HomeMy WebLinkAbout1985/06/12 - Agenda Packet: P.C. Agenda P F' �.. P(se c �,t"e <t Pagel -((( 6-12-85
r
'71
r<iCA
Goo
M(j
CITY OI�
�(�
- RANCi-IO CU- CAN- tc�y
^\1AJiTiiYAiSAliVl4
' .., CdY
/-.
.. ..'
/tiyC'`��y,1,�`)'ppp7,�i'yrTTj (1�7'L�y)j�� \Tj
0 .i,LL31{ ��AyTV
:1-
>
1477 i1TEx3NESDAY June 12, 198H 7:00 p.m.
LIONS PARS COMMUNITY CENTER
91613BASE LUIS
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CAT& ORNIA
L Pledge of Allegiance
It. Boll can
Commissioner Barker Commissioner Rempel�
Commissioner Chitiea Commissioner Stout
Commissioner McNiel
M. Annouiueements
IV. itpproval. of Minutes`
April 24,1985
May 8, 1985
V. Consent Calendar
The following Consent Calendar items are expected to be routine
and anon - controversial. They will be acted on by the Commission at
one time without discussion. If anyone has,concern over any item,
F
it should be removed for discussion
A. TIME.. EXTENSION FOR TENTATIVE TRACT ' 11626 --
RAMONA S&L - A custom lot residential subdivision of 96
lots on 86.53 acres —. the VL District on the north side of
Almond at Beryl Street - APN 1061 - 411 -03, 1061- 451 -01,
1061- 171 -01.
a
B. TIME EXTENSION FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 11606 - BLISS -
A custom lot subdivision of 277 lots on: 70.32 acres of land in
the Low Residential District (2 -4 du/ac) located on the north
side of the Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-way, between
Haven Avenue and Deer Creek- APN 202 - 221 -41, 202 -771 -1
through 44.
Co DESIGN REVIEW FOR TRACT 10041 - PENNHILL - The
development of 43 single,; ;-.mily detached homes on 27.16
acres of land I ted on the north side of Wilson Avenue,
;,
south side of Hillside Road,, east of Archibald.
Vi. Public Hearings
The following items are- public hearings in which concerned
individuals may voice their opinion of the related project. Please
wait to be recognized by the Chairman and address the Commission
by stating your name and address. All such opinions shalt be
limited to 5 minutes per individual for each project.
I
D. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT
REVIEW 85-07 - BARMAKIAN - The development of 88
apartment, units on 6.3 acres ' of land in the Medium
Residyntiel .District located at the south side of San
Bernardino Road, 700 feet east of Hellman - API( 208 -144 -
35 and 38.
E. DESIGN REVIEW FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 83 -09 -
ALTP_ LOMA BRETHREN IN CHRIST CHURCH - A request
-
to amend the approved elevations for a 2,860 square foot
education facility within an approved Plaster Planned church
complex on 6.8 acres of land in the;J"`,idium Residential
District (4 -8 du/ac), located at 9974 1 Street, east of
Ramona Avenue - APN 202 -171 -3135.
i
F. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 9302 -
WESTERN SYSTEMS FINANCIAL CORPORATION - A
division of 7.78 acres into one parcel for condominium
purposes located on the north side of 6th Street, on the west
side of Center Avenue - APN 209= 261 -26.
G. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FIND VARIANCE 85 -03 -
NEWSOM - A four custom dot subdivision on .72 acres of and
located between Jadeite and Archibald Avenue,
approximately 65 feet north of Tryon Street in. the Low
Residential District - APN 208 - 122 -05.
H. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 9248 -
NEWSOM - A division of 0.72 acres of land into 4 parcels in
the I-ow Residential District (2-4 du/ac) located north of
Tryon Street between Archibald Avenue and Jadeite Avenue -
1 APN 208- 122 -05.
I. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 9144 -
DAON CORPORATION - 77 of 14.8 acres of land into
12 parcels in the industrial Specific Plan (Subarea 7), Iccated
between Elm Avenue and Arrow Route on the north and south
and between Maple and White Oak Avenue on the east and
f f. west - APN 208 - 351 --030.
��
41
:i
a
J. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND REVISION TO
CONDi'TiONAL USEUSE PERMIT 83 -22 ,JORDAN ARCHITECTS
- The addition of a second story to an approved self storage
facility on 1.97 acres of land in the General Commercial l
District, located at the southeast corner of Helms Avenue
and Hampshire Street (9419 Hampshire Street) - APN 208 -
261 -57.
K. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT
11915 -2 - ROBV,, MON HOMES - The development of 150
condominium units on 1G70 net acres of land in the Medium j
Residential- District (8 -14 du/ac), located at the southeast
corner of Arrow Route and Turner Avenue - APN 209- 091 -11.
L. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMEfi . AND TENTATIVE TRACT
12873 - PARAGON HOMES - The develepment of 302 single
family detal bed homes on 60.5 acres U,f land in the LM
District (4-k'= du/ac), located on the east side of 'Haven
Avenue, between Lemon and Banyan - APN 201 = 171 -26, 30,
44, 45, 46, 47,
M. DESIGN: ,!Zv_`UW FOR TRACT 12040 - ANDEN GROUP -
Reapplication design review of new aI ahitectural
ar
elevations and changes to the site plan for 328 condominium
units on 25.6 acres of land in the Medium Residential District
(8 -14 du/ae)',�eated at the northeast earner of Turner Avenue
and Arrow Highway - APN 208- 341 -11.
N. AMENDMENT TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 83 -07 -
CHRLSTESON - Amendment to Include a fast fcad restuarant
in the concept plan for the Virginia Dare Center, a business
park" consisting of office, commercial, restaurant and theater
use on approxir.ately 13.1 acres of land in the General
Commercial- District located at the northwest corner of
Foothill and Haven Avenue - APN 1077- 104 -01 and 03.
0. ENVIRONMENTAL AaSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT
'
REVIEW 85 -09 - DEL TACO - The development of a 1900 sq.
:
ft, fast food restaurant located on the west side of Haven,
t
north of Foothill on .12 acres (Virginia Dare Center) in the
General Comir.-ircial (GC) District - A 'N 1077 -441 -027.
VII. New Business
)"
P. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT
a
W - To allow the development o
}'
6,000 square foot restaurant located at the northwest corner,
of Foothill and Haven Avenue on approximately 13 acres of
land (Virginia Dare Business Center) in the General
Cbminercial (GC) District. ,
Q, MODIFICATION TO DR 84 -38 - FOREM - Development of
160 parking spaces with fuii improvements on parcel 2 of
Parcel Map 6194 located south of 7th Street, between Haven
Boulevard and Utica Avenue, within Subarea 6 of the
Industrial Area Specific Plan - APN 209 - 411 -002.
.
VIII. Old Business
I
R. ENVIRONMENTAL - ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT
REVIEW 85-15 - ASSURED MINI - STORAGE - construction of
a mini - storage development totaling 40,13.2 sluare feet. on
1.17 acres of land in the Industrial Park District (Subare,- 6)
District located on the north side of 4th Street, east of
Turner Avenue --.APN 210- 371 -03
IX. Council Referrals '
S. LAN BENTSEN MASTER PL" (DR 84 -22) - A review of the
master plan previously approved with DR 884 -22 (Lan Bentsen
Apartments), for conformance with Ordincnee 259 (Master
Plan requirements), on approximately 40 acres of :%nd 4ocated
north of Highland Avenue, south side of Leman Avenue, east
of Haven Avenue.
r
X. Director's Reports
T, CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS 85 -6
%F. Public Comment
This is the time and place for the general public to address the
Commission. Items to be discussed here are those which do not
already appear on this agenda.
RIL Adjournment
The Planning Commission has adopted Aeministrative Regulations
that set an 11 p.m. adjournment time. `,tf items go beyond that
time, they shall be heard only with the consent of the Commission.
The Planning Commission will adjourn to a .Tuly 1, 1985 workshop
to be held at Lions Park Community Center, 9101 Base Line Road,
Rancho Cucamonga. The Jute 26, 1985 Pkw*ting Commission
rneeting has been cancelled due to lack of quorum.
Y'e<
.k
a
CITY OF RANCEO CUCAMONGA
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Regular Meeting
April 24, 198a
Chairman Dennis Stout called the regular meeting of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at 7:00 p.m. The meeting was held at
Lions Park Community Center,' 9161 Base Line Road, Rancho Cucamonga,
California. Chairman Stout then led in the pledge to the flag.
ROLL CALL
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: David Barker, Larry McNiel, Herman Rempel, Dennis
Stout
COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Suzanne Chitiea
STAFF PRESENT: Dan Coleman, Senior Planer; Rick Gomez, City
Planner;- Barrye Hanson, 3enior Civil Engineer;
James Markman, City Attorney; Otto Kroutil,
Senior Planner; Dino P4trino, Assistant Planner;
Janice Reynolds, Secretary; Lisa Wininger,
Assistant Planner
APPROVAL of MINUTES
Motion: Commissioner Barker requested that his "No" vote on Tentative Tract
10349 be clarified to state that he agreed that Thoroughbred should be
designed as a through street. Moved by Barker, seconded McNiel, carried to
approve the Minutes of the March 27, 1985 Plar -ing Commission meeting with the
correction requested by Commissioner Barker.
CONSENT CALENDAR
A. TIME EXTENSION FOR PARCEL MAP 7902 Located on the south side of Wilson
Avenue, east side of Mayberry Avenue - APN 201- 181 -60.
B. REVISION OF ANNUAL GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT HEARING DATES
C. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 85.05 AJA - The
construction of 6 one and two story garden office buildings on 8.5 acres
located at the southeast corner of Aspen Avenue and Laurel Street in the
Industrial Park District (Subarea 7) - APN 208 -351 -024.
Chairman Stout requested that item: C be removed for discussion.
Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded by McNiel, carried, to adopt the remaining
items of the Consent Calendar.
C. Environmental Assessment for Development Review 85 -05 Aja
Chairman Stout requested that design review for the project be brought back to
the Planning Commission as a Consent Calendar item.
Motion: Moved by Stout, seconded by Barker, carried, to issue a Negative
Declaration for Development Review 85 -05, with a condition the. the design
review is to be submitted on the Commission Consent Calendar.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
D. ENVIRONMENTAL_ ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 84 -12 - DAVIS The
development of 328 apartments on acres of land in the Low Me ium (4-
8 du /ac) and Medium (8-•14 du /ac) 'Residential Districts located on the
northeast corner of Arrow Highway and Etiwanda Avenue APN 229 - 041 -11
(Continued from March 13, 1985 meeting).
Dan Coleman, Senior Planner, reviewed the staff report.
Chairman Stout opened the public hearing.
Bruce Jordan, architect representing the applic.,nt, requested approval of the
project.
There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed.
Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded by Barker, to issue a Negative Declaration
and adopt the Resolution approving Development Review 84 -12 by the following
vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:. tEMPEL, BARKER, MCNIE!, TOUT
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: CF ;1TIEA - carried
E. ENVIRONMENTAL _'ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84 -31 DIVERSIFIED
PROPERTIES The development of an int;�yrated shopping center of
approximately o' z mately 118,988 square feet which includes a gasoline service
station, as proposed Phase I and a conceptual master plan for future
phases. All an approximately 15 acres of land in the Neigborhood
Commercial (NC) District, generally located on the northeast corner of
Highlanr Avenue and Haven Avenue - APN 201- 271 -53. (Continued from
March 27, 1985 meeting.)
Dan Coleman, Senior Planner, reviewed the staff report.
Chairman Stout opened the public hearing.
John O'Meara, representing the applicant, stated that the plan before the
Commission addressed all of the issues previously discussed.
Chairman Stout asked Mr. O'Meara if he would object to a condition requiring
the storefronts to be submitted for review by the Design Review Committee.
Mr. O'Meara replied that, he would have no objection.
There were no further cornents, therefore the public hearing was closed,
The Commissioners commended the .applicant for his work and cooperative effc
in the redesign of this project.
Motion: Moved by Stout, seconded by Barker, to issue a Negative Declaration
and adopt the Resolution approving Conditional Use Permit 84-31, with an added
condition to require review and approval of the stof, front. designs by the
Design Review Committee. Motion carried by the following vote,
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: STOUT, BARKER, MCNIEL, REMPEL
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA - carried"
F. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 84 -03 -A - H &H - A
request to amend the General Plan Land Use Map from Low Density
Residential (2 -4 du /ac) to Medium -High Residential (14 -24 du /ac) on 13.55
acres of land located on the south side of Feron Avenue, -: between Twiner
and Ramona - APN 209- 085 -02, 03, 14. (Continued from April 10,.1985
meeting.)
Lisa Wininger, Assistant Planner, gave an overview of the EIR and significant
impacts associated with the proposed General Plan Amendment.
Planning Commission Minutes -3- April 24, 1985
fir ..
Annette Sanchez, representing the consulting firm of Sanchez, ralarico
Environmental Consultants, responded m written comments rec0ved cr. the•EIR.
Chairman Stout opened the public hearing.
?racy Tibbals, 6286 Moonstone, Rancho Cucamonga, attorney representing the
applicant, complimented the consultant for the data con�ained within the EIR;
however, luestioned the conclusions regarding land use and aesthetic
elements. He stated that the project enhances the City's policies, provides
affordable housing and eliminates the need for long commutes.
Nacho Gracia, 10364 Humbolt, opposed the project based on its high density and
incompatibility with the surrounding area.
There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed.
James Markman, City Attorney, advised that the Planning Commission would
simply be acknowledging the ronsideration of data contained in the EIR and
making a , commendation to the City Council for final decision.
Otto Ktiutil, Senior Planner, clarified that if the Commission wished to
approve the General Plan Amendment, it would only recommend approval to the
City Council.
Commissioner Barker stated that over and over again groups of various sizes
have come before the Commission requesting a continuance of stated policy that �
transitions in density be provided to guarantee compEtibility. Further, that
he would recommend to the other Commissioners and the City Council that the
.ame standards be applied to this project in this location as to any other
project in any other location of the City. Further, that what this applicant
is requesting is to increase the density from 2 -4 dwelling units per acre to
14 to 24 dwelling units per acre and placing it in the middle of an existing
neighborhood. He stated that this proposal would have an immediate effect on
the community and is incompatible.
Commissioner Rempei advised that the City is more than adequately meeting
housing needs in a broad band across the City. Further, as supported by the
EIR, this is not the right place for this project.
Commissioner MCNiel agreed that land use is a problem and stated that this is
not the place for 23 units to the, -acre.
Chairman Stout stated that the City has reviewed a number of General Plan
Amendment requests and that transition of density has been a major factor in
each of those reviews. He advised that WE project should be given the same
consideration regarding the transition of density as any of V- previous
requests. Further, that he would recommend that the Commlss`z< make the
findings that they have considered the EIR and based on that review and
additional input, deny the General plan Amendment request.
Planning Commission Minutes -4- April 24, 1985
4
I
Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded,by Barker, to deny Environmental Assessment
and General Plan kiendment BE-03-A, H & H Investments. Motion carried by the
following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: REMPEL, BARKER, MCNIEL, STOUT
NOES: COMAISSIONERS:* NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: - CHITIEA - carried
8 :15 p.m. - Planning Commission Recessed
8:25 p.m. Planning Commission Reconvened
G. ENVIRONME,.`^ ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS AMENDMENT 85 -04 - OWENS
- A requesi<'to amena the Development Districts Map from 'L" Low Density
Residential) to "ISP" (Industrial Specific Plmn) - Industrial Park for 2.5
acres of lard located on the southeast corner of Archibald and Main - APN
209- 062 -01, 02.
Lisa Wininger, Assistant Plann %r, reviewed the staft report.
Chairman Stout opened the pu5lic heal ^ing.
There were no comments, therefore the public hearing was closed.
Motion: Moved by Stout, seconded by Rempel, to adopt the Resolution
recommending approval to the City Council of Development Districts Ar•i 'r<znt
85 -04. Motion carried by the fallowing vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: STOUT, REMPEL, BARKER, MCNIEL
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA - carried
H. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 9103 DAON CORPORATION - A
division of -8.33acress Mt-9-16—parcels in the Industrial ar esignation
(Subarea 7) located on the west side of Red Oak Street, at Aspen and
Laurel Streets - APN 208- 351 -024.
Barrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer, reviewed the staff report.
Chairman Stout opened the public hearing.
Planning Commission Minutes
-5-
April 24, 1985
Jack Corrigan, representing the" applicant, requested that special conditions
one and two of the City Engineer's report be deleted. Mr. 'Corrigan advised
that these two conditions referred to parking requirements, which th" City is
currently studying.
Jim Barton, 8409 Utica, Rancho Cucamonga, stated that designing parking Lots
was too premature at the parcel map level.
There were n°d ,further comments,, therefore the public hearing was closed.
Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded by McNiel, to issue a Negative Declaration
and adopt the P'�olution approving Parcel Map 91 03, with the deletion of City
Engineer's Report special conditions one and two pertaining to parking
requirements. Motion carried by the following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: REMPEL, MCNIEL, BARKER, STOUT
NOES:. COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA rarried
I. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND UEVELUF'Pt "I Wb IKIGIJ AMMUNtRI as -UU - 4111
OF RANCHO U N - A Development District amendment from Low
Residential (2- du /ac) to Office /Professional for C_77 acres of load
locaed at the southwest corner of Base Line Road and Beryl Street - APN
208- 593 -10.
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 kenipel, seconded by Barker, to adopt the Resolution
recommending approval of Development Districts Amendment 85 -05 to the City
Council. Motion carried by the following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS REM °EL, BARKER, MCNIEL, STOUT
NOES. COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA - carried
Planning Commission Minutes
DIRECTOR'S REPORTS
J. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 84 -29 THE KOLL COMPANY -
he deve opmen� 'o� a eigf�t'. ki ing industrial par com;. ex tots ing
approximately 104,000 square feet on 7.4 acres of land in the Industrial
Park District (Subarea 12) located on the east side of Milliken, south of
6th Street - APN 229- 261 -58.
Dino Putrino, Assistant Planner, reviewed the staff report.
Glen Allen, representing the applicant, gave an overview of the project
changes.
Commissioner Barker stated that when this project had been before the Planning
Commission previously, it was discussed that this project is located in an
Industrial Park designation and the Commission gave the applicant direction on
what types of amenities are necessary within that designation. However, it
did not seem that any of these areas had been addressed by the applicant.
Chairman Stout stated that it was discussed by the Commission during the
previous meeting that only irinimal z;hanges appeared necessary to bring this
project into ctnV'ormance with the I',fdustrial Park category requirements. He
agreed that these areas had not be! >n addressed, therefore the project did not
meet the goals and policies of the'City for this type of development.
Motion: Moved by Barker, secrnded by Stout, to deny Development Review
84 -29. Motion carried by the following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER, STOUT, MCNIEL, REMPEL
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA - carried
Jim Markman, City Attorney, advised that it would be necessary to p'::,e a
Resolution of Denial on the May 8, 1985 Planning Commission agenda coti.ent
calendar.
K. STATUS REPORT ON CERTAIN CUP EXPIRATIONS'
Dan Coleman, Senior Planner, reviewed the staff report.
Jim Markman, City Attorney, advised that any changes to conditions for
Conditional Use Permits in conjunction with consideration for time extensions
would have to be done ,hrough the public hearing process.
Planning Commission Minutes -7- April Z4, 1985
41; was the consensus of the - .Commission that church uses requesting.. time .
extensions would proccei with the submittal of a progress, report. Other
Conditional Use Permit time extension would be keyed to specific plans and a
good faith effort required on the part of the applicant to proceed.
L. COUNCIL REFERRAL OF CITIZEN ADVISORY LAND USE RECOMMFNWIIONS
Otto Kroutil, Senior Planner, reviewed the itaff report.
It was the consensus of the Commission that the land use recommendations be
placed on the May 8, 1985 Planning Commission agenda for further
consideration.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Rick Gomez, City Planner, advised that the Planning Commission should select
the days which would be most convenient to conduct the Planning Commission
workshops.
It was the consensus of the Commission that the workshops would be held on the
first Monday of each month. The Commission will be advised of the time and
location at a later date.
Chairman Stout requested that the Conditional Use Permit for the Boar's Head
be brought back for public hearing as soon as possible.
ADJOURNMENT
Motion: Moved by Barker, seconded by McNiel, carried, to adjourn.
9 :30 p.m. — Planning Commission Adjourned.
Respectfully submitted,
Rick Gomez
Deputy Secretary
i Planning Commission. Minutes
R -lM
- GITY:OF :MNCHO CUCAMONGA
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES.
Regular Meeting
May 8, 1985
` Chairman Dennis Stout called the regular meeting of the City of Rancho
r' Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at 7 :00 p.m. The:geeting was field at
` Lions Park Community Center, x161 Base Lire Road, Rancho Cucamonga,
California. Chairman Stout then Ted in the pledge to the flag.
ROLL CALL
COMMISSI09ERS PRESENT: Suzanne Chitiea, Larry McNiel, Harman Rempel,
Dennis Stout
f COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Davl11 Barker
STAFF PRESENT: Curt Jof,:iston, Associate Planner; Rick Gomez.
City Planner; Barrye Hanson, Senior Civil
Engineer; Howard Fields, Assistant Planner; N ;ncy
Fong, Assistant Planner; Otto Kroutil, Senior
Planner; James Markman, City Attr_ney= Janice
Reynolds, Secretary; Paul Rougeau, Traffic
Engineer
I
CONSENT CALENDAR
A. TIME EXTENSION FOR CONDITIONAL JSE PERMIT 81 -10 - LAMS OF GOD fVAN3F.LftAL
LUTHERAN CHURCH - Located at 9513 Business Center Drive, Stifte J.
o-
B. TIME EXTENSION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 82 -24 - McINTYRF Temporary
F' Empire Bank located at 9506 Haven Avenue.
k
C. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 84 -1. - CROWDER - The
development of nine research an -development buildings Totaling
139,650 square feet on 9,16 acres of land in tine Industrial Park (Subarea
6) category located at the southwest corner- G. 6th Street and Utica Avenue
- APR 210 -08 -7.
;t , c
Motion: Moves by Chitiea, seconded by McNiel,; to approve Tentative Tract
12914 with the deletion of Planning Division, Condition 2`regarding the
perimeter wail. Jim Markman, City Attorney, advised that a statement should
be added that approval of the °entative map is contingent on the approval of
i Development District Amendment 85 -02 by the City Council.
G. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND WNDITIONAL USE PERMIT 85 -06 - CALIFORN A
RETIREMENT ILL INC. - Q eve opment of a 104 unit retirement hotel
or senior citizens with other Services provided, such as dining facility,
recreation and exercising facility, arts and crafts, barber and beauty
shops, on 1.76 acres of land in the Office Professional District, located
at the south side of Base line, 700 fit east of _Carnelian - APN 207-031 -
19.
Nancy Fong, Assistant Manner, reviewed the staff report, -
Ch, airman Stout opened the public hearing.
Richard Thomas, representing the applicant, audrf.ssgd condition 4 requiring a
continuous barrier /fence around the recreation area. Mr. Thomas advised that
most residents like to see r-hat is happening around them and do not like to be
walled in. Mr. Thomas additionally requested, removal of conditions 6 and 7
regarding double glazing windows; and use of double paned tinted glass. He
advised that the applicant would Tike to have the opportunity to use different
techniques for light and glare issues and suggested that more details could be
submitted prior to the buildinn permit phase.
John Jason, also representing - applicant, reiterated Mr. Thomas's comments.
There were no further comment; Mere the pu:)lic (hearing was closed.
The Commissioners commended the r-ppt,rcants for their cooperative efforts wit!.
the City on the project.
Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded by Chitiea, to remove condition -4 regarding
V e 6 foot fence around the recreation area from the north and east sides,
condition 6 regarding double glazing of Window;, and con diti on 7 regarding
use
G
of double paned windows. Motion carried by tF, =a following vote:
tF AYES: COMMISSIONERS: REMPEL, CHITIEA, MCNIEL, STOUT
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: WKER -carr ies;
.boning Commission Minutes -3- May p, 1985
D. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 84 -29 - THE KOLL COMPANY The development of ing industrial park ccmpex Iota ng
approximately. 104,000 square feet on 7.4 acres of land in the Industrial
Park District , ubarea 12' located on the east ride of Milliken, south of
60 Strest - APH 223- 261 -58.
Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded by Chitiea, carried, to adopt the Consent
Calendar. Chairman Stout announced that Item G, Environmental Assessment and
Development Review 8~ Crowder, had been withdrawn by the applicant.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
E. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AMENOME,iT 85 -02 '
KORMAN A Deve1cpment District en :Rent from Me ium Resi enti'al T8--IT
u ac to Low Me•iium 'Residential (4 -8 du /ac) for 4.75 acres of land
located at the northeast corner of Archibald A•'..nue and f9ighland Avenue
APN 201 - 252 -23, 25, 26. (Related File: TT.12914)
F. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 12914 - HIGHLAND VILLAGE
The development of 79 s detachea fiames on 9.75 acres or' land
it Medium Residential District (8-14 du/ac), (Low Medium Development
Di! ct Adnendment request pending), located on the northeast corner of
Arr al.` Avenue and Highland -- APN 201 - 252 -23, 25, 26. (Related File:
rte- 12)
Ha .rd Fleids, Assistant Planner, reviewed the staff report.
Oscar Montez, representing the applicant, stated concurrence with the staff
reports and resolutions of approval.
Petar Laden, also representing the applicant, advises that the project had
been designed in accordance with City policies.
There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Rempel was concerned with Planning Division Condition 2 regarding
redesign 'f the perimeter block wall, and advised that his preference would be
to use larcdTcaping in conjunction with the existing fence.
Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded by Stout, to approve the Resolution
reco,!mending approval to the City Council of Development District Amendment
85 -02. Motion carried by the following dote:
j AYES: COMMISSIONERS: REMPEL, STOUT, CHITZEA, MCNIEL
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER - carried
L,
C
Planning Commission Minutes
-2- May d, 1985
H. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 85 -05 - PAULEY - The
development of a min - warehouse 1aci Tity consisting of buildings- a
caretaker's quarters totaling 125;730 square feet on 4.45 acres of land in
the Minimum Impact Heavy Industrial District (Subarea 9) located at the
northeast corner, of Utica avenue and Sth Street - APN 209 - 143 -04.
Nancy Fong, Assistant Planner, reviewed the staff report.
Chairman Stout opened the public hearing.
Ed Pauley, applicant, ;;+_ated concurrence with the staff report, Resolution and
conditions of approval.
There were no .further comments, therefore the public h�_, ring was closed.
Motion: Moved by McNiel, seconded by Rempel, to issue a Negative Declaration,
and adopt the Resolution approving Conditi;,nal Use Permit 85 -05. Motion
carried by the following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: MCN410., RrMPEL, CHITIEA, STOUT
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER - carried
Chairman Stout advised that the following items were related and would be
heard concurrently.
I. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 85 -07 - FISHER - The
construction of an auto repair uM ding wit. of ice totaling 316T square
feet on 25 acres of land to the General Commercial District, located on
the north side of Base Line, on the west side of Roberds - APN 202 -092-
009.
J. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND VARIANCE 85 -02 - FISHER - A request to permit
zero lot line along the wester y side subject property on .25 acres of
land in the General Commercial District located on the north side of Base
Line, west side of Roberds - APN 202- 092 -009.
Howard Fields, Assistant Planner, reviewed the staff report.
Chairman Stout opened tNe public hearing.
Dan Fisher, applicant, stated concurrence with the staff, report, Resolution,
and conditions of approval.
Planning Commission Minutes -4- May 8, 1985
i
E
Commissioner Rempel stated that during Design Review it was discussed that the
first parking stall was to be angled. He advised that this condition had been
omitted and asked Mr. Fisher if it would be a problem to add it to the
Resolution.
Mr. Fisher replied that it would not be a problem.
There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing w.,,.. '
Motion: Moved by Stout, seconded by McNiel, to approve Variance 85 -OiL..
Motion carried by the following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: STOUT, MCNIEL, CHITIEA, REMPEL
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER - carried
Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded by Stout, to approve Conditional Use Permit
85 -07 with an added condition amending tae first parking stall, per Design
Review Committee requirements.
K. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 9U54 -
CORPORATION - A division of ZU.9 acres into one parcel in the m iisiae
Residential Development District, located north of Aimond Avenue, west of
Big Tree Road - APN -200- 051 -06.
Barrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer, reviewed the staff report. He advised
that the attorney for the first trust lienholder of the property requested
that access be provided to the remainder parcel through parcel one in order to
provide maximum design flexibility for the remaining parcels. He suggested a
condition that would place a blan'-et easement over parcel one for the future
dedication and improvement-of a public street on an alignment established by
an approved master plan for either parcel. Further, that the applicant had
also requested that an irrevocable offer of dedication be granted to the City
for the alignment of future roads.
Chairman Stout opened the public hearing.
Edward Hopson, attorney representing the applicant, gave an overview of the
project and advised that the property is in foreclasure, therefore the
applicant did riot have the four or f1ve months available to return with a
tentative map. Further, that what, was being requested by the applicant would
be approval of a 21 -acre parcel, not the streets within the parcel. He
additionally stated that a 21 -acre parcel is large enough to handle any of the
street configuration alternatives previously presented to the Commission. Mr,
Hopson referred to the conditiot, requiy ing bonds ft:,. ' .?irovements that might
Planning Commission Minutes -5
May 8, 1985
be ultimately constructed and requested that a lien agreement be. required
instead. He stated that it is the concern of all property owners in the area
that they have ultimate usable access to develop tKeir property.
Mr. Hanson replied that if the Commission so desired, Engineering condition
B -1 could be deleted and 8-2 checked with an additional statement requiring
paved access to parcel one and the remaind'sr parcel.
James Markman, City Attorney, advise.. that an instrument would have to be
drafted for a blanket easement which would describe the length and width, and
type of standards to be used for the roads. He recommended that the condition
regarding the lien agreement should state that it applies to the present
alignment on parcels south of parcel one, Additionally, it should also be
understood that if a subdivision agreement is entered into requiring security
for the improvement of those streets within a certain amount of time, that the
City doesn't have to implement the lien agreement.
Ken Linville, Civil Engineer, addressed the Commission requesting approval of
the parcel map.
Art Bridge, 8''15 Banyan, Rancho Cucamonga, was concerned with drainage and the
approval of a circulation system for this parcel which might prove to be
detrimental to development of the entire acreage. He requested denial of the
parcel map until such time as all concerns in the EIR are addressed.
Jeff King, 7337 Pasito, Rancho Cucamonga, suggested that if the Commission
deems it necessary to have an irrevocable offer of dedication over parcel one,
it would be necessary to have the same offer to what is depicted as the County
area on the map since without it that land would be totally landlocked.
There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Chitiea was concerned with the street layout. She advised that
because of the jogs in the circulation system, it would seem to preclude
development of the design most preferred by the Commission in previous
meetings.
Commissioner Rempal ste'sed that the roads presently shown on the parcel map
are in theory only and oould be changed at the time of development. Further,
that it didn't necessarily seem that the street design could not meet the
constraints of vhat the Commission expected at the time of tt ,tative map
submittal.
Chairman Stout stated that while he was sympathetic of the applicant's
dilemma, the City must base decisions on how a project relates to the City and
what is in the! best interest of the community. Further, that from the
beginning the Commission has reviewed this property as one parcel and to now
begin parceling off sections would be piecemeal development. He additionally
stated that it 'has alwaYtc been past policy of the City to require a tract map
in situations where development problems exist; therefore, without knowing
what the development is going to look like, could not make the findings
necessary to approve the parcel map.
Planning Commission Minutes -6- May 8, 1986
z
s
Mr. Markman stated{ that. .at the -Commission's direction he could suggest
l f th 1 t' - t d
Ll
anguage or a Reso u ioa to refiec enzal.
Motion: Moved by Stout, seconded by McNiel, to den., • Environmental Assessment
and Parcel Map 9084 with a'change to the Resolution title to reflect denial,
the statement that the following findings cannot be met, removal of paragraph
one and Section 2. Motion carried by the folluwing vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: STOUT, MCNIEL, BARKER, CHITIEA
NOES., COMMISSIONERS: REMPEL
ABSENT: CC`!MISSIONERS: NONE carried'
^ommissioner Rempei stated his reason for voting No was because he felt the
street configuration was not loci-ad in at this stage of development.
L. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84 -16 - ASSURED MINI-
STORAGE Construction of a mini-storage development, with carets er s
quarters, totaling 32,850 sgtfare feet on 1.44 acres of t.rld in the
Industrial Park (Subarea 6) District, located on the north side of 4th
Street, east of Turner Avenue - APN 210- 371 -03. (Continued from March 13,
1985 meeting.)
M. VARIANCE ,84 -02 - `ASSURED MINI- STORAGE - A request to allow a reduction in
the require minimum landscape coverage in order to construct a mini-
storage facility on the north side of 4th Street, east of Turner Avenue,
in Subarea 6, Industrial Park designation - APN 210- 371 -03. (Continued
from March 13, 1985 meeting.)
Rick Gomez, City Planner, announced that these items had been withdrawn by the
applicant.
By consensus, the Commission accepted withdrawal of the applications.
NEW BUSINESS:.
N. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 85 -15 - ASSURED I4INI-
3ri 'lstruction of a m n - storage eve opment totaling 40,112 sq.
ft on acres of land in the Industrial Park (Subarea 6) District
located on the north side of 4th Street, east of Turner Avenue - APN 21.0-
371 -03.
-7-
May 8, ,1985
Rick Gomez, 'City Planner, advised that the applicant requested Commission
review of this item at a later date; therefore, recommended re"val of
Environmental Assessment and Development Review 85 -15 from the agenda.
By consensus, the Commission removed the item from the agenda for resubmittai
at a later date.
DIRECTOR'S REPORTS
�?. LAND USE ANALYSIS
Otto Kroutil, Senior Planner, reviewed the staff' report.
Chairman Stout invited public comment,
Michael Payne, expressed concerns with the proposal on behalf of the Buildiilg
Industry Association (BIA). He advised that land use amendment, such as those
proposed by the Advisory Commission would cause serious impacts and that the
BIA would consider litigation procedures should the City approve the proposed
land use reductions.
Jeff Sceranka, 6211 Phillips way, Rancho Cucamonga, stated that the Citizens
Advisory Committee recommendations were an insult to those who worked on the
various City documents which make Rancho Cucamonga one of the finest and
fastest growing cities in Southern California. Further, that he didn't have a
problem with any residenf trying to combat incompatibility in their own area,
but to recommend charr,es to city -wide documents which took eight years of
planning, public he -arings, and research was absurd. He advised that the City
needs to stand by their plans and consider change on a case -by -case basis.
Jim Bailey, expressed concerns with the proposed land use reductions on behalf
of the William Lyon Company, and urged approval of the no change alternative.
Chairman Stout felt that the Citizens Advisory Commission is basically putting
the cart 'before the horse. Further, that the could not agree that the C;ty
should simply take the Development Code and other planning docu- ments, throw
them out and start all over. He stated that he could agree with looking at
particular sites in the City on a case -liy -case basis, but reducing densities
throughout the entire City would be thi, wrong approach, In response to the
CAC's concern regarding the high densit; ranges, Commission Stout advised that
most of the high density sites are dlready built -out and there very few
remaining. Further that it has not been the policy of this Commission to
raise densities. He advised that his preference would be to recommend to the
City Council the selection of the alternative which would allow consideration
on a case -by -case basis, and for the Council to advise the Commission
regarding which areas are to be further studied.
Planning Commission Minutes -8 May 8, 1985
13
EN
�1 _
L1I
Commissioner Rempel advised that not only the General ?Ian and Development
Code would be affected, but also the Specific Plans and Planned Communities.
He stated that he wouldn't have a problem with looking at a site when it comes
up, but didn't think the City needed to go looking for them. Further, that
the City looked at the needs of the community, during the adoption of each of
the plans and that they are documents of which the City and its citizens can
be proud, therefore, would recommend the no change alternative.
Commissioner Chitiea stated that sites should be looked at before a developer
spends a lot of time and money into development, and would agree with
consideration on a sate -by -site basis.
Commissioner McNiel stated that his ini%;�"-•pretation was that the alternative
was either a reduction or no change in densities. He further stated that his
concern wi,s with the word "reduction" and would prefer "reconsideration ".
That beinS. the case, he would opt for the no change alternative.
Jim Markmae; City Attorney, stated that he understood the BIA's concern, but
aeu changes in land use densities would not be made overnight, but would be
subject to advertised public hearings before the Planning Commission and City
Council. Additionally, that any changes considered by the City would be under
the guidance of the City Attorney's office.
Chairman Stout advised staff that the decision of the Commission seemed to be
two Commissioners, himself and Commissioner Chitiea, in support of the
alternative to look at sites on a case -by -case basis, and two Commissioners,
McNiel and Rempel, in support of the no change alternative.
Otto Kroutil, Senior Planner, advised the Commission that 'staff would convey
the Commission's recommendations to the City Council at their May 15, 1985
meeting.
P. REVIEW OF EQUESTRIAN TRAIL KtQUiKtMtn1J ruK ItMAILM 1KH41 1CVU4
wuvULM"u rmuiri4 - N Vubt —um 7v4 V, — r , •
and-in t—he Very Low Residential District (less than 2 du /ac), located on
the west side of Hermosa Avenue, south of Almond Street - APN 201 - 071 -5,
6, 25, 26, 35, and 36.
Dick Scitt of Woodland Pacific stated concerns with trails requirements placed
on this tentative tract by the Trails Committee.
Jim Markman, City Attorney, advised that the Commission could listen to Mr.
Scott's concerns; however, would suggest that direction not be given at this
time since these are matters subject to public hearing.
The consensus of the Commission was to defer discussion regarding trails fro
Tentative Tract 12902 until such time as the tract comes before the Planning
Commission as a public hearing.
Planning Commission Minutes -9-
May 8, 1985
ADJOURNMENT:
Motion: Moved by Stout, seconded by McNiel, unanimously carried, to adjourn.
10:05 p.m. - Planning Commission adjourned.
Respectfully submitted,
Rick Gomez
Deputy Secretary
Planning Commission Minutes
C
nrmv nL� D A AT TM nTTn A TAnTTTfl A
STAFF REPORT z�
O O
F Z
UI ?
1977
DATE: June 12, 1985
TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner
BY: John Meyer, Assistant Planner
SUBJECT: TIME EXTENSION FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 11626 RAMONA S & L - A
custom 7t residential subdivision of 96 lots on $6.53
acres in the Very Low District on the north side of Almond
at Beryl - APN 1061 - 411 -03, 1061.451 -01, 1061- 171 -01.
I. BACKGROUND: The new owner, Ramona Savings & Loan, is reque ing
a one year time extension for Tentative Tract 11626, as described
above. The time extens,i`1l was requested to complete their
feasibility and development study ,n the property. Tract 11626
was originally approved July 27th, 1983, and set to expire July
27th, 1985.
II. ANALYSIS: Staff has analyzed the proposed time extension with
the development criteria outlined in the City's Development
Code. Bated upon this review, the project meets the basic
development standards for the Very Low Residential Uistrict.
III. RECOMMENDATION: Planning Division recommends a 12 month
extension tr, uuly 27, 1986.
Attachments: Letter from Appiicant
Exhibit "A" - Location Map
Exhibit "B" - Trat't Map
ITEM A
`t
e 60 to
May 3, 1985
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Planning Department
PO Box 807
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
Re: Tentative Tract Map No. 11626
Gentlemen:
This is a letter of request for a one (1) year
extension on the above - referenced Tentative Tract Map
which is due to expire on July 27, 1985. The extension
is necessary to give us the time, as new owners of this
property in Rancho Cucamonga: to complete our feasibility
and developement study on this property.
Please inform me as to what procedure I must
follow in order to consumate this extension. If you
should have any questions, please call.
Sincerely,
RAMONA SAVINGS AND LOAN
Patty Mangano
Escrow Secretary
WM E Chapmmn AVenu � O ge. CaWornlu 52669 0 {714) 997.0731
0 .i
El
mr-r-
i
r
NORTH -
CITY OF ITEM:
RANCHO Cj..�TCt�9 NIOtNGA TITLE= �' ��
PLAINNINU DIVISKYN EXHIBIT. SCALE=
A -3
� _' _ � • .r. ��: � fig,
^'' -YSv t—s•- Z L�l� ",..E
Sias' � ��„F��'��,�,.l -°`•� s-� ` "� \"�`� Ys-
®� i�li� �SY�� _ 1 t l J,i '' 3� =_S. �` f- =''F .; I j. s � >� Y♦ I
;III t
3 1
W u
a lardild �.�' ��� �•+. � - i� - S - � tea, : c .
tea aI �a 7 � `' _ �'! ( eA ter.♦' ,.ra. _.�; Z: t � �i
ad t �i !t !3 d z
d�'e
iii ; t�... It•` -i :IC- -T 5 � :� � a ��d d`!`
i ➢iiia H53i dc�i 1
{ 7 i!
i
r, i F 2
� 5 1 2 a. ■t
of"
U i l t t
. �+..�`- _ r Y ci t' •� . 1, ' x .};^ i�i� 34 30��56 ?��it Ba�'a_i'z�i:
1, �..+
�, \''I :f
!'H F'��.•�;^v- `]r`;:.. \ \
����a�
t��'!t�
\d' _,I
' "3 b ' 6 •t
i ! - -
,
�I
l jl
� _' _ � • .r. ��: � fig,
^'' -YSv t—s•- Z L�l� ",..E
Sias' � ��„F��'��,�,.l -°`•� s-� ` "� \"�`� Ys-
®� i�li� �SY�� _ 1 t l J,i '' 3� =_S. �` f- =''F .; I j. s � >� Y♦ I
;III t
3 1
W u
a lardild �.�' ��� �•+. � - i� - S - � tea, : c .
tea aI �a 7 � `' _ �'! ( eA ter.♦' ,.ra. _.�; Z: t � �i
ad t �i !t !3 d z
d�'e
iii ; t�... It•` -i :IC- -T 5 � :� � a ��d d`!`
i ➢iiia H53i dc�i 1
{ 7 i!
i
r, i F 2
� 5 1 2 a. ■t
of"
U i l t t
. �+..�`- _ r Y ci t' •� . 1, ' x .};^ i�i� 34 30��56 ?��it Ba�'a_i'z�i:
RESOLUTION MO.
A RESOLUTION OF ^ -
THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION
APPROVING A TTME EXTENSION FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 11626.
WHEREAS, a request has been filed for a time extension for the
above~dp-cribed project pursuant to Section 17.02.100; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conditionally approved the auove
described Tentative Tract.
SECTION 1: The Rancho Cucamonga plannini, Comn ssim has made the
following findings:
A. The previously approved Tentative Map is in
substantial compliance with the City's current
General Plan, Specific Plans, Ordinances, vlamn,
Codes and Policies; and,
B. The extension of the Tentative Map will not cause
significant incuos1stencieT with the current General
Plan, Specific Plans, Ordinances, Plans, Codes and
Policies; and,
C. The extension 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 crdinamce.
SECTION 2: The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission
hereby grants ,nime extension fort
Tract- /pr- Exli[atiJn.
11626 Ramona 3 & L July 27, 1986
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 12TH DAY OF JUNE, 1985.
PL8VIlNG CVMMl33l0N OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
�
`
BY:
vev.* ^. ^~"", Chairman
ATTEST:_
Rick Gomez, Deputy Secretary
'
, .
`
'
'
f
I, Rick Gomez, Deputy Secretary of the Planning Commission of the Ci':y 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 12th -y of June, 1985, by the following vote -to -wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
D
ir
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
BY:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
STAFF REPORT
June 12, 1985
Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
Rick Gomez, City Planner
Nancy Fong, Assistant Planner
cL'ov
a� o
1977
TIME EXTENSION FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 11606 - BLISS - A
custom lot subdivision of 271 lots on 70.32 acres of land
in the Low Residential District (2 -4 du /ac) located on the
north side of the Southern Pacific Railroad right -of -way,
between Haven _Avenue and Deer Creek - APN 202- 221 -42, 202-
771 -1 through 41.
I. ABSTRACT: The applicant is requesting a time extension for
entative. Tract 11606. Phase I (41 custom lots) has been recorded,
while the remaining Phases N through VI (236 custcin lots) would
have expired on April 15, 1985. A letter of request 'For time
extension from the applicant and interpretation from the City
Attorney are attached for your review.
II. BACKGROUND: This tract was origit:3.11y approved by the Planning
Commission for 12 months on March 11, 1981, and subsequently
granted two 18 -month extensions. Due to the fact that an appeal
pertaining to certain Conditions of Approval imposed by the
Planning Commission wds filed and the matter was duly considered by
the City Gouncil on April 15, 1981, the correct original approval
date should be April 15, 1981, and not March 11, 1981. Therefore,
the correct final expiration date for this tract would be April 15,
1985 instead of March 15, 1985, as indicated in the previous
Planning Commission's resolutions.
A letter of explanation and interpretation from the City Attorney
has been attached for yojr review regarding this time extension.
The City Attorney advised that the Commission should consider the
time extension request on its merits rather than having to file an
application for a new tract map.
The Subdivision Map Act allows a maximum of 36 months time
extension which would permit an additional 12 -month time extension
for this project. According to the developer the recordation of
Phase II through VI (236 lots) was delayed due to the problems in
designing storm drains.
ITEM 8
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
Tentative Tract 11606 - Bliss
June 12, 1985
Page 2
III. ANALYSIS: Tentative Tract 11606 was approved prior to the current
Development Code. For consideration of a time extension, this
project was reviewed ftir conformance with the Development Code
requirements. Based upon the review, the project has been found to
be in sutstantial compliance with the provisions of the Low Density
Residential standards of the Development Code. The only area of
inconsistency shown is in the required 7,200 sq. ft. minimum lot
size. This trar..t shows 36 lots to be below the required minimum
which is approximately 16% of the total 236 lots. The lot size for
these 36 substandard lots range from 6,300 sq. ft. to 7,150 sq.
ft., where 29 of these lots fail below 7,000 —sq. ft. This
inconsistency is not ,:.considered to be significant by staff and
:would not significantly alter the appearance of the project.
III. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: This previously approved Tentative Tract Map
as m su staatial compliance with the City's current General
Plan, Ordinances, Plans, Codes and Policies. The extension of the
tentative map would not likely cause inconsistency with the current
General Plan, Ordinances, Plans, Codes and Policies or cause public
health and safety problems. The time extension is within the time
limits as prescsibed.,by state law and local ordinances.
V. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Comnission
consi er�all input and elements of this project. If the Commission
concurs with the Findings, .a final extension of 12- months could be
granted to April 15, 1986.
I Re c*f 1 s" ubmi'tted,
Eck omez
it Plann
RG;N
Attachments:
May 8, 1985 Letter from City Attorney
Letter from Applicant requesting Time Extension
Exhibit "A" Location Map
Exhibit "B" Site Plan
Original Resolution of Approval with Conditions
Time Extension Resolution of Approval
oe— c e..
x
I -a
1
0
• �1
I
hZ
MAY
May Or 1955
Lauren Wasserman
City Man €gnr
City of Rancho Cucamonga HAND DELIVSIMD
P.O. Box 807
Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730
Re: StaWs of Tentative Tract No. 11606
Dear Lauren:
In response to your request, we have reviewed
virtually all of the pertinent documents related to the
status of the above- ref_ssnced tract map. The purpose of
our ing-Ary in accordance with your instructions was to
determine whether the Planning Commission now may consider
on its merits a new request for an extension of the validity
of the subject tentative tract map. in order for you to
understand our analysis, a recitation of the pertinent
dates and facts appears to be in order.
The tentative tract map originally was approved
by the Planning Commission on March 11, 1981. However, an
appeal pertaining to certain conditions of approval imposed
by the Planning Commission was filed and the matter was duly
considered by the City Council on April 15, 1981, At that
point in time, a condition was removed at the re9.isst of the
applicant and the map was approved. Since the matter was
appealed to the City Council, the correct original approval
date for the subject map was April,15, 1981 and not M'irch 11,
1981. This discrepancy is crucial to our analysis.
Thereafter, after the passage of some time, the
applicant applied to the Planning Commission for an 16 -month
extension with respect to the validity of the map. 1 have
carefully reviewed the staff report to the Planning Commis-
sion dated January 13, 1982, the meeting at which the
Lauren Wasserman
May e, 1985
Page Two
Planning Commission considered an extension �i the map.
E also have reviewed Resolution 82 -01 adop+;ed by the
Planning Commission on January 13, 1982. My review of
those documents makes it absolutely cleat tc,me that the
intention of the Planning Commission was to extend the
validity of the trap for an 18 -month period.. Unfortunately,
from time to time over the past few years that 18 aontfs
was incorrectly interpreted to r,xn from March 11, 1961
rather than from April 15, 1981,; the date upon which the
map really was oriq :'Rally apprpyed by the City Council.
Accordingly, it in. my view thaa the Planning Commission'a
action of January 13, 1982 exwended the validity of the
rap for ait 18 -month period commencing on April 15, 1981
and ocncluding an October 15, 1983.
Thereafter, during July of 1983;, the Planning
Commission again acted to grn7w an 18 -month extension an
to the validity of the subje__, map: The documents support-
ing that action of the PTAnninq Commission incorrectly
concluded that the extension would run for a period expir-
ing on March ll, 1985. Because of the prior error in
calculating the time during whi,h the map was valid, it
is my view that a court probably would interpret the
Planning Commission's action of July,1983 as extending the
vali,74ty of the subject map for l8 months to April 15, 1985
rather than March 11, 1985.
The final pertinent document with respect to this
analysis is a letter from the devel ®per which was received
by the City on April 18, 1985. That letter requested
another extension of the validity of the subject tract map.
Sven that letter assumed that the tract was deemed to
expire on March 11, 1985 when, in fact, it was not to
expire until April 15, 19811.
California Gazernment Code Section 66452.6(e)
allows a subdivider to validly request an extension of 'a
tract recap so long as he files the extension prior to the
expiration state of the map. Assuming that Mr. Bliss
supplied his letter requesting an extension on or before
April 15, 1965, it is our view that the Plaw.Aing Commission
should consider on its merits the subject request for
Lauri liasnerman
may _8, 1985
Paige Three
t ®xtension. Again,f/�thia is due to the fact that for some
? years ali Of the`r�arties involved have inc6rractiy assumed
that the map ori4inally, would have expired-'on September 11,
1983 gather than Octobes.15, 1983.
Tn suimnary, based -on the application for exten-
sion supplied by the applicant On or before April is, 1985"
it is our vicar that the applicant should have his request
for extension considered on its merits rather than having
to file an application for approval of a new tentative tract
maps
Please advise if you have further questions on
}
the subj"- t mat3r discussed in this letter.
Very truly yours,
4
r
James L. Markman
City Attorney
City of Rancho Cucamonga
JLM: s jk -
a
i
LAWRENCE O. BL155
PROPERLY DEVELOPMENT
6634 Carnelian Avenue
Rancho Cucemonga..Cali €ornia .92345
-RECEIVED-
Mr. Rick Gomez CITY OF RANCHO CUCA.WNGA
City ^I inner
PLANNING OIYITiIgN
City of Rancho Cucamonga ASR 1 �9a5
9320 Baseline Road, 5uite C. AN Post Office Box 807
Rancho Cucamonga, Ca. 9'1730
RE: Extension of Tentative Tract 11606 phases 2 -6 (phase *1
is recorded),
Dear Rick;
It has come to our attention that Tentative. Tract 11606 may
have expired on March 1.1, 1985. We, on our part, had been
led to believe that the tract map expired on September 11.'
1985 as shown on your June of 1984 page 14 status report
(copy of said page enclosed). Perhaps the 9 /11/85 expiration
date on the status report is not correct.
There have been several inquires about this date z.o she
Community Development Department from various members oZ our
development team. Each time the answer has been that the map
expires on 9/11185. Perhaps City staff members were reading
from the some status report and not the actual file folder.
Tentative Tract 11606 has had a very 'rocky road to travel
over the last year and few months with delays caused by storm
drain design problems. Finally the first 41 lots in phase 1
where recorded anc..hopefully construction will star',: shortly.
In December 1984, after checking with the City'e Community
Development Department and confirming the 9/11/85 expiration
date. final engineering was commenced on the 236 remaining
lots (with phase 2 of 58 lots now in plan check). This has
resulted in the expenditure of many many thousands of dollars
in final engineering that will now be of no benefit whatsoever.
I do not believe anyone wants to find out which person or
party is at fault. All I am requesting is that we extend the
Tentative Tract to its full legal limit of 3/11/86.
L03 /bhs;
C4: Barclays -Tac
Terra West
Sincerely Yours,
�/ �' Larry Bl s
I �
t , ,
i
_ tip
If. t-,
N 45�)
_ VIC /NITY M,p
V �J
NORTH
CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAi�'�ONG i. TITLE. L lAg M)
PLANNING DIVISM E.YHiBIT:- SCALE:
. 1
�m
�,Qzl
4
2.1
Ar' r I
Wit
fir
_=At 10t
gtliz
ii
aw"-E-
PWP�Iff.
IQ
V--
iWeR V? Srf-'•
I.
.25
RESOLUTION NO. 81 -26
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, CONDITIONALLY
APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. '11606.
WHEREAS, Tentative Tract Map No. 11606, hereinafter "Map"
subniL.gd by Westend, applicant, for the purpose of subdividing the
real prop:rty'situated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of
San Bernara;no, State of California, described as, a residential subdivision
of 70 acres located on the north side of the Southern Pacific Railroad
and bordering the west side of Deer Creek into 277 lots, regularly
came before the Manning Commission for public hearing and action on
March 11, 1981; 0,id
WHEREAS,'';he City Planner has recommended approval of the Map
subject to all condi` ions set forth in the Engineering and Planning
Divisions reports; anA
WHEREAS, the ,Planning Commission has rid and considered the
Engineering and Planning Divisions reports and has considered other
evidence presented at i;he public hearing.
NOW, THEREFJRE, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga does resolve as follows:
SECTION is The Planning Commission makes the following findings
in regard to Tentative Tract No. 11606 and `che Map thereof:
(a) The tentative tract is consistent with all applicable
interim and proposed general and specific plans;
(b) The design or improvements of the tentative tract is
consistent with all applicable interim and proposed
general and specific plans;
(c) The site is physically suitable for +he type of development
proposed;
(d) The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause
j' 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;
j(f) The design of the tentative tract will not conflict with
1, any easement acquired by the public at large, now of
j record, for access through or use of the property within
the proposed subdivision.
Page 2 W
(g) That this project will not create adverse impacts on the
environment and a Negative Declaration is issued.
attached
SECTION 2: Tentative Tract Map No. 11606, a Copy of which is
hereto, is hereby approved subject to
all of the following
conditions and the attached Standard Conditions:
PLANNING DIVISION
A
The developer shall install and construct that portion of
the Deer Creek regional trail system adjacent to the
project. App- opriate bonding shall be completed prior
to final map approval.
1,
,aij ,4t d
2. Three points of pedestrian access ihall be installed by
�s ,'
the developer from the tract to the regional trail. Such
-s be
I�--g
pathwa shall a minimum of 10' Hide and shall include
a concrete pathway, walls, landscaping and security
lights. Detailed plans shall be submitted and approved
r,.
l"
by the City Planner prior to final map approval.
`
3. A concrete pedestrian pathway shall be provided between
the two side -on cul-de-sacs on lots 108, 109, 190, and
211. Said path shall be separated from the adjacent lots
by low profile walls.
ENGINEERING DIVISION
4. Installation of a portion of master planned stormy drain
from 19th Street to the Southern Pacific Railroad (Line
No. V_ shall be required.
The cost of construction of the storm drain shall be
credited to the storm drain fee for the project and a
reimbursement agreement will be executed per City
Ordinance No. 75 to cover contributions which exceed
the fee amount.
The proposed storm drain within the tract boundary as
shown on the Tentative Map shall be extended to north
tract boundary to accept ruioff frow the tributory areas
to the north.
No structure or building shall be constructed nor any
street dedication and improvement shall be accepted by
the City within 300 feet of the centerline of Deer Creek
Channel until such time as the Deer Creek Channel and its
debris basin are constructed.
The 300 -foot setback line shall be delineated and a
certificate for gUilding restriction shall be noticed on
the final map.
/O
Resolution No. 811
Page 3
7. The order of phasing for development may be modified to
the satisfaction of the City Engineer to maintain the
required setback line.
8. Construction of interior street improvements beyond a
phase boundary along with the development of the phase
;or proper circulation of traffic may be required at the
discretion of the City Engineer.
9. Installation of flood protection wail along northerly
tract boundary and easterly setback line to the satis-
faction of the City Engineer shall be required. This
condition shall remain in force until such time as the
Deer Creek Channel improvements are constructed.
10. Ded"oation and improvements of the roadway (Palm Dr.)
connecting to 1fth Street shall be required at the time
of development of phase IV improvements.
11. The required width of easement for storm drain purposes
shall be per city standards.
12. All existing easements lying within the future right -of-
way are to be quit claimed or deiineated as per the City
Engineer's requirements, prior to recordation of the
tract map.
1A. Final plans and prof 1,ss shall show the location of any
existing utility far W ty that would affect construction.
14. Adequate provisions shall be made for acceptance and
disposal of surface drainage entering the property from
adjacent areas.
15. Letters of acceptance from downstream property owners
shall be required where runoff from the tract flows onto
private properties, if such acceptance is deemed necessary
by the City Enyyneer.
BUILDING DIVISION
16. A revised conceptual grading plan shall be reviewed and
approved by the Grading Committee prior to final map
approval.
17. Surety shall be posted and an agreement executed, guaranteeing
completion of all on -site drainage facilities necessary
for dcwatering all parcels, to the satisfaction of the
Buildfig and Safety Division.
4
l
{
Resolution No. 8111
Page 4
18. Appropriate easements, for safe disposal of drainage
water that are conducted onto or over adjacent parcels,
are to be delineated and recorded to the satisfaction of
the Building and Safety Division.
19. On -site drainage improvements, necessary for dewaterina
or protecting the subdivided properties, are to be installed
prior to issuance of building permits for construction
upon any parcel that may be subject to, or contributes
to, drainage flows entering, leaving or within a parcel
relative to which a building permit is requested.
20. Final grading plans for each parcel are to be submitted
to the Building and Safety Division for approval prior
to issuance of building permits. (This may be on an
incremental or composite basis.)
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 11TH DAY OF MARCH, 1981.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY
AT
I, JACK LAM, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and
regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of
the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning
Commission held on the 11th day of March, 1981 by the following vote to-
wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: King, Rempel, Sceranka, Dahl
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Tolstoy
e
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
STANDARD CONDITIONS_
Subject:
4T �► ?I V69 60( _
Appl!cant:_
Location:
NIS 6F 51.K.- t.1 BAd N& (-Y412Es� /
-hdom L
Those items checked are conditions of approval,
APPLICANT
SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DIVISION FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING
CONDITIONS:
A.
Site Development _
1.
Site shall be developed in accordance with the approved zite plans on file
in the Planning Division and the conditions cortained' herein.
2.
Revised site plans and building elevations i -7- porating all conditions of
'
approval shall be submitted to the Planning bivision prior to issuance of
building permits,
3.
Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of
the Zoning Ordinance and all other, applicable City Ordinances in effect. -at
time of Building Permit issuance.
Aft
_Z4.
The developer shall provide all pots with adequate siv,yard area for Recreation
Vehicle storage pursuant to City standards.
5.
Mail boxes, in areas where sidewalks are required, shall be installed and
located by the developer subject to approval by the Planning Division.
6.
Trash receptacle areas shall oe enclosad by a 6 foot high masonry wall with
view obstructing gates pursuant to City standards. Location shall be
subject to approval by the Planninc Division.
_ 7.
If- dwellings are to ue constructed in an area designated by the Foothill
Fire Districts as "hazardous ", the roof materials must be approved by the
Fire Chief and Planning Division prior to issuance of a building permit.
_ 8.
A sample of the roof material shall be submitted to the Planning Division
for-- review and approval prior to issuance of building permits.
9.
All roof appurtenances, including air conditioners, shall be architecturally
integrated, shielded from view and the sound buffered from adjacent properties
avid streets as required by the Planning and Building Divisions.
e
e
_� 10.
-
Prior to any use of the project site or business activity being commelced
thereon, all conditions of approval contained herein shall be completed to
the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development.
{
f,T 13
11.
A detailed lighting plan shall be submitted to and approved by the
Planning CIivision prior to issuance of building permits, Such plan
shall indicate style, illumination, location:, height and
„nthod of
shiel,dina. No lighting shall adversely affect adjacent'proparties.
12.
All swimming pools ins•�alled at the time of initial development shall'
be solar heated.
13.
Texturized pedestrian pathways across circulation aisles shall be
provided throughout the development to conrct dwellings with open
spaces and recreational uses.”
14.
All trash pick up shall be for individual units with all recepticals
kept out of public view from private and public streets.
15.
Standard )atio cover plans shall be submitted to and approved by the
City Planner and Building Official prior to occupancy of the first
unit.
16.
All buildings numbers and individual units shall be identified in a
clear art' concise manner, including proper illumina..ion.
✓ X17.
Solid core exterior doors, security dead bolts and locks shall be
installed on each unit in this project.
18.
Security dexices such as window locks shall be installed on each unit.
19.
All units within this development shall be preplumbed to be adapted
for' a solar :eater heating unit.
20.
Energy conserving building materials and appliances are required to be
incorporated into this project to include such things as but not limited
"r
to reduced consumption shower heads, better grade of insulation, double
paned windows, extended overhangs, pilotless appliances, etc.
21.
This development shall provide an option to home buyers to purchase
solar water heating unit.
` �
� Z2.
Emergency secondary access shall be provided to this tract to the
1
satisfaction of the Foothill Fire Protection District.
23.
Local and Master Planned Equestrian Tra11s shall be provided throughout
the tract in accordance with the Equestrian Trail Plan for Alta Loma.
A detailed equestrian trail plan indicating widths, maximum sbpes,
phys -ical condition, fencing and weed control in accordance with City
s`
equestrian trail standards.S hall b& submitted to and approved by the
e
City Planner prior to a,,-.pi -oval and recordation of the final map. —
24.
This tract shall form or annex to a maintenance district for mar,r&znancc
F
of equestrian trails. —
-
13—" -
` 25. This project shall provide _ percent of afordab, .' z
housing and /or
rents, in conformance with Gene, <al Plan housing policies and the housing
criteria defined in the Growth Mancgement Ordinance. Affordability ihall
be determined by current market rates, rents and'. median income levels
at the time of construction--of the project. Proof of this provision -
shall be submitted to the Planning Division prior to finalizing building
permits and occupancy of thy: units.
E. Parking and Vehicular Access
1. All parking lot landscaped 4slands shall have a minimum inside dimension
of 4' and shall contain a 12" walk adjacent to parking stall.
2. Parking lot trees shall be a minimum 15 gallon size.
3. All two -way aisle widths shall *be a minimum of 24 feet wide.
4. Emergency access shall be provided, maintenance free and clear, a minimum
e: 24 feet with at all times during construction in accordance with
Foothill Fire District requirements'.
5. All parking spaces shall be double striped.
6. All units shall be provided with automatic garage door openers._
7. Designated visitor parking areas shall be:,turf blocked.
8. The C.C. & R.'`s shall restrict the storage of recreational vehicles on
this site unloss they are the principle source of transportation for the
owner.
9. No parking shall be permitted within the interior cirulation aisle other
than in designated visitor parking areas. C.C. & R.'s shall be developed
by the applicant and submitted to the City Planning Division prior to
issuance of building permits.
C. Landscaping
1. A detailed landscape and irrigation plan shall be submitted to.and approved
by the Planning Division prior to the issuance of building permits.
2. Existing trees shall be retained wherever possi'bl'e. A master plan of
>: existing trees showing their precise location, size and type shall be-
C co -npleted by the developer. Said plan shall take into account the
l proposed grading and shall be .required to be submitted to and approved
I by the Planning Division prior to approval of the final grading plan.
r
6 `
I
Existing Eucalyptus trees shall be retained wherever possible and shall ve
trimmed and topped at 30'. Dead, decaying or potential;y dangerous trees-
shall be approved for removal at the descretion of the Planning `Division
during the review of the Master Plan pf Existing On -Site Trees. Those
trees: which are approved for removal may be required to be replaced on a
- tree -for -tree basis =as provided by the Planning Division.
1/ 4. Street trees, a minimum of 15 gallon size or larger, shall be installed in
accordance with the Master Plar -of street trees for the City of Rancho
Cucamonga. and shall be planted "at an average of every 30' on interior
streets and 20' on exterior streets.
S. A minimum of 50 trees per gross arra_ comnri —A of *a
shall be provided within the development ;r20. -24" boxcorVUrger, 70.-15
gallon, and 10% -5 gallon.
6. All landscaped areas shall be maintained in a healthy and thriving condition,
free from weeds, trash, and debris.
� 7. All slope banks in access "f five.(5) feet in vertical height shall and
are 5 :1 or greater slopes be landscaped and irrigated in accordance with
slope planting requirements of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Such slope
planting shall include but not be limited to rooted ground cover and
appropriate shrubs and trees. All such planting and irrigation shall
be continuously maintained in a healthy and thriving condition by the
developer until each individual unit is sold and occupied by the buyer.
Prior to releasing occupancy for those units, an inspection of the slopes
shall he completed by the Planning Staff to determine that it is in
satisi.ictory condition. In the case of custom lot subdivisions, all
such slopes shall be seeded with native grasses upon completion of gradingift
or an alternative method of erosion control satisfactory to the Building
Official. Irrigation on custom lot subdivisions shall be provided to
germinate `the seed and to a point 6 months after germination.
8. All parkways, open areas, and landscaping shall be fully maintained
by a homeowners association or other means acceptable to the City. Such
proof of maintenance -shall be submitted to the City prior to issuance
of building permits.
9. The front yard landscaping, and an appropriate irrigation system, shall
be installed b the developer eveloper in accordance with submitted plans.
10. The final design of the perimeter parkways, walls, landscaping and
sidewalks shall be included in the required landscape plans and shall
be subject to approval by the Planning Division.
ii. A minimum of specimen size trees shall be planteLT
within the project..
12. Special landscape features st:h as mounding, alleivial rock, speciman
size trees, and an abundance if landscaping is required along :I
D. Signs -
_ 1. Any signs proposed for this development shall be designed in conformance
with the Comprehensive Sign OrdinancEt and shall require review and approval
by the Planning Division prior to installation of such signs. -
` 2. A uniform sign program for this development -shall be submitted to the-
Planning Division for their review and approval prior to issuance of
Building permits.
3. The signs indicated on the submitted plans are not approved with this
;• approval and will require separate sign review and approval.
E. Additional Approvals Required
1. Director Review shall be accomplished prior to the issuance of a Building
Permit.
2. Director Review shall be ar`:omplished prior to recordation of the final
subdivision map.
_ 3. Approval of Tentative Tract No. is granted subject to the approval
of Zone Change and /or Variance /Conditional Use Permit
4. This Conditional Use Permit is granted for a period of months) at
which time the Planning Commission may add or delete conditions or revoke
the-Conditional Use Permit.
5. The developer is required to obtain the following signed statement by
.purchasers of homes which have a private or public equestrian trail on
or adjacent to their property.
In purchasing the home located on Lot Tract
on I have read the C.C. & R.'s and
r understand that said Lot is subject to a mutual re-
ciprocal easement for the purpose of allowing equestrian
traffic to gain access.
Signed
Purchaser
E Said statement is to be filed by the developer with the City prior to
occupancy.
6. Prior to approval and recordation of the final map, or prior to issuance of
building permits, when no subdivision map is involved, written certification
from all affected Schuol Districts, shall be submitted to the Department of
Cormunity Development which states that adequate school facilities are or '
will be capable of accommodating students generated by this project. Such
letter of certification must have been issued by the School District wi'thin
sixty (60) days prior to the final map approval in the case of the subdivision
map or issuance of permits in the case of all otner residential projects.
Awl
c
9-17
7. Prior to approval and recordation of the final map, or prior to the issuance +
of building permits when no map is involved, written certification from tte
affected water district, that adequate sewer and water faci;ities are or
will be available to serve the proposed project, shall be submitted to t
Department of Community Development. Such letter must have been issued
the water-district-within sixty (60) days prior to final map approval in
the case of subdivision or issuance of permits in the case of all other
residential projects. For projects using septic tank facilities ailovrable
by the Santa Ana Regional Water Control Board and the City, written certi-
fication of acceptability, including all supportive information, shall be
obtained and submitted to the City.
�8. This approval shall become null and void if the tentative subdivision map
is not approved and recorded or building permits issued when no map is
involved, within tweive (12) months from the approval of this project
unless an extension has been granted by the Planning COMission.
Z9. This subdivision was not submitted as a total development package and i,
required to reapply for a point rating relative to the design section
of the Growth Management Ordinance prior to final approval and recordation
of the map if the subdivision is going to be developed as tract homes.
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING DIVISION FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING
CONDITIONS:
F. Site Develooment - -
<<- 001. The applicant shall comply with the latest adopted Uniform Building Code,
Uniform Mechanical Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, National Electric Code, a
[ all other applicable codes and ordinances in effect at the time of approval
of this project.
` vl**12. Prior to issuance of buildin F
g permits for combustible construction, evidence
+ shall be submitted to the Foothill District Fire Chief that water supply'
for fire protection is available.
R 3. Prior to the issuance of a building permit fora ner, residential dwelling
unit(s) or major addition to an existing unit(s) , the applicant shall pay
development fees at the established rate. Such fees may include, but not
6 be limited to: City Beautification Fee, Park Fee, Drainage Fee, Systems
Development Fee, Permit and Plan Checking Fees, and School Fee.
4. Prime- to the issuance of a buildin permit g p t f:.- a new commercial or industrial
development or addition to an existing development, the applicant shall pay
development fees at the established rate. Such fees may include, but not '
( be limited to.. Systems Development Fee, Drainage Fee, Permit and Plan
Checking Fees.
_ 5. This approval shall become null and void if building permits are not issued
for this project within one year from the date of project approval_
6. Street names and addresses shall be provided by the 'building official.
i
_ 7. Dwelling units shall be constructed with fire retardant material
and non- ccTbustibie roof material.
8. All corner dwellings shall have the building elevation facing the
street upgrade with additional wood trim.around windows and wood siding
or plan -ons where appropriate.
G. Existino Structures
1. Provide compliance with the Uniform Building Code for property line clearances
considering use, area and fire- resistiveness of existing buildings.
2. Existing building (s) shall be made to comply with current Building and
Zoning regulations for the intended use or the building shall be demolished.
3. Existing sewage disposal facilities shall be removed, filled and /or capped
to comply with appropriate grading practices and the Uniform Plumbing Code.
H. Gradina
/1. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the Uniform.
Building Code, City Grading Standards and accepted grading practices.
The final grading plan shall be in substantial conformance with the -
approved conceptual grading plan.
___�/2. A soils report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer licensed by the
State of California to perform such work.
3. A geological report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist
and submitted at the time of application for grading plan check.
__�Z4. The final grading plan shall be subject to review and approval by the
Planning, Engineering_ and Building Divisions and shall be completed prior
to recordation of the final subdivision map or issuance of building permit
whichever comes first.
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE ENGINEERING DIVISION FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING
CONDITIONSs —
I. Dedications and Vehicular Access
1. Dedications shall be made by final map of all interior street rights -of -way
and all necessary easements as shown on the tentative map.
2. Dedication shall be made of the following missing rights -of -way on the
following sheets:
� nn
additional .feet on
!Pa- him 17")r—
additional
feet on
additional feet on
r�
i
3, Corner ,iroperty,linr., radius will be required per City standards.
4. All rights of vehicular ingress to and egress from shall be dedica as.
follows
5. Reciprocal easements shall be provided ensuring access to all parcels ov
private roads, drives, or parking areas.
6. Adequate provisions shall be made for the ingress, engress and internal
circulation of any trucks which will be used for delivery of goods to th
property or in the operation of the proposed business.
J. Street Improvements
V" 1. Construct full street improvements'including, but not limited to, curb a
gutter, r,.C. pavement, sidewalk, drive approaches, parkway trees and str
lights on all interior streets. -
2.. Construct the following missing improvements including, but not ;limited
STREET
CURB &
GUTTER
A.C.
I PVM7.
SIDE-
WALK
DRIVE
APPR.
STREET
LIGHTS
A.C.
OVERLAY
WHEEL
CHAIR RAMPS
IOTH'
-NAME
—'
I - --
3. Prior to any work being performed is the public right -of -way, an encroach
permit and fees shall be obtained from the City Engineer's Office, in
addition to any other permits required.
4. Street improvement plans approved by the City Engineer and prepared by a
Registered Civil Engineer shall be required, for all street improvements,
prior to issuance of an encroachment permit.
of 5. Surety shall be posted and an agreement executed to the satisfaction of t
City Engineer and the City=-Attorney, guaranteeing completion of the publi
improvements, prior to recording of the map or the issuance of building
permits, whichever comes first.
✓ 6. All street improvements shall be installed to the satisfaction of -the C t
Engineer, prior to occupancy.
�✓j 7. Pavement striping, marking, traffic and street name signing shall b st
per the requirements of the City Engineer.
K. Drainage and Flood Control
V 1. The applicant will be responsible for construction of all onsite drainage
facilities required by the City Engineer.
2. Intersection drains will be required at the following locations:
y 3. The proposed project falls within area�� indicated as subject to flooding
under the National Flood Insurance ?rogram and is subject to the provisions
of the program and City Ordinance No. 24.
4. A drainage channel and /or flood protection wall will be required to protect
the structures by diverting sheet runoff to street.
5. The following north —south streets shall be designed as major water carrying
streets requiring a combination of special curb hilights, commercial type
drive approaches, rolled street connections, flood protection walls, and /or
landscaped earth berms and =rolled driveways at property line.
L. Utilities _
1. All proposed utilities within the pro.jec', shall be installed underground
including utilities along major arterials less than 12 KV.
si 2. Utility easements shall be provided to the specification of the serving
utility companies and the City Engineer.
