� --- {ice''` rj-'� -,�� ,�` ; � ! � ' o NYrd rc u3mdroJNSOO� NY t 1 / Wo, / 00191 i WNW CNVIRSH 3 Wiz I W g`g Hip, CL tx A. 9tY13Ar ti0W31 Nvu 3dv*s4FV-j I �,�Mwye* vwmv=P"0-4 IMILOMWO I —)VIM N3AVH it NM � �i JIL E n h RH I s 1 r, h � � `. � �� '` ._ r _ •` \ \sue � t .. 11 � 1� x{96. AY (iii) •i.¢ .'t �,� L _ � ����. •�.. � �'� r� {j.,_,. >e-1 _ y� � y ,fit ilk .i —sue =r. , , ::�o" aMY,Y%✓'J91r;W.- Xa/Ar .A. J.*!�G*,aY�,pCIJ�r� � � _ '� n 3 I, Tk ,�- ;,..�,'i . „f J � � �j•��J ^�-4 -. lx� � Y�` _ Y�, '�ri �� .mot I .,4,, �. } � :S'•Zii -'l i1 --�i -Y� ` ":1� .A�� f•` -v �5�_.�"T i � � y� �'^ � _ j1 iM' r.. � '/.jam yr • ijl NN kt- .14 •� ^� .� �..Ti ^�! "�. � Y'�j1, 1'� ,� n �"._ -- -16 is, t L, � In fit, � \� r j 11 `�~ }'fj� s• �1 ' - L x • t �+r�t l N�saN, rf� I7a �Fiq'f C ra r .4N, �s un a- ,S > c' i� K s q4� 1 y� .`F`N'�.w�:FC � P• i• .. - t F r c` r Pa .. a d' � ? � • � ', s `j " ' `T '1Srn�`rX �'! 7 f ly'} a l eil /0701-02 o 2-27-85 PC Agenda o 5 .of 5 ,� a 'S`; s- Y �. t FC�`. T, '�± � � � el. .. 4 r 'mss«, k � —"�,r ' dry ��, t} � w -i t �t� t ;' =�,y 4 � lq +� � 1 t � i.9 � l .t.,�;� y � � r f^ 2 i � �" {... yep y�, �.A �, * -». x, '^ e �.� . -0i. th — .� _ + � , �� ��I �4 _;. ,.., , :�s;�,. . fir. ^Kl irk. 6 CITY OF RANCHO CQCA14ONGA PART II - INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONW= CHECKLIST DATE: APPLICANT- FILING DATE• �f�� f' '` LOG NUMBER: _- FRO. SECT. - ! 4✓�'.,��PT��J�'FG�jwi/ �%/ /Y� c r�if ��c� -- (�-- PROJECT LOCATION: � /tS tl� � 17�CT/� �(�✓� I. MWIRANMENTAL IMPACTS (Explanation of all 'ryes" and "maybe" answers are required on attached sheets). J 1/ YES HAYBE NO 1. Soils and Geolopv. 'Vill the proposal have significant results in: a. Unstable ground conditiops or in changes in i geologic relationships?'l�, b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or burial of the soil? � n. Change in topography or ground suf face contour intervals? ✓ d. The destruction, covering or modification of any unique geo c or physical features? r 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? g. Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards suO, as earthquakes, landslides, mud - slides, ground failure, or similar hazards? t_ h.,: An increase in the rate of extraction and /or use of any mineral resati,ce? 2. &dro OAS+. Will the proposal have significant' results itt: Page 2 YES I MAYBE NO a. Ehanges in currents, or the course of direction of flowing streams, rivers, or ephemeral stream channe?'a b. - Changes in absorption cares, 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. Discba,.ge into surface waters, or any alteration -' of surface watert aiity? I -- f, A teritign of groundwater characteristics? 1 g. Change in the quantity of groundvaters, either through direct additions or with- Oy drawals,, or through interference with an aquifer? Quality? Quantity ?' b. b. The reduction in the -.mount of we� other- available for public water supplies? _ ^� I. Exposure of people or property to water _ related hazards such as flooding or seiches? 3. Air Quality. Will the proposal have significant results in`: a. Constant or periodic air emissions from mobile or inRrb6i cources2 >r 5tati ma so' �� ry �• rces? b. Deterioration of ambient air quality and /or Interference with the attainment of applicable air quality ,standards? C. Alteration of local or regional climatic 1 conditions, affecting air movemont, moistuze or temperature? / _ l 4. Biota r Flora. Will the proposal have significant resul s r , r a, Change In the characteristics, af species, including diversity, distributiowi or number of any species of plaf.zs? b„ Redua.tion- of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of } i" Q� �� plan pp? / FP T �B i C� I ,I , _ we Species of w or disxup 1 of ne n cultuxa '' lnttodurto an area vial gox as t. plants in the poten results - lted °ct', oa? ave �nt d, duct'L a1,b it pro *ill the pxopos o. s4ecibexs, € a�na• existic cation+ °x ia• man ue In d tne °e xs £L ar lsry , pY °�`�Ate�+ taxi y incl d specs o xs of 15�: o£ anY a a�°be a an?°'a ies o£ o£ tt' atlas ve spec xLyeC E Bedu i n axe S4 dl5xupt isr a ba { ct d b ` ox enda & o£ nee of oxfes�o£ an mal -y lntxod °c i�o o a° a o Sovjlm4TL ng f�'sb o= i c • an ;t'ale �igxaticn oval �f �iSti to th at � / Lf cant ex�oxatlbltat? s�' d. �� ldll£6 ba z j t1z � =�oposal o� 4tir �1 { ~ ovation+ sate, To�uZ;at!i° }a' <. alter t1�e ax gx�sWtb i 5 • re the 4xo t+J Cql� to + 06 ns ;ng� o't Will daps ,�S,ati °L Stlno nq eban yTa, 1 a££�ct exal Y.ais;ave J� p5a adds x pog f o jl 4Ii1� th apanL us tie p o . 1 . b` createactoxs• econom #c sot ;a �� sat; . exults ice. xe�la nleG 4 °m� d F b• sl$nlf 'S.oea� ois'e itibxate, �' ch�ge in sties tY+ t a' c}, cv e a1 61vet—f 1tab1� Dist lbuted exci buses �teluesq be ees+ i•e.+ _, bene£i aexs'• 111 the pill ,o]ee` xojec ns• b 4ay.'xs orr 4/ Consfde u ox ✓ "�'' and Vse lia a sigma f 1�attion of the pxesesit 7 • proposal r. tial altexa $r axes? f oil ante , a• A s nc land use ° desi ""' ojo anY °uex 41an With atied pia °s ct of 1: nO%l ox adop uany itY b • �' 01� ties a m ty °x 9 ti`Je e¢tltieg. the Au1'ino cpes�? ° ct upon tile �` ties ' u 'M / s Page 4, li ; Jt, YES ;fAXSE No 8, Transportation, Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular movgmenr? b. Effects on existing strests,or demand for new street construction? C. Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new parking? d. Substantial impact upon existing transporta- tion systems? L` e. ,Alterations to present• patterns ofic'irc4l4` tion or movement of people,aud /or' goods? f. Alterations to or effe�,ts on present and Potential water - borne, rail, mass transit or air traffic? g. Increases in,traffic hazard to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? 9. Cultural Resources. Will the proposal have - significant results in: a. A disturbance to the integrity of archaeological, paleontological, and /or historical resources? 10. Hualth, 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 haaardous substances in the event of an accident?> d. An increase in the number of individuals or species of vector or pathenogeAc organisms or the exposure os) people to such organisms? e, Increase in existing noise levelsxj f. Exposure of people to potentially dangerous' noise levels? —� / g. The creation of objectionable gdors? h. An increase in,ight or glare? /r °--a.: 4. II � � t l • Page 5 5 r/ Y 11. Aesthetics. Vill t YES MAYBE NO the proposal have significant _ results in: a. The obstruction or degradation of any scenic vista or view? b• 7Che 'creation of an aesthetically of ea; i31e site? c. A conflict with the objective of designated or potential scenic corridors f f/ 12. Utilities and Public Services. Will the proposal have a a significant need for new systems, or alterations to the following; a. Electric power? ` `+ b. 'Natural or packaged gas? C. Communications systems? -- d. Rater supply? - e. Ifastewater facilities? �— � , f. Flood control structures? S. Solid waste facililies? h. Fire protection? , r, I. Police protection? , J. Schools? k. Parks or;a'ther recreational facilities? " " 1. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads and flood contro? facilities? m. .Other Page 6 YES i%YBE No p. Substantial depletiort_o£ any nonrenewable or ^� scarce natural; resot rce? 14. Mandatory }windings of Sirtni£icance. \� 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 com4unity, reduce the number or restrict the range of 'a rare or endangered animal plant or or eliminate important examples of the major perods;of California history or prehistory? 1 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 iisre while long- term impacts will endure well into the future} c, Does the project have impacts which are Individually limited, but cumulati 1 considerable? (Cumulatively consider means that the incremental effects of iW' individual project are considerable when vowed 3r connection with the effects of past projects, and probable future proje,:.ts) d. Does the project have enviionmental'effects which will cause substantial adverse effects 1 on human beings, eithbr directly Or indirectxy? 2T. DISGUSSIOH of R, RONMENTAL EVALUATION (i.e,, of affirmative the answers to above questions plus a discussiol of Proposed mitigation measures . Y �•� ,g # CONDI';'IONXL USE PERMIT 84-31 ATTACHMENT TO INITIAL ST_ ;DY, PART II 1. (c) The proposed grading plan will result in significant cut and fill grading that will result in large slopes on northerly and southerly ends of project. Retaining Walls an;1i extensive landscaping are proposed as mitigation me W ures'. 2. (b,i) Construction of this project will include 118,988 sq. ft. of building area and approxivnately 10 acres of,relsted parking 'facilities. These impervious surfaces will significantly. reduce absorption rates and increase surface wate "r 'runoff. A range of on- and off -site drainage mitigation measures_ are- proposed `to Minimize drainage :,impacts for downstrea(r properties. and 'Haven Avenue. B. (a,b,c,g) This project is an intensive commercial 6e which will have significant results in generation of additiar'_,` traffic, demand for widening streets, `new. park `�hazar, facilities, and potentially increasa traffic r: Construction will include full improvement of Ha+isn Avenue and Lemom Avenue frontages, including widening, sidewalks, and street lights. Further, a landscaped median will be constructed on Haven Avenue to control turning movements into and out of9 the shopping center. Also, this project will 'install traffic signals at, the intersection of Lemon Avenue and at the main entrance to the center (Alta ioma:prive). 9. (h) Buildings and parking areas will require lighting for security purposes that may increase light or glare to sur,.rounding� properties.' Adequate shielding will be,,,_.__. required to mitigate to anon- significant level. 12. (f) See 2 (b,i).- ,,` c1 }� -1 RESOLUTION NO. ' A RESOLUTION OF THE OAK' 3 CUCA.MONGR 'PLANNING CO'hat�SSION i APPRR NG CONDITIONAL I�+ E PERMIT NO. 84 -3.1 knp /A NEIGHBORHOOD SHOPPING tt TER LOCATED AT THE NORTf C1{ST i( r: CORNER OF HAVEN AND HIGHLAND IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL DISTRICT 4HEREAS, an the 21st clay of November, 198¢, a complete application was filed by 001 sified Propertie for review of the above- described project; and WHEREAS, on the 27th day of February, 1985, the Rancho Cucam *tpga Planning Commission, held a ptubl'ic hearing to consider the above-described project. follows: NOW, THEREFORE, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission resolved as 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 purposas of the district in which the site is located. 2. That the proposed use, together with the conditional applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public- hW, tlh, 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 Development Code. SECTION 2: That this'projecb,., together with the ConditioyQ af_ Approval, will not create adverse impacts on the environment and that a .Negative Declaration is issued on February 27, 1985._ SECTION 3 That Conditional Use Permit No. 84 -31 is approved subject t4 the following cond# ons: PLANNING DIVISION 1. That approval a` Phase II, and those areas 'or buildings indicated for "Future Development is conceptual {niy and reapplication for Development /Design Review is V,:44ired, 2. Future building layouts 'and designs shall be consistent with the approved architectural ?style.. r <'x Resolution No. CUP 84 -31 Page 2 — ) 3.. Future building pads shall be temporarily "seeded -aed f, , irrigated for aesthetics ar:d erosion 'control. + 4. Provide texturized pedestrian pathways across circulation aisles from Haven Avenue to the easterly terminus of pedestrian walkway. S. Provide locking iJ�cycie facilities in convenient locations. Details khall. be included in the landscape' plans to the satisfaJ_.�ion of the City Planner._ 6.- Provide pedestrian connection ,;near retail $3 to the adjacent residential project. A lockable gate may be ,.rmitted for security ,purposes if master keyed for the adjacent residents. Details shall be coordinated with adjacent developer and included in final construction plans. 7. Pedestrian ame ities shall be providad within plazas, including, bio not limited to, outdoor eating areas, canopy shade/ trees,,: raised planters and benches,,, and drinking f��tains. ' Details shall be included its the landscape , ens to the satisfaction of the City Planner. 8. Dense landscaping shall be provided along Lemon Avenue to screen roof equipment from public view. To maxim 'trnsrf" visibility of landscaping" and to maximize• screen effect, the slc;,e an the South_ �i ie of Lemon Avenue shall be configured to -provide mou Wing' behind sidewalk before slope drops off. v - -9. Shopping cart receptacles shall be provided througtout maiffA parking areas. Details must be included in final construction 'plans._ -.,__ 10. Landscaping and fencing treatment along easterly property line shill be coordinated with adjacent developer. ENGINEERING, fsiVISIDN 1. Drainage: a. A portion of Master Plan Storm drain Line 3 -H, located to the north of the site, shall be constructed with sufficient inlet capacity to accept a minimum g7 flow from the north within Haven Avenue to offsd* the increased flow generated by the develop' n' Construction of this line shall replace the propod• retention basin. il p. T Resolution No. CUP 84 -3I .; Fage 3 b. Increased drainage from the first phase shall ra be directed to Highland Avenue, there crossing onto the private property to the south. It as acceptable to direct the drainage to Haven Avenue by use of an interim earth berm or ditch, assuming Line 3 -H is in place. Subsequent phases of the development shall be designed to direct all flows from the site to future Master Plan Line 4 -N located to the east. Line d -N_ shall be constructed with any future phases. 2, Traffic and Access: a. A., traffic signal shall be constructd� at the intersection of Haven and lemon Avenues, with the - first phase. Cost of the design and construction shall be credited to Systems Development Fees. b. The pavemeni,/ridth of Lemon Avenue Nall be as stated in the project Traffic Report. c. The intei-Im access roadway connection to Highland—_3o Avenue shall be approved by Caltrans. \ 3, Grading: 4 D - C a. 'Prior to aporoval of the rough grading plan, the applicant shall coordinate grading plgns with the adjacent apartment project to the east vto provide a, i compatible grading solution which eliminates any unnecessary retaining walls and/or slopes. i b. Req?,-" re grading to prevent runoff from entering harc,faipJramps. i`, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 27th DAY OF FEBRUARY, 1985. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA h BY: Dennis L. Stout, Chairman ATTEST; jl Rick Gomez, Deputy Secretary f 4 %ic l ,.f Resalutaon t*UP 84,31 Page 4 J T, Rick Gomez, Dc�" Secretary" .the Planning Commission of tl�s City of Ranche Cucamonga} da dereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly od vy regularly introduced, passed, W, adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cum on+gsa, at a regular sme Ling of the PInnning Comgtv on held on the 27th day of Feiaruary, 1985, by the fallowing vote -to -writ: _ �i AYES. COMISSIONERS« 0 NOES: COMMISSIONERS« ABSENT: CtiWISSIONERS« f t ^f .,t .1; 0 .i v a� •�s t' «i 7 Ll y. y �• °.•U•.Y -. nO`'3 N.C.NU OY L�Y ^V �i.�i. `'xOV wgg��YO �p p.C� �� ^a fi NdO R c� w aq� V ga Gi�°n' guq .a� q Y.aYY..° v awr. aiu. oyu b ina^gL 7��."a F"�anOYy q CLyv YL y C. O.� Cpl W CV, '�N ptl VLr ? ^O QC 4C CN. Cw^+ 'p ^� qNy> AC Mu ^V�V. � C `6 +L�YNU q:OJ Op V.Y �'GO M AL~yR ^ 9ywia Cti.M�� i i��µ R yY� Y N N h. 'y C N IN °OCyNr.^ ^ OSu l Sp :6C N^ Q Epy�^•� '�LyL�•N ,p4tlryQYp 4a C��uN WoC.� SL��y� �� =0 9 Q^�LV VC.pQ U.a LCCgO y�CNL 6OC�. ♦ OBY•7 �4I�i ��N•. (�Yp� GC GNtd CV YY�aISJ +p 6. ... i VL . Agg.. C � YSSS'^ Y.Y46 E4V C ,C VV'Jrtlr ¢a+ a+- `G La OaYi !"�OON sY YL <N44 Dh I m "d N yy H F E Z u .fir° O O- 6�0 O KO CN VI KY4 O p� �F W a.• Y =L w �. Ca' Ou Ys a•. � �iZiY O 4 q° �Y �� u' n F n 4' sYUY ov�a:y. LV �qpi ^a. Va c.u.+... pp qLp t LAO D�YMr ciQac 2 i wN px•Vi.6�T1�O�? uL VVM� �L }�qqyY 06F.�Y �Y� y`$iQL qa iTaa.Y ��Cq .{.l Ob4w CC^ LIL�� py.�N °C V'a c� r�ir L Y- O'.J •p..) Q g0� L Y eq �,OLh `.Y a^Ui m`CL 6 y0�•e 4Y y.q h'$G),OY J�Yt Q wyCGGG Ntl.�. LVi Ca��• V L Y VCy'O G SON^ � L 0 .i v a� •�s t' «i 7 Ll y. y �• °.•U•.Y -. nO`'3 N.C.NU OY L�Y ^V �i.�i. `'xOV wgg��YO �p p.C� �� ^a fi NdO R c� w aq� V ga Gi�°n' guq .a� q Y.aYY..° v awr. aiu. oyu b ina^gL 7��."a F"�anOYy q CLyv YL y C. O.� Cpl W CV, '�N ptl VLr ? ^O QC 4C CN. Cw^+ 'p ^� qNy> AC Mu ^V�V. � C `6 +L�YNU q:OJ Op V.Y �'GO M AL~yR ^ 9ywia Cti.M�� i i��µ R yY� Y N N h. 'y C N IN °OCyNr.^ ^ OSu l Sp :6C N^ Q Epy�^•� '�LyL�•N ,p4tlryQYp 4a C��uN WoC.� SL��y� �� =0 9 Q^�LV VC.pQ U.a LCCgO y�CNL 6OC�. ♦ OBY•7 �4I�i ��N•. (�Yp� GC GNtd CV YY�aISJ +p 6. ... i VL . Agg.. C � YSSS'^ Y.Y46 E4V C ,C VV'Jrtlr ¢a+ a+- `G La OaYi !"�OON sY YL <N44 Dh I m "d N yy H F E Z u .fir° O O- 6�0 O KO CN VI KY4 O p� �F W a.• Y =L w �. Ca' Ou Ys a•. � �iZiY O 4 q° �Y �� u' n F n 4' o�.o o °c a .. LNNN� A�0.CroY Tqq•+� C `�s.. OY r G • »! Oqv �I4C V� �. t {�.0 N.d LAC lY „' LYOS OtTwY CY4 ^� d9�i ,,GdG d 616 Ru 1IOj J L ` \n CA • d t� Y L rf. .f d t a d W V+� - U# D.Y VD'd'O kOrJy' OI QC pU p NE r �Y dR.rdi dG Od+LN t.� NJ6G N d~ �' ^f. i G ai'u _w :dd ns 3i rd$�iv {O� • C i�• N w �� L��C �w+R d.M �yG O,,1G9� .. N L� At. iS u N qu CH U LG D } O yC L (C q �•� �L` L Y '^ Yeb r 4.r.q E`^ L /a,q q....tV xr.� O S 4 Ew �+ 466 YS�L� 0456 K, VO�q S ~� P u� N � GG�t w�i 660.H d�q�d` ^�r�d0 q61 qN� r� 4�q LG d 4> dM oa Ory LNF O.D�pti; � 0.^ CL s' �•C T� L S� CZ LM P.. O CS��db ~ C,^G, a..G. D O MLL ' N� • Y7 a OY. qyl.� L.�Dy bL� .O'..b. Gbw CO Lwc ETC LN C Ce1� LO 0.54 L i V 4rq 3b 'QW dC.. YapY LLV ulp ~ Y H ♦ �.0 L.Oi O`^ qF q ayd L= gCrYaa 41 N Q yc.0 0.L If q Y 8 V ♦ C M 0. u Nr O 9 S� ^ 6LL1 y p C ii N ^b+ Y > 4 V� U 'CVI.Ht Lmli RVLJ o.Vr O.y.� - a=L Sao Nye.) ft Ctbt GyGL iY COU 4Y a9. N� Gd Y Y'N. C �L✓ ar `R d O `4'^ tigN � �f LMT NC �t MSs C�dOL ^iO t�bt4��V a+CL7 �t � gflq �aCJ �Y aw � ,t O pN L4.' N C3. OJa.r MD O c C tl L'v� E 0.i4 NL.L1 CMd u M `glylit P to \ 'b C4 � j j17i i �' 1 r; oe.nLO� D Dili Aesatx Va.ML = =j�UO � �CVNQ 0 01r Y].4 J J C. �. O Obd. OOaGaG,` N'rL4 �... q q 4 b. Lu 1 r C 9qA Orp = =b N d�0iwt ^ ^GL Rw 4 ro' b 49a� . .0.V.T N C L N1U0 j O O aCO _O: i io•q - ^q e eed>i - ` C e Z ei D TV OC4 V Vi�S C CN S C,D T b q q Od.O d FSNa +. '� � � L � �+. G b Cy S b C Tb. +i p S/ b T + 'l\ n' t nL:�p N Nov « +q+'v ° °'. O O•'d �,^ ' � .G. T"uu n n =c � �� 1G� R R q qy d WdE3 Fd O O. t Ga L t! U a� N NOQ.� d d�a= H H a C Y '� NN6C. N NaH.a L G ELN a N� � ����"' � O. U.u1OrN dT C C��6� l C CC�00 Y aY N LL R RMr O �y0 O b q. 0.n E d d ,CqN l ' D YL Ay G �1l.u�Q r 4d N � U .°fq C btom S wq T TfAi L, -NN Y� _ l L n Y - N w u •_ d a o '-f Y M ro i q v ro•^ Q v c, A A may. � A y b U � � r N.•Ti b 6b °� + b id.. Q� b E iYq�Vwm G. L Ouv�4 D� L p �. YQ n 1Y •°. yb A E c N C ° N 91 r J L aa Y. C' C C O N •�.. N b N 3 2 l{ L Y i_ Eb • - p: o Q o .•.' x N v.-d.. "'vT° L. qa it b � V 4 T� � � E I:w. G .dq 2 L N:: L �a L \..• \\ � Y - Oq dorCn N -YN E 3 - U OZ8 pt INV 'yyam S YA QS.. dJ °qb p�C EN �bb14 ...,G OWO•� [ wt°.i0 4A � Sr O.ii6�v p 4Gid. W3 ° VR FC`E. in 4 L ,n O N C l• c. b !i L O a1. N U Y. L V C c .-.2-1 I. :=. R v�: .� u 5c .:G vma� _ ya Y �. N� a cd.y4 �g p•Y tV T ai '. G E p• 4 Y 0° C �. y p. Y V V OL•. ° iy6 0 q V °�„�� y Cy d Nq yry.� gdrC UQ�g QIQ N= 'q^pw rC C. •' a� � C ". UD ^�. 0.O °q 'V uYr pCE bgxq'• qt Np N O q�h~.. b P G bUr NL `L Gq V Nt� Y 64.~ Ut Y.•qy LLY a EE b � �L'y �GV A r LN • Y �C .M L6 Y h�G:- bb EuU U��... N E��4 ♦r,E, � -w dCd•.Lp.7 s-• q N H Y _Y' SOT V pd�D CErC u' DGyG gwr..c. -.. �C a,pb Em ^,� lY�. •V�r K � ^OCRC N °�f: RUa Gat• nVFLw gb�AU Nom. Yad{. qy �� \ NC GG u d YG U Gb qtT Cl' 6Q » QUia p�Y q.q Q. UfVbYI� �P:AND. 06•n Tpd y�j � POw�,. l~.14 =I > a1� :�� Ci W � � +� �N VE�(} r 6•,Y Y~ 4 4.C1 'N • C` v J b V t C a G p V C u 4 W a C • CLA A h J V O q C LAL >Nr qC � ��N Qy New gC 014cL q q M� dYp u3 C 9 rn.L Y4 J .A {.NY 4n q b t VTA� Y� jYiN M CNO V�� yY�� pVVC agyV~ � a iY. N _ l � h R \ \;. iaEt A S, IF A + +gyp S w i y'V 5 o oda : : I N ny N'+ - cti r S. y u u N NV A At N�1 t O O. ♦ m Y q � - � ' '` 9 9�y'LS.� � � ♦ m Y Yy r r,JL.. A� � Y M� � i W - + +7Q- ...v.� I C�p.L ^ My N Yi.pV i W _ G.' Q AON.y . .4 }",. � � O O d d � �S G qp•1 t t G G� 1 u u 1 .Z=4 ---- -� CITY OF RANCk6 CUC-AMONGA :I STAFF RUPO Y ca o L3 U > DATE; February 27 1985 1977 T0: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission t+ FROM: Rick Gomez, City Punnet` By :,( Curt Johnston, Associate Planner SUBJECT. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESS�EHT AND TENTATIVE 7RACt'1?670 - LEWIS - The aevelopment of 1153 single fami ty data , 6d Homes on ?3.06 acres i)f ' land - within' the Terra V stag Planned Coamunity dgsdgnated "LM" and "M10, located" mi' the south ci %Jde of Ea se, Line Road, east > of Spruce Avenue - A.qN, - 1077o09!, l2, 08. 1 AB!,-tRACT: The tract map design under `'cons iderPtion has, not -= received Design Review 'approval. Rather, the Committee referred the project to the Planning Commission for review of two issugQJ: (1) or?entatiop of single family homes to ,a future easterly seniy; -. - housing project; and (2) appropriate sip a and dimensions of t�e seetior citizen site. II. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Acttai - Requested: 'Ky iew and consideratiar, of a subdivision map and .wilding plevat-�tls. ; -5 L B. Purpose. nevelopment of 153 single family detachEd.