V' 3. Developer shall be responsible for the relocation of existing public
utilities, as.required. --
o% 4. Developer shall be responsible for the installation of street lighting in
accordance with Southern California Edison Company and City standards.
V5. Water and sewer system plans shall be designed and constructed to meet
requirements of the Cucamonga County Water District (CCWn), Foothill Fire
District and the Environmental Health Department of the County of San
Bernardino. A letter of compliance form CCWO will be required prior to
recordation.
6. Approvals have not been secured from all utilities and other lintel. '�d
agencies involved. Approval of the final map will be subject to are
requirements that may be received from them.
M. General Requirements and Aoprovals
aV 1. Permits from other agencies will be required as follows:
*,"A. Caltrans for: ms's
_*L_B. County Dust Abasement irequired prior to issuance of a radio
C. San Eernardano County F1p,^j Ct-,t r 7 District g g remit)
✓' D. Other:�—�eu
i
,3- - -Q!
n
_ 2. A copy wr -the Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's) and Artici ?s
of Incorporation of the Homeowners Association, subject to the - IPproyal o,-
thie City Attorney, shall' be recorded with this map and a copy provided -to
e City. Alk
3. Prior to recordatfOn, a Votite ofi Intention to form Landscape and Lightin
Districts shall be filed,with the City Council. The engineering teats
involved in Districts Foz. =cation shall be borne by the developer.
4. Final parcel and tract maps shall conform to City standards and procedures.
i
I I
RESOLUTIV4 NO.
A RESOLUTION-OF THE RANCHO CdCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION
APPROVING A TIME EXTENSION FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 11606
WHEREAS, a request has been filed for a time extension for the
above- described project pursuant to Section 17.020.090; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conditionally approved the above
described Tentative Tract; and,
WHEP,EAS, the project was appealed to the City Council and approved or,
April 15, 1981.
SECTION 1: The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission has made the
following iMiings::
A. The previously approved Tentative Map is in
substantial compliance with the City's current
General Plan, Specific Plans, Ordinances, 'Plans,
Codes and Policies; and,
B. The extension of the Tentative Map will not cause
significant inconsistencies with the current General
Plan, Specific Plans, Ordinances, Plans, Codes and
Policies; and,
C. The extension of the Tentative Map is not likely to
cause public health and safety problems; and,
D. The extension is within the time limits pre_cribed
by state law and local ordinance.
SECTiOR 2: The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission
hereby grants z time extension for:
Tract Apglicant. Expiration
11606 Bliss 4/15/86
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 12th DAY OF JUNE, 1985.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONG+
BY:
5ennis L. tout, Chairman
ATTEST•
hj -��
Resolution No.
Page.
I; Rick Gomez, Deputy Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of
Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and
reyalarly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Comr.-ission of the
City of Rancho Cucamonga., at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held
on the 12th day of June, 1965, by the following vote -to -wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
11
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
BY;
SUBJECT:
A MITr ATA " • I.TATTA /" -- ♦ � 1-1— .
va asV vVV ;'I.�ILV:.T Vl7.
STAFF REPORT
x 1 r
O C
June 12, 1985
Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
Rick Gomez, City Planner
Cure Johnston, Associate Planner .
DESIGN REVIEW FOR TRACT 19047 PENNHILL - The levelopment
of 43 single family detached homes on .16 ac-.3 of land,
located on the north side of Wilson Avenue, South side of
Hillside Road, east of Archibald.
19777
I. PROJECT AND S1'E DESCRIPTION:
A. Action Requested: Design Review approval ,f building
elevations and plot plan.
S. Purpose: Construction of 43 single family homes on 1/2 acre
lots.
C. Location: North side of Wilson, south of Hillside Road, east
or chi bald Avenue.
D. ?arcet Size: 27.1E total acres
E. Density: 1.6 du /ac
F. Existing Zoning: Very Low Residentip" (less than 2 du/ac)-
G. Existing Land Use: Vacant
H. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning:
North - Single Family Residence /Vacant, designated Very Low
Residential (less than 2 du /ac)
South TT11609 bein construction, designated Very Low
Residential ?less than 2 du /ac)
East - Single Caidily Homes /Vacant, designated Very Low
Residential (less than 2 du /ac)
West - Church under construction and single family homes
designated Very Low Residential (less than 2 duiac)
Alta Loma Channel, designated Flood Control
ITEM C
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
Tentative Tract 10047 - Pennhill
June 12, 1985
Page #2
I. Proiect ail s: Three one and two - story, floor P ans are
proposed, ranging in size from 1,808 squ�'ra feet to 2,190
square feet. Each plan has three exterior designs. The
architecture features concrete mission the !4 shades! and
stucco and masonite siding with rock and brick veneers.
II. ANALYSIS: Existing and approved subdivisions and homes surr)unding
the pro ect site represent a wide variety of architectural styles
including English tudor, traditional, and Spanisn. F„cess to the
tract links directly to Wil3on Avenue and Hillside Road.
The Design Review Committi -e recommended approval of the
arCaitec ure, with a condition that additional architectural
embellisiments be provided on side elevations facing the street.
The plan, have now been r;2vised to reflect DRC regl,irements.
III. RECO..AWENDATIOI If the G xnnission concurs with the Design Review
Committee recommendation, adoption of the attached Resolution of
Approval would be in order.
m KU: U.'Cv
Attachments: Exhibit "A" Locati,- Map
Exhibit "B" - Site Plan
Exhibit "C" - Grading Plan
Exhibit "D" - Master Plei of Trees
Exhibit IT, - Elevations
TT M047 Resolution of Approval W /Conditions
Design Review Resolution of Appragal
(2-a
1]
D
u
t ^s.. (� ti -�e���'� i�t'Y _'"� i r I. ;( Nall r 1 `!'- -- -_ • -
T '�: r�„�— _- .r -�-?• rr� i 1 fgYY ' 7 7 � � _' �7 1 2
r;10
4
or 1
� I y►. � c r ° fi n _ q �
' 1' 7 I '� � s w y • /„_ . —.fit
r --- -- J" -- -'-- YZNTATIVC
w04T
sal vnu:anMN av
y
rx)F.Tx.
CITY OF 11TRA, _7_ IQ247
R-ANOM CU AMONGA 1I-q E, ca, AA AGO
PLANNM DIVISM EXHIPa r- A 5G? LD
�;� -', <-
�4
'p:llgjllllullll{;��a�,�,. °' �; '
�'' 't�
.k �,.. `,
MATH
CITY OF ITFriI: -r9 Q2!Lr
RANCHO CLICATMO GA TITLE: -,atOt•w—
PLANNING IXV.SIM EXHIBIT - SC. B
Mil 0 �i A
1�, �-1 1 - I
l
.� Al
Kral) Itrk Acres
c v
NORTH
CITY OF
RANG-D CUCAMOtiGA TITLE. - li,►� �.�, 7
PLANNNG DIVISION - EXHIBIT- G -Z SALE-
�t
(]r VTeiI cri •..b
.rr �
�•iN
I'vL• � �'7
$-
r
TENTAY/VE MAP
TRACT 'N0. I0047
nrcmnbcoesuw,..e..
0.
wn N i i1
.ti wn
♦�(!{'I�`li,'� \� *:il``� A�IW - 1 r
�
.W'F
MMMLI!LANTR@1LIk.
r rr..a '• �`� ��"v`"�
7R�iGi NO.f0017
k CITY OF
1TEPv1- Tt c=qi
P%JV `CI CUCAMO°e'GA TIT LE: *" rOL CT- -W4M5
` PLANNING DIjJISM EXt IIBIT _--O-L_ SCALE- `°
$ � 5
�
�.
-x� Y � � a
.: :* f�� �
'
��
� �
us.
:.
Ye
51 � to '.o a
.. -. e
. ;��,.
'R � 4
'� x
,a��x�c+
�. �t'
x
�
�.�
'[Y e'fr. „.4
�,,' x
�
h
�q � C
yF
a,
fJNi et ^
d r ++F
.3i. � y i
u9,
�,g
r 4 . t
� � ti
e . �,�� .
P
y .`�.
V.�
f
lg
�uY{
XY }�
G r'
�'' + �r
J
G9l�Mon
_ Vl
FLOOR PLAN
.
700 $ INOV /ER NOTE
• �., � � • - _
NOM
MM fASULAT10N .
ssw -a *av na rr: n... mow, *.
.me
�' ^ a
'....
w•
.
yam• ^. �♦ b�a�► -c.c wa..ur
►Mwl V•.�VML'Y RY�[t ?LK MI
�r �a as r
-z�.o ,cw.� w+e.c� .u�..a rw.,.u+✓a
A..IRt
GLA27Nf,�RlOUItIIliEN*,9..
>ViTiLL r.l
�S/.=
rtC T'G' ? �✓'R R.ol { 'RJ.� I�'.h cH' 4`.0 .
K�ii
4a
' Wes— �V�v�w
�
�
IA1!AO.�
L
w �•�
CITY OF
RtiNCI-'0 CJCAIVIaiv�Gk
PLANNHW, DIVISM
ITEM: 'TK- tc!Oi—!
T,,rI E: eteovnws / *_
EXHIBIT: rI._ scALE: •.---
C)
11
0
1L.
r
CITE' OF
RANCHO CUCA.rMONGA
PLANNING D[VIS'ION
I'
ITEM:
TITLE ESC- �/pe�io tf i
EXHIBIT, SCALE _ --
t
/1
L f/
L
T
a
.uu
u
l
Ty..`
� sau run {]L
'ONO FLOOR \^��
MLOOR OI:AN LDOQIO�
CITY OF ITENII:. _r4 .11xx1l
RANCHO CUCAL 1�ONGA TITLE =. e5�+4Tloljs
PL.ANNENG DI`rSI N EXHIBIT E-3 SCALE:
IM
L J
r
CITY III)f
RANCHO CUCAMONGA
PL kMING DIVISM
- . . - - - - ..
ITEVI. -T?t leM
TITLE- EICWOMO&M
EXHIBIT. 6-4 SCALE----�.
C; -13
I"'
TIR! S.dlIDn111R NOTiY TBSR' +.rt.n u .u..e.a..s.r , � �� _
�.. ",.mow .P.•LAN
qq�� • 1 S! �."'""^ �S. C.... NOTLS L111a TAWLAT70N
•. N Ow j u�. n t •w �HjF �i:.y •• wr • � �%�•w .gel bf. �eJ<,.z.J� �J• +a al 4.st.sr .w .^K !yi MI.� ,
�A.'�./WMI� /.•I. a:IFN.Iw# W.w�]1.i. �L•nMM. wn..0 O4'T.
w..rt • nJ r N ?�.:/ Nr K f/ RirAI ./fI llr J.V. �!L.4. �M C 1 �
a'. a' ^ -tr .rw..v w..� r.�.0 �'•- ' •' DL11Z�D RpOtMENfNTS
•ry -O s•�w.r -.!' • ..ype.caf.o ..wa�L y -w .vt t-.r <s, .rsr ww.�.� s� �'.aL � ':. =' �•••.
.wr.wa+�'i.ac .;.cis m�e� �o�nw.orn:s.. •••ter•••• - •'y.
f
g�g
F
CITY OF ITEM:
RANCHO
CUTC,MONGA TITLE: 'EUZV r, L i% r- ��-�2�
PLANNING DIVISION EXHIBPT: !9'
f,
r
If
CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAjvj0NLGA,
FLANNM DIVMN
ITEM: _TZ
TnU,- %V -%VS
EXHIBIT:_ ,5'4- SCALE:,,
El'm
3
l ::r V4 w AOR
�r
.tie---'*'• -'-�
1
- CITY OF LL�W7
PLA, NNU DI -"ISKXq EX-"IMT --9--2-- SCAI. F, '-
�-1 ��
0701 -02 o 6- 12� -85 'P.'C Agenda Packet Page 2 of
F71L
AIGNr S10E ELEVAr N MEAR EIEVA'n0N
PIP—
C6 LU
v C
tES•r nuE n a�rr�n� sROrer tLEVAn �.. —e+Y ert 3S4
All. /� �dtsrur a�''S,• �..'I .� ..r I � WV"�
•—'c— �/ +soar SECONO FL40A' —�—
_.� ROYI RAN AOOENOt t.i.:iv! �.lD
CITY OF ITE vi
RANCHO CCCAM(1'�!GA TITLE:
PLANNING DIVISION EXHIBIT. Gn? SCA[.E-
F (2 -i7
r
TW a 340^ !R NOTU
►W 7 N�� � .W�. ?Vif N. f
Mill f
U—oro s.'K �•ar'.� �� LJ_ �{j..a.. Z;:C "��."
. .h. Y..IJ4. M II PAT Yti.•N J• CJi .= L��.... ]Z"T
•M.
• v+. .t �. JaTJ..:e, Js Ja J.>s .T FLOOR PLAN
. •. �fi JKK 'S wit IMr,C LA 4 •'�!� �•�. •G(tl.JI, w o �n w.
OiAZp(fi REOtMEMENT6
u.n. =J..s...ac.u.
. ._ - -A... .i _ .1— . . . -
CITY OF IT a til: - -rte ► Q401
RANCHO CUCAIV ONGA TITLE
PLANNING DIVISM EXHIBIT- SCALE:
/ wNM
f
iew in
nn MUS Q 0
/ 3r
I . I LEFS 9101 MZVAnOM
d*OiP PLAN
FRONT ELEVATIOtl
CITY OF ITEM: -re- lcv!"7
RANCHO CUCAMONGA. TITLE: 9�IWJS
PLANNING DIVISION EXHIBIT. F--lo SCAY.E:
`, -19
-= o
I �.
a'
6 4t.
t tea: r
r
Lars alMATIM
�
FLOaR pIAN �aOf114A ..v.0 ^ ,� 16
-,�
BOOR Pll•.10 e...rw - .r '.• -
CITY OF
ITEIDI -PL tlOql
RANCHO CUCAMONGA
TITLE -,AMID 'S
.
PLAP'[TU D V5AON
EXHIBIT = �I L _SCALE=
1r
• .,yam o��A: ci'T i. ir�y -.'e �'irl } '�i' l�Y�`
—_ — _ — — � �• _. tiles.•- .C'O.e' • � �. - � � c.
�.�"'� �� rteAR eievanoN
t Rath oAS eLavAnoN - -- '.�.�
F- L74
• iMM
PIP
•'`fg10@Fl@YlT;ON �� FRO�FIEVATION ,y_ '°�� "- 4 _
_ k
'•L�y— �-�- r ` , I - - FLOOR PLAtl.A44EN4Avu •' 'O' 1j .-.r
y )
f100F PLAN �.�4 ._ • :y s a i « i . r _ +:F, !�. .�2 �ai
ft • —. .. r« �. L ..— .�ILI• � ia-_ .. •.. .. .s •. .�—. . �. +yYN 1.wt ..LRl��al'YY..•
t
�1 CITY OF ITEM -77Z la !'i
RANCHO CUCAMONGA TITLE: F�/'kTtc�ts
PLANNII'GDIVISION EXHIBIT. SCALE- ---
am
RESOLUTION NO. 80 -86
_ A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE,
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, CONDITICNALLY
APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 10047.
WHEREAS, Tentative Tract Map No 100.�7,.'hereinafter "Map"
submitted by The Anden Group,, applicant, for the purpose of subdividing
the real property situated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of
San Bernardilo, State of California, describea.as a tract subdivision on
27.2 acres in the R -1-•20 zone, located in the south side of Hillside,
west of Hermosa - APN 201- 083 -41 into 43 lots,; regularly came before the
Planning Commission for public hearing and action on December 22, 1980
and
WHEREAS, the City Planner has recommended approval of the Map
subject to all conditions set forth in the Engineering and Planning
Divisions reports; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has read and considered the
Engineering and Planning Divisions reports and has considered other
evidence presented at the public hearing.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga does resolve as follows;
SECTION 1: The Planning Commission makes the following findings
in regard to Tentative Trace No. 10047 and the Map thereof:
(a) The tentative tract is consistent with all applicable
interim and proposed Seneral and specific plans;
(b) The design Mprovetients of the tentative tract is
consistent with all applicable interim and proposed
geney-al 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 of
record, for access through or use of the property within
the proposed subdivision.
a 1 oo'4h
A
Resolution No. 80-886
Page 2 AW
(g) That this project will not create adverse impacts on the
environment and a Negative Declaration is issued.
SECTION 2: Tentative Tract Map No. 10047, a copy of which is
attached hereto, is hereby approved subject to all of the following ,
conditions and the attached. Standard Conditions:
Engineering Division
1. Master planned storm drain shall be required as follows:
et. Design and construction of an adequate concrete
lined channel over Alta Loma drainage course from
south of Wilson Avenue to the north edge of Hillside
Drive shall be, required.
-
b. The length of the Hillside Drive and Wilson Avenue
crossings of the channel shall be based on master
planned street width, and shall be designed to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer and San Bernardino
County Flood Control District.
C. Inlet structures at north of Hillside Drive and an
outlet transition struyture at south of Wilson
Avenue crossing shall ae required. The outlet
structure shall be adequately,,I signed to protect
the downstream end of the existing channel from
erosion and overflow.
d. The existing 80 foot wide drainage easement within
Ir the ll +bject tract shall be dedicated in fee to the
Flood'C{introl District,
I e. The design and improvements of the storm drain.
f facilities shall be done in conformance with the
Flood. Control Dis'trict's standards and specifications
and to the- st.�,isfaction of the City Engineer.
Approval and permits for the storm drain construction
shall be obtained from the Flood Control District.
f. Reconstruction of Hillside Drive and Wilson Avenue
shall be required on the approaches to the required
street crossings of Alta Loma channel. A 26' wide
pavement shall be provided for the approaches on
Hillside Drive with a profile to match the ultimate
design of the street. in addition to the required
improvements on Wilson Avenue contiguous to subject
tract. 'The approaches to the channel crossing
beyond the tract boundary shall be reconstructed to
the existing width of the pavement to match the
ultimate profile of the street.
}
Resolution No. 80 -86
Page 3
g. The cost of constructing the storm drain facilities
shall be credited to the storm drain fee for the'
and a reimbursement agreement will be executed
per Section 8 of the City Ordinance No. 75 to cover
the contributions whici, exceed the amount of the ,
fee.
h. The cost of constructing the channel crossings
including the approach roads on Hillside Drive and
Wilson Avenue shall be credited to the system development
fee for the project except for that portion of half
width Wilson Avenue approach road contiguous to the
subject tract which shall be the responsibility of
the applicant.
A reimbursement agreement, at the discretion of the
city Council, may be executed to cover the contribution
which exceeds the fee amount, with a stipulation
t',at the system development fees from the proposed
tracts 11609 and 10046 shall be directly reimbursed
as required to the applicant to cover the cost of
construction. This reimbursement shall be made only
after the system development fees are collected in
connection with subdivision developments of the two
tracts as mentioned hereinabove.
7. Adequate roll shall be provided on the tract access
street at Hillside Drive to preclude flood flows entering
the tract.
3. All existing easements lying within the future right-of-
way are to be quit claimed or delineated as per the City
Engineer's requirements, prior to recordation of the
tract map.
4. Final plans and profiles shall show the location of any
existir.3 utility facility that'•could affect construction.
5. Concentrated drainage flows shall not cross sidewalks.
Under sidewalk drains shall be installed to City standards.
6. Existing City road requiring reconstruction, shall remain
open for traffic at all times with adequate detour,:
dur ng actual construction. A cash deposit shall be
required to cover the cost of the grading and paving
pViEy' to recordation of the tract map. On completion of
the grading and paving, to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer, the cash deposit shall be refunded.
7. Adequate provisions shall be made for acceptance and
disposal of surface drainage entering the property from
adjacent areas.
8. Letters of acceptance from downstream property owners-
shall ba required where runoff from the tract flows onto
private properties. ivoWT
�, yes,
f Resolution No. 80,-56
Page 4
G
9. Private drainage�easemer ±s with improvements for cross
lot drainage shall be required and shall be delineated on
the final map.
10. At the time of underground utility installation and prior
to installation of street improvements, the developer
shall contact the appropriate cable television company
for the area and make arrangements which would give the
company the opportunity to install cable at the time of
trenching. If the cable television company does not
install cable, then the developer shall install conduit
and pull boxes throughout the tract. Such details shall
be shown and verified on the improvement plans.
11. All interior streets within this subdivision shall have
sidewalks on at least one side. The location of such
sidewalks shall be shown on the Final Map and shall be
subject to approval by the City Engineer prior to
recordation.
12. Prior to Final Map recordation, the feasibility of
Hillside (toad redesign shall be investigated to pr e
adequate space for sidewalk and other improvements
within Hillside Road parkways.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 22ND DAY OF DECEMBER, 1980.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF `SHE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAN)NGA
BY:
ATT
I, JACK LAM, 'Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and
regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of
the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning
Commission held on the 22nd day of December, 1980 by the following vote
to -wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: King, Rempel, Sceranka, Dahl
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Tolstoy
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
STANDARD CONDITIONS
Subject:— �f 1004-1
Applicant: f dt;c( e-5
Location: 14%zk-W lalt:n'- of "105 z k1�7
Those items checked are conditions-of approval.
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DIVISION FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING
CONDITIONS:
A. Site Development
1. Site shall be developed in accordance with the approved site plans on file
in the Planning Division and the conditions contained herein.
Revised site plans and building elevations incorporating all conditions of
approval shall be submitted to the Planning Division prior to issuance if
building permits.
v" 3. Approval of this r9quest shall not waive compliance with a;l'sections of
the Zoning Grdinance and all other applicable City Ordinances in effect at
time of Building Permit issuance.
!/ 4. The developer shall provide all lots with adequate sidayard area for,�Recre n
Vehicle storage_ pursuant to City standards.
5. Mail boxes, in areas where sidewalks are required, shall be installed and
located by the developer subject to approval by the Planning Division.
6. Trash receptacle areas shall be enclosed by a 6 foot high masonry wall with
view obstructing gates pursuant to City standards. Location shall be
subject to approval by the Planning Division.
7. If dwellings are to be constructed in an area designated by the Foothill
Fire Districts as "hazardous ", the roof materials iiust be approved by the
Fire Chief and Planning Division prior to issuance of a building permit.
8. A sample of tie :•oc:f material shall be submitted to the Planning Division
for review and approval prior to issuance of building permits.
L/ 9. All roof appurtenances, including air conditioners, shall be architecturally
integrated, shielded from view and the sound buffer?4 from adjacent properties
and streets as required by the Planning and Buildin! Divisions.
14. Prior to any use of the project site or business activity being commenced
y— thereon, all conditions of' approval contained herein shall be completed to
the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development.
_ 11. A detailed lighting plan shall be submitted to and d,pproved by the
Planning Division prior to issuance of ou,lding perri ts. Such plan
shall indicate style, illumination, location, height and method of
shielding. No lighting shall adversely affect adjacent properties.
12. All swimming pools installed at the time of initial development shall
be solar heated.
13. Texturized pedestrian pathways across circulation aisles shall be
provided throughout the development to connect dwellings with open
spaces and recreational uses.
14. All trash pick up shall be for individual units with all recepticals
kept out of public view from private and public streets.
15. Standard patio cover plans shall be submitted to and approved by the
C4ty Planner and Building Official prior to occupancy of the first
Un it.
• 16. All buildings numbers and individual units shall be identified in a
clear and concise manner, including proper illumination.
_ e► 17. Solid core exterior doors, security dead bolts and locks shall be
installed on eacfs unit in this project.
18. Security deviczs such as window locks shall be installed on each unit.
19. All units within this development shall be preplumbed to be adapted
for a solar water heating unit.
20. Energy conserving building materials and appliances are rp-ff"ed to be
incorporated into this project to include such things as but "not limited
to reduced consumption shower heads, better grade of insulation, double
paned windows, extended overhangs, pilotless appliances, etc.
21. This development shall provide an option to home buyers to purchase a
solar water heating unit.
22. Emergency secondary access shall be provided to this tract to the
satisfaction of the Foothill Fire Protection District.
V 23. Local and Master Planned Equestrian Trails shall be provided throughout
the tra =.;t in accordance with the Equestrian Trail Plan for Alta Loma.
A detailed equestrian trail plan indicating widths, maximum slopes,
physical condition, fencing and weed control in accordance with City
equestrian trail standards shall be submitted to and approved by the
City Planner prior to approval and recordation of the final map.
V 2.1. This tract shall form or annex to a maintenance district for maintenance
of equestrian trails.
t c=1�G. 'F�•
25. This project shall provide percent of affordable housing and /or
rents, in confarmance with General Plan housing policies and the housing
criteria defined in the Growth Management Ordinance. Affordability shall
be determined by current market rates, rents and median income levels
at the time of construction of the project. Proof of this provision
shall be submitted to the Planning Division prior to f'lalizing building
permits and occupancy of the units.
B. Parkin; and Vehicular Access
1. Ali parking lot landscaped islands shall have a minimum inside dimension
of 4' and shall contain a 12" walk adjacent to parking stall.
2. Parking lot trees shall be a minimum 15 gallon size.
3. All two -way aisle widths shall be a minimum of 24 feet wide.
4. Emergency access shall be provided, matntenance free and clear, a minimum
of 24 feet wide at all times during construction in accordance with
Foothill Fire Dist"ict requirements.
5. All parking spaces shall be double striped.
6. All units shall be provided with automatic garage door openers.
7. Designated visitor parking areas shall be turf blocked.
.1. the C.G. & R.'s shall restrict the storage of recreational vehicles on
this site unless they are the principle source of transportation for the
owner.
9. No parking shall be permitted within the interior cirulation aisle other
than in designated visitor parking areas. C.C. & R.'s shall be developed
by the a;uiicant and submitted to the City Planning Division prior to
issuance n; huilding permits.
C. Landscaping
1. A detailed landscape and irrigation plan shall be submitted to and approved
by the Planning Division prior to the issuance of building permits.
f
1/ 2.' Existing trees shall be retained wherever possible. A master plan of
existing trees showing their precise location, size and type shall be
completed by the developer. Said plan shall take into account the
proposed grading and shall be required to be submitted to and approved
by the Planning Division prior to approval of the final grading plan.
4� 3. Existing Eucalyptus trees shall be retained wherever possible and shall be
trimmed and topped at 30'. Dead, decaying or potentially dangerous trees
shall tie approved for removal at the descretion of the Planning Division
during the review of the Master Plan _of Existing On -Site Trees. Those
trees which are approved for removal may be required to be replaced o,, a
tree -fv -tree basis as provided by the Planning Division.
4. Street trees, a minimum of 15 gallon size or larger, shall be installed in
accordance with the Master Plan of street trees for the City of Rancho
Cucamonga and shall be planted at an average of every 30' on interior
streets and 20 on exterior streets.
5. A minimum of 50 trees per gross acres comprised of the following saes,
shall be provided within the development; 20 % -24" box or larger, 70 % -15
gallon, and 10 % -5 Fallon.
6. All landscaped areas shall be maintained in a healthy and thriving condition,
free from weeds, trash, and debris.
1/ 7. All slope banks in access of five (5) feet in vertical height shall and
are 5:1 or greater slopes be landscaped and irrigated in accordance with
slope planting requirements of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Such slope
planting shall inr-',;:!a 4t not be limited to rooted ground cover and
appr,�priate shrubs and t "ees. All such planting and irrigation shall
be continuously maintaireed in a healthy and thriving condition by the
developer until each individual unit is sold and occupied by the buyer.
Prior to releasing occ panty for those units, an inspection of the slopes
shall be completed by the Planning Staff to determine that it is in
/ satisfactory condition. In the case of custom lot subdivisions, all
such slopes shall be seeded with native grasses upon completion of grading
or an alternative method of erosion control satisfactory to the Building
Official. Irrigation on custom lot subdivisions shall be provided to
germinate the seed and to a point 6 months after germination.
8. All parkways, open areas, and landscaping shalt be fully maintained
by a homeowners association or other means acceptable to the City. Such
proof of maintenance shall be submitted to the City prior to issuance
of building permits.
9. The front yard lardscaping, and an appropriate irrigation system, shall
be installed by the developer in accordance with submitted plans.
10. The final design of the perimeter parkways, walls, landscaping and
sidewalks shall be included in the required landscape plans and shall
be subject to approval by the Planning Division.
11. A minimum of specimen size trees shall be planted
-- within the project.
12. Special landscape features such as mounding, alleivial rock, speciman
size trees, and an abundance of landscaping is required along
11
C' -may ( coq-7
D. LM
_ 1. Any signs proposed for this development shall be designed in conformance msk
with the Comp�,�hensive Sign t1,rdinarice. and shall require review and approval
by the Planning Divisicn prior to installation of such signs.
.2. A uniform sign program for this development shall be submitted to the
Planning Division for their review and approval prior to issuance of
Building permits.
3. The signs indicated on the submitted plans are not approved with this
approval and will require separate sign review and approval.
E. Additional Approvals Required
1. Director Review shall be accomplished prior to the issuance of a Building
Permit.
2. Director Review shall be accomplished prior to recordation of the final'
subdivision map.
_ 3. Approval of Tentative Tract No. is granted su! ?ject to the approval
of Zone Change, and /or Variance /Conditional Use Permit
4. This Conditional Use vermit is granted for a period of mortth(s) at
which time the Planning Commission may add or delete conditions or revoke
the Conditional Use Permit.
V-5. The developer is required to obtain the following signed statement by
purchasers of homes which have a private or public equestrian trail on
or adjacent to their property.
In purchasing the home located on Lot Tract ,
on , I have read the C.C. & R.'s and
understand that said Lot is subject to a mutual re=
ciprocal easement for the purpose of allowing equestrian
traffic to gain access.
Signed
Purchaser
Said statement is to be filed by the developer with the City prior to
occupancy.
6. Prier to appreial and recordation of the final map, or prior to issuance of
building permits. when no subdivision map is involved, written certification
from al' affected School Districts, shall be submitted to the Department of
Community Development which states that adequate school facilities are or
will be capable cf accommodating students generated by this project. Such
letter of certifi.:ation must have been issued by the School District within
sixty (60) days pt,ior to the final map approval in the case of the subdivision
map or issuance rf permits in the case of all other residential projects.
C' " 0
4.
Prior to the issuance of a building permit for a new commercial or industrial
development or addition to an existing development, the applicant shal' pay
development fees at the established Nate. Such fees may include, but '•!ut
be limited to: Systems Development Fee, Drainage Fee, Permit and Plan
Checking Fees.
This approval shall become null and void if building permits are not issued
for this project within one year from the date of project approval.
Street names and addresses shall be provided by the building official;
yG. T 5
✓� 7_
Prior to approval and recordation of the final map, or prior to the issuance
of building permits when no map is involved, written certification from the
affected water district, that adequate sewer and water facilitiia are or
will be available ty serve,the proposed project, shall be submitted to the
Department of Community Development. Such letter must have been issued by
the water district within sixty (60) days prior to final map approval in
the case of subdivision or issuance of permits in the case of all other
residential projects." for projects using septic tank facilities allowable
by the Santa Ana Regional Water Control Board and the City, written certi-
fication of acceptability, including all supportive information, shall be
obtained and submitted t> the City.
B.
This approval shall become null and void if the tentative subdivision map
is not approved and recorded or building permits issued when no map is
involved, within twelve (12) months from the approval of this project
unless an extension has been granted by the Planning Commission.
9.
This subdivision was not submitted at a total development package and is
required to reapply for a point rating relative to the desigr. section
of the Growth Management Ordinance prior to fincl approval and recordation
of the map if the subdivision is going to be developed as trait homes.
APPLICANT
SHALL CONTACT THE Bln LDING DIVISION FOR COMPLIANCE WITF; THE FOLLCNING
CONDITIONS:
Site Development
1.
The applicant shall comply with the latest adopted Uniform Building Code,
Uniform Mechanical Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, Nati ^nal Electric Code, and
all other applicable codes and ordinances in effect at the time of approval
of this project.
2.
Prior to issuance of building permits for combustible construction, evidence
shall be submitted to the Foothill District Fire Chief toat water supply
for fire protection is available.
Y" 3.
Prior to the issuance of a building permit for a new residential dwelling
unit(s) or major addition to an existing unit(s), the applicant shall pay
development fees at the established rate, Such fees may incl-4de -.but not
be limited to: City Beautification Fee, Park Fee, Drainage FLe, Systems
Development Fee, Permit and Plai Checking Fees, and School Fee.
4.
Prior to the issuance of a building permit for a new commercial or industrial
development or addition to an existing development, the applicant shal' pay
development fees at the established Nate. Such fees may include, but '•!ut
be limited to: Systems Development Fee, Drainage Fee, Permit and Plan
Checking Fees.
This approval shall become null and void if building permits are not issued
for this project within one year from the date of project approval.
Street names and addresses shall be provided by the building official;
yG. T 5
7.
8.
N
Dwelling units shall be constructed with fire retardart material'
and non - combustible roof material.
All corner dwellings shall have the building elevation facing the
street upgrade with additional wood trim around windows and wood siding
or plan -ons where appropriate.
G. Existing Structures_
1. Provide compliance with the Uniform Building Code for properLy li.7e clearances
considering use, area and fire - resistiveness of existing building ,$.
2. Existing buildings) shall be made to comply with current Building and
Zoning regulations for the intended use or the building shall be demolished.
V" 3. Existing sewage disposal faci. -ties shall be removed, filled and/or capped
to comply with appropriate gradin3 practices and the Uniform P1umFing Code.
H. Grading
r"l. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the Uniform
Building Code, City Grading Standards and accepted' grading practices.
The final grading plan shall be in substantial conformance with the
approved conceptual grading plan.
2. A soils report shall oe prepared by a qualified engineer licensed by Lhe
State of California to perform such work.
3. A geological report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist
and submitt9d at time of application for grading plan check.
✓` 4. The final grading hall be sub,,ect to review and approval by the
Plann4ny, Engineer,., Building Divisions and shall be completed prior
to recordation of th6 iital subdivision map or issuance of build :,, permit
whichever comes first.
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE ENGINEERING DIV;SION FOR COMPLIANCE 144TH THE FOLLOI•JING
CONDITIONS:
I. Dedications and Vehicular Access
s% 1. Dedications shall be made by final map of all interior street rights -of -way
and all npaessary easements as shown on the tentative map.
V" 2. Dedication shall be made o" the following missin•i rights -of -way on the
following streets:
�Ot additional feet on Wksaw 14M. • `
►ai additional feet ones
additional feet on
1i i coq'7
A
all
✓3. Corner property lire radius will be required per City stand,.10s.
4. All rights of vehicular ingress to and egress from shall be dedicated as
follows: -
5. Reciprocal easements shall he provided ensuring access to all parcels ever
private roads, drives, or parking areas.
6. Adequate r- ans shall be made for the ingress, engress and internal
ci- rulation ny trucks which will be used for delivery of goods to the
property or in the operation of the proposed business.
Street Improvements_
L14 1. Construct full street improvements including, b!st not limited to, curb and
gutter, A.C. pavement, sidewalk, dri,le approaches, parkway trees and streei
lights on all interior streets. A k.lt�� z" MVFF TAvis mAgr '�' $E, 4:1 aj M47
fm "4- NAy `'7M6Vi 1-50--b$ wr7lV4 I ti's - + �f •
V e Construct the follcwing ml�ssirg improvements including, but not limited to:
STR' -�
CURB
GUTTER
A,C.
PVMT.
SIDE-
SIDE,-
WALK
DRIVE
APPR.
STREET
LIGHTS
A.C.
OVER
WHEEL
CHAIR RA14P5
OTHER
s
1&14
A
.
�3.
4.
5
6.
Prior to any work being performed in the public right -of -way, an encroachment
permit and fees shall be obtained from the City Engineer's Office, in
addition to any other permits required.
Street improvement plans approved by the City Engineer and prepared by a
Registered Civil Engineer shall be required, for all street improvements,
pr'or to 'issuance of an encroachment permit.
Screty shall be posted and an agreement executed to the s tisfaction of the
C•ty Engineer and the City Attorney, guaranteeing completion of the public
irprovements, prior to recording of the map or the issuance of building
permits, whichever comes first.
All street improvements shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City
Engiineep, prior to occupancy.
Pavement striping, marking, traffic and street name signing shall be installed
per the requirements of the City Engineer.
C, - 33
I
M
K. Drainage and Flood Control
{►� 1. The applicant will be responsible for construction of all onsite drainage
facilities required by the City Engineer.
2. Intersection drains will he required at the following locations:
V.3. The proposed project falls within areas indicated as subject to flooding
under the National Flood Insurance Program and is subject to the provisions
of the Program and City Ordinance No. 24.
4. A drainage channel andrar flood protection wall will be required to�protect
the structures by diverting sheet runoff to street, 01Z
5. The following north -south streets shall bt designed as major water carrying
streets requiring a combination of special curb heights, commercial type
drive approaches, rolled street connections, flood protection wails: and/or
landscaped earth berms and rolled driveways at property line.
6. Condition K -4, above, may be reduced, at the discretion of the City Engineer,
if adjacent development pr;:ciodes the need fcr any portion of the mall.
L. Utilities
V 1. All proposed - �Ilities within the project shall be installed underground
inciu ing utAlities along major arterials less than 12 KV.
2. Utility easements shall be provided to the spccii icat•ion of the serving
utility companies and the City Engineer.
V 3. Developer shall be responsible for the relocation of existing public
utilities, as required.
✓ 4. Developer shall be ;responsible for the installation of street lighting in
accordance with Southern California Edi:on Company and City standards.
V 5. Water and sewer system plans shall be designed and constructed to me?t
requirements of the Cucamonga County Water District (CCWD), Foothill Fire
District and the Environmental Health Department of the County of San
Bernardino. A letter of compliance form CCWD will be required prior to
recordation.
6. Approvals have not been secured from all utilities and other interested
agencies involved. Approval of the final map will be subject to any
requirements that may be received frwi them.
M. General Requirements and Ap, rovals-
1. Permits from other agencies will be required as follows:
A. Caltrans for:
B. County Dust Abatement required prior to issuance of a grading per
_
C. San Bernardino County Flood Control District
D. Other
C- 3 y
AIW
Z.
A copy of the Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC &R's) and Article',
of Inco.'poration of the Homeowners Association, subject to the approval o..
the City Attorney, shall be recorded with this map and a copy provided to
the City.
&A 3.
Prior to recordation, a Notice of Intention to form Landscape and Lighting
—'
Districts shall be fined with the %I:ity Council. The engineering costs
involved in Districts Formation shall be borne by the developer.
Ae"4.
Final parcel and tract maps shall conform .o C`ty standards and procedures.
t>
.
— 3J t -Days
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION
APPROVING DESIGN REVIEW .,FOR TRACT NO. 10047 LOCATED ON
THE NORTH SIDE Or Wii:WN AVENUE, SOUTH SIDE OF HILLSIDE
_ ROAD, EAST OF ARCHIBALD IN THE VERY LOW RESIDENTIAL
DISTRICT
WHEREAS, on the 10th day of April, 1935, a complete application was
filed by the Pennhill Company, Ltd., for
review of the above- described
project; and
WHEREAS`. on the 12th day of June, 1985, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning
Commission held a meeting to consider-the above- described project.
follows: NOW, THEREFORE, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission resolved' as
SECTION 1: That the following can be met:
1. That the proposed project is consistent with the
objectives of the General Plan; and
2. That the proposed rse is in 'accord with the
objective of the Development Code and the purposes
of the district in which the site is located; and
3. That the proposed use is in compliance with each of
the applicable provisions of the Development Code;
and
4. That the proposed use, togother with the conditions'
applicable thereto,wiil not be detrimental to the
public health, safety, or welfare, or materially
injurious to properties or improvements in the
vicinity.
SECTION 2: That Design Review for Tract 10047 is approved subject
to the attiiched Standard Conditions.
Tentative Tract 10047
Page #2
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 12TH DAY OF JUNE, 1985.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY:
Dennis L. tout, Chairman
ATTEST
Rick Gomez, Deputy Secretary
I, Rick Gomez, Deputy Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of
�. Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and
regularly introduced,, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the
r City of Cancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the a,anning Commission held
f
on the 12th day of June, 1985, by the following vote- to -rit
AYES: COMMISSIONER' --;
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
i
S ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS!
4
O
1� ~
u
2 N
d
0
ip
6
'o
O
O
Y
t
v,°a
e W
U
fttU.iit
O Z"
�
«.«
LC �•°'o .vim
•io
.-
q
os^
ggg5
E
-
Z.
o d
Jpdo
A
na,�q
'^.
mjOd
u
a° pi
WYpY >�
L ew u
ul
Q
c.N .. �u
WpUd n 'Z N yUM
N4a
v�`u
Q�Y
0.
. 4J
C,1
e
d T
C�C
d C q
did
q ^^
•O
ov °ody.
ae. cq
cqua
i
�zs^ Ay.
. o
o
��
^N
d�
ray a
a
Y
°c oo.
vu
... ,a .,a
ova. ua
NE
d.+LO
q Y
N $
aspp
� y
NYa
_
E. o
U= d y Y.
d -b.8 °:a1
p.r d
cH
N
qN
e�c�na N
Lio m2 .
g°ou
YY
S
Yo f
g�
'E d �'
ccpg
eN
NNC
=.2
nOeo
ddsdaii
dp
°
v
� °
G
CL S�ZOl lZ2. aZyE C
i E
u^
Nd°
d ^6
c`Ya
p�
O « ^v
p}^ dV
ar z C
L Y q 6
LV)N L AS^
Y
d a>
H:OO�N
6Y«
<N ^YES
GOdm
F.l°
LLn ^o
N
m
O
1� ~
u
2 N
d
0
ip
6
'o
O
O
Y
t
2
WN
G
W
d °
° 9pL
W
° C O
N x9�
a
o N z
S p E
G A L
t, dww
w n..
*� r n d
0
J �^ C
L
C 6p^«
N.. N
.GO 2
6� r
C11� Ju
d 2 E
6 V F
3Odie y00
L �> p C N
o ^ut m_P ^n
C a C T d
G
eL W >tN'u�Y ~°
�c
55.'oa.°.� °aLi
N a=d«
« d d
a
r u..®. °'.t.-
u
C L C d
9n`E�"t.Cy
6 A C . .. n O. w-
^N ^qc�
;a c v o w Via. R.ENEi
6d yd Y�NC�N
... G T a d U
O f 9 0 w Z N g N t Y
NI.. f•lY QI y�l
C -3�'
9
e W
U
fttU.iit
O Z"
�
N
2
WN
G
W
d °
° 9pL
W
° C O
N x9�
a
o N z
S p E
G A L
t, dww
w n..
*� r n d
0
J �^ C
L
C 6p^«
N.. N
.GO 2
6� r
C11� Ju
d 2 E
6 V F
3Odie y00
L �> p C N
o ^ut m_P ^n
C a C T d
G
eL W >tN'u�Y ~°
�c
55.'oa.°.� °aLi
N a=d«
« d d
a
r u..®. °'.t.-
u
C L C d
9n`E�"t.Cy
6 A C . .. n O. w-
^N ^qc�
;a c v o w Via. R.ENEi
6d yd Y�NC�N
... G T a d U
O f 9 0 w Z N g N t Y
NI.. f•lY QI y�l
C -3�'
9
0
O
d-1
v
a
'n
O
Z
ell
Noma oL
G a
AB
i°a NM 20, ^G Y. 9
N 0 N L O M L L C L
O Y L j V u
0 a d Ecp
=
qo_c
mvwc N9C
aA 9 �� d ^yYt -NV
O A� ydy
a . Od C9' Y N ui
C.0 Lt ^EE LG
C Y mui2
^ � L pL G L �► Ao ..
N.n LS
b
� J
W Y
VN
v 2^
C V.°id
o
ON 9'N
^ V r ^ 0
^ B u G
A `
sec
€yo u <r=
� d
C Y a
Oatl W9
E d O O M Y g O C
G C
�u °L
°U�9E G Cy w.
Y
aN ON C��j..0
O u
d
ao -ipa-
dA)p'OVN
r.u.,°Y
H .~1
I
N
eN „p
a sENy
aq
^ a^
d OTu
2.
pO
3.0 da
°� o °Y
v °o ruAi�
° «o
A no c
A,^
aaCwi
;-.I-
Lr..L+
V a
6 N ...
d D• Y d d 0
c a
� yLy a�-
NnO ^NY.M
^�EN.n'09Y
L
Y
anm=, NU
p
t'a�
u
a q x.
a°
A^
�a aLnpC
=T
o
>Nu
ue t ^a NG
N�
T O9L U
9
p
a am
25
------ .G
m ^ °z
C
8
+ W
-�
K
^ sa
^ N � A V
Tw
CV T p
y.A ^EE p�iad L
OGu.L
60
C V N
Od9 L9 Y
^
?
9
^ G
V
N Q ti x N° d r 6
0
W 3
C G L N°- V 16 0
L. -..+.
a ONO
o. ^
v 2^
C V.°id
o
ON 9'N
^ V r ^ 0
^ B u G
A `
sec
€yo u <r=
� d
C Y a
Oatl W9
E d O O M Y g O C
G C
�u °L
°U�9E G Cy w.
Y
aN ON C��j..0
O u
d
ao -ipa-
dA)p'OVN
r.u.,°Y
H .~1
I
aaCwi
;-.I-
Lr..L+
v
-9
CCU
A^
0.6au
Nq0
VL
^O.
�gEu`gy L.�
v
°% Y A
«
C
N "":5
^
?
9
^ G
V
_`
u
L. -..+.
a ONO
o. ^
' e u
o
N...
oc
mss.` °m
^
d
N.
L
Ni p
°n
A6
Acs
y ^99 N�Gq^
^ uN
^_
G=A
Cdy
y G
Q^
N
W
V
6 ^
.5
9, apVV
.
=NON
LV
q« C=
".0
l A d
i C
L C
6.° k C.5 A V 9
NLL9
u'
n
m�
c
u 9•
w
L
e-L
O
°>
�r c
-I-.
NSy
ee A
d y0
�OSO
Cu
99
S Cc
AAA
>
fi 9 C t
N9
99
W
4 Y
�L..L
4
sOL
^ p=x OW ' ^LI
2 a 6 t 6
:+
v 2^
C V.°id
o
ON 9'N
^ V r ^ 0
^ B u G
A `
sec
€yo u <r=
� d
C Y a
Oatl W9
E d O O M Y g O C
G C
�u °L
°U�9E G Cy w.
Y
aN ON C��j..0
O u
d
ao -ipa-
dA)p'OVN
r.u.,°Y
H .~1
I
1
�M
1
E
a ? C
Ca.
LdC xi.q O
CS CL
Et
6d
w°.N
�
Na
rO°I016m d
LaC
Eay�
P= O
AN
k
y
A
Ya Ca °v6rd
Cb.
adOCp
YO.
s.
111 O
°SgplO
d
u
y,A
.+
cro L YNw~•x N.�
o:�a
4^,-� 9
T ^A
N x
•r-L
wq
Z
c+
A
d
u r
.L. Ma
y
cqw
ca
A
n
Q.
OUO
A 1!
^
6 C
G
0
ad uN Cy
�pO
S .+
�L
Ca°+al
Lgyi
.1°GA^
O�.O�
OIC
W4
Y
rMV
Ny
Ld
6: pl° Cp
Or. gti.+N06�T1g
� �
p1Y° G
N-
y4 O
�v�f•Of
G 2
de 0
Gw
YQ
LN
= °
L= uy
Yn L N� aG
L. pC t• .
NNN tb
NCO °p L
— ...
N
L
Y.
n 4 A7•
ddM.gh.
9 Cd
4 qr
lw
p^
EM
Oµ
�G
6 6
y.
�t`
O4 LL^ Ol•s Oi Llr
q` u
6°I xxy ^.O ��CY °.riAYT °
n
pY .•
_
°pLq V 4
N NqN
6u—i^
V'w
�4.•
SNO
�V6 N C
^9DEY I L iyy
Wvli XN Y42Ti C10Np0 SA•.C.06 6U
C4ALL
ILOA6N
NI
I
'•��
�
I I (I
^I
y��
�wd'A
ts
Op
^°
G OYD
Cam^
EEr93xg
—d..°+
rdG
�:°-n
�•°+
N.L.•
MR
2
N G^ pn
R 6 W
dW
.'0
d2m q++•O
_
,c°�„L'a
G
ViNpc
d
y^•C
a o2 ..`—
Ao9
aua23
Yf "� 6,•p,,.
dO �l Dlx
7rC
n
9La
CYr
C
A�
d
^°p9
LTaq
n L� C
pN ..C4d
�
dyY VAN
� ��q+L•
N
>$�
aL
o�O
L
U
O
—o
°
A '. r,8 w.n4 -NC
E •°p^ �=
m� � ^.N■..:
y d A O G�
n °o�
W q O t
N`t
Ct
L
O
V
Yi •
N O p
yiO "2�.+
T O
6
D _■
Aa L
G y�AA
4`C°
N {•
9H EGEQ
O
L q G
6
6
6 i
n
V
° b C
�
ALL
a
P
--a
Yq
O C
O O
<
9
C^
p�
O L 9
IL^9
O V I.— V
^�:4L
q L=
GNdI. 4y.
C M N
e
O M N^
i d p T
L O •n
...
A
W •Ad °
Y
C • ^ a s
a. G g N y
p y 0
^ 4!.9
� R1p 9
Y d •r
U
L
O.y
E A
M dL
Y O
S�
x p W UY Y L n
^
L
Opp
<•+n0
iAli m�
y
y
49N
p
H6n
- W O C
<ti 4D On^A
CN
60. 6 K N p A
W 6.ri N Yp.
1
�M
1
E
11
A9
EE
�U�4
n'c
^Eva
ata
J
d -oa°Li
E >=
�c
Q A
c,°ae N�.c
C 9
4
q
J
•'s'
y
c° A � o
Y
A 4
da
xu°
ihr�
« O V N
pc
�.
J g J O Y
q..
d
a
N= J
J�z
U.
Ema qR
NSw
°� J
tin6
J
C3
Z
.'•+.::
yew.
UR°
Ap 6
C
^ L n
NNEt
,{d
(i
Q7
Jby�
y
O. gg�`
«=fix
N3Aq:C
uU
«
do+
�
t00
OIOq.
ue.°S.
aU GUd
9CL
Y
JwN
Y =1
A. F�OCA
AO b
NJOL
Sys
R =`emu
2 .N 1�
�yl
AJ
^!!Y q
q
0 6
� U
J
c 'O
G
S.J d
yL b^ Q
O L
°eaua
yj RG Y.N
t
=`
N
s
'c
5
J�.AGJ
.
:
L
�`oAOV
qqZ
N5z
o d
y
J
i u.
>
°•
a
4 L o q
O l J d
55 L y
°• o
t
t -A°a °q
rdcLS
Ano
ra-am
�nJJ
6LC�
b
w -
.•�6
Co=
EV A L�Y
N
N d «L
^
N
N•JUU
t`u
3 6. cR
'•. u`O
A9
EE
�U�4
n'c
^Eva
u =
��°,L° •
e� '°
ba
�'-
`o
eu °toi
c,°ae N�.c
uYO
z
$�
9i+5 Y
•'s'
y
c° A � o
i
°o
A 4
NV',uG
O d
« O V N
g L p
�.
J g J O Y
q..
a
N= J
m
r
Ema qR
om
t
4G.0 Nb
o
Z ^t
=.iu
.'•+.::
O
U >
�Y
wA'O q G
y
«
t
Y
u t!.
Y06 x
.E �d
4^
G
Y
A
L-u
^` A
2
Y'
Sys
R =`emu
2 .N 1�
�yl
AJ
^!!Y q
q
p�
J
c 'O
L.Nraa a
L M u E e y
^ i^
e YauiS
FYWL
d
°eaua
yj RG Y.N
+° -�a-q °
6w qY.p N
i -
m
RUp
N
s
'c
oa
As�d
ug
v«
aim
bJ..
�o
°c^
a x B.
ooc
.°...
`L a
v~ 3,
q
t
oY °u
°m a
.'•+.::
A o
J`
«
p.
^ `f
A p
A
L-u
^` A
2
^VNV
>
L
L>.
'
U
uL
q
NON
ro
A
noR
'c
A
SL°6
ey
o d
y
J
•-
>
°•
a
r a
J gp
t
EG6
Y C1
aOV
pp
C
�nJJ
6LC�
b
w -
.•�6
Co=
EV A L�Y
N
N d «L
^
N
N•JUU
t`u
3 6. cR
'•. u`O
069
a9A
E.ih
a
LbON
lw.6G
'
�
T.}Y^
,L
ari� Oi LTG
,NR
"Oj0
O E >•
4 d
A
jV
E L
bu'
Y bJ
O.��y
°e
,o
Nugo
o:..a c
L' ._ uNJ
LA"a9^
N o.NJ °'N
.EeL
A^
qbN
an ^:
�°.ao
O
L
CLO=i
r
O G E-94
a
-m- a
C �wu
=
_aN
�EOiya
-G
dy
Y�
^ 9x0
�A A
YN
NNSO
N. W
C
0 U U
° G V
L r Y O L
f-Na M
Y
N
y
pYN�
U 1•8
W
E•�J
4 >O
IJ
-y1
Ll
t
C
a
u
-1 T.
S
W
C.�
01 d
4N'C«
d ^�r�
C'd
^
ANL■
O
y V
«�
°t
3
ML
«L
CC
O.�°
C� N4
O.C2
�.�
d U NE
gECV UNi
bN
Z
d 0
YQ L��rr
° d
l
4J
o
rn
52
=
°� y L
N'-
= a
V
@7
`
a
d L N..
O
Y
J Qt
I
d
4
a,4
L�
'^ -arc j�
N4
u� � w
► s �„ = N
v «vd ej
c
yy
&:r o
w9L0
'O V�CCq
Z uY9
LCeO
S.`:v. -.
C L e y ^ems.! •
Lr4^W f�
E A
4 C L L
EE C •+'
V O
u
a
q c
= a
4 a
d `m
S
a«
�'
u Y
°y
Lo L Y.
r`c°'roe
n Y`.,,
,
HE Lm�Lay.
54 ,5'
4-
tLNOzr.�
.r
d
z
u.5
�
a o
4 N O L
O L° L
L d
pL n
pP
4 Y;5
Wo f
z
.A
I
I I I
b
I
Iz
l
Ll
t
C
a
u
S
W
C.�
01 d
4N'C«
d ^�r�
C'd
^
O
O
y V
r
pp
Y
V
«L
CC
O
Y
^
Q L
^
SIT.
�. 4.
a,4
°
n 0. 0'S
Y
Y
�:
c
yy
&:r o
w9L0
'O V�CCq
Z uY9
LCeO
qg
NS9
C
?
u
a
q c
= a
4 a
d `m
S
a«
�'
u Y
°y
Lo L Y.
r`c°'roe
n Y`.,,
,
HE Lm�Lay.
.z
_
.- c
d
z
u.5
�
a o
Ty
qua 0
a c o M 2
C L CY
C
Cm VN
Y
Nq3.
y«
°.
\d. LY �.S
CYLN
« «OAT N.
'" ^ qo
vS
v °
Hi:
„v+.
Y
�4
n
ax
°o
°fou
mow. "
4
rn aaivaz
ga +`n
oim +vv
W 9 W y i.r
vu
O =
4
•
c
u
Ll
t
iJ
U
Ol
Q
m
E
N �w-U
d
�.
1r'
In
NL�
y
d
L• d •1,11
Y Y
v C' Z 3
Zj NO
Via- a
d
�'
�
L
`� r «n
N ^g.EZ
b' �
LC
L y 7
9I
O
G
A
N
4 V N M O °
O C
•_ c
N
AE
t.>
yN
L
A�N °CC
N
1IW ugW
91r. �L
w0
C�'N
GL
W
M2
N..i
NC ca
4
y° �.�
Y9 2«
c
y?.
ua
O.i
^CcSsL
G9,"
i
a
_
La
Oyy
N
Ecq E
4 C
a
sn
A� �
C
YO
LPU
it L
E
p0
01 •
«W
T t ^
AT
N •
N
Y T g Y
N
o
d1.EM.
« C Y
d d
�. O$
C
ZZ
CCQ4N
i V ww N
N •"fI
S
N�
O a
D
via c�
�cL
yL�n
Ae
N
88.2
J�
.',
'G°u
« +O u
°
_o «
CN
}W 0. 11
9�OCy
u�p
DId9C«N..
Yom. C.
LN
Y°1C y
VdCV a'
pp
A
L
y-C�
fi
«
qqa
NV 4- VIII
D N@ Y
.-
y4y q L
•1 +UO.^
«y G�
GjP
a
11L
`
9`� «y Y
4Y. s
CM
+�6°
per.
Y:•. �..
ggb
—N
O Gd
Viapl d.
n
«nC^
YT a C
> gA
r R°
�W b�
O^
aaa
i L
NL
Y y Y L A L
` 505
L a r Of
E `
Ya�l
a
N�6f0y
&a
a0ii�
LC
C�
^p YVQC1 ^L
LN
.l." O
9
q
.
L R C
M
Y d
N
W
1 a22a9
d C
Nl61W �
p
4yN
OY MLLY
N
0
N04
O
'>
G
O°ld
.-. W r
14
. . 6 .
14
C A
-C 42
z N
�
avoo
E g
O
av
Y
AE
t.>
yN
L
A�N °CC
N
1IW ugW
91r. �L
w0
C�'N
GL
W
M2
N..i
NC ca
4
y° �.�
Y9 2«
c
y?.
ua
O.i
^CcSsL
G9,"
i
a
E
N L Ty
La
Oyy
N
Ecq E
4 C
a
sn
pOO
=
oa ^
YO
NN
�Li
K a
p0
01 •
L�
rn
TK`e0
7 ^`C
�N Y
O.�
`ilY
o
«L�J
�Q Y
04
Q + +p
64 6CV
0!I AI
GgN
Y
.1
�
C
ZZ
CCQ4N
i V ww N
N •"fI
S
6 p1 C
u`4 t0.1.
N� NII
w
O
av
J
U w
CO
W
M2
N..i
4
1 Y
N
ci a
K a
W
0
U U
H
H
N
(2-(/3
z �M
v
c = _
L v
O C y
� v `
Y L
t � d
O L 6NO
Z «�
6 L V O
O1 SL C
O1 «Yy .f[Q N
L V N =i
�C
W
C 6 f ^Y
� � N
YO
U
C
a
Y q
O
O
V V
Yy y
u$
ca i
d>
Y� a
L� ^
N
a
�= N
C
iM q
i
c
4
a u c
d
S
y U
n a V
q C
LL
Y
Y
G
1 w
N
KI.
wgy
u�
vY
a�' o
2
S u
v"
qa e
o
J
uz=
t
L
Y
�
Y
yN
L
Cs
04
i Y
o n
O
NP
Yu
V
9W
OLgt
U6�
YOn
Y=L=
�L
GD
Y
U.0
•L
LY
a d
N a
gsz
as
a_
In
2 N
''" c
Y Y8888.
YI
c�a
0
a
v M
Y q
O
O
V V
Yy y
u$
ca i
a
Y� a
L� ^
N
a
�= N
C
iM q
i
c
4
a u c
d
S
y U
n a V
q C
LL
Y
Y
G
1 w
N
KI.
v M
Y q
O
O
d O
u$
a
Du
N
6
U
9 N
U
p
Y q
^ N
^ O
wgy
u�
vY
a�' o
2
S u
v"
qa e
o
J
uz=
L
Y
YN Y
i Y
o n
q U E
<GN
yy� Y
Y Y9 C
pia o
•i
y
Z
q s
N A
q Y 3
$ v
M D E
as �
Y 1
g q
L
v �
e �
^ 4 ^ 6 L
b d O u
9� �O
d €'
� N rS v qu
N 6J CO
•Y
C O nL Y C
OC
� N �
a
iu: u
uo
on
V 6q
4 Y
=° g
aNv
� O N
°�Y c
V yn �
q
u
C G^
Y You v
L��c Yzy
�I �l
ELI N
�2W
OUO
y Y N
L twat`
e-
G Y
°ua r
O 3
09 La
6.JYG
�l
s y
r
4
Y
a
� u
Y i
D N
M iLc
v O
u
a
n= �
V y �
� y O
N L Jas
Yoh 8 L
T QQ
4 li
t Y or
Q
E
n,-
0
V
nrmV nV r? ATT(`An PT''r.i11nNY_A
STAFF REPnRT�� �^
IT,
7
197;
DATE: June 12, 1985
Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner
BY: Nancy Fong,`Assistant Planner
SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 85 -07 -
ARMAKIAN - The deveaopmPnt of 88 unit apartments on 6.3
acres of land in the Medium Residential District (8 -14
du /ac), located at the south side of San Bernardino Road.,
700 ± feet east of Hellman Avenue - APN 208- 141 -35, 38.
I. ABSTRACT: The purpose of this report is for the Plannii,g
Commission to review, discuss and provide direction to Staff. The
options are:
1. To proceed with this project by evaluating it under current
Development Codes;
2. To develop interim policies for Foothill Boulevard :7,d further
process this project under these policies; or
3. To recommend to the City Council a moratorium along Foothill
Boulevard for the ertirc study area of the propcged Foothill
Corridor Study.
A land use boundary determination is also requested.
II. BACKGROUND:
A. Project Description: On February 13, 1985, the developer had
submitted a proposed residenttial development consisting of 88
apartment units with a net density of 14 dwelling units rnr
acre. The proposed site plan consists of units grouped into 4-
plexeF and 8- plexes with garages arranged in parking courts.
Open spaces provided are centrally lop ed with greenway
linkages throughout the site. The proposed apartments are 2-
story buildings of contemporary architectural sytle with thick
butt asphalt shingles and stucco walls. The proposed
elevations appear to be adequate in providing a variety of
ITEM 0
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
Development Review 85 -07
June 12, 1985
Page #2
to
architectural treatments. The proposed unit size ranges from
650 square feet for a one bedroom to 950 square feet for a two
bedroom, while the rental rates range from $580. to $675. per
month. According to the developer, this project is designed
under condominium standards, so as to leave room in the future
for conversion when the market allows.
B. Determination_ of Land Use Boundary for Project Site:
The location of the site as shown in Exhibit "A indicates
approximately 200 feet in the east portion, lies within the
General Commercial District. The developer is requsting that
thq Planning Commission make findings to clarify that this
portion of the land area in questicis is intended to be within
the Medium Residential Districit, pursuant to Section 17.02.0306
- Conflicts and Clarificatons of the Development Code.
Based on Staff review, the General Plan Map as shown in Exhibit
"B ", indicated that the land use boundary between GC and M on
the north side of Foothill Boulevard matched with the land use
boundary between GC and M on the south side of foothill
Boulevar6. This generally follows quarter section lines.
Since the Development District Map was established according to
the General Plan Map, pursuant to Section 17.02.0306, the
Planning Commission could make findings and interpretation that
the 200 feet east portion of the project site is intended to be
- Within. Medium Residential District through adoption of a
Resslution of Record.
C. Surrounding and Existing Land Use: Areas north of the site are
designated as Low Residential District and consist of single
family tract hones. Area immediately east of the site is
designated as General Commercial District with a couple of
large parcels that are currently vacant while a couple of small
strip commercial use parcels exist along Foothill Boulevard.
Area west of the site is designated as Medium Residential
District with an existing model home park and other single
family homes. Areas south of the site are small strip
commercial parcels owned by different individuals with a couple
of-the parcels being land locked (Exhibit "C ").
The proposed development - has completed both the Technical and
Design review process. However, since the site is locate-
within the heart of the Footht'l Corridor Study area the
" PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
Development Review 85 -07
June 12, 1485
Page ,#3
project raises two broad issues. The first one is project
related issues such as dersity transition, circulationlaccess,
and neighborhood compatibility and other site specific
questions. The second one is a broader, policy related issue
such as how this project relates to the 'Foothill Corridor Study
and if the existing land use is appropriate. The following
analysis addresses the two sets of issues separately.
III. ANALYSIS:
A. Project related issues: In an effort to address the identified
issues as mentioned above, the developer has provided two
master plan alternatives as shown in Exhibit "C" and Exhibit
"D" Alternative A (Exhibit 'Ir "), assumes that only the six
small parcels east of Second Avenue will be ultimately
designata<a as Medium Residential use and could be designed as a
Second Phase of the proposed residential project., Alternative
8 (Exhibit "0 "), assumes that the entire area south of the
project area will be ultimately designated as Medium
Residential use and could be developed independent of this
proposed residential project, wet providing continuity to the
residential use:
The developer in designing this project, tried to m ;tigate the
land use conflict through providing a building setback of 45
fez�t where single fa;:ily homes are - across the street; providing
a building setback of minimum 75 feet to the west where mobile
homes are loLated and providing adequate parking facilities so
as not to burden the street. However, at a neighborhood
meeting, the surrounding residents raised their concerns
regarding this project. These concerns could be summarized as
follows: too high a density, increase in traffic and crime
rates, and decrease their property values. A copy of the
summary of the neighborhood meeting has been attached for your
review.
B. Policy Related Issues: Master planning of the project site and
surroun infi g area could be a useful tool t. assure harmonious
development along Foothill Boulevard. However, the Foothill
Corridor Study is intended to study the existing and future
land use on both sides of Foothill Boulevard and to establish
development policies and standards to guide future
development. One of the primary goals of this study will be to
assure harmonious relationships through coordination of
drainage, traffic,
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
Development Review 85 -07
June 12, 1985
Page #4
I
ANIL
circulation, access points, land use and urban design
guidelines. Therefore, prior to the completion of the Foothill
Corridor Study, proposed develop ment could be premature if it
could preclude future circulation or land use options or affect
the viability of the ultimate development of this area.
IV. OPTIONS FOR CONSIDERATION: Based upon the analysis, the Planning
omarrssion cou consi er the following options:
1. Proceed with the project by evaluating it under- current
Development Code and attempt to resolve identified project
related issues. Approve or deny project on the basis of its
mzrit without consideration of the broader issues.
__
Impact: Proceeding with this project by evaluating it
under current codes, and resolving the project
related issues, would fulfill the City's
obligations to complete processing this
residential apvlication. However, if approved,
this project may not be consistent with the
long term solutions for Foothill Boulevard, and ,
may limit the choices availo4le in the
immediate. area.
2. Direct Staff to develop interim 6evelopment policies for
Foothill Boulevard and continue this project, with the
applicant's consent, until the adoption of the interim
;, olicies. Follow through by evaluation of this project in
light of the interim policies.
Impact: The development of interim Policies �or.
Foothill Boulevard' would provide criteria Por
review of ,proposed developmen4s along Foothill
Boulevard on a case by case basis.- The
advantage of,this approach lies in the ability
to proceed with review of projects based on
specified criteria. Projects consistent with
interim policies' would not experience undue
delays and could be approved prior to
completion of the Foothill Plan. Only those
projects with significant potential of
interfering with the long term goals for;
Foothill Boulevard would not be permitted to
proceed until adoption of this plan.
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
Development Review 85 -07
June 12, 1985
Page #5
3. Declare a moritorium until the completio!: of Foothill Corridor
Plan. This option would prevent consI,r;,ction of projects prior
to adoption of the Foothill Plan. However, it may also
preclude>.ior unduly delay, development of desirable projects
consists: +L' with the City's long term goals. In addition, a
moratorium would not be likely to create a positive environment
in which tc begin preparation of the Foothill Plan.
V. CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised in The D2aj Report
r. as a pu c eari,ng,. notices were sent to all the property owners
within 600 feet of the project site and a 4 foot,.by 8 foot
notification sign was posted at the site. A neighborhood meeting
was conducted by the developed on April 9, 1985, at the Rancho
E Cucamonga Neighborhood Center where approximately 25 residents
attended this meeting.
A copy of.the summary of this meeting has been attached fer your
review.
VI. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that t6t Planning Commission
review all of the information presented irr this report. It is
recommended that the Commission adopt option 2, to create interim
policies and to-';ontinue the project to the Juiy 10, 1985, Planning
Commission meeting. A determination on the current boundary
between the GC and M districts is also requested and direction
should be given on final processing of DR 85 -07 for subsequent
action of the Planning Commission.
k
R sd tful smit
LO ubted.
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF
REPORT
Development Review
85 -07
June lc^, 1985
Page #6
Attachments:
Correspondence from Residents
Letter from property owner
Exhibit'A"
- Location /Dev�flopment District Map
Exhibit
4'8" - General 'Illan Map
Exhibit
''C" - Surroundiiig Land Use
Exhibit
'D" - Masttlr flan Alternative A
Exhibit
"E" - Master Plan Alterntive B
Exhibit
"!'4i_- Detailed Site Plan
Exhibit
11V - Conceptual Grading Plan.
Exhibit
"H` - Conceptual Landscape Plan
Exhibit
''I -`- San Bernardino Road Street Section
Exhibit
"J""- Elevations and Floor Plans
Summary
of Neighborhood Meeting
Initial„`itudy,
Part II
t
,'arch b, :=Br
=c -,hom It Nay `-'�ncevn:
L a.-.; a c,.)nrprned CVr-r Z.-,- LruLv ?d -aeveion--nz of Pile
—zriber D-, 49-47 : -n an Bernardino -,).--d it., -ta-=^o -jucamonk,,a, I am opposBd
to the high -ien,s-Ity of the units as 4eil ;!s the fact that people will
be in a rental -situation rather tnar a purchasing one.
apax-une-4,ts would detract from, the enti= area as Weil as lowpr
the value of ry property. The traffic ci.rcultition would add congestion
to -=. alread.,. uncomfortable area. It woull also nontxibute to the
over populated school problems.
All in 311 I believe the ltaei:Lvier t1he drans.-ty the higher the
possibilities for an irflax in crime.
I hope that you will consider these problems and build Condominiums
with less units per acre.
Thank You
�rf 7X
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Planning Department
P.O. Box 807
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
Barmakian Company
4..
9375 A-chi bbl d Avenue C1.
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 oy 9 ,9A� �4 cod'®
This same letter was sent irk by the•residents as listed
in the attachment.
Z9 I?
K 11
Dick and Peggy Ellansky
9587 Stafford Street
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
Mr. and Mrs. Hausman
9430 San Bernardino Rd.
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
Gerald & Linda Choppi
7970 Layton Street
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
Ralph & Marilyn Garneau
9450 San Bernardino Rd.
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91 "'30
Brenda & Hector Rodas
7930 Layton Street
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
Donald & Patricia Johnson
7945 Layton Street
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
G
Patricia Holvoyd
7935 Layton Street
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
J
Linda & Michae, Ward
7990 Amethyst
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
Mr. & Mrs. Larry Molineux
7898 Amethyst Street
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
f
Magie Christopher
7805 Amethyst Street
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
Stanley Goldyn
7880 Amethyst
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
Charles & Karen Metz
4
9480 San Bernardino Rd.
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
Mr. & Mrs. Daniel Wesley
7925 Amethyst Street
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
Mark Burger
7865 Amethyst
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
Lynn and Carolyn Ganger
7895 Amethyst
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 —
March 12, 1985
Cucamonga Planning Commission
To Whom It May Concern:
As a local resident, I am very concerned aborut the proposed
high density apartment development on San Bernardino Road,
which has been filed by the Barmakan Constiruction Co., file
number DR85 -07. I moved into this communitt primarily because
of what appeased to be good community planning and controlled
growth development. I sincewely hope this philosophy has not
changed within the planning department of Cucamonga,
We have all seen the disasterous results of high density
apartment buildings in other communities, please do not allow
this to happen here. I could go into great detail about the
obvious potential problems associated with the these high
density apartment buildings i.e., property values, traffic
congestion, over population of local schools, crime, etc.,
but I'm trusting our planning department will interject
some common sense and put the quality of life for the residents
of Cucamonga ahead of the profits of a land baron. Greed is
the name of the game in politics, but you can do something
about it. Please keep it out of Cucamonga politics.
I trust these
you will consider thoughts of mine and if
development is persued, less dense condominiums would be an
acceptable alternative.. At least the "owners" of these condos
would have an additional incentive to maintain their property,
not someone else's.
Sincerely,
Mark L. Burger
7865 Amethyst
Cucamonga, CA .;.;
v
77
7�1
JI
R
G
..' `t-
sg ►� � f � .l
-a
�i
WO(OK MM PgffAY OWo,.-AK
C
Im
Rica Gomez HAROLD R. LOV(.'sREN
City :
61
NORTH
t. CITY OF ITEM-
RANCHO CUCAMCNGA TITLE.
PLANN I ING DIVA CWT XHIBIT- --47- SCALE-
rr
Lj
LAND USE BOUNDARY. BETWEEN COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL
ON BOTH SIDES OF FOOTHILL BLVD ARE MATCHED
gggp CV a O a . [na �it•:
it .O o A 1 ®r 0 a J
I
$[
V C t IF
�ACAHT
?y M4DOI.E HONE P�W ILK r
OF
e� o ®e a ®eit� aka. ®a eem ®ma e
�:.00nac •- .ao�tiraAi j �;-- raon.u� f —t -- � _ • —
j CC' W Ob• I
VACANT t
C
PA
- y t
[_
;.��1��p�,,L1. `� i .1 -�3�� 1 � e� �Zr. y. 1 °,(Y� 7 �i ~ � � �•.
VA
A SO
4-� s r.
w
fn
ric
we
ow
£; lL�,' <` � c �L kiwt+ 'lwj"":�i}z �—r'•:+, E� R= .e��,J r� ; :`� °`� _ �
A IC
Q !`f
@- =
got
Yy •� '� , yid 1L. ��
kit
fill
7f �f.y A t��8iti �i rQy�L r t
z yr; yti max. A
Am
IDA � ' � � yam � +` �`. t �}� ' r'' Msi- f'• � k��2�_ i �y,c
iaa f
m
..Y
V V
NORTH
ow
�a
r
SOMM °me
Will
�- � ,
��� �!