`,:�; s. C. Location. South side of Base Line Road, east of Spruce Avenue..' D. :Parccl Size: '21.06\�aves E. Ppeject Density -.6.6 du /ac F. Existin Zoning. Te Yd Vista Pfa'nned' Co=unity, design' Medium (4 -8 du /ac) and Medium (4 =14 du /ac) �. Y G. Existing Land L`se: Vacant /Vineyard Adak A) ITEM M �� PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TT 12670 /Lewis _J February 27, 1985 Page 2 H. Surrounding Land Use and Zon4ti North - Vacant /Vineya; ~d, Te ra "Vista PC, designated future 3 99 -acre park South - Vacant/ Vineyard, Teri a Vista PC, designated Low Medium (4 -8 du /ac), uture elementary school site + future park sii^ , East - Vacant /Vinega er' V1��. mated Red r (4 -14 du /ac): OOVice ark West - Vacant /Vineyard, sing a family homes ors, Ea,(�00 square foot lots (TR 12364 -I park'site, apar6en units nearing completion (TR 2402) Terra Vista PC, l designated Medium (4- 1`du /acj and Medium High (14 -24 du /ac) I. Terra Vista Planned C6*uni Des' -u ac Me h Project" ite - Low- Medium 8 dulac) North Future City Park South Low Medium (4 -8 du /ac), future elementary sc400l, future pat* o East Medium Residential (4 -14 du /ac), Offic4 Park West Low Medium (4 -8 du /ac), Medium (4 -14 6 /ac), Medium - Hirgh �11r4 -24 du/ac) li �.� 0. Site Characteristics: The proje•�t site is currently vacant and `s- opes southward at approximatJ4y at a 2 -3 percent grade. A Eucalyptus windrow located on the north end of the site will be remo�rd'to construct the futurkf base Line Road. No structures exis6 on the property. K. Applicable Regulations: Terra Vista Planned Community permits one _ dwelling .pe73,000 squarer foot minimum lot size to approximately 7200 square foot lot size in a conventional subdivision within the Low Medium and Medium Residential "' "" ' Gategor�,�s. = III, ANALYSIS A. Generaf- The 1,53 lots within the project have a minimum size 5774-,00-6 square feet. Four floor plans are proposed,with a total of twelve new elevsti ns in a Tudor style of architecture (Exhib!t _���1�). 1 B. Design 'Rev �w Committee: The Design Review Committee referred the applicant to the P tinning Commission to establish minimum" dimensions "for the senior housing site and determined the.° discusse d a plan orientation between the two land uy� as g PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF =REPORT TT 12670 /Lewis,, / - February 27, 1985 Page 3 i Senior un`asinm %Site: The. Area Development Plan approved by the Planning Corm',4zsion lorat;es Tentative Tract 12670 eignt hundred and fifty feet �jst of Milliken Avenue. An additional row of I ots, however,_ ! ps added to the project ' moving the Tract boundary 150 feet east. The result is a senior housing site (Medium Residential, 4 -14 du /ac-) only 280 feet wide adjacent to Line ' Base bad In - Omparlson, the Terra Vista Plan indicates a Medium Residential area roughly 150 feet wide. The Committee felt that a dimension . too narrow would create design constraints and ��uld reduce opportunities for transition of density and bij eying adjacent land uses. Two options, -were dissdssed by thaU followsr RC to increase the size of the senior site s e 1. Elimi6 to ,Street "A" and the adjacent lots, thereby ianvTng the tract boundary, westerly approximately 25(' feet; 2. Decrease the size of the OP designation at the ,corner of Base Line and Milliken. 0 AL Vollowing the Committee meeting, the appicant 'adjusted the , Office Park area approximaely 80 feet easterly to expand the senior site to the current w)jdth of 280 feet. " Site Orientation: The map proposes a north /south street 4etweea the twu' and uses and kfront -on lots facing the senior housing site. The Committee recommended that the Commission discuss the alternatives of `providing side -on 'cul -de -sacs or rear lots along the east boundary of Tental�ive Tract 12670. In addition, the Committee felt that performance criteria should ' be required to soften the bc- -Idary between the two lail" uses. Followin g- Dk review, the applicant, provided a lonceptual �f la ;but for the senior housing site (Exhibit "D ") -with only one �( +story units along the of Street "A" Off- street } l,? arking would be provided by parking courts with cc�ess off of l� ,,Street "A ". The success of this -a ternat�v� =mould greatly depend on the architectural compatat{r;��v of the two product types. ? ,With side or rear facing single family units,,, additiona"1 buffering could be provided by dense landscaping, reducing the westerly window treatment on 'two -story ,,senior I{ units, and providing separate /internal circulation for' both 1 projects. If the Commission feels, the front -on lots are inappropriate, the Project should be referred back to the DRC for review of any revisions. t� t PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT ." TT 12670 /Levu s February 27, 1985 Page 4 I.her items discussed by the Design Review Committee included architecture and side yard. setbacks. , With respect to architee'`uref the Committee initially had a'number of concerns with the overall design :quality of the units. The applicant, however, provided significant revisions as shown on the attached exhibits acid has received Design Review Committee . approval. Regarding setbacks; the Committee felt the minimum distance of lO feet be provided on interior side yards "should adjoining rear yards. -A condition of approval is provided for your consideration. C. Environmental Assessment: Part I�tl`)the Initial Study has been completed by-, the applicant. (Staff has completed' »the envir6)mental checklist and founC.no Significant adverse f environmental impacts as a result ($, th`is project. If the Cormnisyo_n concurs With this finding;.: issuance of a Negative Deciara }�'p� would be appropriate. 3 IV. ''FACTS. FOR FINDINGS:,,, Befbri approving the Tentative Tract Map, thee' Planning Commission must determine that the project is consistent with the Terra Vista Community Plan and wiz t be detrimental to building designs, adjacent properties: Further, the proposf, - l site plan and subdivision, together with the recommended conditions. of approval must be in compliance with all applicable revulations , of the Terra Vista Plan and Development Code. If the'oirn;ission determines that the project is not consistent with the intent of the Terra Vista Plan and may be det�Nimeatal to adjacent properties W" by limiting the site of the senior housing or office park sites, ' the project; should not be approved. V. CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised as a public hearing ,.,` in a ai y epart newspaper and the property posted. To date, no correspondence has been received either for or ;against th1V"" L project. VI RECD ENDATION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission resew all 'i)input and elements of" this project. After such « >>derat min, the Commission has three options as outlined below: A. Approve the project with adoption of the attached Resolution and issuance of a Negative Declaration, or, C, r , w PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT + :T 12670/Lewis !'t February 27, 1gBt, Page 5 B. Provide direction to the app,',:Ant, rOative to revision of the development plans; and, cj06tin6e the public hearing. , ' This . alternative t(by require resubmittal of plans for additional review by 'the -- Design and Technical Review Committees; or, G. Reny the project. ' Res' ectf •fly tubmited, 1' is G City Planner RG: Cd: jr1 i Attachments,: Exhibit "A" =- Location Map 4' Exhibit "B" - Area Development.' Plan ' Exhibit "C" - Tentat* 'e Tract Mats AIRL Exhibit "D" - Deta ?4a'Site) Plan Exhibit "E" - grading,Pian ;� Exhibit "" - Conceptual landscape Plan Exhibit " " - Building elevations J Initial Study, Part IT Resolution of Approval with Conditions `- =`,,O r 1/ ,..v�` .rte 1 ee•. ., .. ... , .._. ,n . 1\ �Y 1 pg11T YHpp/8(1. eoaYYe Y� «f.owsA c our Yns�t auynu�ra+R �RszffIL_ U4 M 1 f f- / LM LM 1 c OP W-0 +�a FEGVRE 191-17 Lang Use 'Plan CITY OF ITF-M �`r r?-:�i i4;1 � R N-CHO CUCAM NGA TITLEn-- tciF�t ,�t�Pr��J W fr' PL.AI�3t�IL �G�IUI �t �YHi�lr= _Y SCAM rc -TENTATIVE - TRACT NO 12670 `M» r�'+4.,.h'� ( COYMttt �bCxNl ttRRAiIDIN9 OiAtR' Of 4ALtlOIGMU AaAs Lm" aax son DP:*Jlpo 1. "vM"X3gs& .t dT /lyre 4 ,AT'' 1. .. 1 fit. �Y �a FB . t F���^ ,w ;l ' ; �� (f ., ^lam .• ....,.Y.CtA'YS$•_.. S � Al '. Y&S" Jp Zi "''y �, ti �l R�Obv �ytC ' T i ♦ �..7 q i �, t tMJ�.✓ T 3 � i. �\ r NORTH CITY" -OF IT,- WC"D WICAMONGA TITLE= PLAIS NINV- DI'VISIM SCALE= i SE CE3Y amt - w:. r - -- :,........ . eAltillWxAtatxa s :Asa or C16Ltvo MI *d� •, • ' i� . 1• awritaHta w+�w.wmtn it wmYt :-ia..w„rr YN.• (` w wr'our �... wawa t. wsRnr «! uwcs wea st Y ' ♦ . tl! R Y ti...Y i1 LLi 1. Y .W 1. h.IR M•r1q[ R s A46Y �i1riW CeMIT. RW KoLLtl'Wi. . t Isitors or 0.000 S.F. 'llovamult 14 /a • , . . . �� -�Q�� -� saeiTMts.FtittNt�~ fu -: , tLrl to co CITY OF � HOUSt a t ,a RANCID , CGTC"il�Inl�G SCALE PLt1NNM DiVLStC �t E HtBt% " ?" — � : ERs: .rte 9ij� 1 { ~w • f FRE►tT MARYr}8ATIm. - 4•'_,r, AND IDgA NA�cg* yrLLAH,; A09cltiti. 49/4 1"t Acm TRACT . iti ta27, Dr 4,oat V.: NO. 12670 1. i+t rwc atr o; ru+sao CuaxxoNU� eeuxn w aAw u�9Aaauo .. ii - cram or cASavr�+a+a 1 o CITY OF di �.� v 1] � NGA ���4-, L�` ✓���J'�ji�il�.an` Il y+ .�':�''- d+������.�Air�'. �` y4` �}� ��j' ''r- 7t �i�J(C'�C.id.YlS /i Fi u NI 7ING Di i WtQN 7 ,td:Ylili„�: SCAM �••�i. I 1i CITY CF PWNCHO CUCAMONGA PART TX - INITIAL STUDY BWIRO iMEPiTAL Ci3$CELIST DATE. ter-- -- - . -- — APPLICA:,'fi: .��e✓d$ - "d= . _ _ .. ' cli,Z:i6 BATE:? ,4 4f NitM$ER,�r� 7 PROJECT: PROJECT LOCATION: I. E VZRON'�1ENT.AL TMPACTS i sheets) of a'f all yes.,and ma be answers are required on attached . DES .° Soils and G'e� x a MAYBE ? TO Proposal have significant xesult �~ a- Unstable ;round conditions or in changes in geologic relationships? ',' 4. \ r' &. Disruptions,. displacements, comraction or displacement- burial of the soil? s/ c. ,Change in topography or ground surface contour intervals? d• The destruction, envering o Modification— or any unique geologic O r physical features? e• Any potential inrvease in wind or cater erosion of soils Oaffecti'Wind her an or off site conditonsl f. 'Changes in erosion siltation, or deposition? $• exposure of people or roperty toi' eologic hazards such as earthquakes, land - :,ides, mud- F;1 &Sides, ground failure, or'�similatthaEfrds? h. An increase in the rate of extraction and /or use of any mineral resource? 2, F? drola . I712x the_Proposal have significant results in; �17 x y J � Page 2 a. :Changes ;zr_ currents „ or the course of direction Of flowings� reams, rivers, or ephemeral channels? stream b. Chanpes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface water runoff? !; c. Alterat `ns to the course or flow of flood warers �i d• Change in the amount of surface water in anv body of water ~� e. Discharge into surface waters, or any alteration of r surface water,qualty? f. Alteration of groundwater characteristics? g- Change in the quantity of groundwat6rs, either through direct additions or with- drawals r or ;through inter ference with aquifer? an Quality? Quantity? h. The reduction in the amount of water other- wise available for pubi,.c water supplies? I' Exposu ^e of people cr property to water related hazards such as flooding or seiehes? 