...T s� 1
>.��`ta
Y,L \III ,». .1 ' -1 1' 'III' �_
.1. lll�t ®I 1� v� IIt� �
1���w', �i�l t �, II� � �'�
�Llr i k I
1{ III � ' i :M .1'
ti-"-- � � _�;1 1
� ��li. ��� � i i
-�
��.�� � �� I i,j � '�a�'��I ad���'�'
� �I�JI � 3
�.
i s. 5 l
��1 �. � ,.� � 1 f� `.r�
1i, irk
'�� \111 /1 tl iCll ij ��
r �;..
�:��
+ �..
T 4+ _ %�
� �n!V��
_���
�I��. �' � �, .
�aC4`
uunursi�
��
t,
4 nummm
Tll
ifs �s
i low,
milik iM1111" I t
t
fy
U
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMO;'' CA
MEMORANDUM
r
^I` 10
iz
1977
DATE: April 11, 1985
TO: To File
FROM: W ancy Fong
SUBJECT: SUMMARY OF nEIGHBORHOOD METING - DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 85 -07
A neighborhood meeting was conducted by the Developer on April 10, 1985,
at the Ranct., Cucaianga Neighborhood Center. The purpose of this
..ee:ing is for the devsloper to present their proposed project to the
residents as weli as receiving iriput in addressing those concerns raised
by tt-e residents. Approximately 250 notices were mailed out by the
developer to the property owners within 800 feet radius of the project
site. Twenty -five residents attendee this meeting. The following is
the summary of the mee ing:
The developer described their proposed project which consisted of
eighty -eight apartment units witii a net density of 14 dwelling units per
acre. The amenities proposed include recreation facilities such as
swimming pool, tot lot, and gr °enbelts; on site parking - two spaces for
each unit, and one space per four units for guest parking; covered
garages; and providing washer /dryer and microwave for Each unit. The
unit size ranges from six - hundred -fifty square feet, to nine- hundred-
fifty square feet, with sixteen units in the one ,; Groom, one Lath,
thirty -two units in the two bedroom, 1 bath and forty snits in tnic two
bedroom, two bath. Proposed rental rates ranges from $580. to $675. per
month. The developer in designing of this project tried to address red
mitigate lr id use conflict through providing a building setback of
forty -five feet where �inule- family homes are across the street;
providing a building setback of minimum seventy -feet to the west where
mobile homes are located; and providing adequate on-site parking
facilities for each uit and guest parking so as not to burden the
public street. The developer stated t4at this project is designed under
condominium standards, so as t„ leave rc^—T. in the future for conversion
where the market allotis. The developer stressed that they are owner
developer and that there will be a hood property management to maintain
this project.
—mot
i
Summary of yeighborsreod Meeting
Development Re,,iew 85 -07
Page #2
T;ie ccncerns of the ,residents were as follows:
1. Density - The residents felt that the proposed project is
toc dense to be acros_ from single - family homes. The
increase in dwelling units will impact the school by
contributing to the over crowding er atudents.
2. Traffic - The residents felt that at present, they have a
traffic problem with speeding cars, foot traffic from
children and numerous au idents. The resui,, of this
proposed prtiect will add and contribute to the existing
traffic problems. Aesfdents would like the developer to
explore the possibility of having access from Foothill
3oulevard through Zod Avenue, instead of San Bernardino
Road.
3. Crime - The residents raised concerns - ggarding the
increase in crime rate as numeroq• 'rudies have
demonstr.ted such increase.
4. �Prcgc�rty Values - The residents were f. _ir.ned that being
zQj3cent to apartments would lower their property
values. The residents would like the developer to
compromise by - devFvlo�ing this project as condominiums.
The reason -being that the ,p is no guarantee cf any future
property owner to maintain the apartment project, while
the HomeownerF %Jssociatior for a condominium project are
requi red ' --',� m! itt'' n the property.
iiF: cv
�M
P
'� / /1�� /iC)r�✓ C:5�7 ^s�✓'i��xa _ 7 X�G� ,�a'� �G�d /�=J
c %ps c4a,"e-
7SO ens.
�rA/QNE�94k 45�s`u S�I�' �8�671►ri9/Q b /r+i R�.
1p
'7 9�
71135 a
1"
3/
;F
CITY OF RANCHO CUCA.MON'A
PART II - INITI..L STUDY
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
DATE-- 5-.2 -05
APPLICAM /V&A '(� I
FILING DATE: Z'lj-�r7 LOG NIMER: �Q
PROJECT:
PROJECT LOCATION: e7 _
— H�cLLNi�f+11 .
ey-
I ENCIRO`MNTAL I*TACTS
(Explanation of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required on at'�ached
sheets).
YES :LME NO
1. Soils and Geoloe4. Will the proposal have
sign TTcant results in:
r
a. Uustable ground conditions or 3,1 changes in
geologic relationships?
b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or
burial of the soil?
c. Change in topography or ground surface
contoL; intervals?
d. The destruction, covering or modification
C,f any unique geologic or p %ysical features?
e. Any potentirl increase is wind cr water
erosion of soils, affectin either on or off
site conditons?
/
_ ✓
f. Changes in erosion .Utat {,on, or deposition?
g. Exposure of people or property to geologic
hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mud-
slides, ground failure, or similar hazards?
_
i, An increase in the rate of extraction and /or
use of any mineral resource?
2. Hydrolc_�y. Will the proposal have significant
results in:
p -3 =�2 --
Page Z
'(
YES u4Y3= ::0
" a.
Changes in currents, or the course Of direction
Of flowing streams,
('
rivers, or ephemeral stream
channels?
a
b.
Changes in absorption rates, drainage pattetns,
or the rate and amount of surface wager
..
runoff'.
'.
c.
Alterations to the course or flow of flood
i
waters?
d.
Charge in the amount of surface water in anv
body water?
of
V
e.
Discharge into surface waters, or art
alteration of surface water quality?
°.
Alteratien of groundwater characteristics?
g.
Change in the quantity of groundwaters,
either through direct additions or with-
_
drawals, or through interference with an
aquifer?
Quant y?
Quantity?
h.
The reduction in the amount of water other-
wise available for public water supplies?
I.
Exposure of people or property to water
related hazards such as flooding seiches?
`
or
3. Air Quality. Will the proposal have significant
results
1'n2
a.
Constant or periodic air emissions from mobile
or indirect sources?
�'
Stationary sources?
--
b.
Deterioration of ambiei.z air quality and /or
i
Interference with the attainment of applicable
c
air quality standards?
c.
Alteration of local or regional climatic
conditions, affecting air movement, moisture
or temperature?
4. Biota
Flora. Will the proposal have significant results
in c-
a.
Change in, the characteristics of species,
�1
1
including diversity, distribution, or number
of any species of giants?
b.
Reduction of the numbers of any unique, raze
or endangered spec_es of pYants?
�,,�
?age 3
YE5 v =`0
c. Introduction of new or disruptive species of
/
plants i:ito an area?
` /
d. Reduction in a potential for agricultural
--- --- —
l
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. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare
or enda.agered species of animals?
c. Introduction of new or disruptive species of
animals into an area, or result in a barrier
to the migration or movement of animals?
d. Deterioration or removal of existing fish or
wildlife habitat?
5. Population. Will the proposal have significant
results in:
a. Will
the proposal alter the location, distri-
bution, density, diversity, or growth _ate of
the h=an population of an area?
/
b. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or
/
create a demand for additional housing?
V
6. Soclo- Economic Factors. Will the proposal have
1
significant result,- in:
a. Change in local or regional socio- economic
j
characteristics, including economic or
co=ercial divers:.ty.; tax rate, and property
values?
b. Will project costs be equitably distributed
among project beneficiaries, i.e., buyers,
tax payers or project users?
"' )
7. Lard 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?
€
b. A
_
�
conflict with an y de -a gnations,.objectives,
policies, or adopted pans of any governmental
entities?
c. An impact upon the qulaity or quantity of
existing consumptive or Yon - consumptive
recreational opportunities?
D--3 4
°-
Page 4
Y,rS
`L�Y3r NO
8. Transuortarion. Will the proposal have significant
results -in:
a. Generation of substantial additional 'Vehicular
/
movement?
b. Effects on existing streets, or demand for
new
street constriction?
'-
C. Effects on existing parking facilities, or
demand for new parking?
d. Substantial impact upon existing transporta-
tion systems?
e. Alterations to present patterns of circula-
tion
or movement of people and /or goods?
f. Alterations to or effects on present and
Potential, water- borne, 'rail, mass transit or
air traffic?
�-
g. 'n traffic hazards to motor vehicles,
bicyclists
bicyclists or pedEStxians?
ANk
1
9. Cultural Resources. Will the proposal have
~�
p
significant results in;
d. A disturbance to the integrity of archaeological,
paleontological, aad /or historical resources? _
`
10. Health, Safety, and Nuisance Factors. Will the
proposal have significant re_alts in;
'
a. Creation of any health hazard or potential health
hazard?
�. Exposure 7f people to, potential health hazards?
c. A risk of Mplosion or release of hazardous
substances in the event of an accident ?'
+
d. An increase :`:n the n..mber of ir.dividuals
--,
or species of vector or pathenogenic
organises or the exposure of people to such
organisms?
e. Increase in existing noise levels?
f.. Exposure of people to potentially dangerous
noise levels?
Ask
G qW
.�
g. Lie creation of objectionable odors?
h. An increase in light or glare?
„d- 3(.
Page 3
Il. Aesthetics.
vas ua�s� �o
Will the proposal have significant
results in:
a. The obstruction or degradation of any scenic
vista or view?
b. The creation of an aesthetically offensive
site?
c. A conflict with the objective of designated
or potential scenic corridors?
12. Utilities and Public Services. Will tae proposal
have a significant need for rew systems, ,,r
alterations to the following:
a. Electric p*wer?
b. Natural or packaged gas?
c. Communications systems?
d. Water supply?
s. Wastewater facilities?
f. Flood control structures?
AINk
f
I
g. Solid Waste facilities?
h. Fire protection?
i. Police pro& - action?
J. Schools?
k. Parks or other recreatirnal facilities?
1. Maintenance of public facilities, ;including
j
roads and flood control facilities!
M. Other governmental services?
13. EnersS and Scarce _Re3ources. Will the proposal
have significant results in;
a. Use of substantial or excessive fuel or energy?
b,, Substantial increase in demand upon existing
sources of energy?
c. An increase in the demand for development of
new sources of energy?
`
- d. An increase or perpetuation of the consumprion
of nor_- nenewable forms of energy, when feasible
y
renewable Sources at energy are available?
L,?
„d- 3(.
Page 6
Y5
`La 3S y�O
e. Substantial depletion of any nonrenewable or
rt
scarce natural resource?
14. Mandatory Findings of Si nee.
a. Does the project have the potential to degrade
the quality of the environment, substa.itially
reduce the habitar.of fish or wildlife species,
cause a fish or wildlife population to drop
below self sustaining levels, threaten to
eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce`
_ the number or restrict the range of a rare or
endangered plant or animal or eliminate
important examples of the major periods of
California history or prehistory?
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 rcle.tively
brief, definitive period of time while long -
teru impacts will endure well into the future).
_
c. Docs the project Nava impacts Which are
individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable? (Cumulatively considc 'roe
means that the incremental
effects of an
individual project are considerable when viewed
In connection with the effects of past projects,
and probable future projects).
d. Does the project have environmental effects
Which will cause substantial adverse effects
on hutan beings, either direcIly or indirectly?
II. DISCUSSION OF M IYONMEnTAL EVALUATION (i.e., of affirmative
answers to
Tie above questions plus a discussion of proposed, ritigation,meassres).
A PON '70 A117741- 57L)P/ , fkT _X .
I
-3,7
1,1
Page 7
Iii.. DETEE?:x`:ATIC?I
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
7 I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect
on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed prcject could have a significant
effect on the environment, there Will not be a significant effect
in this case because the mitigation measures ;4escribed on an
::tacked sheet have been added ro the project. A NEGATIVE.
DECLARATION FALL BE PREPARED.
I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the
envirnment; and an ENVIRONMMNT L14PAC REPORT ig} required.
Date
—w�/ %,gnat Ire
ll! 1l!_9G1C
Title
r
C> -3g
a_.
1
Fl, _
Y
v
ADDENDUM TO INITIAL STUDY, PART II FOR DR 85 -07
2. Hydrology (b),)
The construction of this project will increase the amount of paved
surface area which could result in an increase in the amount of surface
water runoff and a decrease in the absorption rates. However, the
proposed drainage system far this project will handle this increase. The
development of the site could expose people and property, especially
downstream properties, to flooding. However, this could be mitigated
through the construction if storm drain facilities to handle the surface
water runoff.
4. Biota a b and c
The development of this project will introduce and add new plant species
to the site, which will provide for a rersity. However, the
development of the site will cause the removal of the northern eucalyptus
windrows as they are within the public right -of -way. The developer
should mitigate the removal of the existing windrows by replacing them
with new ones as well as providing dense landscaping.
7. Land Use and Planning Considerations (b")
The site is located within the heart of the Foothill Corridor Study area,
which raises 2 broad issues. The first one is project related issues
such as density; transition, circulation, access, and neighborhood
compatibility. The second one is polity related issues such as
appropriate land use and development standards, and how this project
relates to the future Foothill Corridor Plan.
The Foothill Corridor Study is intended to study the existing and future
land use on both sides of Foothill Boulevard and to establish development
policies and standards to guide future development. One of the primary
goals of this study will be to assure harm -nious relationships i>�Zrough
coordination of drainage, traffic, circulation, access poisits, land use
and urban design guidel;nes. Theref -3re. prior to the completion of the
Foothill Corridor Plan, any 'proposed development may seem to be premature
anc could preclude future land use options or affect the viability of the
ultimate �ivelopment of this arpi.
8. Transp.�:^tation Lal
The development of this project will cause an increase in vehicular
traffic, however, San Bernardino bein, a collector street, is designed to
handle such an increase.
.Y
CPPX OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
STAFF REPORT
J�®
DATE: June 12, 1985 i!
TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Rick Gorez, City Planner
BY: Nancy Fong, Assistant Planner
SUBJECT: DESIGN REVIEW FOR CGYDITIONAL USE PERMIT 83 -09 = BRETHREN
IN CHRIST CHURCH - A request to change the approves
elevation for a 2,800 sq. ft. education facility within an
approved Master Planned church complex on 6.8 acres of
land in the Medium Residentlal District (4 -8 du/ac),
located at 9974 1-9th Street, east of Ramona Avenue - APN
202- 171 -31, 35.
I. BACKGROUND: The Master Plan for the church complex was appreyed <
the Planning Commission in 1979. This proposed 2,800 sq. ft:
classroom building was approved by the Planning Commission on
September 14, 1983, and is designed to function as a private
elementary school for 100 students from kindergarten thr,)ugh third
grade. The applicant is requesting to modify the approved
elevate ions.
II. ANALYSIS:
A. General: The approved elevation for the classroom building was
des g d to be consistent with the existing multi- purpose
building with variations 'in roof pitch, height, and angle, and
the concrete tile roof. Gue to the high construction cost, the
applicant is proposing minor changes to the elevations, but
naintainirg the same dramatic theme. The proposed new
elevation also has a high roof pitch and angle with the same
roof and building materials of the existing building. The
Design Review Committee has reviewed the new elevations and
recommended approval subject to the original Conditions of
Approval.
IT E
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPGRT
CUP 83 -09 - Brethren in Christ Church
June 12, 1985
Page 2
III. RECOMMENDATION• Staff recommends that the Planning Commission
consider All material and elements of thus project. If the
Commission concurs wi':h the Design Review recommendations, adoption
of. the attached Resolution of Approval would be in order.
R c u itted,
i
Mick ome °
City iann
RG:NFsns
Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Location /Site Utilization Map
Exhibit "B" - Site Plan
Exhibit IC - Previously Approved Elevation for the
Classroom
Ev. ibit "D" F : vet New Elevation
Original Resod at and Conditions of Approval
Resolution of Approval
ti
E
El
CITY OF
RANTCf D CIJCAMUNGA
PLANINM DIVISM
nrpm - I&Awi7 .,
f ITLE-- LOV
EXHIMT.-A sr,,LE /
-
I -13
(Rth)
(D
TE 14GWY
AOL
CITY OF
RANTCf D CIJCAMUNGA
PLANINM DIVISM
nrpm - I&Awi7 .,
f ITLE-- LOV
EXHIMT.-A sr,,LE /
-
I -13
0701 -�(2
61-12-85 P, C, Agenda Packet o Page -3 of 8
PRASE IVi
a j
` m
z
PHASE II _ =
4 cusSRaonns _ '? ' i
yg n� -M T 1
2 TOILET MOMS r7�c�2oX V
I--'- IV - 2*0- — 432 PZ•�
TOTAL 2448 Y
PHASE I p=
S f
4 GLASSRGpIV15
< -
TOTAL : 27W-' n
a "r (A
m
-�p m
O:5
0 0
m r0 Q I GFFIC03 / NIRiSEHY
EXISTING PARKING I t
i
CITE' OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA
PLANMM DIVISM
2
ITEMS -
x,, lid
TITLE: At P
EXHIBIT: ak SCALE-
��y
lu
M6RTM ezcv,noM
UNIT O"AI M
EXTERICQR ELEVA?MS • CLASSR0014 BLM DMiO
CITY OF
RAN LID CUCAMO NGA.
91-k INU DWIS v
NORTH
SOUTH ELEVATION
EAST ELEVATION
EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS • CLASSROOM BUILDING
SCALE . ,,.•. "-W
1
I
i�
NORTH
CITY OF STEM: i_ 4 ( 7
4 RANCHO Ci7CAMOONGGA TnU. L � �� �0
Alm
PLANNING DIVISION EXHIBIT l SCALE
_ j�
i,
a
_
r
z
O
h
7
W
J
W
m
W
z
0
W
I•
f
11 !`
Z `fi
o ;
i
W '
O I (!
z
i W
N
LU
t
a
is
go
tz
s
o�
�
0
s
3t
`m
z
0
W
I•
f
11 !`
Z `fi
o ;
i
W '
O I (!
z
i W
N
LU
go
tz
�
0
RESOLUTION NO, 83 -112
A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION
APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 83 -09 FOR ALTA LOMA
BRETHREN IN CHRIST CHURCH LOCATED AT 9974 19TH STREET IN
THE R -1 -8500 ZONE
WHEREAS, on the 8th day of July, 1983, a complete application was
filed by Alta Loma Brethren in Christ Church for review of the above - described
project; and
WHEREAS, on tits 14th day of September, 1983, the Rancho Cucamonga
Planning Commission held a public 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 wiS'_t the General
Plan, and the purposes of the zone in which the use
is proposed; and
2. That the proposed ,use, together with the conditions
applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the
public health, safety, or welfare, or materially
injurious to properties or improvements in the
vicinity; 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 andthat a Negative Declaration is issued on September 14, 1983.
SECTIM 3: That Conditional Use Permit No. 83 -09 is approved
subject to t e fol owing conditions,
PLANNING DIVISION
1. All laws and regulations of the State of California
relating to licensing of elementary school
facilities shall be complied with prior to opening
or 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
cem- mission for their consideration and possible
termination of such uses.
IM
LA
Resolutirn No.
Page 2
r3.
Operation of the school shall not commence until
such time as all Uniform Building'—Code and Title 19
of the State hire Marshall's Regulations have oeen
complied with.- Plans shall be submitted to the
Foothill Fire Protection District and the Building
and Safety DW sion to show compliance.
4.
Expansion of the preschool /gradeschool beyond 200
students will require the approval of a modified
conditionai use permit:
5.
Precise design and site plan review will be required
for all proposed future phases.,
6.
The existing annex building shall be removed prior
to issuance of occupancy permits, and final approval
of the main sanctuary (Phase 3).
1.
Conditional Use Permit approval is granted for a
period of eighteen (18) months. Approval shall'
expire, unless extended by the Planning Commission,
if building permits are not issued within eighteen
(18) months from the date of approval.
8.
The site shall be developed'in accordance with the
approved site plans on file in the Planning Division
and the conditions contained herein.
' 9.
All site plans, grading, :, plan-, landscape and
irrigation plans, and stres- '�aprovemr,nt plans shall
be coordinated for consistency prior to issuance of
building permits, pr =':or to final map approval in the
case of a custom, -rot subdivision, or approved use
has commenced, whichever comes first.
10.
Approval of this request shall not waive compliance
with all sections of the Zoning Ordinance, all other
applicable City Ordinances, and applicable community
plans or specific plans in effect at the time of
Building Permit issuance
11.
Prior to any use of the project site or business
activity being commenced thereon, all conditions of
approval contained herein shall be completed to the
satisfaction of the City Planner.
� Resolution Na,
Page 3
12. All roof appurtenances, including air conditioners,
shall be arch �ecturally integrated, shielded from
view and the sound buffered from adjacent properties
and streets as required by the Planning and Building
Divisions. Details shall be included in building
plans.
13. All ground mounted utility appurtenants such as
transformers shall be located out of public view of
the main building area and adequately screened
through the use or combination of 'concreta or
masonr y walls bermin
g, and landscaping.
14. Emergency access shall be provided, maintenance free
and clear, a minimum of 20 feet wide at all 'times
during construction in accordance with foothill Fire
District requirements.
15. Prior to issuance of Building Permits for
combustible construction, evidence shall be
submitted to the Foothill Fire District that
temporary water supply for fire protection is
ar4 fable, pending completion of required fire
protection systems.
16. The applicant shall comply with the latest adopted
Uniform Building Code, Uniform Mechanical Code,
Uniform Plumbing Code, National Electric Code, and
all other applicable codes, ordinances and
regulations in effect at the time of issuance of
relative permits.
17. Prior to issuance of building permit for a new
commercial or industrial development or addition to
an exsiting development, the aE,3licant shall pay
development fees at th established rate. Such fees
may include,` but not be limited to Systems'
Development Fee, Drainage Fee, Permit and Plan
Checking Fees,
18. Grading of the subject property shall be in
accordance with the Uniform Building Code, City
Grading Standards and accepted grading practices.
he final grading hplan shall be in substantial
ormance 44. t
e. conceptual grading
plan. �
- Resolution No.
page 4
ENGINEERING DIVISION
19. The westerly drive approach shall be 'completsd to
current city standards;
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 14TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 1983.
PLA NG MISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY:
Dennis St ut, Ch am
ATTEST:
ecretary of the Planning Commission
I, JACK LAM, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duty and
regularly into- oduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the
City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held
on the 14th day of September, 1983, by the following vote -to -wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER, McNIEL, JUAREZ. REMPEL, STOUT
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
i
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION
APPROVING DESIGN REVIEW FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 83 -09
LOCATED AT 9974 19TH STREET, EAST OF RAMONA AVENUE IN THE
MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT
WHEREAS, on the 10th day of April, 1985, a complete application was
filed by Alta Loma Brethren in Christ Church for review of revised elevations
for a 2,800 sq. ft. education facility; and
WHEREAS, on the 12th day of June, 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: That the following can be met:
1. That the proposed project is consistent with the
objectives of the General Plan; and
z
2. That . the proposed use is in accord with the
! objective of the Development Code and the purposes
of the district in which the site is located; and
3. That the proposed use is in compliance with each of
the applicable provisions of the Development Code;
and
t 4. That the proposed use, together with the conditions
applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the
? public health, safety, or welfare, or materially
injurious to properties or improvements in the
vicinity.
r SECTION 2: That Design Review for CUP 83 -09 is approved subject to
i` the orianal Conditions of Approval contained in Resolution 83 -112.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 12th DAY OF JUNE, 1985.
c PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY
Dennis L. Stout, Chairman
ATTEST:
Rick Gomez, Deputy Secretary
Resr ution <No.
Page 2
s
i
I, Rick Gomez, Deputy Secretary of the Planning Commission of the O ty of
Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolui44An was duly and
regularly introduced, patted, 'and ad tech by the Punning Comikissfo of the
City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of 'the Planning CotLnission held
on tho 12th day of June, 1985, b; the following vote -to -wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
�_ ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
U
11
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
STAFF REPO RT
DATE: June 12, 1985
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer
BY: Barbara Krall, Assistant Civil Engineer
SUBJECT:
1�
1977
the west si
ses located on the north side of Sixth Street and
Center. Avenue - APN 205- 261 -26
I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION:
A. Action Requested: Approval of Parcel Map (gee -exhibit "B ").
B. Purpose: To comEiine sic parcels into one for Industrial
on ominium purpose.
C. Location: North side of Sixth Street, west of Center Avenue
see ex ibit "A").
D. Parcel Size: 7.78 acres.
E. Ex'
is
tin Zonin�c: General Industrial Development District
su area -5�
F. Existing Land Use: Vacant.
G. Surroundin Land Use:
fort Exis and' g lndustrial building.
South - Vacant.
East - Existing Industrial building.
West - Flood control channel and vacant land.
H. Surrounding General Plan and Development Code Designations:
Nort - General Industrial su area
South - Industrial Park (subarea 6).
East - General Industrial (subarea 5).
West - General Industrial (subarea 5).
I. Site Characteristics: The site slopes in a southerly direction.
I
u TEt4 F
IL ANALYSIS: Development Review No. 84 -32 consisting of 6 buildings
totaling 123,000 square feet was approved for the site by the Planning
Commission on August 22, 1984 (see exhibit 11C11).
On October 10, 1984, the Commission approved Tentative Parcel Map No.
8800 to ,subdivide the property into 6 parcels. The final Parcel Map was
recordeJ on January 3, 1985. The public improvements required for the
parcel map have been completed and building permits have been issued.
The originar subdivider, The Barmakian Company, has since sold the
property to Western Systems Financial Corp. The new owner is requestinj
approval of this parcel map to consolidate the 6 parcels into a single
parcel for Industrial Condominium purposes.
A condition (F.2) has been included', requiring that C.C. & Rs be prepared
and approved by the City Attorney prior to recordation of the Final Map.
III. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: Also attached for your review and consideration is
Part o e m ial 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 she
Initial Study and field investigation, Staff found no adverse impacts on
the environment as a result of the proposed subdivision;
IV. CORRESPONDENCE: Notices of Public Hearing have been sent to surrounding
property owners and placed in the Daily Report Newspaper. Posting at the
site has also been completed,
V. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission adopt the
attac a reso utien conditionally approving Tentative Parcel Map 9302 and
authorizing the is -`ance of a Negative Declaration.
Respectfully submit d,
LBH ,jai
Attachments: Vicinity Map
Parcel Map
Site Plan
Resolution
Recommended Conditions
Initial Study
.o
E
PR
r4t� It3t,"ll
r:
- -- - - - - - - - -
111--oll 1 1 d B u NY t. 11 4 q k441t tit
C 4:CNMI? A VFW.0
M-Y-TIVEP-MCEL NAP .0. 9302
I WMIMP 3YITM MAN AL COIMt
RANCHO "KTEX DIOUSINIAL PARK i � -- w. -,t V
WES ENCMEEOS
[A
um
-4
M
Z
C>
r-
r >
O
CA
WES ENCMEEOS
[A
um
r
l 17
� R: m •3
'� .ice. A j_.� ? ,:gA� ji �.�. :r B? � �`e�v: _ -.r 1���F•�
rte-'
S,p..Ffl ` �.. - PLA
V V
iT P OF pRQJEC Parcel Map 9302
�'' - ieevi ti rt.f- 1lvit.Ji L J-� i iTLE:
ENGINEERING DIVISION EXHIBIT: "� +'
o
h �
U �
1977
GENERAL
For all projects requiring environmental review, this form must be comiileted
and submitted to the Development Review Committee through the department 14hern
the project application is made. Upon receipt of this application, i!e
Planning Division staff will prepare Part II -of the Initial Study and make
recommendations to Planning Commission. The Planning COWissicn will make one
of three determinations: (lJ The -project will have no Si
environmental iuPact and a Negative Declaration will be filed, gnifzc he
project will have a significant environmental impact and an Environmenttal
Impact Report will be prepared, or- (3) 9 �', t ;,f,a; information -report
proposed project.
should be supplied by the applicant giving further information concerning the
ENVIRONI (";NTAL RE",TIEW
APPLICATION
!NITIAL STUDY PART i
Date Filed: May 16, 1985
Project Title: Rancho Center Industrial Park _
Applicant's Name, Address, Telephone: Western Systems Financial Corporation_
10960 Wilshire Bivd. /Suite 1504, L s Angeles, Ca. 90024 (213) 477 -6775
Name, Address, Telephone of Person Tr Be Contacted
Concerning this Project: Pfei,er E Associates Engineers, ci
1742 -B South Euclid Avenue, ont- Ca: 91761 (714) 983-110.1
Location of Project: Northwest tf Sixth Screet C Center Avenue,
Rancho Cucamonga l --
Assessor's Parcel No.: 209 - 261 -26'
.List other permits necessary from local, regioral, state and federal agencies
and the agency issuing such permits: Final Parcel Map No. 9302
PROJECT itSCRIPTION
I
Proposed use or propo,ed project Industrial Condominium
Acreage of project area " square footage of existing proposed and buildings,
if any: 7.24 Acres 17,280 sq. ft. of buildings. p
Describe the enviromnental setti -lq e the project <ite including infovmation
on topograi�hy, soy stabilyty, plants (treesl, land arf:nals, any cultural,
historical or scenic aspects, lance use of sirrounding properties, and the
description of any existing structures and their use (attach ;necessary
___L vacant tot with no trees and unattended grape vineyards.
The :-apes approximately 2% from North to South with stable soil conditions.
S IML, , BAX South is an Industrial ParkOevelopnent district. North,
Eas` 11 is Genera► tndustr'at.
Is :he project part of a larger project, one of a series~ or cumulative
actions, which although• individually small may as a whole have significant
enviroimiental impact This is a one lot 7.24 acres development.
r—
n I -2'
i
RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION
The following information should be provided to the City of Rancho Cucamon a
Planning Division in order to aid the school district in a3sessing their
ability to accommodate the proposed residential development. Developers are
required to secu:-e letters from the school district for accommodating the .
increased number of students prior to issuance of building permitsi
Name of Developer and Tentative Tract rho.:.
Specific Location of Project: —
PHA5E I rHASE 2 PHASE 3 PHASE 4 TOTAL
1. Number of single
family units.
2. Number of multiple
family units,
3. Date proposed to
begin construction:
4. Earliest date of
occupancy..
Mode7a
and of Tentative
5_ Bed_ rooms, Price Fange
1-4
TILL THIS PROJECT: YES NO
1. Create a substantial change in ground contcurs? x
2. Create a substantial change in existing noise of produce
vibration or glare? X;
3. Create a substantial change in demand for municipal y
services (police, fire, water, sewage, etc.)? X
4. Create changer in the existing Zoning or General
Plan designations?
S. Remove any -existing trees? iiow many? X'
6. Create: the need for use or disposal of potentially
`hazardous materials such as toxic substances,
flammables or explosives? X _
Explanation of any YES answers above (attach additional sheets if necessary):
i
7. Estimate the amount of .sewage and solid waste materials this project
will generate. daily: 1.200 gal /day and lc cubic yards
8. Estimate the number of auto and truck trills generated daily by this
project:_ 720 trips /dav
9. Estimate the amount of grading (cuttinij and filling) required for this
project,.in cubic yards:
30- if the project involves the construction of residential units, zamplete'
the form on the next page.
CERTIFICATION: I hereby certif that the statements furnished above and in
the attached exhibits present the data' and information required for this
initial evaluation to the test of my ability, and that the facts, statements,
and information presented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and
belief. 1 further understand thzit additional information may be required to
be submitted before mi adequate evaluation can be made by the Planning
Division.
e .
Date, Mav 16, iq g Signature _
Title
I -3
•
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PARCEL MAP NUMBER
x'02. (TENTATIVE PARCEL A-no NO. 9302) LACATED BET14EEN
NORTH SIDE OF 6TH STREET, WEST SIDE OF CENTER AVENUE
WHEREAS, Tentative Parcel Map Number 9302, submitted by Western
Systems Financial Corp. and consisting of I parcel for industrial condominium
purposes, located on the north side of 6th Street, west side of Center. Avenue,
being a consolidation of Parcel 1 -6, of Parcel Map No. 8800 as recorded in
Book 92, pages B8-89 of Parcel Maps, County cf San Bernardino, State 'of
California; and
WHEREAS, on May 22, 1985, a formal application was submitted
reque ^zting review of the above- described Tentative Map; and
WHEREAS, on June 12, 1985, the Planning Commission held a duly
advertised public hearing foi the above - described map.
NOW; THEREFORE, THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLVED AS
FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1: That the following findings have been made:
1. That the map is consistent with the General Plan.
2. That the improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent
with the General Plan.
B. That the site is physically suitable for the proposed
development.
4. That the proposed subdivision and improvements will not cause
substantial environmental damage, publ - health problems or have
adverse affects on abutting property.
SECTIOD'' 2: That this project will not create significant adverse
environme—FT57 mVacts and a Negative Declaration is issued on June 12, 1985.
SECTION 3: 'That Tentative Parcel Map No. 9302 is aj 7roved suleject
to the recorerce,.w etc Conditions of Approval pertaining thereto.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 12TH DAY OF JUNE, 1985.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY:
ennis out, Chairiran
ATTEST:
Rick Gomez, Deputy secretary
I, Rick Gomez, Deputy Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of
Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and
regularly introduced, passes, and adopted by the Planniag Commission of the
City of Rancho Cucamonga,, -,at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held
on the 12th day of June, 95, by the following vote -to-wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
AIM
elm
s
:
CI' RANCHO CUCAMONGA
RECOMilENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
LOCATION: North side of 6th St., west side TENTATIVE PARCEL-MAP Pte. 9302
of Center Avenue DATE FILED- May 22, igstf
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:. Parcels 1 -6 of Parcel NUMBER OF LOTS: i
Map 8800 recorded in Parcel taps Book 92 GROSS ACREAGE: 7.78
pages 88 -89 of Parcel Maps in San ASSESSOR PARCEL NO: 209 - 261 -26
Bernardino County, State of California
y„fx
DEVELOPER OWNER ENGINEER/SURVEYOR
Western Systems Financial SAME Pfeiler & Associates
10960 Wilshire Blvd. #1504 1749 -B S. EL-lid
Los Angeles, CA 90024 Ontario, CA 91761
fmprovement and dedication requirements in rccordarce with Title 16 of the
Municipal Code of the City of Rancho Cucamonga include, but npy not be limited
to, the following:
A. Dedications and Veh cular Access
1. Dedications shall be made of all interior street rights -of -way
and;all necessary easements as simian on the tentative map.
2. dedication shall be made of the following rights -of -way an the
fallowing streets:
additional feet on
additional feet on
additional feet on
3. Corner property line radius will be required per City
Standards.
4. All rights of vehicular ingress and egress shall he dedicated
as follows:
5. Reciprocal access easements and maintenance agreements ensuring
access to 311 parcels and joint maintenance of all common
roads, drives or parking areas shall be provided by C.C. &R.s
and shall be recorded_ concurrent with the mao.
B. Surety
6. All existing easements lying within future right -of -way are to
be quitclaimed or delineated on the map per City Engineer's
requirements.
7. Easements for sidewalk for public use shall be dedicated to the
City where sidewalks meander through private property,.
1. Surety shall be posted and an agreement executed to the
satisfaction of the City €ngineer and City Attorney,
guaranteeing completion of the public improvements prior to
recording for and /or prior
to building permit issuance or
2. A lien agreement must be executed prior to recording of the map
for the following:
3. Surety shall be posted and an agreement executed, guaranteeing
completion of 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 tie 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 'che map and /or building permit issuance.
1. Construct full street improvements including, but not limited
to, curb and gutter, A.C. pavement, sidewalk, drive approaches,
parkway trees and street lights on all interior streets.
2. A minimum of 26 -foot wide pavement within a 40 -foot wide
dedicated right -of -way shall be constructed for all half -
section streets,
3. Construct the following missing improvements:
Prior to recordation for i
Prior to building permit issuance for
Curb A.C. i Drive treet Street A. C. Median 1
Street Name Pvmt. Walk Appr. Trees Lights Overlay Island* Other
i
*Includes ladscaping and irrigation on meter Adak
—2_
F-13
,ice ±J
4. Prior to any work being performed in the public right -of -way,
fees shall t, be paid and an encroachment permit shall be obtained
from the City •Engineer's Office, in addition to any other
permits required;
3.
-Street improvement plans shall be prepared by a Registered.
Civil Engineer and approved by the City Engineer prior to
issuance of an encroachment permit.
6. Developer shall coordinate, and where necessary, pay for the
relocation of any power poles or other existing public
utilities as necessary.
7. Existing lines 'of 12KV or less fronting the property shall be
undergrounded.
B. Install appropriate street name signs, traffic control signs,
striping and markings with locations and types approved by the
City Engineer.
g. Street light locations, as required, are to be approved by the
Southern Califorriia- 'Edison Company and the City of Rancho
Cucamonga, hST�ts shall be on decorative poles with
underground service.,
10. Landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted to and
approved by the Planning Division prior to the issuance of
building permit.
11. Concentrated drainage flows shall not cross sidewalks.
Undersidewalk drains shall be installed to City Standards.
D. Drainage and Flood Control
1. Private drainage easements for cross -lot drainage shall be
required and shall be delineated or noticed on the final map.
2. Adequate provisions shall be made for acceptance and disposal
of surface drainage entering the property from adjacent areas.
3. The following storm drain. .hall be installed to the
sattisfaction of the City Engineer
4. Prior to recordation of the map, a hydrologic and drainage
study for the project shall be submitted to the City Engineer
for review.
S. A drainage detention basin per City Standards shall be
constructed to detain increased runoff
-3-
E. Grading
1. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the
Uniform Building Code, City' Grading. Standards and accepted
grading practices. The final grading plan shall be in
substantial conformance with the approved conceptual grading
plan.
2. A soils report 'shall be prepared by a qualified engineer
licensed by the State of California to perform such work prior
to issuance of building permit.
3. A geological report shall ne prepared by a qualified engi -neer
or geologist and submitted. at the time of application or
grading plan check.
4. The final grading plan shall. subject to review and approval
by the Grading Comnitttte and shall be completed rrior to
recordation of the final subdivision map or issuance of
building permit whichever comes first.
5. Final grading plans for each parcel are to be submitted to the
Building and Safety Division for approval prior to issuance of
building permit.
F. General Requirements and Approvals
X 1. Permits from other agencies will be required as follows;
CalTrans for
San Bernardino County Flood Control District
— Cucamonga County Water District for sewer and water
San Bernardino County Dust Abatement ( required prior to
issuance of a grading permit)
Other
X 2. A copy 3s the Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (C.C. &R.$)
approved by the City Attorney is required prior to recordation
of the mar..
3. Provide all 'utility services to each lot including sewerage,
water, electric power, gas and telephone prior to st.•eet
constructon.
X 4. Sanitary sewer and water systems shall be designed to I %camonga
County Water District standards. A letter of acceptance is
required.
5. This subdivision shall be subject to conditions of approval
from CalTrans /San Bernardino County Flood Control District.
X 6. Approvals have not been secured from all utilities and other
interested agencies involved. Approval of the final map will
be subject to any requirements that may be received from them.
—4—
x 7.
The filing of the tentative map or approval of same does not
guarantee that sewer treatment capacity will be available at
the time building permits are requested. When building permits
are requested, the Cucamonga County Water District will be
asked to certify the availability of capacity. Permits will
not be issued unless said certification is received in writing.
B.
Local and Master Planned Trails shall be provided in accordance
with the Trail Plan. A detailed trail plan indicating widths,
maximuq,! slopes, physical conditions, fencing and weed:,control,
in accordance with City trail standards, shall be submitted to
and approved by the City Planner prior to recordation
for and /or prior to building permit
issuance for
• 9.
Prior to recording, a deposit shall be -posted with the City
covering the estimated cost of apportioning the assessments
under Assessment District 82-1 among the newly created parcels.
X 10.
At the time of final map submittal, the following shall be
submitted: Title Report, traverse calculations (sheets),
copies of recorded maps and deeds used as reference and /or
showing original land division, tie notes and bench marks
referenced.
CI'i'l OF RNNCO CUCMWA
LLM B. M*MS, T El16I11EEt2
by.
_g_
CiTY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
STAFF REPORT
�p C�;CA,yp,Vp9
o� io
Ri^
! a�
1977
DATE:. June 12, 1985
TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner
BY: Dino Putrino, Assistant Planner
SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND VARIANCE 85 -03 - NEWSOM - A
four custom lot Subdivision on acres of land
located between Jadeite and Archibald Avenues,
approximately sixty -five (65) feet north of Tryon Street
in the Low Residential District - APN 208 - 122 -05
Related File: Parcel Map 9241,
I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION:.
A. Action Requested: Reduce lot size and width of a four (4) lot
custom subdivision
B. Purpose: Create four (4) single family residential lots
C. Location: Between Jadeite and Archibald Avenues approximately
sixty -five (65) feet north of Tryon Street
Parcel Size: .72 acres
E. Existing zoning:_ Low Residential
F. Existing Land Use: Vacant Lot
G. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning:
North Single Family Residential, Low Residential
South - Single Family Residential, Low Residential
East - Multi- Family Residential, Medium Residential
West - Single Family Residential, Low residential
11
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
Variance 85 -03 - Newsom
June 12, 1985
Page #2
H. General Plan Designations:
Project Site - Low Residential
North - Low Residential
South - Low Residential
East Medium Residential
West - Low Residential
I. Site Characteristics: The subject site is a vacant lot which
Was frontage on I-o—tF Jadeite end' Archibald Avenues. At the
northeast portion of UE site a 20 foot alley provides access.
II. ANALYSIS•
A. General: The applicant is requesting a variance for the
reduction of lot size and width to allow a four (4) lot custom
subdivision for the reduction of lot size and width. The
project site is the last site in .the immediate area which has
not been subdivided into 7,200 square foot single family lots
(Exhibit "B"). The applicant is proposing an average lot size
of 7,890 square feet (110 square feet less than the required
8,000 square feet net average) and an average lot width of 60
feet (5 feet less than the required 65 feet net average). The
average lot size of the surrounding lots is approximately 7,700
square feet, and the average lot width of the surrounding
interior lots is approximately 62 feet.
B. Environmental Assessment: Part I of the Initial .Study has been
comple'�d byby ;:he app�t. Staff has completed Part II of the
Initial Study and found no significant adverse environmental
impacts related to the proposed use or project.
III. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: The proposed project is consiste ^t with the
surrounding area and meets the intent of the Development Code and
General Plan policies. In addition, the proposed site, together
with the recommended conditions, will not be detrimental to the
public health, safety or welfare.
IV.
CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised for public hearing
and environmental -eview in The Daily Report newspaper, the
property posted, and notices sent to a property operty - owners within 300
feet of the project site.
0
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF 'REPORT
Variance 85 -03 - Newsom
June 12, 1985
Page 713
V. RECOMMENDATION: If the Planning Commission can seaport the
required findings, then the adoption of the attached Resolution
with Conditions would be in order.
Rej¢ttfully min ed,
IKICif Uomez
Ci P1 er
RG:DP:cv
Attachments: Exhibit "A" Location Map
Exhibit "8" - Tentative Parcel Map
Exhibit "C" - Conceptimal Plot Plan
Initial Study Part II
Resolution of Approval
P(vI�RD'NA /flOf y
TENTATIVE PANEL MAP NO. 9248
%n The C it a' ,{', zho C rar>bngo'
Btis> Oii�in aIa lb!l.P. of ?e_la+.3, T /S, R7W,
M.B. / /�1 SB.C.fA/. ,vf fhe Co..,ly eF SwBr..vdaR•,
SJde d G.Y.Farn;s.
1 L.. AQV tV i {
--
� a
-�\
:v
.rmfa..yya tuJ .srnyzy.ru
- r- wir.sa mrorr.rsr
ress;. fAa/sdsv/a a NORTH
CITY OF
VAPA�kM 66-03
'Tec�ne.s'(Ht)sP! -esa .vrs.,a,c16�.;.nm
ay.r..eC�gsu-ues
RANCHO CUCAMONGA TITII —E: T�T�.Ts�� �t L'1 AP
PLANNING.- EXHIBIT: SCALE: F1T 5
i
A` 1
�rODst. ¢oos.T I
3 V
Jd
5�cYe Newsor»
P.0 BaX 1b 93 g
Ontaria�.;Calif.917G1 3
i
1
Ap, #
Arch; 5a /d Ave. NORTH
CITY ®r IT M- k C � ul4e,Ar14c.p- mss- 03-
PLANNING DV ISM F–XHIBrr- ` Q- " SCALE- tS—
0
CITY OF RANCHO CUCA.KONGA
PART II INITIAL STUDY
ENVIRON fENT.Al CHECKLIST
DATE: ✓
APPLICANT: iVE M
FILING DATE. LOG NUMBER: ��fZ11•�hll'� ��- ?�.
PROJECT:-Po rM OT -'5V2 ,64Jv Ic/,- 14 4 Lor -sago/
PROJECT LOCATION --/7444V,)�1
I. ENVIRO`,".�?ITAL IMPACTS T YdH �✓T.
(Explanation of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required on attached
sheats).
YES XAYHE NO
1. Soils and Geoloev. Will the proposal have
significant results inn'
a. Unstable ground conditions or in changes in
geologic relationships?
b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or s
burial of the soil? V f
e. Change in topography or ground surface
contour intervals?
d. 'i'he destruction, covering or modification
Of any unique geologic or physical features?
e. Any potential increase in wind or water
erosion of soils, affecting either on or off
site conditons? s
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?
-V-
2. Hydroloey, Will the proposal have significant
results in:
C�,
Page
a. Changes in currants, or the course of dir_ction
Of flowing streams, rivers, or ephemeral stream
channels?
--^ J
b, Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns,
or the rate and amount
of surface water
runoff?
c• Alterations to the course or flow of flo<cd
r
waters?
/
d. Change in the amount of surface water in s3v
body
x
of water?
e. Discharge into surface waters, or any
alteration
of surface watet, quality?
f. Alteration of groundwater characteristics?
1
o. Change in the quantity of groundwaters,
either through direct additions or with -
drawals, or
through interference with an
aquifer?
Quality?
Quant' 7?
h. The ;:eduction in ?.fte amount of water other-
Wise available for public water supplies?
�J
I. Exposure of people or prr-erty to water
related hazards such as flooding
J
or seiches?
±; 3, Air Qualitv. Will the proposal have significant
results in:
a. Constant or periodic air emissions from mobile
I
or indirect sources?
Stationary sources?
--- --- _4
b. Deterioration of ambient air quality and/or
interference with the attainment of applicable
air quality standar0s?
C. Alteration of local or regional climatic
conditions, affecting air movement, moisture
or temperature?
.�.
✓•
4. Biota
Flora. Will the proposal have significant results
T37-
a• Change in the characteristics of Spec'os,
Including diversity, distribution,
of or itumber
_ any species of plants?
j
` b• Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare
or endangered species of plants?
Y.
'age j.
YY_5
c. Introduction of new or disruptive species of
plants into an area?
J
d. Reduction in the potential for agricultural
__
production?
Fauna. Will the proposal have > ignificant results
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?
c. Introduction of new or disruptive species of
animals into an area, or result in a barrier
to the migration or movement of animals?
`
d. Dttcrioration or removal of existing fish or
wildlife habitat?
5. Population. Will the proposal have significant
results in:
a, Will the proposal alter the location, distri-
bucion, density, diversity, or growth rate of
the human population of an area?
b. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or
[
6
create a demand for additional housing?
%
5. Socio- Economic Factors_ Will the proposal have
significant results in:
E
a. Change in local or regional socio- economic
Characteristics, including economic or
commercial diversity, tax rate, and property
values?
b. Will project costs be equitably distributed
among project benefici - -ies, i.e., buyers,
i
tax payers or project users?
7. Land Use and Plannine Considerations. Will the
proposal have significant results 3n?
!
a. A substantial alteration of the present or
planned land use of an area?
b. A conflict with any designations, objectives,
p olicies , or adopted plans of an y governmental
entities?
C. An impact upon the qulaity or quantity of
existing consumptive or non - consumptive
recreational opportunities?
l3'
(' -l6
Page
YES
`LAYS= No
B. Transportation. Will the proposal have significant
results in:
a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular
movement?
V,
b. Effects on existing streets, or demand for
new street construction?
c. Effects on exis '.ling parking facilities, or
demand for nea.,parking?
u. Substantial impact upon existing transporta-
tion systems?
e. Alterations to present patterns*of circula-
tion or movement of people and /or goods?
f. Alterations to or effects on present and
i
potential water - borne, rail, mass transit or
k. air traffic?
k g. Increases in traffic hazards to motor vehicles,
bicyclists or pedestrians?
4. Cultural Resources. Will the proposal love
significant results in:
a. A disturbance to the integrity of archaeological,
paleontological, and /or historical resources?
10. Health, Safety, and Nuisance Factors. Will the
proposal have significant results in:
a. Creation of any health hazard or potential health
hazard?
b. Exposure c£ pecple to potential health hazaros?
c. A risk of explosion or release of hazardous
substances in the event of au accident?
i
V
d. An increase in the number of individuals
or species of vector or pathenogenic
organisms or the exposure of people to such
organisms?
e. Increase in existing noise levels?
1/
Q f. Exposure of people to potentially dangerous
V-ise levels?
g. The 'creation of objectionable odors?
h. An increase in light or glare?
(' -l6
Page 3
YES ? 42:J- No
11. Aesthetics. Will the proposal have significant
results in:
a. The obstruction or degradation of any scenic
vista or view?
b. The creation of an aestha- ically offensive
site?
c. A conflict with the objective of designated
or potential scenic corridors?
.
12. Utilities and Public Services. Will the proposal
have 7a significant need for` - -,w systems, or
alterations to the following:
a. Electric power?
v
b. Natural or packaged gas?
c. Communications systems?
d. Water supply?
V
e. Wastewater facilities?
£. Flood control >tructures?
g. Solid waste facilities?
`
h. Fire protection?
i. Police protection?
J. Schools?
k. Parks or other recreational facilities?
1. Maintenance of public.tacilities, including
roads and flood control facilities ?.
m. Other governmental services?
13. Enerev and Scarce Resources.. Will the proposal
have significant results in:
a. Use of substantial or excessive fuel or energy?
J
b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing
sources of energy?
An increase
c. in the demand for development of
new sources of energy? _
d. An increase or perpetuation of the consumption
of non - renewable farms of energy, when feasible
renewable sources of energy are available?
?age 5
YES
`L4Y3 NO
e. Substantial depletion of any nonrenewable or
_-
t scarce natural resource?
—
14. Mandatory Findings or' SiRlificancn,
j a. Does the project have the potential to degrade
the quality of
i, the environment, substantially
reduce the habitat of fish wildlife
or species,
cause a fish or wildlife population to drop
below self sustaining levels, threaten to
eliminate
a plant or animal community, reduce
the number or restrict the
range of a rare or
endangered platit or animal or eliminate
important- examples of the major periods of
California history or
prehistory?
b. Does the project have the pot_ntial 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 relattiely
brief, definitive
period of time while long-
term impacts w,11 endure well into the future).
_
c. Does the prt<ject have impacts which are
individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable? (Cumulatively considerable
E means that the incremental effects cf 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 will cause substantial adverse effects
on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
II. DISCUSSION OF}Z+IgOyT�y EVALUATION (i.e., of affirmative
answers to
the above questions plus a discussion of proposed mitigation measu''s).
a
i�
' Page 7 I
III. DET= ?:SINATION
On the basis of this initial evaluati6n:
I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect,
on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION sill be prepared.
T find that although the proposed project could have a significant
effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect
in this case because the mitigation measures described on an
attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE
DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED.
I find the proposed project MAY have a'#Ignificant effect on the
envirt-uaent, and an ENVIRONMENT IMPACT REPORT is required.
Date 7i7 UJ
�i S gna s �—
Title
i
1� l
ti
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION
APPROVING VARIANCE NO. 85 -03 TO REDUCE LOT SIZE AND WIDTH
OF A FOUR (4) LOT SUBDIVISION LOCATED BETWEEN JADEITE AND
ARCHIBALD AVENUES, NORTH OF TYRON STREET IN THE '_OW'
RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT
WHEREAS, on the 10th day of May, 1985, an application was filed and
accepted on the above - described project, and
WHEREAS, on the 12':h day of June, 1985, the Planning Commission held
a duly advertised public hearing pursuant to Section 65854 of the California
Government Code.
SECTION 1: The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission has made the
following in-dings:
I. That strict or literal interpretation and
enforcement of the specified regulation would result
in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical
hardship inconsistent with the objectives of the
Development Code.
2. That there are exceptional or extraordinary
circumstances or conditions applicable to the
property involved or to the intended-use of the
property that do not apply generally to other
properties in the same district.
3. That strict or literal interpretation and
enforcement of the specified regulation would
deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the
owners of other properties in the same district.
4. That the granting of the Variance will not
constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent
with the limitations on other properties classified
in the same district.
5. That the granting of the Variance will not be
detrimental to the public health, safety, or
welfare, or materially injurious to properties or
improvements in the vic:nity.
Planning Commission Resolution
Variance No. 85 -03
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 12TH DAY OF JUNE, 1985.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY:
Dennis L. Stout; Chairman
ATTEST:
Rick Gomel, Deputy Secretary
I, Rick Gomez, Deputy Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of
Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and
regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the
City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held
on the 12th day of June, 1985, by the following vote- to-wit:
AYES:
COMMISSIONERS:
NOES:
COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT:
COMMISSIONERS:
�"rS'.
11
j
L
DATE: June 12, 1985
TO:
FROM:
BY:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
STAFF REPORT
Planning Commission
Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer
Barbara Krall, Assistant Civil Engineer
r
1 n
e�-
O Q �Z
inn t
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL. MAP 9248 - STEVEN NEWSOM, - A
61-vislon-of 0.7Z acres of an into 4 parcels in the Lo - 6ensity
Residential District (2 -4 du /ac) located north of Tryon Street
between Archibald and Jadeite Avenues - APN 208 - 122 -05 -
Ref: VAR. 85 -03
I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION:
A. Action Requested: Approval of Parcel Map.
B. Purpose: To create four (4) single family parcels.
C. Location: North of Tryon Street between Archibald & Jadeite
Avenues.
D. Parcel Size: Parcel 1 - 7290 Sq. Ft.
Parcel 2 - 729U Sq. Ft.
Parcel 3 - 9690 Sq. Ft.
Parcel 4 - 7290 Sq. Ft. - Average Size Lot 7890 Sq. Ft
E. Existing Zoning: Low (2 -4 du /ac) Development District.
F. Existing Land. Use: Vacant.
G. Surroundin Land Use
North - Existing single family.
South - Existing single family.
East - Existing Candominiums.
West - Existing single family.
H. Surrounding General Plan and Development Code Designations:
North - Low - du /ac Development District.
South - Low (2 -4 du /ac) Development District.
East - Medium (8 -14 du /ac) Development District.
West Low (2 -4 du /ac) Development District.
I. Site Characteristics: This site slopes in a southeasterly direction.
There are no existing structures.
ITEM H
_l
II. ANALYSIS: Mr. Newson is proposing the subdivision to create four (4)
huildabl e lots for single family homes. A variance is required for lot
size and lot width and is also on tonight's agenda for approval.
Sidewalk, street trees and drive approaches will be constructed at the
time of building permit issuance. Curb and gutter is existirl on Jadeite
and Archibald Avenues.
Parcels 3 and 4 fronting nn Archibald Avenue are required to take access
from the adjacent alley, as do the existing residences to the north, �.
order to avoid creating traffic conflicts on Archibald Avenue
III. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: Also attached for your review and consideration is
Part I o t e n teal Study as completed by the applicant. Staff has
completed Part TI of the Initial Study, the environfr ptal'checklist, and
has conducted a field investigation. Upon completi(a and review of +,tie
Initial Study and field investigation, Staff founr' - adverse impacts un
the environment as a result of the proposed subdivision.
I
IV. CORRESPONDENCE: Notices of Public Hearing have been sent to surrounding
property owners and placed in the Daily Report Newspaper4 posting at the
site has also been completeJ.
V, RECOMMENDATION: It is recortr ended that the Plznning Commi, n adopt the
attached`reso ution conditionally approving Tentative Parcf,'Map .4248 and
authorizing the issuance of a Negative Declaration.
i
Respectfully submitid,
r
LBH:BK
Attachments: Vicinity Map
Parcel Map
Resolution
Recommended Conditions
Initial Study
(f
r
"1'EN MVE -PARCEL MAP NO. 924.8
The Cify d i s x /w exwvn a•
�'QO.es�r�a�4/b -hin eF3eefFrr 3r T /S�R7W�
$Axis /eI G/5. H CIE L'put% aF �wrd�nvtipb•
- rarv.awla � .gyyy)� dwi
�+ fda�.rlti.n
�}.•^sMS�VNpw•
Ylr- Awl
+sA!ird aatty.l. !ae
rin
his
�:(nt)ex -see
EXHIBIT "B"
ENVIROr IENTAL REVIEW
a r APPLICATION
w - ^n
O O
At
v�l 4 > INITI , STUDY PART I
GENERAL
For all projects requiring environmental review, this form must be completed
and submitted to the Development Review Committee through the department where
the project application is made. Upon receipt of this application, the
Planning Division staff will prepare Part II of the Initial Study and make
recommendations -to Planning Commission. The'Platnsing Commission will make one
of tizree determinations: (1) The project will have no significant
environmental impact and a negative Declaration will be filed, (2) The
project will have 'a significant envircnmental- impact and ` Environmental
Impact Report will be prepared, or (3) An additional information report
should be suppled by the applicant giving further informati., =ncerning the
proposed project,
Date Filed: 5 -6 -85
Project Title•
Applicant's Name, Address, Telephone: Steven Newsom
Ank P. O. Box 1693, Ontario,*CA (714) 591 -7852 _
Name, Address, Telephone of Person To Be Contacted
Concerning this Project: Steven Newsom, P. O. Box 1693, Ontario, CA
t r -
Location of Project: 1001 f North of Tryon between Archibald Ave.
and Jadite Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga
t
Assessor's Parcel No.: 208- 122 -05
list -other 'pmAiz metmary from local. regional. state and federal agencies
and the agency issuing such permits: /
E
c
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
AINk
Proposed use or propos;d project: Fill in an existing residential
araa with Ennformincrimproyements
Acreage of project area and square footage of existing and dpropose� buildings,
if any: Net area .72 - Proposed improvements rest enti.a of
1200 sq. ft.
Describe the environmental setting of the project site including iirformation
on topography, soil stability, plants (trees), land animals, any cultural,
historical sr scenic ,aspects, lanI use of surrounding properties, and the
description of any existing strucsures and their use (attach necessary
sheets): Flat level land, no fill, one 1811 palm tree and-5-611 trees
and one 18" Elm tree; Surrounding properties are residential of
average 1200 sa._ft. Average age 8 -10 years old, lot areas average
7200 sq. ft. Existing structures on property.
I
Is the project part of a larger project, one of a series of cumulative
actions, which although individually small, may as a whole have significant
environmental impact NO
S
WILL THIS PROJECT:
YES NO
1.
Create a substantial change in ground contours?
X
2.
Create a substantial change in existing noise of produce
vibration or glare?
X
3.
Create a substantial change in demand for municipal
services (police, fire, water, sewage, etc.)?
X
4.
Create changes in the existing Zoning or General
Plan designations?
X
- S.
Remove any existing tress? How many? one
X
6.
Create the need for use or disposal of potentially
hazardous materials such as toxic substances,
flammables or explosives?
X
-Explanation of any YES answers above (attach additional sheets.if
necessary):
pne (1) larvae 18" Palm Tree will be removed if it
poses a
hazard or nuisance.
7. Estimate the amount of sewage and solid waste materials this project
will ggenerate daily: Amount necessary to provide four N)
families of three _ erfami
8. Estimate the number of auto and truck trips generated daily by this
project= Amount necessary caenerated by four (4) families.
9. Estimate the amount of grading (cutting and filling) required for this
project,.in cubic yards: N/A
iD. If the project involves the coustruction of residential snits, complete
the form on the next page.
MTIEiCUIDlie I hereby certify that the statemen , furnished above and in
the attached exhibits present 'the data and infon!!atian required for this
initial evaluation to the best of my ability, and that the facts, statements,
and information presented are tree =.d correct to the best of my knowledge and
belief. I further understand that additional information may be required to
be submitted before an adequate evaluation can be made by the Planning
Division.
Date, �:y— �i'i�5 Signature
v
Title
I -3
w
RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION
The following information should be provided to the City of Rancho Cucamonga
Planning Division in order to aid the schuol district in assessing their
ability to accommodate the proposed residential development. Developers are
required to - secure letters from thy: school district for accommodating the
increased number of students prior to issuance of building permits.
Name of Developer and Tentative Tract No.: Steven Newsom( %Developer
Tract, No. 9248
Tpecific locate of proJe; 10G+ North ofTryan between Archibald ,and Jadii
PHASE I PHASE 2 PHASE 3 PHASE 4 TOTAL
1. Number of single
family units: 4
2. Number of multiple
family units: -0-
3. Date proposed to
begin construction: Unknown
4. Earliest date of
occupancy: Unknown
Model
and 4 of Tentative
5. Bedrooms Price Range
I-4
RESOLUTION NO.
I
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PARCEL MAP NUMBER
9248 (TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 9248), LOCATED NORTH OF TRYON
STREET BETWEEN ARCHIBALD AND JADEITE AVENEUES
WHEREAS, Tentative :Parcel Map Number 9248, submitted by Steven News�Te
and consisting of 4 parcels, located north of Tryon Street between Archibald
and Jadeite Avenues, being a division of a, portion of Section 3, Township 1
South, Range 7 West, Meridian Base 1/78, San Bernardino Book & Maps, County of
San Bernardino, State of California; al:d
Wl" AEAS, on May 10, 1985, a formal application. , was submitted
requesting review of the above - described Tentative Map; and
WHEREAS, on Jun. 12, 1985, the Planning Commission held a duly
advertised public hearing for the above - described max
NOW, THEREFORE, THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLVED AS
FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1: That the following findings have been made:
1. That the mad is consistent with the General Plan.
2. That the improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent
with the General Plan.
3. That the site is physically suitable for the proposed
development.
4. That the proposed suodivision and improvements will not cause
substantial environmental damage, public health problems or have
adverse affects on abutting property.
SECTION 2: That this project will not create significant adverse
environmental p cts and a Negative Declaration is issued on June 5, 1985.
SECTION 3: That Tentative Parcel Map 9248 is approved subject to '
the recommended onditions of Approval pertaining thereto.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 12TH DAY OF JUNE, 1985.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY:
enms 1. Stout, airman
ATTEST:
Rick Gomez, Deputy Secretary
r.
I, Rick Gomez, Deputy Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of
Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and
regularly introduces, passes ;' and adopted by the Planning Commission of the
City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regulrt^ meeting of the Planning Commission field
on the 12th day of June, 1985, by thr,following vote -to -wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONEC
P-/,)
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMON"4
RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF IKi(OVAL
LOCATION: North of Tryon Street between TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO: 9248
Archibald &- Jadeite Avenues DATE TILED: 3/10/85
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:'Being a division of a NUMBER OF LOTS: 4
Section 3, Township I South, Ranqe 7 West, GROSS ACREAGE: 0,72 acres
Mer`aian Base 1/78, Sui-i Bernardino Book- & " ASSESSOR PARCEL NO: 208- 122 -05
Ma,s, County of San Bernardino, State of Caif
DEVELOPER MNER ENGlNEERMVEYOR
S.W. Newsom Kyoto Gardens Rest�itlrant Linville _
P.O. Box 1693 540 E. Foothill 9333 Baseline Rd. Ste 190
P,ntFxi'o, CA 51761 Pomona, CA 91737 Rncho Cuca. CA 91730
Impr7vement and dedication requirements in accordance with Title 16 of the
Municipal Code of the City of Rancho Cucamonga include, but may not be limited
to, the following:
A. Dedications and Vehicular Access
_ i_ Dedications shall be made of ?-17 interior street rights-of-way
and ,11 necessary easements as shown on the -tentative map,
2. Dedication shall be made of the following rights -of -way on. the
following streets:
additional feet on
additional feet on
additional feet on
3. Corner property line radius will be required per City
Standards.
X 4. All rights of vehicular ingress and egress shall be dedicated
as follows: Archibald Avenue.
5. Reciprocal access e.- !,,ert..s and maintenance agreement, ensuring
access 'to all parcels„ and joint maintenance of all common
reds, drives or parking areas shall be prorided,by C.C.&R.s
and shall be recorded concurrent with the map, '
-1-
k rj
w
j
6. All existing easements lying within futurL ;'%: -t -of -way are to
be quitclaimed or delineated on the map p..,,r City Engineer's
requirements.
7. Easements for sidewalk for public use shall be dedicated to the
City where sidewalks meander through private property,
B. Surety
X i. Surety shall be posted and an agreement executed to -he
satisfactioil of the City Engineer and City Attorney,
guaranteeing completion of the public improvements prior to
building permit issuance for individual parcels.
2. A lien agreement must be executed prior to recording of the map
for the following:
3. Surety shall be posted and an agreement executed, guaranteeing
Gampietion of all on-site drainage facilites necessary for
dzwatering all parcels to the satisfaction of the Building and
Safety Divison prior to recording for
and /or prior to issuance of building permr or
C.
_Street_Improvements
Pursuant to t e 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 including, but not limited
to, curb and gutter, A.C. pavement, sidewalk, drive approaches,
parkway trees and street lights on all interior streets.
2. A minimum of 26 -foot wide pavement within a 40 -foot wide
dedicated right -of -way shall be constructed for all half -
section streets.`
X 3. Construct -Vae f,3i ?owing missing improvements:
Prior to building permit issuance for individual �cels.
CurB & e rwe ree ree a Tan
Street Name Cutter Pvmt. Walk Appr. Trees Li hts Overlay Island* Other
Archibald X X X =
Jadeite X X X X
*:Includes landscaping and irrigation on meter
—2
X 4. Prior to any work being performee in the public right -of -way,
fees shall be paid and an encroachment permit shall he obtained
from the City Edginear "s Office, in addition to any other Ask
permits required.
X S. Street improvement plans shall be-prepared by a Registered
Civil Engineer and approved by the City Engineer prior to
issuance of an encroachment permit.
6. Developer shall coordinate, and where necessary, pay for the
relocation of any power poles or other existing public
utilities as necessary.
X 7. Existing lines of 12KV or i:ess fronting the property shall be
undergrounded.
8. Install appropriate street ryame signs, traffic Lcntrol signs,
striping and markings with locations aad types approved by the
City Engineer.
X 9. Street light locations, as required, are -to be approved by the
Southern nalifornia Edison Company and the Cite of Rancho
Cucamonga. tights shalt be on decorative poles with
underground service.
10. Landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted to and
approved by ine Planing Division prior to the issuance of
building permit.
X 11. Concentrated drainage flaws shall not cross sidewalks.
Undersidewalk drains shall be installed to City Standards.
D. Drainage and Eland Control
1. Private drainage easements for cross -lot drainage shall be
required and shall be delineated or n�kiced on the final map.
2. Adequate provisions shall be made for acceptance and disposal
of surface drainage entering the property from adjacent areas.
3. The following storm drain shall be installed to the
~� satisfat^ ion of the City Engineer
4. Prior to recordation of the map, a hydrologic and drainage
study for the rrojec4 shall be submitted to the City Engineer
for review.
5. A drainage detention basin per City Standards shall be
constructed co detain increased runoff
E. Grading .
X, _ 1. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the
Uniform Buildirig Code, City Grading Standards and accepted
grading practices.
X 2. A soils report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer
licensed by the State of California to perform such work prior
to issuance of building permit.
3. A geological report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer
or geologist and s�jbmitted at the time of application or
grading plan check.
4. The final grading plan shall be subject to review and approval
by the F --tiding Committee and shall be completed prior to
reca-datiort of the final •subdivision map or issuance of
building permit whichever comes first.
X 5. Final grading pla•rs f,- each parcel are to be submitted to the
Building and Safety D vision for approval priur to issuance of
building permit.
i F. General Requirements end Approvals
X 1. Permits from other agencies will be required as follows:
CalTralis for
San Bernardino County Flood antro District
CucamunSa County Water District for- sewer and water
{ San Bernardino Ccdnty Dust Abatement (required prior to
issuance of a grading permit)
Other
2. A copy of thz Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (C.C.M.$)
approved by the City At`'-7!ey is r °auik•ed prior to recordation
of the map.
X 3. Provide all utility serv: is to each lot including sewerage,
water, electric power, ga: and telephone prior to street
constructon.
X 4. Sanitary sewer and water systems shall be designed to Cucamonga
County Water District standards. A letter of acceptance is
required.
5. Titus subdivision shall be subject to conditions of approval
from Cal7rans /San Bernardino County Flood Control District.
X 6. Approvals have nut been secured from all utilities and other
interested agencies involved. Approval of the final map will
be subject to any requirements that may be received from them.
X _ 7.
The filing of the tentative map or approval of svm2 does not
guarantee that sewer treatment capacity will be available at
the time building permits are requested., When building permits
are requestedx, the Cucamonga County Water — District will be
asked to certify the availability of..apacity. - Permits will
not be issued unless said certification is received in writing.
S.
Local and "Master Planned; Trails shall be gnovided in accordance
with the Trail Plan. A detailed trail plan indicating widths,
maximum slopes, phys.'ical conditions, fencing and weed control,
in accordance with City trail standards, shall be c!:Ibmitted to
and 'approved by the City Planner prior to recordation
for _ and /or prior to building permit
issda-ce'f or
9.
Prior to recording, ai: deposit shall he posted with the City
covering the estimated cost of apportioning the assessments
under Assessment District a2 -1 amng the newly created parcels.
X 10.
At th, time of final map submittal, the followilig shall be
submitted: title Report, traverse calculations (sheets),
copies of recorded reaps and deeds used as reference and /or
showing original land division, tie notes and brnch marks
referenced.
SPECIAL CONDiTIGHS
X_ 1.
Existing drive approach on Archibald Avenue shah tie removed
anti replaced with rurb and gutter prior to building permit;
issuance on. Parcel Nr. d.
X e.
Parcels 1 and - shall be graded tc drain to Jadeite Avenue and
Parcels 3 and 4 shall he graded to drain to Archibald Avanuc,
CM OF RMCHO cUCAMNGA
LLOYR B. HUBB.S,, CITE ENGINEER
,1
I
IE
ir.„
Z
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
BY:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
STAFF REPORT
.,,0 G,r
p p
June 12, 1485 U
1977
Planning Commission
Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer
Barbara Krall, Assistant Civil Engineer
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 9144 - DAON CORPORATION - A
iv3ision or 7.8 acres of an into 3?parcels to theustrial
Specific Plan Area (subarea 7) located between Elm Avenue and Arrow
Hwy, on the north and south and ietween Maple and White Oak Avenues
on the east and west - APN 208 -3:1 -030
I.
PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION:
A.
Action RegLested: Approval of Parcel Map
B.
Purpose: To create 12 parcels i °or futui °e industrial buil,fl ,Os
C.
Location:: Between Elm Avenue ad Arrow Hwy. on the nor'. d south
an befw-een Maple an" White Oak Avenues on the east m
D.
Parcel Size•
r-c6 -:2 ac. Parcel 5 1.2 ac. Parcel 9 0.5 ac..
Parcel 2 2.1 ac. Parcel 6 0.5 ac. Parcel 10 0.5 ac.
Parcel 3 2_1 ac. Parcel 7 0.6 aL. Parcel 11 0.5 ac.
Parcel 4 1.9 ac. Parcel 8 0.5 ac. Parcel 12 2.2 ic..
E.
Existing Zoning: Industrial PA-k (subarea 7).
F.
Existing Lard Use: Vacant.
G.
Surrcur.ding Land Us:
North - V3cent.
South - Vacant.
East - Existing industrial Building.
West - Vacant.
H.
Surroundinc Ger.:ral flan and Development Code DesignationFz
North -- Inuustr'- Par. ,subarea .
jouth - Mini& �--•'v Industrial Lsubarea 9).
East - indc
West - Irdustria,
I.
Site
Characteristics: The s _ in a southerly direction. The
Vnnnt Atjn� rnnric!; mric +lv of rrr;ino •ae ?nri egmn nrAq'ac_
�e
`I
-
ITEEM I
II. AN,A' YSIS: � ; purpose of the Parcel Map is to create 12 individual
parcels ranging in size from 0.5 to 2.2 acres (see Exhibit B, Tentative
?arcel Map). No specific development plans for any of the parcels have
been submitted at this„time. WF
The previously approved master plan for the total business park is shown
on Exh4bit C with the area of the parcel map eutl:ned for reference.
Parcel 1 -5 and 12 generally correspond to the master plan, however,
Parcels 6 -11 do not. Their small size (0.5 acres) and number (6) -ould
indicate the construction of smaller bu ldings than those shown en the
master plan. The buildings will most probably be similar to the ones
indicated on the masinr plan on the east side of Maple Place, across from
this parcel map.
Mutual access easements will be provided as shown no the tentative map.
Staff has added a condition (G.2) that the access easements also be
dedicated for irainage.
In general, the streets surrounding the project are improved witt, the
exception of sidewalks and street lights which shall be completed as a
requirement of the parcel map.
The Developer's er. leer has indicated that there is a possibility toat
the Deveioper may want to combine Parcels 2, 3 and 4 into one parcel
prior to recordation of the f;nal parcel map. Staff feels that this
pares} ronsolidation will not present any particular prob'iems, and would
prefer to show them as one parcel on the Final Map in ordAr to eliminate
the need for future parcel consolidation proceedings. Tharefore, a
clau.a has been included in the rasol+.ticr stating that it 'ss acceptable
to combine the parcels on the Fi;nai Mar (see Section 3_ second senteuce).
III. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: Also attached for dour review and coasideration is
Part I of the Initial Study as completed by the applicant. Staff has
completed Part II of the Initial Stttdx,r, the environmental checklist:, and
has conducted a -ieid investigatior. , Upon completion and review of the
Initial Study and field investigation, Staff found no adverse impacts on
the environment as a result of the proposed subdivi_icn.