4 3. Air�c uaigty. Wily the ro 'results in' P PNsa1 have significant a. Constant or periodic air emissions from mobile or indirect I sources? Stationary sources? -- 'r b. Deterioration of ambient air quality and/or Interference with the attainment of applicable air quality standards? —' e. Alteration of locxt or r egional climatic conditions, affeL ring air movement, moisture - or temperature? k. B16ta Flora. Will the proposal have significant results N ` a. Change in the characteristics of species J including diversity, distributio of no cr number 'any sPe- -IPs of plants? a b. -Reduction of the Numbers of any unique, tare -or endangered species of plants? s , pave 3 �Z Aft I YES c . It�'lraductign of._+�e. ;,r QxsY'uptive ,species of area? d. Reduction in the potential for agricultural .. production ?. _ Fauna. Full the' in: Proposal 'have- signiflcan�.;eaults ��' }� a. Chan ge in the(,'characteristics o£ species, including diversity, distrlbution, Z or numbers of any speci�s of animals? b. Reduction of the °numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of animals? _._ ^ c. Introduction Of new or disruptive species of animals into "✓ i an area, or result in a barrier to the migratiea or movement of animals? d. Deterioration or removal of :existing fish or wildlife habitat? 5. Population. Will the proposal have significant results in: Will a. the proposal alter the location, distri- bution, density, diversit ya'or growth rate of the human population of An area? \ b. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or create a demand for additiunat housing? j 6., Soci.a- Economic Factors. W311 the proposal have significant results in; G , a. Change,in local. or regional socio- economic characteristics, including economic or commercial diversity, tax rate, and propey values? b. Will project casts be equitably distributed among project beneficiaries, i.e„ buyers, tax payers or Project users ?' 7. Land Use and planning Considerations,r/`all titp proposal have significant results in ?// a. A substantial alteration of the present or Planned land use of an area ?. t b« -i= conflict with any designations, objectives, Policies, or adopted plans of any governmental entities? Y ' w Q. An impact upon the qulaity or quantity a£ Y existing consumptive or non- consumptive recreational opportunities ?' +n f 'age 4 $. Ira looeration . the', r5 osaT h vh rests Sig nifitant a. Generation of substantial aaditionaf vehicular mgvettent? b. Effects on existing streets, or demand for �F _necr street construction? =5 c. Effects on existing parking facilities, tir demand for new parking. d. Subsrautial impact upon existing tzansporta- tion sy$tems? n e. Alterations to present patte,ns of C$r6�s3 -' tion or movement of people and /or goods? ;l f. .Alterations to or effects an present and - „ potential water - borne, rail, mass transit, or air traffic? C, g. increases its traffic hazard.' to motor V- hides, bicye.Lists or pedestrians" 4. cultural z _ _al Rsources. Will the ,proposal,, have significant results in. a. &'disturbance to the :sntegrity of archaeological, � Paleontological, and /or historical resources?` - 10. Health, Safety, and Nuisznce Factors.. Ffill the proposal have significant: results in: a. Creation of•any health hazard or potential health. hazard? / G b. Exposure of people to potential health hazards? c. A risk of explosion or rQlease of h�'zardous substances in, the event of an acci%rnt? d. An increase in the number of 3ndi4iduals or species of vector or pathenogenic organisms or the exposure of people to such organisms? w- e. Increase in existing noise lzveZs? k f. Exposure of people',ta Potentially dangerous '? noise levels? d^ Z. The creation of objectionable odors? e ,. ' - "\ , h. An increase .its light or glare] a_ go _1 ll. Aesthetics. Will the ��oposal have significant T results a. The obstruction or degradation, of arty scenic vista ?' or view b.. The creation of an aesthetically offensive }� site? c, A conflict with the•ohjective of designated or potential scenic corridors? ✓ 12. Utilities and <ubiic Services. Will the proposal have a signir".icant �--- need for new. systems, or alterations,to the folluwingt a. Electric power? b_ Natural or packaged gas? Gommunicat3gns systems ?' d. Water supply? T WE e. Wastewater facYl3tii,es? �. f. Flood control structures?.- - g. Solid waste facilities? L. Fire protection? i. Police protection? J. Schools? `•_.' k. Parks or other recreational facilities? f� 1. Maintenance of public facilities ;, including roads and flood ccx b1 facilities; M. Other ove g rnmBital services? 13. ,Enerey 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 OL energy? C- An increase in the demand for development of new sources of energy? +c, d. An increase or perpetuation of the ca.xsumption Of non--venewable forms o G -~ &3, phen feasible renewaUO sources of energy, -;fie availllle? ' r 't YES 4INYBE No e• Siibstantia2 depiction of any nonrenewable or ' scarce natural resource? s 'A 14. Mandatory Findi s of Si ni£icance. a. Doe.If_ the project have the potential to degrade the 4uality,of the environment, subst ntiavly reduce the habitat of fish or wildlif species, cause a fish or wildlife population t� drop below self sustaining levels threatenito ? eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a are or endangered plant or animal or elimina�/e , Import 4i exampler )£ -t maj? or periods of (1r Galiforn\•histocy or p `history '� b. Does the project have the potential to achieve a shoat- -term, to the disadvantage of long -term, environmental goals? (A short -tee iu��cti on the environment :6 one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period rif time while long- terct impacts will endure well into the future). o c. Does the project have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (Cumulatively considerable means that the incremental e£feet ✓of an individual project are "considerable wb4n 4iewed In connection with the effects of past projects, and probable future projects).: d. Does the project have ecvironmental effects whici will cause substantial adverse effects out human beings, either directly or indirectly? Ix. DISCUSSION nr i`xmmn4:v?____ FVALClATIQN `, the above questions plus a discussion oi(propos (- 5mitig tion e m aenwur s) IYW Q) G i i III. DETE.'4uINATFO`l - On the 'basis of this initial evaluation. -- _ X find the proposed prejeet COKED NOT have a significant effect ,� on the environment, and a NECATFVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant IL J4 effect On the environment, there will not be a significq_= effect in this case because the mitigation, measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION Val, BE PREPARED. I find.the proposed project KAY have a significane effect on the envirnment, and an F- NVIRO.'N' M DIFACT FEPORT is 76quired. Date Signature L 0 • �I i a •y 'e j o e r] E s RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING. COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, ",ALIFORNiA, CONDITIONALLY APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 0. 12670 rj<> WHEREAS, Tentative Tract Map No. 12670, hereinafter "Mapes submitted by Lewis Homes, applicant, for the purpose of subdividing the real property situated in the City of Rancho, Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino, State of California, described is the development of 153 single family detached homes on 23.06 acres of land within the Terra Vista Planned Community designtd "LM" and "M ", located on the south side of Base Line Road, east of Spruce Avenue - APN 1077- 091 -02, 03 into 154 lots, regularly same before the Planning Commission for public hearing and action on February 27, 1985; and WHEREAS, the City Planner fias °recommended approval of the Map subject to all conditions set forth in the Engineering and Planning Division's reports; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has read and considered the Engineering and Planning Division`s reports and has considered other evidence presented at the public hearin,. NOW, THEREFORT', the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamong. does resolve as follows: SECTION 1r The Planning Commissi'�,,rnakes the following findings in regard to Tentative Tract No. 12670 and the Wp thereof:: (a) The tentative tract is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, and specific plans; (b) The design or improvements of the tentative tract is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, and specific plans; (c) The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed; (d) The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage and avoidable injury to humans and wildlife or their habitat; (e) The tentative tract is not likely to cause serious public health problems; (f) The design of the tentative tract will not conflict with any. easement acquired by the public at large, now or record, for access through or use of the property within the proposed subdivision. J ,4 � d d r Resolution . - -' _- rr- WgvlV' Page 2 (g) That this project will not create adverse impacts on the environment and a negative Declaration is issued. SECTI4ii 2: ° Tentative Tract Map go. 12570, a copy of which is attachewl hereto, is hereby approved'�subject to all of the:'following conditions and the attached Standard Conditions: pLANNIM DIVISION: 1. Ten (10) feet minimum sideyards shall be provided where the side of a unit abuts rear yards (lots 45. 54, -55, 124, 225, 139, 143, 144). A detailed site plan indicating compliance with this Standard and showing the revised elevation mix shall be subsaltted for review, and approval by the Planning Division prior to recordation of the Tract Map. 2. Each lot withf.1v the project sba7l;�havre a minimum, flat (2% slope or less) rear yard area f0la building to property line or slope /retaining wall of 15 feet. A final detailed site plan which indicates the slope and retains ,,g wall locations and unit plotting shall be submitted p+ior to issuance of building permits. 3. Each lot within the project shall be provided with front yard irrigation and landscaping, including street trees and seeded lacror details shall be "provided on the Landscape and irrigation plans submitted to the Planning Division for review and approval,,, prior to issuance of building permits. 4. Corner side yard fencing and retaining walls shall be seta' back a minimum distance of fiv& 15) feet from the back of sidewalks. All interior street facing retaining wail shall be constructed of decorative block. 