IV. CORRESPONDENCE: Notices of Pui>lic Hearirg have beer sent to surrounding
property owners am placed. in the Daily Report Newsp•�, Posting at the
site has also been completed,"
V. RECOMMENDATION: It is recomanded "hat the `Tanning Commission adopt the
attached reso ution conditionally zppraving Ter,`atl:e Parcel Map 9144 and
autnori.zing the issuance of a ilegal i,e Ueclar_Lio1.
Respectfully submi ted
LBH:BK•ko f
Attachments: Vic ity Map
Tentative Parcel M__n
Area Master Plan
Resolution
u
CITY OF PROJECT: Parce'. Map 914's
�111k1 YL! dk 4di✓Zd/ t�VfV�V� /� d TITLE:
LLB Uicrni ty r,V
ENGINEERING DIVISION EXHIBIT.- "All
\�
�2.�
!�
�.��
AD
. � �,
> % ~�
f��] > � .
�
HIM,
& k °¢}
\ ° `
2
llif
.
'd firs
\
f� \
}\
\� \
Li
\��� �
} ;� \�
� �.�.�\�
��
. « �
\�
�2.�
!�
�.��
..
2/
HIM,
��
if
/� 2�
��\
\
f� \
}\
\� \
E
11
Lj
J
:M
GENERAL
ENVIRONACNTAL REVIEW
APPLICATION
INITIAL STUDY - PART I
For all projects requiring environmental review, this form must be ,�;Ompleted
and submitted to the Development Review Coataittee through the department where
the project application is made, Upon receipt of this application, the
Planning Division staff' will prepare Part, II of the Initial Study aqd make
recommendations to Planning Commission. The Planning Commission will make* one
of three .determinations: (1) Time project will -hw.e no significant
environmental impact and a Negative .Declaration will be filed, (2) The
project will have a significant environmental impact and an Environmental
Impact Report will be prepared, or (3) An additional' information report
should be supplied by the applicant giving further information concerning the
proposed project.
Date Filed: April 26, 198-5
Project Title: Parcel Map 9144
Applicant's Name, Address, Telephone: Daon Corporation
4350 Von Kirman, Suite 100-Newport Beach, CA 92660 714/476 -2766
Name, Address, Telephone o` Person To Be Contacted
Concerning this Project: D. H. Mays -- I.D. Icing, 111e-
2151 E. D St., Suite 120A - Ontario, CA 91764 714/988 -5492
Location of Project: Rancho Cucamonga Business Park
Parcel 11, Parcel Map 672.5
Assessor's Parcel Nc.� .208 -.k51 -030
List other permits necessary from regional, stzte and federal agencies
and the agency issuing such permits
Grading Permit Ci::y of Rancho Cucamonga
Building Permit - City of 11ancho Cucamonga
Water /Sewer Permits - Cucamonga County Water District
..L r
` I_1
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Proposed use or proposed project: Divide for sale
Acreage of project area and square footage of existing and proposed buildings,
if any:._
14.8 acres, no existin$ buildings
Describe the environmental setting of the project -,ite including information
on topography, soil stability, plants (trees), lank animals, any cultural,
historical or scenic aspects, land use of surrounding properties, and the
description of any existing structures and their Ilse (attach necessary
sheets): —
This site
is in the Rancho Cucamonga Business Park.
The area
is
presently
under development and construction of
streets
and
utiiliti.as
is underway. Some of the surrounding
proRerty
is
already
developed. The site slopes to the south
a
approximately 1.8% and v,:as formerly a vineyard.
There are
no
existing
structures.
Is the project part of Tar,er project, one of a series of cumulative
I actions, which although ind,vidually small, may as a whole have significant
environmental impact _
This site is a part of the Rancho Cucamonga Business Park.
t+
P
'i
MILL THIS PROJECT: YES NO
I. Create a substantial.change in ground contours? g
2. Create a substantial change in existing noise of produce
vibration or glare? g
3. Create a substantial change in demand for municipal
services (police, tire, water, sewage, etc.)?
4. Create changes in the existing Zoning or General
Plan designations? Y
S. Remove any. existing -trees? flow many ?_ x
6. Create the need for use or disposal of potentially
;iazardous materials such as toxic substances,
flammables or explosives? X
Explanation of any YES answers above (attach additional sheets if necessary);
7. Estimate the amount of sewage and solid waste materials vies project
will generate daily: unknown
8. Estimate the number of auto and truck trips generated daily by this
project'. unknown
9. Estimate the amount of grading (cutting and filling) required for this
project, in cubic yards. unknown
10. If the project involves the construction of residential units, complete
the form on tht next page.
�iCA110R I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in
the attached cszhibits present the data and information required for this
initial evaluation to the best of my ability, aad that the facts, statements,
and information presented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and
belief. I further understand that additional information may be requived to
be submitted before an adequate evaluation can be jmade lky the Panning
Division.
Date: // Signature t "1
Title Prol
€F€ 1 -3
E „', h
RESI9ENTIAL CONSTRUCTION
The following information should" be provided to the Cit;t of itancho Cucamonga
Planning Division in order to aid the school district in assessing their
ability to accommodate the proposed residential development. Developers are
required to secure letters from the school district for acommodating the
increased number o. students prior to issuance of building permits,
Name of Developer and Tentative Tract No.:
Specific Location of Project:
PHASE I PHASE 2 PHASE 3 PHASE 4 TOTAL
1. Number of single
family units:
2. Number of multiple
family units:
3. Date proposed to
begin construction:
4. Earliest date of
occupancy:
ModelA
and # of Tentative
S. Bedrooms Price Range
-4
r�,
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSIONV OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PARCEL Mr.B NUMBER
9144 (TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP N0, 9144) LOCATED BETWEEN ELM
AVENUE AND ARROW HWY. ON THE NORTH AND Sa1TH AN^ BETWEEN
MAPLE AND WHITE OAK AVENUES ON THE EAST AND WEST
WHEREAS, Tentative Parcel Map Number 1944, submitted by Daon
Corporation and consisting of 12 parcels, located between Elm Avenue and Arrow
Hwy. on tle north and south and between Maple and White Oak Avenues on the
east and west, being a division of rdreel 11, of Parcel Map No. 6725 as
recorded in Book 67 of Parcel Maps, Pages 4 thru 7, records of San Bernardino
County, State of California; and
WHEREAS, on April 30, 198'x, a formal application was submitted
regcesting review rf the above- describea Tentative Map; and
WHEREAS, on June 12, 1985, the Planning Commission held a duly
advertised public hearing for the above - described map.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE RANCHO CU(;iu10NGA PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLVED AS
FOLL%S:
SECTION 1: That the following findings have been made:
1. That the map is consistent with the General Plan.
2. That the improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent
with the General Plan.
3. "that the site is physically suitable fur the proposed
development_.
4. 'that the proposed subdivision and improvements will not cause
substantial environmental damage, public health problems or have
adverse affects on abutting property.
SECTION 2: That this project will not create significant adverse
environment` a �impa::ts and a Negative Declaratio,i is issued on Jnne 12, 1985.
SECTION 3: fhat Teitative Parcel Map ",). 9144 is approved subject
to the recommenaea vc,iditions of Approval pertain;ng thereto. In addition, it
is also approved that Parcels 2, 3 and 4 as shown on the Tentative Parcol Map
may be combined into a single parcel on the Final Parcel Map, if so requested
by the Developer.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 12TH DAY OF JUNE, 1985..
PLANNING ','OMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY:
Dennis L. Stout, Chairman
L -f0
M
ATTEST:
Rick Gomez, iieputy Secretary
I, Rick Gomez, Deputy Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of
Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and`
regularly introduced, passes, ant adopted by the {Manning Coa;nission of the
City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held
on the 12th day of June, 1985, by the following vote -to -wit:
A1ES: COMMISSIONERS:
NAGS: C9HMISSIO3ERS:
ABSENT: CUIVISSIONERS:
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
REC"ENDED CONDITIONS OF' APPROVAL
LOCATION:, Between Elm Ave. & Arrow Hwy. TtNTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO: 9144
on the north & south & bwtn. Maple & White DATE FILED: April 30, 19x,5
Oak Avenues on the east „n west
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Parcel 11 of Parcel Map NUMBER OF LOTS: 12 �^
6725 as recot --ded in Book 67 of Maps, Pages GROSS ktREAGE: 14.8
4 thru 7 records of San Bernardino County,' ASSESSOR PARCEL NO: 208 - 351 -030
Late of a ornia
DEVELOPER OWNER 'ENGIMMfSMVEYOR
Daon Corp. SAME L. D. Kng, Inc.
4350 Von Karman, Ste. 100 2151 E. "D" St., Ste. 120A
Newport Bch, CA 92560 Ontario, CA 91764
Improvement and dedication requirements in accordance with Title 16 of the
Runicipai Code of the City of Rancho Cucamonga inclW , but may not be limited
to, the following:
A. Dedications and Vehicular Access
1. Dedications shall be made of all interior street rights -of -way
and all necessary easements as shown on the tentatfve map.
2. Dedication shall be made of the following rights -of -way on the
"y following streets:
additional feet on
_ additional feet on
additional feet on
3. Corner property line radius will be required per City
Standards.
X 4. All rights of vehicular ingress and egress shall be dedicated
as follows: on Arrow Hwy. except for one 40 foot wide opening
as shown on tentative map.
X 3. Reciprocal access easements and maintenance agreements enaurirg
access to all parcels and joint maintenance of all ci mnon .;
roads, drives or parking areas shall be provided by C.0 &R.s , a
and shall be recorded concurrent with the map.
6. All existing easements lying within future right -of -way are to
be quitclaimed or delineated on the map per City Engineerts
requirements..
7. Easements for sidewalk for public use shall be dedicated to the
City where sidewalks meander through private property.
B. Surety
X 1. Surety shall be posted rnd an agreement executed to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer and City Attorney,
guaranteeing completion of thz public improvements prior to
recording.
2. A lien agreement must he executed prior to recording of the map
for the following:
3. Surety shall be posted and an agreement executed, guaranteeing
completion of all c —szte drainage facilites necessary for
dawatering 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. StrE2t 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 ,ecurity
with the r ty guaranteeing• the required construction prior to recordation
of the map and /or building permit issuance.
1. Construct full street improvements including, but not limited
to, curb and gulter, A.C. pavement, ;sidewalk, drive approaches,
parkway trees a► ?d stvehet .ig'Nts on u4 interior streets.
2. A minimum of 26 -foot wide pavement within a 40 -foot wide
dedicated right -of -way shall be constructed for all half -
section streets.
X 3. Construct the following: missing improvements.
Prior to recordation.
—"` Curb Side- rive ree Street Median
Street nt:'e Gutter Pvmt. Walk_wAppr. frees Lights Overlay island* Other
Arrow uwY- _ Meandering X X see Cond. G.1
White t 1c X X X X
Maple X X X X
Elm Ave. _X X X X
*includes lan0scaping and -irrigation on meter
-2-
m
-_ -/
r
r
0701 -02 o 6-12-85 P.C� Agenda Packet o' Page-4,_-of 8
X 4. Prior to any work being performed in the public right -of -way,
fees shall be paid and an encroachment permi.l shall be obtained
'cram the City Engineer's Office, in addition to any, ry her
permits required.
X 5. Street improvement plans shall be revised hit a Registered Civil
Engineer and approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of
an encroachment permit.
b. Developer shall coordinate, and where necessary, pay for the
relocation of any power poles or other existing public
utilities as necessary.
7. Existing lines of 12KV or less fronting the property shall be
undergrounded.
B. Install appropriate street name signs, traffic control signs,
striping and markings with locations and types approved by the
City Engineer.
X 9. Street light locations, as required, ara to be approved by the
Southern California Edison Company and the City of Rancho
Cucamonga. lights shall be on decorative poles with
underground service.
X 10. Landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitU l to and
approved by the Planning Division prior to the issuance of
buildi:,g permit..
X 11. Concentrated drainage flows shall not cross - sideialks.
Undersidewalk drains shall be installed to City Standards.
D. Drainaqe and flood Control
1. Private drain, ease ants for cross -lot drainage. shall be
required and shall be delineated or noticed on the final map.
2. Adequate provisions shall be made for acceptance and disposal
of surface drainag* entering the property from adjacent areas.
3. The following storm drain shall be installed to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer
4. Prior to recordation of the map, a hydrologic and drainage
study for the project shall be submitted to the City Engineer
for review.
S. A drainage detention basin per City Standards stiall be
constructed to detain increast.d runoff'
1
E. Grading
X L Grading of the subject ;property shall be in accordance with the
Uniform' Building. Code, City Grading Standards and accepted
grading practices. The final grading plan shall be in
substantial conformance with the ap'.roved conceptual grading
plan,
X 2. A soils report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer
licensed by the State of California to perform such work prior
to issuance of building permit.
3. A geological report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer
or geologist and submitted at the time of application or
grading plan check.
4. The final grading plan shall be subject to review and approval
by the Grading Committee and shall be completed prior to
recordation of the final subdivision map or issuance of C
building permit whichever comes first.
X 5. Final grading plans for each parcel are to be submitted to the
Building and Safety Division for amiroval prior to issuance of
building permit.
F. Generitl Requirements and Approvals
X 1. Permits from otter agencies will be required as follows: Amok
CalTrans for
San Bernardino County FloU—Mf�trol District
—R— Cucamonga County Water District for sewer and water
X San..Bernardino County Dust Abatement (required prior to
issuance of a grading permit)
Other
X 2. A copy of the Covenants, Conditions anu RestriLtions (C.C. &R.$)
approved by the City Attorney is required prior to recordation
of the map.
3. Provide all utility services to each lot including sewerage,
water, electric power, gas and telephone prior to street
constructon.
X 4. Sanitary sewer and water systems shall be designed to Cucamonga
County Water District: standards. A letter of acceptance is
i required.
S. This subdivision shall be subject to conditions of approval
from r_.alTrans /San Bernardino County Flood Control District.
X 6. Approvals have not been secured from all utilities and other
interested agencies involve:. Appra:al of the final map will
be subject to any requirements that may be received from them.
-4- -� S�
X 7.
The filing of the tentative map or approval of same does not
guarantee that sewer treatment capacity will be available at
-
the time building pct-mits. .are requested. When.building permits
are requested, the Cucamonga County Water District will be
asked to certify the availability of capacity. Permits will
not be issued unless said certification is received in writing.
8.
Local and Master Planned "trails shall be provided in accordance
_
with the Trail Plan. A detailed trail plan indicating widths,
maximum slopes, physical conditions, fencing and weed control,
in accordance with City trail standards, shall be submitted to
and approved by the City Planner prior to recordation
for and /or prior to building permit
issuance for
4.
Prior to recording, a deposit snail be pasted with the City
covering the estinated cost of apportioning the assessments
under Assessment District 82 -1 among the newly created parcels.
X 10.
At the time of final map submittal, the following shall be
submitted: Title Report, traverse calculations (sheets),
copies of recorded maps and deeds used as reference and /or
showing original land division, tie notes and bench marks
referenced.
G. SPECIAL CONDITIONS
X 1.
A lien agreement shall be executed prior to recording for the
future construction of 1/2 landscaped median island on Arrow
Hwy. unless the requirement for median island on Arrow Hwy. is
deleted by City Council.
X 2.
Private drainaae easements far cross lot drainage shall be
provided and delineated on the map within the reciprocal access
easements as shown on the tentative map.
X 3.
Notice of intent to join the proposed Median Island -Landscaped
District shall be filed with the City Council prior to
S•
recordation of the Final Map.
EYTY OF RANCHO CUCAh10hiDA
LLOYD B. HUBBS, CITY EPltalt UR
by:
-
r1
11
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
STAFF REPORT
asp
+R�
• as
DATE: June 12, 1985
TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner
By: Dino Putrino, Assistasit Planner
SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITI7NAL USE PERMIT 83 -22
- JORDAN ARCHITECTS - The aaaition of a second story to an
approve self storage facility on 1.97 acres of land in
the General Commercial .District, located at the southeast
corner of Helms Avenue and Hampshire Street (9419
Hampshire Street) - APN 208 - 261 -57.
I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION:
A. Action Requested: Add second story to an approved self - storage
structure.
B. Purpose: Increase number of storage units.
C. Location: Southeast earner of F.elms Avenue & Hampshire Street.
D. Parcel Size: 1.97 acres.
E. Existing Zoning: General Commercial.
F. Existing Land Use: Vacant
G. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning:
North - Covnercial Retail, Ge;;eral Commercial
South Single Family Residential, Low Residential
East Single Family Residential, Low Residential
West - Vacant, General Commercial
H. General Plan Desi nations:
Project ite - Comnercla
North - Commercial
South - Low Residential
East - Low Residential
West - Commercial
I. Site Characteristics: The project site is adjacent to single
family residential uses to the south and east. The site has
been rough graded to accommodate the approved storage facility.
ITEM J
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
CUP 83-22 - Jordan Architects
June 12, 1985
Page 2 .
II. BACKGROUND: Conditional Use Permit No. 83-22 is an approved self-
storage warehouse facility. Also, a variance to reduce the setback
from 20 feet to 10 feet along the south and east residential areas
was granted (April 25, 1984). The granting of this variance was
based on certain mitigation measures: a low profile design
(approximately 15 feet in height), dense landscaping in the south
and east setback area adjacent to the residential district, and the
development of a less intense use in a general commercial district.
III. ANALYSIS:
A. General: The proposed project raises three major issues: (1)
5-tensity, (2) building height, and (3) F ading. The proposed
project would increase the intensity of the approved storage
facility use; however, a storage facility is considered a low
intensity use. The intensity would relate more to aesthetics
of a 2-story building rather than increase in traffic or :40.se.
The proposed second story addition would increase the structure
height. In order to maintain the same low profile consistent
with the original approval, the applicant has lowered the
finish floor elevation, This would require further extensive
grading of the site.
The proposed grading is designed where the finish floor would
be lower than the lowest existing grade of the project site;
therefore, the project would require a pump system in order to
drain the site of water run-off. According to the Grading
CorwAttee and the Building Division, this system is not
reliable and can present long term problems. These problems
range from "over capacity" to "maintenance". The concerns of
this system are increased due to the history of flood control
drainage problems in Rancho Cucamonga. The a'ternative to a
pump system is gravity drainage (grading the site according to
the approved plans). This would raise the building height by
five (5) feet. In turn, this would conflict with the intent of
the variance Resolution 84-36 to maintain a low profile due to
the decreased setback.
B. Design Review Committee: The Design Review Committee expressed
concern with regards to the neighborhood input at the time the
approved CUP 83-22 and Variance 83-05 were processed. The
Design Review Committee requested that the applicant conduct a
neighborhood meeting in order to address the neighborhood
concerns and comments. The applicant held a neighborhood
meeting on April 6 1985. Staff was able to contact Mr.
Everett Visk who attended the neighborhood meeting for his
J--),
E
K]
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
CUP 83 -22 Jordan Architects
June 12, 1985
Page 3
comments. Mr. Visk expressed favorable comments to the
proposed project basically for the purposes of providing
improvements, thereby eliminating the adverse conditions of a
vacant lot, such as dumping,_ dust, and noise from children's
activity.
C. Environmental Assessment: Staff has found that the proposed
revision of CUP 83 -22 may create significant adverse
environmental impacts relating to a substantial change in
ground contours (drainage) that cannot be mitigated.
III. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: Upon review of the proposed Conditional Use
Permit application, the Planning Commission must make the findings
that the proposed project design and site is or is not consistent
with the Findings of the approved Variance 83 -05, Development Code,
and General Plan policies.
IV. RECOMMENDATION: If the Planning Commission can support the Facts
for Findings, then adoption of the attached Resolution of Approval
with Conditions is in order. however, if the Commission cannot
support the Facts for Findings, ,then staff should be directed to
prepare a Resolution of Denial for cola ideration on the next
agenda.
w
ly submitted,
Ri Gom
C' Pla er
' 1
L RG: :ns
i Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Location Map
Exhibit "B" - Site Plan
Exhibit "C" — Grading Plan
Exhibit "D" - Elevation Plan
Exhibit "E" - Landscape Plan
Planning Commission Staff Report - April 25, 1984
'66 Minutes - April 25, 1984 Planning Commission Meeting
Neighborhood Meeting Letter
Variance 83 -05 - Resolution of Approval 84 -36
Initial Study, Part II
Resolution of Approval
J,3
w
1
NORTH
CITY of 1TEDI:
RANCHO CLTCAMUNGA TITLE= !- �Tlart/ err.►
_ J Y�
lu
�1
W
v
a
ve Ze
-S
r.
F
pp�
Z �I
c�
w
V
`
W �
T
0
0
00
_
m_
'�„i'�•„t',=
I � JIF
tax
•i' S •� 1 � 1 � sli. •
i fr 4li \
�-
r•' I -
t r •
,,� � i• � � is • �.
tYi
t .�
In
A
:f
Ri
W 8
Q1
i
�-
Ca
d
J e
0
0
5
N
�Q Q
V�
C,
1
i CQ
-L4
I
i
i
1 t
i
1
I
I
I
I
f
I
i
I
I�
i
I
I
1
1
I
I�
I
i
II
r_
11%
Ncl
m�
o� 4`
D V
5 \ Q
J
F�
O
CU G
Im
E
■
CITY OF RANCHO CUC MOlvGA -VICAN10
STAFF REPORT
a, o
�-, 2
U >
DATE: April 25, 1984 1977
TO: chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner
BY: Cur', Johnston, Asssociate Planner
SUBJECT: EN`JIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 83 -22
- BLANCO - The development of a 41,181 sq. ft.
self- storage warehouse facility on 1.96 acres of land in
the GC (General Commercial) District, located at the
southeast corner of Helms and Hampshire - APN 208 - 261 -57.
Related File: Vari,.nce 83 -05 Blanco
I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION:
A. Action Requested: Approval of a precise site plan and
architectural esign, and issuance of a Negative Dec,dration.
B. Purpose: Construction of a 41,181 sq. ft. mini - warehouse
C. Location: Southeast corner of Helms and Hampshire (south of
Foot 1 Boulevard)
D. Parcel Size: -96 acres
E. Existing Zoning aeierai Commercial
F. Existing Land Use: Vacant
G. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning:
North Ferry's Mar et pp
o-ing Center and Woolworth Garden
Center, zoned General Commercial
South - Single Family Residential Subdivision, zoned Low
Residential (2 -4 du /ac)
East - Single Family Subdivision, zoned Low Residential (2 -4
du /ac)
West - Vacant, zoned General Commercial
H. General Plan Designations:
rFooj'ect Site - Commercial
North Commercial
South - Low Residential (2 -4 du/ac
�
East - Low Residential (2 -4 du /ac,
West - Commercial
PLANNING COMMISSIO<_ -AFF REPORT C
CUP 83 -22 /Blanco
April 25, 1984
Page 2
D
I. Site Character "stics: The 'e slopes to the south at a rate
i> peg rcent. egetation is limited to indigenous grasses and
weeds. No structures exist on the property.
II. ANALYSIS:
A. General: This project was submittec in conjunction with
aril rfiance 83 -05, also on this agenda. Approval of the Variance
is necessary to develop the site with 10 -foot interior yard
setbacks, as proposed on -,he attached exhibits.
In August of 1983, a Zoning Ordinance Determination was brought
before the Planning Commission for input relative to the
appropriateness of a mini- warehouse in the General Commercial
zone. The 'Commission determined that mini - warehouses should be
allowed with approval of a Conditional Use Permit. A
Conditional Use Permit ,.-s required because this type of use
has design and operating characteristics which are unique to
the GenerO Commercial District, and they may or may not be
appropriate in all locations. The Commission also specifically
discussed the subject site wid at that time determined that a
mini- warehouse could be comr)atible with the neighborhood and
noted that the site was unfc�!a to the General Commercial zone
in that visibility from Foothill Boulevard was limited and the
lot dimensions (141 feet X 603 feet) would make it difficult to
develop a commercially viable retail use in accordance with
current design standards.
Two low profile concrete tilt -up buildings ranging in height
from 10 feet to 15 feet are proposed. Architectural relief on
the buildings is provided by changes in texture (smooth versus
fluted panels) and variation in the plane of the building
elevations. The building setbacks on Helms and Hampshire are
approximately 35 feet from the curb, consistent with the
adjacent single family homes.
B. Design Review Committee: The project was reviewed by the
Design Review Committee on two separate occasions. Building
number one, as shown on the site plan, was originally submitted
as a 2 -story structure and the setback of building number two
along the south property line was 4- feet. When the Committee
initially reviewed the project they had major concerns relative
to the setbacks along the south and east boundaries of the
project, archit- tural treatment of the second story on
building number one and design of the manager's unit.
Substantial revisions to the project were made including
reducing building number one to a single story structure and
providing a minimum 10 -foot setback along the rear property
line. Following submittal of the revised plans, the Design
�--1b
PLANNING COMMISSIOP'AFF REPORT
CUP 83 -22 /Blanco
April 25, 184
Page 2
E
I. Sit9 Characteristics: fie site slopes to the south at a rate
off1 percent. ege ation is limited to indigenous grasses and
Creeds. No structures exist on the property.
II. ANALYSIS:
A. General: This project was submitted in conjunction with
Variance 83 -05, also on this aaerida. Approval of the Variance
is necessary to develop the site with 10 -foot interior yard
setbacks, as proposed on the attached exhibits.
In August of 1983, a Zoning Ordinance Determination was brought
before the Planning Commission for input relative to the
appropriateness of a mini - warehouse in the General Commercial
zone. The Commission determined that mini - warehouses should be
allowed with approval of a Conditional Use Permit. A
Conditional Use Permit was required because this type of use
has design and operating characteristics which are unique to
the General Commercial District, and they may or may not be
appropriate in all locations. The Commission also specifically
discussed the subject site and at that time determined that a
mini - warehouse could be compatible with the neighborhood and
noted that the site was unique to the General Commercial zone
in that visibility from Foothill Boulevard was limited and the
lot dimensions (141 feet X 607 feet) would make it difficult to
develop a commercially viable retail use in accordance with
current design standards.
Two low profile concrete tilt -up buildingF ranging in height
from 10 feet to 15 feet are proposed. Architectural relief on
the buildings is provided by changes in texture (smooth versus
fluted panels) and variation in the plane of the building
elevations. The building setbacks on Nelms and Hampshire are
approximately 35 feet from the curb, consistent with the
adjacent single family homes.
B. Design Review Committee: The project was reviewed by the
Design Co mttee: on two separate occasions. Building
number one, as shown on the site plan., was originally submitted
as a 2 -story structure and the setback of building number two
along the south property line was 4 -feet. When the Committee
initially reviewed the project they had major concerns relative
to the setbacks along the south and east boundaries of the
project, architectural treatment of the second story on
building number one and design of the manager's unit.
Substantial revisions to the project were made including
reducing building number one to a single story structure -fnd
providing a minimum 'lo -foot setback along the rear property
line. Following submittal of the revised plans, the Design
J -it
MM
PLANNING COMMISSIOV —TAFF REPORT
CUP 8322 /Blanca 1,
April 25, 1984
Page 3
14
11
Review Committee recommended approval of the site plan and
architecture with a condition that a low garden wall be
provided at the northwest corner of building number one to
delinvate a small patio area for the manager's unit.
C. Develo ment Review Committee. The Development Review Committee
Kviewe tom project and etermined that, with approval of
Variance 83 -05 and with the recommended Conditions of Approval,
the project is consistent with all applicable standards and
ordinances. Conditions of Approval are provided on the
attached Resolution and Standard Conditions
review. form for your
D. Gra_dinq Committee° The Grading Committee reviewed and approved
the conceptual grading plan with a condition necessary for
compliance with City standards. A final , ;,rading plan and
revised floor plan will be required prior to issuanci ot
building perm' -,s.
E. Environmental Asse,9ment: Part I of the Initial Study has been
completed by the applicant. Staff has completed the
environmental checklist and found no significant adverse
environmental impacts as a result of this project. If the
Commission concurs with these findings, issuance of a Negative
Declaration would be appropriate.
III. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: The proposr:` Use, building design, and site
plan, ther toge with approval of VA 83 -05 and the recommended
Conditions of Approval, is in compliance with all applicable City
standards and ordinances, the Development Code and the G ne!•al
Plan. Ie addition, si project will not be detrimental to adjacent
Properties or cause significant adverse environmental impacts.
IV. CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised as a public hearing
in The Dail Report newspaper and notices were sent to all property
owners wIt rn 7109 feet of the subject site. In addition
hearing notices were posted on the property, public
r_ The applicant was a.so required to .onduct a neighborhood meeting
# to allow the surrounding residents to review the development
plans. Approximately 70 letters (Exhibit "G, were sent to
adjacent property owners and attendance at the meeting was limited
to three persons. Concerns brought up by those present included
building height at the south property line, the building setback on
the south property line, and traffic generated by the project,
entering the neighborhood to the sou };r. Following the meeting one
letter was received from a homeowner on the east s we of Helms
south of the site (Exhibit "H"). V. response to the. neighborhood
concerns, the applicant increased the setback along the south and
Pi.ANNING COMNISSIWP ii 'AFF REVORT
CUP 83-22/Blanco
April 25, 5984
Page 4
east property lines and provided low profile buildings to the
extent possible. A cross section illustrating the heicnt of the
proposed buildings relative to the adjacent homes is' shown on
Exhibit "D -3 ".
V. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Planning Commis4ion l
con uct a pua is hearing to consider additional public input and
elements of this project. If after such consider the Ccmmission
concurs with the facts for findings-and Conditions of Approval,
adoption of the attached Qesol�W on and issuance of a Negative
Declaration in conjunction with Variance 83 -05 would be
appro late.
sp full s bmitied,
Ri k Gomez
City Planner
RG:CJ:jr
Attachments: Exhibit "A ".- Location Map
Exh -'bit "B" - Site Plan
Exhihyt "C° - Conceptual Landscape Plan
Exk, :_, 'I, "D" - Elevations
`y "Ell - Concepttiol rrz�dind Plan
Ex, "I - Floor Flan
Exh3L, ' - Neighborhood Meeting Letter
Exhibit -,t" - Letter from Adjacent Property Owner
Initial Study, Part I
Resolution -f Approval
It was the consensus of the Commission to postpone the public hearing for
these items un*il later in the agenda.
Chairman Stout advised that the following items would be heard concurrently.
E. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND VARIANCE 83 -05 - BLANCO - A request to reduce
the required rear yard setbacks Lo allow the development of a 41,181
square foot - storage warehouse facility on 1.96 acres of land in the
zad Hampshire (General srcial) 0istrict, located at the southeast corner of Kelms
- APN 208 - 261 -57.
F. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 8322 BLANGO - The
development of .a 41,131 square foot self- storage warehouse facility on
1.96 acres (f larva in the GC ;General Commercial) Distract, located at the
southeast corner of Helms and Hampshire e ,.?N 208- 261 -57.
Rick Gomez, City Planner, reviewed the staff report.
Chairman Stout opened the public hearing.
d Gall, representing Blanco, addressed the Commission stating the
.ica,t's concurrence with the staff report and resolutions..
all Stout asked Mr. Gall huw access would be obtained to maintain the
la. ;aping at the southeast property line.
Mr. Gall replied that a gate would be provided to allow access.
Chairman Stout asked the applicant if he would ot-ject to a condition being
placed on the CUP to require the maintenance of i-his landscaping.
Mr. Gall replied that he had no objections as this was the intent of the
applicant.
There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed.
Mot,-Dn: Moved by Hempel, seconded by Barker, carried, to adopt the Resolution
approving Varianue 83 -05.
Motion: Moved by Hempel, seconded by Barker, carried, to issue a Negative
Declaration and adopt the Resolution approving Conditional Us= Permit C3 -22
with an added condition to require maintenance of the landscape buffer at the
southeast property line.
as s st e a
G. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84 -02 - HARP - A request to maintain a 350 -400- bird
aviary at 9110 Carrari Court in the 11VL11 District - APN 208- 781�19. II
Planning Commission Minutes -3 April 2- 1 84
P �, 9
6 �
y
Dear Homeowner:
Recently Allsite storage aquired the self storage project located
at the southeast corner of Hampshire and Helms, adjacent to your
neighborhood in Rancho Cucmdonga. Uport review of the proposed
design they felt that several areas coul%' be improved upon.
.Iowan Architects, Inc. was retained to study the proposed
changes and implement them at the city level. As a result of ttie
proposed change a modification of the previously granted
conditional use periit will gave to be obtained from the city.
In an attempt to obtain comrw)nts from you the homeowner and
address any concerns that may arise, we are inviting you to
attend a meeting *J be conducted at the project site. The
meeting is to br� held on Saturday April 6th from 10 :00 am to
11:00 am. SNiuld you be unable to attend , please provide this
office with any concerns or comments you may have, prrior to
April 13, 1985.
The proposed changes e7e generally described as follows:
1. To increase site security we will be adding a
24 hour on site manager.
2. A second floor will be added wi:hou: any increase in
building height. The project, in essence, will remain as
originally approved.
3. Landscaping will be increased at the perimeter of the
project to provide a better transition to the residential
neighborhood.
4. We have redesigned the entry area at the front of the
project to improve the asthetics of he project and provide a
better image fcr the neighborhood.
2201 Martin Street, Suite 201, Irvine, California 92715 • (714) 470.2535
r /�.. _ ,•
We hope that'you will be able to attend the scheduled
meeting so we may show you in detail the upgrades and
improvements we have planned. Allsize Storage sincerely waists to
be the best neighbor passible.
Thank you for your consideration of this mat•+r.
Sincerely,
Bruce Jordan
President
Jordan Architects, Inc., AIA
BJkd
"U
` /�Ti]t1 AT:tTI A TTA TTA l�TTA
..�� i .... i.AU.vuv <141 V[1U1V1`IIlA G�ca.yl�
STAFF RE P, ORT
4 j Q
O'
v >
DATE: April 25,: 1984 1977
TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Rick Gomez, laity Planner
BY: Curt Johnston, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND VARIANCE 83 -05_ BLANCO = A
request to reduce the required rear yard setbacks to allow
the development cf a 41,181 sq. ft. self- storage warehouse
facility on ,1.96 acres of land in the GC (General
Commercial) Gistrict, located at the southeast corner of
Hells and Hampshire - APN 208- 261 -57.
RELATED FILE: CUP 83 =22 - BLANCO
I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION:
A. Action Requested: Approval of a variance and issuance of a
Negative Declaration.
B. Purpose: Construction of a 41,181 sq. ft. mini- warehouse.
C. Location: Southeast corner of Helms and Hampshire.
D. Parcel Size 1.96 acres.
E. Existing Zoning: GC (General Commercial)
17. Existinq Land Uses Vacant
G. Surrounaing Land Use and Zoning:
No!-th - Ferry -s Shopping Center and Woolworth Garden
Center, zoned General Commercial
South - Single family residential subdivision, zoned Low
Residential (2 -4 du /ac)
i3st - Single family residential subdivision, zoned Low
Residential (2 -4 du /ac)
West Vacant property, zoned General Commercial
H. General Plan.Desi nations:
Project Site - commercial
North - Commercial
Su,_. - Low Residential (2 -4 du /ac
East - Low Recidential (2 -4 du /ac)
West - Commercial
3-17
e
Planning Commission aff Report
VA 83 -05 - BLANCO
April 25, 1984
Page 2
I. Site characteristics: The site slopes to the south at
approximately Vegetation is limited to indigenous shrubs
and weeds. No structures exist on the site.
II. ANALYSIS•
A. General: This variance is proposed in conjunction with CUP
2T,_also on this agenda: Approval of the variance
application is necessary if the project is to be developed as
shown on the attached exhibits. The development plans propose
buiiding setbacks 'of 10' to 14' along the south and east
project boundaries. Development Code requirements for interior
setbacks on _commercial property adjacent to residential land
uses is 20 feet.
State law, as well as the Development Code, gives the Planning
Commission th.. , :authority to approve a variance for certain
development standards only when special circumstances
applicable to the property, such as size, shape, or topography,
would create undue hardships. Also, variances,anay be granted
when the strict enforcement of the DevelQ;M'.cnt Code would
result in practical difficulty or unnecessary hardships
inconsistent with the objectives of the Development Code.
With regard to this site, the long narrow configuration of the
property imposes a difficulty with developing the site in
accordance.with City standards. The minimum depth of lots in
the General Commercial zone is 175 feet. However, the
north /south dimension of the subject parcel is 141 feet, 34
feet less than the minimum required by the Development. Code.
Several factors combine to lessen the impact of the reduced
setback on the adjacent single family homes. The proposed
buildings have a low profile design and the maximum height is
approximately 15 feet. Architectural treatment on the south
and east elevations will be similar to that proposed on the
street side. AAso, the setback varies from 10 feet to 14 feet
on the suut� side and appropriate landscaping will be provided
'n the setback area.
Another factor which lessens the potential impact is that the
proposed use is Tess intense than typical commercial
establishments permitted in the General Commercial District.
After the majority of spaces in the mini- warehouse are rented,
traffic and noise generated by the project will be minimal.
Also, security for the adjacent residents should be improved
because access to the rear landscaped area will be controlled
by wrought iron fencing at each end of the building, and 'a full
time manager will reside on the site.
0
I&a
W]
Planning Commissi taff Report
VA 83 -05 - BLANC�
April 25, 1964
Page 3
B. Environmental Assessment: Part I of tae Initial Study has been
completed by the applicant. Staff has completed the
Environmental Checklist and found no significant environmenal
impacts as a result of this project, if the Commission concurs
with these findings, issuance of a_Negative Declaration would
be appropriate.
III. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: The reduced setbacks in conjunction with
the proposed use anU building design will not be detrimental to
adjacent properties. Considering the unique lot dimensions,
strict interpretation of the code would result in practical
difficulty. In addition, the granting of this variance would,
not be construed as a special privilege inconsistent with the
objectives of the Development Code.
IV. CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised as;a public hearing
in The Dail - Re ort newspaper. Notices were sent to all property
owners within 300 feet of the project site. In addition, public
hearing notices were posted on the property and the developer
conducted a neighborhood meeti..g to, discuss the project with
surrounding residents. Since that timz, no correspondence has been
received either for or against this project.
V. RECOMMENDITION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission
co�ncuct ,r p c hearing to consider public input and elements in
this project. If after such consideration the Commission concurs
with the facts for findings, adoption of the attached Resolution.
and issuance of a Negative Declaration would be appropriate.
�pec'• 11 submitted,
Rik ez
City Planner
RG:CJ:ns
/attachments: Exhibit "A" Location Map
Exhibit "B" - Site Plan
Exhibit "C" - Illustrative Site Plan
Exhibit "D" - Elevation
Exhibit "E" Development Code Standards
Initial Study, Part I
Resolution of Approval
J - ICr
RESOLUTION NO. 84 -36 J
l
A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO -. CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION
APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 83 -2? FOR A 41,181
SQUARE 'FOOT SELF- STORAGE WAREHOUSE FACILITY LOCATED AT
THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF HELMS AND HAMPSHIRE IN THE
GENERAL COMMERCIAL DISTRiLT
WHEREAS, on the 20th day of December, 1983, a complete application
was filed by Blanco Security Storage, Incorporated, for review of the above-
described project; and
WHEREAS, on the 25th day of April, 1984, the Rancho Cucamonga
Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider the above - described
project.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission resolved as
follows:
SECTION 1: That the following findings can be met:
1. That the proposed Ise is in accord with the General
Plan, the objectives of the Development Code, and
the purposes of the district in which the site is
located.
Aft
2. That the proposed use, together with the conditions
applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the
public health, safety, or welfare, or materially
injurious to properties or improvements in the
vicinity.
3. That the proposed use complies with each of the -
i applicable provisions of the Development Code.
SECTION 2: That this project will not create adverse impacts on the
environment and that a Negative Declaration is issued on April 25, 1984.
SECTION 3: That Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 83 -22 is approved
subject to the following conditions and Standard Conditions:
PLANNING DIVISION
1. A low garden wall, approximately 4 feet in height
from the pad elevation, shall be provided at the
northwest corner of the building for the manager's
natio. The wall shall be textured to match the _=
building. Final design details shall be provided
with the construction drawing submitted for review
and approval prior to issuance of building permits.
Ll
CITY OF, RANCHO CUCAMONGA.
PART II - INITIAL STUDY
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
DATE: I' 1 AY 71 1
APPLICANT: --:,
FILING DATE: a)W- q& -LOG NUMBER: t I P_Fj 3-ZZ G-�1CS101�
PROJECT: ijFeyt D OW-( App1T10►1 TO A1.1 A4�?C o' J!✓� SELF "
PROJECT LOCATIONs,ei��(f
I. EW- IRO`.ZENTAL U-1-PACTS.
(Explanation of all "yes° and "maybe" answers are required on attached
sheets).
1. Soils and Geolonv. Will the proposal have
significant results in:
a. Unstable ground conditions or ir_ changes in
geologic _elan onships?
b. Disruptions, displacements, cr;paction or
burial of the soili
c. Change in topography or ground surface
contour intervals?
d. The destruction, covering or modification
of any unique geologic or physical features?
e. Any potential increase xn =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 propert,7 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. &drolO�. Will the proposal have significant
results in:
6*- _w
YES :LaYBE NO
' 11
u
J
d
YES MAYBE NO
a. Changes in currents, or the course of direction
Of flowing streams, rivers, or ephemeral
channels? stream
b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns,
or the rate and amount of surface water
runoff?
c- Alterations to the course or flow of flood
waters?
d. Change in the amount of surface water in any
body of water?
C. Discharge into surface wafters, or any
alteration of surface water 'quality?
f. Alteration of groundwater characteristics?
g. Change in the quantity of groundwaters,
either through direct additions or with-
drawals, or through interference with an
aquifer?
Quality?
Qu.; ntity?
h. The reduction in the amount of water other-
wise available for public water supplies?
I- Exposure of people or property to water
related hazards such as flooding or seichen?
3. AIL Q� uality, Will the proposal have significant
results in:
L�
a. Const24 t or periodic air emissions from mobile
or ii:direct sources?
5tat--nary sources? --
b. Deterioration of ambient air quality and /or
Jr-
interference with the attainment of applicable
air quality standards?
C. Alteration of local or regional climatic
conditions, affecting air movement, moisture
or temperature?
4, Biota
Flora. Will the proposal have significant results
in:
a• Change in the characteristics of species,
including diversity, distribution, or number
of any species of plants? -.._.
b• Red'
ction of the numbers of any unique, rare
or endangered species of plants?
Page Z
J
!, 11;
Page 3
YES �LAY3E a0
V.
lL
f�
c. Introduction of new or disruptive species of
plants 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?
b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare
or endangered species of animals?
c. Introduction of new or disruptive species of
animals into an area, or result in a barrier
to the migration or movement of animals?
d. Deterioration or removal of existing fish or
wildlife habitat?
5. Population. Will the proposal have significant
results in:
a. Will the proposal alter the location, distri-
bution, density, diversity, or rate
growth of
the huaan population of an area?
b. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or
create a demand for additional housing?
6. Socio- Economic Factors. Will the proposal have
I!
significant results in:
a. Change in local or regional socio- economic
characterist >cs, including economic or
commercial diversity, tax rate, and property
values?
b. T [11 project costs be equitably distributed
rmong project beneficiaries, i.e., buyers,
tax payers or project users?
7. Land Use and Plannine Considerations. Will the
proposal have significant results in?
a. A substantial alteration of the present or
planned land use of an area?
b. A conflict with any designations, objectives,
i-
policies, or adopted plans of any governmental
entities?
c. An impact upon the qulaity or quantity of
existing consumptive or non- consumptive
recreational opportunities?
Page 3
YES �LAY3E a0
V.
lL
f�
Page 4
YES
$. Transportation. Will the have
.".AYBE NO
proposal significant
results
a.
Generation of substantial additional vehicular
movement?
V
b.
Effects on existing streets, or demand for
new street construction?
c.
Effects on existing parking facilities, or
demand for new parking ? -
v
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?
g.
Increases in traffic hazards to motor vehicles,
bicyclists or pedestrians?
4. Cultural Resources. Will the ;rcopo;;al have
f
significant
results in:
a
a.
A disturbance to the integrity of archaeological,
paleontological, and /or historical resources?
10. Health._ Safetv, and Nuisance Factors. Will the
proposal
have significant results in:
a.
Creation of any health hazard or potential health
hazard?
a
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
or species of vector or pathenogenic
organisms or the exposure of people to such
organisms?
e.
Increase in existing noire levels?
f.
Exposure of people to potentially dangerous
noise levels?
yf,%
g.
The creation tf objectionable odors?
V
h.
i
An increase in light or gyre?
1
>���a4
oC
!9
Page 5
ss N0
11. Aesthetics. .Will the proposal have significant
results ins
a.
The obstruction or degradation of any scenic
vista or view?
V
b.
The creation of an aesthetically offensive
site?
c.
A conflict with the objective of designated
f
or potential scenic corridors?
12. Utilities and Public Services.- Will the proposal
have a significant ;red for new systems, or
alterations to the following:
%
a.
Electric power?
J/
b.
Natural or packaged gas?
c.
Communications systems?
'LJ
d.
Water supply?
/L
J
e.
Wastewater facilities?
!L
f.
Flood control structures?
^✓
g.
Solid waste facilities?
h.
Fire protection?
i R
i.
FJlice protection?
J.
Schools?
k.
Parks or other recreational facilities?
1.
Maintenance of public facilities, including
roa_3s and flood control facilities?
m.
Other governmental services?
✓
13. Enerev and Scarce Resources. Will the proposal
have
significant results in:
a.
Use of substantial or excessive fuel or .-nergy?
b.
Substantial increase in demand upon existing
sources of energy?
c=
A^ Iticrease in the demand for development of
new sources of energy?
d;.
An increase or perpetuation of the consumption
of non- renewable forms of eaerg;, when feasible
renewable sources of energy are available?
672ADIA_1G P,�-470/k5�S 4 Pt "p
��rgi�L� LY AF L4481,S AA10 Cam! RZ6 7- GoM�j
t10 ✓EiZ. P�'li -�- "1 i°v '`:�is�,F.fT�tA,�,�C6 t�
Page 6
YES
.AY5E NO
e. Substantial depletion of any nonrenewable or
AOL
scarce natural resotirce?
14, Mandatory Fir-Linrts_of Sika3ficance.
a. Does the project have the potential to degrade
the quality of the environment, substantially
reduce the habitat of fish or wildlife species,
cause o fish or wildlife population to drop
below self sustaining levels, threaten to
eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce
the number or restrict the range of a rare or
endangered plant or animal or eliminate
important examples of the major periods of
California history or prehistory?
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 relatiaely
brief, definitive period of time while long-
term impacts will endure well into the future).
c. Does the project have impacts; which are
individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable? (Cumulatively considerable
means that the incremental effects of an
L dividual project are considerable when viewed
in connection with the effects of past projects,
and probable future projects).
d. Does the project have environmental effects
t
which will cause substantial adverse effects
on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
II. DISCUSSION OF I M IRMENTAL EVALUATION (i.e., of affirmative
answers to
the above questions plus a CUCI- 's;,ion of proposed mitigation measures).
672ADIA_1G P,�-470/k5�S 4 Pt "p
��rgi�L� LY AF L4481,S AA10 Cam! RZ6 7- GoM�j
t10 ✓EiZ. P�'li -�- "1 i°v '`:�is�,F.fT�tA,�,�C6 t�
Page 7
111- D£T£_ -1IOY
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect
on
the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have n significant
effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect
in this :case because the mitigation measures described on an
attached sheet have been adder: to the project. A NEGATIVE
DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED.
I find the proposed project MAY have significant effect on the `
envirnmento and an ENVIRON:DENT IMPACT REPORT is re u.red.
Date
.� 1 Si nature
1C
KI
RESOLUTION N0.
A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION
APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REVISION NO. 83 -22 FOR A
SECOND STORY ADDITION TO AN APPROVED ONE STORY STORAGE
FACILITY LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF HELMS AVENUE
AND HAMPSHIRE STREET IN THE GENERAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT
WHEREAS, on the 25th day of April, 1984, the Pianning Commission
approved CUP 83 -22; and
WHEREAS, on the 11th day of December, 1984, a complete application
was filed by Jordan Architects for.revised site plan and elevations; and
WHEREAS, on the 12th day of Junes, 1985, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning
Commission held a public hearing to consider the above - described' project.
follows: NOW, THEREFORE, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission resolved as
SECTION is That the following findings can be met: j
1. That the proposed use is in accord with the General
Plan, the objectives 'of the Development Code, and
they 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 4:ealth, 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 project will not create adverse impacts on e
environment and a Negative Declaration is issued on June 12, 1984.
SECTIGI 3: That Conditional Use Permit No. 83 -22 Revision is
approved suhJ— ec to the following conditions and the attached Standard
Conditions:
E
h
s' '
s
Resolution No.
CUP 83 -22 - Jordan Architects
Page 2
DESIGN REVIEW
1. A low garden wall, approximately 4 feet in height
from the psd elevation, shall be provided at the
northwest corner of the building for the manager's
patio. - The wait shall be textured to match the
building. Final design details shall be provided
with the construction drawing submitted for review
and approval prior, to issuance of building permits.
2. Provide final detailed landscape and irrigation
plMS to the satisfaction of the City Planner, prior
to issuance of building permits.
3. Wrought iron fencing shall be provided at the
southwest and northeast end of building number two,
to prevent unauthorized entry behind the building.
Details shall be provided with the construction
drawings prior to issuance of building permits.
4. Adequate provisions shall be made for maintenance of
the landscape buffer, along the south and east
property line. -
ENGINEERING DIVISION:
1. All applicable conditions of Parcel Map 6582, CUP
and Variance 83 -05 shall apply to this
project.
BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION
_. Notification must be made to all tenants of the
lower storage units of the potential flooding to
these units. Such notification must be included in
writing in the body of the rent /lease contract
agreement.
2. Maintain insurance to protect against floud damage.
3. Provide plans designed with a two (2) pump system,
primary and secondary of equal capacity, for
drainage, and "stand by" automatic power prior to
.ssuance of building permits.
4. Verify non -entry of storm water at driveway access
points prior to issuance of building permits.
5. Provide a final design of the pump and emergency
drainage system to the satisfaction of the Grading
Committee prior to issuance of building permits.
J - aci
Resolution Ni.
CUP 83-22 - Jordan Architects
Page 3
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 12th DAY OF JUNE,- 1985.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF •'ACHO CUCAMONGA
eY:
Dennis L. Stout, hairman
ATTEST:
Rick Gomez, Deputy Secretary
I, Rick Gomez, Deputy Secretary of the Plantiing Commission of the City of
Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and
regularly introduced, passed, WAA adopted by the Planning Commission of the
City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held
on the 12th day of June, 1985, by the following vote-to-wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
I
I
—YN r j.
yny0
A� nL >aE.
q
L
° O U L
L S d G°U
6.
yL^V-.N p
wT d E
CC A 6L° E
No-
pa6
9,t
Ad U�..G�.W
t.
yyy
E i• O
zao
G
Q�
Z
Y °6d °Ca°•
dE L Np U'y
NY U
w'crc
O. ° °y°. p0
a,ZL
C
U
=ote
°
tp
V
° C L ��
d g A b
a p 6
a€ d A v
b O
i
C dy d�E ^q.N
MO
ic
C'„ yAyT
a^
��p ud
.°rss eY v
aNasMw, b a
vN YN
c Lr-3 a
ob°
^ �f
'-OdAC
IE Y vu
Oa
OCAA«
r
LG YO.
uri6 C „Y p0
q ' C
R-
y21 py
d aN
���oy�
d C�C6M
° Of y L
L
•,,, Y°
q}. UAN lL p
^O YWy.5 d a
rLU Eq
c
�V. q A9
o
a.- u E C day
yCy
E
a Y Y d
p12L
d G
O A°
>.V s oz 1; ;;:2 au
C
.o - + N m
T
w=A.iSc +
i50
d
Y
p
° ”
v
6L pU
!L o
m
o
p
L Fa
W
FE
L N Y sm G
NEIti. N
ry
Cu
G
i'H d «pi
d
° r
O O
dLi CpC
V= OOyw «�
G
r�i
p
s
.a-
Is
.a
o
N.•
J_31
A� d 01
"O q o
c> -. T.
-. y >t O d
s e+. •
a
6 E y
-
e
Vib L.. P °.
mo �Nua
ae�.'N^
ro
SY C�
nd
'°'�
nAu �a 59
b�aih
oawuA.
°L
+
N L�r
uGy d
r� °PAN OPL.
a L
u
AS
L
Z °LVL
u
p i-L
-0.q Au
y�00 q'ar
dy
,Fr'a
U � o ca.
^DS
�$v
s
say«
A
y
� N
o ^,.
^.N =u� -L
da
=G dN.
i C C+
d U 1D
dqc
a L t EE
C�OGa W61 d.-.
M E.
1� 0
b
ryN
U.
NEY
G C_r
a =xYNL WUN
+` C TA°
ydr
.
�.. y
Q
LL° °
dC
Of06ry ��.N
L
E HOC
y
°rV
NZ
u.
�.Nw
t01
N.Gn
ddQC
CU
�a °rNN{j.
Na t.V Gw
a L
bfj
P.
A C u L
G.6 Ld
D °9
dw ^pA
2 Li a0f..P C CT O
CaAE.dp +2U
N p y, r a
P.. °G`Y.
Au .
44
U=6.
A. O
Lie
ida
CC
-OW
W ^Fw-`y ra
4r+, 2E QuA
> O y.O
d LM
01
�
2. Cam.
9. +CA ■
+w
+
SC «q
Dd Ar
UVA dV'°OY
GM
LV°
a".g
G_zt
C
e a
u$c .F
mr a
A`N.00
Sv
+uc
pd'i`v
X4
r0oq�.
OrA- -�
nV PG
eA7N dFtAV 1
N r N 2 i N v L:
til
c^
� �. N d N '� 6
C
W + •- i
2C
C C
14 �
yD�
6 L A
N 6 6
u
�i
GC C °O y «Ci d>1 • A ad GN «'OW9 . M G dN
q0 Nd. �- ,p
o N
Ln pig LN Ly N
Egg C 4}uj a10_ t
. . M L LKACL �I6 DN a�ArC p
p T
_
pN ^n- °^ o °ad Cdp cap �_ r �6oamoy Lr N}q' NN c
A+NEL U Y� qA .eA6 Z � NL VuA uyU A N N01 °�
.A ri A.yt L C� a
y �. u G ^= a C a C N y G ��> a y > y
=y ^A pYy fa`6N. A ^G ap' N '^W2 wN p6ppCV tJ NI.
�OLr s 1- Q �'-'OU U.p e. 4.001• Nr .��uJapq
rLN.O AY NLyd NT° LQG Ldp N yC� ^p9N .nO +QL +C
gd!aq 4 'GU A�pp,AV V.DY =NUMy
eA dy. A °y�6 CdA EYi =6 �+ICa NLp O1y O. CD9� r�p1q ^.
az .d �i `^ use eA. �iu ac is i�M�a. ,L„2 en.�e tN —Z
6 E O C C V !� N G V. 4 L a W 5-s-54,2-
O. y C CT y
G Ode^" b= bN.'� N yY0 SauiG 'O+ L�"'p >p °d..l AaF d y NFF 0C
d � OO1L
^ Nr. LA y w +Sdpy 401E At�. G AC9 QC 0a cggd. �..G.dj
0 C y M r u N d A d � Cq C 6 0 a C A> C E!�
o A u O.O a. G L, y
d
Nd a
=M Vy.
'OaNE • yV' 0.G n �> A EdC +CU a duq�F.. ^wy G�NOC rp ~np
ro O d d d A'C P.
ua
d a ee a ° ti a's u °y e.>1eu v °6o >%yna-
CErnc qt n d� 40 AD a.-L
U 9C d ... A U y O d d A U M 4 u
K 'a 6L6 �N6 1�M.t FA Z.2 iRa Not dU .0���nYN�01 +H tiV >dN GD.y L.
I�M�{NGA 1:.r Ai AR
J_ 3a
11
•a a
o e
u ^r
a' p
L
_
O L. of dCt
'9a°
a
G b
64 C
g L
C
w q-
ra�
=p
�a
L
LNa
«�
np •
A^
PLOT O�pO�W C
cv
u.L dV
a r
mS •� C
• LyQq
O
x
W
N (G
L'
L
y
L
O A
q W
•,. a d ovac�°
.... >
0
L d 0
q O t
L O
6 Y
dA
N
b V
d ^a
N
d t .a
L
EnE
G
A a
• d {.
3a
�9.0. Nwy.
Ob�N
LNn
NC
U E.N
tOYt
Y
^ur
O.GONC -.
O°
9 yN a^
GJ °emu
O
'O PqU
U61
O
.°�
NO NNO �d9
^d Tr.'
NJA
i
cC
my I
n 0
NO
iL
O
a. ap
NOo N%
r L
d ° «
O'Q Or° L
WL_nNgp iy
0 9 0•
pcm
..°.
EL. vA €�
Tz
o9LQ0
L «v
. q
yt
gtTC q. a.
•^q
Lr
6.O 0•
yo:a
01U CC®
ay
S
tLY�
daC
�.
yN.
�O �°
Nq:LLy C.� N y
�•N L.
O.'L
N�yN
•AUN
N a
LV^
yI
L.�r
`yN d°
Yet CIT�NNr
a.Cb
b
aE�y
AV Ca
O.
T_TI
T� qbd
G aGipp NG .°.•
-
D• '^�
NLN
g ny �.
Lam° T ~C
N° O
�^ k l
H
� L A b
N i D• T L
= G -.
b d C C U
•' ^L,,r
�lic ml
LCN
�ca
pbo Na
G. 6
a�q. ^o
CO.L.L Ut
nrAU�
^t
�C
If�AL`
•q..
-Ea
E.a
d.«
dE �
>.
H-
6 N^
6 vpi
S N O H
K N u
.17
G. 6 N6A
^
Y H
Ui
k-.
•a a
o e
u ^r
a' p
L
«�
A°1c
'9a°
a
da>
S.
G
64 C
g L
C
w q-
LC16
Ny
�L
�a
CcO OtVd
..,�6..G.. y.p
vO
6
'�yd
y �
GL
Y q •N•i
�.q
L
71
q d
Z . ..r �
+ O C
6.^ 6.
N
oN c
qa
oy
o
83-1.%
K+L+N O.
Kwo.m
rD n.
06
to 6
C
N^ +p
C
��
N2
v
tpLi
6d
OG^'.
CcO OtVd
..,�6..G.. y.p
Aq
Id
y,'Ld
WH
O16 •�
o
83-1.%
U
d
d
c N
A
U Y
O
N
N
•^ g
A
u1 ° O a
A
.. °°c
v°
Lv
c
NL
p
Nby
�y
u
a Acy
tLjO^ V .j
L
y
N
zyLe
Pd
Gp60 eat:
oY
iv
LG
o
.-=a
y M •
cd
N
L.�r
oM
Odg9
^LL
a
V-
L °
6.a C1
°�•�
du.
NZ, NV
Ej.
yaO
LOIN up
•Nn b
QOM
o OL � N.
�Q Or�q
O
u•'il
n•W
yC
t
«,^
a'. ^-
0 N V � O.'
^ YOC
p. .a
�lic ml
LCN
C'
ay°
p.Yd°
oc
6Ut�Y
aN
.de
Nom' N
a' �qvo
d q ^Ly
O
> KoN
tl
6
O
ia`ON KY
N fh
K9
f
CL
1�0 N'�.A
N
CC d
6G6
b
.17
G. 6 N6A
^
Y H
Ui
W6ny Nye.
N
M I
9 ^¢ a
AALL
L ^L
• A
^LLC
T9
L O
Wrn 9 WL U.q
^ ^U OyU
w .0
V O�••c•
CaN
E •M a
G.
G> f
CD•
LL V L
VV W
O
`^ c C
jJ �M
mEE S e G
O(iCi
C N JNJ T�
Tm �� ti o g E •. tu. d
nN
6�'
�qE
�aE
=LY
'•
qq
C'c^b
C
c N J Y Y
YNbL
4N6
Sy
U i•y0.
dEU
Y��.
L O
-z
d�L6itl CpigE O
•
HST
C ?W
E
�.N. Y
b�A �.•
N'^OG Iii
W
O ^yO
0.
3NVI. YW..b�. bY. �� 9
C� y N
�L
vLW•.
Z
}!
� N
a
A¢O
U..a r W.y.
°=
L�FNF
y. G O H
Y
6 '� b
o u N
b'•gsa • m
A.
f'• L A Y N y v d C ^ L
•��
°u °uo_a
^
•''2
i
Yam
^V
R
LG]
E>
C q
WLtc
y 0 u y
O
6. W. d y LL E Y W q.
�
LOS
GUN
WOO
S•L�
.+ N
yyO
U.
uE
c
JCL J
N.py O
CNL
rL�
=4tN
py
T^
m C�u ^L b ^W
y�y 4gGyV �N
O _LL aS.cb p U
�_��V.
GS^
NS>
C
N > b
c
N
d y
•9
> b N
C. 6
0 0.
O g
U ,4 C V
C
L v Y
f•
Sby.
9WU W Ea wY N yL
OW�
b
.1
Vq
WU2T
d`o v
C 9L
ggS
NES.s °v.
u L u
WGC m
€cam
LfN
u�o
@@ L N •
Mgt •rly Gd l
LL N
n.COh O
i
_
nLEW
Uiwid
n6uG
E
bEMLy
N�m
J
6.rb =
N.>
G
d�V
LA
^^ c 61 b y y
t W N
i�NY. yu fiW CC
91a
o
q O� ]•
9
=
'
O
L y
O�9L O LNG. C Y
O
r NVb
FQ L•+
ii i G
S LLN6
r
rb. .fin
W 9 2 T
HiJW:w
W
•� + T J W t O G Y b O d r
6p.6�t�vVi d+c•oMWG N 6Va
0
�`aiW
m
S
v
9 ^¢ a
AALL
C C 6•
VV
^
` V y O
L O
:13
w .0
V O�••c•
6660
NY
GAG
YWAY
6�'
Cz Y G
C
MW
c
'•
qq
C'c^b
C
u
YNbL
4N6
Sy
L L
6^ n
W
G p L V n
Uq ^.
x v L•
Y Y
v
u.Wi
CC
Y b
--t
wr
u ...
b L^
D C G N N^
q o:.o
�6�C.rA
i 2
vVi
"
^.
>p = 'vYwpi
°u °uo_a
^
•''2
i
Yam
^V
•,.
W
CNyu•
NUL
�pL`�.;^
>
qp
W� r•WL^.q
m E=
d9E
f
y'u a�LN
N > b
c
N
d y
•9
> b N
C. 6
0 0.
O g
U ,4 C V
=LOG
L J
_
Q' C
O
y
b
•LU`
M
� L TOt � OI
y N Y
v oU
N W
Y c
y
L N
=
n.COh O
i
y
�<
A N^
dnC
�9C
O.
6
q E 4 E
u
T�q.
4:
Ls YT,^c
5—:;4
_o
o
y L
yea
9
=
N.y°
aW M i
p
�S sir
`¢^
m
0
�`aiW
Nw-g
^,ugei
5.51 =moo.
p OT
ota Lm
L O. L.
y Tb
d.E a `
LWti E.
aF
N
]
O LbC
sO.t
ofw
CON
w+�YC
a
'.O qO
�.G NMm O
Ya Nom^
O WW
O
T.W qLL
N
O ^O
. d.p
uLL ^
Cy Tc
q Y
L v
O. G^
^
b
oE
p.
eG O1
L =WO
r ^O c
•' W
by �~
p' M
W
pVA
O
.• VCL•
aLM
y^ d 0 L O^
aty. LL Ld
W
LV W
d
6—
6
nM
.n> ..
MEQ Y
Y
J ^3q
D
t.
•�
Ld
L.6C
qJ 2
Z q
.0 O.
CD
�� CC
q Pty � '
yoL
.. 1
y,
_
{ CQ q a
N � •
aA y
L ^
N
dN
a c
n'
vWv
Y
cE
.w rno
V
dAN
i . 1
v d ^L
P
° L. �d
n
I"
°
d
Otl6
�d
..a
r"3
n�V
'�
^a: p,o~;o
_
E » y
y d
da'L.
p.,
CL
p
Eo
L
Y yan
C
. ^^
C
E W 4 E 9
YI
L
N
1.-
O. =
L' y
nA
d
` �PJ 1.i »+
d
LYw� av
OA
Y
_
d y.n
»nt5E
•+
aq+p-
CAOa
A
6
A
q L vgiL
ba.� L.
Nu o
O
qd OC d
O °r
M
_
•->XN Nui }.L.ti. €Y
Y
t
12
p�w oP
qE nq
so
u -Pex
a++a
tZ...
6 ouuo v11`e
O
o f
-QO zz
LCD
2
W
N
~I (
n1 Q
I I
NI
b
(
1�
I
ad
GC
PO C a Lpq
PLp9Y
O�
O�Y .
Ta
$ u°i
.a.i�.4
cign u■■
cad.
^
GC
O
`
d ° p
d y Y r M O °
uN� L a01
`
P O
° A °
as p1 P.
_
Z7- S d 6 C
L a
d=
O Y G 6 Y^. `•..
p
�:
g N 9 r
C C
E N q
a u A �
6C
60� C�
�a.. q°
d °■
9 00
w°� a C q
��
tll �.0
N d Py
�
�9 O
°.r
O. L
i0 AY
u
^Q ii
o
•+Y
C
'L°`oo
n n
N-, Z
° o
uv
qL... o.
Ep
yO
O
a v
^
a
N6 S°1 C.
6
`ypp
N�f 4� D YO
q 6
N.0 C.N. = N
^p
En
y S .
Gd9 pQ •
d p N
:n O^ A
Y C
CN
~ -e u
»C
uq E Y y.
09LLL
p
non
-.
° e °u -o 'Jg- ° L
nO
n °P
E 00
a 'O y.^CG
,
C.
°H�Er
Ce
rl" d 06�. P q q
V. O
O1 y. �gp
N Cp Y O
^+^Ca
o 6
C G
C O Lp
aN.
G y 9
» a
p M A L Y s a •`
01
^� G •+
° u y K
O V L N.
r d D L
P t
p
d Ep d 0
N`4'.
r
<gg6i
N f 7
CtA E...V
is
61d
WNp
W4Jfi �n
O!�°I Q++ 4O tPU
!�O
q
,p
Y
6�
C4
14
J
`
J
3s
O
Z
N
U
a
•n
O
S
d
N�� d
�L �
Y
d
C C
C
•a • a
.� -
2 •�
-
S i
II
.r
r
� L
°
CO -•-
c G
N 2
S
q �'
ZU
v
qz
L
xN
D•
r
O
i m N o u
u
o
m A n Y
Y A
y.a o
C c
y A
N O
^ d q
6
s.
Y
y
v
u'o G G
y n
a° y A
N a 7 u V y
^ T
� W
u,tY c
N 2
y
Q•�� .° �+
v O�
g
y N W qsL, O 22, ^ tl
c y 3,
c -5:z °
A n
N
•G
v
Bey m
o.
qq��
a� u
v >u
n�
pp u
°1vi Ne .,c�
yt Y o. m
2sYO Sv.
na
N
V W
< O
°ca
6,prc^
>
o�°.�
NE`s
�trr
�oo�
—c`Y
or a"•.
.accts
^yA
�
i°.
.�;c 'o n. ��'�
p
EL �d
yy �. A u. a. c
Tq� ui ro a. m
ruY
ia.a�
u
n.
qAn
oN� a �v
.°•. i
uavr ++ c
6g
Y L d
NR
Q
r0�.=+ND
1W� 6U 4r
Ww w{O.LU S.G �JO K W
� b
�.
m
Ol
•-1 � •� ti
r til �I til
0
u
O �
G
0
L c
,r E
01
A G
C G
Y J
O Ia
0 0 •
Si
9 y C G i
EE
u Elq Y G
L
L d n N O
n d t Y C
r y E N
inom+
r
C 6 L N
C
Z p p
a'
Yoo
C > L
v=Ni q n C
A
O L ^W
N ^ Y
6
V Q L N V
LA
1
1
Y
i y p G
y
C
C
Z c
�
Y
"cam
u
S
q �'
ZU
v
E d d c
O:r
L
xN
D•
r
O
y
V
O
N O
^ d q
y
pip a d
6 n
L V N 6
G}
F
^
�Oy
g r
� W
Y E
A n
W
N
V W
< O
^
Nc oo
N Y
w
7g
np
= pf
E
n.
W�
Y L d
Yo
G�
Q
N J
••
sc
Nd.
`Ep.N
SV
C
o¢
OpC
N 3
y:
Lim
cv u~ Nu qam N.p
N Yvr
L� �
N 2^
Cai
v
=o .- -e
6A. <'QV
N
W2. L.
cv ZN
L1 RIq Np�
fiy
<L
ce
LOit
N
1•!
0
u
O �
G
0
L c
,r E
01
A G
C G
Y J
O Ia
0 0 •
Si
9 y C G i
EE
u Elq Y G
L
L d n N O
n d t Y C
r y E N
inom+
r
C 6 L N
C
Z p p
a'
Yoo
C > L
v=Ni q n C
A
O L ^W
N ^ Y
6
V Q L N V
LA
1
1
6 n
� W
H
W
N
0
u
O �
G
0
L c
,r E
01
A G
C G
Y J
O Ia
0 0 •
Si
9 y C G i
EE
u Elq Y G
L
L d n N O
n d t Y C
r y E N
inom+
r
C 6 L N
C
Z p p
a'
Yoo
C > L
v=Ni q n C
A
O L ^W
N ^ Y
6
V Q L N V
LA
1
1
1:5
__
= V
Au
1`i'.
ym
ad
O
oC
•.r qp
°
;O
CY
r d'l•
Cy_Tpp
N
N
4
v
L��
i
C pp • N A
M
C
L
^
W
a
N q
b 6
AS L c9
Y
VQ
..•
N.9
^ O• G 2L S A
L
W C r bq� O
M N ?•
N u u^
d
•..`.'
L
ow n
qO y.N `�
qOy
by
Cy
�U`•�
aq+
O.
CI
L
L P
1
Y
O• � L d6 f
d.6 O N
^
_ v
"o
O
L
N Y
G q
S O
�W YO.V N
O y d
$ G9
y4
M
�.°i
CQ
dY0
^ y M
Lu
M
q =Z.s
L
d
C N
�6
M
O
`` O
qAC L� u
960..
N
NCyd
u d
'Opd
r
uN
2�
NA LS l� C N^ L v
d^
°e• a2
a� dH
6
to
�t C>
rd�
? .q
O�N
•N.•m Cgi q
O
�^L„ ^i rr.0 Td>•
CO
NO GN
V-�Qa.
Ly
20 q
4
OTC CY Cd
6 O•
4
2-4 •
�
6� C o
6
104
L N
N••
d
ue
L ��•L.•
dO
t o
q 2 N
� L:r.
L:.
qCO
9 • YM L N
d V L N
� Sr
4 ^
d
QW
q
yOj
Q
od
S cc M
UA
Qc` �4d
d �
1
.009 q•.•Y QL
y b
`9•
v.
•O
YO.d QOM bL
r ^L QpN 4N
JId
q
O
L•-C'
V2^
d� U
a o
v b>
O.w
(
CL
b
1N0
d
+Oi9•r
Q..•O.
y p
� 7 G7 OWN SA N Y.6
c
Q6 1-�
6JtOJQ
YI
o
II
•
• C .
a
i I
M
4
v
L��
i
C pp • N A
M
C
L
^
W
t' 2
V Oab .�� 10e
b 6
AS L c9
Y
N
..•
.. V
^ O• G 2L S A
� y
^
N u u^
d
Y
L
ow n
qO y.N `�
qOy
by
Cy
�U`•�
aq+
O.
CI
fir.•.
dN
�S
a
uV1p•J
..NO.
_ v
"o
d
y
b"•.L. �
.p oN
a
L
M
�.°i
CQ
EO
SLLR Si
Lu
M
q =Z.s
•O
V
�6
M
O
`` O
qAC L� u
960..
N
NCyd
Nd
t..
20 q
4
OTC CY Cd
6 O•
90 •
S•" `
q
W
104
L N
N••
d
4.L
Y
dO
t o
U V .�
b C t qY
O,
OST 1 GO
L:.
qCO
p^
`�O
d
QW
q
yOj
M Z
irL
S cc M
UA
Qc` �4d
d �
1
�9 �
Z.lz
^�
`9•
v.
V
N �'•4 r
YO.d QOM bL
r ^L QpN 4N
JId
q
O
L•-C'
V2^
d0
FM
°�Y
O.w
N
IN
14 !
b
R
E-
r
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
BY:
SUBJECT:
V111 WX 11AP1V11V %. UkdtUYlV1VVK
STAFF REPORT
June 12, 1985
Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
Rick Gom;z, City Planner
Curt Johnston, Associate Planner
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 11915 -2 -
RODERT90N HOM - The deve opment o condominium units
on 10 70 acres of land in the Medium Residential
District (8 -14 du /ac), located at the southeast corner of
Arrow Route and Turner Avenue - APN 209- 091 -11.
I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION:
A. Action Requested: Approval of a revised Subdivision Map,
architecture, site plan, and issuance of a Negative
Declaration.
B. Purpose: Construction of 150 condominium units.
C. Location: Southeast corner of Arrow Route and Turner Avenue.
0. Parcel Size: 10.7 net acres.
E. Project Density: 14 du /ac.
F. Existing Zoning: Medium Residential (8 -14 du /ac).
G. Existing Land Use: Vacant, vineyard.
H. Surroundin Land Use and Zoning:
North - Vacant (condos approved, TT 12040), designated Medium
Residential (8 -14 du /ac).
South - Small lot single family subdivision under
construction (TR 11915 -1), designated Medium
Residential (2 -14 du /ac).
East - Deer Creek Channel, designated Flood Control; small
lot, single family subdivision being construction (TR
12525), Medium Residential (8 -14 du /ac).