5. Street facing side elevations on corner lots and the reams? of two -story units facing "Base Line Road and Mountain View Drive shall be upgraded with additional wood trim, wood siding, or plant -ons where appropriate. Construction details shall be indicated on the working - Drawings (including specific lot numbers). O Low" level lighting shall be provided along the interior trail between lots 99 and 100. Construction detail of the trail, including landscaping, shall be provided prior to Issuance of building permits. ,, 7. Construction detail's of the perimeter wall treatment along Base Line Road and MougWn View'Drive --gall be,aubxitted for review and approval, by the City Planner prior to the ° issuance of building pe.*its..- P- 00lwtigm go Page 3 AOL F A Tree Rewval wait shall be soWitied for review a'Ad Approval ,by the P'lawlag Divisloo Pte" to a"Wal of the roogh grading plan. E9N6Il DIYISMN.- Base Line M fka� < Rbad'shall lie ,�r� fma the track to 2. se#S� wears of amass, with `a asfaai>�. 2�' � AC pkvf withig a 4011, uldth ''rte' of � Iw s4miTi be .° provided to the tract, The „al�'� "� r� shall be seat fb t4be artrl of City Ei. w. WMED ABM Y OF F MWr, Z i.' Dennis taut, rn - tt � � J ATTW: VeNty tea +stjy $6 Y of the Plawlag c4missilm of the City of Ran v Cisca qa, do hereby certify Vat -the wag Resalutlop Was d+aly and " regularly Wr ca , Passed, and adopted by the Pla wdog Ccwrfssfrn a}" the 1 City of Nei Cucavwga, at ,a regular aatiaag of the PI mtq Om at#SOM held on the 27th der of F' ary,� IM. by the fol %ing arat 4 ,,it: � ..., AYES: C"ISSIMRS XOES:. ABSENT:. CWSSIOM; = a S„q..rr4L 7= .�__ "�'�✓c aer °y- oµar...L. Cy. �� _ _... ,.. �...�yG i�et��- j,y �}o� o�""•s'.� pa"o...� mhu sLU' �,�s sue, rgas. '+��... .. f>°�.... =°s,� �C'y4 (•� L..+.�N, IC�AwVa4.0 •� ��bOY �K ✓1 ,�GtV �bX(6 Ly'Srar+3 Y�Y VL �y9u 3��OE SyyR it 'nn C.. �r �.�� MC C�� P�f4 ¢�•�YCY 4.�>°. �VY 6�L��� 5� g' tl p��db rtJC �r q � ✓ +A N•. Lt ap <r tt[[ �C 6d..•. o vG .° P>N a w V cEC1 �i� ✓Q �p,CC(� tl299w. � 6.."'_�Z qII L.f��..� ` °fC.rr6 m MKX^`3_ '3 °wS0 �y 'npL.L�• �ns`` 4 ®S WE w' �..$ tae °�Z w,^, �'°,j `o$w�a L tea°. •-d.J ...� • •C �xy6�a.Y'c.aC'd 'csR t6 22 •1+�1t1 4C VN.N �9 =x�qq b° N�Q' �4��•".• i�uC� � �u�0`r aMq>^L .( —XI s6fq��Tr L�pp, >•D },as u�w r� ��p. M6L gal V4. C "�R� DVS f8�4�K C e�4 �rr 4H { wC aV Ot No4� x$ St6pOgCQU.. ~ �r� 49 yt f I ,K�✓p'!Vy sL rte. L!a/GA'.. f�'�•�4t Gys{mr's ✓ � 6adG My��. i`i ^LNmYOT'�t °w a. lb'..1\ {4 4�� Q '� ••; :� >y 1{F �V yx as,.• >. 3R�..y4 sa w.'S` °.. LL i � nr•Y �6 -H3NL RYA a a.., ps Lr r+... tr YN'f pp Y �� gY. > Cs p(GG(Vf et y a. wl�°� tl µc u 4M'^.Y�Z 1c�._Y. a.e4 P 3 L:x M.. wz! //y)yy ~ rgOVL+ M 6 T _y D.0 t�s 4 SY i0 PJCpiL NL •C N d.0 .J �. •� CC 6 bu �.i• 4 L MQSi.Ywepq pp Qa�M0GJ /��`� � 6Y• ice. � y �stQ�6.L aY°y � vqd p t+ ..� 1 O I• L+ a "'S" ��. - yit of f• ..pll-. � �� e�rc y s. y '� c,° va � � ,= ` rj CC-�n • yy Gd � Y L IIY!V• iflAp l'�.e�� I R•ii y�• .Vy� t v - • -�--3` �� �..a".�__ °- �.'°•.. � �-- o �.... c: s� c �. 4 � _ �"��u -- a o N. �.- E L c u L-m"" L�'v'u— c r`.oM a.a � '_'arxr`� a G c ._._- ----�� osSo YNwd Ot UC :51Z fl'u nq.A40 s0 OOgA 2 OLD ^U cp J OAV pa 9..Fv0�OT ° yq9 tb`L tai '9 >b OY ^_ o. `JE N4o.L Epp LO L9.a yea. �• o u.i ��c° E M -- 'n. a ^O L AN2 >U n;,.�LTOa O.C•C• r G` W y4s0. t'� OVp a wo °af u`L� a � 9 < ° ar L:7pV °5.Jl__ CL °.p tj 4�•• •A yE Og CW?g Lpn ^c IIyb v cFY A S ...p ° 1 NK 9�U^ N YC O yY O2D Yq.^ VN Lbpc ,...�C o .LAW L., G C C� Wc'N .T �o EC, N n O p q a a G U ip ° CU U NO it 5. TA�ys� nNU V 3 >O °Rr u cog -3 9: • ^G�e 4E4p r4G.. °A�Y � O � ^. ,� 9 Vy Vp � cA ♦b� YL y1Gf',� Et q LLu L9M' O 1 a Y�y.. gOLI�NV �~ Y3N4t p �p parr N O.COt °t E �r.O=B4cN GCi�ab. a,,=an cn• KS b U C a u a•. O V w C 4 V S 9 Y S L 2 A . 4 g V _ 74 WgVgO Ob 6� LGt �� ;6N C O q« YAE �qq0 i.dO M. c D b F@ p9 L� 9 J OypG '. >U t Vb a�L L UA CNYd•CY �N 44 iM Yipi vy .iJY w'NYY+C•G �- I yr ^ p 2 C zI-az YN0. 4qY m U i N. A a <'.Tr °c vv nY Y cbN . ^ -2.'2 q.�2 LL V9 A- C C14+OC. AY L Naa..c US Y9 YM SAE _�.L �. C d �iJW GC 4..VC�G RVyO � .. GiY .O. T qO O.n i!rY Lp - LrL CL�LgNA A.; ~•cff -L-p SCr V Q� ...�$O .O..�NV pC'..�V pV aq a'b'co ao c t� fvy •K� � r ��°Mm y d L CpL m L >l G4 G ` 6q �c AW VLO° A Y t Y�y> Vc•C. G9., 2cT 'Ja OA NL A2 c01 _..:spi -.._ V $z...�..�_.. ui V= a VG 'itYS C. rLi4 4md u C04� <�O F. F V C Q_- %O Y ;N{� U °^ C CaL+>L C E x'GA °E qE> L> ... WO •Cy Wes- V6 •L•pV 6� Ly Abp y'p C -:G G.q O'L�iTi oOdG L UA 4� Cq Nu� wC wy Oil U V 9q!mO VD��LV o Q LW .. cbuNN c0 K4 ,�o Sr o• c' n� co �t� •T� .� ° CYCH Jf.. ML} 1A �. pyb WC. h'�NG B.�Nn N�O*'1 J�GG QGFL CE bC �A�CLee. —K.gly <Y 96dA Y01n �+ G•y.EO �cY HG_N y n � • �s � `N.� q.C:l A LGT Ny yAQ z c µc w V.. aV.O. Y.F a.Nx ... ° iCy b 3 • q: Q A 22 46.04 ai Yya NO Oa °a.N �. a0 Ltwu N y � qN _ 9rCL E P Ly t L a.+ 14 46 Vy, L\ Gy yC CFp10N� 4C�� = Y ,� r '6 OAR T' °QiC pif Q14O M i° rq xyy �L Y dEYQy K: M Ra W / ZZ Y�C }�04 9 'U Ld UU^ YO�,?5 • 'i N 6 Nd. OQU y0Y >N \1 •� UUC dNN �".- a NFE C�{�, `� Y yN C 01.Y ° a°i °GA�La G Q.,..GOp OEM N.iNM `C NNY O y.�T 1ti L a Y �Qa� dCU qx _o _ ° R ,p (�y�+.N� °• ��Ya N?90 _ r Uf.RU hq B Y a�0 EOd vuaUS a C'° p � O Of OTq QOY C � Apy � y •. NO- iN.y x' 'C Lei 4 aw.P KC A y T y?°yey N4 UCU K� w R•- t R � ?dOC Crt� OA pyK .IIOAO �O rA+ Py yl bya CCA C }^ ^A Ry NrW L Y &y C •°•° xr � OY. N _ N <Y E, CC pNa � � OV. O I a Y Ay OIL V �oC Ah ^.0 O °ya? `y ,lo Ry. wl° `E7 • rt C Y �� CN �w0 > ^a N L O u d? j, CC N °' E Uwa 00 w °N Q -Cr E Cc y @ CC N :ID 0{P aMd Y•• N? N r N�? O. Q.G ptCLQ. G4 i 'Y I J]� � I♦ �._�._ -:.i _ Ry_- ...... �G:._- __.r,A i�_IOa.na. i_._a -OtaO .�� •K.,�3M � L a1 aN o u Lov erYreYe of OO a2 cA 'dY. w ' C CCY L O w� ar C 0NU Y %ate EyUV yGO1 N4 UaUiy ^�Y Yom` u Eli ^�. VTC� Y��N rNy QCN �Vp ° o TL �° d..ra °u `�- ° K ctn syR m < c � -ct� O1 .Nn. °.. s1.., v e °„" c ?u"' �.L.. a �•w„ ° ° ><°.N ,-'° Kr. ` t �ccc M ca h C 4Y^ �a0 a.h =YAY uuuo Ayy CRU °YC r oN T QryR rl.- f.1 U R� L OOi .LL XX�Y• � -� Y <SSN 1-'P, N. <Li 6V FAO N'rw C <h QA WN.hO R3.. =NSH„ Q.N iN0 F=NL 1 I a ., d a F�V nEgA. OLO • Q•r .... ^L: C U. Nc •^i. LY �.-. rim: bA. �. Z G C wL - •Q = d. q CIT Sf w Late • m AL S f'• -8 0.. Y O Y O A L v. w 6 YYb Y p1 w~ V G r C ° O 60��W u IR Va OC �• q b ¢ O Ex D and O Ey Ow WO^ �w rR Yy q~G vOR '� � L� W° b G c :d ... .,•d b.. y€ `EJ RT Ta �y C Y ry dL.- '�'•.p 6 .�.•d RZ, 1rw.? d �V rY AC•- N6 6+°• ! , j 'I .. G V w d�Qyc •eDi ^d F � OY A w v yya. �' L d ti Z w uw��d v dd �N �2 uL C ^6 ub •°� =SLV E OzNV �oY EO _ �v� C} d^ Ny b V^ P6 OY NY. A�:•it �.. LLT J¢ yCw•L 6Y dti ^ 4 ¢d d� R g NU Y p OO J l i S.Y =Y Y D ^Utl Yhj ^ L O �jtl N 1 "'P d i Pu i� O A1�Y.c Ld �I _S ptJWd O=V —73 4LCVJdu L �.\p irT `C G4L y 6UWQE 651 dq &Z'7 L t NV WU'ti p6 MLr•�CS 4� ,1 / d0 Y u wC AY •N� b o.y YN O `•WVL KK N` bw L'T �• q 110 L� _.. al- �,,qET a -x EOE ,••,•.. ?Kc O - �Vw.� xis N LA '' •q M H aL ♦. i! .yet n °u iVE u O YU Qy ... •. 17 •� 4 u. C opq gCgQ D w aY � p9 C - C 9 C' •r�U.T Yd >�0 V. Y._s..4+.,c_. [LR O _: �._. � L bL��� C LAN T Y�.__� .._._ :- zz - V4 .r- ..d .,; ,. p' �y E� v-•+ w n Z— �OLU �l5 N b �•-. ... __':"u h rop _'•2:wa� ASSn 9° ¢W A.Y. �O •Mi•.L� _ ___ __ __ N r 00 ^4i i• ¢.�. i CG-. NN YAV ua Y C� d r b.•YLLy C*` S u G wr '� T y C E .•. d C L. U �.V L L q^ y 4 1� • EL wu •Dxy. C D..d YO < ^L d� iu rza r AZ i =wL D ° oYcu vd . a- L �� c w � �OW u°LL 6r KY Y N� 1 - CND C i d to S -- �° �W^ :� L d. µ dQ wok C C L b .L Y w Z. w D h yw^ T .• .L N .gC YC o L.+ t Z. T>p 2 NE.d dM ' gAA C� C•,. hOO O YtlAO Yq ° i3a PNO. yLC 4L. 4Lq �iO �� RE L� 6p0 y IC C� Lu Y4 Lv aizi O �OIIt6 N6 NT�Z L 4 tl L C °¢ K6�3 OY K 1S. LL. WES -O.Y Cam. ✓U �w 1r•66Y d 'SLY. vfL C �. li L N �/ a N V ^• m ' r ' � 1,�� T u r Z L, CI 2 L Q/ Far rop V6 �.b ro C NS `..0.. ay cOVa Cl- ge ^ lA @ 4 = fI C N \q\ � Ou pV A tT r 60 L2 Eroy'h tlF C,O 6L I V NE�O�} L L L`HC�'IC d6 V�Q 9y d0.N m� 4.0^ 1 a q@ >o a o ^< - Tam L� L YY O b E .-~ nus+ a..@ cvro ao.. Ha. r AOL Ln a � C'Lls~ LV AL tTy -L A. ; aq a ON^ Mw. J+ ro groC at LroA r C V0 F� 6 ,C O ro G V rocc =dN.YaN AACC =y✓+Ni 'an�ro.MT qO�Q - N V Nn '^C O�%� ,:l Cw^ Q @u°r'L 4 ro R V a VV CNGC�YV LMT 4Q roC3 C _— VO i G COI FV Odd u.a 4') YL C= �--- µ o @N L�`iso.LO. p 4°`0� °o °eaa Aw by 4 N L' a6 _ ob 0. ^p0. O .Ni o �CµM O� Ep r Y OA @ b�Y c 4I� bN 04E dLAY1Y,r ai Eq aC N �r G .�O RNCT Se @bw �v�Y.^ 0.a @~ a �NCV U� u ^.p L��gMC.r. « LyyOSRyma TO1WyC ii roCp�LbTOA �IIVVGd. A PCZA�� OLd @! Yi�y q0 Cti vOU O,C � � CE SL.�Oa.e hVL nT' OVLN Cis; < 9CJti 4N>1NQ ^4 i`.OI rr0 N 'GFL C�.r epOepf IOO G+..Gy LL!fD�V..KgY . � y y � CY 0� '^ �F . a 9 ov dN O.Y E V.C�.RA ` yam. M Al �.,:w�t,?;..,_ `.��. r,-=`= _ I� , era .:�•. 1 I� G T i Y LW u i L Y Y Off' Ml d W YqV�' MW L rnar ,.G V q'Ov q V LGwt i Ndb} 6�.. Itd4 a. A, OE qGq N Erna�N ..� C = ^ O O NN qVN L a y Cd O n L N �L G�YUgi z c Vq :-N qN y E ctlo°•t���„ L 3 A A. GU L N A tT Qiq e. O T C U N dt • c d q y. G V O .�.. a d d n�cE.s. rn b'T. C Y .S d ^mac s 4 T9 y. s L ER A T p C 1 a ,IIW9r ° a G N ON na ,n'c''.. ..d. E9LOO g C i. v „"� it RIG;t. VQ V E GY Ems' ^T LY.. L N. Oa: y CN d.0 fi CCf..I pC d,C Eqq �. O. o L 6qY N� SE L TOy CV4+ N� 2y U.p G Qy NWd O y; L qp� F. Oy d W9 Ja'G ,p O a°i y gyp' E E4.W y L O TUG E L L ryy g j Y V L iO G° P 9 A V a. W V COCedi N4N G yq G C d L ^ q L Utz; w LV Sd -.V9 q 1"C =Y.w4. nN yy CN S JIS O. H r1 C4 f'y .•Qy w/°a q 2 1 1 G T i Y LW u i L Y Y Off' Ml d W YqV�' MW L rnar S9LNtL � V q'Ov q V LGwt i Ndb} 6�.. Itd4 ° 2N y G _ � O E G L V V` +rn N W TdC T E ctlo°•t���„ L 3 A A. GU L N A tT Qiq e. O T C U N dt • c d q y. G V O .�.. a d d n�cE.s. rn b'T. C Y .S d ^mac s 4 T9 y. s L ER A T p C 1 a ,IIW9r ° a G N ON na ,n'c''.. ..d. E9LOO g C i. v „"� it VQ V E GY n OW A.°- d a. r r Ilio.L..�a y�y ri .r� m a -- — 72 << b 4 €_ W_ q an 69 d -2 Wy a � ✓ 1 0.J Fd a Ah � ^OY O M Yy aC b /rC LvtaYb _ L V d Y •. •i� vya'� Y.Q. y (r 4 t: V 'O d Li. L c t .'.0 ggT.` i:y.a � :�_ -rOn H.:: -: - - = , i _q r Y N. � f. -. L.0 Ov..... ¢ L N � .p O iyi hvwj • .. C�m.. .0 � a r,'tT YY V4" LY YN mea-. ZE 4V c .; a dtl G� N -a,i, C ^�. Y1'OCyy � �:a.. iA r u Ri.a _ ".Uan � o cNQ � L SY .OY Q =. b r^tO Y A SW 1\ i o.W ai Su^ LY 3 N Y itl �V E d iA' uMM bN. Y ".1F M tJ O� �V Z . LN 1Pb 3 O Ny zz >YV � 4 Y4 s r � � ^ Nie.Sw �V KM N3 I•"bYO. � y ¢� Ca 6C3 \ � Cb 6V -3 3 N ryJ Iz fi Q3-3 DATE: 1177 February 27, 1985 TO: Members of the Planning.: Commission FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner c Nancy Fong, dSs Istant Planner r� h; SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND bEVELOP6,W REVIEW 84 -46 FLAHERT;' - The development .bf a 6,000 square foot restaurant or 1.1 acres,of land in the Commereial District (Subarea 7) of the Indus ial Specific ,Plan and Haven Avemte-0verlay District ed at the northeast career of }, Haven Avenue and Arrocj, Highwwy t� I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTIVI A. Action - Requested: Approval 4f site plan, elevations, and issuance of a Negative Declaration i B. Purpose: Construction of A76,000 square foot restaurant 1*` C. Location: Northeast corner of Haven Avenue and Arrow :Highway D. Parcel Size: 1.1 acres \ E. Existing Zoning: Commercial-District (subarea 7 ),; Haven ,e Avenue Overlay District F. Existing.Land Use: K -14art Shopping Center -� 4 G. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North - Vacant,. office; Industrial Park District (subarea ?} South - Bank, vacant; Industrial Park District East K -Mart; Industrial Park District. (subarea 7) (subarea 6) , W&i - Vacant; °Pending Industrial Park District (subarea 7) k--L ITEM N Plannine l;nm ,On. --aft -ncpur4 _ February 27, 14985 DR K - ",,6 - haheriy Pages F2 H. General Plan Desigrtations- Project Site - �`mercial North - Commercial, 7�,dustrial Park South - Industrial Wk Cast - Industrial Parks ,+, West '^ - Pending: for; ado Lion by City Council to ch ge framlOffre Pro esionat to Industrial Parkan 1. Site characteristics: The project site is'vacant and rough gr&° , Street improvements for `the! entire, commercial center and on -site parking area have been completed. _ 11, ANALYSIS A. General: The ' proposed -6 000 square foot P ederosa Steakhwase restaurant is located on Haven Avenue ( Wacent to KC- -Mart) and is subject to -the Development � iS,;( q es cf Haven Avenue Gv��1ay District. L el Design Review Committee: This project has been reviewed by,. Design Review Gammittee twice, due to the fact that the initial proposed: elevations did not comply with the Haven ` Avenue Overlay District iit that the architecture was of traditional styles with low profile and linear buildings;. The Design Review Committee h5d worked _,gith the devel9per in resolving. these design concerns. The has . r'eviewed, the final design of the elevations an`- has recommended approval of this prqj nt subject �0 recommended changes to the project: "J( I. Enhance- the, plaza. area with more pedestrian oriented facilities. such as. shaded seating area _ with attractive landscaping„ fountains, public -_art and/or kiosks, benches, trash receptaejes and r other" stweet furniture. I ; 2. Th-� propose b,.� ,ck veneer shall ,ire � ct'anged to _ split fa E lack or a texturiaed brick (velour ` Tekaiir; - 1 4-pese Heavy Speck; G'or material compatih�lt�o t,e entire commercial area. The metal roof., shall %be of brownish color fur,. compatibility'-to K- Matt:- tie Planning Commissions ff Report •r C February 27, 1585 Page #3 C. Environmental Assessments > ;t i of the, Initial Study has „ been completed by the applicant. Staff has completed Part. II of the Environmental Checklist and fougd no significant'(� - impacts on the environment as a result: ;of this project I -��opy Of Part II of the Environmental,, ecklist is attached �• your review aNA consideration. III. FACTS FOR FINDDINGS: This project is Co�isistent with the n-dustria�� Rrea`Specific Plan_ Development Guidelines of Haven Avenue Overlay District and thy: General Plan she project will not be detrimental to adjacent prppertigs or cause' signific�nt environmental imparts..- In addition, the ''proposed site ind building designs, touether""wi the: recommendeeConditions, `are in compliance with the indu if'aal Area Specific Plan, ,the Development Guidelines of Haven Avenue Overlay District and City Standards. V.` RECOMMENDATION: Staff recpnmends that the Commission approve Df`4 r 84-46 through adoption of the attached Resolution and issuance a,Negative Declaration. Re ectfnlly su fitted, �± Ci k RiC X \\ r Cit Pia; tree RG:NF:cv, - Attachments: Exhibit "A" Location Map: Haven Avenue Overlay Di.':tri ct Exhibit "B" - Site Utilization Map Exhibit "C" Detailed Sate Plan Exhibit "D" - Conceptual Grading Plan Exhibit "E'1-- - Conceptual Landscape Plan .;Exhibit "� `—'•a2vatigns (2) Initial Study,; Part II r Resolution of Approval with ConditiQL. Urban Center Overlay District j NOM - a 0 T F RANCHO rMNII. MANNUNr, DI �1 - `mow: msnwT r �KaYU � a.awt rreos El .R _ ;�aAOw iwrc O SITE UTILI« AtION MAR - ixx CITY ofv S RANCHO CLEAMUNGA ITF�It= Tnu P`I.EL1�t hNv IXVISpN LxHiBrr.. s, � lI C r _ t r- MATH Y L IIIa.Mw'wy!.�1.rM MRMWMIV!.V � „ItiY RY41t 4 V il\ `\ . n anr+wla' e,s t Yr,•..�t f 1 + 1 e Sa.tr�aaca�tti.....r.layast4 rtwu4a.wasermr.�u M�*.I,w 1! i t i DETAILED SITE: Araw, fKXM - < m aTy o I'I'E.it .CHO CWWONGA, TUM F= n t PLANrtltr E F.l I h.l - { t - f;. Z - w�e+norar�pr�wrarss��ree . ,� �� - �✓` :,�� � „ t�,� � � 'fit, _ � }, �,,.`� - k4.uwrnrm�sagMawaMtirY>rm.tn 7 t CONCEPTUAL . L Ny®. SJHnr...�i''�. . ROUTE CITY OF. RANCID TME' (r+,f,��j ", parr°" •Jrr�� —wnt i 1Y � YrJ - � � %� tvoarl•I r FI.AI`cII1II�ti�, iVialt � , 1HttIIT; —�` SC<AIA -. n 1 1 x i Al 's • f t O 7a 4' ,r t ilk la i � N s G� 1P k CITY- or Racr'o CUiYSif_3=4 •. ypyyp�+�..�ma�y�}� +�ry��{ aaaa.��� BART I; U17-In SWU .. I, \) 3Ke�L CHEW-•71 DATE: FILrXG DA-- ��14 J — fiw1p� �s is PROJECT: 4,, Qp PROJECT • L , J . WIRCi -N ieNTAL TW5 (Explanation of all "yes"' =4 "maybe "ansraers aze required on attactaed 1. Sails and Geolo¢v." Nil? ti:e proposal have YES =' X YEE Iko Signiricant results int t a. 'Instable groursd conditions nr in changes in ge?ilogic relationsV_ps? D. Disruftions, displaceftents, eompaetiats or burial of the soils I c. :Change in !topography or ground surface contour'- intervals? , d. The destruction, coVerin Of any =>;ue e�yl , g *t modification g ce=c or physical features? `�un e. Any potential increas >_ saincl Or eater _ erosion of sails, affecting either on or off .site conditons? f. Changes in eroaion siltation, or deposition? g. Exposure af'people or property to geo1crgic hazards such as earthquakes, landslides- sd_ olides, ground failure, or similar baz;.3ds? Ts. An increase in the rate of extraction and /or ' use of any faineral aesotsrcfi?' � Z. — . �i1 1 the prrpgoaai iawe ai g ificant ri � reslts in: , r*90 amd ANOL at of as a�sf� Cer rawff? r€ to the 'use or r1Mfi si r' irJ.ppd' .. t1` tila w la the t of surface %-ASeS % ., k of water.-7 $•II Attu 44 4f rem � r i'Y tl:Y'�'}D„ Gi"i fit _ ,xise ?2b1r x of Ic r,.r FisA�, xiz PeZIM,4C ail llY *l+lw Xwo **Ile ter' gs of gww r ats �-�r3 a IA Y attainment of -wT l 7sC J f Air cosi&tloosy s or oAa} iaz;a; 3� or I.3tUt't? aw yy�� �a.�go fa � riza of -p rd- r ar x n u .` 4� Of 'mss raft E 711 nJ i /r s'�rw�ri.Q A 7 ?age 3 InJCtroduction, ntraductian of '!,esr or disruptive speei =s or plauts into an area" S'E5 uAyBC NO z °., ' Reduction i n the pakent far agricultural producr?on? — it Fauna. UJil, the proposal `havesignificae,; re in is a. Change in the characterittics , ct species,, 7.ncluding dive sity,-distribution `? or numbers -If any sge¢les of animals? b, xedLCtian>o.� the numbers of any unique, race, or eAdangared species of animalsf c. intraductlon �)f neV or diszuptive species of to info as areal or xesult in a barriet,,, to the _r�3gation ora�3uement of at},jma ?s ?/ 1 d. [%Deterioration or removal, of stiffing fish o�` ° Wildlife. habir4'�? S. Pocnlation. Will ttte proposal, hav6, significant - reaults iSi.' a, VI-U the proposal all r,tha lo,catiota,,- distri- butian;, density, di irsity, or growth rate of the human aopulati'on�of,,av, area? h. '7L4 'I"oe proposal affect existing hou5£ng, or ,creare a demand for alditional _ 6, Soei'a- Eeentrac Bactc�7s. $11n the proposal :jjiy4 significant results _._. - in: f a• Change local or regional sotio- •economic ` zbaract.er'•Lzt3cs, NI, including economic or = commer�\al divers# ty, ta3r rate, and property valueS `IWLI1 S b,, Prof tear--, be equitably f eji ttirij+bute'd axon $ gra�edr �beneficia'ties, tax / ; / payer � ,;;gject users? fi 7, Land Use ar.6'Plannirt� Considerations: Cixll the proposal h-i-e G- 12icane r=sults in3 a. k substantial alteration of the present�or \k Planned land use of an area ?' �- A conflict with a, r -cy, dasigna,:ions, o6jectiv.s, policiss, or adopted glans of any governmental S, ent {.ti S? cX upon the gaalsity quantity, of cS n sLitng honssamptive 'r non - consumptive l TEC�leatlFM38a cppArtuniCi�? f � t dFr.. -. _ .. . iy. x ._ ..... _� 1�./ iii•✓ �_, ... ,� N w #'. � � ` �y 6 gaga [4 - YES NO $. Transnortxtion, Will the propasal have significant - ts in:' - _ a- a- Generation of substantial additional v.Ihicular zovemen:t?. b -,. Effects or existing streets, or demand for new street construction?. C. Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new parking? d. Substantial impact upon 1hcIsting transporta- tion systems? e. Alterations to present patt er��__,!Zf circuia- M ' r t:Lor& or movement Of people andfox^;ds? f. Alterations to?or,effzcts on present an i Potential water - borne, rail, mass Iran.,\ air traffic? g. T.nereases fn traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? . 9. Cultural Resources. Will the proposal have r significant results in: a. A disturbance to the integrity of archaeological, paleontologicall. and /or historical resources? 10. Health. Safety- nnT Vwr ance Factors. Will the proposal have significant results suits n: i1 A- Creation of any health hazard or potential-: health hazard? 'b. Exposure of people to potential health 'hazards? J c. A, risk of explosion or r+eleas¢ of isaza_.daui> substances in the event of an accii;enr2 =- d. An increase in the number af' individuals '�,p species of vector -or pathenogenic i organisms or the exposure of ueople to such organisms? ._. �., ' e. Increasf)itt existing noise. Ievels ?' £. Expos4:;re: o£ r_ea le to .' p Potentially dangerous xkc3se �ve1s? ' � at g -e creation of - c9jectinrtable odors? 1� ttist♦ A-x, $ncrsase i:St Ught or glare? 4 t Page 5 4 ( ll. Aesthett,cs, will the xys axss N proposal have significant resuits i;%: a. The obstruction or degradation of any scenic l - Vista or View? - b. The creation of an ae; thatically offensive site? ' c � c c: onflict with the objective of designated Or potential scenic corr:.dors? i iC 12. Utilities and .Public Sere {• Les.: Will the proposal have a significant i j :teed for necr systems, or alterations, to the following: a. Electric power? i t ,r Y b. Natural or packaged gas? c. Communications systems? d. Hater supply? e. Wastewater facilities? E. Flood control structures? i Z. Solid 'Waste facilities? h. Fire protection? �^ Police protection? i J . schools? k•`arys or other recreational facilities? 1» 711A111tenance of public facilities, including xoals and flood control. facilities? 'e. tither governmental services? ,✓ 13: _Enereg and5carcE Pes_ Will the proposal Kaye sigrillcant +" results in: Use of substantial or excessive fuel or ene4� ' c • - £ l�rg? Y b.. Substantial I.tcrease in demand upon existit sources of energy' ,, c. An increase in tie demand for development of new sources of;_energy? ';� d. An inc> ase or perpetuation of the consumption- 9,f rwon- renewable forme of energy, when feasitt3e enewable. � •.' sources of energy, are available? %' Page b \\c x , J �t YES b!AYSE :VQ ;\e. StLbstaiZtial depletion of any�Ionrenewable or scarce''natural)resource? 