West - Neighborhood Market, designated General Commercial;
Single family subdivision, and Low Residential (2 -4
du /ac).
ITEM K
PLANNING CO, "KISSION STAFF REPORT
Tentative Tract 11915 -2 - Robertson
June 12, 1985
Page 2
LA
I. General Plan Designations:
roject ite Medium 'um Residential (4 -14 du /ac)
North - Medium Residential
South Medium Residential
East - Medium Residential
West - Commercial, Low Residential (2 -4 du /ac)
J. Site Characteristics: The site is currently a virayard and
s ro pmodera Fly o the south. There are no existing
structures or mature trees.
K. Project Details- The project consists of 16 two -storf
buildings with a total of 150 stacked flats. The units range
frThe70otal open space ( bforothe project quals ft. 5(two-
bedroom). of
the site.
II. ANALYSIS:
A. General: This applicant is proposing to revise the site plan
an a evations as shown in Exhibits "G -1" through "G -4 ". The
original tract map, 11915 -2 (Crowell), was approvaad on October
26, 1983 (G -Y). The new elevations are identical to the
Project under construction on the east side of Vineyard between
Arrow and Foothill (Tract 12721).
B. Design Review Committee: The major tonics discussed by the
Design Review Lamnittee included: open space, perimeter wall,
treatment of the side elevations, location and enhancement of
the recreation building design, and exterior colors. In
response to the Committee's concerns, substantial revisions to
the site plan were prepared to expand the central open space
area and create a more significant greenway spine. The side
elevations were also revised with the addition of furred -out
treatment around the windows. The Committee recommended
approval of the revised 'plans with the following conditions:
1. Provide three exterior color schemes.
2. The pilasters in wrought iron portion fence shall have a
plaster finish with a decorative brick or block cap.
3. The use of heavy wood trellis to enhance the recreation
building, particularly the front elevation.
4. Provide trellis work over trash enclosures for shading.
5. Final design of the carports to be submitted for review and
approval by the Planning Division prior to issuance of 1
building permits.
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
Tentative Tract 11915 -2 - Robertson
June 12, 1985
Page 3
C. Environmental Assessment: Part I of the Initial Study has been
completed by the applicant. Staff completed Part ?I, the
Environmental Checklist, and determined that with the
appropriate Conditions of Approval the project will not create
significant environmental impacts. An acoustical analysis was
submitted which ind'icates future noise levels along Arrow Route
will be 65 CNEL. To mitigate the impact, the buildings at the
northeast corner of the site were turned 90 degrees with the
patios facing away from the street. In addition, a solid wall.
(versus wrought iron fence) with a variable setback is required
along Arrow Route. Construction details of t" wall will be
based on a final acoustical analysis subm: ted prior to
issuance of permits.
III. FACTS FOR FINDINRS: This project is consistent with the General
Plan and Development Code. The project will not be detrimental to
adjacent properties or cause significant adverse environmental
impacts. In addition, the proposed use, building design, and site
plan, together with the recommended Conditions of Approv =' are in
compliance with all applicable City Standards and- Ordinar•
IV. CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised as a public hearing
in The Daily Report newspaper, the property posted, end notices
sent to all property owners within 300 feet of the subject site.
V. RECOMMENDATIOV, "' is recommended t.iat the Planning Commission
conss ear all - -input and elements of this project. if after such
consideration the Commission can support the Facts for Findings and
Conditions of Approval, adoption of `he attached Resolution and
�suance of a Negative Declaration would be appropriate.
ct submitted,
Rick
Citv
:ns
Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Location Map
Exhibit 'B" - Detailed Site Plan
Exhibit "C" - Grading Plan
Exhibit "D" Landscape Plan
Exhibit "E" - Building Elevations
Exhibit "F" - Tentative Tract Map
Exhibit "G" - Previously Approved Plans
Previously Approved Resolution with Conditions
initial Study, Part II
Resolution of Approval with Conditions
LA.
v
NORTH
CITY Qr, ITE \I �L 1 -�� _�
IAA CHO CUCANIONGA TITLE - LDCA" fl4kl IJ'�i
N
PLANNING DIVISION L. ° -11BIT -iN _. SCALE •
�� I
CITY OF
RANCM CUCAMONGA
Fi.AMUNG DIViSON
V �I
NORTH
IMNI. 'TT 119 tv -z
TITLE. d _ - PLAA J
EXHIBIT: JS SCALD
CITY OF
RANCHO CUTCANIONGA
PLANNING DJVISM
V �
NURTH
ITENI.- TO WC
TITLE:
EXHIBIT- SCALE-
k`�
Em
- w
STAIR END ELEVATION
FRONT ELEVATION MUCCO
REAR ELEVATION
TYPICAL LOW -Iypr
CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAlVUNGA
PLANNING DIVISUN
ITEM.- 1-11151S'-
TITLES
EXHIBIT= SCALE-
A- - ?
V
NORTH
m
r,
rYl 1 M i YQn
b`�YYw�rs vY.d lrw�rnY lYn♦M YUwlwren YYY.w�,
v,wYllnr MYYr rlYUrw.rYr���+.wwlw
�/Y�/jKWO � MCIMaf� I!
�g>mYl�s.se
air1�M. Ma.► e1e -sus
FOF3 OONDOMlNIUM Ri�O�
'TA. 320"
Jyr.)
0
r-
p
i
;o
V
NORTH
' CITE' OF ITFNI: ,._I 1171 S--
z
RANCHO CUCAN ONGA TITLE: V6- - M. �
PLANNING DIVMN EXHIBIT - ._ SCALE=
��.
Szr� 5ft�5 � 4_ _ i i t' ; _ i i _ � �• eZeJt
►- s �'cieKsi' i �1f �° 1 r �} �. F � � i — rr IZSZ.S-
�
a � � �. ✓ ' r'� -. -=� 111. i l� }�(" 2
� _ r
ill � . � • � •-_- -f � Y' � � �. ��.�J i� T � 4 ,�� I U,
Il i lam. —� . �' +� � ._' u SfS � {� �: ! `• � 1 I ,�
c:.. ,
~'•-- ;"-�'-
1 �'yf
- � i•• � i �`� � .r- � y � I� '--,.J ....,' ,'v � f_-V.t G�`� } 5r
. 1
1: d.Vv gw �i�= gJrctQ
-•7'j- tlRds i V �!
:FORTH
CITY OF yy � �� ���/'�A7� �/'��
R1 NCFD C�LICATMOltGA
PLA.NNM DrVISION
ITEM. 'i'Tdt4t�' —Z
TITLE: j 111 q1
EYHIBIT - I _ SCALE:
'ljr �i:%rsfiT.i �' =_ f / sti; ::_•.�_�:ts.,: -.�; -'� j�f...s'i..n�r -.� f =ate
Wil
�.._.t ... _
r c�- iiii•[ +-[+iiii• � -�j�ii � ;, - -ii - i' -i��- ��i i_i_ - iiii'�'i, -r�
11t111 t[t�111 '� �j�'Il'��FIWI •tLL'll V IlWlll
CITY OF ITEM- - Z
RANCHO C;UCA. 10,VG .
f PLANNIN U DIVISION SCALE-
u
KI
aulLoiNG
C MY OF
ink RANCHO cUGVMCjNCAA
PLANNING DIVISIOIN
ITENI � ! S
/pmt;
TITLE=
EXIiI BIT- �_� SCALE °""'
RESOLUTION NO. 83 -13? A
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANT, iNG COMMISS13N OF THE CITY, OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, CONDITIONALLY APPROVING THE
AMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 11915 -2
WHEREAS, Tentative Tract Map No. 11915 -2, hereinafter "Map" submitted
by Crowell Int:_stries, applit; ant, for the purpose of subdividing the real
property situated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino,'
State of California, described as the development of 150 dwellings on 10.69
acres of land in the "M" District, located at the southeast corner of Arrow
Route and Turner Avenue into 3 tots, regularly came before the Planning
Commission for public hearing and action on February 8, 1984; and
WHEREAS, the City Planner has recommended approval of the Map subject
to al conditions set forth in the Engineering and Planning Division's
reports; and
WHEREAS, said map was conditionally approved by Resolution 83 -132 on
October 26, 1983, said conditions remain unchanged and in effect; and
WHEREAS, the Plannis+.. Commission has read and considered the
Ergineering and Planning Division's reports and has considered other evidence
presented at the public hearing.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga does resolve as follows;
i
SECTION 1; The Planning Commission approves the modifications to
Tentative Tract No. 11915 -2 based on the following findings:
(a) The tentative tract is consistent with the General
Plan and specific plans;
(b) The design or improvements of the tentative tract is
consistent with the General Plan and specific plans;
(c) The site is physi:ally suitable for t" type of
development p"oposed;
(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 he =lth problems;
(f) Thy- design zf the tentative tract will not conflict
with any easement acquired by the public at large,
now of ret'prd, for access through or use of the
ID property 4hin the proposed subdivision.
Ilgt S- �
t
Resolution No.
1
.:.
Page 2
(g) That this project will not create adverse impacts on
the environment and a Negative Declaration is
issued.
SECTION Z', The Planning Commission approves the modification
to
Tentative Tract Map No. 11915 and finds that all conditions contained
in
Resolution 83 -132 for the tentative approval shall remain in full force
and
effect.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 8th DAY OF FEBRUARY, 1984.
PLANNIN OMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY Y
•Denm
Stout,hairman
�;
ATTEST:
R)}ck GGomez, [BeputySecretary
I, Rick Gomez, Deputy Secretary of the Planning Commission of the C' ty
of
Rancho'Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was &1y
and
regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of
the
City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regct'ar meeting of the Planning Commission held
on the 8th day of February, 1984, by the following vote -to -wit:
k
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: REMPEL, MCNML, JUAREZ, STOUT
I�
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER
I
1
i
F
d
c
RESOLUTION NO. 83 -132
A RESOLUTION OF.THE PLANNING COMMr5SI0N OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, CONDITIONALLY APPROVING
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 11915
WHEREAS, Tentative Tract Map No. 11915, hereinafter "Map" submitted
by The Robert Mayer Corporation, applicant, for the purposE of subdividing the
real property situated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San
Bernardino, State of California, described as a residential subdivision for a
total planned development of 44 zero lot line homes and 150 townhomes rn 17
acres in the R -3 /PD zone, located on the east side of Turne••, between Arrow
Route and 26th Street into 48 lots, regularly came before the Planning
Commission for public hearing and action on October 26, 1983; and
WHEREAS. the City Planner has recommended approval of the Map subject
to all conditions set forth in' the Engineering and Planning Division'sa
reports; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Comr,'"ssion has read and considered the
Engineering and Planning Division's reports and has considered other evidence
presented at the public hearing.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga does resolve as fellows:
SEcrION 1: The Planning Commission makes the following firdings,in
regard to Tsntative :.act No. 11915 and the Map thereof:
(a) The tentative tract is t.nsistent with the General
Plan and specifi- plans;
(b) The design or improvements of tam 'antative tract is
consistent wit!: the General Plat: 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 wixdlife or their habitat;
le).The tentative tract is not likely to cause serious
public health problems
�F) The design of the tentative tract will not conflict
with any easement acquired by the public at large,
now of record, for access '•hrough or use of the
property within the proposed subdivision.
��r
Resolution No.r
Page 2
(g)
That this project will n)t create adverse impacts on
the environment and a Negative Declaration is
issued.
SECTION 2: Tentacive Tract Map No. 11915, a copy of which is
attached hereto is hereby approved subject to all of the following conditions
and the attached Standard Conditions
I
PLANNING DIVISION
1.
The conditions of approval for Planning Areas A & C
of Tentative Tract 11915, as listed in Resolution
82 -27, sheik not apply," and are superseded by the
foll,�ng conditions and attached conditions.
2.
I
Dense landscaping and terming, including vines and
thorny shrubs, shell be planted against all
perimeter r=ills tmd fences.
3.
Access to the Deer Creek Charnel, as shown on the
approved site plans, shall be provided ir. accordance
with City Council Resolution No. 81 -93. Details
shall be included io the final construction pac., ge
to the satisfactio, of the City Planner.
4.
Details and typical elevations of wall and fences `
s'iall be "Included in the final- construction
package. Perimeter walls and fences shall be
decorative and include such featw-es as columns,
texture treatment and trim cap.
5.
The townhomes shall be provided with tr.es between
garage doors to the satisfaction of the City '
Planner.
6.
The townhomes shall include horizontal siding
materi >i on all ground floor and elevations,
7.
The townhomes shall be provided with planter boxes
on upstairs windows per approved elevations,
B.
The townhome driveways shall be provided with
textured .paving crasswalks,to the satisfaction of
the City Planner.
9.
The Lownhon,a project ertranct:s shall be provided
with security gates subject to a', roval by the
Sheriff's Department and Foothill Fire Di3trict.
F
t
Resoluticr. No.
Page 3
I
fir. �f
I
AU
10.
The zero lot 'line home front yard landscaping, and
at. appropriate iTrl4ation system, shall he installed
by the developer in accordance with submitted
plans. Said front yard landscaping shall include an
averaf.a of two fifteen gallon to ees, in addition to
street trees. The zero lot line homes shall be
provided with return fencing between each unit.
11.
The zero lot line homes shall provide a variety of
elevation treatment distributed throughout the
project.
ENGINEERING DIVISION
12.
Construction of off -site improvements beyond a phase
boundary are required at the dist--etion of the City
Engineer as needed for drainage and traffic safety
and shall be 'bonded for prior to rec3t•oation of that
phase.
13.
All median islands at the entrance of the private
access roads shall have a setback of a f�,:i,imL%I of 5
feet from the right -cf -way line.
i4.
The following street improvements beyond the ct
lines of the following perimeter street'`
required ,to the satisfaction of the City Engi
a. Turner avenue - Existing PCC pavement shall be
removed and be replaced with .asphalt concrete
pavement of minimum 6 inches thick. This` work
will be subject to credit towards System
Development fees or other reimbursement by the
City.
b. Arrow Highway any renter r;-pet - Reconstruction
or asphalt overlay ;,r 'he existing pavenent
shall b! required depending on the design to
provide standard cross siape on the
reconstreclled street.
15,
All streets within the zero lot line portion shall
have a m4ni�nuir or 50• 'oot right -of -way and shall be
dedicated to the City.
16.
All d, -fie runo "f from the project area west of
Deer conveyer directly to the Deer
Cresw..,� pied --s or existing inlets on
23th StreF..
fir. �f
83-
Resolution No . t�
Page 4 j
17. Permits will he required from San Bernardino County
Flood Control District to connect required storm
drains to Deer Creek Channel.
APPROVED AND ADOPTE.D,THIS 26TH DA's OF OCTOBER, 1983.'
PLANNIN ' MMISSION OF 145 C117 OF RANCHO CUCAMCNOA
f
By:
•Dennis L. taut, Cti rman
ATTEST • _ - --
Secretary it the Planning Commission
r,
I, JACK LAM, Secretary ,uf the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho
Cucamongj, do hereby certify that, the foregoing Resolution 'was duly and
regularly introduced, passed, and a`ioptad by the Planning Commission of the
City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a reg c1r meeting of the Plaraing Commission held
on t;e 26th day )f October, 1983, by the following vote -to wit.:
AW
AYES: CO` ril:'SIONLRS:' - REUMPEl -i MCNIEL, BARKER, JUAREZ, STOUT
NOES: COMMSSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: Co"MISSIONERS, -NONE
I;
/C;'
c.
Z
4J
U
a
A
i
d
S
O
0 0
uL•
V O
O
O N
K
O
d e
dv
v y d
P^
C i- C •-..
C
O =•
Z
r
6 P°
..•.� 0•.
L
1
d
a
a
66
_
e E
�.••?V
_ °np�
'`O.N
L00
ice` A •
9dC
L
d `
�.N_^
�.s n6
Ra
A2
C
a ydC.
�
N
...
^.
dy
EL
�Y y
.. a• ^e1
E'��
nvOi..Oi ^'
01
NAY
^ d
^
vS2
.'•
C
NY Q.0
v
V
C R G
n
••C�
V�.Gj O.L
_.O
d
NO
>
O.
uy
CO
_y
A`N
E
NO
G
^ � n
=Y`
q�9CC
7z
N
N
Y B.y Y V
p•C M M
M.N ^
^
u
Y
S w
O L
.52
Nu.�Y
'"'Oy^E
..v� Lr
Y ^ue
Y >YL. cy4
oTN@
�N`
z52
E.Ni
>E
a
>
O.y
NnN C VSY.
O•LV VO
na 0 6.N
w�iv
O C d 6
9 J •
�=
p< 0 6 y_ � � O
CN
E
O `
G
�LJ
Y
M
�� �
^~AC � ^
�^ •
�o.Yt
CO 4
°wo•6
C
w
.d. •�.e
2
�aN
N°'
X Ydi
^ d
Nu7nN
^ E
QY ? u
6+
9 u
vea
d.-.
2t FER.
< r O Y
6 0 w m d L
R Od.
6 L G
4 p Y
NQti
6 z a
< A m
^< a
f
S
O
0 0
uL•
V O
O
O N
K
O
yV•� � F „ ' J •+ N A 'Q 1!1 C • N
J� _;2C`
1/1?/.r
m
L-3
d e
dv
�•Od
Y�
ma
a
u
_
e E
a c
Zak
H
CC
Od °3
.°
�
did
G
^ � n
"' ' d A ✓ d
N
A
�•
^
Y
Ebb
nab
c
r
y"'
>qa�
d
V
EYo
� •'^Y
O
� NO r o
�3
g
01+ a
�'•L
aq
cdo Nu
d` sad
H
gg
8
N
H S
yV•� � F „ ' J •+ N A 'Q 1!1 C • N
J� _;2C`
1/1?/.r
m
L-3
� L T
•
�. O Y
A O� W�
^
O L O E Z d � O
^
VC q s t •O L
G
�q�
6�
Sx�y ✓U.CV.00 L6O S�
E
LN
O E y tl6'c Ey Lt O^. L Vj6 g4OZCpY yOp
1.
may@ R E A. yu• 6.E 2Od Ya E -�N `L.4 NU ."'
O
4 L VA 4 C
a E d i C O j L . 0 0 a
L.L .Op fOy AOV yO� °d <L Y. —U aUO 9L0
t I
r
^P GG O '� ✓+ °La0O nyP wPi
izE
d
^ Z C�Cp Ec7 ^N CZ w'Gy
° � i q� •+.. y C G L Z.
n p O p q I J
�
N
^
9 fi 0�^ .^ L 6 iJ p +4i ^. C V 9 M 2 v r U •r P p � 1 E q
Cq. .HO 4 N p0 `EE L dd .Ll L6 �Cd L
°•' ..` s. °ol ca nc �� «66p G �i� ✓�Y^' •n c°a °r6
�.
E OR
�o
oo oap -9^-Rd 'Ot o'er^ er s�b4
.w-°cq
L
P' pS wv
O
c Na LGO c _U ... Y dEH Dy ^Nv OLr.Ln
I ^.1OC
•
C a M 4
CC O O
a P
U
L m c.
V O✓ Z Y � O N V c •� O d 4 b 0 4 H. <� � d b a O p Y
Lay
p. < 4C ET 7yr^LC t N,Y
NLyO..rp— w2^ r ? 4DN
VwL92u•
LL xs
' FM O ^ LL —S Nq
4i�p FL UO. LnG
.7
YII bl
G
p
0
N
p2 a✓ 6
aY�
v ✓V ^ '
6ti
^ g= O q L4�C OL V C NY4� N L q
yy 4y
Ya a=
Huy. y'
q
p 4 a q O r S L G
E.
Nytl Ll a—. ^GEC. `q m N =.'. et
L b c^ U N
9 y H°
E -R. ^
P yu dv Gy an ¢ d.
N
U L •n
N4pm
OC an. E 2 V ✓ L O G. L
w O L qW O 6 C
LQ
Gam.
O Gq
CO C O O c� 2 < N
N
milt
G Ly
c.EY w2 O• S Y=p4 q.P.Y +U.fG.OQtl ^W�
y L O O
L y O
< 4 C y= C d d Z
—OOt
y V
✓ a i A .�— <a C t vi a U. v M w r o d
W
EE C O O R
6OV avf� �� Vu 6 SYc c• qfi O.�y. tl Q�9 L G �?
w ✓
E
Eo O
G C
�
�
�—
M� tl U Q O� p yy. w p C �. N
^ >�L L AC Cq OCR cE ✓0.� 9y.
C N 4.•
—L9°
VV t 4
jU 3 4 q c
L ct
_
O� L to 607 9
E G >
a y y ' E L n &G V w V L < L
U
r _
< °P D� y^ a2
'
L 9V.
sy
u
vo. 5 _ voy Ar °n —.ro c. aq� La y—
ow ^as
on
O I.J u
m� u a W
AWL
lip
` r 6V y vai Y Yu.A• Y U
U
J L U C p L Q nL L C L L d N -V •� J: +• — O G O
<�NL 6Y �96Yw ✓P— r. ✓.ti Cw !6 ✓ <I.i
w
C C r C 6
qCq
w n�i M Pa ~ y N 1•f
f
s = I-
MG p�F `O
EC roG a�
y
O�UO
u
C T6 i
M°
Y� Own
.OL
•• ro.
-
E 7
T�LCU
�p
ro
p
J A
� �•�u
cN 4.::
O
yqd
GL
OdR
G
Q%
•O
VtG N»
M d2 = »'C
roC ONE
u
du �
Nn G
y
~ =cc
�Tu �,N�
°a �
CVro •.� •� .
L
6ro D
wppyd
�a gtOi LCw
d
°_
=9
✓
Y
T
N y
b
g0�•CIC
R 4 E
.L.Cw.�
4 L Lr b^
w cLi G u >•
N6t c b C` •
pC Tu d
Y .� u L
Vat
MO.
°q0
� O W�
wOm N
L i » �
`� OAR
- hb.
°Y��°
ro�N.NO
wyy> �Rp
f1.0 y0 � OC>
U • d >�
~�` �a41 Lt�a
ON N
°dM.. 6'L1•
NL 7
O JyyC
j
•IIYn rou OfC .RFC
fJy C.,w6 JZ O,
v n"u
SMS C. •1.
G ^Y 'A.
,
C ^'
°Q
»p. ro
9
HE y
..
!
<�m-E oz
N ti b
<Y Lam F•Na u�
nG�
v�Nro =M� JLGr
q.�4.�
6Lm Dv -
W
I
e
ANIL
b�o�
dq Vr.q
�_� oa nc so o
C;
OIL
cc
V •L L
ticrnoo
�^
O u Ct �
N G 6
y .� A� O. µ
• ✓ ma y
oQv 2tiN 5k G M
p z
N C
V yi
�
as
RYV•OibL
�u
V V V b��
AL <c CC OpES�N
roQ• �i�
N
O.•
L °CQ L°
'� tL�pdiCI
MOMy�O
�v
Oq
ro q 6C
O�6C
�
y
u
O T
�44.
o .i °N.
L�:p. " ^'d C.NL
�
�• cLU OC.Ni
I
••
OVA
J aCy.e-pN
d
b°
6C
EJ
�6
E°
O
i�.
L.
i
RO L
N Lb nal�VUQ
v° O s Y 0.° d ro O d
C D\
R •ss >o.0 bq
d
a �.
�.
roCn
•Lbj
u�
•La _^ �'F L.=+
o
�- V f
T p ° yUf�. rY <�
r
b
� � Cam.
V
_
S,s
=SLY gLys . CJ°p0
Lap•
QyyG�q
a°�'p,
°w o 'y
vsgz
oLp Nc RJ ate:°. `�
R °ro
w - un�N °N
`I
uL
C. yq
CF �T�
Pp
F m yp d�
3b �xC °R�BT
p•
p^
d
L C GCpp
RC »N.V.`b
511-
•• O
w A d L V
� J
N
�6 V d L N
J+
y 0
~N E
D\ N C Y
Cd O.o
Y
° J L O O• :V V
.p O ° .o TJ
• E N n
�e d L d b
S E Obi G�
tl NNN�
Of�L
R
S2 Y.l Ui •
R
••a w ZV
-8v
d C N.
CR NO�yY y-
.".55
t 6 9 r 0 N^ b C
< N 6 ro W CI » U F S N C» ro
M t»
4.b0 4 N 7 N f• N
AWS
E
-�r
T I
E
.1 T.
9. v
ra
R C
z
Z rn
UIN
tit.O
T El! 2
1 S-4
9
IN 11'
g
. 5 t
Is
97-
Zj
by
79
.9
j:5
15
C
Sc
i
kzz
X Z
g.
oL 9*
Z.
uw
-�r
T I
E
t
T
ra
z
Z rn
UIN
tit.O
T El! 2
1 S-4
9
IN 11'
NI
-�r
t
T
1 S-4
9
-
t
2
. 5 t
Is
97-
Zj
by
79
.9
j:5
15
Sc
g.
oL 9*
Z.
uw
-'2 t :5
2
EL' .5
3
&
ic
-all
Iz
yy
N
Q
Z
Y
u
m
0
i
O..
"F
VV
• T,�
d
p_
p
°N
I I
E
L„
�
C = p
m Z
•p
yo °
a N
¢ �.
I
N
u�^
�
C
E T Y
O D`m O j .•.
o
N 3
t .
a n °rG d� 5g
t
O� d 4
S
Y
U 4)
J
°•Y
LOY7
d d O y Car 4 C C q N S
'd6 92 d.
C C
t
Z C q 1
ET u BE yW
O u
E m�
c
lxl ly, C
L�.°.ir
•69�
N
YOE Dn it d�� E`
d�6�4 6u.`.. 6 «L W3.
E' SD ° a VV
E
°
!�
m O�
al
Z
yd E
a « ^9 t,G.
9d4 GC y
pv
u
EO ^p
Lo
G ��
�:
«
y Y
� L
= d
�.
Q c ^ Y •La. M d 9 L
T
E
V O q
-
3
L
Y O
C u. C W
S O C O
l L
6
`Q,
d y v
1 d
+ d
GLiO
.raN
O o�
aq.
d y�� LQ VLF
,Z; 0:5
V.BV
V
y C ^
^6 00 d?9aaL
GNy
��l.MO
N m
dN
ad
O4.
�:
cs�• «
c N
ahE
c o ^r v—c
V�
Oa
v
.2.5a
G
N Zvi
d E
Couuo o+ ° s
0. C
y u
p
D
9.. LN YV
rt
U C T d« c
rz ,� •.. J L 2 O
E T9
d
n uW Ndv. cam. i V n J N
UM
� � u
a 's um � t•o u° # a•� u
•-
<�
.G a ooE a`i w.lN «t+. 4it' `Na 6^
Ask
0
• • \ tp
` oc N�•rd o.oas 'a u � o o`oa a�
g vds.� oa ' c
` O dd d0 O• d qOJ t p—� iO�TN S
� `•` Z� u — n .d.• t t G d N` i.
J� Y O `• '. " L� SJT J yOt CO N4 � U N
�Y D 14
^ O T
6 Z T 3 4 u .fi A d T C• N •td, G.0• V d O'
f <N" �C 6�U Ce E nd JJ C UL qu•.✓ r GN
N @ EEC LCD Nq
S CU�W� Ad L Va 6 Zu E
E O O
JU r C� nN TqC G✓
eJ� O <N CC�J^ NOd d <O@ E> ;S 6d �6 ^dp 6 CS... ►V a.D
EO U Ta _L TOggEq quO aW E6 QQ..O.v S•L —�.. r,` 6G yq OpO�C
O yT0 MUCH EOM. q ^W
L..p. N qdC �JnUw qal t....�._ pqT C •y° G1 UaQc N
<•'. yaC bLVt �tl V�� NW N C .^. C. OW
V r•y E N 7T �
NnY•90 <YM N05O N1JflU '6 LH 6.
U 3
y �
H�
o
z
41
U
d
•n
O
L
6.
_ of v Yo
V C °may
� V
N G
p� d YC N•Z•L N �.:�
r Y� G C W NY
L� �E� C•c i
�C d2 � .0 ° - y 9J Q•Q
d Y C L a NT Y d
6 �
Y' C C)
TT o° ap °q ea sY ut 5 v Ld o� i =1
G
!15'is'
12
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
PART II - INITInL ; =T DY'
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIS!,
DATE: i -I1(
APPLICANT:
FILI`:G DATE:.: /YLtt�. / %`/�5LOG NUMER.
PROJECT.
PROJECT LOCATION:_
1, ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
(Explanation of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required in attached
sheots).
YES MAYLE NO
3 Soils and Geology. Will the proposal have
significant results in:
a. Unstable ground conditions or in changes in
geologic relationships?
b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or
burial of th- soil?
c. Change in topography or ground surface
�i
;ontour intervals?
d. The destruction, covering or modification
.G
of any unique geologic or physical features?
-
e. Any potential increase in wind or we ;ter
Erosion r. soils, affecting eitheY -in or off
site coTlitons?
/
f. Charges in erosion siltation, or deposition?
g. Expoaure of people or property to geologic
hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mad-
slides, ground failure, or similar hazards?
14,-
h. An increase in the rate of extraction and /or
use of any mineral resource?
7G
2. Hydrolasv. Will the proposal have signif.lcant
results in:
x-
x
Page 2
r
FES MAYBE NO
a.
Ch'-ages in currents, or the course of dirc:tion
of flowing streams,
{�
i`
rivers, or ephemeral stream
channels?
b.
Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns,
or the rate and amount of surface water
runoff?
/
G
e.
Alterations to the course or flown of flood
waters?
d.
Change in the amcunt of surface wat,.r in any
body of water?
— G
e.
Discharge into surface waters, or any
alteration of surface water quality?
f.
Alteration of groundwater characteristics?
_
g.
Charge in the quantity of groundwaters,
either through direct additions or with-
drawals, or through interference rith an
aquifer?
Quality?
Quantity?
h.
The reduction in the amount of water other-
wise available for public water supplies?
I.
Exposure of people or property to water
related hazards such as flooding or seiches?
Z. Air
Quality. Will the proposal have significant
results in:
a.
Constant or periodic ail emissions from mobile
or indirect sources?
f
Stationary sources?
b.
Deterioration of ambient air quality and /or
interference with the attainment of applicable
air quality standards?
c.
Alteration of local or regional climatic
conditions, affecting air movement, moisture
cr temperature?
4. Biota
Flora. Will the proposal have significant results
in:
a.
Change in the characteristics of species,
including diversity, distribution, or number
if any species of plants?
b.
Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare
or ex 3angered species of plants?
r�
�/`
?age 3
YES
_ r
t'C
i
c. Introduction of new or disruptive species of
plants into an area?
d. Reduction in the potential for agricultural
production?
Fauna. Will tt.. proposal have significant results
in:
a. Change ir, the characteristics of speci -s,
includ ag diversity, distribution, or n=bers
of any species of animals?
b. Reduction of ttie numbers of any unique, rare
or endangered species of animals?
c. Introduction of new or disruptive species of
animals into an area, or result in a barrier
to the migration or movement of animals?
d. Deterioration or removal of existing fish or
wildlife habitat?
S. Population. Will the proposal 4.Lve significant
results in:
a. Will the proposal alter the location, di5.tri-
bution, density, diversity, or growth rate of
the human population of an area?
b. Will the p g g,
pro osal affect existing housing,
create a demand for a4ditional housing?
6. Socio- Economic 'Factors. Will tai proposal have
�i
significant results in:
a. Chanp.e in local or regional Socio- economic
characteristics, including economic or
co=excial diversity,.tax rate, and property
values?
b. Mill project costz be equitably distributed
among project beneficiaries, i.e., buyers,
tax payers or project users?
7. land Use and Plannjne Considerations. Will the
proposal have significant results in?
!'
a. A substantial alteration of the present or
iplanned
land use of an area?
b. A conflict with any designations, objectives,
policies, or adopted plans of any governmental
entities?
c. An impact upon the qulaity )r quantity of
existing consumptive E;r nail- consumptive
recreational opportunities?
?age 3
YES
_ r
t'C
i
at
Page 4
YES ?_4Y3S ND
B. Tran3Dortation. Will the proposal have significant
results in:
a.
Generation of substantial additional vehicular
movement?
b.
Ei_ecrs on exiNtj..;g streets, or demand for
new street corstrcction?
C.
c.
Effects on existing parking facilities, r
demand for new parking'?
d.
Substantial im�:as.t upon e- ;isting :transporta-
tion systems?
e.
Alterations to preaent pattern; of cir.;ula-
tion or movement of people andJor goods?
f.
Alterations to or effects on present and
potential water- borne, raal, mass transit or
air traffic?
g.
Increases in traffic hazards to motor vehicles,
bicyclists or pedestrians ?�
{
9. Cultural Resources. Will the proposal have
+/(
significant
results in:
I
a.
A disturbance to the integrity of archaeological,
paxeontological, and /or historicel resources?
10. Health, Safety and Nuisan,e Factors. Will the
proposal
have significant results in:
a.
Creation of any health hazard or potential health
hazari?
i
b.
Exposure of people to potential health hazards?
i
—�
A risk of explosion or release of hazardous
substances in the event of an a _ident?
-.
an increase in ti? rr=ber of Individuals
•C
^r sPac,'.es of vector or pathenopenic
j
organisers or the exposure of people to suca
orga ,isms?
j
e.
Increase in existing noise levels?
f.
Exposure of people to potential!:/ dangerous
noise levels?
g.
The crnation of objectionable odors?
h.
An increase in light or glare?
s
7. o genda Packet o Pale 5 of 8
Page 5
YE MAYBE VO
11, Aesthetics. Will the proposal have significant
results ins
a. The obstr--ction or degradation of any scenic
vista or view?
b. The creation of an aesthetically offensive
site?
j
c. A conflict with the objective of designated
or potential scenic corridors?
12. Utilities and Public Services. Will the proposal
have a significant need for new systems, or
alterations to the following:
a. Electric power?
b. Natural or packaged gas?
f
c. Communications systems?
�
d. Water supply?
e. Wastewater facilities?
f. Flood control structures?
g. Solid waste facilities?
"
h. Fire protection?
i. Police protection?
�.
i . School;
i-
k. Parks or other recreational facilities?
I. Maintenance_ of public..facilities, Including
roads and flood, control facilities?
.�
+
m. Other governmental s -krvices?
13. Enerev and Scarce Resources. Will the proposal
have significant results ins
a. Use of substantial or excessive fuel or energy?
b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing
sources of energy?
c. An 1- ^.cease in the demand for development of
new sources of energy?
d. An increase or perpetuation of the consumption
of non - renewable forms of energy, when feasible
renewable sources of energy are available?
—�
d. Does the project have environmental effects
which will cause substantial adverse effects
on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
II. th--- --- OF £Di['IRONMI£YTAL EVAlUAI�;�
the above (i.e., of affirmative answers to
questions plus a discussion of proposed mitigdtion measures).
u,
ate -/&04P_ Vi: i ...v
zcso. S. M+4 7gEatiu t c � rf�~
4—A= ,# 5'ov vf.> wit G 3 $v��T
Cv.VG�jF.r�/ ga. yFf�ipo/i/9,G ��l�j/QE'�' �1tiitL '�CUVST /G�(-G .�Nrl'L7St,3
�I
Page ,6
e;, Substantial depletion of
YES MAYBE a0
any nonrenewable or
scarce natural resource?
14. Mandatory Findin s 'of Si nificance.
`
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 papulation to drop
below self
sustaining levels, threaten to
eliminate a plar:
or animal community, reduce
the number or restrict thai range
of a rare or
endangered plant or animal or eliminate
important examples
of the major periods of
California history or
prehistory?
b. Does the project have the
potential to short -tern,
to the disadvantage Oflong- term,7e
environmental goals? (A
short -term impact on the
environment is one which occurs
in a relatively
brief, definitive period of time while
long-
term impacts will endure -vell into the future).
c. Does the project have impacts which are
individually limited,
but cumulatively
considerable? (Cumulatively considerable
means that the incremental effects of an
individual
project are considerable when viewed
in connection with the effects of
past projects,
and probable future projects).
d. Does the project have environmental effects
which will cause substantial adverse effects
on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
II. th--- --- OF £Di['IRONMI£YTAL EVAlUAI�;�
the above (i.e., of affirmative answers to
questions plus a discussion of proposed mitigdtion measures).
u,
ate -/&04P_ Vi: i ...v
zcso. S. M+4 7gEatiu t c � rf�~
4—A= ,# 5'ov vf.> wit G 3 $v��T
Cv.VG�jF.r�/ ga. yFf�ipo/i/9,G ��l�j/QE'�' �1tiitL '�CUVST /G�(-G .�Nrl'L7St,3
�I
Fa Page 7
t'
III. DETERMI`IATIO`i
� On the basis of this initial evaluations
f �I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect
on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
_ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant
effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect
in this case because the mitigation measures described on an
r attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE
DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED.
e
f I find the p:opoaed project MAY have a significant effect on the
` envirnment, and an E%, TRDN'MNT IMPACT REPORT is required.
t.
Date �/C Z✓ �� _
ign ure
Title
i
P
RESOLUTION N0.
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANVING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, CONDITIONALLY APPROVING
DESIG3 REVIEW AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 11915 -2
WHEREAS, Tentative Tract Map No. 11915 -2, hereinafter "Map" submitted
by Robertson Homes, applicant, for the purpose of subdividing the real
property situated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino,
State of California, des ribed as the development of 150 condominium units on
10.7 net acres of lard ik the Medium Residential District, located at the
southeast corner on Arrow Route- and Turner Avenue into 1 lot, regularly came
before the Planning Commission ?or public hearing and action on June 12, 1985;
and
WHEREAS, the City Plnner has recommended approval of the Map subject
to all conditions set fo.th in the Engineering and Planning Division's
reports; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has read and considered the
Engineering and Planning d,Yision's reports and has considered other evidence
presented at the public haring.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of thy; City of Rancho
Cucamonga does resolve as follows:
SECTION 1: The Planning Commission makes the following findings in
regard to Design Review and Tentative Tract No. 11915 -2 and the Map 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 plays
(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 Tti4'= ablems;
(f) The design of the tentative tract will not conflict
with any easement acquired by the public at large,
now of record, for access through or use of the
property within the proposed subdivision.
b
Resolution No.
TT 11915 -2 - Robertson Homes
Page 2
(g) That this project will not create adverse impacts on
the environment and a Negative Declaration is
issued.
SECTION 2 Design Review and Tentative Tract Map No. 11915 -2, a copy
of which is attached hereto, is hereby approved subject to all of the
foilowing conditions and the attached Standard Conditions: ,
DESIGN REVIEW:
1. Three exterior color schemes shall be provided. Actual
color samples shall. be submitte� for review to the
Planning Division prior to issuance of building permits.
2. The perimeter wall and wrought iron fence shall have
pilasters with a plaster finish to match the buildings and
a decorative block or brick- cap. In addition, thorny
shrubs and/or vines shall Viz provided along the wall to
discourage graffiti. Final design- details shall be
submitted to the Planning Division for review and
approval.
3. The recreation building shall be provided with heavy wood
t -ellis around the exterior to enhance the architecture,
particularly on the north elevation.
4. Trellis work shall be provided over trash enclosures for
shading. Design and construction details shall be
submitted to the Planning Division prior to issuance of
permits.
5. The final design of the carports shall be submitted for
review and approval by the Planning Division prior to
issuance of building permits. Typical end conditions
shall include a stucco wall with vines as shown on the
preliminary landscape plan or heavy lattice.
6. Landscape planters with a minimum outside dimension of six
(6) feet shall be provided througi'out the parking areas
every ten (10) spaces, and at the end of all parking rows.
7. Low level lighting shall be provided in all open space
areas. Construction details shall be provided prior to
issuance of building permits.
t
Resolution Not
TT 11915 -2 - Robertson Homes
Page 3
8. Outdoor storage shall be provided for all individual
units, such as carport lockers or storage closets adjacent
to patios. Construction details shall be submitted for
re iew and approval by the Planning Division prior to
issuance of building permits.
9. All outdoor mailbox locations shall be covered and
appropriate lighting provided. The final design of any
free standing structure for this purpose shall: be
compatible with the building architecture and shall be
submitted for review and aproval by the Planning Division
prior to issuance of building permits.
10. A final retailed acoustical analysis shall be submitted
with the construction to indicate mitigation me ?Sures to
achieve interior noise level of 45 CNEL and 65 CNEL or
less for patios and balconies. All construction documents
shall be consistent with the acoustical recommendations
prior to issuance of building permits.
TENTATIVE TRACT:
1. Turner Avenue shell require removal of existing concrete
pavement for entire - street width and replaced with a
minimum 6" A.C. pavement from Arrow Route to the southerly
tract boundary... The cost of the westerly half of the
street will be subject to credit towards System.
Development fees,
2. Arrow Rou':e shall require reconstruction of the existing
pavement to provide for a cross - slope to the satisfaction
of the City Engineer.
3. The intersection of Arrow Route and Turner Avenue shall be
reconstructed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 12th DAY OF JUNE, 1985.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY:
Dennis L. Stout, Chairman
ATTEST:
Rick Gomez, Deputy Secretary
Resolution No.
TT 11915 -2 Robertson Homes
Page 4
Mh
I, Rick Gomez, Or+uty 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 12th day of June, 1985, by the following vote -to -wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
I,.
Fz
Z
u
U
CJ
G
S•
LL
w°•WLCdN V. v.LN Y -- ^T
w2 °L�aTi� q qd c0 .- L
v�4:�
a�Yp au +•dn
Z"; gk,?F NEI ez oa
141-21 'Y° °n. -u�iA
°>qd °.=T o m mvoN oLi nV~ o.d•� e•t toq oo• E»
a�ui Av q� oYpo.c qe � f.d up -' a
u e�ci q .A. a
y na~l dG.v nyN V O �oY•,.,G � °� aW pOy •gypp d� �� O A
E E+ LY d =Oq dYL. d t�A 8.2 =Cyt
u'L'ou^ -Is $'e .YiN
�u:+2 Wu L q wq •°OC.6 u �a �p .p.N N c O.N E c
L .•� O n A d .wc• N EEN a.,.Y d9 ^^ L q Y^ ° d
d VOEE� LL` C
'Gal.
VqL 6rVQinb0 d.,.
�6.A NO WNd 6 °y 0.� d B.:
C N A
mv� �' q C° YQ1•- 0. q �a, 9 pq °aN ^�d
C d9 O� O qC yC V ^ E
q � L�.. yq^ °L �•Opp nny ¢C+ yE N r' ^.
pW O�tV.0 O °TLN ^' C yE. X001 � QCAtl. NNE EQ�
c O A C yNN A V N N° p ° O >: d 6 •9
r d U � N E c N: u � � ,d� ' E wNi o � •°i @.-. Y� d u .- � a vi D A
V C >C 3+d+i C d•°- 4L". -. �TA c A b Vim.. GT.�A J
w O O i•�+L �..y.V E ttai N9.d Nt°.M CLC V 6�6� ,,CNC i V CJ
S� °.BOLA. F� F-OOa 685 <N.'^Y�2 COgm y.r 6L6
m
i
d
Y 9 L b C N O n
Z
u
w
W
_N
G �
M-
q
'o
z
U
aAys OUF �++•q
s
N
�
'r as°
O
V
.•.yea°.
t 6n9 6
V
•-
u. L � Y -�.•
m
V s'• o i c
C
Aa
'.iW.� ou.�....o
r
t
C
w
N F
yL
L .q �Od�udi
La
Y
r pp
NM
e
i
OOE ~
Cpo ELY ° °y.
OO
U
NeY
N K
J
L7
d
Y 9 L b C N O n
k
u
D» N g E Y K V
490'a
W
_N
yF
M-
d•Nq +°+ N
°ydi
aAys OUF �++•q
5.
o.
'r as°
Ya.
.•.yea°.
t 6n9 6
V
•-
u. L � Y -�.•
m
V s'• o i c
C
Aa
'.iW.� ou.�....o
^
w
N F
yL
L .q �Od�udi
La
Y
r pp
NM
LIZ
Y EE q u
i
OOE ~
Cpo ELY ° °y.
OO
..1
c O
L9� d 1 L
wC
NL
Au Ca.sc
2N+ EtY'dG.d•u.
N •.
y
�p s O Q q
N
H A
G "r 2
Ll
1
N
• C
W r d °a a o
of o ° C
L'
c- O"•
rL cacd.� dp
2. •�E L
p .L -.,�
w
o SS
° °•�30 �d$1
�.o «a�xa 6.
A _yam da
`o.'° °u.�an
°6 L
t9
yEdH
cam;` S.
a >q ggGS
aq
ni
qy NL
log
uwOy Q O •.O dN
0030.g
uo
ONr EPI Obi "'
9 O az Ig
{J
i(( U
V° O
« a OU$rT
C$Nq
Od +� V
=max «y
E6
14, •�
ca
N A
�
oui
O O y O
uqC aW.s
'oy
�E>
LOC
'O a?y a.-°•a Adu x
�' as° .- °.��•='a LV
xAN
dcgCA
N=tcLa��n ` dos ^.o
'EE^�.. .. AP. yd° « °i o.. rte*
yp NLL6P4 Nn�VY'e a2id+�
9 2 L
.-. CEO{
N ° Y �^ N C cE �
V�+ 4
� A
u « « x^ C^
°O
v
•• L�
E
+ a L O a g�°; W d+ L'° 2 O
� ��^
°yam « +eym
� N� N
q+ A M
LAN �^!�p
p d W
+
o°
• N W
AQ
A^ O x x L O`
a
T
^`L M.>
O.AU Cam■■
6AiLEEV�>
«67 L 5 z I i-0
C.
ECE Et �•dO$ q6�N ^O idp +C ui
D
w Y'« dC 28:= Oq e
u
it
i
N
>=9C �O u�ci dJ. •
A aQ
L O
-uw
a c d q N C ^ O
C+ L 9 i+ u
o ° u.y3y
4� 2« E •.
odyq
° x E O �L
max lLp`gE ti
d iiL
c YtOVi 2
4.9w°Ly yn «
+c
C�gCV
d �C.�
�NEN
42.
o�aq xqo
6
cCAq d t
«y
cEL v
O d q« i V
Lu u yN
^d +EO
_1qx xxu�
NO��
E+ dy
N A C
CtLd GL
L a 6 N
�C rAU q« "O
Eroxi'�?`N.
Eat �
> Y«
L a O.
dq
C
O "' V p t>
ro•'
es
u W S^ u• 6 O a Y
r
•d C C H L ` C° O O E
H
.-.aNC
Y ^=
$o
n «,,, a m�
o qy. $`9 d.
..LAP
•mc +c
•
u N
a x u=
« t+ «
d
2 N
d V 2 te
a.
_
L¢ ti L^
C S C 0 9 C W O
wo
+a
O d
x �O�OU GdWpa
L^
° >L6.d.A
q V
A
d 6+
q O1
CC9
O
E Ot C
V
c
O «
E O•C
° ^ �•
E Ly2 L x
ul a «AC
f.t °a
aJy
1
O«A
LECNZ °p cLE c9 Y
L; COC4
>dO >q dy0y0'1
Iqw
GG�4 `�.O P >° Ad l iYOCC
6 N 6 L 6. •� N 6 H r N C c Q O �. V) A. 9
7 tp
AO+ O4Le�O
< J y a 4 L N
VYC V
f C
G q.
j1; ^
Y P• \p�jj1
\�yI y
\•I
•V
coAO
�o
° _� e�
eLLbe Na,q«
AaL
.
q b
t6gd
N
O
�
�yt
PR Fc
N
c�C dYV.
OdO UL
•
9d Cf
ba Y LCV��
E T aL.
L 6r
L.xL °
\.
.cC• 1
d v
c R
o .�
d
� O y t
E c
11�•
Qb nN
wN9
"k
n
G• OwZi WD
t dO V°
t�ti V
u O Oc °Nd
°Y °yq�
°m4
� L �' A
•--6 Vu
P.Ld
�+
90LT
o s9
�II�pG
1V1
• i•.., aabi
iL o,n •+d
=N
» aN L
°'a°e
ZN2Ay
n
•�.. •°-
•_
u
�. •a. PL
R T m
2C6d N.`�Nw
q n^ u N a
u9 i'+ A
u: '
��
N
./.,Y
d c
u
quN
u
bP
_
SL
.-.
9`nN bb �. Vyb
H ; N
•.G.
�L
n
Yd
U
'r�7
QN
_.x
L.G ^N .b•
ywdG
.•--
OIVL�
^ACC
I
�. �•
aN
6 D O G a
W 4'
.O q
O
c
Act
.°•. C
' C
0,.0
L O°
•O.
LuG
aiit — Oi G [
w. L v x pp G m L c i
aY�fON v
S
y y�
Op a1
� OYw d
N'
mY•�f
d•°O
w^ AN
NZ Lt 2A d
yA
L 9wd v
°..O L.
�y.,.
� x
qti
1VV�'�
d q.
nL�
21 c n6Ciaa•CCNdo..�
Nu cA ou
d•'Y E
tp °
aa• L
yL�s
b
°•��{
tI1W_?
on "'
b x
°>
° cnN
96?
c.�
EE _ Oa
t
=GN u.0 c
.° -•,Yj q c c,..
Lou
>•a6uw
N NAN
6x�
a[vai =NO 1-NL
N C
GiV U��OYT p.gN60
Qqc. Oa <Y
I�OA6N
��
�
Yn •.f �
p
I \OVI
I
nG
C
> AN
Gnat 1_^
=bp$s"v
a.L ao
ao�
's� 0 =fin
ac:-°
NY
p
OS Uw,�,.�
O12�
NL
q.d
o
��
: a
C�
E-
^ ° cx
oa
a6Y
^ Lt° uN
,,, o `Nd'a>'inA o..
ao
c °a
Cvq
12 rna
a•L•v �o
=qu
aui
w Ny n Y°a-✓
°�
IIuL •
U�OY.
°�N
xaY,d Lw!
t0Y=
QVO
>a'O
d IGn
Vu
y ua v-
a^� qT
'
uAw VC
L %NOnI
t b4
N ••R
CC�.0
�9V
q
9 qE
d =L �wOG v�
wNUL �Y
aL an
+Q.�O
2G
v.
V�NA
t q^
L 2� ¢� Lb' EN
AE
d6Np�Cui
E vu.
du°pNU
u G.�.O
d �L
d ... N =^ ^�
°
�`V
TLpA
wC�w =qUw
LAV Ev
6.n•. b
-L6•
` C N
b
c i
9 Gw A:
^�• - •O
•W .� .-
G .mi CA.
A C y+ N�
q0.Y..
n w C°
O C q a
d9 CGE'
Lq�g
Li
L c
pyR ^nom
.0
^� 'L". 1.
O >nq O
t3
Nu
NALY.,
NaC �aa w.0
6
°
ax
A. �
y CLOY
A s
� vrAi V ALA �LL
V
AE
.�
7� dC
�. tY
r C
S
Ovgc
v�baw
LO •O
b �SS2p n � G
nn O.
qz
^.r
� G GA G.
GuEb
K+•x0
6•D Ir.G
S CV FpyaY
�
�w:
CV 69 H•j N..c. q G'b
6Cp
LtLIt
G' Y¢ „a
aL4
.N L aOp L
O1L�00
Wa 6wN M'Yr
R
W
v
Lj
.Na
•' =oa
"Fe
°c S
= .v,a°cq
osta+
dP
.
O w O
cvd
yo•'
y4u9 L
.4";z aar^ �
Y
aq
q +A�N ..
uc E .d+�o '
a +d
�
�^
9 ^+
6ce
Od
d �
�u�
Ei0
LNW V
ceLi
�VOn
��'
uQE�'.
FEFE q
OYVY
a7; d.
AVN
d
NFU
DEC IJ�r
G �.r
O
SN�49
ANy P
VN
.V
N. =y
E9�
N00
ON
N
Cv Q
l %dam
Y
'r�i
Y aNiN
Nom`
uAq
—Jul e
c
e+d+.s. c�
oci —n
$Ng F
ro W
A N
d�q+
`aiue
Yµ.N+
YuC
Y Y «LL 4
��11 «'°
6O d�'`^P d
m'EE.
GV`N
G
qo
iA`
�U9
dVC Y
J
�y LE
6d NmU
G.y..y +.0 V
.,.y
dW0
zrO °'cd
F2 o. ,r'd.
d g
au
l mw u
9 R cN o
n
u
oeq
o+
cam+
�t�
dN
N,S>y+
c�WN
qo 4
�`u
gg +y
g�we
cr y
a:. yeo
a "n
our
L.yayo °
u
N
vP
u Y
^c`
+ Q
N.a
ny <�
•uioi
«q+
Ley
fig"°
o9 d�a°
L,o « °y
T.aY N
jzo
=L
t
7-0
``
6Lai
n
�gaad
Af�Omi
O +q JJ
•'
Q� =�
o i
«O�gy1L
T
N L� +
� u E A N �
L d +
v y`
.`6
i
=
O V 6
O
�J d O
i O
d 9 d a
L w9 00
1-5 g Y t
N+
—5 •.`
C Q
+
AO
r g ON
f6 G�
SIILNq` n
l=-9q
H sm
6 �6 . N
�V .
NN C NL
h
6da
•+t o'P
iE
NEO
O N.
2
9 N O+ C
yd
N
d N V
rd C
C
C C 6 O p 0
■!
E
N
S
u.�
^
��
O w O
«CUE
G,
2
A 9
Jty
W
Sm
„d�.9.
Pi
•
--M.
qo
iA`
si
N.L
°i�uR
OQ
°
D.N
uu
w
N
7.0
+
q Q S
d 6
d y
E
�. « d
Z
p V
` C
W LL x
i
W��t
�VDU`Q^
y
u Y
L .. ✓
G U Y.
7-0
``
L'
o
Nd9E
•ma
.�,=
uN
LOIG
dn9E
zGULO �
QN
OCyro
�a
AO
^du
i.y'
o�oq}
_
`� +
6.a
N
yN220
aF
•+t o'P
iE
NEO
O N.
2
9 N O+ C
Y• p
d N V
rd C
C
C C 6 O p 0
■!
E
N
Te
u.�
��
E
O CV
o
g06
qNT-
'N C
+a C
N
Ay
Y r P
tlN
6' O t= 4
u
O.O. wdi CV
Y - �!
w 0
'P.G
O1W.
L
L L 1i
C
d 9. N 4
dor
Y d
�•O. «
ac
I
+
+ d 6 S M
6 acm °T
� q war
a
y
ouN
pE�B
YE
T
e Y
O �1
.1
v V
c.o
too
GG
vGCmo
Nag.
A
aC
u
9
m
A�w•.•
y
1
C
`�N �a6
t` O LLL
LYLL
O
A
W
y
a N
CO
«y`
C N M
� �CC
Y
Y
4 Y
•
w`
L
.Y.
^
..
w` N
rw1�W
�.L
O
CC
V A
N
-
Zir
u 4 u
A
"
1_
a i_o
c i� ^n
LEA
LG
vY
t
N
a Y_
Yay
�pGaN
y.. y°�
LO�OVO
w
M
N
v..o«
e
y
L
wnE
a�
r- d ^wY.t
°
qLU
=Y
{{i��
rn
d^e N+
C. u.S
V
•rj
N
Ov
s dgr',�a
t
YV y^
A
cd
rd
Y
vw
C.
LO
CC
^ar3
N A •
M
O z O a L .�
d�
��
p
d
0 p e_
r1
d� V
q. G
,coq
r•:]Y
V"O ^ppQwb
N Y CL•
d Y� .
` �.
Ya R
Y
A q AO�
v�om
a'
NE G.=,. °
G
SL
ua.
Ny O.
d^r, GSo. "1
N lYCy
A7 a°i
u Y Y O..
q
+
G6G�t•.,
^ n
'e....
^�°
WcnnALm
�°
°
L1
,YOB
S32 is
N?O
E °yn.N.oi
N01`
&Z LI N
YY
Y9CCL`E
cL.
GAOL
Cd.r r-• y
L mCt
� ^C.TY
.�
LA
Y.O
^
t
Y
Nq
C:C
OC_
p.s V..•1�.
Y
Y W.O. N^ ��
N riwi•^Y
^ A L
N„
O 9
212,415
...
°
Y Y
A`
O.
100.1
qL
��
mm
.
^
N d` ^..0 m
Y C a N
O
C
^ E
p
S
.•
pY
Y s i
A
Ord
u
^.'9... o
�� W •�
N C.ryC
u A•.°• L
G
YC
L
601
01
q
6p
G
w 90
$¢
LLO�Y
QO VO OVA N)
O 9�C.d
O
`^
LC
L A
^YO.
dA'. pL �p
v u G
V;k
-e.
O
Y
d
�O�W
01°r
^N
1J0
l'9
CM dV6
yy
6Yr
N °y
pN
Z
J
r.y
W,
MIN
NVON�
6NN0
06-6'�L
lz
WYV
v V
c.o
_
C
- e
EC
A
aC
aWi
o A
m
m a
•y. ero. m
y
12%,=
oy
C
^
q R
GGCadE
W
�' 6
6 .V.r L—
«y`
C N M
L•. D v y
CC
=
d�.0
.Y.
S
o1q
vO
rw1�W
�.L
vvE
as A aL
°•ia°in
y d� t. 6..�
VciG
V L m
=vC
LG
9=
t
N
a Y_
Yay
mc
y.. y°�
LO�OVO
V Y
w
A
4
CJ
y
.-C
A'
A m
E K O
T q m
1r V BI g A
Q
s qb
A
22
Y
L Cg`yy.
^y�q
Nwyj=
O M
m
^ t
N A •
L
<
d�
��
Y Y M°
0 p e_
d L L y �
,coq
y ^a
N�1^c
a:�
o'
Lo
go
e. acn�
v�om
cy u.Nd1.>Y.
y°
ua.
•°..a.
1Y.Au.i
r'o:e
d
'e....
^�°
WcnnALm
�°
°
L1
,YOB
Y m.YO�p
N
o
E °yn.N.oi
YY
cL.
N
__.�
V •-N
22
1
r=id y
p.s V..•1�.
G °.++.•
CC A
^
qr'
6y
OS
'C
V1L°r
212,415
...
�1
t.r°.
DG
401
Ly
O�
qL
��
mm
9. yq.GSq.•+.O9
^OA
°yL
9+T
YM
°-dss
c°
u
cz:
.-oAN$
a..°.
a.
NY
o0
9try
N 8C...°
Ayq d
9� °N.CV
GT
mw
NOY
P
N °y
pN
"A
O
r.y
W,
MIN
NVON�
6NN0
06-6'�L
WNa
WYV
�6
�•
t7�6E
Q�
Q°
-C M.
p
r 0
rq�
K q
d
V
Ni N� C� tLi I[
7
/(_ 4�L
Im
O ili
ti
C N O^
Y'6
V A j
W q
y
C
IL
N
+r
ti ° yW
qEOY
E u
..°C.dC
Q%
^�
;+ t d � L. U •� L
L q L
O C N T
d r V
�.
Oq
C
N'.1 U Vq 40. Ltt
LcE
t 46 VN
°NC
Nd
T
Y
�L 6° Oy ° dC
U n L6Y ' N
y
vdi'�
N CN O.0
N 9 VU
yU
a.rN
� O
•'� d N
... 9.
r S' A O y'
c 7,
L
•'d
rn
u�q�
Cy. a � cU ^i ^
dCY •'
q wt
iu
v'
IV
Ou dOL
q M
CCE 6L V.y rd
Oq •d
^
u d> > y N N 9
O L b
d 9 L y
r
^ G WW
N
p
N
4 r o
LL 4 Q O yam ^
C
° �A
6.z 02
q \J•'� N (mil
O
O O u0
L
Cq Oy
a°+
N
3
Y
d
x q c
^ d Y
Z^ V y E
N d
y
a `T^
D xi
a
g q
♦ V
C L 2
yqu cd N� L. O
. EO na q
O.y >I
Get dN
d
u d,°o C6
�L Ca
✓I �U
N
° � ad.9
C O M 9 d °LC
d
UU'b OW
q 1
pW N
A`3
Cq..�O awn
H1rM 4L6N 4N J1�
D
LTS.^ ^Z '
1 Ld du
I aa+ 4 2
C �
1'1 a yl `JIB
Im
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA C�;CAXro
STAFF REPORT
DATE: June 12, 1985 -1 V
1977
TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner 11
BY: Curt Johnston, Associate Planner
SUBJECT:: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 12873
PARAGON HOMES - he development 6f--JO2 single family
detached. homes on 60.5 acres of land in the LM District
(4 -8 du /ac), located on the east side of Haven Avenue,
between Lemon and Banyan - - APB! ' 1- 271 -20, 30, 44, 45, 46,
47, i!
f
I. ABSTRACT: Dedications for Lemon Avenue and the Banyan Street
parkway and street alignment have not beea f'a,Tled as required by
current City policy. The applicant, hovr_vev, vequested Planning
Commission review considering the project has been in thr, review
process for approximately six months.
II. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION:
A. Action Requested: Consideration of a tentative tract map,
building elevations, and issuance of a Negative Declaration.
B. Purpose: Construction 302 single family homes.
i
C. Location: East of i �etween the future extensions of
Lemon an Banyan..
0. Parcel Size: 60.5 acres.
l E. Density: 5 du /ac.
t
` F. Existing Zoning: Low Medium Residential.
G. Existing Land Use: Vacant.
H. Surrounding L `?d Use and Zoning_
North Vacant property Char "fey College, designated Low
Me '.um Residential (4 -8 du /acl,
South - Vacant (Lan Bentsen apartments approved), de,;lgnated
Medium High Residential (14 -24 du /ac).
East - Vacant, designated Low Medium Residential (4 -8
du /ac).
I West - Single family subdivision, Lutheran Church,
Ltesignated Low Residential (2 -4 du /ac).
,_� ITEM L
PLANNING
COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
Tentative Tract 12873 - Paragon Homes
June 12,
1985
Page 2
I.
General Plan Deli nations:
Project Site - .Low Medium Residential (4 -8 du /ac).
North - Lvr Medium residential (4 -8 du/W.
Sout1 - Medium High Residential (14 -24 du /ac).
East - Low Medium Residential (4 -8 du /ac).
West - Low Residential (2 -4 du /ac).
J.
Site Charact_ Gs The project site is undeveloped with no
strit,,kres or u.. +er existing improvements. Vegetation is
14ntited to inoigenous shrubs and weeds with Eucalyptus trees
located in the Lemon Avenue right -of -way and adjace- to the
southwesterly existing tract.
K.
Applicable Re ulations: Basic development standards of the Low
Medium Residential District, 5,000 sq. ft lot size minimum,
6,000 average.
L.
Section Details: Four one- and two -story floor plans are
proposed. T he two- and three - bedroom units range in size from
j04 sq. ft. up to 1,567 sq. ft. Four architectural
irii•tions are proposed for each floor plan. The roof material
'i? oe tile.
III NAt S:
A.
General: thaffey Zollege is located directly to the north of
the site, separated by an E0 foot Metropolitan Water District
right -of -way along the future extension of Banyan Street. To
provide a buffer between the project aad °uture campus
development on the vacant property to tie - nar`th, 62 feet of
landscaping and equestrian trail improvements within the MWD
right -of -way will be provided as shown on Exhibits "D -1" and
I'D -4"
B.
O-? s i q Review Commiittee: The Design Review Committee
=mmen ed approval of the tract subject to:
1. Landscaping and trail improvement within the MWD right -of-
way.
2. Increased use of curvilinear streets.
3. Upgraded perimeter wall design.
4. Four elevations per floor plan.
5. Tile or shake rooflnq material.
6. Upgrades to side and rear elevations facing the street.
4
� J-
i
t
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
`tentative Tract 12873 Paragon Homes
June 12, 1985
Page 3
7. Landscaping on top of the retaining walls bordering
the westerly tract and provisions for removal of
existing fences or walls (see Exhibit "E -211).
The revised plans show landscaping and a trail 62 feet wide along
Banyan east of "Ell Street, On the north side of "D'+ Street,
approximately 12 feet of landscaping will be provided. Within the
interior of the project, the street pattern was varied. The
perimeter wall design includes native rock with pilasters, insets,
and tiered walls with landscaping. - Regarding the. architecture, one
additional elevation per floor plan was prG O ded (16 total
elevations). These revisions, together with the recommended
conditions of approval, bring the project into compliance with
Design Review Committee comments.
C. Technical Review Comm4 ttee: Two items of concern regard right -
of -way ded citions 'ra emon Avenue and Banyan Street. For
Lemon Avenue the map cur entdy shows 33 feet of dedication
(half width), but seven additional feet to the south is
necessary to constrsct the minimum 26 feet of pavement with a
40 foot right -o; -way. A portion of the dedication will be
obtained ;,, the near future with Phase I of the Lan' Bentsen
apartment project. The remainder borders Phases II and III of �
Bentsen Master Plana.
Regarding Banyan Street, the original design showed the street
completely in the MWD right -of -way with a 12 foot parkway and
26 feet of pavement. Chaffey college, however, agreed in
concept to dedicate 37 additional feet or right -of -way to move
the street north. In exchat+ge, the develoer will install the
complete width of Banyan Street (44 feet)'aid the landscaping
and trail` improvements (see Exhibit "H ").
Although it appears that the dedications can be obtained by the
applicant prior to recordation, current Planning Commission
policy mandates that a71 of the dedications be obtained prior
to tentative map approval. Approval o the tract as designed
could require the Cite to condemn the offsite right -of -ways per
Section 66462.6 of the Map Act. Given these circumstances, the
Commission has three basic options, as f:
;flows:
1. Continue the project until the dedications are recorded; or
2. Denial of the project; or
3. Approval of the project subject to the Engineering Division
special Conditions 2 and 3 which include statements that
the tract be redesigned within a certain time frame if the
dedications cannot be obtained.
K,ANNING COWISSION STAFF REPORT
Tentat vo Tract 12873 - Paragon Homes
June 12, 1985
Page 4-
The City Attorney has indicated that a condition which sets a
specific time limit is reasonable. If the dedications cannot
be obtained by the applicant, the redesign of "inyan Street
would entail major revisions to the tract rr +,, whereas the
realignment of Lemon Street 7 feet to the north could be done
withol=a substantial alteration to the overall t -•-' aasa,gn.
Appruvic.g the tract without provisions for redesi�,Y „,,,�,_
commit the City to obtaining the necessary right -of -ways by
condemnation.
Drainage: The drainage plan for the development is shown on
Exhibit "G ": The majority of flows will be directed to Deer
Creek Channel within a storm drain system. Three alternate
alignments have been proposed for the system. Alternatives 2
and 3 have lower improvement costs, but acquisitions of
easements from offsite property owners is necessary.
Therefore, the recommended Conditions of Approval require
construction of Alternative 1, unless the developer acquires
the iasaments.
Some drainage from the project will be directed to Haven
Avenue, which is presently overtarpd. To mitigate the concern,
an upstream storm drain (line 3H) is required to reduce flow on
Haven Avenue by the :amount added by the project. Line 3H
outlets into the Alta Loma basin on the west side of Haven
Avenue, north of Banyan Street.
D. Environmental Assessment: Part I of the Initial Study has been
completed by the applicant._ Staff completed ° -1r* I, the
Environmental Checklist, and determined that with the
appropriate Conditions of Approval the project will not create
significant environmental impacts. An acoustical study was
submitted analyzing future noise levels alone Haven Avenue,
Lemon Avenue, and R,nyan,.Street.. The report indicates that the
5 to 6 foot high perimeter wall proposed by the applicant is
adequate to achieve exterior noise levels less than 65 CNEL.
IV. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: oefore approvir,g the Tentative Tract Map, the
Planning Commission mr_t find that the project is consistent with
the intent of the General Plan and Development Code. Further, the
proposed use, building designs, site plan, and subdivision,
together with the racommendod Conditions of Approval and mitigation
measures, must be in compliance with all applicable regulations of
the Development Code. In addition, the project must not be
detrimental to adjacent properties or cause significant adverse
environmental impacts.
W1
r
r;
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
Tentative Tract 12873 Paragon Homes
June 12, 1985
Page 5
V. CORRESPONDENCE: This project has been advertised in The Daily
Report rfzt,spaper. In addition, iha applicant h6ld' a neighborhood
Fe-eting to, discuss the project. 17�_a imnselvsus of adjacent
homeowners present is that tho project was beneficial to the
neighborhood.
VI. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Comrission must determine if the
project is in substantial compliance with current City policies.and
the Facts for Findings.. As discussed, the following options are
available:
1. Continue the project (with apj,�licant consent) unti I the
street right-of-way dedications are recorded; or
2. Denial of the project; or
3. Approval with conditions requiring the applicant to obtain
the dedications within a specific time period, or the
prGject redesigned.
c u! submitted,
ic omez
Ci Plan r
RG:C
c u'
p
r
'u b
I,
m
e
-c omez
C i P1 an r
Ii.!RG - C
t h
Attachments: Exhibit "All - Location Map
Exhibit "B" - Site Utilization Map
Exhibit IICII -Tentative Tract Map
Exhibit I'D" Landscape Plan
Exhibit, "Ell Conceptual Graling Plan
Exhibil, 'IF" Detailed Site Plan
Exhibi" IIGII Storm Brain Alternatives
Exhibij; i H11 Banyin Street Pight-of-Way
Exhib I:, . "I" - Elevations
Exhibit IIJII - Chaffey College Letter
Exhilift IIKII - KWO Letter
Initial Study, Part 11
Resolution of Approval with Conditions
I'
M
At 9% r
NORTH
'r.
CITY OF ITEM
RANCHO CJCAlVlO \GA ' TITLE-
PLANNING DIVISIQN EXHIBIT. " SCALE:
:r arty �'.• ^'" �+7
r �
� (l
jam• M
RfR � ' .. l+'rK� •�t a
r �\
1 •� a a
�! � sitJit ` 6 •!" e
011�
fLri81 ':1L�RJ1�.4x L
_ �E - .r71�!�1� f
t`r� . -�:�.g ♦.
tZ t ag�3 I
it
L
Z i
rF
Zit
h! `
P
CITty oF� ITE:%t: -7--r Z?73
AR.MUIO CUCAMONGA TITLE: lir 296= tires
]PLANNING DIVISKYN LXHIBIT: _lam SCALE: ""'
11J_TA�tYy�
rr
C� wr
c�.
cC�CC�a o C o �:
'NORTH
CITY OF ITEM: T7 10973
RANCHO CUCAXIONGA TITLE __ � a •�n�c.� PcAn/
PLANNM DIVISION EXHIBIT= L-)-z-- scALE-
C
�0
J f ;, Q�p
ou
1 � WIT
1
iqh
on
i._
CITY OF ITEN-1- :ZZZZ
RANCHO CUCAMONGA TrTLE: &*
PLAINNING DIVISKYN EXH1Brr. D =3 SCALE.
`
i�
QL4 t�..,�
lom Don awanue."
o-
cny CAF x
RAN CUCAIVI h'NGA
PL AMID DIVISM
�� � Sate
ITEM. _- '? /2773'
TITLE= s- irr'Ll_
EXHIBIT•. -��, . SCALE-. —
� }L RMIt(p LR.WI LLSLL
t(r/ /. f•Y( rL4Nt•�p
YI�
.�I
L(N
6'L'AW WC 11111 ML
RI(�Its LLLUtY1WW LWLYI LRIIY Wit• —1[N
xrwr rL[.t {{ffG,u�
uGT+P: �.♦ 4i.LtIGtJ G•L '.
I NI ♦LKL N tl' I.tO [NiLt • 5 iLY1TLL .
I4 tLtMIVu{i.
p[LYGt .a ;tit.., Y �i��-- ...,L•- �. LL �..
�owul rLncR•t ,��`°'�•�r"_w Gd.GUUL.�.ir. , � �� 'a ..
III' i" .wrexu —�—ri I�
urceuaa qta i
enR eta/c
I
ti••tu.it [M1:'iW LMtne rl /RU! S .
J+•1a •1[•rnOV V 44 t.+ L r..4'. r •• y r I i, h � [ -
.�
M
n6inL 9L IIIL t t.. /,
G
LY
• {11L44L of M
• • - ttY[LONILL fI
t • 1
CI'T'Y OF ITEM.
RANCHO CUC -MONCA TITLE:
PLANNING DIVISION ELYHIBYI' �-'z SCALE
U
IYS..I.t? - -� I .tif Npot KYR \r, Y n.{y_ y
1 � �
!sf ItYCiL Nj1.�I
r. :ico •t w a+ .��
- •.'1011 J•J .B...q ��s9+a: w.l. r�oIDUGE r CU"r �i�r7 tl
N N win.,.v ~ -\ .'[ +' c.WW. a*
to
Aj
eeTil31 r•fr '
f N w9ieui u'w it �".t_ .fib.
ITr T'1 •. �� i�t T •gin tLfW�.� ..
•ccrfaJ_r.r• :.• I
1'
CITY OF I'i'm:11' /z�?77's
RANCHO CUCAl\ /JQN A TITLE
PLANNING DIVISION EYHIBIT._ F--5 SCALE.
/s-
Em
,!t,n,74 v,V
—2U,filcm W-W
CITY OF ITEM; 7.r- le9 73
R ANCHO CTTCA'N,40NTC A
PLANNING DIVISION EXHIBIT: &--!V SCALE.,
I]
CITY OF -ITEM-
'C
R ANCHO CUC'AMOA TrTr r, -P.4 x
PLANNING DIVISION EXHIBIT: r-
V �
NORTH
-iC .+'n `ES
�
4f- ,MAw- P-omT iii!FFF
•
Lon��4t�itiYa
�4ut:� r.
�Tiz�t'
Go1.4Eto�
0
i
GIT �T�OT�'
TNT\_ T��.
'1�
lEA4 - T`T�IZP73
R:A '.4 ) \. _1 \_ rl ! 4`lt 1: `( A
'7'tTT. j`:..%?ri/�!'�`'•'I t � _ ; -, G �= C"`%�lC'vl...t
- -�
PLANNING DIVISION
EXHIBIT SCALE. -'
K
PLAN �` ! 2
FLOOR:PLAN
t
it � ITENI: 'J° l l Z Alk
PLANNIING DIVISION EXHIBIT. -1-1 SCALE:
20
"..1
z _
X.