14. Mandatory Findixt s "bf Si nificance. !; a. Does the Project have the potential to deerade the quality of environment, the substantially reduce the habitat of fish or wildlife specie'Zr C,- ;e a fish or wil'dlif4 population to drop bt•.ow self susteining,Aevels, threaten to Z �6 eliminates giant aranimalc� �. munity,.redu�_ the number: or restrict the range of a rare ce endangered plant or animal or eliminate :r G (r11,#p?rtant examples of the majot\ periods of history \�lifornia or Prehistory! b. Does the project"have the potential to achieve -- to,;the disadvantage of long -te=, +;environmental goals? (A short - -term impact on'the% ,'environment is one which occurs :in a relatively,"' brief, definitive perio£�i Of time while long- term impacts will endure well into the future). a. Does the project have 3mpcs which, are ,L individually wm ted,but: cumulatively considerable? (C'umslative,� considerable means that the incremental `sffacts of an Individual project are eon, ,-ia able when -416ed f :{ in connection with the eEiects'6f past -projects, and / probable future projects). d. Does the project have environmental of�edtt''�f` which will �. cause+,substantial adverse effkI4 on human beings, either eirectly or indtr _ tiy? ` DISCUSSION OF ENFIAq.. �- -- -� q t NII'MZTAL EVALTMITIAN (i.e , of,,affirmative arswerar•trr- the ab ,e ues ions lts discussion a of proposea`�tiLigation measures). r i RJ fig.- .H..EYi• ffi.:.��'a�i.IL. ✓ -. `.�i.r ui $.!_".. -, .1 �5:. ' ,.. - e ±- •:iN're. .?wv $v^.'+N Page 7 111. D EF- I VAT 10, On tI.e basis th of -is initial eviluation: �ct COULD NCV��-,Ive a significant eff ecg I find the -�roposed pr oj'e"� "I the enviro—ent, and a JECATIVE DEC; 'J"," TION�- -�Iill be p 7epared, I find th� a t although the proposed pr I �/ courl')iave a sig-nificant effect nn the environment"6er lill a F-I a ItIot be a'64gnificant affect In this case because th"i mitigation measures 'e-Scribed on�an attache�A shier have been'',ad4ed,.' DECrA-RATION WILL BE PREPARED. ..-o the kojectl' A NEG.kTIM., f-1-4 the Provased proi ect, Al., have anVit=ent, a sigaifica4-a-, effect on the and an F-WTROTM;T IXFACT REPORT is i-4uired. Date Signature 11cle v AWL j (> ` 11. l `\ ESOl.UTION N1 t O. 111 A RESOEA1TION THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING '6MMISSION r, APPROVING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO. 84?46 LOCATED AT T)ic'NORTHEAST CORNER OF HAVEN AVENUE AND ARROW HIGHWAY IN THE INDUS IAL PARK 1 DISTRICT (SUBAREA 7) AND'THE HAVEN AVENUE OVERLAY DISTRICT WHEREAS, on the 15th day of October, 594, a compi� to application etas filed by Edward Flarerty for review of the above- described projecti and WHEREAS, on the 27thh day of February, 1985, tkee Rancho CucaMvi a Planni, .Iq Commission held a meeting to consider the above - described project, follows: NOW, THEREFORE' the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Coorn scion resolved as SECTION 1 That the following can be met: 1. That t,l a proposed project is consistent with tj�e \ ;j 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 lr the applicable;,provision,-, of the Development Code;, &1d �i 4. '� ,That the proposed use, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the i pubi'ic health, safetyip or welfare, or materially injurious to nrogsrties' or improvements in the vicinity. <' \\ SECTION 2s That this project willjnot create adverse impacts on the environment and that a Negative Declaration is issued on,February 27, 1985. SECTION 3s That Development Review No. 84 -46 is approved subuj�ct to the following conditions and attached Standard Conditions. PLANNI'NG DIVISIOY I. The plaza area shall be provided with more, pedestrian oriented facilities such ass shaded seating:'area with attractive landscaping, fountains, public art;- =andJ� kiosks, benches, furniture.' trash receptables and other ., 1-7t % ,A DR 84-46 Page t 2. _ The landscaping shall have an overallr -thy with s�ecial - lanscape�treatment along Haven Avenue, Arrow Hig�wy and at the entra�Zce of ;tire plaza area. The special I dscape treatment shall be designed to accentuate 0 architecture of the project. ` 3. The proposed brick veneer shall be changed W split dace , " block or (S texturizel brick (Velour texture Y Mwigannse . Heavy Speck) for compatibflity to entire -, c al area,. the metal roof shall b2 of.,browrnisl'r color- for compatV�Oity of "K-Mart. 4. Trash enclosure shall be designed per the C ty� Standards. - _ 5. Any proposed '"sign shall be a separateit. 6. All roof appurtenances, including air conditit ers; sh Cl be architecturaily integrated, shielded frow' view and the sound buffered from adjacont- properties. details shall be included in building plans. Y APPROVED AND ADOP ;.D THIr,27TH OA� Ob 1EERttARY, 1955« j PLANNING COMMISSION CF THE diT.Y OF RfANMGi7L' AONGK f i Dennis 1... Stout, C a rman ATTEST: o . � Rick Gomez, Deputy ecretary t I, Rick Gomez, D�,puty Secretary of the Planning CWmiss on Of the City of RanchoiCucamonga, do hereby certif� that the foregoing Resl ution was duly;;�rxd... regul afi�ly introdu"ed, passed, and adopted by the P%pnni. 4 Cc erission _of the City cf`�Rancho CL amonga, at ,a eqular meeting of the Plan nq' CnwissC',j' held oq the 27th day of }=ebruary, 1985, hy,the following vote- �t,Vit: T� ) } AYES: COMMISSIONERS ii NOES: ` COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT : - COMMISSIONERS: ' 2 r - 7•.,. G y C P/ n $ Nod •41 �C6.V a. wL4 a VsL «, °a« uQ„c +yr rr �Q'`°w�Rr. ia'i 44 ► r ! r n O �y a� ♦1t 5iw ul ��bS �M1 gln 4.a s Ltl .lS yy 6V 4/AV.� C4Ga +mss °c�a;a icatld y °ttl ».=tl..'a•z rzs as iva cewU� �'NCf tl4 Q4rYry9� �, �,i•. y' LL,h �y"'N 4 f'Y'yP. Yr,L � o-0 M�L Ovv min 0��4 gt ✓M.7G,�." 40 o r «4..0 ��u .Lz 4z �= - Q.s 6 OLnyyL C3'�✓ .�... ]i 6T f'fY.."'= io�M � S+R ,.' rs Ty9�r .tlM yiv 6atl OLV � 44Wt °w4i�r L aau 44y.Cyl yR^ Cis L tS µGa CwnM S�•�rss' l'GVN4��aw oG�tY 'C V.iY {yyN,Yl�w'O. tlCKOaiV 3y� �, 4L.' 44 sLpp tl �p:C Y : l$� Rbi-ZI � + Y cyru AS' R4 +L$y � +'w y { {w M '•Y Vw tl y8'd a Y W U.M y.a a yl�.O ' Y �p"' N `��'i � -01[w +0 tl A6 ♦ 'A 1+ pp,zOYtl. Y N �C A'�L 4 ;��� 1F?.fS ',{t<V �yy.6gry ♦� _ i[F Gh. +tr O C A q 03 �R lOiLb O.O L NY.Y+� 'N1i Wp'�'n'V.y GyYr RYltl U4 >.M�,.•c $`o..s.', +'$..nv °- .$' +�c $.tea 3 a4 i 4 C iN+rS�Qw «RT xt "yam, r C ` !♦ - Y G RYS,� C jp y'i fiq 44ti6 �".Cv� Zz ►QY.L Y i i yr.Y is« yS�. L 0701 -02 0 -27-85 'PC Agenda. a 6 of 6 s�� ... .�FS4� _� � ■y '�""'. ✓ a�51�� a9.uCa '�f vVys� y _= l� .: sill � � w Hal hisG �a { ry Lgg' 3 e 3 s r' Oti i WE Ill mF,.".." . 10 �Vs�f. s LZA UPI +. a'Er J eli� ®t zt PA q� Al rs6Y •i �s '✓;ti E } s�� ... .�FS4� _� � ■y '�""'. ✓ a�51�� a9.uCa '�f vVys� y _= l� .: sill � � w Hal hisG �a { ry Lgg' 3 e 3 s r' Oti i 4m CS a� I M�_ E � Gr O �M °; s "Cf4:!e;r 3 t w G wCC� V s V dV� 40C tC P✓ �G O_b MLo i Y�Y,4 LSE ,�6L RY ✓FµVµw `S'e'w �ySy.�.�� `S Y dr�9 P� �3 `� .Wi, /r 9 ✓COr 111.0 —K, ANA s~ � ri6vk y E 7A ymy�Ar Stn YS� i K �i1 r G�4 6— O o 6SLG J6ui A ✓t p�rims K ^C� r l I✓s r a trill gi CC 6 'z ~ gym US rrt1 G-1 �.r ✓. Cr�� �lyt �LY�V _ ViLy aY'A`t' '�ij�Od4i� s2 i' r c+'s a camas 9a is mow? � � ✓d K AKVG#y d� . Y4yjdb=6 M�u KG Eli 17 —° iry � 6 • {qoq ty— T'NS rM N +13 .1 .7. Yh 16� 444Yrrr h�'� �J i - 11f NAY Z �K,�s K�aA r r : yC. is. y o�S�y it y� y M Gw0' �J _✓ C � Gr O �M °; s "Cf4:!e;r 3 t w G wCC� V s V dV� 40C tC P✓ �G O_b MLo i Y�Y,4 LSE ,�6L RY ✓FµVµw `S'e'w �ySy.�.�� `S Y dr�9 P� �3 `� .Wi, /r 9 ✓COr 111.0 —K, ANA s~ � ri6vk y E 7A ymy�Ar Stn YS� i K �i1 r G�4 6— O o 6SLG J6ui A ✓t p�rims K ^C� r l I✓s r a trill gi CC 6 'z ~ gym US rrt1 G-1 �.r ✓. Cr�� �lyt �LY�V _ ViLy aY'A`t' '�ij�Od4i� s2 i' r c+'s a camas 9a is mow? � � ✓d K AKVG#y d� . Y4yjdb=6 M�u KG Eli 17 —° iry � 6 • {qoq ty— T'NS rM N +13 .1 .7. Yh 16� 444Yrrr h�'� �J i - 11f NAY Z �K,�s K�aA r r : yC. i K �i1 r G�4 6— O o 6SLG J6ui A ✓t p�rims K ^C� r l I✓s r a trill gi CC 6 'z ~ gym US rrt1 G-1 �.r ✓. Cr�� �lyt �LY�V _ ViLy aY'A`t' '�ij�Od4i� s2 i' r c+'s a camas 9a is mow? � � ✓d K AKVG#y d� . Y4yjdb=6 M�u KG Eli 17 —° iry � 6 • {qoq ty— T'NS rM N +13 .1 .7. Yh 16� 444Yrrr h�'� �J i - 11f NAY Z r c+'s a camas 9a is mow? � � ✓d K AKVG#y d� . Y4yjdb=6 M�u KG Eli 17 —° iry � 6 • {qoq ty— T'NS rM N +13 .1 .7. Yh 16� 444Yrrr h�'� �J i - 11f NAY Z 4 }�� slY, GCL.0 m 1al+ra L. q vi +fi i17! s t ' W f ,rgw �.� o''rn°„ G G^ q qa �� F F ° °ny „ --✓ V�Eb L „a'L-, - 2 Q Q© 4 4.VS ��h V L I M M bR C C s sRC � � yab4Q CU i � �4�YY Ptl�d V � �� u uJ.Q ♦. �. 2 2 w w+Y Y Y1 F-si 4. O Oyu C C�iN tlm �['Ma �++✓ � "a t: v v p� j a~ Oftm� it ^ ^,pF ±S.n k k?QY . .V+✓,F J+'O Rq tTr W W ?E I IIa ~ ~ O Or i i { 4 � a ;m 6 Lmdp @4 W oR.b a aL u uy C CwC d d� 4 � �b ; C"Wasr"'.ttm q� W 9;6 B VE R RT�r � qq q q a .�. a a z ax ° ei 1 pR �Gr.Lw+pQ,. y .,NU,. a 4 V V ` `r.LCA a a�dgr m SAM �.. . ..z4 N N� Nom. 3 3a - D DVrC . .+ti. c' g g+ '8 & ^ mq t t o. a3 m V •.rGac � ^?m > .°-o � �u Q c cgar s snm. tly. w w r q .J C V..w'..w� ' '^•i iTOEmQ at H�z m M L . ,dye. Q }" Y Y" > Q y y 0 qS V tlTL. 4 GtiL� ! a II l dm� _ _O `rq O xL L L'O pp '^69 V.CC... g aLs � �R 41 I b >AAM.f i y. b�1.4 W WNC W.VV' 9 9A A AF 4 4N ' } a T4 t r r .. O mom. r k V r •8 �Pa C e� C ea�.^'�od gm7 k 2 . V t 6 a C � ��.FeV�ff `> �4 ggm4 N N y y6.Cq. G G GL3y. rt. � �4 a a t tiOZ ^ ^j. c ca c .v q qC t tl i i p w wq 4y0 N N Oq L4 b bEL,_. i'f Cl. V.y =E C CCAjR A A. d N N A �+ wG3 R R G G= ' 'Z T Y r r T., 9 Y -.µC. K m�� r rj v sP a4 c N Nm v v,QQy" i C p Gam. Gay O�O d E Etl�01 L L3C S SY � t'btx°.+04ii0 g gC4aL.�,.�jrp f ff «CC} t t'; G �yy t Ov r4 Y Y ( y Lyy w wfl . ?NMy L L¢ 4 O ZRZ -- mLb ( y d C d G IZ » Z L b C.f G�ON Q� 4 b O �Y r bbQ Y 4 Q • °� it s !a C. U ��. rrq :OH N Vb�Yo CC At v4pO Yap.. nom. wi4•w A � _� .'e `°'-.n.°�ca4ic N..°. .off. y°a^n �gw au � _ N4M. r-• � L 04 i Ir 1arN �y -. �C Y /ys Nit Cq� b� r ' ~.3 TtA 4* Orr oh �'aY4 4.a�` .Nr�E. Nd N Y adxQ. fix. �"'�k Va <.t . •Ya °ir6 4U� 6LC �° t tl GCC�N �°� yt• f 1 1 I Z i t i cs ° =ocd avT ioY a`LG moo bec =yw N °oa QQG t a 4 A LvRi yQ.,° ydbi "6's COr .G "r L Z "H Ur- v�. 2- 24-2 •c •NF`od w.. aRE -. i etaiL i N Cc Vc'. a+°L�C' ygcT p� AW.a- 22,5 4 'CIO NY _ A QTa L �w�Y. C ♦r.'k Ur°; i O T � W N�•� .. �A .•.'n..v_ Qa is &T= c - y° G uc .r vrQ OF. '.''YramY d in �di U,ai p.L yY Not YV, z� >a witn IyN. o ci L w F. d.s �' d qd�L� Nb .GCS °Nr.. Foy4c °O � rN -0a+ N. r H.0 l• V w L N u° yr�r d_wis OS O L.C� C 00 w'O �6Z UNr �N °Q° atiCG at0 °¢ -`a GaN Hy R°° w o: ` �` a° Ot a 0'.'" b r✓ - 95 C� N Clyy� N6 Y nN...M� Crime'' H ar�dCN �N L. » b �. Y w RT 'tl' 'YC U.w th °f y. � "' _ 4 q.. V 4 ID • w Y +.'11°N L TL WTC Lidd°° 6tHY Oi dtY aC4 u �y YpCL Yu 4CH aIC CvF w°.H +C ND41 b °N Gff 1[•�M1. N LU NYy >'� �ti BE.» 6W rU �pp i' .'- OCrR °O � kR u N}a9Nw 4LC.}. Ci°.,Na YY G�aE ^'��C+wC4L °�°� ,LGN q KA AG 04a-lc r'L i.-G G°uLOy wA ti y �� O W b cr w { ALA Q c A h N Q O 4 eat.. aM O L m� Y i C Y C Q�r aA� � • E a .`• F E �i' K E b! L a V � aq ' V L� Cb ti O 4 M w9 MQT n N L p.L4 O..p b A br E 6 CY Wly- �°+O M'� YaTt"' Vy N N1 �.•.. W:.. X �a DC � E a 4 L 2.1 N N *naXn. � . D•9 trtq. � 0 q O Y u Y q rzr.w.�nw4a N Y �¢a r .. YGU G K`.w Nb V� 6 !� Y'•v G O N G t l q •.G --'Lt Yb 1i w y 'O H m dr rru. b�uyy a ms+ AO `mLWp a tV+ of s.h Y Y y My L ° a ea w war yyC \\ � q0 C 1pffN�W�C 0 wtd NO r y X6.61 OG Cy 10- .D L{ T Y yN�U LY - L K O -�6YrQ 08 q pU 3u t•NG W w w4 ttY naO+,GG N NG Y O y'R G.. Ll O GCa 4d h wN� L u^ bt U� OI i C asG L� q .