PLAN - 1 5
ELEV. -A
CITY OF ITEn1:
PLANNING DIVISION EXHIBIT- -1-2 SCALE-
Fri,
EEF
�� -�f'"1 i—�_r }J ` \ � f E ♦f jtat.a_ �O�LYSJ= ®(�I
Pl.ttN. , s
E.EV' s
CITY OF ITEM: = Z ZI S
RANCHO C'I?C'AMO:�'"rA TITI.r•: ,-7pi-/
PLANNING DIVISION EXHIBIT = -1 -2 SCALE-
w
•r rl— -p1
e __ +y.
. ClrrlOF
PLANNING BIVLSIQN "
'PLAN
-'y ELEV c
ITEM:
.T' -
EXF AIT-.JL-` — SCALE -
af- a3
'._ : �nH--n I...L`• Ai \�� ». — \� E � F r'^ _ : 1�1� j�"j - �_ ...",° 41 f MUM
in
t
_L
CITY
OF ITEM: 77r/
RANCHO (y CAM N l
Trrm r..
FUNNING DIVISION EXHIBIT: -E'er SCALE..
• Y n.c
PLAN r t s
ELEV.:" . D
ggg.
ll-t;, -t7
- PLAN �2 lot.
io]
FLOOff PLAN--
CITY OF
T
ItANCI io Cuc V-N !C� T" I iii
PLANNINU DIVISION EXHIBIT M SOXLE.-
MIR Id
RIGHT ELCVATION REAR ELEVATION
7
_ nc \ f �: t:�1 � _�._:' LI�❑ �� X11 _ �.�• '`a
LEFT ELEVATION " °•� - r ,��.�- 'S�r`"
RO F PLAR
FRONT ELEVATION �:..�r.A_� _ ro
• � O,IIAOC '
" � � _ 'J wf PJ''J•w
ut •. '��
J_a ; Y
t e • J
PLAN 2 19
FLOOR PLAN ADDENDA o; W, ELwo .` �" A
CITY OF ITER 1: --r
�3
. ,��T CT
,C..1 � J( Tr-A
PLANNINTG DIN'LSIQN EXHIBI-1- 7 SCALE.
�-ax. rx... �� �" li•
ew
U L
RIGNT ELEVA M "'z' REAR ELEVATION
� ..t
/�;1 �,' ---� Q rte'.,... k • •� ..}ti f:
4 y'�L''E''FTELEVATtON � "•" �• �
J1i Y t FRONT ELEVATION
iL
`v
"`� ! ^ -1PLAN t i =4,.12 14 .
Wa
ROOF PLAN •. w.+ ' '=FLOOR PLAN ADDEND ' .•„M R E V B
CITY OF ITE.\I- T-T F7:�
n .� cllia �-
PLANNING DIVISIC N EXHIBIT: ,n SCALD
ESHT E� LyVATI N
L—L I
. i t r• � r � r.T Ca �yh7 Y R .� R"P�f�.
^ I
REAR ELE ATIQN ti _
w�
FRONT ELEVATION ` =`�'f ig s
•
i .0 1 Yi�1i�iet` P� ■siu
RQOF�I�N ...w.!� ' P;c.. .FLOOR PLAN AD�,DEND.a. .0 E E1NP 7 :,'iC• 15.
CITY OF ITEM- _ -r°r /?-1?73
R AN -CHO, C ?CAMONNCTA TITIF1
PLANNING DIVISICXN EXHIBIT. .1-7scAu
FIGHT ELEVATION
REAR ELEVATION
Eli
.,:
.
LEFT ELEVATION
+�V ..- -• v
."'
mow,
FRONT ELEVATiON
._y•L +'
r0 E;
it
E-2
GAMIC
I
•�
A..1
i • 1.f•
1.'t
a
W
!CAM • . 2
`•
�. ROOF PLAN «;.rJ.J
FLOOR PLAN ADDENDA �_.a..W_d� ELs=Y D
CITY OF
ITEi\i: 4 -V73
ff /
PLANNING DIVISION
EXHIBIT= --I:�Lo- SCALE°
r }f 111
41 WE
41 71
t -%.Z Or
r J(
-- - - - - -- -- r
�, -- ---
SEC9N0 FLOOR PLAN t S fi -'+•3- Fl °t FLOOR PLAN
�!_ 19VAME FOCT9 �� ,r
1 �."{ ri= rv`3°l. Mlr� gt1r1 • .'•�r �...,t•,.. '��•w.•
• ', PLAN ' -•'-' 3
13,
F! OOR PLAN'
M
CITY OF ITEM: _7"T i
TI A NC'HO CL?CA?VIC?' NIA TITI P , z. ;i
_ `' PL.ANNM DIVISION EXHIBIT..1= - SCALE:
•. -li—� �ezo� 1_� _ I _
,mow ids � II In
MIMI-
RlGN7 ELEVATION -" - 9e � n REAR ELEVATION
I
min
I LEFT ELEVATION
FRONT ELEVATION sfJ
11111f 1 11014 ] - IIVINO Rtf
I ( f
ROQF 7LAN -NN SECOND FLOOR ADDENDA - F)RAT'Ej QQR Iti,DDFnNDA =LEV ' • ' A
CITY OF /-� 1TEIM:
PLANNING DIV EM EXHIBIT. SCALE-
r� 5
... -�L Wes,^ j .•
1
Ex
IN
T fl-. Frx. 10
v
CITY OF ITEM 77
RANCHO ( LTC NIONGA
PLANNING DIVISION EXHIBIT: I 13 SCALE:
X
�r
�8,rr
CITY OF ITEM 77
RANCHO ( LTC NIONGA
PLANNING DIVISION EXHIBIT: I 13 SCALE:
L,-A
j'� - - -. -'
'RIGHT ELEVATION \•• w REAR ELEVATION
—� ; ; � : � ��= =� : - �]= oar a ►� °° �.�
LEFT ELEVATION
I� r FRONT ELEVItTIl��J
xf
1 ` I �' BEOIIY.i YE011Y i ;
SECOND'FLOOR ADDENDA •. ^cT pL nnR ADDENDA ELEV D
ROOF PLAN e1.:J -- i
CITY OF ITEM: 7 < z z X73
... t
PLANNING DIYiSM EXHIBm scALE .
03°
1
1 IL, r
N.
l7,
-�; RIGHT- ELEVATION \�- (VEAR ELEVATION '
Vi
LEFT ELFV-71ON
RONT'ELEVATION
� ` I �meu r -e[oeu a unxo eu p I .ocw ten,
-_ -_ rya
ROOF .PLAN SSCO..::FLOOR ADDENDA - [ ,ST FLOOR ADD'eNDA �LF\, .3 24
G T(''+ T�n
CITY ®F' ITEM: -7 3 -D
RANCHO CUT`A1W ONTGA TITIr:
I PLANNING DIVISION EXHIBIT: SCALE-
"```r •
+ic
�.' ..acc?. =.
l
� :l 9
a•.,
ail
p•
�'
v
1
�.
�� �� °
Aram
,�;,T-..wi.. - •
r ,:
drag. ,�Hyr� ,1
1 ry
PLAN 4
F_1:OOR PAN
26
CITY OF
ITEM: le-F 7 3
RANCHO CUCAMONGA
TITI F.
I'LANNING DIVISION
EXHIBIT S . - -
SCALE=
Ask
7] -
� 911M
DO
Ao
CITi' OF rrEm. , ?71e-S-73
R .ANCHO C'UCA?�ION- '�',A TITt.r. , f
PLAINNINU DIVISKAZI EXHIBIT= 7 SCALE-
• � off°- 3b
�s'er
rml EEO
7
0DM it
•'� ♦.�� Ili 4� ({jj..I{.. ii-
eb �.. _..,.� - n�ae • .�..e._ "."� PLAN , 4
- ELEV B
CITY OF ITEM- "7-7 IZ-f73
RANCHO CU C: MONGA �-
PLANNING DIVISKYN EXHIBIT. -I-JA-SCALE.-
:.. 37
� .-rte '�; �; `� �,'.�. �� - n�:
= � ilIOU
oCAN .4 37
... _. _._ ELE1/ C
.. • tea« x .. � ... � . i.� � � Yt. >'X' )3.`2,M^. � r �'R - ... .8
CITY OF
PLANNING L.. ,LION
ITEM- - 7712S 7-1
EXHIBIT - SCALE.
A
-If 177T.
— per.
i11. 4x -L eJ-
_i
CITTY TO''{TF T Tr. 7O`` [/ 1 1
ll\ . PLANNING DIVISK N
EXHIBIT -': SCAT E-
(.
CVICLF
�Ml
col d ..- I a l
(tOLLeGe ni-sasct ,
March 12, 1985
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Community Development Department
Planning Department
P. 0. Box 807
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
Attn: Rick Gomez
Re: Chaffey Community College District
Banyon Avenue Street Dedication
Dear Mr. Gomez:
Pursuant to our telephone conversation of March 5, 1985, this letter
is to officially notify you that the Governing Board of the Chaffey
Community College District approved in concept the request submitted
to it ;_pm the City of Rancho Cucamonga for the dedication of thirty -
seven feet (37') along the southern property line of the Chaffey
College Campus. The Board further authorized me to meet and negotiate
an agreement with representatives of the City to finalize the •edica-
tion.
With this direction from our Governing Board, I would suggest that
you establish a meeting time, place and date for us to develop an
agreement which will be satisfactory to both parties. I will await
your contact.
Sincer ,
Donald K. Sorsabal, Ed.D.
Assistant Superintendent, Business
cc: Dr. Ferguson
Peter Tolstoy
1
—,�- ,— —
�.
' is
sms Hav— Awme., .haL ma.camw.asuof 111C987- f7;i7. 739.0242, 822 -4484 A,A41— r eALI � Ea lOrp voEmnn,e+MFrDaadea
A
The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California
cr�ror Atl',,t -`
'
ortue of 1110 co „,•,, i n,.,,,,,;« <<..Mr4lrrc ; •' = MAR 5 1995
h1AR G z� Rialto Pipeline
6M Upper F -eder Pipeline
7i$l9rj►jI1Ip,, , i } MAID 11.0. 2 -0225
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Communitt Development Lepartment
Planning Division
P.O. Box 807
Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730
Attention Mr. Howard Fields
Ass�,stant Planner
Gentlemen::
Landscape Guidelines
Thank you for cur letter dated December 27, 1984,
regarding landscak >ing and street trees within the rights -of -way
• for our Rialto and Upper Feeder: pipelines in the City of
Rancho Cucamonga. The right.: -o”. -way for our pipelines
consist of both fee and permarL-_-c easement parcels.
3
Our landscape gu.>_3elines are as follows:
1. Absolutely s^ trees will be allowed within
15 feet of the centerli.a of our pipelines (existing
or future) and appurtenant facilities.
2. No deep - rooting trees will be allowed in our
rights -of -way. However, trees with shallow root
systems _r shrub -type landscaping will be considered
upon submittal of landscape plans for Metropolitan's
reV_ew and written approval.
j
3. The landscaping plans must contain provisions
for Metropolitan's vehicular access at all times along•
its rights -of -way and to structures or facilities
appurtenant to the pipelines. Gates with Metro-
politan's locks are requ= ....red ii_ any fences across the
rights -nf -way. Also, any walks across our access route
'
must be constricted to AASHTC if-20 loading standards.
-7-1 le—&- 13
1
� ��
,Yi1'x .•d l�•a t .. ' ...u' ,i.:Yr• ..a. �W,r.1t,• ,�,,, ; ,i•.c. ;e JIXI �,•t,, >�KY,,,• ;c�irrzs�ruuwr
TRn Mmrmnr)1R- W,v— flkt.:rr of ......
City of Ralicho Cucamonga - 2 siHi 5 1985
4. The cost of Metropolitan's review of plans
must be borne by the .developer of the landscape areas.
Deposit amounts will be determined -,pon receipt, o€
plans.- Our final billing will be based on actaal cost
incurred. If the cost is less than the deposit, a
refund will be made; hox2ver, if the cost exceeds the
deposit an invoice* .till be forwarded for payment of the
additional amount_
5. nights to landscape any of Metropol.l-an's
fee parcels must be acquirPa from its Right of Way and
Land D_ �,sion.- Appropriate right of entry permits must
be obtained pr.or to ai.;r entry on our property.
Should you 'r_.qui e additional information, please
contact 'Ir.. Jim 1,---le, telephone (213) 250- 6564.
Very truly yours,
Robert C. Moehle
Chief Engineer
JEH /sh'
CITY OF'RANCHO CUCAXONGA
1°::RT II INITIA-1 SI'UDY
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
DATE:
AFPLICAN'T:__�� G+�csK�j
FILING DATE: LOG NUMGER:_� 273
i
PROJECT: 30Z
PROJECT LOCATION:
I. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPAC?5
(Explanation of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required or, attached
sheet;)
j� 1. Soils and Geology Will the proposal have
1 siga.Eic,ant rn_sults in:
a. Unstsble around conditions or in changes in
geologic relationships?
b. Disruptions, displacements, _3apaction or
burial of the soii?
C. Chan @;e in topog- nnhy or ground sr.rface
contour intervals':
d. The destruction. ct±veiing or modification
of any uniq a geologic or physic-,]. features?
e. Aiy potential increase in wind or water
erosion of sods, affecting either on or off
site condi.ons?
f. Changes in erosion siltat):un, or deposition?
Eg. Exposu- ` peonle or property to geologic '
hazarr - -ivak:es, landslides, mud-
slides , 3, - sr,imilar hazards?
h. An increase i1: -extracticn and /or
use Of any minerx rL-- 2'? -
2. Hydrolo,;y. Will the proposal have significant
results in:
Ll
°cS KA.YBE NO
Page
2
YES MAYBE N0.
a.
Changes ik cu;c rents, or the course of direction
of flowing
streams, rivers, or ephemeral stream
channels?
'
b•
Changes in absorption rats drainage t
or "terns,
the rate and amount of surface waters
_
runoff?
—_
c.
Alterations to the course or flow of flood
waters?
d.
Change In the amount of surface wader in any
body of
water?
—_
e.
Discharge into surface waters, or anv
alteration of surface water quality? _
f.
flteration of grcandwater characteristics?
_
g.
Cho. - in the quanetty of groundwa-ers,
-
either through direct additions or with-
drawals,
or through ,interference with an
aquifer?
Quality?
Quant!ty?
h.
Tr: reduction in the amoun, of water other-
w.se
available for public water supplies?
I-
Exn`sure of people or property to water
related hazards
such es flooding or seiches?
3. ALL
Quality. Will the proposal have sienificant
results
iu:
a.
Constant or periodic air emissions fr:•t mobile
or indirect sources?
/
Stationary sources?
b.
Deterioration of ambient air quality and /or
interference with tal. artainmeet -�z .applicable
air quality s, %n&,r1s?
-�
c.
Alteration of j._,a or regional cL:matic
conditions, affr ;iT,� air movement, moisture
or temperature?
�.
4. Biota
AMk
Flora. Will the proposal have s'_gnificant results
in:
i
r:
a.
Change in
°. �hP Ch3T3C: er_ «t
includir,g diversity, distribution, or number
Of any"specieS of plants?
b
Redit: tion'.if the numbers of anv uigque, rate
o� endangered species
of platxts ?� �
�,/
I �_'
F ;ge 4
YES `RAYSE NO
'
E, Transportation. Will the proposal have significant
results in:
Pa.
Generaticn of substantial additional vehicular
movement?
e /
b. Effects on existing streets, or demand for
new street construction?
y
C. Ef.ects on existing parking facilities, or
demand for new parking?
_
d. Substantial impact upon existing transporta-
tion systems?
e. Alterations to present patterns of circula-
tion ar movement of people and /or goods?
f. Alterations to or effects on present and
potential water - borne, rail, mass transit or
air traffic?
g.. Increases in traffic hazards to motor vehicles,
bicyclists or pedestrians?
9. Cultural Resources. Will the proposal have
G
ignificant results in:
c
a. A disturbaAce to the integrity of archaooiogical,
r,
paleontological, and /or historical resources?
G
10. Health, Safety and Nuisance Factors.. Will the
proposal have significant results in:
a. Creation of any health hazard or potential heath
hazard?
b. Exposure of people to.potential health hazards?
c. A risk of explosion or release of hazardous
substances in the event of an a%-_ident?
/
d. An increase in the number of individuals
or species of vector or pathenogenic
organisms or the exposure of people to such
organisms?
e. Increase in existing noise levels ?'
t. Exposure of people to potentially dangerous
noise levels?
g. TI-e creation of objectionable jdors?
`
h. An increase in light or glare?
I �_'
IV
Page 5 1
renewable sources of energy are available?
-� r
SS 4YBE 10
11. Aetnthatics.
Will the proposal have significant
results in:
a.
The obstruction or degradation of any scenic
vista or view?
b.
The creation of an aesthetically offensive
site?
c.
A conflict with the objective of desigcfated
or potential scenic corridors?
12. Utilities and Public Services. Will the pzopoaal
have a significant need for new systems, or,
alterations
to the following:
a.
Electric power?
b.
Natural or packaged gas?
c.
E�jmmunications systems?
d.
Water supply?
e.
Wastewater facilities?
f.
Flood control structures?
g.
Solid waste facilitie,?
h.
Fire protection?
i.
Police protection?
J.
Schools?
k.
Parks or other recreational acilities?
I.
Maintenance of public` -Facilities, including
roads and flood control facilities?
7�
m.
Other governmental services?
rC
13. Enerev and Scarce Resources. Will the proposal
have significant results in:
a.
Use of substantial or excessive fuel or energy?
b.
Substantial increase in demand upon existing
sources of energy?
c.
An increase in the demand for development of
nex. sources of energy?
_
d.
An increase or perpetuation of the consumption
of non - renewable forms of energy when feasible
renewable sources of energy are available?
-� r
Page 5
YES ay—BE NO
11. `esthetics. Will the Proposal have significant qP
results in.
a. The obstruction s., degradation of any scenic
I+ista or view?
b. The creation of an aesthetically offensive
site?
c. A conflict with the objective of designated
or potential scenic corriCors?
_
12. Utilities and Public Services. Will the proposal
)lave a significant need for M w systems., or
alterations to the following:
a. Electric dower? r
��
b. Natural or packaged gas?
c. Co=uni.cations systems?
d. Water supply?
e. Wastewater facilities?
f. Flood control structures?
rte' i
g. Solid waste facilities?
�.
h. Fire protection?
I Police protection?
J. Schools?I
_
k. Parks or other recreational facilities?
1. Maintenance of public facilities, including
roads and flood control facilities?
`4
M. Other governmental services?
13. Enerev and Scarce Resources. Will the proposal
have significant resu lt have
a. "se of substantial or excessive fuel or energy?
b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing
sources of energy?
.__...�
1p
C. An increase in the Jamand for development of
d. Asti increase or perpetuation of the consumption
r
of non- renewable forms of enemy, when feasible
renewable sou Hof energy are available?
_
Page 6
YES
MAYBE NO
e. Substantial depletion of any nonrenewable or
scarce natural resource?
r�
14. Mandatory Findings of Significance.
a. Does the project have the potential to degrade
the quality of the environment, substantially
reduce the habitat of, fish or wildlife species,
cause a fish or wildlife population to drop
below self sustaining levels, threaten to
eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce
the number or restrict the range of a rare or
endangered plant or animal or eliminate
important examples of the major periods of
California history or prehistory?
�.
b. Does the project have the potential to achieve
short- term, to the disa-vantage ;of long- term,
environmental goals? (A short -te-m impact on the
environment is otie which occurs in a relatively
brief, definitive period of time while long-
term impacts will endure well into the future).
G/
L c. Does the project have impacts which are
Il individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable? (Cumulatively considerable
means that the incremental effects of an
C
individual project are considerable when viewed
t' in conaection with the effects of past projects,
and probable future projects).
d. Does the project have environmental effects
which will cause substantial adverse, effects
on human beings, either directly or indirectlyi
II. DISCUSSION OF ENIMI M!JMN I EVALUATION (i.e., of affirmative answers to
the above questions -,plus a discussion of proposed mitigation
measures).
Sa�ru+ NHS Tc, ce. tvirc H17r�.t l,�,c,o.��T,
n s
Page 7
III. DETEMMINATION
On the basis -of this initial'-evaluations -
I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect
on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant
effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect
in this case because the mitigation measures described on an
attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE
DECLARATION FILL BE PREPARED.
r-� I find the proposed project XAT have significant effect on the
envirnment, and an ENVIRO`,".1M' %%PAC �REPOR fS'^lrequired,. {
Date - /?%?/�G�T
Signature
i
— T tle
i
i
i
r
I
�- big
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, CONDITIONALLY APPROVIN "'
DESIGN REVIEW AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 12873
WHEREAS, Tentative Tract Map No. 12873 hereinafter "Map" submitted by
Paragon Homes, Inc., applicant, for the purpose of subdividing the real
property situated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino,
State of California, described as the development of 302 single family
detached homes on 60.5 acres of land in the Low Medium District, located on
the east side of Haven Avenue between Lemon Avenue and Banyan Street - APN
201- 271 -2E, 30, 44, 45, 46, and 47 -into 302 lots, regularly came before the
Planning Commission for public hearing and action on June 12, 1985; and
WHERFAS, the City Planoer has recommended approval of the Map subject
to all conditions set forth in the Engineering and Planning Division's
reports; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has read and considered the
Engineering and Planning Division's reports and has considered other evidence
presented at the public hearing.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga does resolve as follows:
SECTION 1: The Planning Commission mak's the following findings in
regard to Tentative Tract No. 12873 and the Map 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 �:uitaE.le for the type of
development proposed;
(a) The design of the subdivision is not likely to cau7e
sebstantial environmental damage and avoidable
injury to humans and wildlife or their ha►aitat
(e) The tentative tract is not likely to cause serious
public health problems;
(f) The design of the tentative tract will not conflict
with any easement acquired by the public at large,
now of record, for access through or use of the
nronerty within the nrnrmaad cnhdivi¢imi.
~ 50
t
Resolution No.
Page 2
I
(g) That this project will not create adverse impacts on
the environment and a Negative Declaration is
issued.
SECTION 2: Design Review and Tentative Tract Map N.). 12873, a copy
of which is attached hereto, is hereby approved subject to all of the
following conditions and the attached Standard Conditions:
DES_Trh' REVIEW
1. The perimeter wall shall be constructed with gray split
face block to complement the use of rock. The top arch
shall be elimnated and a gray spiitface cap block
provided. The final design is subject to the review and
approval by the Planning Division prior to issuance of
building permits. Design details shall be sunmitted.with
the landscape plans.
2. Landscaping and irrigation shall be provided along the
west and soAh. tract boundary adjoining the existing homes
(TR 9475), specifically in the areas between the common
property lines and the proposed perimeter wall. To avoid
two walls /fences placed hick to back, th;e developer shall
be responsible for removing existing walls or fences, with
written consent from the adjoining home owners. Final
design and construction details shall be subject to the
review and approval by the Plann fig Division prior to
issuance of any permits, including'roug? grading.
3. Tile and /or wood shcke roofing materials shall be used. A
composite sample shall be submitted to and approved by the
Planning Division prior to issuance of building permits.
4. The final grading plan shall be drawn at a scale not 'i
exceed 1" = 30' and shall reflect the following,
a. The pad elevations of the eight (8) lots on the south
side of "D" st-eet (north of Banyan Street) shall be
lowered approximately 10 feet to reduce the southerly
slope height. Special architectural treatment (i.e.,
raised f+-unda *ions, split level pads) may be necessary
for construction of the dwellings, as determined by
the Building and Safety Division prior to issuance of
building permits.
b. Graded slopes shall be located out of the public
right -of -way.
I]
Resolution No.
Page 3
c. Runoff approaching the southeast :portior of the site
shall be conducted into Street "D" by a hydraulically
adequate "V" gutter as determined by the City
Engineer.
5.
Any grading or construction work proposed on adjacent
properties requires rights -of -entry and/r, easements prior
to issuance of permits.
6.
A final tletailed acoustical analysis shall be submitted
witsi the construc'0on to indicate mitigation measures to
achieve interior noise level of 45 CNEL Fmd 65 CNEL or
less for rear ,yards. All construction documents,
including the perimeter wall design, shall be consistent
with the acoustical recommendations prior to issuance of
building permits.
TENTATIVE TRACT:
1.
Drainage. In general, drainage from t,`;e site and
protection from offsite flows shall conform to the
measures outlined in the drainage report completed for the
project. Specifically the following are -equired;
I U-
a. A storm drain system shall be constructed from the
eastern boundary of the tract to Deer Creek Channel on
an alignment as follows: (1) Southerly in that
easement granted from Mr. Sylvester dated April 25,
1485 to Highland Avenue and, (2) thence within the
Highland Avenue right -of -way to Deer Creek Channel.
Other alignments are acceptable subject to acquisition
of necessary easements by the developer.
b. Construction of that portion of City Master Plan Line
3H from the Alta Loma Usin to the east side of Haven
e ;enue with sufficient c,tch basin capa�.ity to accept
the amoint of runoff cont,- 'huted to Haven Avenue from
this tract.
2. Banyan Street shall be constructed and dedicated full
width at the developer's expense. If the developer is
unable to acquire the right -of -way as shown on the
approved plans within eighteen (18) months, the project
shall be redes;gned with Banyan Street and the required
equestrian trail within the tract boundaries subject to
Planning Commission apprcval of the redesign.
3. Lemon Avenue shall be constructed with a minimum 26' paved
width within a 40' wide dedicated right -of -way. If the
e
Resolution No,
Page 4
i
4.
from the property to the south within eighteen (18)
months, the project shall be redesigned to accommodate the
full 40' wide dedication within the trzrt boundaries
subject to Planning Commission epproval of the redesign.
If the tract -is to be recorded and /or construshed in
chases, the following are required:
a. Two means of access shall be provided to each phase.
b. Sufficient drainage control devices shall be provided
as required by the City Engineer.
c. Proper mapping (parcel map, tract map, or lot line.
adjustment) shall be processed as required to prevent
the creation of unrecognized parcels.
d. All easements (full length and width) required f;r
Banyan Street and Lemon Avenue shall be acquired ty
the developer prior to recordation of the first tract
maps.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 12th DAY OF JUNE, 1985.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY:
Dennis L. Stout, Chairman
ATTEST:
Rick Gomez, Deputy Secretary
I, Rici; Gomez, Deputy Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of
Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and
regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the
City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held
on the 12th day of June, 19B5, by the following vote -to -wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
U
X UL ty
L'.et u�wh. Na `O il°a • o•aTi `.4U •-C U. erd `YY
s�YE ME
wM r- •g V�.CU �y6 �. C.Y.��
w•;� Q�`ai n nM Yuw.xY 'c `"'E.Q'� �. u. Y, 'L'acYru uru
� OOA L 1 OV} Nyr t YY. nV ry
«
n
N c a e
yEtao M�r l� J �9 CrC.;Y
a7-
�V =yaO+4�CVi •"'qN L�.OM� C'A N2N ~�� ky4EQ.yy�
3 >Oy O.wYD Y —ONN YM Cyv OLOYw C�
S .Ui uyio °fuvo. �M a« Nuv .� $QriG�.
` wb'YNY �OU oC�YL NL a Np^ yY�y � yy wN
�� O �
SCaw Yq ^.N� >rod« v ^pp °18 °N. CC_9
^yEE��uoT uyu^ 9.gva qa.° C G ^«L EyN� nua,�C'oL.
�r6 OT O�y ^. aCy1TY 6Q .0 C'N�
pa YiNy O. �N — O Y�O C�Nayq� rO O 'CCG
�w
a ay�C +Tau' NM�wY NNE O. LU.O OY QG YfN w.•.O C
~CU��•N6CN aCy r�Ti+Nna TA Yi�uUii ^ aC ib.V z+i�
O C
bbNr TV Y pp,, NNr
6r Yg.6U2 Y Sys O I�OOCN OG V.M .IT YUS GORm. IL—.g 6�L 6V
m
g
T+Y
��gc Y
C « Oy (IYLL
On �a wT NTO
u
LNNNU —u rQ
L
a N � E pyT?T
w
S
.�
a•p� N �
`
�Y µNN >a ^�p�
g
> Tn
W
r Q Y =rn L u r
w cy
r T V.
Naa�^
g
LG *°
CZ
1��
H
•
�
vT...
1-i
. .C.'o 1 o a w
r w. � +: = w w
O
Z
U
Q:
•n
i
d
°r c cv ^a °� > aO.L-
y
cP� O 6... Syu Ca
NriaC. t:.
f Y y�°
Y �NSN pCp
Y -
G
w6YN L°..6`. ON.Gp
N = as C o L p
q l�� ONyL 4t -;a
u
N pV N V v V
OQC� `y aL- L o.0 sC
y w
Ez
Cl 6
dY C 9CU w�Y N�Q
ngW°o� C
1
.
N,G Cq��}
�.a
660.6 CNVY� �tw ».'n1S
b
^I -1
wqa i°a�au 'Y°4�u a °�mW
° La
r +•
Y
YTua uNn ..YL. ,
yn +r`IIT— uV00 W Y PCN yL
..vo �n
9 6qy
M -yi A.V p` Y °^ C y NCy
N�<u y Ca N.Y Y drLiN^ y^
A�yd
Na
v 4 ^o n Yq
01 O u V M V Y 1v 9 O. Y C
t N
Y'`^ � y N° d N A p^
' € a q g Z—.
pia no
q`vcdeMOMa
i. 3aia ^..°. LcEr -CiC V SAC
N CO'S NC »c O ss
C �w Y a6 W + ^) O.0 {LA.�Z vyin6
d
L
V A y
>
.� uq
^y
Aap
b
GO g
y�i LN
LW
Nom-
AC
_F,
_E
y yy
y,ME `
55_
Y
Y« A9
Fgvt'
Ly .p�E AY Y
NO,gq
�ll��
OY
aly
�y
n~
^ �
Z` -°j^ �
"
ra G.
ugW
M C O
Cd
>A
O
y$
T4�2 °N �p9 •
y p.Y "�aq g �0
' 1 ^ y yip ^.
Y.° -.rNL
�. =Cl�fi.
�aaVS
Y
a:
y
y
•ad . M
i.
N
<p♦
{yCt
qy y^ LAY
�C1yy °
- L.C�
<X .N%
_
�
25,
adqy
``y `�
N�nL�AV
6y`
tqr Yy�
"cO�Yf
3°�.q
..dA qtr
y>
A�Cy'
~ti.'n
4q
C �CLb Oq.a ♦p
OY.E T�1!
✓
O `��
q
,¢ qqq A
CLy`
^.+'
-z
hsS?
YA�4V
'pp 6r'O
"2y
�yy OC
CY qq 6= ep
yVO�N�
00 R�
—*=
y�
4���
Y
C'.'y
v� ^V
6O
Yp
CL Wu
ta.
CANON
'aWm«
G
Y a.
L O o
V
nr
CCs
9 ^p,
C
�.O
ti' ba
o
IM
Em
0701 02 o 6- 12--85 �P. C. Agenda Packet. o Page � of $
"'
'1
26 Y
O•
N
N
�G.
O
aaro'
C)^ O. C'C
^•pw
A Yb...
L O T
r Y&
7 Od
O
Y
Y
C
O
` x l m L T
pY ^Ct
L G
T Od0
O
O r
A N
O
D
Y
o
UqC NNOC 3
y
d O r
W p
Y'jd�
t
O
OLb q
rqN
L
M
L
Nv..
Yq
dT+ p N V=
! YC1dA r
abO
^
a
cfI
TvYr
V
ni+N
y 6N
�m
CNT
`^
�6N00 4N Tq
aT
Nw�N
Q7
•n
°moo
P�yT
u
W K
N`
p, ^Q
NN.0 YN C
t `
Cry.=n
TaT
a.OL
OL
L r
LO
'✓
^
C
d
qi
r
O o
Va d»^ <L Ly
N
rC q0 ai
o
'NTQ
L
W OC
•�,.5
N
O Gb
Qi V
EcE
p. CC
EE
L V
b
r p
u�L�
lV
O 1
L
r q
y W
U NY duN,iC
d Y y L W ..� O N a n N
4C> N b N 2
AL NE
Ot L O• f.
ry.
'
Eyyv
d
k
d
�L1
Od
qY�
G
COp n broN
Nr acC ^Y
C~
C N
yY•ri. c.
L��p
b nN
O
KI
N
Oµ
Y�Y
Y
Y
w tOq
=d9dd Y•� r
6 W.>n
pCdY
^O N
E
N
4E
L L
N»
noO 8uC
O�OC
TO�p,r
T .L
Cr�1
<l uCVtiY_..
1 L •^ -bo E
uq
0
v'�..
L-0�
b^
O
T � p O c
C C C qnq
T E
•� L a d�
^LPr
Tib
^ NnY
C^
,^ O.
cq
Y
F
r. 6LL
a
Vin$
1� nqy.
y•�LCr.DY
a+NT
C Y.Li•O
E Wdu
A�
� L
q
Ai �2
>.� O
'� a
b WY••C-
p
>A
O9
�N uWt a'
;•.� 4r'
• LO
d•°,+ cnT..
Q N 9� O.
T
ui.'o.,
d b w L>
�V
T
^
r U .. N
awi C)+Oo
vNi�u M1 P2
o
q> s
tN
Td
: E mac
C
WT ter�a.-
<iNQO�
Nf
n
O
N
O•.� � G C
• �Y w
Z
�O,.q Wp ubm,d
n6gN
agnt
F.
v O^ O
NO.
N Y
9r-0
u
CC
i t
C
Ao
A U r
4 �9. uNtu
W..N.uL
ZZ A .5O
V
FCZ �MW
:°.N
O
EN q.b-^E
•
y Ly
T
N
•
CCW
EN
.CF
O
a
L p
t
L•qb+ .p
r OrQ
q'
•
M
4
r
uL
m Cd
6 y
p
F
^ U
ryGC O+j
ab YCTECE
4
gg
Lb
r
N
U
O
d tCO.i>6r
.NdrG ULNy
MCA! «YO
G 3 ^n0
y
u On 4C>
V
b
q0
C
G OY
•
a.
N'O L ti
`
4. N d
�b .-•�YL
W Cr
d► O ^dY
L
on 'v
p��c
A
C
oc
�L
w$.
A
6
`
O
OY
T
V
G N 7 T U L L
U
O r r L O
_
C Y O
_ a Y
d n
•O
QAwm
Y
QVN
lGV
QV b iO Ai06
Qn 6A
W0.6:✓ .°+w
"'
v 4 o =a
fid
y06
T
yY°.04t F�
U d�
M� ' m du R +ON
�1::: EE c� y�!
YC C
LSa°iE
•
�.^
�V
'dN
u 4.a
L ^^
dGE
yiG=.f ~� ElrT
U .WO -OLG Cn�l`C
�d�d
q
rytd
V• Y^aCi3 �LG
CN
��Nd i u0.0
GCAdI
dl
O.
W}
9y
d.E'�
�.9
C 'C
yuU
ZT N q E �.^ O
.DCL
W 'O^ Y p YV�yd,6
qY d N
Of
b
•U "
L'
.L
g133 W
O
ZO
F
L g
.dc oo
Loq
la aT.
c "s
c
�
a+C�
aE�.� uo: aLi
S F4i u++ qq duu
�gCdU
OL
q qd
C2>
�n E'.'dN `. UD.d
G r.CCrvLL
F C.y0 ^0.
6
td
Y_
Za
F'.c_
.-.c4
Zd
Nar
nMU6u "°'
9 ♦+qS
1_i "'.
qW O''OU aib^
YaWY�
61ETOy
L
N
UO
^c
G�
L A
NS
d CCai fi,p
C ^Gd
N.�r.�d
N
`N
'u .°a e''
oYt u...
N"u °a m•'+
m GtiuN '^£c
"`°'s^c°
iu.
.
B iQ,.
Oid C'
>d
T �^Od'fC
LCi�
u^�LCY
q'C �•+6
E d9N3 �y T.tdt
0�It nt
^d
vl
R�
rzv
O i • Y ° NY O yLIDa
N
fdd
y
Oyu
V�V
4i djy
wtGIL C^
•C
q cZ.
c
�a
r
d a L H•. X. Q
Q
O p
C N N
•q-6Ua
L �
OYL my 4
L ^O-.°. N
. dlJ �
ry
r.0
TNyN N.0 hND
q
DD
}i9
g9Ob
Y� Ol
CM a>
LX G
Cy V d 9
CTZ LqQ u
pQ C� 06
A�d0. E.0. dy
'D
�
n'i
C
E.wln
L O_iJ
WW tY.IT
i AY
p
Ny
1° ^q M
rqN �NY+t
uiy. _'�y 9
r
c
4�Cd �H riY.d
A
b E
CN
d.°
�. •t°a.0.^. b
a
t q � .,,' N .-
� t 0 rd. N N
"w
L �� y
=v.0 .aye=
ON
K °L .DE-+V '�
L
�dNQN CagYp
p W r N
URw
D E
°`
004C}
qp
yC C
a Q,dn
bL LtypE
Ne3,�
rn
O yl LL G A
vgygT �" u ^MC
LY
r
NFO
m .G T
4.NGQ
O �L
d Y
q E �
4 tiw=. �
� u
N O GSU„
rt NE.a 'E'•°a u.�..
t
d:O Nr
C
W 4
CN Ta
9 •
N � ggi'i� C
�QG .n�Y� " °dO
ydjY
qNr�
a-Z
NNYO
.� Y u q
d �
b C C 2 � .• �
� o « �.4 0. �� '° p
iL
4.'G
<
g d g 2
c
q
—2
u
4
c
NnO: +�
EXa
W
Q ^N 7
1.ND
dY�'O rn�D
C_Cr�'e tYy.ggN
N'D1t
AEY
LO^dO.a .
WW
C
d
W Uf
G Ya+U
AUIL
u C
v
to jeE
LoV.
o
n
A
V°
aui NE
� OOU6Y.
LaN O
U qq
u j
>r
i
T
q
V
C O
9
p
CO
TC UO^•d
L� q
rn••
y L
N
�N
«qA
uuu
C��
• 6
•L
UU °u.Lw
Z
U p
a «^ O
o N
gNrn
O d
d
a
q^
Oyi 1•°.b
y
c 0
41
V
qyE
.-qua
�NL PO
ON'L
d
UNN �
Qu.0
Nq
nLL�t„
V.q
n W
�U ^m
w ° O L q
ENr
F
.-
Y^^. rui
y
L -. O
I L
O O O d A
A
«
Uup
- c a •
At
P ,�.•-
T�fi
•„•
•Fiia
Nq
G�
°y 3
W
Ems^
L.r
aldG ^Na
GdL
Ud
�
E�.`p -.°
ysA
N�v6i
uHC�n°
vimu
EN u
♦y°+ +~°'
w 9} 9
<C °'�.°•
up
E.dW
nA j
ea
OCd.
N w OA U N�O
q L °^ qy gc
d y q
d w
O q
u
d 9+ u 6
yy'-
u
o
ALON
«
A��
w
oo
°uz
>oo
�c
IioatOi
UOyEa
QODUO
}
u= ^a
uD
UA C =. L�
L
^_ T-1
n E
U q
81 .
i U
a
U
T GO -w
m O
p1r°
•+N U9
6q
¢u6
6Yu
J
a U
Ta
T�
a u
Ca
oA
L S
.. ccq. 1
O
9 .0
o «ma
A C..•
o
p�U
r a+
dq
b ^r
6.
3o
Yd6Un
1tiW C
Y
O
A
L L
U
L
d^ L
9p 6u
u.v
9�S Ua C
Un Of Of
Cw�S
Y�>,0••C-
9-
^ A
p N
u
u
^
c
n
u
.c ° C 2 a
.
w.w�.o
4-
°y
p
gy,
vi'ia
�a
qA o'
9u o
Yo 'c w.°-
Q.
y.
°p u�
67,
t'7f
a°u^
u4L�LL
N.�
NgWY.
gnu
COQ L V
o
U
.�-,°c ~v
°y
'� °q'
°.°.• a.+
^.e
No
•Mn
2 "p�LC
O= U
U C
12.oi
oa EUU
E
o
upO1e
A Ap
ac 12
vo.
NM
+'
qo
ae
> n ^Lp�.
o "� a
�.o++..
car
acOq
•
C
p^ N
Ofw` ej
11
a•.C.
RD
C
S, ° q x
>O.
l
y y ..°,
1
O U O U
�E A V:
1.1
•
Oaapi
d
V
aA
1 6
yN
^ C
NCU
! ° O V
O OC
QC
°.
U ,
Q
u L
C 6
NC H
q.
°
U �� Q1 °0 y
^C°
A
.
GOL
N
v A .° C
.�
�CF
W N V
l
nU
�
u�
� C.
R
NC Gp
.+ O
•
ynY
�.
�. �Ep
N
V HVay.
q
oUa}
¢q g000+E.L
O
NO TT
au
r.1 t
K •t
u
i- u.
•a q
A
1
Q1
b
�O
r 111 O
C
j 1
Np'C Cpl
3
2 N
�
O A
oy
Rd •
S
x m
S r 7
r
b �
A m
kO
cV
�C
M
n 9 T
M
7
1
Q1
e
0
q Sq
3n r4
C\
C
N N
Nor
q;
tan
ar
oy
39
qF
x m
N
b �
A m
kO
cV
E atCCNT�
m0.6n
l
f• H
N--S
. �
6 q.
pyua
yri .r..Y�
o A
A•
3
O i
0
A
e
0
q Sq
3n r4
o�
N N
Nor
q;
tan
ar
oy
39
qF
c3
N
kO
cV
E atCCNT�
m0.6n
W3 �N
� pr
R
N
6 q.
pyua
yri .r..Y�
C y F
R N
J 7
�O
N
ol2 O.n
ti
'CL
3
3 n
n
b mio
Mr
sa
n
W�
No_
c
R6
°o3 �rqps
9 3� O
i
o
n
�ul
q
io
e
r O
E atCCNT�
m0.6n
W3 �N
C'fN1
R
N
i
9.9.Sq
pyua
yri .r..Y�
oo c. 'mi
Tq jVq
n
O n
n�
O Y
SO
O: SZ�
C •Ca
O ql~0.
0 ~r.
1n N.a�
y rn
is �',�
y
'(S0�
r
O•
l nn
R d�O•
n
�C \r
SO'
3.r
F
� ^"1 jy
OO'
a3 lq
OaR
CV
q0
e�t i.
0.; �"fi
n�curip
�N
S �O� `
�b nN
M9
Oilmen
9<r'
C GdN
9s9
N°
Ze
n 1^ v a
to n °
•c. s
n;
S N C
''c
a. a y
O
dq
wa
p
n n_
y n
O'1
SID
tNDgp�
ip
SC.�;
� G
� OI
d O
C 6 1
a0 �
1 6 F -N•1
')
O
E� �. � r
S
r � O' ? O O
O` �
6 O' M
1 O
R!�
O
S
•@ OI n n
0
Z
4J
Qi
n
0
d
u
I
w r Y
O
W O D
A
y
d L o
^
"-
L oA • '°d i
�
A
y
a n
o
^W
cis ^O
my
oG
e ou
y
g-
°
T
n°
Y
•-
O
y
ADd
9
NT
_
K
� A
c C
L
L u
•.• a
I
\
q
O
Oy
v =
o�`o c`
ns�n
d d
Y
V
o
°m
W ^
O O N d o
T
u d
=E
ntl
Cry
d L
OLM
o
Y u T O
A
A
L
�v9
,d9 Y
sue.
EEu ^� as
tN
�xy
La Ld
LAu
a E�
Nu nu9
oll
O
I
w r Y
O
W O D
A
y
d L o
9
"-
of
c
O
EN ^O
YedZ iY
Ld
dY
Ata
NO gad
r •
o
^W
cis ^O
my
oG
�°.'^' A
g-
WY
n°
v
Gy
m Y'
« a c
io
6 c
L u
I
\
q
v =
o�`o c`
ns�n
d d
Y
V
o
°m
W ^
O O N d o
T
eWY
u
u
A O p
o
OCO S
rd.
OLM
o
Iv
Z
� D
N N a
Y d wl
U
Y L
d
E W q
O T
Y I ••
u � u
C 6 N
¢S
d d Y d
E � C
r Uu� aG
A M �
O E E
G A
O
c�
E t Z e
CI••I� N V)
OA Off' O
i U Y d
a
=N oT M
N G N Y
c ?
�nYm •^
u"'q vE
Ad G
a�,GV +o•L
o c m
^ Y
U
W ` q
Cam^
�U N
osa
o
W d.
xou
rni
�cu
�J 0,
LA ~a
o u
\6v1J t0] D
/1
o -u
3
Y e
S W
N C
r
N r
0
n c
� Y
u°
T.
Ha
e
r
'O u°
vW Epc
q L L
O
aV g G
c i
¢Y 4 2
O
y
nTmV ALI. S9 A Til�VA l�TTl�A TRAT.7!'� A
STAFF REPORT
F'E Z
DATE: June 12, 1985 1977
TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner
BY: Nancy Fong, Assistant Planner
SUBJECT: DESIGN REVIEW FOR TRACT 12040 - ANDEN GROUP -
Reapplication for design review of new architectural
elevations and changes to the site plan for '328
condominiur units on 25.6 acres of land in the Medium
Residential District 8 -14 du /ac, located at the np- theast
corner of Turner Avenue and Arrow Highway - APN 208 -341-
11.
I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION:
A. Action Requested: Approval of revised site plan and elevations
B. Purpose: Construction 328 condominium units
C. Location: Northeast corner of Turner Avenue and Arrow Highway
D. Parcel Size: 25.6 a0-,es
E. Existinq Zoning: ;- Medium Residential District 8 -14 du /ac
F. Existing Lanf Use: Vacant
G. Density: 12..85 du /ac
H. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: 12.85 du /ac
North - Single Family Homes; Low Residential District 2 -4
du /ac
South - Vacant, new homes; Medium Residential District 8 -14
du /ac
East - Creek, vacant; Creek and Medium High Residential'
District 14--24 du /ac
West Under construction, apartment; General Commercial
District, Medium Residential District 8 -14 du /ac
IT €M M
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
Tentative Tract 12040 - Anden Group
June 12, 1985
Page n2
I. General Plan Designations,
North - 'Single Family Homes, Low Residential District 2 -4
du /ac
South - Vacant, new homes; Medium Residential District 8 -14
du /ac
East - Creek, vacant; Creek and Medium High Residential
District 14 -24 du /ac
West Under construction, apartment; General Commercial
District, Medium Residential District 8 -14 du /ac
J. General Plan Designations:
Project Site - Medium Residential
North - Low Residential
South - Medium Residential
East - General Commercial, Medium Residential
West - Flood Control, Medium High Residential
K. Site Characteristics: The site is vacant and slopes to the
south at approximate y 2 %. Deer "reek Channel is located to
the east property boundary. Vegetation consists of indigenous
weeds and shrubs.
IL. ANALYSIS:
A. General: This project was originally approved by the Planning
Commission on November 25, 1981, and the condominium map has
been recorded. The developer is proposing new elevations for
the 328 condominiums and redesigning the site plan by deleting
7 of the total 48 building pads. Each building will contain 8
units versus the 7 Alex buildings previously approved. This
will maintain the same number of units, but increase the
percentage of land area for common open space. The overall
site plan - basically remains the same in regard to building
location, circulation and open space. Attached for your review
are the previous site plan (Exhibit "C "), and the proposed one
(Exhibit "D ").
The arrangement of the building pads with units on the second
floor creates a streetscape of garages; however, this same
arrangement of buildings was in the previously approved site
plan.
9
Im
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
Tentative Tract 12040 - Anden Group
June 12, 1485
Page #3
The previous architecture features w9od siding and asphalt
shingle roof materials (Exhibit "H"). The new architecture is
Spanish style with off -white stucco walls and red the roof
(Exhibit "I "). The new elevation has more architectural
detailing. Overall, the new elevations are an upgrade of the
previous ones. The proposed unit sizes range from 875 square
feet for a two bedroom to 1,340 square feet for a three
bedroom.'- The proposed prices range from $71,500 to $88,500:
The previous unit sizes range from 1,140 square feet to 1,465
square feet,
B. Design Review Committee: Tha Committee stated that the revised
site plan is in substantial compliancs with current development
standards of the Medium Residential District. The Committee
recommended approval of the project, provided that the
following improvements be made which the developer agreed to:
1. Provide landscaping pockets between garage doors.
2. Provide two different shades of color and similar
design of the garage doors to create variety and
interest.
3. Design guest parking at 9GO angle within the site
and relocate the guest parking at the curve of the
driveway to mitigate potential traffic hazard.
h Staff futher recommends that the wood patio fence for ground
floor units be upgraded with additional details.
C. Grading Committee_ The Grading Committee was concerned with
the 5 foot to 8 foot grade difference t'tween the building pads
along Arrow Highway and the street graac (see Exhibit "E" and
"F "). However, this conceptual grading plan is consistent with
the previously approved one. According to the applicant's
engineer, the fill is necessary for drainage purposes.
D. Environmental Assessment: A Negative Declaration was issQed by
the City Cancil on January 6, 1982, with the previously
approved tract. Based upon further review of this project,
Staff haS ;�"entified one environmental impact: noise. The
project site is impacted by road noise (60 — 65 db) from Arrow
Highway which requires a Noise Study per the General Plan. The
noise study proposed the following mitigation measures:
`r ���
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
Tentative Tract 12040 - Andea Group
June 12, 1985
Page #4
o A sound barrier cnnsisting of a wall or wall/berm
combination, with the top of the wall elevation
being 6 feet above the centerline of Arrow Highway
elevation, shad be required. (See Exhibit "L" for
exact location of this sound barrier.)
o A final acoustical report to provide mitigation
measures for interior noise reduction in complying
with Title 25 standards shall be required.
III. FACTS FOR FINDINGS The project is consistent with the
General Plan and Development Code. The project, with the
added mitigation measures, will not be detrimental to public
health, safety, cause nuisance, or cause significant adverse
environmental impacts. In addition, the proposed use,
building design, and site plan, together with the recommended
Conditions of Approval, are in compliance with the applicable
provisions of the Development Code and City Standards.
IV. CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised in Tile Dail
Re^ort, public hearing notices were sent to all the prc A1--1
owners within 300 feet of the project site, and a 4 foot x Sr
foot public notification sign was posted at the site.
On April 16, 1985, the developer conducted a neighborhood
meeting in order to present their rev?sed plans to the
adjacent residents and to receive input from them. Two
families from the single family tract to the north attended
the meeting. The consensus amcng the attendees was that the
proposed chap -ges were an upgrade of the project and that they
would lice this project to be constructed.
V. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning
Commission consider all material and input regarding this
project. If the Commission concurs with findings, adoption
of the attached Resolution with Conditions of Approval would
be in order.
Re pectful ubmitted,
Rick Gomez
City Planner
RG:NF :cv
LZ
11
�r
r ;
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
Tentative Tract 12040 - Anden Group
June `?, 1985
Page #5
Attachments: Residents Petition
Exhibit "A° - Location and Land Use Map
Exhibit "B" - Site Utilization Map
Exhibit "C" - Previously approved site plan
Exhibit "D" - New detailed site plan
Exhibit "E" - Conceptual Grading Plan
Exhibit "F" - Building Pad Elevation along Arrow Hwy
Exhibit "G" - Conceptual Landsrape Plan
Exhibit "H" - Cross Sections
Exhibit "I" Previously approved elevations
Exhibit "J" - New Elevations (2)
Exhibit "K" - Floor Plans
Exhibit "L" - Phasing Plan (2)
Exhibit "M" - Noise Level Contours
Exhibit "N" - Proposed location for sound barrier
Original Resolution of Approval 81 -139
Resolution of Approval with Conditions
rl
D
TO- THE RANCHO CUCAHONGA PLANNING COMMISSION
SUSjtcT: CIMARRON OAKS. IX
We. residents of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, have met with
representatives of The Anden Group regarding the design changes
proposed for their development at the northeast comer of Turner
Avenue and Arrow Highway. In our opinion the changes proposed
are an improvement over the approved design. We therefore offer
our support and regWist the planning Commission amend the
original approval Frith °.he changes proposed herein.
NAILS
DDRESS
7�
1 Off � ��G^•-- .+r^��
� JF1-^- tJ4^C.w�.e....
z . 1
L LOW
M /
1 •1 LI ,. a �i _��t � j
r
Iwt.uri! � ' � /7 7twT•W[rwl !•
C, CWAARON OAKS IX
PROJECT SITE
o �---�
� Q
r �
,CO ERCIAL
tuo
J
Y � i
�.
f
COMIAERCIAL
nw.r=
i RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM
� � tuac .�nuet
� •s
1�rORTf-{
k
k
CITY OF am . 124#0 - '
RAl\Ui0 CLTCAIVIC RIGA TrrLE:_� iu drams
PLA.NNM MBION EXHIBPr ?-- _ SCALE= �''
ul
AO
Ilk
a-
Im
IG LW
l tj
it
UINM
151
®iuJ
NORTH
CITY OF ITEM: fWAW --220-9ft?
RANCUDCUUAIVIONGA Tmm- AM
PLANNM DIVISON EXHJBM SCALE,
ezWST 6`PtitPRt 3fYE CHPdE isisr &'
8LOCX W19t G GiF iYPOO 6EtiC
WITH LAN05CFP /NG .�%
. x E.iI�T, t�gXrc'
Mow
SE 1,fY T RUI 6' -ORTH PROffi TN
LINE
G
IWRTH
11
m,
Ac go.
ttt
fA'Cf
d'
..
i
Ammva Flo
pzoam�f
r� �d VldH �ss�E
•'3
awa
UMV
ii �PE/*�Tk6aTiA
B
f AF
T0rfi1 fCr. EX
Pool:
�
SECTION _ _- THRU. EAST R.
G
IWRTH
11
m,
wimW
WX ,
Ilk
"Aw*
di
A$
Mog
grim,lk
V
—t
law
Au - pqm no
�F 5
ME
i
r
FRONT ELEVATION CIMARRON OAKS
THE ANDEN uROUP
TRACT 12040
CITY OF RoN6HO CUCAMONGA
RE AR ELEVATION CIMARRON OAKS
THE ANDEN GKOUP
TRACT CITY CA TRANCHO CUCAMONGA
E
ICI ►-
rs ..,I
DIDI ELEVATION
CIMARRON OAKS
Tmd AN.IN GROUP
THGCT 1_040
CITY OF AANI:NO CUOAMON &.a
CIMARRON OAKS
THE ANDEN W6<OUP ,
CITY OF FAH HO CUCAMUHOA
, rl
iii r
Vk
3
JIM
ir-
ir''J
I E-71
ii
iQ5 T rLOO�
TITLE: — ,rnmff sm
EXHIBrr- SCALE.
uw
!6 ".
A'
tiN
iii
,tl�s
ae L
nL
It`
ITEM 2.ol Q - �PiE�1l9E7
TITLE: — ,rnmff sm
EXHIBrr- SCALE.
RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION
The following information should be provided to the City of Rancho Cucamonga
Planning Division in order to aid the school district in assessing tW r
ability to accommodate tha.- proposed residential development. Developers are
required to secure letters from the school district for accommodating the
increased number of students prior to issuance of building permits.
Name of Developer and -GKM ue Trac,1;,No.: The Anden Graun• Ti7act 1 `%4n
Specific Location of Project:ye
PHASE I PHASE 2, PHASE 3 PHASE 4 TOTAL
1. Number of single
family units: See attached vbasing; snedule)
2. Number of multiple
family units:
LZ
3. Date proposed to
begin construction:
UnImom at this time
4. Earliest date of
occupancy:
UnImawn at this time ,
Model#
of TAD&Mdw
5• DMWM ��°
# of
Bedrooms Size
Est.
Price.
A =_
R
r
--l-I&M. 1340 S:_ F
I Bdrm. _Ljo ff
--I-Bdrm. 171q BSF
88,500
88.500
82.500
'F
F
F
--- 1i 0 S�F
L Bd=. 965 ,�
2 Bdrm. 465 SF
82- 50/01
77 5, p �
- 777,5500i_
G
2 Bdrm. 875 SF
71,500
H
2 Bdrm. 1000 SF.
73,500
1
Kl
R
n Andes 1,
PHASE
1
2.
3
4
5
6
Tcm4L
8 FIEX UNTiS
N MTIP E FA MY
(Wildinp)
DWKLLING UNITS
4
32
8
64
8
64
7
56
8
64
6
48
41
328
f3i Lw
I
I
i
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
PART. II - INITIAL STUDY
ENVIROXIMNTAL CHECKLIST
F LI:tG DAS 4-10-86' LOG NUMBER: %r�SII��i
PROJECT: =II q/�I L jg11TS
PROJECT LOCATION._ PC22, Aemil
I. ENVIRO`MENTAL IMPACTS
(Explanation of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required ot, attached
sheets).
YES %LkYBE NO
1. Soils and Geoloev. Will the proposal have
significant results in:
a. Unstable ground conditions or in changes in
geologic relationships?
b. Disruptions, displaceuents, compaction or
burial of the sail?
c. Change to topography or ground surface
contour intervals?
d. The destruction, covering or modification
of any :anique geologic or physical features?
7
e. Any potential increase in Wind or water
erosion of soils, affecting either on or off
site conditons?
/
f. Changes in erosion siltation, or deposizion?
-� —
g. Exposure of people tzr property to geologic
t
hazar,,s such as earthquakes, landslides, mud-
slides, ground failure, or similar hazards?
h. An increase in the gate of extraction and /or
use of any mineral resource?
2. Hydroloey. Will the proposal have significant"
- results in:.
'
YaV
YES MAYBE NO
a.
Changes in currents, or the course of direction
Of flowing streams,' rivers. or ephemeral stream
channels?
j
b.
Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns,
or the rate and amount of surface water
/
runoff?
c.
Alterations to the course or flow of flood
waters?
/
d.
Change in the amount of surface water in any
body of water?
i
e.
Discharge into surface waters, or any
alteration +f surface water quality?
J
f.
Alteration of groundwater characteristics?
/
r
g.
Change in the quantity of groundwaters,
eit`.:r through direct additions or with-
drawals, or through interference with an
aquifer?
Quality?
Quantity?
h.
The reduction in the amount of water other-
wise available for public water supplies?
i.
Exposure of people or property to water
related hazards such as flooding or seiches?
_ 1
3. Air Quality. Will the proposal have significant
results in:
a.
Constant or periodic air emissions from mobile
or indirect sources?
Stationary sources?
b.
Deterioration of ambient air quality and /or
interference with the attainment of applicable
air quality standards?
c.
Alteration of local or regional climatic
conditions, affec -.ing air movement, moisture
/
or temperature?
4. Biota
r
Flora. Will the proposal have significant results
ia:
Ank
a.
Change in the characteristics of species,
including diversity, distribution, or number
of any species of plants?
%
t
b.
Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare
'
or endangered species of plants?
.
: ?age
3 .
c. Introduction
YS �! z� H �_p
. of new or disruptive species of
plants 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?
b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare
or endangered species of animals?
/
c. Introduction of new or disruptive species or
animals into an ai.ea, or result in a barrier
to the migration 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, diversity, or growth rate of
p
the human po;+ulation of an area?
L
b. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or
/
create a demand for addi :ional housing?
6. Socio- Economic Factors. 'Jill the proposal have
significant results in:
a. Change in local or regional socia- economic
characteristics, including economic or
commercial diversity,..tax rate, and property
values?
b. Will project costs be equitably distributed
among project beneficiaries, i.e., buyers,
tax payers or project users?
t
7. Land Use and Flannine Considerations. Will the
proposal have significant results in?
a. A substantial alteration of the present or
7
planned rand use of an area?
/
`r
b. A conflict with ar..y designatior- �abjectives,
policies, or adopted plans of any
governmental
entities?
�^
c. An impact upon the qulaity or quantity of
existing consumptive or non- consumptive
•,
recreational opportunities?
.
?age L
YES ?!kYBE
NO
8. Transportation. Will the proposal have significant
results in:
a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular
J
movement?
%
'
b. Effects on existing streets, 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?
e. Alterations to present patterns of circula-
tion or movement of people and /or goods4
/
f. Alterations to or effects on present and
potential water - borne, rail, mass transit or
air traffic?
g. Increases in traffic hazards to motor vehicles,
bicyclists or pedestrians?
9. Cultural Resources. Will the proposal have
significant results in:
a. A disturbance to the integrity of archaeological,
paleontological, and /or historical resources?
10. Heald:, Safety, and Nuisance Factors. Will the
proposal have significant results in:
,.
a. Creation of any health hazard or potential health
hazard:
/
b. Exposure of people to potential health hazards?
c. A risk of explosion or release of hazardous
substances in the event of an accident?
d. An increase in the number of individuals
or species of vector or pathenogenic
organisms or the exposure of people to such
k
organisms?
e.
e: Increase in existing noise levels?
f. Exposure of people to potentially dangerou
noise levels? Af
�ttcccc�� at- 6_T
r
g. The crzation of objectionable odors?
h. An increase in light or glare?
I
R
Page
YES HAYS. No
11. Aesthetics. Will the proposal have significant
results in:
a- The obstruction or degradation of
any scenic
vista or view?
b. The creation of an aesthetically offensive
site?
l
c. A conflict with tie objective of designated
r
or potential scenic corridors?
12. Utilities and Public Services. Will the proposal
have a significant
need for new systems, or
alterations to the following:
a• Electric power?
b. Natural or packaged gas?
c. Communications systems?
d. Water supply?
_-
e. Wastewater facilities?
f. Flood control structures?
Solid
g. waste facilities?
h. Fire protection?
7
i- Police protection?
/
J. Schools?
k. Parks or other recreational facilities?
1
I. Maintenance of public facilities, including
- -^ /
roads and flood control facilities?
/
m. Other governmental services?
j
13. Enerev and Scarce Resources. Pill the proposal
have significant
_!
results in:
a• Use of substantial or excessive fuel or energy?
b., Substantial increase in demand upon existing
sources of energy?
c. An increase in the demand for development of
new sources of energy?
- d,. An increase or perpetuation of tha consumption
of
non - renewable forms of energy, when feasible
renewable sources of energy are available?
i
i
Page 6
YES NO
e. Substantial depletion of any nonrenewable or
scarce natural resource? r
14. Mandatory Findings of SiQZificance,
a. Does the project have the potential to degrz;ie
the qual'_ty of the; environment, substantia'.ly
reduce the habitat of fish or wildlife sracies,
cause a fish or wildlife population tc;!top
below self sustaining levels, threaten to
eliminate a plant or animal cosnunity, reduce"
the number or restrict the range of a rare or
endangered plant or animal or eliminate
important examples of the maj6'r periods of /
California history or prehi^tory?
b. Does the project have t'Tie potential to achieve
short -term, to the disadvantage of long- term,
environmental goals? (A short -term impact on the
environment is one which occurs in a relatively
brief, definitive period of time while long-
term impacts will endure well into the future).
c. Does the project have impacts which are
individually limited,, but cumulatively
considerable? (Cumulatively considerable
means that the incremental effects of an
individual project are consiL�rable when viewed
in connection with the effects of past projects, /
and probable future projects). 1
d. Does the project have environmental effects
which will cause substantial adverse effects /
on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
II. DISCUSSION OF ENFIROIM. NTAL EVALUATION (i.e., of affirmative answers to
the above questions plus a discussion of proposed mitigation measures).
Health, Safety-and Nuisance Factors;
10 ft The project site is impacted by road noise from Arrow Highway,
therefore, the development of this project will expose its
residents to potential dangerSdS levels of noise. A noise
study has been prepared by an acoustical consultant to
investigate the degree of impact and provide for mitigation
measures as follows.
o A sound barrier consisting of a wall or wall /berm
combination, with the top of the wall elevation
being 6 feet above the centerline of row Highway
elevation, shall be required.
o A final acoustical report to provide mitigation
measures for interior noise reduction in complying
with Title 25 standards shall be required.
Page 7 !
III. DETERMI'ATIO }I
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find the proposed project COLD, NOT have a significant effect
on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECL*%ATION will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant
effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect
in this case becauAe the mitigation measures de1'cribed on an
attached sheet hale been added to the project. 'EA NEGATIVE
DECLARATION WILi;'fE PREPARED.
EDI find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the
envirnment, and an ENVIRONMENT IMPACT REPORT is required.
Da,e
J Signature
Title
ov
(i e %Z Y T 07Y . ANAL
It
RESOLUTION NO. 81 -139
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANMING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, CONDITIONALLY
APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 12040
WHEREAS, Tentative ``race Map No. 12040, hereinafter "Map" -
submitted by Pfeiler & Associated Engineers, Inc., applicant, for the
purpose of subdividing the rival property situated in the City of Rancho
Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino, State of California, described as
a 23.6 site located on the northeast corner of Arrow Route and
Turner Avenue into 7 lots, regularly came before the Planning Commission
for public hearing and action on November 2S, 1981; and
WHEREAS, the City Planner has recommended approval of the Map
subject to all conditions set forth in the Engineering and Planning
Divisions reports; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has read and considered the
Engineering and Planning Divisions reports and has considered other
evidence presented at the public hearing.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga does resolve as follows:
SECTION 1: The Planning Commission makes the followinc ` ndings
in regard to Tentative Tract No. 12040 a,,d the Map thereof:
(a) The tentative tract is consistent with all applicable
interim and proposed general and specific plans
(b) The design or improvements of the tentative tract is
consistent with all applicable interim and proposed
general and specific plans;
(c) The site is physically suitable for the type. of development
proposed;
(d) The design of the Subdivision is not likely to cause
substantial environmental damage and avoidable injury to
humans and wildlife or their habitat;
(e) the tentative tract is not likely to cause serious public
health problems;
(f) The design of the tentative tract will not conflict with
any easement acquired by the public at large, now of
record, for access :through or use of the property within
the proposed subdivision.
Resolutio 1-40. 81 -139
Page 2
(g} create a verse impacts on the
environment and a Negative Declaration is issued
SECTION *2: Tentative Tract Map No. 12040, a copy of which is
attached hereto, is hereby approved subject to al -1 of the following
conditions and the attached Standard Conditions:
PLANNING DIVISION
1. A directory shall be placed near each entrance to the
project showing the location of specific units.
2. The detailed landscape plans are to include_ adequate
features for buffering between this ,project and the
single family subdivi5`on to the north, as well as,
between this project a .,the Deer ;Creek Channel,
3. N detailed plan of any roof mounted equipment shall
be submitted showing how it is to be integrated
architecturally with the building. The plan is to
be reviewed by the Design Review Committee prior to
the issuance of building permits.
4. Adequate landscaping and a stable z ;—_ term fence
or wall, shall be installed along the north property
line and shall be subject to review and approval by
the Design Review Committee prior to issuance of
building permits.
ENGINEERING DIVISION
5. The required on-site and off -site easements for the
proposed storm drain system shall be dedicated to the
City. The applicant shall make all necessary arrange-
ments with San Bernardino County Flood Control District
to provide the connection to 'Deer Creek Channel.
6. The existing temporary construction easement along
Deer Creek Channel shall not be occupied or obstructed
until the easement %i, �iacated by the Flood Control
District.
7. A lien agreement or in -lieu cas:i deposit of the (1201
of the estimated construction cost) at the discretion
of the City Engineer shall be provided for the future
construction of the landscaped median island on Arrow
Route (1(2 width).
a
Rps,-,Iution No. 81-139
Page 3
& Left turn ingress and egress to the project from Arrow
Route shall be 'p-eohibited once the median island on
Arrow Route is constructed. The developer shall in-
corporate a clause in the C.C. & R's notifying the
prospective homeowners of this access restriction.
9. The portion of the existing P.C-C pavement to the,,
center line of Turner Avenue as determined by the/tity
Engineer, shall be removed and replaced with abp4ijit
concrete pavement. Minimum thickness of asphalt !6-on-
crete pavement on Turner Avenue shall be 6".
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 25TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 1981.
PLANNIN8 COMMISSION YFHE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY:
J9 ey � g
y i , Chdirmant
Secretary o the-11"!`nning Commission
I, JACK LAM, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and
regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of
the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning
Commission held on the 25th day of November, 1981, by the following
vote-to-wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Sceranka, Rempel, Dahl, Tolstoy, Kinr
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None
rl
r4
A
^
o
9
A
� °.. MU
L �C q'..l .�
6.A
rc f•6
c
CN
>
�> •+E
S .�. �. y..A�
w GN rok °ro 0
�L
`!.J
ro,�OZp�
r
Y
ro L
° '+4 C ➢1.
°•« •- F. L1
j�.
•Li.
5 y`
A
b
L L
Y
0. £
7.
.'r�
n
i
^ rte•.
MW Yb
tA..S LCO
^
iy
C
° C
u ^+
���.r.b�G
G.
OCC
d
v^ E
^C
dd
°G �C °NCl
L U� aW.S Y6A L
b~
de
4�Lt OC
.bG q
A
LG
V L N> Y
^ qrr CXOI�.�c
yv
.+G �'�p0.
NY
0� O u °b O«�
GV
Cd•
>
`°'
i
au.0 >.a vcc o m c°
>p
^O
u O= >n�T t.0 0 'db.B� Ly
Ju>i0
' ' LuyC
Ce,
3
O..c.�E l
EL
?
�c
yp}A
CW
NO aro
�
NG Fq rEJRy ..r Nd
O to A:n W.... X 2 tJ �.A. ��wi>aV LQ
� •
VLF
N r'
�u'S ^•�
.Qa
.Nq i .qi N
�
cu
J ^
O
^ Y
v
�Y
W
�C ^� .••N
A NC ?� �q00
`Y
A0.
«�L+ 4y'
~
V
¢ `
A
0
M
OTS _
v¢ Z b
O C Q
b• t j C..
01 M b
yE
O, Vy 6
v
.. C, r
4 D
CC'
tM1 L. u
O
_
d
G
1
i
CO e-•
a
�.... 'aa
u ro
'
o A
a
°
0 0
z
cr
O W
Z
O ¢
L
Q °
=O. q �'^
u. .. V N
.Tim 0 et
t C�.
4
.u.' v a
•-
}i y
ao.
L-
bu
g rro
fU
o
A
L i
"'.ui
.c
.t
f0
� o _
.� °
b �`
j•
A
�_ Oy V
«
i•O
•c.. �a
no`o
o Env
S
. z ..
c.+
j C
U v a
a
i c� aarory
o
°r
Y
cc
Y ro m
p
G
u N
Ya YN
4A r. .0 C
.e be
bt�L A u4f
oz.
YG
F —E.
-2 S O
zi L
d
tC A r
4J
b G ¢ v v
L L V O b y y
a u u
A
T
b b
d
roy
aec
L" b^ .Ymw
°CY
o
q ev
bzy
Q. Q
�� V
ONE
1'- LQL 0.d V
Ad.� O
d` eL
r «M
a °
Gi
rl
r4
A
�I
O
Ll
O
s
pp
m let b ri p
O
G
_
b
b
b «
O
a ti
•1c
= �IfJ
O
q
^
_ Gv4
p y
a
S �
«
N
a
gnaw.
v q NN cno
as Y'+y
uvL
_c
q
L
M.
N qc
�L
p
c «n �. -.L�c
°
6...
'
�j Ga
T
p « T
ga I
uz�H
N4
� r
LO aqi
v7COCC 4YU gnu �C
i` inyuo
N�aw
luz
O
1. 6
E�.�«
L �
.- , N S . na° ae
qvO
NO
Co
� O .emu 00 '
c ��
« S
e. G_uc=
J«
_U
SN
.ytGr
`L�
a
-q
eq
U2
.�
y}t
u
_
b n
. °e
t
XI
� X(
O
X. � (.
Sa T
t..'o
- YO
c
•"J �.
q
80
6
u�`
n
°u
�•
E.c`
>_
mow.
�
V
Sr
v
tov
'O
000
q
«n
e-
b
tt
'L
Cry
r�3nL
as
q QJ
i4
P'� O
n�Q
b0
t
t
2
o •
«
�=Q
�Ej
OI U.
[nC
O C
G�
� •
O
i
r
N«
c'sa
tno3
i-e
m let b ri p
O
G
_
b
b
b «
O
a ti
•1c
= �IfJ
O
a
_ Gv4
a
a
S �
c
N
a
gnaw.
v q NN cno
as Y'+y
uvL
_c
q
L
M.
N qc
�L
p
c «n �. -.L�c
°
6...
'
�j Ga
T
p « T
m let b ri p
N
J L
r�}I O
c
u
O
a ti
•1c
= �IfJ
O
a
_ Gv4
.••.
�"m
`:=
c_u
uci?
o«
�y 7Y Uq.
G G •_ ��
N qc
�L
•..
c «n �. -.L�c
°
6...
ga I
uz�H
N4
� r
LO aqi
v7COCC 4YU gnu �C
i` inyuo
N�aw
luz
O
1. 6
E�.�«
L �
.- , N S . na° ae
qvO
NO
Co
� O .emu 00 '
c ��
« S
e. G_uc=
J«
Y
NI
4
�«
4ca "Z
-p G A
oNnu °cv : u.4,
a O
a
N
a
«_p �_�� e
.••.
�"m
`:=
c_u
uci?
o«
�y 7Y Uq.
G G •_ ��
^Eeigq
M7 LRNU
OIL
V�
q
tN..G.N
T�3 w
�L UOJ °u ?3
°
6...
uz�H
=Y i•
� r
LO aqi
v7COCC 4YU gnu �C
i` inyuo
N�aw
wa Ea ...0 M5
w G G 7 ? 6
E�.�«
4 G
4
a4GOy
G4.-.
`S.O� 72
« 4
c ��
« S
e. G_uc=
J«
22�
qv
apcc
u
'a nb
o v q
L'S
Euq v�
i
4
�«
4ca "Z
-p G A
oNnu °cv : u.4,
a O
Ldp
p
4 d W Ci P.ii u �.
pa
O
118,31!
o
Lq
NuG
uz u =`E� uw
0.
N
b n
. °e
t
XI
� X(
O
X. � (.
N
� c
G
y0 J C J
6 = r
C C�
ate@
� c�
y
GO q
� V M
N�
o °Io
a q ...
r A
6
JCC
NU ��
Ga
ou a'
P e a.'.
X+
°T
n C? n zo
o`er „�`Jy_J
g...b .p -ubp
�vuo Jnq^
q
_ Jyr GZC.
r N b Na G
Q?y;y
c =Z�� cu
_ � c
��D xw.n C�V3
q � 2Jidez
C � 2Ybb ,p
� o
G_ U
60gi�..r..°i lYt
n
so
>e�
ax
q -u
J�uG
Gr b
^o�a
o L x Y
L G c
qa
w
X�
'HOC
b V y s
NGL p
GNP V W
4�si C
»nU W
? s
yiu� u
O
°e
v a
u ya..
Ng4y `
�LOLN �
3 rib �
c 7 C N
ei
a r '
G J
N u �
.� pr
-19
n
Ol ^�
s
j z
o
O
_ T
v 3
o
o T^ v
b i
d
yl RIE v
= v p
u a
O 9 p N
L2 a xJ
am
9
O � �
O
C '
I7 n y
ODp V C
O p O
v` c
q a A
b q L
C y
O N
G r O
L`
tJ t q
"I pl
am
vy
d
q
a
c
�—
PcJ'
° pi0
J.
FRJq =
4d
=
JO
J
L6 -a
v
L m Tq D
u c n E
'= G q 0
°JJ
°uv
L
a
d
•
-
n O
2
N
j 01 i LJ
S
-
=
09a
9
�y
4W
pp O
d9c
.N,cn
o�i�u
nc Lw
dN GN C C
bu
Nu CO
�b Ct
r��
`3iuJu
eGGrr�L.C�
yu
°u r Nw
pqC
OJ
+C� =
CJdO
njc
y.VP
d�
No N ._
'�
i
N� o
mJ
v
M"2Oi
�
.°4.
N LF
ZZ
O.`+
pp
f'. 900Y
L..TG
Ors
Y j
�
n C? n zo
o`er „�`Jy_J
g...b .p -ubp
�vuo Jnq^
q
_ Jyr GZC.
r N b Na G
Q?y;y
c =Z�� cu
_ � c
��D xw.n C�V3
q � 2Jidez
C � 2Ybb ,p
� o
G_ U
60gi�..r..°i lYt
n
so
>e�
ax
q -u
J�uG
Gr b
^o�a
o L x Y
L G c
qa
w
X�
'HOC
b V y s
NGL p
GNP V W
4�si C
»nU W
? s
yiu� u
O
°e
v a
u ya..
Ng4y `
�LOLN �
3 rib �
c 7 C N
ei
a r '
G J
N u �
.� pr
-19
n
Ol ^�
s
j z
o
O
_ T
v 3
o
o T^ v
b i
d
yl RIE v
= v p
u a
O 9 p N
L2 a xJ
am
9
O � �
O
C '
I7 n y
ODp V C
O p O
v` c
q a A
b q L
C y
O N
G r O
L`
tJ t q
"I pl
am
vy
q
dTL
�—
PcJ'
J.
FRJq =
4d
=
JO
J
L6 -a
v
L m Tq D
u c n E
v
°JJ
°uv
xr Nob
_t
x u p o.
av
d
�y
4W
d9c
.N,cn
o�i�u
nc Lw
�b Ct
yu
PON
q
^d'� ti
d�
ZZ
f'. 900Y
L..TG
Ors
L�p.Ep
O
pT4E� �..
L
C9
y
°�z
o i-�mo
Lr.i��
6
^�.n.d
6Jb
°�d. -.o ^
609�Irt
u
N CY
GAO
W/-
36
u
G
O�
G�
L•
� c
^ t
E`«
xb
= G
U
N C
�n
:aE
1 N .rn
0 9
P V
_tine
` L Y
o °v
^ j l
b L
c «a
V drl
� L
> O
L s
L n
G d
zo�
a
a
i � ~
u_ d`
xG ��
GLD
y 3 r
b
«L q,
` o
r�
_' Cy
v
C- rC
I
co O
Y
O
..9
71
y C
Y
<
N
� •�
i
og
W a
ca
L
G H
«
41a Y
r G
N
V
S O
C U
jI
o
u
°O
GY
v„
u
uw NY
Y
Yq
Y
r.,j lX
a
L
vL�
4 �
u
���.vo
Sc
.e
5r w
o
•�
M
d
G
C N
N
'Y
a
l
NV Yd
^S
Y=
a
X
Y1b
�L
O:
a•+ W.
anOSN
V A
GNU
NLw O:L•
a
`..�.+
ON
w
ZZ .:°
wu
O
44 yCN UGC�G
cyA
�•q
�
�y� x
�
^ N u p
C P W j
r
��
wW L
-G9
l
Y
v_
��
G O
�
°ate
���
a C
e
vv
o«
v °u :.•'�L
M
O
�a
.°�Y
wo.r
CU
cj
vLa uu
° `s= >
o:o
e'.�'
°d
A >��'O 4L
oz.
,°•�
1.2
G
Cj
XI
XI ^I
o � �
�
I
X•r
el aCl
m
a .
K
Y M
Y
O
..9
71
y C
Y
<
N
� •�
og
W a
O
L
G H
«
41a Y
r G
N
V
S O
C U
jI
_G
u
°O
GY
v„
=;6
uw NY
Y
Yq
Y
r.,j lX
vL�
u
���.vo
Sc
.e
5r w
o
•�
p- ..�.�.
d
Mw
N
'Y
!may
l
NV Yd
a €q
ca.
a
X
Y1b
�L
O:
a•+ W.
anOSN
V A
GNU
NLw O:L•
a
`..�.+
ON
w
O. yN
44 yCN UGC�G
cyA
�O
`. V.
�y� x
Y L C
6 7
^ N u p
C P W j
VicyJ
u u v
S a
1.5
Y
-i
X
r v
at
O
..9
n 0
O
y C
Y
<
N
� •�
og
r
L
G H
«
41a Y
r G
G .•
O
Lu
_G
u
°O
GY
L^ w
r
r A
C Y
8£
at
O
Ti y
y„.V. '
Nl. � G
N
� •�
y_ t
W y� q
L L
r G
G .•
O
a`
°O
���.vo
e'v�oG
e.q`^
�C
a €q
ca.
Y1b
�L
O:
a•+ W.
anOSN
V A
GNU
NLw O:L•
NOOK !Y
O.Y
%.LiYO�
W
N O
a.
a-
n.
0.1
^°p
u r
o F..•
LO
v
v
_23
[
p
j LO
V g
.±... ,..0
pP
-_
^
�
�•�
IY••
OL.
gnu v"i
w
d
c p
p q u._y
o >' cam_
TEL
u u d
`
i
_ M
•� 'O y p a
I
v3pJ
C v q
O
U d
L
=
IE
Tf •6w..
7
d 4d. . .. O
1
p
°
Vpr�
C.
uGd
�
L
ON.y 4N 4q
Ga a �
L
iI
G( u@
�.q na
a'v LL �nYr
a•L
YiM
boa
_�°
P
d
cq °�..
_ a
L
cc
v ove o
vai
a'y
v ut q,�
..
= as `co
L
N (•l
O
41 b n•
x
AV. 3s,
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION
APPROVING DESIGN REVIEW FOR 'TRACT NO. 12040 LOCATED AT
THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF ARROW HIGHWAY AID TURNER AVENUE
IN THE MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT
WHEREAS, on November 25, 1981, the Planning Commission approved
Tentative ' Tract 12040; and
WHEREA °i, on the 21st day of May, 1985, a complete application was
filed by the Anden Group for review of revised site and elevations; and
WHEREAS', on the 12th day of June„ 1985, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning
Commission held a meeting to consider the above- d3scribed,r4roject.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Comnissi'on resolved as
follows:
SECTION 1: That the following can be met:
1. That the proposed project is consistent with the
objectives of the General Plan; and
2. That the proposed use is in accord with the obje tive of
the Development Code acid the purposes of the disL•rict in
which the site is located; and
3. That the proposed use is in compliance with each of the
applicable provisions of the Development Code; and
4. That the proposed use, together with the conditions
applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public
health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to
properties or improvements in the vicinity.
SECTION 2: That Design Review for Tract 12040 is approved subject
to the following conditions and attached Standard Conditions:
DESIGN REVIEW•
1. Landscaping poc.ets shall be provided between garage doors.
2. Two different shades of color, and similar design for
garage doors to create variety and interest shall be
provided.
3. Guest parking within the site shall be *edesigned at a 900
angle. The guest parking located at the curve of the
driveway shall be relocated to mitigate potential traffic
hazard.
-3
Resolution No.
Tetitive Tract 12040
Page # 2
4. The proposed tia,)d nano fence for the ground floor units
shall be upgrad /:-! with additional details.
5. A sound barrier consisting of a decorative wall /berm
combination with the top of the wall elevation being b feet
above the centerline elevation at Arrow Highway shall be
required. The design of this decorative sound barrier
shall be included in the Detailed Landscape Plans and to be
submitted for review and approval by the City Planner prior
to issuance of building pernits:, Thorn shrubs on vine
shall e provided along this decorative wall to prevent
6. A final acoustical report to provide mitigation measures
fir interior noise reduction in complying with Title 25
shall he required, and shall be submitted to Planning
Division for review and approval at the plan check process
prior to issuance of any permits.
7. A blo::k wali with landscaping shall be required along toe
northern properly boundary for buffering between this
project and the single family homes.
8. A decorative open fence with landscaping shall be required
along the east propert, boundary "or buffering between this
project and the Deer Creek Channel."
9. All pertinent conditions of Approval for TT 12040, as
contained in Resolution 81 -139, shall apply.
ENGINEERING DIVISION:
1. Reconstructie.) of the existing pavement to provide for a
cross -slope shall be required and to the satisfaction of
the City Engineer.
2. The intersection of Arrow Route and Turner Avenue shall be
reconstructed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 12TH DAY OF JUNE, 1485.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY:
Dennis L. Stout, Chairman
ATTEST:
Rick. Gomez, Deputy ecretary
L
Resolution No,
Tentative Tract 12040
Page # 3
I, Rick Gomez, Deputy Secretary of t,.� Planning Commission of the City of
Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and
regularly introdeced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the
City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held
on the 12th day of dune, 1985, by the following vote -to -wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
Aft
z
S
W
O O
O
V v
O �
yW �
60..
4'
Z
W U Y
Y
G O• O p1M L i
p +N A y
A
� L�� E' O•
\
p d r
Oµm 01e d. O r
U C M L
S.-
r
c N
q c
O
g,
yCy ANUO?V
n E a a U r d
w• d 6 C w
O.AYg0.
O
d U � �. >t
Ci6
jWW c
d
pfOY _
L ®C®C C
i
xav
d .^ W
C r"r 4
A
�. Y
Z
+y
O�
A
ONd
OQ
y\.
Q1LN
qd�
at
(�
a 0v=Ai.9
V
OEN f..lc
F O-9 d^
OA
qQ:
d
O.
v
G C� � '� E
V N O
Y� Y.
y0
°. T •
d0.
p, n
A
d V= N C
•r1
L92=d2iw
C y .O J 2 r
EdmaN
.O
F c
°.0 p.Y
°Y
E U
n?N
°NN
O o .••
c AUN
°1s
- V
Sdu
c .+ p W
Eic qy�.
d
Y= t.p+a6ovc
tly■■d2�u L0ga
.%
0.0
O
mr
La Nom=
coN
r. °a Gi.
V
y i W O p 0 c
T c - O
^�
a q
n N N
b�L
N A. O
-d
Cd
d p N q=
F qY CCYq
L Y KoC
O Y
��A:a
NL
'C M4=
J�qd
EE
+�tl�N
cN.
7 Lq.!�O A
d
aMUngj
AC
n.`r+°n
any`
PG
�u: ,pig
nO +u s
LL
+�
O +
d
O
CmV�
L W yy
NEM
C
Cj�
Y• 6
1b O A y Y 0. >f L•
Oy GyA�YY
r"� q cp•
.mod o
U O
O q
6 L OG0
Y
W U b
O W
O y9
C C E
ry Cw.
6
aRYUm feu �av
y
o.c
d�Y�NaiiQAgao
2
vm •o
oG> E.
OLD
^aNd
J od
N~
AV.�tdi
C� ^y
RG+
d�
Od.Gb92JO
E >NA
0.
i
y
^ -O C
Q +VN.69x�1m 1^
1-0G?
v�
4N: �Yr S
�09m
HG n.L 6t]
ydy
O
V
z
S
W
O O
O
V v
O �
yW �
60..
4'
r:�i
Z
W U Y
Y
G O• O p1M L i
O
� L�� E' O•
r"
C
uNTO +D
�
Aso
Yv
c
d
% ENxptdi T�
Mc
W
4
^.OTC +Y..c
e: eon
°tea
d
w
'c°s Y rn >e vu'oi
Q
0.
i
y
^ -O C
x
01 q
qc A py_g
N
V
EE T
NC
~
�
s pa d
AO n11r LyF NAn'
'
�N
aNa
cd R
O. 4
A Hq 0.'N' 2NCa NL Y�
mW o� F V
H
J
'.q.Ij
NI Af.
f Y1
r:�i
G
p ouc
m ^da
•..Q ME
LE
UO LC
dya
n.� EdY ®® dE
q
Mp
a O MO dp
d.. u. udo`M
C E °
v..9
YepT oo
1-:5
° Ltlraa TC
N E
0�60Dd
a d0 3 nY
�"•
d��lL
�ra ^
. q N
gpHi
L
C O V °
6N�. d"
L -0
N
°TOy L��Nn
�
C STD
7L
dL
q tia N `L
cu
•n
CQ
` °CN
'.YyL �• �^l
ON UL� V
L
WL
a v1° " cn
^ OL
`_ S Eq
n
�ucN
I ��oa2HFE
q E i.
C � L O N. a d d'I N
+ Q °' d y c +Yi
� .dG •� °
°
n�OE R Ada
c,9nT
G.° vR. c y =o
�ON
Tr °oGya a
�d E Rcoo nm.
u °sL Lp
nLDC
^^ a'CDyL'q'TO
L� ^°u CCU^
6 >
LN
I
LN
T. y>
_=.LDO
lq Ca
cv GNO9
~ =o
yN
C
nC G_C
N WCU
n� q•+t
O Td I Q aO
"'.,°mEg qav«
uuv-
6Eu6d CNYd^ N OIrTiLS iN dii
CCREEL
6�2 °�O W.G -..�5 lo-
o Z C
^
d j q U
a U9 6a
. L
b� R PS a p6p
L
V O 6 V � C
Sda B
:.2
L d V Y^
O
N G ..p
y.0
+ ^,�
•E w uN
Gu° G�
:
R
_
V L
Ld
Q•O L. @YC
r E C d 9
° ^L 9L q 12 a-
Y
m �' ° U
yNN -u
�+N E
n
U q d
cum
d�O u. d•y•Iy'•
N
N c
R occ
^ d 9 n
N da
NY A >y
Oyy .-
�-
° N C R
dOlq q^
u °U ODV- >OI
o apG
L y d N
S p
u^ 1-L ya p�N..G.
G o
p a
w.CO 6a
c
d 0 '
a
dN =
y
^S
G
bN YL t.6� R 6
OD
cdm a`I iL
A L L
°. Llaa. "Lr�tri
C
d y•�
O C
us . `.a�y�
cYU
R»
6r y
D Y
" �.DE
d i
C �d =l��y C
W 9 O q
LT Oa" °i'r_
N ' V y L•
C
°
O
9�
d•• C O
fO���0
a��aQ 6dm
Ld RE
�^d _
C LR
N9
6C
dNN >y
LRd
q C U9 �a 4
.nGLd9r O
dV
R t � ptTLC
� ^R
y°• o .ai
Nwt r
NuG Y�C
�. E',a�N ^ °o .L.
d�'�y y6 .spd
G
qq C a
Y aT OI
Od OP` dv�l
E � R
nN p nN�r
aD a
d^
d d c • a.y E :JO
G Y d O of N
COI ° N 'c. O ML• CY
dy
R •YNY
L�pG N G�
>
�a °q G�GV a� °a�II
L6R R N G YLL
9 L Lm G01pddn°
°d �R dq >YOa
Oa d
dUa G
Dq .01LG
m O T 6° qG'
> V
d d am u d N d pap�j
bl ^I
m c;
.a
`
---- 1r i
Il aL6 Cl «O C C.,pA Cuq T O.0 y�qq N= pYO 3bd G
._ Wl+qi au , 1 iV L bLp Nu. qb Y ^q
Az
O 6.
n
P � U q � C N C N m�°° � Y e C G+.•q
J pb Y °• Cy �• Y n `� Y V a d L N N^ ++ L Q �+ °• n Y L
@@A Y p � LLYN OL g OA
'C U L w O » O Y C+>•• �. 9 L L Gp T C L P O
t KYNp <.lwffi.> 60Nhnw <ti 'tL f- �+c ��s +Kpp e�NLA lup 6�Na+V
ci
y
� 1V 111
GO j
j. G
G. M
M' 0
00` L1 V>. T
TU C E
E LLB
�° E
ddw L' N
E
�' o
a ^N t
tix i
i• P
PN a
aW �
�.a P. Po° u �
�.L G9L L a
ast!
»b Y
Y �
� q
Y A
Ay u
LL 4Fd O.q b D
Dd�j� •
O� b q •
L q
q Y. q
q q ^ p L V J N
N L
•�- .di.bq
ii «
« i �
• L
� •
qu • Y
Y Y
+N� T
T^'N _
_ q .
.
i� a
a Y
eiow Y
Yi. r
rn s
Yr A
PP cdn y °
A Y
YI=
'O °
°fNOa N
NuM�NO n
n•0 a
a �
�Cy Fdt L.G. L
LO O.^ q
q ^mac
G2 °
� C
°.
Ee= G u � �
O • �
� ^ L
L Q �
� N
N N L L A pC N dy �
M � � � �
+� P ° N
c.Ny L
� O
ON. f
f•Iq y
y.0 P
NNtd
� +
PF N
Y 1
1yY. O
p•Y C° dj G
N k°
Y 3 EE
q•n Y
O G
GL'a. N
N Cc }
} r
$a a I
I o
oNr` G
GA Y
Y�YYU=.m^ n
n wo ^
^hod
aviN .
n c N
N a
.� n
` Cp
C
^ 1
C�d E
EN°1 H
HtVi
b ^EY
•Ga ^
o V
+. C
b
CP •
V °
1
M
l
iay a
amq �
�m a
ar& ^
^ a ^orn �
�c ti�� O
Yb
Y ^ .Z W
WG r
rt r
rO O
OUA•Y G
G.•O. d
O"Y.aG Y
G L
LB N q L
NS .
L 6 O
O.A nn p
C p v Y
^Y� N
N °G.-:n �
�° N
.''n ° +L•�n° c
c" Upw d
p C
yNLn G
GL+'.. q
^ q
qn. q
NOO1cN
`uo 9
9aa ^
q c
cbz N
qLC �
�.v °i6,� N
ai i+•'�q` I
I
+ b
b> q
qY a
Y N
V.�° N
.ai'°lf
O�a V
V �aV _
ate• L
L Y
�O Y
N W~bu A
AY V
N��E .
q N
N N
Na°i q
q O =C^ L
q t
YYa ^pt
� t
tiq� s
s _
bC e
s
pdnN i
iWAC G=
Nay V
VVd y
� b
e C
C y9 �N�.+ w
w ^. •OE��. C
Cq pw q.
`qa C
CL N
N b
b 2
2aN W
W 9Y gyCCw L1 N
N� L =a? �
� =�L NyV
y.�b �
�uq Y
Y �
��^ w
w4 ° C
C` c
•'•' �Qy R
Rbzq £b
.% PC. trIY
a —La b do
u ^b
Nb YO
L`. •i.°+
qa
J IM
I.i.5 .
a n
�yaL
yY EC`
gLNA� 'ti
6C9 •
.L+D.
4
E a
b•
E s
v
E �
Ur ta.
ELLt
EE EwE
-
C ^�
a.@
aV
T
q Y
—UC
ujbv p
nN
FdL
bcd
G•nb
qN qL
O
y°'3
C >�
AEU
NqE
... q. J
O...O
7L.2
V�,,.uQ
tl•al..N
=N LL....
q Gu
=w�
•V�
N
gdNC
G nOn
N
aV
E..
G—«Y
= 0.6 bu rn S'y
Yi.` G2 q eU
c
u
«a
.j)
v w�
ao °b
VG—
u'qq
se>
vu� d�
= sgn"co. °Yc
c�
uta
wELV=
oO q
wgw�w
_
G
N —L
quG
q
bC u.
�
aOmo
� =Yw�
new — °s�,Gu
�
Loo
tJb
at°J CEUL
b. J
wV NE
n01gmn
C�w'�L O
...y
u C ^q
L
CON1
« N g
91 6
^NC O
qy L y
iV O«
Cpw��.
^.btl A
AEG O
tlq
ta
rn
_
b°
fl.
w
qEb
w y 2 C C r 01 O V
N
p O a O Ot
N
C Q C g O
! ppOw^
s G E O^ a
i
N�L
lu w
°GO
q
Na
E
C ^O�^ `ba•
YN
Via= TC6�Y
d
c
cy` E
w bN,�a y
^ V
Cyr
E d
Wom�
A— L VL
.^�c /L Lrn (((
. t
qo
ua°
YO
O.Yw
>o vi
"
o
—5.2
d
6
AVN
L
1-Q 6w
v OLL{ C T
2Lak
L q c
L° U U 0
d
I w T w w.L
p��aliN
—
6�-N.. rO h
6VL
a —La b do
u ^b
Nb YO
L`. •i.°+
qa
w�
�yaL
yY EC`
gLNA� 'ti
6C9 •
.L+D.
N°
qN qL
qw.q
°d,
YOb'
q Oy�
b
CC°
=o
gdNC
G nOn
aV
E..
G—«Y
= 0.6 bu rn S'y
Yi.` G2 q eU
c
u
«a
ab Oy
Em L.°.L
di
CC
E
OLLaN
a`� ..K
ut
L
^N
-�
ba
w�
S «aoo .o .
!—Z4
d L tl a
N d rn
Yov'.. -aN
M N O q •
L� «
u
N'^
V O
6. l
°I q.«c•
G b y 0
�.«, ..°.^
.
y G0 ` C V N
u C ^q
L
C r L T
« N g
91 6
:
OM .
T q .� . Y`tl.
o c U
•a � C n rntO
O.YA C yy
E
nY 9 v
`
^cq ^
O_
L
d C6 rn
3bq
ta
rn
_
b°
fl.
w
qEb
w y 2 C C r 01 O V
N
p O a O Ot
N
C Q C g O
! ppOw^
s G E O^ a
i
N�L
lu w
Ca Ld
� q w 4•
L 2 O
b
E
C ^O�^ `ba•
n
i
Via= TC6�Y
Y^.
Tow
�YgE6�gp
°4r
C—e
Cyr
A— L VL
.^�c /L Lrn (((
. t
6ID q
WV.
WE2
YO
O.Yw
1j
NI v
d
6
9. aY
C
O^
C^
�C
dO�.V
G
V
C
C9
e•LaU
CL•C'«
« T
�N�
OMq N
C N
^
La E
d
'
L n
o
Q
LC 4fu
SN�
t0
d
��
� «^
•
q>.yys
O.
d
Lin
pOY .°.
N
L T
a
L.
n^ c.
p G
T ••
oq
v
o y. �^
'. a N
a
Z41
D
yoT
q6e
qW
Y =��.LY°..
W. a qL
�O
ESN ..C.Y
n N
i
SOY
No
eVd
°Y$
.n
U.°�g
em
Cn
. i
o•.-
`a «o q
^ e` N en e
e c o �. ad q
My
++ o
a -L,
N.gNn
qy
O
Lp
go
^ Q
v«C &
uY
E...
„°,pY
ungEp 9
aV • v A
4� O Y4
E'n «j
dTL
`
r ga°+«LC
9..
A.- m
aL
u. -
-2
N6.
o.y COQ
nU
�a
EE
i
a.L,
aau
M p6
V nu
�GEnL
q«
AY
•re
.j
U
Gy
�
.-C
tT
C NC � o�
N° '=
°Y
E9 dno6
LO
N«
n�
jp
PY
°
.Oq
LH
O1C Olu
60+°•N' -M.G
o .+ a
p�iLq
C
°py_C�q
CO
N�C
�av
St:
'A
e ••
_
o v
not
dN$
LV
v
d
n Y
GO•C -W GM°. I
O o
G �I NI
2� J
cq T u€
--N UO 4n GO p,LG
NI R� �I bl
yy�un
GU5:
Iz
9. aY
C
O^
C^
�C
dO�.V
G
V
C
C9
e•LaU
CL•C'«
« T
�N�
OMq N
C N
^
La E
d
'
L n
9.
E aYU:TCR
LC 4fu
Lam+° -r�
n i c
u
L.
1,
=o°a
ua
oq
v
vu
icy+
° sp! n
e
Y.. -o
�,LOOa
c
o
L. d.�Cq
a
U.°�g
em
My
G
N.gNn
qy
O
Lp
V
^ Q
v«C &
uY
E...
v176i
LV.
Vd
'O�
`
r ga°+«LC
Na O
`Y-
N
aL
u. -
-2
N6.
o.y COQ
nU
�a
EE
i
a.L,
mss.
M p6
V nu
�GEnL
q«
AY
•re
.j
U
Gy
�
.-C
tT
C NC � o�
N° '=
°Y
E9 dno6
LO
N«
n�
jp
PY
°
.Oq
LH
Ny
-�L
p�iLq
C
°py_C�q
CO
N�C
'A
dnT.
W
OY.
�O„L„°
LV
9C
�n
qL
O r.0 C• p
N «yL
« G
CL.. *'v2
C O
Q dp.
N
pg
6
N O'
O1
�tl
4
01y
N„°-
-
V.Y d y.
C p1N
xo€
Off«
01
MOVV
qei_
.y:N�
o
�Q
U10
C«
uY
V LE2•rN
�p3 V4
NQOT»
WNV.
'W YLI
�6
tp�6.Y
s°
a
V
Ji
E
7
O
Z
41
U
d
•n
4
CL
1
1V- r'7
.T,
o`o
o
a.
�
d
r
`Lp a a dd u
�"`
�•
9 y
L
NSL
N•�
AN
+. C
V Y d
2
Y
p+
A a
w w
m�
�
��c,.
Cd
6
'
Crn
�•
• w
w^
cy
CO
A
°
�
S
L
a c
9 <
.-
ff
dNL1
C
ZL
A
w
°Tby■■
V °
GG«
C Ny
y w0 G
L^�
d y
nca '^
6 O
B O G
E•°'�'°
A
S V
u9
V w
L
LQ..W n6`
oco°
Cw
`Q'^C
v`
iO
4U
C N
FSw
> ^_L
Orn.°•
v
u
{�
��
6 Y
Ay C QC°rn
Oy
L
G'
6N
RI
<SL
R�
W=
O
wI
tJMrnONC
L •'��
S
'CL
NI
H�
NI
ern'
� ^
hi
u
�a
�a�
g.
�y
=a.
°0
Wu�d.A
LT.G�
dS ^rNn
NVa6
Tt 6y
yN.y.
ONV
C. yy^
Ny dM
_Y.d�u.0 Au L
Ned Vv SN W.0
al
� ^
N 6W w'-
V]I
QdNM
1��
NOM
mI
NO
R�
64�
.�-.I
.[L: wC W.�.ynLL6) 36 �1C
•1� .Ni� a-rnI w1I
< Y°..
.bi�
1V- r'7
.T,
Au�oo
wa
g
L
U R
M
« p� E
C
�•
9 y
L
L•�
=.yT
U
W
TdY °i
^
SN
9
Y
p+
A a
w w
m�
�
��c,.
Cd
6
'
Crn
�•
• w
w^
Ny
CO
A
°
�
S
L
a c
9 <
u
ff
dNL1
C
N
T^
La
O r
y
Im
N.0
L^�
m d
u
iO
4U
C N
FSw
> ^_L
OT
u
Eprn
G'
6N
RI
<SL
R�
W=
O
wI
tJMrnONC
L •'��
S
'CL
NI
H�
NI
1V- r'7
�
o
y
_9 -L.
0
�
T
7t
Ou0
�gy
�
.ra0
Cd
6
'
Crn
�•
� L C
yAd
EcE
r N
p
C
$1O N
C�d
v
a c
9 <
u
ff
dNL1
C
dai
s c °
.,u a :7
-
a
•°„
`
a,..
q Ste.
�
ai
A v V
.ma
L
q
Dr q
ao
mY �
Y
w .>
s
�k a•.
>
�
tdD
�
V
�9
O'
N
r C
d.qy
G L•
.^.Q
GJ
^• N q
U
is
tl '�
2 ..
q ca
CL
p0.
iu GptY
VV
!.
vn
ro"N`
N
dtl...
�$
u n
Y N �, E;
nar•
Y tl
N .c
Yo
a :�• �
Na
�. o P
c
.+
s a w.
y.
a��
^
V
u• L
Y v C q
4 D
L `. F
a.
o r
C i p
C�C
C
D
J
S
yNH4:i
tide
�?
as
o= OH,
6 M
d
C9 D C+
»
O. []+C.N
4 N
C
IL 6 ..L p
r—
>3A
�
O
D,
1
+•
o
�V
v
«qO
e
YO
LOM
C m X
1
—
y. Ds
� o
_>
u�on
q r'+
O G.
•^
A.r. •
L�y
L y.
4 'pa
bC
d nA
S
r
�
� ro
'.
d A°
y
u�
a
I
yW v
v0
dE Td •
Y�Q
°u
N
Q�.
M
Y
Y
t
na•
q
�
o
t •..
oq
9y
E O Ly
O N�
D
O
1r V
N$
iRd
wy
aY
ro
oy
�+
^•
»
N—
+
�
..o
SN
a
ear
0.
W.
�ys`p
u
°O•L .
`� �.
00
Vtl�
coq. d �.°�
Y+
q
(py'^
C
•"u
YY
rou �'
LY
c
Y
/mod •C.
FL. •^r w
66N
ppL
`N J2�
O
•L+Tq�
4r
-- CITY OF RANCHO CUC 'MONGA c o
STAFF REPU,'t1
O O
707 F z
>
DATE: June 12, 1985 1977
TO: - Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner
BY: Dan Coleman, Senicr Planner„
SUBJECT: AMENDMENT TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 83 -07 - CHRISTESON -
Amendment to include a fast food restaurant in the concept
plan for the Virginia Dare Center, a Business Park
consisting of office, commercial, restaurant and theatre
use on approximately 13.1 acres of land in the General
Commercial District located at the northwest corner of
Foothill and Haven - APN 1077- 104 -01 and 03.
ENVIRO !1-1!-3TAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 85 -09 -
DEL TACO - The development of a 1,900 square foot 'fast
food restaurant located on the west of Haven, north of
Foothill on .12 acres (Virginia Dare Center), in the
General Commercial (GC) District - APh 1077 -401 -027.
I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION:
A. Action Requested: Amendment of conceptdal master site plan for
Conditional Use Permit 83 -07, approval of site plan and
elevations for a Del Taco restaurant, and issuance of a
Negative Jeclaration.
B. Purpose: Development of a fast food restaurant
C. Location_ Northwest corner of F.h_r�=ll and Havc (Exhibit "A ")
D. Parcel Size: 13.1 acres
E. Existing Zoning: General Commercial
it
F. Existing Land Use: Abandoned Winery
8. Sur.,iunding Land Use and Zoning
North - Vacant Industrial Park
South - Vacant; Office Professional
East, Vacant; Community Commercial
Wes{ - Vacant; General Commercial
E
ITEM N & 0 ,1
1� _
7
bj =+�L-
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
CUP 83 -07 and DR 85 -09
June 12, 1985
Page #2
4.; Site' Characteristics: Property is the former Garrett winery
site, which has been regraded, and Phase I of the business park
is under construction. Site slopes at a 2% grade.
I. Applicable Regulations: Revisions or modifications to an
approved conditional use permit may be vzquested by the
applicant as set forth in the Development Code, Section
17.04.03, and processed as `a public hearing before the
Commission for their consideration.
II.' BACKGROUND: The applicant is requesting a change of tl,tir approved
conceptua master plan to provide for a 1,90E square foot fast food
restaurant to be located on the west side of Haven Avenue, north of
Foothill (Exhibit "C ") On December 12, 1984, the Planning
Commission, reviewed and considered this proposed char 'kge to the
master plan am related parcel map. The Commission was ?concerned
with the development of a fast food use Along Haven t anue. The
Planning Commission had established a polic;t that with, :n the Haven
Avenue Overlay District, fast food facilities can only be permitted
as an ancillary, -Pnd not be directly located adjacent to Haven
Avenue with drive thru facilities. The fast food building was
removed from the master Planning Commission and the
applicant was directed to fi4tigate the Commis0on's concern t�arough
an attractive design solution prior to the Planning Commission
allowing the fast food facility on the Master Plan. The attache(i
Exhibit "B ", reflects the site plan approved by the Planning
Commission on Ddcember 12, 1984, without the fast food use.
III. ANALYSIS•
A. Design Review Committee: The ;4,,aposed elevations are
consistent with the mission style architectural theme approved
fo;, the Virginia Dare Center. The winery theme is also
reflected in the extensive use of vine covered wood
trellises. The drive -thru lane has been screened by a four
foot high plaster wall and bermed landscaping. The Design
Review .,ammittee requested that the applicant explore more
screening and more architectural treatment to the Haven Avenue
elevation such as trellis work, lattice treatment, etc. The
Committee requested that the screen wail be wrapped around the
southerly end Lf thy; drive -thru lane to meet with the lout'
trellis for additional screening. Finally, the Committee
requested that the orange sun -burst logo be toned down in colo
and that the Del Taco signs be designed consistent with the
1,�/o a
11
11
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REF`zRT
C«g 83 -07 and DR 85 -09
June 12, 1985
Page #3
Uniform Sign Program for the Virginia Dare Center. The
applicant responded by proposing a 7 foot Lhi gh. hedge between
the screen wall and drive -thru which will wrap around the south
end (instead Qf 4 -foot screen wall). Also, lattica "work
treatment is proposed along the west elevations. Colored
renderings of these changes will be available at the meeting.
B. Environmental Assessment: The :Planning Commission issued a
Negative Declaration for the Virginia Dare Center on June 8,
1983. Hawbver, a noise st:Jdy was required by the General Plan
for the restaurant use. The noise study indicates that
ini•,erior noise levels will be satisfactory as - ,Jesigned without
spJcial mitigation. "lased upon completion of %he Initial Study
Pai,t II, Staff wo_ ld recommend issuance'; of a Negative
De+,larataon.
IV. VACTS FOR FINDINGS: Before approving a Conditional Use Permit, the
P annrng Cow.!ssion must make the following findings:
1. That the proposed use is in accord with the General Plan,
the objectives of the Development Code and the purposes
of ':'e district in which the site is located,
2. That the proposed u" together with the conditions
applicable thereto, wiri not be detrimental to the public
Health, safety or welfare, -or materially injurious to
properties or improvements in i'•le vicinity, and
3. That the proposed use complies with each of the
applicable provisions o date Development Code.
V. RECCMMENDATION: It is recomTianded' that tie Planning Cutaission
review and consider the infoh.tion provided, if the applicant has
mitigated the Planning Commission's concerns regarding the drive -
thru facility along Haven Avenue; and the Planning Commission can
support the Facts for Find-t gs and Conditions of Approval, adoption
of� -the attached Resolution with Conditions, and motion to delete
Condition 745 from Resolution.83 -796, would be appropriate.
PLANNING COMMISSION '-TA I FF REP ORT
CUP 83-07 and DR 85-09
June 12, 1985
Me f4
RespeltTully S�u �1 �e
ck o ez
ty I ner
RG-DC:cv
Attachments: Letter foom Applicant
Exhibit "A" - L"ation Map
Exhibit 'IV, -z-a- Approved Mastar Plan
Exhibit It" —Revised Master Plan
Exhibit I'D" - Revisud Conceptual Landscape Plan
Exhibit "Ell - Site Plan Blow-up
fNhibit 'IF" - Elevations
Exhibit IIGII - Haven Avenue Set�tion
MiZtes, Plannng Commission Meeting, December 12, 1934
Resolution No. 33-79-B
New Resolution of Approval with Conditions
U1
lu
Mr. Howard :fields � 2 J 000 `$ � PM
Assistant Plarner t gmI�1�6Z1`�1�14i5'6
city of Rancho Cu.amonga
9320 Baseline Road
Suite R
P.O. Box 807
Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730
Re: Del Taco D -2 -49, virgiuia Dare Center DR 8:-u9
Dear Howard,
In reply to your letter of I -lay 24, 1985, Del Taco ii.'ereby submitting
4 sets of revised plans showing site plan, exterior elevations, and a
larger cross section. RGVLsed colored drawings are also be`- ub
mitted.
Del Taco has w,,rked've_y closelx with the developer and i rte, sitect
fpr the Virginia rase Center to insure that the Del Taco ...xnitectural
statement is compatible, by reflecting the winery theme and mission -
style azzhitecture as weii as by using architectural elements that
carry through the overall program. TAis has resulted in extensive
modifications to Del Tace's building in elevations and site plan to
mitigate thc- planning eommission'.s concerns through an att^ active
design el:ment and landscaping '4,eatment. Del Taco feels it has
beer successful in addressing tre ;cncerns expressed.
As can be saen or, the attached drawin?-q. t.al Taco has revised the
?-indscaping along Haven % eiiue to include a hedge between the
screen wall and the driv- this to insure that fie icles in the
drive thru lane will not ,e visible. The hedge is noted as 7 feet
high on the site plan (A -1) and the cross section on A -3. Per
Architectural Graphic Standards sixth ,edition, the maximum width
of a car is a buick :61 -811) and t'-,,. maximum height is a Jeep (51-411).
On the cross section A -3 tat Taco has s*— a vehicle that is '' -fi"
high, higher than
g , g jeer-, and it is still completely scree±ted,'by
the wall and h.:dge including tote antenna. Del Tacz has showr, the
hedg_ on A -2 as k aT-- "tal trees x;n the Haven (east) ele-
vation to help ? -eairq that will be achieved.
.A Taco has curved th, e drive thru towards the south
to screen this portion of I— s: Zu as requested instead of the "L
wall, which was left straight to is >, into the future building to the
F south.
345 BAKER STREET, COSTA M <;:A, CALIFORNIA 92425 (71.4 5448914
;:r o
'a
May 29, 1985
—REC 4ED—
):JN OF RANCHO cucA.M01iGA
1UNNING DIVISION
MAY i
Mr. Howard :fields � 2 J 000 `$ � PM
Assistant Plarner t gmI�1�6Z1`�1�14i5'6
city of Rancho Cu.amonga
9320 Baseline Road
Suite R
P.O. Box 807
Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730
Re: Del Taco D -2 -49, virgiuia Dare Center DR 8:-u9
Dear Howard,
In reply to your letter of I -lay 24, 1985, Del Taco ii.'ereby submitting
4 sets of revised plans showing site plan, exterior elevations, and a
larger cross section. RGVLsed colored drawings are also be`- ub
mitted.
Del Taco has w,,rked've_y closelx with the developer and i rte, sitect
fpr the Virginia rase Center to insure that the Del Taco ...xnitectural
statement is compatible, by reflecting the winery theme and mission -
style azzhitecture as weii as by using architectural elements that
carry through the overall program. TAis has resulted in extensive
modifications to Del Tace's building in elevations and site plan to
mitigate thc- planning eommission'.s concerns through an att^ active
design el:ment and landscaping '4,eatment. Del Taco feels it has
beer successful in addressing tre ;cncerns expressed.
As can be saen or, the attached drawin?-q. t.al Taco has revised the
?-indscaping along Haven % eiiue to include a hedge between the
screen wall and the driv- this to insure that fie icles in the
drive thru lane will not ,e visible. The hedge is noted as 7 feet
high on the site plan (A -1) and the cross section on A -3. Per
Architectural Graphic Standards sixth ,edition, the maximum width
of a car is a buick :61 -811) and t'-,,. maximum height is a Jeep (51-411).
On the cross section A -3 tat Taco has s*— a vehicle that is '' -fi"
high, higher than
g , g jeer-, and it is still completely scree±ted,'by
the wall and h.:dge including tote antenna. Del Tacz has showr, the
hedg_ on A -2 as k aT-- "tal trees x;n the Haven (east) ele-
vation to help ? -eairq that will be achieved.
.A Taco has curved th, e drive thru towards the south
to screen this portion of I— s: Zu as requested instead of the "L
wall, which was left straight to is >, into the future building to the
F south.
345 BAKER STREET, COSTA M <;:A, CALIFORNIA 92425 (71.4 5448914
;:r o
-2-
The trellis height of 9' -0,, clear with a aide beam of 1" depth will
not allow any tali or large campers to pass thru the drive thru there
hy- mi.tigating .this, n.. Only
-conc4 ,a small shell. such as on the back of
a toyota will, fit and it`4would be screened by the hedge.
St is Del Taco's position that.the drive thru is not visible from
Haven avenue, it is completely "screened from the street, and that
this concern has been successfully mitigated.
Cal Taco has prodded a;lt-ttce work treatment along the western
elevation to provide addit�,onal architectural treatment, It is
designed to have r4son_-y columns with plaster to match the trellis.
It has also been designed with a pi3nter'at its base to allow a vine
to grcw throughout ;end provide a softening effect. :cell s -,.ng is
provided on all four elevations.
Del Taco .,ill work with the developer and the staff to arrive at a
uniform sign program and will adhere to it. Del. Taco will also •.tone
down the orange color of the corporation LDgo.
re1 Taco fells it has achieved the mitigations required to solve tt,ci
concerns ol, t,t,. planning commission as presented. The massinj,
screen wal.1, lx_,dscaping, ana' architecture do�not indicate a fast food
operation.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call.
Very truly ;•ours,
DEL TACO, IN,
L
l
Stanley . PT?stfall
Vice President
Design /Construction
SAW /pad
CC: The Christeson Company
Bissell Architects
(- y
NORTH
CITY or, 1TQ,1: �- ir - 0
RANCHO �L'1I�J1'Gr1 T►T� c: eel 'Y14L��
PLANNING DIVISION EXHIBIT:
SGit.E:'
rJ•�IIt,•tilcs•ItLutl:,clllis r 12 y . mM -1.l7- 1) I rtul
'fill TIIIJl1 t111111I1j
a !I if
1 � � '�7•'�_II "Ills � l
-
'
.a4�'I a rnll:;%ir I •�a1tF � -� ,r: g,", �q �
I
Ti
• l� it> �1 — Il +ttii .!tip �� ?III ..I!Ilfr.,l. fIt i
a�rc
�.�. =1 ��;' it r,,l �•�� c;--;✓
••'_.,',----+�.i��i : �FmTTtILL BLVp
—L I
sip pct v �u n�n1��c°� 664015610ni
CPO Dec• 12 113 84--
NTTORTH .
CITE OI' ITEM:
RANCHO CUCAMO GA TITLE:,, TEr;
PI,ANI`tI1\'G DIVLSIE3N EXHIBI'.►.'_ _ SCALE-.
K /g -a
Ask
ilIl Llllilillllll�I�L@Il '. �.t',�' i_.
1.1111111 LLLLj uL L a If y
Jit� ♦R
t
J �. It
w Iva(
i
� R!tlt: l�� _ . i , ' .,r�.i 1.111E _• II
• / tQ?T�r'ritil; a
I;' y rnrt - is -ci
cm
WE DM
a�.
/ e R•
-�
i <t
w.au.R� .r i.. u�iw .n.re ....aw iociFAl. F?tya�
huwN[; nom►
iRD
�: «w,°urwwn rea n,
an..i ies
n.rsian DvscwtwLwrw.�...rnr..vj l�f ^�,J
awn In.ai T <mi
RRRf UMi b Ull
IRIRRL9 TfD
T� 1T
aax it cwt nRt uab
I
CITY OF EM -
ONUA
�:AN��' CU�M 'I'ITI.E'
PLANNING DiviSIoN EXHIBIT
41 /G < -'
vow Waco • ts�lltsra>tn sre AM3NIM 3HY0 YINIOHIA
•— •• r• �� 100 YONoywono OHONYH
V k' Nbld 311S °�
a
a a
�I
FI t
- AyL PJ PAW •ytl ? oc ;... � ? i— ++
r
it
f DRi`� -TARO LAt�t Ct•�'E o BEKN'�
n,
t
CTTY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
PART II - Ilari L sTu -,,Y
ENVIROMIENT:iL (.HECEyl5t
DATE: "e g" " 5
APPLICA \T:
ILINS DATE: ' ��0 g
-� 'LOG NsTMBER •—= rte-- -n
PROJECT:_ a= /
� PROJECT CATION:_____��21��
I. M IRMNENTAL IMPACTS
f,Explanation of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required on attached
sheets).
s
YES MAYBE NO
1. Soils and GeoloQV. Will the proposal have
significant resin *in:
e
a. Unstable ground conditions or in chanSes in
geologic relationships? f
b. Disruptions,. displacements, compaction or
burial of the soil?
c. .Change in topography or ground surface
contour intervals?
d. The destruction, covering or modification
Of any -Lique geologic or physical features?
e• Any po`,nat al increase in wind Ir water
erosrin of srils, affecting eith,.r on or off /
sitr conditons?
f. Changes in erosion siltation, or de�Osition?
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. Hyde, Will the proposal have significant
;asults in:
EI
Page
?
YL5 MKYBE NO
a.
Changes in currents, or the course of direction
Of flowing
_
streams, rivers, or ephemeral stream
channels? -
b.
Changes in absorption rates, drainage F..tterns,
or the
rate and amount of surface watr-r
runoff?
/
c.
Alterations to the course or flow of flooa
waters?
d.
CF.ange in the amount of surface water in any
body of
wate':?
e.
Discharge into surface waters, or any
alteration
of surface water quality?
f.
llteration of groundwater characteristics?
9.
07hange in the quantity of groundwaters,
either through direct additions or with -
drawq;is, or through interference with e-
aquifer?
Quality?
Quantity?
h.
The reduction in -the amount of water other-
/
wise available for public water supplies?
I.
Ex,losure of people or property to water
_
related hazards such as flooding or seiches?
3. A'.r uali y, Will the proposal have significant
results
in:
a.
Constant or rerfodie air emissions from mobile
or indirect sources?
Stationary sources? -
b.
Deterioration of ambient air quality and /or
interference with the attainment of applicable
air quality standards?
c.
Alteration of local or regional climatic
conditions, affecting air movement, moisture
or temperature?
4. Biota
Flora. Will the proposal have significant results
a.
Change in the characteristics of species,
Including diversity, distribution, or number
of any species of plants?
b.
Akuct$on of the numbers -f any unique
q
i
'rare
or arigered species of plants?
✓ ✓✓
N /o -1c,
_ ---t
rage 3
c. Introduction
YLS NO
of new or disruptive species of
plants into an area?
d. Reduction in the potential for agricultural
production?
Fauna. 4';11 the proposal *have significant results
t
ins •_
a. Gha•,ge in the characteristics of species,
including diversity, distribution, or numbers
of any species of animals?
b. Reduction of the numbers of any unJ.. ;z, rare
�!
%
or endangered species of animals?
c. Introduction of new or disruptive species of
�L
animals into an area, or result in a barrier
to the migration or movement of animals?
d. Deterioration or removal of e.,tistins fish or
_
wildlife, habitat?
5. Population. Will tha p -odsal have significant
results in:
a. Will the proposal a?'�er the locatio.,, distri-
bution, density, diversity, or growth rate of
/
the human population of an area?
b. Will the ,proposal affect existing housing, or
create <a demand for additional housing?
6. Socio- Economic Factors. still the proposal have
significant results 14:
a. Change in local or regional socio.- ecoomic
characteristics,
including economic or
cammercial diversity, rat rate, and propsrty
vakves?
b. Will project costs be equitably distributed
among project beneficiaries, i.e., buyers.
tax payers or project users?
7, Land Use and Plannine Considerations. Will the
proposal have significant results in?
a. A substantial alteration of the present or
planned lana u,e of an area?
b. A conflict with any designations, objectives,
Policies, or adopted plans of any governmental
entities?
c, An impact upon the geiity or quantity of
,
existing consump_ive Or non - consumptive
t
recreational oyportunities?
✓ ✓✓
ut 1c) �
— —
Ell
►J
•
Page 4
YES
NO
8. Transoorration. Mll =.he proposal have significant
results in:
a.
Generatiw,4 of substantial additional vehicular
movement?
'
b.
Effects on existing streets, or demand for
new street construct4otz?
c.
Effects on existing parking aacilities, or
y/
demand for new parking?
r
d.
Substantial impact upon existing transporta-
tion systems?
l
e.
,Alterations to present Fatterns of circula-
tion or movement of people and /or goods?
f.
Alterations to or effects on present and
potential water - borne, rail, mass transit or
air traffic?
g.
Increases in traffic hazards to motor vehicles,
bicyclists or pedestrians?
9. Cultural Resources. Will the proposal have
significant results in:
a.
A disturbance ',o the integrity of archaeological,
paleontologic',.d, and /or historical 'esources?
10. Health, Safety, and Nuisance ?actors. Will the
proposal
have significant results in:
a.
Creation of any health hazard or potential health
hazard?
b.
Exposure of people to }otential health hazards?
c.
A risk of expiosier„ or rele.se of hazardous
substances in the etie.t of an :accident?
d.
nn : ncrease in the number of individual's
or species of tyeetor or pathenogenic
:organisms or the exposure of people to such
organisms?
Y"
e.
`—
Increase in existing nois4 levels?
f.
Exposure o° people to potentially dangerous
noise levels?
g•
The creation of obje,tionable odors?
h.
An 1,vc?�sse in light or glare?
0701 -0 O 6-12-85 P.C, Agenda Packet O Pa e '7 of
C
Page 5
YES :fAYBE NO
11. Aesthetics -. Will the proposal have significant
results in:
a.
The o%structioll or degradation of any scenic
vista
or view?
b.
The creation of`an aesthetically offensive
:site?
S
C.
A conflict with the objective of designated
or potential scenic corridors?
12. Utilities cnd Public Services. Will the proposal
have
_�
a significant need for new systems, or
alterations to the following:
a.
Electric power?
b.
Natural or packaged gas?
C.
Communications systems?
d.
Water supply?
/
n.
Wastewater facilities?
f.
Flood control structures?
g.
Solid waste facilities?
/
h.
Fire protection?
i.
Police protection?
J.
Schayls?
k.
Parks or other recreational facilities?
1.
Maintenance of public facilities, including
roads and flood
control facilities?
m.
Other governmenta; services?
13. Energy and Scarce Resources. Will the proposal
have significant
results in: e
a.
Use of substantial or excessive fuel or energy?
b.
Substantial increase in demand upcn existing
sources of energy?
c.
Al. - ncrease in the demand for deveaowment of
.___.
/
new sources of energy?
/
d.
An increase or perpetuation of the consumption
of non - renewable forms of energy, when feasible
renewable sources of
energy are available?
d
Page 6
r
YES vAYBE NO
y
e. Substantial depletion of any nonrenewable or
� Dcarce natural. resource?
14. Mandatory Findings o± Significance.
a. Does the project have the potential to degrade
t the quality of the environment, substantially
reduce the habitat of fish or wildlife species,
k cause a fish or wl�dlife population to drop
below self sustaining levels, threaten to
eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce
the number or restrict the range of a'rare or
endangered plant or animal or eliminate
important examples of the major periods of
California history or prehistory?
b. Does the project have the potential to achieve
N short- term, to the disadvantage of long -term,
environmental goals? (A short -term impact on the
environment is one which c_ -curs in a relatively /
brief, definitive period of time while long-
term impacts will endure well into the future).
c. Does the project have impact- which are
individually limited, but cumulatively
k considerable? (Cumulatively considerable
means that the incremental affects 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 will cause substantial a&,erse effects
on human beings, either directiy or indirectly?
t II. DISCUSSION OF ENPIRO*,iMENTAL 'EVAMMON (14.e., of affirmative answers to
t the above questions plus a di--ussion of proposed mitigation measures).
tiex i
,ylr) -� r
( 'il Page; 7
ZII. DETERS_ TNATIOM
On e basis of thisiinitial evaluation;
I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect
on the enviro=ent, and a NEGATI:JE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant
effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect
r in this case becao "se the mitigation measures described on an
attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE
+ DECLARATION WILL B;S PREPARED.
1-J I find the Plo+)osed project MAY 'Have atsi nifirant effect on the
envirnment, acid an ENVIROMMENT I:4'A; i/s PORT is equired.
.i
Date
i
1
before a specific design is developed. He further, stated as the architecture
and engineering has not been done on_ the. upper right, corner of the project, he
could not speak to that issue.
i
Commissioner Barker expressed concern that approval of the revision now before
the Commission'aould lock in the fast' food use.
Tim Beedle, Senior Planner, stated that the Commission could indicate that the
fast food portion of the conceptual master plan is conceptual only and does
not waive the requirement. that the ,fast ;;r od use would be a conditional use
permit separate from this conditional use permit /master plan.
Commissioner Barker asked if approval wouid•not mean that a fast food use is
acceptable at this location.
Ted Hopson, Assistant City A *torn6y, advised that in approving the conceptual
master plan: the Commissior does .nothing bur•, indicate that it is willing to
accept a conditional use permit application fora fast food restaurant.
Commissioner Stout stated concern that approval of the conceptual master, plan
would be indicating that the Commission is'-,n favor of a fast food with drive
through capabilities at that location.
Mr. Hopson advised that approval would simply mean that the (ity is willing to
consider an application for'tha`s purpose: • He. stated that the developer is
asking for a chance to disprove the Commission's reaction t.rtt he can't make
traffic, general and aestheaic compatibility work with a fart food facility.
Further, that since a fast food use would otherwise be a permitted use with a
conditional use permit in this zone, findings would have to be made as to why
that determination is being 2,�de.
Chairman Stout asked if it Is a permissable conditional use, did it mean that
the City had to allow a fre3standing building or could it be required to be a
cart of the larger building.
Mr. Hopson advised that this would be a condition of approval on the
Conditional 'Use Permit.
. Heaton stated
Commissioner Barker stated concern with the ,existence of
parcel parcel five on the
ma if it is a
P P approved.
i ..
Planning Commission Minutes -4- December 12, 1984
3a,10
Barrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer, suggested that staff work on language AOL
would would combine the parcel witli parcel four..
Motion: Moved by Barker, seconded by Chitiea. carried. to adopt the
Raenlntinn n- -in... __ �—__�___,. �_ _ __ _ _
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER, CHITIEA, MCNIEL, STOUT
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE,
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
k ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: REMPEL - carried
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: . BARKER, CHITIEA, MCNIEL, STOUT
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NORE
` ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: REMPEL
� - Carr ; %iY:
Ask
Commissioner Hempel returned to the podium.
'4
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 84 -22 BENTSEN - The
k elopment of a 924 unit apartment complex, to be built in 3 phases, on
f abou 58.3 acres located on the north side of- Highland Avenue, east of
Haven A ue in the MH Development District - APN 202- 271 -59, 60.
Pan! Rougeau, Senio Civil Engineer, reviewed the staff report.
Chairmr,n Stout opened the p lie nearing.
Rick Gomez, City Planner, gave a overview of the Commission 's f
regarding he past action
g project and advised th the. item is before the Commission at
this time for environmental review only.
Don King, 9375 Archibald, Rancho Cucamonga, repro ting the applicant, stated
that the applicant had no problems with the'mitiga measures outlined in
the study and the staff report.
An adjacent resident opposed the project and stc.ted concern w traffic
impacts on Lemon and Haven and additionally opposed the street wide of
Lemon.
Plaririing'Commission Minutes ._5-
December 12, 1984
C. DESIGN REVIEW FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 12801 - DEER CREEK The development ,&f
97 single family decached >dwelling units on 32.3 acres of land in t Low
Residential District (2 -4 du /ac) located at the southeast corner prBanyan
Street and Carnelian Street - APN 1062- 361 -01; 1062 - 371 -01.
Commissioner Banker requested that Item C be removed rom the Consent
Calendar.
Motion: Moved-by Hempel, seconded by Barker. u imously carried, to adopt
the remaining items on the Consent Calendar;
Commissioner Hempel commented that. item. , Salvati, was one of the nicest
apartment designs to come before the C .issien and hoped to see it built.'
C. DESIGN REVIEW FOR TENTATIVE• VMCT 128o1 - .DEER.CREEK
Commissioner Barker stated at when this tract was before the Commission for
approvals there were a umber of issues associated with the project and
concerns were express ever the d4sign of the east /west street. At that
meeting the Commiss n attempted to redesign the street without taking a look
at what the fin if
would look like. He further stated that in the
future it nigh a best if redesigns are referred back to staff and the Design
Review Comm' ee for review. Since the developer had designed the street in
compliant with the recommendations of the Commission at the meeting,
Commiss her Barker made the motion to approve the design review for Tentative
Trac 12801, Deer Creek. The mo Lon'was seconded by Commissioner McNiel and
un imously carried.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Chairman Stout announced tbsL Vfio following items would be heard concurrently.
D. AMENDMENT TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 83 -07 - CHRISTESON -.An. amendment to
the conceptual plan for the Virginia Dare Center, 'a business park
consisting of office, commercial, restaurant and theater uses on 13.1'
acres of land in the General Commercial District, located'at the northwest
corner of Foothill Boulevard and Haven Avenue - APN 1077- 401 -01', 03.
,s
E. REVISIONS TO PARCEL MAP 8303 - CHRISTESON -_A. change from 15 parcels to 11
parcels-- A division of 13.1 -acres in the.General Commercial District (GC)
located at the northwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Haven Avenue
APN 10 -7- 401 -01, 03.
Commissioner Hempel stepped down from the podium due to possible conflict of
interest.
Planning Commission Minutes -2- December 12, 1984
is -
lo -a3
Tim Beedle, Senior Planner, reviewed the staff report pertaining. to the
Conditional Use Permit and Barrye Hanson reviewed -the report on the Parcel
Map.
Commissioner Barker referred to the fast food use at, the northeast corner and
asked how access would be obtained from the property owner to the north.
Paul Rougeau, Senior Civil Engineer, replied that this was -a- condition placed
on the original parcel map and would assure that the fullest access is gained
for the center as -a whole. Further, that access�througts the property to the
north will be necessary for this project,to have left turn access across the
median on Haven Avenue.
Chairman Stout opened the public hearing.
Bill Heaton, representing the applicant, stated that the site plan depicts the
applicant's intent, but did not believe that immediate access out to Haven had
been planned at this stage. He further stated agreement with the Resolution
and conditions of approval.
There were no further comments, therefore the public bearing upus closed.
Commissioner Barker stated concern with the location of the fast food
restaurant. He stated that he was very proud of this project and it is a very
special ine, but did not understand the logic beleind the fast food use at that
partV,,Ular location. He stated that the location and dr;Ign of the fast food
i use creates traffic problems and cuts down on the open space. Additionally,
if that part were to be eliminated he would have no concerns.
Commissioner McNiel stated that this issue was labored over during Design
Review and that the Committee recommended that the fast food use be designed
with a theme consistent with the rest of the center and have sufficient
landscaping and berming to almost conceal it. He stated that the applicant
anticipated that most business will be generated from within the project and
that the possibility of moving the fast food use to another location still
exists.
Commissioner Chitiea ,atated tHat placing h %.fast food restaurant at that
location does seem to create access problems with the property to the north
and should be further reviewed. '•
Commissioner Stout stated that if the applicant needs a fast food user he did
not see the need for it to be a free- standing building. Further, that he
would be more inclined towards approval if it were part of the main building.
l
f Mr. Heaton stated that the applicant shares the concern of the City that the
entire development should blend in well. He advised that the applicant
currently has a proposal for the fast food restaurant and that it will be
before the various City committees and the Commission for review several times
Planning Commission Minutes
r
December 12, 1984
0
I
l RESOLUTION NO. 83 -79B
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCA'MONGA PLANNING
COMMISSION AMENDING CONDITIONAL USE PERK11' 83••07 TO
REVISE THE MASTER SITE PLAN FOR THE VIRGINIA DARE WINERY
GUSINESS CENTER LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF
FOOTHILL BOULEVARD AND HAVEN AVENUE ON 13.1 ACRES OF LAND
APN 1077 - 401 -01 AND 034
WHEREAS on 8th day of June, 1983 the Rancho Cucamonga Planning
Commission approved the Environmental Assessment. and Conditional Use Permit
83 -01 for a Master Plan at the Virginia Dare Business Park Center, and
WHEREAS on the 12th day of December, 1984 the Rancho Cucamonga
Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider the above - described
amendment.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Mancha Cucamonga Planning Commission resolves as
follows:
SECTION 1
1. That the proposed master plan as revised is in
accord with the Gr neral Plan, the objectives of the
Development Code, and the purroses of the District
in which the site is located.
2. That the proposed revised Master Plan together with
the conditions applicable hereto will not be
detrimental -to the public health, safety, or welfare
or materially injurious to properties or
improvements in the vicinity.
3. That the revised Master Plan complies.with each of
the applicable provisions of the Develo ent Code.
SECTION 2: That the Conditional Use Permit No. 83 -07 is approved
subject to conditions contained within the Planning Commission Resolution No.
83 -79 and 83 -79A, and the following conditions:
1. The owner shall provide for implementation of a
shared parking program concept through:
a. Executazg all necessary parking exchange
agreements between all property owners. to the
satisfaction of the City Attorney prior to
development.
b. Under the current shared parking concept, the
land use mix cannot provide for any greater
intensification of parking demand through
modification of land use types.
t , /o -4s
E
yl
Resolution No. 83 -796
Page 2
c. Assure through an executed agreement with
the
County Flood Control District, a long term lease
agreement which provides for the use of the area
shown on the western boundary of the plan
for
parking for a minimum of fifty years.
d. Provide for a greater distribution of compact
parking stalls.
2. Assure with further detailed site plans,
the
enhanced opportunity for pedestrian orientation
features around the restaurant cluster adjacent to
Haven Avenue.
3. Provide a conceptual landscape plan subjict
to
Onrign Review approval prior to the submittal of
any
' detailed site plan.
4, Assure that the architectural statement for
all
remaining buildings will be compatible with
the
overall architectural program currently - approved
for
the Virginia Dare Winery office building.
S. The fast food use at the northeast corner of the
shall be deleted from the Master Plan.
site
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 12th DAY OF DECEMBER, 1984.
PL ANN COMMISSION OF THE CITY,OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY:
Dennis L Stout, Chat an
ATTEST:
.
Rick Gomez; Deputy Secretary
t
i
•
/ Q -'-4
Resolution No. 83-799
Page 3
I, Rick Gomez, Deputy Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of
Rancho. Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and
regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the
City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held
on the 12th day of December, 1984, by the following vote -to-wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER, CHITIEA, MCNIEL, STOUT
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSTAIP° COMMISSIONERS: REMPEL
i
�I
e
RESOLUTION NO. — '¢
A RESOLUTTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION
APPROVING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO. 85 -09 LOCATED ON THE
WEST SIDE OF HAVEN, NORTH OF FOOTHILL IN THE GENERAL
COMMERCIAL DISTRICT
1. 1
WHEREAS, on the 3rd ''ay of April, 1985, a complete application was
filed by Del Taco, Inc. for review of the above - described project; and
WHEREAS, on the 12th day of June, 1985, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning
Commission held a meeting to consider the above - described project.
follows: NOW, THEREFORE, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission resolved as
SECTION 1: That the following can b� met:
I. That the proposed project is consistent with the
objectiv,_s 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 prrposed use is in compliance with each of
the applicable provisions of the Development Code;
and
4. That the proposed use, together with the conditions
applicable thereto, will not lie detrimental to the
public health, safety, or welfare, or materially
injurious to properties or improvements in the
vicinity.
SECTION 2: That this project will not create adverse impacts on the
environment and That a Negative Declaration is issued on June 12th, 1985.
SECTION 3: That Development Review No. 85 -09 is approved subject to
the following conditions and attached Standard Conditions:
Engineering Division:
la All pertinent conditions of Parcel Map 8303 shall apply.
Design Review:
1. Densely landscaped berming and screen wall shall be provided to
screen the drive -thru from Haven Avenue.
2. A color sample of the guadrafoil sunbrust shall be submitted to
the Planning Division prior to issuance of building permits
which indicates amore subdued orange tone.
s. All signs shall conform to the Uniform Sign Program for the
Virginia Dare Center.
4. Construction shall include a parking lot with at least 25
parking spaces.
5. Where applicable, the conditions of approval contained in
Planning Commission Resolution 83 -79 shall apply.
6. Provide trash enclosure, for restaurant only, located north of
building.
Grading:
1. Balance of rough graded Virginia Dare Center to be put .r.der
permanent erosion control prior to issuance of permits.
® APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS•12TH DAY OF JUNE, 1985.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY:
Dennis L. Tt�..it, Chairman
ATTEST:
Rick Gomez, Deputy Secretary
I, Rick Gomez, Deputy Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of
Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and
regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the
City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held
on the 12th day of June, 1985, by the following vote -to -wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
0
F
Z
S
J
o �
H ~
O
O
F
2 N
H
0
r
v �
7 J G
N i J
L
G
`o
C
O
Y
Y
EU
Y
Y
O
�S
O EE
� N O
2 G
� uc
`s �z
:c I--
O W O
t 0�
aR
x0 � OLD
C O E
uS
gZ O O
C L u N
pN
R M
Q N GN
o P�
J >�C
N.r 4d s
1-
J D Y
o z E
Kv f
4
= C �yat Olt L° Oi
ii .9.. �pqu•� C Et
1- °a Nq 2�?•
Y � e Lp.�u NiiiltiY�NO
uuR�mis
M ZN
C O t 0 N C
^ er G ^
�- oya•��ugo
s
u
A N ..`O.�s � O _ e• q
w L D. AI
^ Nq:
� Y O
F N G SS
c 0 00 1
i
O c Li
u °
N Ir1 ? N
I I I
hk /o -3o
Im
EI
V C L W L Y
Y° YOY YYIT
G�OA
r^-
'Y
b t'
O
^C . YY
O
O Yl..w
.1
R L
O oE
q
�•
,O
O
22!-. d
° }CYO a+` ON
WV.G N L
6N
qC-
C Lu Y
Q.p aY SCp. V w
a tL Y
A
O DC
p
6q U�.
N ^.
C6C�LIqu•
O 3
E.V
R
o
E.. 6.
N
•Yia u. PU
t° E C L V m C L
Y O.. \
Cdd
T P
q7
L B o o
=>.y
CU r
LCf
n
•r O. °
` Y G
U� 0
4
•=I• S
,.• ,� GF� LY
C 9
29 ?•uq
Y
°ue °L'O
Ywu
Poo
Ymn
=c�6
Yg =Ma
O
Lam_.
G= aY YW.ur..g.
x
9.YC
CA
vO0Y0
^
ILA
E y��_
Q.
Y
P
L aOius Wti 6V
u
W r
u•
r N
.V^
L.
' eT
CON
GCC p
N CwE Y9Nlny
i1C �01C
R°
^�Of`
COIV 6C
'pp
'°
Ar qua
N
VN.4at
qON
966gL
PGaj
VcMw
_G Et .
Yq�WN
Ot�C
6 G u R .•.�
q Oye'vI C.0 Gr•.Od
TW
O6 Ya•,Y
.-. Y L°1^
=
M -CC
O. 6
MOC
CW
6'055.8
r
O� t
E
_�Ca
^60 CYO
N LO d L
O•"Cy9 6
M Y
U2—
Y
C
O'°
O S • u
c N�9OUY9`z't`�
-
c M. 0
=a
.2u.YC
C
A.
d Y N 6d S COi V N 2
l
Y-
< y�i w Y- j
6 O a m
m
I
F
Z
S
J
o �
H ~
O
O
F
2 N
H
0
r
v �
7 J G
N i J
L
G
`o
C
O
Y
Y
EU
Y
Y
O
�S
O EE
� N O
2 G
� uc
`s �z
:c I--
O W O
t 0�
aR
x0 � OLD
C O E
uS
gZ O O
C L u N
pN
R M
Q N GN
o P�
J >�C
N.r 4d s
1-
J D Y
o z E
Kv f
4
= C �yat Olt L° Oi
ii .9.. �pqu•� C Et
1- °a Nq 2�?•
Y � e Lp.�u NiiiltiY�NO
uuR�mis
M ZN
C O t 0 N C
^ er G ^
�- oya•��ugo
s
u
A N ..`O.�s � O _ e• q
w L D. AI
^ Nq:
� Y O
F N G SS
c 0 00 1
i
O c Li
u °
N Ir1 ? N
I I I
hk /o -3o
Im
EI
N
II
I
1i o-5
"'o d c"
• LL.^ N^ 9� C w p ' °6 2 Y9.—u
bL° Q L N a h ®L C N O. « V .G q S L S L w 2 <
.st M VLF C wE a•}. ' Hq w1°rL N ."! O
Y� SY N...wGN xx uq
^ L V y i
00
u'o '-
O C L — 8x r.$ °off
I�dC-1 "r-,
O+C �p Gy uaRO
Y --=--o-- N N _
u It
NCO 4 w a• G O 7 1 G E r �.L °`! D L' V S�� >� Y + L�� u x0 ` � �
w °p u2 w dtw cm= a -nw �eoeL" qmo -.
og o'u W`'a'
u Wo SNLNrn c- yu. cY v
'c o °n .s �� 5. °n o v moo
L Q 0W `i' 4L w � u c n .•a"V'C• V°e a °cO ' C ^ — c C` . 6 y L N O e
O — m2•-� Oo�� w�0 u tl OV HY V VL.w` u��xL
Ns.` cY = ;5 o- .O x votl
< u`
qwx w.. t'as i. ioi 000 ceoO4ce
P1�u t°Y gG a V > L .. L u i tL ° o S- G u V°
6' d tl i .. „ j L .C`. y .•>„ G — Y G .OL S e.� T U w 122 1S 6 Y 9 d L 6S y N O L O V>
qw RtR R HZ NCIw < Nfi h JM
Gu O Or qM dY ny.E0
!L- �.HG�O f•.Qi wn
t
fEU4.
�MdO
L�
Q'�pY.'o
Gn�r
C��..G°•tEPO�
s, =LLwy
.°,u,S,
.o°.vo�
a�
bo
R
u�
oN ^ °Vr� -
vgoVy ^c
L «n
• ^msµ
Qo
®
"
oiwvuY.
^d.
you°
G R4
-owa N•-+'
9n� °°
g
L4
i
L`4«
O
T.e
COw«
G ^O
LU'L9d Lnx°
O•^ O.NUY
S
U
xy LL
-
4-3
q L i L
uOY°
Sq N« g
"
Z22'.=
°t. x^U1
C
—
«qU.U.u.�
r��
�9�1d.
O
uep
Qi
•O
HOC°
Y
� «N+
u ^yyy„
w — =u V�x""O
U
EQOwUVUti
Y.u.
G
2
y�,°6
iS r�
^ O d C
9r A
M �.^
' H� �.Y
L G
9 �
N,,,.
q S
QG G�
Own
G N T
Y �T NLO y ?M
°E
x L Y
upu
2���y
�C
�N p°
��ULtLS` •
Yw°. wq aC
oe
GOC
N�YY !!G OL�
rw ^LOUp�
°N'S°
a6
pCOT
Cm
GEOC
o u
ratio
C.
o�
L tQ. Ol^O
uo`t`^.�
wY
O`qu
"ca'u8s .G°.
uw
u Oy
.: ugug °GN
6..N`�r•
'u ��
O.•.
oy
ON
v.• °�°�
L�c G
.i i
cG
''.caw
L c
�. w`•ua°.
+°- Y Ld
'va usimi.~+H
Yy g�x °o«
Va.
LMi°
.g
Ea= c za
c
— L^ d R
4 E.•6
L
u p 0 Q C
OG N..0 Y'•
� r
O t O i� O •� .L N X pp
NN N.x L22 YY
e gg o`aoo
N CV
< Y
O
H
�o••aLi
'_'
G
uL'o h.::
9 «,p
cue.
N 6 G
N
II
I
1i o-5
"'o d c"
• LL.^ N^ 9� C w p ' °6 2 Y9.—u
bL° Q L N a h ®L C N O. « V .G q S L S L w 2 <
.st M VLF C wE a•}. ' Hq w1°rL N ."! O
Y� SY N...wGN xx uq
^ L V y i
00
u'o '-
O C L — 8x r.$ °off
I�dC-1 "r-,
O+C �p Gy uaRO
Y --=--o-- N N _
u It
NCO 4 w a• G O 7 1 G E r �.L °`! D L' V S�� >� Y + L�� u x0 ` � �
w °p u2 w dtw cm= a -nw �eoeL" qmo -.
og o'u W`'a'
u Wo SNLNrn c- yu. cY v
'c o °n .s �� 5. °n o v moo
L Q 0W `i' 4L w � u c n .•a"V'C• V°e a °cO ' C ^ — c C` . 6 y L N O e
O — m2•-� Oo�� w�0 u tl OV HY V VL.w` u��xL
Ns.` cY = ;5 o- .O x votl
< u`
qwx w.. t'as i. ioi 000 ceoO4ce
P1�u t°Y gG a V > L .. L u i tL ° o S- G u V°
6' d tl i .. „ j L .C`. y .•>„ G — Y G .OL S e.� T U w 122 1S 6 Y 9 d L 6S y N O L O V>
qw RtR R HZ NCIw < Nfi h JM
Gu O Or qM dY ny.E0
!L- �.HG�O f•.Qi wn
t
L#�
o
y
^ p a
a
C EL
A l
La [d d
,x
aN
V
n..L..
d6L o
N O•
YOt 9
L cy
L C
Ea
!��
W'
L Z-.o
y
cam. n• or .+-
Ad
^o«up
>. ca o
�^L L^
qy n
+ a d.