•.•1� � n. Y Gym _u W Eu y V p 'YC L .. ' • 4i.� _N 6U � Wy 4T WY NY Lfi 'b pS u0 LL Y•.. a .fib L O z Q c A h N Q O 4 eat.. aM O L m� Y i C Y C Q�r uyy � • E a .`• F E �i' K E b! L a V � aq ' V L� Cb c8 m i e n 4k L p.L4 O..p b A br E 6 CY Wly- Q h N Q O 4 eat.. aM O L m� Y i C Y Cjam.. O U y Y GQrw Q�r tt � .`• f i �i' �,c 7 � aq ' V � Cb a m i +.. i urn CCy` (.YW L p.L4 O..p b A br E 6 CY Wly- �°+O M'� YaTt"' Vy N N1 �.•.. W:.. V 0 r_ z C�L r.� �a DC t 01 0 q NS u Y q rzr.w.�nw4a V} �¢a 6 !� Y'•v z ° a ea w war yyC \\ 72 -as° h N Q O 4 eat.. aM O L m� Y i C Y Cjam.. O U y Y GQrw n qti p61 tt � .`• ° �i' �,c 7 � aq ' V � Cb .qt sa m i +.. i urn CCy` Y. L p.L4 O..p b A br E 6 CY m �°+O M'� YaTt"' Vy N O �.•.. W:.. V 0 r_ z C�L r.� 0 q u Y q rzr.w.�nw4a Sit 72 -as° .`• ° �i' �,c � aq ' V � a. i �.as'. v= wNN s Y +.. i urn CCy` Y. 6<!d La �.•1G.� m �°+O M'� YaTt"' Vy �.•.. W:.. V 0 r_ z C�L r.� Sit ° a ea w yyC \\ C wO�.' N A yN�U LY L K O C pU ¢Y t•NG a y L u O. bH GCa 4d h � � � 4uON Gy q,gym. a �•: � c An�Y � _c N pp � '�c ¢ °j iY °aru v y .a' .. ,,, y..dro -•� i> No ww vlq 's p 72 -as° r d °3a 4 dp - Z y Qj ao W _ 9J Ga wY pu V o 6 u w O Me i rd °ae a q •-� > i 9 u L q� wd G Y t M 4u U� a- U- aLL VUNU L•ti VG3 T ,9�uX A.°-> > �T ° O Aa p_d �r �- � V V, pp p� y vc �Yn CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT a 1 r r G d _i DATE: FebrLJry 27, 1985 U 1977 > TO: Chairman an& Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Rick,Gomez,,City Planner BY: John R. Meyer, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: POLICY DETERMINATION - ROYAL CREATIONS' BACKGROUND: Recently, the staff received a request from Royal Creations, Inc., to establish an off. -site loading facility for rail service. This facility, proposed between the AT &SF railroad line and 8th Street, west of -Deer Creek Cannel in Subarea 5 (General Industrial /Rail Served), would allow Royal `Creations access to rail service, see Exhibit 9 ". ANALYSIS: There are no provisions in the Industrial Area Specific Flan for off -sate loading facilities. The ISP statl,)s Mali loading facilities„ and raneuvering areas must be on -site with use". The establishment of off =site loading areas' for rail service will alloir�,�,that service to businesses which otherwise would not have it (i.e., not adjacent to rail spur). The intent of the ISP's General IndustriallRail Served category is to encourage uses to be either, rail served or functionally linked to ;rail- served land by non -rail using, activities, The intent is"that users requiring "rail service would locate adjacent to existing rail spurs or construct new rail spurs to serve their needs. In these Subareas, standards are provided to ensure future .rail access. "Lot divisions and building layouts within Subareas 2, 5 D, 10 and 1"s shall be done in 'a- '* -_,_. manner to ensure for full potential. :Iuture rail access and should not preclude rail access'to other properties within the Subarea. Despite construction of new spurs, it is inevitable that some ,parcels would be unable to gain rail access. Where rail service is physirally feasible, off -site loading facilities should' not be substituted for construction of new sm-s. Where rail{='service is not physically possible due to site constraints, it would seem appropriate to consider off -site loading facilities. The Commission should consider the following options: 1. Allow existing ,users which-cannot construct rail access, to establish off -rite loading facilities for rail service; or, ITEM 0 ggji PLANNING COMMISSloN STAFF REPORT �a. Policy Determination - Royal Cre t vAS -February 27 1965 Page 2 Ji Re affirm the industrial Area Sped4fic Plan requirements r� of all loading facilities to be oj'rsit4. a RECOMM�ADATION: If the Commission{ dete*ines that off -site loading facilities may be considered, then staff should be directed to prepare development and locationai criteria and an amendment to the Industrial 1; Area Specific Plan. If the Commission determines that off -site loadin6 r is not appropriate then the Industrial Area Specific Plan polity should be reaffirmed. Re Rectfujjnuhmitted, ilk . Go ty PI anner G:JM:jr Attachments: Exhibit - Location Flap Exhibit "an - Conceptual Site Flan t4 zr , yy�y r •� ,x*"9 �+tA�'ra��� ,} d �,y`,p� 'elf "1�' L.> t' �. f'�"„_ �.^�.r ` 3k•�K_r4�.�' 4coe.tiCW-`ssY..�.� .ia" .7 _ ._ - s ..i Ell �'-'-- rt1111T1 ' ...,..�,,. Utz � r '-il r ti.- rr•-�+-TffSl- ✓ NXWH i..rr1 Y or, T i Fri f: Co rc i t?tEL St VtL1r r] F4 f. T 'T REPORT DATE: February 27, 1985 — B77 TO: Chairman and Members of she Planning Commission FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner BY: Dan Coleman, Senior P34nner !j SUBJECT: USE DETERMINATION 85-01 - LANDSCAPE NURSERIES WITHIN UTILITY CORRIDEIFts I. ABSTRACT: Within the past year, a mixture of uses have appeared on ti ulity corridorr land, including tree farms, :landsn�se nurseries, and building supplies sales yards. 'Tree farms and building supplies and sales are permitted uses in their respective zones. The nurseries are located on Southern California Edison land; therefore, these users,,/started operation "under leases granted by SCE without City appyoval. Further, rased upon their individual location, the regulations of the Development Code, Industrial Specific Plan, or Victoria Community Plan say apply. In order- to ensure that the City`s regulations will permit &W-1- similar uses in each district, the Flanaing Commission cam-'( determine whether a use P-st specifically 7-zs'ted as permitted in any district shall bey deemed a' tpmwitted ur-e in one or,amore districts on the basis of similarity to uses specifically listed. Therefore, Staff is seeking a use i:atarminatinn ronnsardinn lantferana fm�in II. BA(XGROil ,- A summary of the five users 'located within the SCE-*"---- _ 1 colTidor is provided in Exhibit "A" for your review and consideration. One of the nurseries is located within the Victoria Planned Community„ and the other is..located within Subarea. 8 of the Industrial Specific Planned Area. Again, this use determination is only regarding rte two landscape nurseries; the remaining three lar,Ed uses are peg- witted. The Victoria Community Plan discusses the potential for mixed use of the SCE corridors: Finally, these linear, strips a land coal:: acc- mmodate any one of a number of agricultural uses that would not conflict with their use as transmission line corridors and add to the visual and 3ctuzal quality of the (�(�' environment. Amy the uses that should be - consid.;;WJ,, i are: nursery stock faams, citrus orchards, vineyards aad turf farms. Pr¢Yis30n for inklividctal private veg��74 old also be appropriate, especUlly Nexr density residential areas. ��, rrm PLAMMM COMIS,CIGH STAFF REPORT Use Determination 85 -0I February 27,1,1'€985 Page 2 1 The Industrial Specific Man does not specifically list any uses similar to a nursery. However, the ISP does specifically define agricultural uses, such as row crops, as an interim use permitted prior to full development. 1 Therefore, neither the Victoria Community Plan or Industrial Specific Plan specifically list nurseries as permitted. Any land use propa -al not specifically covered by these plan texts shall be subject to the regulations of the Development Code. Landscape; -` nurseries are specif kally listed in the Oev7opment Code as a permitted use in the Neighborhood Commercial and General;Coamercial Districts, and defined as follows: A retail service providing propagation and sale of plants, shrubs, trees,; and similar products, and related materials and sere , ;is associated with i.,*tallation, ,. maintenance, and improvement of yards; gardens,- landscaped areas, outdoor Iiving and recreation areas, and similar facilities. within Utility Corridor /Open Space District, the De— lopment Code ;. specifically Iists a oi~__3agricultural as permitted uses, variety uses ", includieg plant storage or propagation, orchards, tree farms, and greenhouses. Further, the on -site sane of products groan on sites, is permitte .- III. ANALYSIS: The issue to be considered with this use determination is�whe whether andscaFe nurseries may be considered under the development rev,` -,w arocrss as provided for agricultural uses within the UtiEity Cor dUistrict. The closest land use category to this use within 7_,,q ility Corridor District regulations is plant storage or propagation, tree 'Farms, and greenhouses, which ar"= listed as permitted agricultural uses. Agricultural uses are generally characterized by: (2) no improvements, and (2) temporary seasonal retail sales from roadside stands or trailers. Agricultural uses are considered to be a transitional land use,; such as the historic vineyards, and permitted: to continue as a legal nonconforming use. The options available to the Commission include the followings i. Determine the landscape nursery as a permitted agricultural use within the Utility Corridor (1 designation, or ` 2. Proceed to consider the landscape nursery use as an �J additional permitted use, distinct from agricultural;, uses, within the Utility Corridor designation by amending the Development Code.- 17 r; a z; rLANNINd COMKISSIOW STAFF REPORT Use Detetiaination 85 -0I February 27, 1985 i Page 3 Tt�# overall c)L�,cteristies s he two nurseries in question kNuld : appear to be that of a commercial landscape nursery operation, as defined by the,. Oeve`iopment' "Code. Due to the nature of the use, it appears anlikay that these users would continue to- operate with ^xt jfetail sales. On this basis, then, it would seem approprW":ui to consider adding landscape nurseries to the list of permitt&J uses within Utility Corridors subject to Development /Design, review C process and appropriate improvements. V. RECOMMENDATION, It is renommended that the Gommisslon make a-use determination that would allow.- -landsege nurseries--- Ithist u_ti?itY corridors subject to Development /Design Review process and direct j Staff to prepare necessary amendments to the Development Code. Re t I submi ted, ;� I rr R ck omez ty P lather G :DC:ns� Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Sur%ey Exhibit OBO - Location Map - Photographs will be available at the meeting i r i j 0-, ; t .e � t, y�, � xbi11Y!5 .t v, j N y , C C tgi7 0. �. al - u rd tia �o s - a -r�i ca �p3 r 4J Gq tU sue. O W 4J i y( 0 ro cu m t�L 'qc u c °) a os tl- ,-- r tv - CL AW; v7 4Q:3 Qt M C " O nS G LY A �'S.y $. I o a a .0 +ts > ea y? i r v °� C nt ADZ s.. a L a w u aLi ns r � Id K ¢ N LLI to N uj a w ca w w w aL r ° a la w n. cs a ci rs v 0. vi if3 tJg1 Vai Vq} ,..., to Ly U � n � Z q w L CD .. twrG C y ra i O X03 NR] t� U d-) N =to --- Ul �,.. M co ■ i■ s , � �' a as ■a�ai� ■ ERE ME !■ ■i�r� 7 i r: ■ I r ■ iiai■ ■ ■riri ■ ■il 4 ■ / a�.. ■ riii 1.-� i ■ Y ■ ■ �� as ■� ■ i ■ ■ M ■ � s ■;� A ■ tik 's ■ �iMY�■YI ■ ♦` E ■ +` + ■ C ra,3tvlii■yR t ,.: y ■ ■ ■ 4