N c
Eu
^. q m
c
C VC
,O'SO < N
°
r
Lyya
Y q S a
L�L+cdG
dL
vi
C _
AL
L
NdaL
ac
°.a;
U�dN�
^+. w
UL
O SL
LL� NOS u0
yqp d. Una
Yd..q °L^vpip d�q
CN.
ar Nda^Vq'
�
� ^r.:;
6L
no
N Cd N
F p
yc,0.
S-
° q
° cyo
i p u
qn
d° q
a� FCs•
G 6 p N
O•� L G
nS
°^, n42NLC -�'��
+ c�yd
p' c
:Ni
��
mY aeo
a°n c
v . 1
o f
N
—Lp
�y
ET N
aH v0
yON
dy d
cd
O)d
.d
nCga NO p.
d
L
°it
d C C
n c
qva
d N
q
n"
ya
EL N
O.L d q
U
a
a^OqE
C Upj
n L Cle
�i
o s
. ',.
.Lt
u r i O-
Ea
Fa y
C.0
Q Y-OO h t,
^a
o
I
q
LE
y
^T _L
lrvoio ¢gwL.m
V p
y
^ p a
a
� e
cn
'^
La [d d
^Y� ....p
V
C�
d6L o
6A
n w.
O: O gL y
�^L L^
qy n
+ a d.
N c
Eu
^. q m
c
C VC
,O'SO < N
°
r
Lyya
Y q S a
L�L+cdG
dL
vi
C _
AL
L
4:NV Pi �.
d
.+'L
A Y
O
^
L
Y
) Q
'
- °o, Z
1
e
•
GLa
L< c q E
O ••
�O
Y U E
p
dqO
aLi w
qL
•'.
F p
A L G
p d ° b
° q
q
i p u
qn
d° q
a ...
G 6 p N
O•� L G
vvd
��
q�Y
q
p
qva
q
n"
ya
q LO Yy.
as 6u OEE�j
LOI
\,
qy 01 qLd}
C Upj
n L Cle
�i
��
qE OL
O C
u r i O-
Ea
Fa y
V
q
LE
y
^T _L
lrvoio ¢gwL.m
Q1� 4tf �n
�
1d n�rni ¢u ¢o
L
°'
fit' ON+-q
rC �
6.Cn
v °n
4N 6q
d ..
W66H V1apik
r `�
cz
T
V4N�OYr' . GdN d>JS
dO n9' bOq yy2 NR 2Gjt Lja CL yG U2^
024.
+E OOq= Cy 3Z ywN
i'd.0 yy "tyc u sr
d Mme.„. Up V c cELa4~- N�r,.E y
- �
N q CL 01N Cc L6 SE N,yi L4. 4 V 019 Nd VC".yy
yO.d..rAr � '. O pU 4R q q04 L O °pE
G. N. 1r d U L 01
NTuujl w= 90,0'L tE�°. qY =•'.V'.d 1; 3Ca�LaO.j
N N.-O u iC a2f N� ✓waqE L 9 d� 2._RO y Y Sc0 `�1 E�o�.
0 ^9 �= po�N q CCC �•'F, .5 PiR
yy c E�OO.+
d �' � V� A m = NdJo d q Or 6o' GLiu 4O uY
NN _.4 dw r >deF LO1L. q qL 9� pL N E Nc
5 C c
n9 J9 q 9°aSd+.y tir EE 1N q2 q Ctr q. b n�T j1
VISSO N y n �O Nd= C nq O ty.�
j L c a N '- n W y
C y a+ L~ u D N. U u eJ = ._ eJ v u V �, 9 T g O V O Y S V
VS�T.f ur may. WL , 9 ENLV NSu C.0 �� ���,LCd • fw NON d0 S.�S
c ♦d 9P� Edj9 � .+ °YC.Q � Ccw c+01.. 1- .:LR.+
o o ° e o .9- a q o a
EE a q- E 6. Nwr c Ly
«ARL1L LNG I�L NON 4�N.0 y9iY 64 JM96etrJNN �r •. eJd U�DY°
N d06j1ja
S �
nCewe H Gg6q Q
ti ��
G �. �.
t
mz!!
N ... C L n
d T L A
Mr'r- .aLNad
C Z q O
2 m L L �.
G d
° •Lj N p
�..0,,.
v
nY.�+°
atr
5 2
Cwy^q
'O °� °und.c°
Fn E °
•t
°d
f^q
�' •Y's ti.N
oo
_
d EC
aN ^O..
d
n'eO p09 dwOi
y N
E^O. C.O Lyb
tr w
.- _
E dp Ln�
6C
L,
9.2
Gs%
m
'c
CpcG
c«d
•��
NE W�
O Y
Y Cy..
dWJe
OOddN'
XyL
d�O6
_.�
^.^
J' .q
t? s 9 N
+.;..
2 bnmas'+
wq
O
o.°+e'ei
°nv
cw
qE>
~cep
''u�.2n
a °N�.°.0 n N
rL}s°f c aLiy wcep
V p
�yp�
^O.
d.
L°
d °9CA
q
r,nC E'w^et'aza
„..5Y �NN.H
�Nyo +J q^R�
i,.oyaF
�.yw+
qU
_N sa
Va d..•O•'O
wn4-
°oL
q°Ra
iiuv'J° d�?
dROf
wNo.Aeu''
c EGd
ya.G. c^
_
jwj
e
•��qNw
1r y Z,
J q
1u
EE
d
4
N
15
Ly
d =C 9y
�� yYi
p
f�Y
YY
yGUC .
.°.LmY
Nu `dl WU
jJ O1
C�
C9; aC„pro
•C
YAYq
�
LgG�6
� C
60
n•' u C �gg
d. E O
° u
•Lj
EE
L N i S a V f
ya
�.
�+ 9 E E s. a
L
g o M w
^ 3... �
� U o d
L a•
_ w
6EueL6
�uniY4�
NON N132N 4V'
N
:.l
CC
¢W V21MN�+e -6
yy¢p
V4N�OYr' . GdN d>JS
dO n9' bOq yy2 NR 2Gjt Lja CL yG U2^
024.
+E OOq= Cy 3Z ywN
i'd.0 yy "tyc u sr
d Mme.„. Up V c cELa4~- N�r,.E y
- �
N q CL 01N Cc L6 SE N,yi L4. 4 V 019 Nd VC".yy
yO.d..rAr � '. O pU 4R q q04 L O °pE
G. N. 1r d U L 01
NTuujl w= 90,0'L tE�°. qY =•'.V'.d 1; 3Ca�LaO.j
N N.-O u iC a2f N� ✓waqE L 9 d� 2._RO y Y Sc0 `�1 E�o�.
0 ^9 �= po�N q CCC �•'F, .5 PiR
yy c E�OO.+
d �' � V� A m = NdJo d q Or 6o' GLiu 4O uY
NN _.4 dw r >deF LO1L. q qL 9� pL N E Nc
5 C c
n9 J9 q 9°aSd+.y tir EE 1N q2 q Ctr q. b n�T j1
VISSO N y n �O Nd= C nq O ty.�
j L c a N '- n W y
C y a+ L~ u D N. U u eJ = ._ eJ v u V �, 9 T g O V O Y S V
VS�T.f ur may. WL , 9 ENLV NSu C.0 �� ���,LCd • fw NON d0 S.�S
c ♦d 9P� Edj9 � .+ °YC.Q � Ccw c+01.. 1- .:LR.+
o o ° e o .9- a q o a
EE a q- E 6. Nwr c Ly
«ARL1L LNG I�L NON 4�N.0 y9iY 64 JM96etrJNN �r •. eJd U�DY°
N d06j1ja
S �
nCewe H Gg6q Q
ti ��
Y.
Z dY
u
dY_o. m`om
a,o
E
n
=
G Eu
nm
00
^
-
c
O O L
can •..�
r
`�u
d G
•
0 01
N
d d
O
d
• '
n L
pO
9wy
y
Edp�
6Kim y
o vy u
�e
adL�
p
' °ng
:2v
2
d
Imo
LpENE
4J.
C.1.
6
�C V dCY.N
d L y
U A S
c O
uU
a
u I.
L v
s p y V C 6
L Gp
i
�Ei
a
How
Y i•• aL�
AR-1
d Lh o
t•d .�NEU..0
�x O
COY
O 1-tiW L
d
60paliN
d NC LN
Y
s ^O
-
o`r
N
S
v
4i, qti L
r. L O
YTZy d0 L
N�
}a
u .-
^y
d..n.^ u . d0 `
duzi. -z
Y
N .T
ca
LLIG M
AV y6
N«
6q
WE •."
Z2
aC, a'id
dq:
d u 9
g
L d
ay N
rra
Y.
Z dY
m 9 U?
St
x p
G Y
Nu I
.54. C
d O
`�
E
n
T .mo�••
Et.G
•
3�L„• A
L
nm
00
CU O�
� N
L
G yy
TAB
LYL0.
L9
1; O
ai
>
v�
d G
•
0 01
N
d d
O
d
• '
n L
pO
9wy
y
Edp�
E «y a
anw
adL�
p
ow. Eu v
CTyr
V.W
d
•°+
SGAa.
ao r
�.ca m
av a
o
d E p a u
x
L
.d
yEbG
w u °N
o
r}y C.}G
NFEyo.c
•" c o°
C^.1 •u
N'
^d
u.
O N
4G
Y i•• aL�
AR-1
d Lh o
W`q �d
y y E n
`J. uN
c C
•' L^
O 1-tiW L
d
60paliN
par q•dr0 h
�.�
N
S
v
777
o =- .:k N
•Ln v V
qNC
U d
udgad.``
clli 'd
N •
Y
MNUp
aN^
x
y d
ro.?
E y L0
^G
= i•
Y d0
zy
9
LY4..
NOL
y .pG.�
gpjN
aOS E
vCyn
sy+
tQ
L
Nu ¢�'
d
d
•°+
o spi+G-
u N a
i1
G
CCU.
N
a i n
^r`
dG^
a^
aN A
yegia y
qo° a
N>
d
Y
Y
Lor
3 6
777
'; Ward)
LLIG M
AV y6
Eq
Cwt
WE •."
Z2
pOCC`
LGq
-• aH
N
d u 9
g
L d
ay N
rra
.NC
G
d
6
y G
V O
d O T
G
41.
n'
y�E
d�
Y
N O
6C
Ep
d q.•
O,
y,.
no Y
5C
N
p •-
L
Ny.L
j
d n
•_ O
d
6 q
d i C
an d
E
•4.,
O L q�
L
ssi •.p..
n C 1
6
y C C
Y .- O
^ a N
t W N 2 0
T
N ^n Q
O
•q^ t o
n E dL an
+ i d
�Y n r
x
N 3,p T
u?�d.Gk
6. u1
=Yy�
G Y
d. N
G
M^ p
VL
u �y
�C
��C
cc 9 O
6.
_
•.O.}ia .h
..u...'.'
pL
Ey, O�Qd.O
06 yr•„
NvyOd yy 1N0
dL
a O.
=9 �.qp.W^
^
..9 �d
OO
d
oM
p
�
U.
a V O
ry
u d
V 5 q
iO
5
H�4 C
N C VM
N.N r S Y r ^
.t •C �
JLE Q
p, :.
.E •.
nd
C S
.
G7
SY
LL
o =- .:k N
L . I
222
2
ZE
w
V
�o T t
25-
Z Sm
t
-Z
2
w
t 9
E
2 �!-E
3
-.'S
w=
4!
% S u,
6
%
7-;
w
-,z:5
sx-4
-=I-
C;
-:rz
iguz.
oz:
k-
S. Z
ZZ
9 gm 4
!7M
?t
79 Z
w
12
wu k.
U, ot
12
02.
W
W-
T
OR-
'Z-
.9
.1
t
—1.
—=a=
mo I.;
0
Zl= 2 T4;
72 3-1 z U.Ut .9-
u
c;
-W
Z70
N
E
0
80-�=
L . I
w
V
Z Sm
t
-Z
2
w
2 �!-E
3
-.'S
w=
4!
6
7-;
w
-,z:5
sx-4
-=I-
C;
-:rz
iguz.
oz:
S. Z
ZZ
9 gm 4
:Gt
w
12
72
U, ot
12
02.
W
W-
T
OR-
'Z-
A
—1.
—=a=
mo I.;
0
u
-0
R 0-
-W
Z70
N
E
0
80-�=
t%. 0-
UIN
U
V qT
Y
6 U`C C
4.
G
T
p
d^^ 1
°
W.
...
°. G
+s
Ngi
NOS. -. ^Y
w
y•. iC�y -.
O�4YI k
d E
O'
�
IIVV
End
iCU
y
°
qN
S.
O
�qdG=
3 t� y
daE ° n
LCa° d Ny
°
0O
L
•n
°rn�m=
n
°o� -c°
G a
�4E6 yN
MCC tJ
o° m
O•�r d
9
d 2
C.
°9 L
G yq
O
0
A
rn ° 'o Td° Mi
N. UL
E.Lim r `o
a LN
`
a:OU
1.:
LU cU
o' G
c
°
•.Ed
r
°" EM
d
^t0 `EE
Ewo
i 3
-
G2aMW
vdiEL� n O Cd
I�-i Ni �L
O 6 ,qL
Oy 6dtl
6
a C d p
pa�EA
O•° d L pa,
_
` E
cam
dt)YL
°4 .�-• Ot
L
E N
° bu�UL �C.
+`G
U�oM°
_
�. •` L
go
L ' w a O E N
n
yS�M ut 6E `y
O. ��
_ C
NU
L E e
W
��
aY EE
Tw. is
WE
GO.v`iA 4O:55
i4.r Qt; n
E NL LZ;
•p-
ad GN
3O. .39 6 a
Aft
L
Y d
tS C
L W
11181
V Y Z y N
Ld G E
O d.YTU.
C
Y
•.•
V w
Y N
° G
d V
E
L.
391
��
5
` U
Zl=
d E &o
C�
d
it `
p
L
O
• y q N
QO
tipN
G
d0
U
al
�
V
{°.
Sol
yMy
d
°
' uN
W
u W
`I
OC
wd p l
L
W1-
G
y =b
tLA
rn °d
dy
4. c
=0 E pa
uwi
>C
y d
•
L EUCd
G
d°d
Iid y0
d
C�
Q C
r _C WT
_
a E
E
G
rW�
O
y�
6m QQL
W -2'
UNq NC
CL Ur•
U J
y
\lI
O
\ \ \\
�
x
�
L
x z
a cv
o
°uo
9
2 A
N
y
y
�t
c
v
an G
NL
C
9
Ti V
v c a Y
c'
p q _
`�
au.o. n.
O
q W
.�
•
N y.;
c G L N •-.0
L° V N 3..
J
i
a p
un in
Y « .2
ua+
d. d LT
.p4 '+ aL
o N y
A Ytu o c
w
E o,N^
> G aN
e
V 4Y :2 A d
«a.
N
W�� Yp
Cry E wm mo
o
p. �.
.aN
V
u
N r
c
LL
ptycL
N
i
Q N L
C
N
p^ C
� c
4
is ZE
0
o:
L
c� ou o
`uuY a
°u�an
�uaq
O 1
Et + ~
BtY O
mc
v N`N 'c^
a
aoN
Z; ll�
o�
cyy �
u
L C O t
P�Q o�C
N 4°
u L'
M q
i
Wk / n — 11, C-1
C T^
U u=pi
O t z
x�o
rw�
om�
Zp V
A Ol
C 6
O
J °1O
Lq1�•�
od
a�
x
E s
N i
a �
L
L N
n o
o r,
a
� v
N3 °o
4.
u
L L
LLD• `L
�I
7
Li
p
o
°uo
9
L aNa
212;
N
N
y
y
y N
mr P
�qN
NL
a
xOp
m
E
n
YY
NT c
C
e'''y
ff
o
p. �.
v
Yy.
V
Yr,�
u q
a°o
C• Q
q C 6
LL
It
p c
� C
4 �
C
N
p^ C
� c
4
c� ou o
`uuY a
°u�an
�uaq
O 1
Et + ~
BtY O
mc
v N`N 'c^
a
aoN
Z; ll�
o�
cyy �
u
L C O t
P�Q o�C
N 4°
u L'
M q
i
Wk / n — 11, C-1
C T^
U u=pi
O t z
x�o
rw�
om�
Zp V
A Ol
C 6
O
J °1O
Lq1�•�
od
a�
x
E s
N i
a �
L
L N
n o
o r,
a
� v
N3 °o
4.
u
L L
LLD• `L
�I
7
Li
CITY OF RANCHO CUCATMONGA wCAM�,:
STAFF REPORT
O g
F
L
DATE: June 12, 1986 197
TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner
BY: Dan Coleman, Senior Planner
SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 85 -12 -
PIRES. - The development of a 66,000 T7gare foot restaurant
located at the northwest corner of Flothill and Haven on
about V acres (Virginia Dare Center '), in the General
Commercial District - AFN 1077 - 401 - 027.;;
Related 1-- les - CUP 83 -07
I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION:
A. Action Requested Approval of site plan, a evations and
issuance of a Negative Declaration.
B. Purpose: Development of a restaurant
C. Location: Northwest corner of Foothill. and Haven (Exhibit "A ")
D. Parcel Size: 13 acres
E. Existing Zoning: General Commercial
F. Existing Land Use: Abondoned winery
G. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning:
North Vacan; Industrial Park
Sour,;; Vacant; Office Professional
E)3c vacant; Community Commercial
-klest - Vacant General Commercial
H.. S-'te Characteristics:
Former Garrett winery site, which has been regraded and Phase I
is under construction. The site slopes at a 2% grade. The
site is located between the General Telephone facility and Deer
I ' Creek Channel.
ITEM P
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
Development Review 85 -12 - Spires
June 12, 1985
Page 2
II. ANALYSIS•
A. General: On December 12, 1984, the Planning Commssi'on
approved revised master plan for Virginia Dare Center, which
included, this restaurant pad for a 1- story, 5,470 square foot
restaurant (Exhibit "B"). The applicant is proposing to
increase the size of the restaurant to 6,000 square feet as
shown in Exhibit "E ". Adequate parking will be available per
the approved - shared parking plan approved by the Planning
Commission, because 60 parking spaces were allocated for this
restaurant pad.
B. Design Review Committee: The Committee felt that additional
architectural treatment was desirable along the south elevation
facing Foothill Boulevard. The Committee suggested that the
applicant explore the use of vine covered trellises, additional
woodwork, introducing the quadrafoil element and rounding the
window tops on the tower. In addition, the wail signs should
conform to Uniform Sign Pro- am for thu Virginia Dare Center.
The meandering sidewalks should b'a re- designed to conform to
the City Standard to provide an undulating sidewalk design.
The revised elevations (Exhibit "F "), indicate new trellis at
west entry and over }rash enclosure. The arched window
treafiient is not consistent with Phase I.
C. Environmental Assessment: The Planning Commission issued a
Negative Declaration for the Virginia Dare project on June 8,
1983. A noise study was required by the General Plan for the
proposed restaurant. The Noise Study indicates that the
restaurant interior noise lever will be satisfactory as
designed without special mitigation measures. Based upon
completion of the Initial Study, Part II, and review of the
Noise Study, Staff recommends issuance of a new Negative
Declaration for the restaurant.
III. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: This project is consistent with - the
Development Code and Geteral Plan. The project will not cause
{
detriment to adjacent prVerties or cause significant environmental
impacts. The proposed site plan design, together with the
recommended conditions is in compliance with the applicable
t
conditions of the development code.
i
i
i
r
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
Development Review
85 -12 -
Spires
June 12, 1985
Page 3
IV. RECOMMENDATION: If the Planning Commission can supp \rt the Facts
_fdFF`ind1ngs, then
adoption of the attached resolution of approval
would be appropriate.
Res p Afully s
ted,
,tick ez
City PI r
RG :DC :cv
Attachments:
Exhibit
"A" - Location Map
Exhibit
"B" - Master Plan
Exhibit
"C" - Revised Master Plan
'
Exhibit
"D" - Revised conceptual Landscape Plan
Exhibit
"E" - Site Plan Blow -Up
Exhibit
"F" - Elevations
Initial
Study, Part II
Resolution of Approval with Conditions
t
6
_
f;
�3
f
CI' F
RANCHO �'Y O
PLANNING DIVISICXN
la
I
NORTH
ITF -II_
TITLE= E/ i'
EXHIBIT- SCALE= i �C�
•�.�.... �Y ,yam. `..�
. � 11.11) n. n 11 r7 t La I�i I •i�(1 ..
,y
Its
St 11 1710
1 j
6 .. .✓ �;Sucttaa. �
/. _I I 1 ,y1:i%�II�iTr:itti � I E° `•; � ` I
e
111 t• lit!`!!IIIFr:tltl � � t
/ 'I III11� I� � �• +
R 04
y 334 ".�T6. f_:I • I 'Ji` ,3.J ��� � . 4�1��q
1
t �
NORTH
CITY OF ITEMS _ (�c/I J '0
1► RANCHO CLJMONG';?, TITLE= T _AMA 5 T
PLAM vc Dn err: scm.E: —
r-2 s
j
965
CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA
PLANNING DIVISION
ail ;i
Tm�
FWTMLMNa
.. - -t
NORTH
07
ITENI: g t
TITLE; 44
E,XHIBIT---C—,— SCALE.-_
L2
LJ
%y.
ig�FIF,
I
j CIS OF
k RAJ\TCHO CUCAMOl�T+�A
PLANNING DIVISION
NORTH
ITEM
TITLE._-- ��. >%"�
EXHIBIT D SCALE. r'""
4
�1I
YL
� 1. ��p'�• , '.
R ..
S
a
\l
�73
•
L
1
O
L72
9
�t
rr
an
r■
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
PART II INITIAL STUDY
CHECKLIST
ENVIRONMENTAL
p CISIST
DATE:
APPLICANT• %
FILING DATE: LOG NUMBER:
PROJECT:
PROJECT LOCATION:
I. ENVIRO T,11ENTAL IMPACTS
(Explanation of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required on attached
sheets).
1 °S MAYBE NO
g
w
1. Soils and CeoloQv. Will the proposal have
signi =icant results in:
a- Unstable ground conditions or in changes in
geologic relationships? _
L
b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction o;
burial
i
of the soil?
C. .Change in topography or ground surface
contour intervals?
d- The destruction, covering or modification
Of
any unique geologic or physical features?
e. Potential
raffecting ieither
erosion of soils, on or off
site
/
cornditons?
f. Changes in erosion siltation, or deposition?
g. Exposure of people or property to geologic
hazards
such as earthquakes, landslides, mud-
:lades,
ground failure, or'similar hazards?
h. A1. increase in the rate of ,extraction and /or
use of any mineral resource?
2. "Iiydrol�orzy.
Will .,be proposaA have significant
e
results in:
Page 2 1
YES `.AYBE NO
a. Changes in currents, or the course of direction
Of flowing streams, rivers, or ephemeral stream
channels? -� L
b.
Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns,
or the rate and amount of surface water
runoff?
c.
Alterations to the course or flow of flood
waters?
d•
Change in the amount of surface water in any
%
body of water?
e.
Discharge into surface waters, or any
alteration of surface water quality?
f.
Alteration of groundwater characteristics?
/
g.
Change in the quantity of groundwaters,
-rte
either through direct additions or with-
drawals, or through; interference with an
aquifer?
Quality?
Quantity?
h.
The reduction in the amount of water other—
wisp available fnr
/
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 periodiQ air emissions from mobile
or indirect sources?
Stationary sources:
i
b.
Deteriorarion of ambient air quality and /or
interference with the attainment of applicable
air quality standards?
j. c.
Alteration of local or regional climatic
conditions, affecting air movement, moisture j
Jr temperature?
4. Biota
Flora. Will the proposal have significant results
in:
a. Change in the characteristics of species,
including diversity, distribution, or number
of any species of plants?
b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare
or endangered species of plants?
® I
( I
Page 3
YES '40
Ell
c. Introduction of new or disruptive species of
plants into an area?
d. Reduction in the potential for agricultural
production?
Fauna. Will the proposai'have significant results
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?
c. Introduction of new or disruptive species of
animals into an area, or result in a barrier
to the migration or movement of animals?
d. Deterioration or removal of existing fish or
wildlife habitat?
S. Population. Will the Proposal have significant
results in:
Will
a. the proposal.alter the location, distri-
bution, density, diversity, or growth rate of
the human population of an area?
b. WiU the propo,al affect existing housing, or
croa.te a demagd for additional housing?
6. Socio- Economic Factors. Will the proposal have
significant results in:
a. Change in local or regioral socio- economic
characteristics, including economic or
commercial diversity, tax rate, and property
values?
b. Will project costs be equitably distributed
among project beneficiaries, i.e., buyers,
tax payers or project users?
7. Land Use and Planninz`Considerations. Will the
propcsal have significant re in.
a. A substantial alterarion of the present or
planned land use of an area?
b. A conflict with any designations, objectives,
policies, or adopted plans of any governmental
entities?
c. An impact upon the qulaity or quantity of
existing consumptive or non- consumptive
recreational opportunities?
Page 3
YES '40
Ell
Page 4
YES
MAYBE No
8. Transportation. Will the proposal have significant
C '.
results in:
a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular
movement?
b. Effects on existing ,.treets, or demand for
new street constru( «on?
-
c. Effects on existing parking facilities, or
demand for new parking?
d. Substantial impact upon existing transporta-
,L{
tion systems?
e. Alterations to present patterns of circula-
tion or movement of people and /or goods?
f. Alterations to or effects on present and
potential water- F;orne, rail, mass transit or
air traffic?
Y
g. Increases in traffic hazards to motor vehicles,
__
bicyclist% or pedestrians?
`
9. Cultural Resources. Will t'e proposal have
significant
results in:
a. A disturbance to the integrity of archaeological,,
paleontological, and/or historical resources?
10. Health, Safety, and Nuisance Factors. Will the
proposal hove significant results in:
a. Creation of any health hazard or potential health
hrszard?
b, Ext)sure 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
or species of vector or pathenogenic
organisms or the exposure of people to such
organisms?
e. Increase in existing ncise levels?
L
f. Exposure of people to potentially dangerous
noise levels?
g. The
creation of objectionable odors?
h. An increase in light or glare?
3
Page
5
11. Aesthetics. Will
YES lfAYSE NO
the proposal have significant
.
results in•
a. roe obstruction or degradation of any scenic
vista or view?
/
(�
b. The creation of an aesthetically offensive
site?
c. A conflict with the objective of designated
or potential scenic corridors?
12. Utilities and Public Services. - W317. the proposal
have a significant need for new systems, or
alterations to the following:
a. Electric power?
b. Natural or packaged gas?
c. Communications systems?
i
d. Water supply?
/
e. ?wastewater facilities?
f. Flood control structures?
g. Solid waste facilities?
h.- 'Fire protection?
i. Police protection?
J. Schools?
k. Parks or other recreational facilities?
1. 'Maintenance of public facilities, including
roads and flood control facilities?
m. Other governmental setvicos?
13. Enerev and Scarce Resources. Wilthe proposal
LLL
have significant results in:
a. Use of substantial or excessive fuel or energy:
b. substantial increase in demand upon existing
sources of energy?
c. An increase in the demand for development of
new sources
Ip
of energy?
d. An ,increase or perpetuation of the consumption
of non - renewable forms of energy, when feasible
f
renewable sources of energy are available?
Page g
i
YES 'UYBE NO
e.' Substantial depletion of any nonrenewable or (�
scarce natural resource?
14. Mandatory Findings of Sienificance.
a. Dues the project have the potential to degrade
the quality of t,'ie environment, substantially
reduce the h4itat of fish or wildlife speeies,
cause a fisfi or wildlife population to drop
below self sustaining levels, threaten to
eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce
the number or restrict the range of a'rare or
endangered plant or animal or eliminate
important examples of the major periods of California history or Prehistory?
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
en?ironment is one which occurs in a relatively
brief, definitive period of time while long-
term impacts will endure well into the future). L/
c. Does the project have impacts which are
individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable? (Cumulatively considerable
means that the incremental effects of an
individual project are considerable when viewed
in connection with the effects of past projects, f
and probable future projects). L/
d. Does the project have environmental effects
which trill cause substantial adverse effects
on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
II. DISCUSSION OF MrIRON%ENTAL EVALUATION (i.e., of affirmative answers to
the above gwestions' plus a discussion of proposed mitigat,:on measures).
IAVI
ZIA
Page 7
III. DETERM �,ATION
On the basis of this initial evaluations
find the ro osed
p p project COULD NOT have a significant effect
on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a signi£ica-�t
"frect on the environment, there will not be a s�„nificant effect
in this case because thelmitigation measures described on an
attached sheet have beef; added to the project. A 1ECATIVE
DECLARATION WILL BE PRVARED.
I find the proposed project MAY have a s.. ni ant effect on the
euvarnment, and an ENVIROINENT L11PACT -REP required..
Date
S gat re
Title
t
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION'
APPROVING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO. 85 -12 LOCATED ON THE
F NORTH SIDE OF FOOTHILL, WEST OF HAVEN IN THE GENERAL
COMMERCIAL DISTRICT
t WHEREAS, on the 3rd day of April, 1985, a complete application was
filed by Spires Restaurant, Inc. for review of the above- described project;
' and
WHEREAS, on the 12th day of June, 1 '15, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning
Commission held a meeting to consider the abli,__- describe project.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission resolved as
follows:
SECTION 1: That the following can be met:
E 1. That the proposed project is consistent_ with the
objectives of the General Plan; and
2. That the proposed use is in accord with the
objective of the Development Code and the purposes
of the district in which the site is located; and
3. That the proposed use is in compliance with each of
the applicable provisions of the Development Code;
and
4. That the proposed :use, together with the conditions
applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the
public health, safety, or welfare, or materially
injurious to properties or improvements in the'
vicinity.
SECTION 2: That this project will not create adverse impacts on the
environment and that a Negative Declaration is issued, on June 12th, 1985.
SECTION 3: That Development Review No. 85 -12 is approved subject to
the following conditions and attached Standard Conditions:
Engineering Division: All pertinent conditions of Parcel Map 8303 shall
TO ly.
P -/,
Deve ipment Review No. 85 -12
Page #2
Design Review:
1.
All pertinent conditionz ' of CUP 83-07 as contained in.
Resolution 83 -79 shall apply.
2.
Sidewalk along Foothill shall be redesigned consistent with
City Standard drawing #304.
3.
A continuous hedgerow shall be planted at the south end of, the
westerly parking area to sc,•een cars from Foothill.
4.
Evergreen trees, minimum 15 gallon size, hall be planted ten
(10) feet on center along the east side of the easterly parking
are to screen the GTE building. -
5.
CuAstruction shall include a parking lot with minimum of 60
parking spaces.
6.
All signs shall conform to the Uniform Sign Program for the
Virginia Dare Center.
7.
Top of windows on tower shall be rounded consistent with Phase
I design.
Grading:
Balance of rough graded Virginia Pare site to be put under
permanent
erosion control prior to issuance of permits.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 12TH DAY OF JUNE, 1985.
PLANNING
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY:
Dennis L. Stout, Chairman
ATTEST:
Rick Gomez, Deputy Secretary
I, Rick Gomez, Deputy Secretp;y of the Planning Commission of the City of
Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Res((Iution 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 'Commmission held
on the 1,th day of June, 1985, by the following vote -to -wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
l
WN
O
Z
iJ
U
N
O
i
LL
+°+uaLri�w oa�a"r �cn ^a °u.= =v cqd a
nI O.O NY dy�y `G Lp50 F New �Z �•Oa.
U. °=° dCV 6C O' w0. ^• A9A 06E �.p
Sqc Y °AU C.
C? ^—o .°. ° V
4 � Y d. `
C �YC E 6
09^ T E G �U Ti Yc GA LO YadiO AOA— —6.. G 001
GG gtiw^ YO .��A ^qV u €_Nr
e°s =,°M Ya. €y,_•qN °yf.u° aac Vq�' iL� � €9� a
t"p�°p °
N q
n cs ^a.= •ate °coN ° a o
rwov_ K u Am .c.n gE e A� 'N' °a EOU��Y
L�p.O EEp OGG N �.�0 �D.. 6Cr'G DThr�rnB
.°- 5 O1.i
ACw °90 a� d F3 — Y
� V�L uON. `pO.. —O aSL YN va'^
r C
A^
Od�..T ^NvL °Llr.„ pv d ENa L Ey N L.O A
p YOp Y iO. ° W A
YG
g °
A L.9V 6
i w�<
sA ° w Y N wy G O A a VY N G C A N N CLO, O C QY O 4 6 d E.a U
o°
L..— _ E T_o °N C°1'•A NwCU > A 6�,n "w�
LNflc ° �•C E ~ >x >Cd rLNYO� qq 6— yN- • V— �cOaT+
U
m
r
E
O
D N
H ~
m °
V
Ll t
c o
x N
°
Z. O
t} �
tryy, Y
V1 6 J
Z
�Y L
G
O
dw tTw LL
9a Cp O
G
'.Vy
Li :.:: m .
J
Y°.
N E w
F6
u Y
9
S
^ y59q� E_
u
6�°nY Ew i•
Z
H
�.0
� .
L.N •. ) v9 N D
O.r YLie
S
• „
v
dam_
rG..A O. L
G
V
t4 -L.Y. Y.r9 A
°
N I umr'n c
v
w
l.k
p7 p
NO'
zn O.E OLGy —.
w
� L
L
o +d.
.Gp�ru^ a aiu n •.
G.O�
�.VY
•S°..
°
xe
.r0.0'p
ry F.
x
N t
w
°
u"' � � fi
I
•s' w
Ea .+c Nat
LO.�E��.d o•a,..
C S
O °E FL•
Lp
Lp
A01 =dUaw pG.
p9L n
^uOVW9a
au
�
N
A pY
Y 1�
y
^ H
E
^Ew °
IO
pO�MO L
M ^6
�y.L C
~
O
L)
I d
d q
L°
A
0
V
ss
Y�yww.dtC
>�w
A T
Lem AG
1�
J N
Y .u•
pp 2
17
f
YY
,jCO:
F• .GU
t
,I
I
O
z
4J
U
d
•n
O
i
d
n u° °cmq ° °qa�o VLO ^oa`i
`°LL v °o
w � ^
q IMG yN.+L L��'sA 6gt�y �T�
cw � n.. . G.°•.Q A Ysr Gr M' O V Off°
�eaU `Ye ay cr,F�m^ Lq
w°' C N 3 wG L U
U C L `d v C .^-. y N O M. H N g H y C •A
L O O y y p 0 9 N S li ` °• L� N
B GT u N U^ C U w i F O y C u
2Q �qT Yrq Lp t.. -. e20
Ycy O1. ��NC n4 LU 1.°.y COC
AM YZ Y..• >N
Z;.5
.• y Eo •OrnEY i92... n W rAg
c 6 uuy j� g AA E
4.E�u^. LLV ¢vdi ua'�`• �wNh� iiNUU N dr`M°. usi
O
ti
^) �' o �I
V
v
ay
v oLtw.
uc
q
v <..0 c 09C —
A Y
y
baLU' -,.r +
-. °y a.
� A w
C
M
Cp�
•
.••
UM^
9 V 0.0
Cc h
LD
i Nyoq
o«
a
u N
L asF j c
V L
�.
Hq9 W��,, .aG
C y s t
^.N+L
Y L
N'
�qo.
q�.
mM MCC
U �y 6V
a'
C L
Cw
NUT
N 4
= N M` Z
Y
t O1
q
a0
�q�.
•^ -•�•o D•USp
Y9
��'q
Gp
aL0 ^.y
�U U
Le•
6L
°'V
A ^c
wp
V'°M•
��
p
b0.
L
w
V Y.r
N. i g c O
60
pp
VY
q�
L
Y
CY2 UC
yp�
9
`8eM
ARE
ur
N
d32
� d•
41�
_
GE ` 8 =� °
V M• V
a- N
U^
G!
' Orb..
q
v <..0 c 09C —
A Y
y
baLU' -,.r +
-. °y a.
� A w
C
....
Cp�
•
.••
FU4h1 ^•r..
pY
y
St
r•uwq
w >>.N
On:6
ya
�.
Hq9 W��,, .aG
C y s t
^.N+L
6 d C c
9�q"''u
N'
�qo.
w
�cEOUCO
^
rL ^6°
' A
qNN$<
y
E��°
Cy Yy >N
O•Qj
yCy
U�
yY
aU
�C
L .4y U yy
.'•t A�.q`NC
C
C N
„ CqL
O C
HU w
ANTUY
��'q
Gp
aL0 ^.y
�U U
Le•
6L
°'V
A ^c
wp
V'°M•
��
p
b0.
L
w
r�C.0 CNtI
... ; LLL11M. V
~LC�a �t
��..T>.bY
V �l�py
Ci •..ti CO
V
vp`O.U•agg
Ol
V
9
^qT
r.� -�Y
9i
pw N�
'.D.LG
N' =N
9O�L
^= O
�E..°-
dtG
q•L O.
y
O0.
....
Dp•
YYq LL�U
y2C Nw 60. A'
aUMpA
UvyUD
yw Z.,;
VZG
VNCy^
L <�aw
.E^E
W�y
��G•,
vU'2 0.�9
Y aUiC 4�
N.NLwLU
y`W•ra
6.�:r Oi
O C
Y.• UN
DLL
OONL
d`Z
Y _~
.°•. U.
W9 I
6NSNON.a
C•`py p
O:U b
Z'ObD
o¢ A O
yt Y
•` NL
t q Nay
.~.. >vUi�
c.
¢
NCi
O
°6�
TO Y•^�.Y.`�
=
4ny•O
^y°
=tea•.
Cii q.�d
O`0. q�+
N
••'•rM
~T aq2°
ppar °•�
.•`i..LiC
d
-•
+t +�'�.°. ^y
N w ,�
W—:E q`
°.
V
VO4N V
y O L
N
6
9yyI
d
C
4 O
yQ�
<q 6L6
ttFNO
mA E
«Nd
`
Y OL
L y 0
NAZ
L 4
_ U
40 l� D L
i p U 4
V > V
V
6a "o, L6.b..
M6 YLNOA
<V.
,gyp py qw p^Y
F��NC.O
HwA <qp
Sao
C
400.
'I
M
i
8% 1.
pv
^u
°tu
`o.o oc -J uiIo
=uYo
v:
a :I-
1_v1
�°-a
�n
9a
'G°p•°- ~ ° ^a
VtlJ,
rn:u
-SAN
Op'
,^o_e��
'LUYYOt
uL.:'.
'cJ ee'�
.2�'•
It L .
Ya
6 °NY
TLO C�
L •e ✓+
L u N e
W Y
A°
p' ✓
✓ L D q.� V
C Y��. N
N V A
z
N2qu
��^ �.
N
_ve
.�qO ouNW T
y��„N
C
�• CFO
N
V
O u N
L. �Yf � `I
O
w. O N o o'er.- � T.-
Yo^
✓.,...Nr
Cy
CJ
^_
.n G A
G
CI
Y
L
CGe6
Na n
i
�
t
ti C
✓ '611
O I p
Y^ p C
Lu
°
O
N
L WC
Y L p, y
n
N.
A
@L qY
a
� A
04.. Y.G
Y
�� � pp N D•° G Ya
�.p
a A
✓-
~
Nw L VSd
^ N L
Y zO
e^ N
Y +^ O
i6N
M �•I �.
d
C
Y N t Y M N b A N
Y. V •J L 6e O Y n 6
C
9. L N 7°
N= C V a
E
A ^uY
nom.
TY
pt
QLU
G �y2C Na G✓
Vr.
OtNOC
G �y✓ L
O
U•L. UN~Y
r1 p
' (l:KN
\`��
e•
�.
42 tat
G C ice,
Y A N •'..�
Y
� • �G
Y p
^�.�
L Y
�a
U p A Y L
NO`L Y�NYGG q�A
L q y
✓ Te�4
vAV
N C N A N
ova ^E :.
<":,g 6 N
°"
Z N O
YYO
F
�^
t Z. Y p w O Y am.; .0 Q q.a 0C
AU✓
nYer
Q Y WON 6 N
•�U
Yee
Y
U^U
-Em
C6 ^LT Y
uq'
A,a
sac
A c
N C.p
°°
!M
N✓
=
° c NLyn
n unY LO
M D^ �L pa•
G
LO'
"'qc mrnO q`6
n n .5 ✓
� ViY
Ur
C
6
•N. D.a
E5
C
L rTM
.GM
Q
L
Eu
^YP
va i,ua>
a"
pR-5
iqo K L =
°i.
>N'
yvLa C
v9u�
4q
.G
°-v
Nwrd
qo �T p -
$?
c
ay✓��a`
Y p'M
a
to
�c
rnu ^
y .Nn�v
ns
oL
uTOG n=mz v�=
"'qNN n.✓.6J`rv�
•
um
LK�
Y
AONV �
^_
'Ya
Oad° C =�w
�.G
AOCa YYU^'O.0
'
s°1s
c°Na a
�'.
ND
��
°a v.
uv
Ye
C✓
L
•- °
M✓
.ta HN I ;.E :
L N
i st
`•.i+
`.A
qw
✓ ° q
q °
L aT
YLa
'NVN N
v'J
i >�
eu "�°
qOC•°�
aY.a u✓i a °M. u °.
i Y
TdO
EYY
Y
uNYY u
ueN
n.Cy^
...�
tmn Od
a�
^LL
•' Lq °•^AE4
4L A
U646.5j.
dr
L p ..
YU~ `
•
w
��
q✓
��
A
Z et LC
••L•
S
Cg
UVq ^y��YM`
N
^JO
✓q
'e
•rCp.
O u�
L
Y i4uC.
`X G+
L
n
M
e
1:2
Ge ✓ Y
L✓ T >LUO •
_
Y�y
NE
ON �• ✓
Aa ✓q Z Mq 6Ln
tit
•� �L
Y•
C,," uO
••y�.^. t
9
QAY•m T
N
�.
<ON
KOA
H6N
•�Y. 'c? Y.L dd
6. L O Cl
6t1 <e M•O N�•A
TC' Y
`C.6 C
oq..L°.z = iu6°aY
L L cnc Y L L g O O
<N6A WG.D.YN✓�•
t
•
'I
M
i
acid
�na7A°
°.L+�y
w m d.°+ t
cc.
LE
•rd Au y
gZO
Y
yL
b U'a
�Q�Q1�
Lp
L Y
pC
u
V u °u
`5.9
L q
N L
Oa
Gy
I t gg
Y a
by.
i•-1
C0.
D
GA
Z•.
OIL
C
$b w
b001.L.«
LAN
U
a
•n
oob
a,pA
vi �.�
uA;� ys. u.,..
rg � =Aqe
ous�n
«o
o,tc
O,.°.
O
un
u�wIo
Q.-S.
vCL- L
9•>
v9 N �..
Z T
O
y.ir
d p
v5 r�N O�
p�l
A•`O^N
� A
wq
np+^yN
� A
..s—
a� A
.u+w a
Ed-
Aug l
l p
39C
=yd
Vol
A. •,u
M d y C
n .
y
N y O C
Irr A y
_
yN .p L
0..°6.j
na G
c p
n
p�qiN
6pyiul6 L¢pl
a�T
0
CL y
L'p d
gar`n.L+ 3N. vA�a
mow°
r2 u
c r
N F
acid
�na7A°
°.L+�y
w m d.°+ t
cc.
LE
•rd Au y
gZO
•
OO
•Y
• U N
L Y
U O Y
u
V u °u
`5.9
L q
N L
Oa
Gy
Y U
Y a
by.
d
e
V L g N
C0.
D
LK l'1
�
OIL
C
q WL.gh
3p
aYA _
_••� u N i M
MOB i
d °"'L> O
O,.°.
r.
v9 N �..
acym
•c, •a�y^'t
b
� A
p
� A
..s—
a� A
.u+w a
`.u� V
Aug l
l p
ax
GK y
Ste°.
A. •,u
� Rd f
�'LW• y
uv
u�d n
na G
uw
c p
u V.
�^
•°. b M c t j
CL y
L'p d
y N
°yr
r2 u
c r
N F
n A
Y
L° •N. • 9 4' p
L N V$ C
Y r
b L V
u
c A° Y
C c
a
°;
O 1'�Y4lL
u
d7 aal:•N
n u
pT A.rp
'V1 N
6YL
y LdC p
p•LL V L
H N a Y Y'' N N +.t L N .A. G S •� L> AS 1)
40. SO. YN•� U W4- YYII Q1" 60M V
mixk It 6
O
0. a
•`I
1
t� N
^^u` �K w
w m d.°+ t
t� •
•�� •
•rd Au y
y
u t
q •
q •
• U N
L Y
U O Y
wOGd C
N q
L q
N L
y q
L L L
Y U
Y a
R a
u °ug °
°up a° z
zz r i
iN o
o e� c
c'.Lu
aYA _
_••� u N i M
MOB i
d °"'L> O
O,.°.
r.
j"Tt •
•-•�
LC�
..s—
a� A
.u+w a
`.u� V
Aug l
l p
ax
GK y
Lpca °
° O ��� �
�'LW• y
y p�ua C
u�d n
na G
uw
c p
p Z
L N N L •
•°. b M c t j
CL y
L'p d
y N
N
r2 u
c r
N F
F Lby S
S w
w n^ N
N -
�L� V u
u�c ` °
°� 'NL'au „
„°o, I pu u
b G
o� °
°n
O V° �� ~
a0 C O y y
y LdC p
p•LL V L
wmq
r 2
p N n L.
a L
L U g
N b g y A
V. O
!•' r
�d C. O
O . e
_ }. lF g
g �
u ` m
_ y�• Y
Y `. G C
C2V� N
e _
ND.a A
�Oi q
AMr
G ^`•'f A •
•may A
q_6 =w C
C M4 Q
=G�y
cow
n y
y= YO 3
3uy.
.A•rL C
_f U6 nC =
0. a
•`I
1
too
°:°+N
rb
wno z
F7 q
t N�
A
d V
?Lq
�dt dt0
yy O °
ar.+E L
• htdt
rn.
O ^
q. E
uLCN
YGSnY
C�yLM_
nu..y. E
LOS'
t d
.^pOU
'2'9
A n E
Or ai •�L
=tqd
YV'6N.Dt
q.c
p
"'
c
N
ytFa
Y
a
A
O'
�q...r
Lw�•oUa
NaC
UNCUn iO
tgOCE F Y Y
d
V r
d
V
9
aENE
O
OE
tN t� a
C� r
L r 4'1
La 9c N
'u
td e
3 ac D
yr0 aV ur
ts� Ya
N
M Q T Q M y
E� ^
u ^'
LSD qY
ter^ a Z da
2
Qy4 NV cE
c Lt p M ob
N� ^pE N U U
%O W Yt OO
WNt WyW �Q
I I 1
¢q
�i
uD'` rD
Lot D C O
09A Nit
Lt 0 b 5
o °w
q,. o
O d
o _Y
r q a w^ c
voC6d g��
E D. F
E O u 6
Nr rJ H i a O t�
�c
t
Y2L
d
N
Lp
q. E
uLCN
YGSnY
C�yLM_
nu..y. E
O�.0
r
M
1C
^
Or ai •�L
=tqd
YV'6N.Dt
p
"'
c
N
ytFa
a
A
O'
�q...r
Lw�•oUa
9
aENE
O
OE
yN
qo M'tM
dqY�
d`�q
m F t
t G
i
I
6Y
aw
qdY ��.
tqi. tgNp
}o e
OiNQl
ITEqu
c.. -'^�
iiO
N.1
tarNri"a
'^aLiL
u'C^Y
L[
q6 }
UgnnL
dY Or
= ^ «C
O �qUU
Ld
�y O
LO
-.24E
)1d NCO
utp
S.
t' p� L
O V
u.�Ud.CY
y°'
O OS
Y y
q
V.L rrS
q
C y N v ST
,� y
NN
Yq
OY
t•` q
NVVVir
40rD6G
06 E ^L
a3
Ln
�
L
N� O L
L 0 0 O.
.
• o .
d
a d d
U
V w yYUI
e
L
d
u, tT
iW
u
�
C��j EE
♦ p
9N.
J
�W
Jo
0
U
dYa�tO
r6vC
2N..
d6
`
q6
•O
�
wY .C.
AA
V
L
°A„
c
1
DJ
to 3
de
ua C
�
rS
d7N
uE
d'n
0
U
°
Cd
?v
A
V
Z
`v
Tqr nS
L
G A WO1C
L �•
Y°e0
p e.C�
M
Lly
"�9.y
S
L
d N W
43
yT R.r
IaW
v ° m dFi y.
ao° v
'
Ab
-'-o
��
y.� q'
95.y
J
'n
0
C.. 6
a i na
4'••' C
N S
pO
9` Q
•+ Ad.
+ a M'
m •ice
° R U Ot x
•, °
2 C N V`
9n•
au N« qyu.^
yC ^JNA
�U
Ci.1� t
O{r�
~dUa.
OYL°.
E
Ly C
NL
v
jN
d {1.dL^
N
OI NS.yS•.
t1dW
P• A
LL
M°
vvv:°i
V A A NC
6NL E"
u°I
°C yLRgO.
uE
^q�
O
Z
L 6L
FdO
Ey^
7
� L T
px
ncLN
yd
CL
LTN.
L
L
L
�
p,�r•
� R_
O..L.: d O
A
La O^
9 d
m0 ♦ ap`Oy
Jn.
ya
L. ^.
Snc
as ^♦
Cd
°p ^uN
y N.
l
j U N L d ^ at
E
-s"2.
Laa�
G1
d
yN�
L V
uy
L9
w
d.,y
N
S C O
L may. 'RJ Y q 9
N GW N.�
R6nM ypw.Li.
NO
1d
�
�
L
d N
aT.
i,vo0
u
dr'=°=
G6
a°+ d
U
V w yYUI
e
L
d
u, tT
iW
u
�
C��j EE
♦ p
9N.
J
�W
Jo
I.w.
U
U
dYa�tO
r6vC
2N..
d6
`
q6
•O
GaLSM6
�
wY .C.
AA
V
L
°A„
c
1
DJ
to 3
de
ua C
�
rS
A
uE
d'n
0
U
'o
C
s
L
2y
+•
ysLy
�d °'
2
(W
N
uo
Ca
•^ E d
E
jN
d {1.dL^
E d E
d]
OI NS.yS•.
C� LY
P• A
4 V L
W Z A
vvv:°i
V A A NC
Ecl "6
6 L tJ�
d♦
�
O
Z
C
O
c d
In Ld
L
L
o
w
dr'=°=
G6
N
yL�
E
d =v�
J
�W
Jo
x.
°
N
w�
z�
NJ
E
d ^
a
O py l
CW~
r
s tr
o
V
•r d
L
.°r
q� d
1
DJ
to 3
• 1
](1
ua C
�
rS
uE
d'n
0
U
'o
C
s
J
J
2
(W
N
Y
d
c d
In Ld
L
L
o
w
�v
Sl p^
d'v
oc�
N
yL�
E
d =v�
°
N
u Sygy C
LOy
E
d ^
a
O py l
CW~
r
V
•r d
L
.°r
q� d
C C
J
ua C
�
rS
'o
C
s
�t1
l
c
!1 u
O
O
YW r
ow Y
V_J A
U � Y
o�
d
2
is
L N
^ 9
I u L NW I
n d d
LL C Y
a U L w
cT F a
d
N
O
2«
2:ai
dt
qY L
da
, U
1
Ya
y d a
R. q
Y
q
n
d
ds
N
U
i
N
Lip �.
TaC
U
c
a= � N
c E E
O
J
H M
C
y p •
^
r
S
UY
{
N. O
A=
d
iY
,.a
W u
�'a
Cd
V
d U
O 1
Cu 4
u O OOC Ot4.
n-
M L
N
u�
Nd
Ya
4J
a
0
g-,
E 4
o'
-L
dp
°Ep
Uq Nu d
VW� OU E
�6 ah
v
O O W
U d
'a'sY
6Y0
d♦ d N
a C
O>
Y N
C
i
od
N d
O c
p A
a
N
O C O
Y a
L
O L C d
L
O U
h...
a OO
C6N
�V
d L
6N
Ua.
L^
JS.00 O
Au
-
E C
aCA
a n
0 3 N v L
d V L O
N • E G^
_�
dda
o°
L� +•c o
c+c°.
aL YOc
C
�t1
l
c
!1 u
O
O
YW r
ow Y
V_J A
U � Y
o�
d
2
is
L N
^ 9
I u L NW I
n d d
LL C Y
a U L w
cT F a
d
N
O
2«
2:ai
%
pa 5
d Y 6 4
1
Ya
L
N
c
L
A O
Y
q
n
d
ds
N
U
i
N
Lip �.
TaC
U
`
N
U
q
d
19 L
C
y p •
^
r
S
UY
{
N. O
A=
d
iY
,.a
W u
�'a
U
° L.L Q
V
d U
O 1
Ndv
mo
�L
p�
N
u�
Nd
a
iLLA
g-,
E 4
`u
N
-L
.ra
dp
°Ep
u 0
Z�
Z
O A
Y
v
O O W
U d
'a'sY
6Y0
d♦ d N
a C
O>
Y N
C
i
od
N d
O c
p A
a
qo .
d4^.y 6
gg 4
q O u 6
O C O
Y a
qU
O L C d
L
O U
h...
a OO
C6N
�V
d L
6N
Ua.
L^
JS.00 O
C T O Y
O
L a£Y.y q
C
d Y 6 4
1
Ya
L
N
c
L
A O
Y
q
N y
LL
ds
N
N
i
`
�N�
.C�
L
O
u °a
u
•Yn
0
� M
o
C d
q y
O 6n
O
N L
c 1
C
V�b
q
OWE.
^ C
V
d U
O 1
Ldo
?gY�
G = �
V
d.
r w
oe�?
�a
O N
No-
=0 V
c L a
O c�
aY qa
d
MUA
d �
o n
0 ca
6�f02C
fl
1
t\
�
L
L �
=
Y
V
�
N
A•
N.
N
L
Y
O
0
M
L
N
c
L
o
.d
Y
a
N y
LL
A
i
C r
a
u °a
� M
o
C d
"eV ..C.
O.0
rn
E
3
nrm[r AP. b A TT11T -Tn OTTO A ndnATr_ A
I. BACKGROUND: At the regularly scheduled meeting on October 24,
T9--8-47 he Planning Commission reviewed and approved Development
Review 84 -38 ( Forem), for the construction of a 63,000 square foot
*ndustrial /Warehouse building on 3.09 acres of land (Exhibit
"B•,. The applicant, Forem /McCormick is requesting to integrate
160 additional parking stalls to their previously approved
project. The Planning Commission had expressed the following
concerns over a similar parking lot proposed by Gabric /General
Dynamics on the same site:
o Haver. Avenue Overlay (Master Planned Areas) - The parking
lot proposal cou'id limit development of the westerly
property.
a Intensification of building use - At the end of the 5.
year lease, the "temporary" parking lot would be removed,
which would result in inadequate parking for Building B
which had been converted for office and R & D uses.
o Pedestrian Access Pedestrians crossing the street at
mid -block on Seventh Street which will handle the bulk of
traffic flows in the area.
To address these concerns, General Dynamics is requesting review
aad consideration of the Forem Building located on the south side
of 7th Street, adjacent ti the proposed parking lot, (Exhibit "B").
II. ANALYSIS:
A. General: The applicant is requesting consideration of
integrating 160 parking spaces into their previously approved
project (DR84 -38 Forem Building), (Exhibit "C "). The project
proposed meets the City Standards for parking facilities in
terms of access, size, design and landscaping. The subject
site is contiguous to their development proposal and is
ITEM Q
STAFF REPORT
r
c
o
F
Z
VI
>
1977
DATE:
June 12, 1985
TO:
G:airman and Members of the Planning Cornission
FROM:
Rick Gomez, City Planner
BY:
Howard Fields, Assistant Planner
SUBJECT:
MODIFICATION TO DR 84 -38 FOREM /GENERAL l,.'NAMICS -
EXPANSION
F EXISTING PARKING FACILITIES
I. BACKGROUND: At the regularly scheduled meeting on October 24,
T9--8-47 he Planning Commission reviewed and approved Development
Review 84 -38 ( Forem), for the construction of a 63,000 square foot
*ndustrial /Warehouse building on 3.09 acres of land (Exhibit
"B•,. The applicant, Forem /McCormick is requesting to integrate
160 additional parking stalls to their previously approved
project. The Planning Commission had expressed the following
concerns over a similar parking lot proposed by Gabric /General
Dynamics on the same site:
o Haver. Avenue Overlay (Master Planned Areas) - The parking
lot proposal cou'id limit development of the westerly
property.
a Intensification of building use - At the end of the 5.
year lease, the "temporary" parking lot would be removed,
which would result in inadequate parking for Building B
which had been converted for office and R & D uses.
o Pedestrian Access Pedestrians crossing the street at
mid -block on Seventh Street which will handle the bulk of
traffic flows in the area.
To address these concerns, General Dynamics is requesting review
aad consideration of the Forem Building located on the south side
of 7th Street, adjacent ti the proposed parking lot, (Exhibit "B").
II. ANALYSIS:
A. General: The applicant is requesting consideration of
integrating 160 parking spaces into their previously approved
project (DR84 -38 Forem Building), (Exhibit "C "). The project
proposed meets the City Standards for parking facilities in
terms of access, size, design and landscaping. The subject
site is contiguous to their development proposal and is
ITEM Q
PLANNING COMMISSION. STAFF REPORT
OR 84 -38 - Forem /General. Dynamics
June 12, 1985
Page 2
consistent with the ISP requirements. The applicant proposes
to expand the interior floor area an additional 20,000 square
feet in the form of a second floor, consisting of a mezzanine
and additional office space. The proposed total floor area is
now 83,000 square feet. Therefore, parking requirements based
on the square footage of proposed use area are as follows:
First Floor - Office 20,000 sq ft div. by 11250 = 80
Second Floor - Mezzanine /Office 20,000 sq ft div. by 1/250 = 80
Laboratory 40,000 sq ft div. by 1/300 = 143
Total 83,000 sq ft
Required Parking 303 parking spaces
Total Provided 246 parking spaces
Deficient Park; x Stalls -57
In this case, the applicant would need a Minor Exception for a 19
percent waiver to resolve the deficient spaces and meet the parking
requirements.
As a result of the Parking Study, the findings indicated that a
suitable ratio for R & D uses would fail between 1 /300 to 1/350,
The Coffmission has directed Staff to amEnd the ISP to include an R
& D parking ratio. 'However, if the low end of the interval
(1/300), is utilized, there would still be a deficiency, and a
minor exception for 11% is still needed.
Total Floor Area: 83,000 divided by 1/300 = 276 required
246 provided
-N deficient
If the high end 1/350 is applied to the entire project, it would allow a
sufficient number of parkin& stalls:
Total Floor ':.-ea: 83,000 divided by 1/350 = 237 required
246 provided
Staff recommends 1/350, since this ratio would accommodate the
amendment request and provide the required parking.. Staff has
determined that there will be no adverse environmental impacts
associated with this project.
B. Lot Merger: The Design Review Committee has concerns with both
parcels in question due to the separate ownership issue, which
could lead to legal entanglements and the possibility of both
parcels bezag separated in the future leaving the Forem
Building unable to provide the required parking. As an
alternative} The applicant has proposed a covenant agreement
that Will legally bind both parcels. The City Attorney will
review the document and present comments to the Commission.
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
DR 84 -38 - Forem /General Dynamics
June
12, 1985
Page
3
III.
FACTS FOR FINDING:_ Before approving the modification to DR 84 -38
Forem ,the Planininp Commission must detemine; that the project is
consistent with the Industrial Area Specific Plan and will not be
detrimental to the public health, safet,', or welfare or materially
injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. Further,
the proposed use and site -plan, together with recommended
conditions of approval, must be in compliance with all applicable
regulations of the Industrial Area Specific Plan and Development
Code.
IV.
RECOMMENDATION: If the Planning Commission determines that the
35 ratio sliould be applied and can support the Facts for
Findings, design of the proposed use, together with the Conditions
of Approval and Covenant Agreement, then approval of the
modificatic of DR 84 -38 would be appropriate.
Re
t l7y submitted,
ick
ome
it
Plan er
y
RG:
F:cv
Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Location Map
Exhibit "8" - Vicinity Map
t
Exhibit "C" - Site Plan
Exhibit "D" - Conceptual Landscape Plan
a
r
l TERRA VISTA PLAN MED COMMUN , Y
Fx {
owFC
GC
rn t ® ®ooTiS%iGL �—�
---------• OR 7; ¢ - Q ®O:�Lrc ® ®OP 01■ ®{01701!07 ■t ■® ®0101■ (0101 ■ ■oi
iY
i,® Future City
u _ OP, Hall i— --
FC MH q 1
GC mummmuff
I.S.P.
p M
dD
- -iJ INDUSTRIAL SPECIFIC PLAN;
L.S.F7 ! _ . j
a
1,
CITY OI` iTrN•I =Ig mss-
RANCHO CUCA1ioi \TGA TITLE
PLANNING DWISIO\ I \I>IT: -,9 SGkLL•
_ Q, -�
ACACIA STREET
EXISTING
BUILDING
z EXISTING
BUILDING
w SEVENTH' STREET
PROPOSE =D
PARKING
r3l)iL 8
}}M.41D�M1EA17 �d
a I I
a i
I J��
' !I
'i
� 1
�t
. �y�l r 1 i i .. -�1 (, .. .. tti; _•� 111 .
% �i;'iU11111 Q(iijj H.' ® 1;
p
x j i
j
e
i - I
� � 1
` I i2
J!
Z ...1
Aii a r&
_UnCA AvE si-t Ott Sr
z
r d 3 2,
6.X / 773
(� (( t ! RCIaOSED PARIama F, mccoomlcK con57EUCilpn Ud a
FOR ...r.....��.o.M..
} OREIA gSRfAI $S.Dt;
.a
I i
C3
RIX
111417
.0
1 IP
oz
C3
111417
.0
1 IP
L:J
n;
A.
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
BY:
SUBJECT
CITY OF RAND.HO CUCAMONGA
STAFF REPORT
G�}CAAgp�
a 1
O 4 O
U � ?
June 12, 1385 1977
Chairman and Members of the Planning Corrimibsion
Rick Gomez, City Planner
Howard L. Fields, Assistant Planner
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 85 -15 -
ASSURED MINI-STORAGE - Construction of a mi i- stor&jee
development Iota tng 40,112 sq. ft. on 1.17 acres of land
in the Industriai Park (Subarea 6) District located on the
north side of 4th Street, last of Turner Avenue- APN 21R-
371 -03.
I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION:
A. Action Requested: Review and consideration of a precise site
plan and architectural design, and issuance of a 'Negative
Declaration.
B. Purpose: Construction of a mini - storage development.
C. 1- cation: North side of 40 _Street and east of Turner Avenue.
D. Parcel Size: 1.17 acres.
E. Existing Zoning: Industrial Park (Subarea 6) of the Industrial
'Kr ca Specific Plan.
F. Existing Land User Vacant.
G. Surroundin Land Use and Zovin :
Nort - scant, existing flood control channel, ISP
South Vacant, Chevron Specific Plan, City of Ontario
East Existing industrial facility (Poly Plastic), ISP
West Vacant, ISP
N. Fnneral'Plan Designations:
Project Site - Industrial Park
North - Industri— )art
South - City of Ontario corporate limits
Fast - Industrial Park
Crest Industrial Park
ITEM R
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
DR 85 -15 Assured Mini- Storage
June 12, 1985
Page 2
('r I.. Site Characteristics: The subject site is an abandoned and
` unimproved flood cont al easement, which is fairly level with
gentle drainage to 4th Street. Presently, site has light
vegetation with no trees and has no significant
cultural /historical aspects.
II. ANALYSIS•
L,
I/
A. General: This development proposal is a revised submittal of
CUP 84-16 and is still subject to special considerations for
both streetscape and architecture. Under the revised site
plan, the applicant has decided to eliminate the caretaker's
quarters and request withdrawal of Conditional Use Permit 84 -16
and related Variance 84 -02. The revised site plan currently
meets all the development requirements of subarea 6 (Industrial
Park) designation, and will consist of 2 two -story buildings
situated lengthwise and I one -story building along the rear
property- .FlMe. The buildings are comprised of 18,956 sq. ft.
and 1,800 sq. ft. respectively with a 400 sq. ft. manager's
office. A major change to the site plan is the approximate 24%
landscaping coverage including vertical landscaping along the
west property line.
B. Design Review Committee: The Committee forwarded the
elevations for fu Manning Commission review and
determination. The revised elevations reflect the changes
requested by the Committee; however the Committee did not reach
a consensus of approval.
C. Tech: ?cal Review Committee: The Foothill Fire District
reviewed and approve the revised site plan subject to similar
fire mitigation measures imposed or the original submittal
(i.e.., sufficient turnaround radius, placemw of fare - fighting
facilities, fire protection 'in huilding de,, ,i, and sprirkler
system for the trash enclosures).
D. Environmental_ Assessment: Part I of the Initial Stu°;y' was
completed by the applicant. Staff has completed Part II of the
environmental checklist and determined that this project may
have a significant impact upon the environment by treating a
visual /aesthetically offensive site. The applicant proposes
_ertical landscaping along the west property dine as a.
mitigation measure for the two -story developmeni: concept.
Ho+: -_ver, the 'west building elevation will still be in
consideraole viEw.
l�
7, C
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
DR 85 -15 - Assured Mini- Storage
June
12, 1985
Page
3
III.
FACTS FOR FINDINGS: To consider approval of thi's Development
Review, the Commission must make specific findings of consistency
with the General Plan and Industrial Area Specific Plan. The
project- nas been revised consistent with 'the Industrial Area
Specific Plan and General Plan. The prc,%.ct will not be
detrimental to adjacent properties or cause significant adverse
environmental impacts. In additiun, the proposed use and site
plan, together with the recommended Conditions of Approval, are in
compliance with the applicable provisions of the Industrial Area
Specific Plan and City Standards.
IV.
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission
consider all nout and elements of this project. If after such
consideration the Commission can support the Facts for Findings, .
the adoption of the attached Resolution and issuance o" a Negative
Declarati ould be appropriate.
Re
ctf y su tted,
Rick
omez `
ity
lann
RG:HF :ns
Attachments: Letters from Applicant
Exhibit "A" - Location Map
Exhibit "B" - Site Utilization-Map
Exhibit "C" - Site Plan /Concr:;tual Landscape Plan
Exhibit "D" - Grading Plan
Initial Study, Part II
Resolution of Approval with Conditions
it
i
i
0
s
:L
I.S.P.
El
NORTH
CITY OF ITZ*vi-
1�
RANUHO CLVAMONGA TITLE- 1-06477CAl APIAR
PLANNING DIVISION EXHIBIT. —' :4 Sc,-ALE.
I
;�" '�o 'y Y�+l a. '. .• �a'�=� / "�i t`�ti. ,aY'�•��'�"` s3 t?�A aF..:. u,L''t�F� � .:
.6 a 4 �'� � a.T• �� ti s r 4�' a, c 3 'a °t r+ L .t �
tq: i'l�• - .,`7�7�.�'.t'i�i4,t:R ".: .Wt:' � ��vtii i1 -, Y�+_ •ni nR`i. Jiy -�r'M° .. :,. I'F sir s
NORTH
_I
'
J
CITY OF IT'S 1: /37
RANCr10 CUCAMONGA. TITLE: Sl-rE L- it l-Z-47iotJ i- iP
PIelNNttl`+C; DIVISION! - EXHIBIT 13
SCALE.
tea. nr
t: I
yr 6 T
v L3ggCJR
46340;
r
6.13 AC 14x-
LE
A
lUlgAc
is
T
I
;�" '�o 'y Y�+l a. '. .• �a'�=� / "�i t`�ti. ,aY'�•��'�"` s3 t?�A aF..:. u,L''t�F� � .:
.6 a 4 �'� � a.T• �� ti s r 4�' a, c 3 'a °t r+ L .t �
tq: i'l�• - .,`7�7�.�'.t'i�i4,t:R ".: .Wt:' � ��vtii i1 -, Y�+_ •ni nR`i. Jiy -�r'M° .. :,. I'F sir s
NORTH
_I
'
J
CITY OF IT'S 1: /37
RANCr10 CUCAMONGA. TITLE: Sl-rE L- it l-Z-47iotJ i- iP
PIelNNttl`+C; DIVISION! - EXHIBIT 13
SCALE.
4
cc
cl
Ul
Is
two rat-49J Id ft-M, I we&
WWA. OW 40MO
r.L..Mwqq,oju
r.
d
41
sac• •bin
�I ?creawoa e►ex.�w • ,mot t-� .w,,,�,.N, a.us _ •�-�:A �«-
�i9a+s�600t
wH.
:.
Alf
77! 1 1g� #iid
.✓ t
�1 cz
..........
T a-µ�g %1
'���� Ski � �� �'� _ .• ......_..__
G
�......... (1 = = -,
,
WP AP
'` - -- -
STORAGE MANAGEMENT CONCE7TS9 INC*
1600 FAIRWAY DRIVE (714) 370 -1602 COLTON, CA 92324,
Howard Fields
Community Development
City of'Rancho Cucamonga
Re: Proposed Mini - Storage project on 4th St.
Dear Howard:
I am writing to you to indicate the efforts that we have
made to cooperate with the adjacant property owner, Mr. Alan
Tibbets.
We appreciated the opportunity of meeting with you in your
office shortly after the last planning commission meeting.
At that time we presented three possible site plans that
we had already had approved by the fire district. We also
presented renderings showing elevations of landscaping to
be provided if we could achieve a cooperative effort.
Our preference was a 'site study that showed us cooperating
with Mr. Tibbets by providing a reciprocal driveway, 10 feet
of landscape buffer and a fire exit from the rear of our
property. die preferred this plan because it gave us a consid-
erable a=unt of extras building square footage.
Mr. Tibbets objected at that tiara to the possibility that
trucks might use the driveway that we would be providing for
access to our project. He stated that he would have to confer
with his associates and would contact us within a week to
let us know his plans.
After about two weeks I contacted Mr. Tibbets and sought his
answer. He indicated that his associates and he did not
desire to cooperate with us, _tiler than using our driveway
as a reciprocal driveway providing them access to their
project.
Based cn his apparent lack of desire to provide a cooperative
environment we submitted a plan complying with all requirements
of the planning agency you represent.
I hope this is helpful in preparing your staff recommendations.
Sincerer°
Charles R. Wear
April 24, 1985 /� G
STORAGE MANAGEMENT CONCEPTS, INC_
1600 FAIRWAY DRIVE (714) 370 -1602 COLTON, CA 92324
Howard Fields
Community Development
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Re: Proposed Mini -- Storage project on 4th St.
Dear Howard:' `
Pursuant to your request we are withd ;:,awing our request
for a conditional use permit and a variance on the
proposed project.,
We are requesting that your department consider our request
as a aagular design review.
The conditionai use permit is no longer required because
we have eliminated the resident manager.' The variance for
landscaping is no longer required because we have complied
with the requirements for the area.
I
Thank you for your kind consideration in this matter.
Sincerely'
Charles R. Wear
April 24, 1985
OaTY OF RANCHO CUCAMO%GA
PART II INITIAL STUDY
MIRONMENTAL'CHECKLIST
Ea
r1Li o DATE:_`j a` -2�f� Ig ?AG NUMBER:
PROJECT: C�OgJC7/,rf� Jf3^I �� F} N+7t►VE C7`�i2i&t"�
��LMEI►%T-
°ROJEC "i I:OCATION:/4'G�2.THS /„p� j)� l7(%'N�`�j���,.� r
��?���F��� ✓�
L I. E*NIR_ ONMNTAL IMi'.4CfS
(Exp_-aation of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required on
sheets).
attached
YES MBE NO
1. Soils and Geoloev. Will the proposal have
significant
resultz in:
a. Unstable ground conditions or in changes in
geologic relationships?
b. Disruptions,, displacements, compaction or
turt'.1 of tha soil?
_ _V_
c. Change in topography or ground surface
contour intervals?
v
d. The - iescruction, covering or modification
any unique geologic
.of or physical features? �.
V
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?
VZ
S. Exposure of people or property to geologic
hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mud-
slides, grouted failure, or* similar hazards?
h. An increase in rbe rate of extraction end /or
use of any mineral resour ?
2. HLdroloQ , Will the proposal have significant
results in:
Page
YES uaYBE \:,
a.
Changes in currents, or the course of direction
of flowin3 streams,
rivers,; or ephemeral stream
channels?
b.
Changes in absorption rates, drainage paet•erns,
or the
rate and ; amount of surface Water
rnof °?
V
c.
Alterations to the course or flow of flood
waters?
a.
mange in the :amount of surface -water in anv
body of water?
r
e.
Discharge into surface waters, or any
alteration of surface water quality?
f.
Alteration of groundwater characteristics?
_..
r, v
g.
Change in the quantity of grounds-aters,
either through direct additions or with-
drawals, or through interference with an
aquifer?
Quality?
Quantity?
IZ-
h.
The reduction in the amount of water other-
C
vise available for public water supplies?
,J
i.
Exposure of people or property to water
related hazards such as flooding or seiches ?�
3. Air Quality. Will the proposal have significant
resides
in:
a.
Constant or periodic air emissions from mobile
or indirect 'Sources?
Stationary s,iurces?
y
b.
'Deterioration,, of ambient air quality and /or
interference with the attainment of applicable
air quality staidards?
C.
Alteration of lok4l or regional climatic
conditions, affecting air movement, moisture
~
or temperatire?
v
d. Biota
i
Flora. Will the pTaposal have significant results
in:
a.
Chat Qs in the characteristics of species,
includimg'oiversity, distribution, or number
of any species of plants?
r/
e
b•
Reduction of the nuribers of any unique, rare
or endangered species of plants?
1
?age
3
YES `?3YBE NO
C. Introduction of new or disruptive species of
Amok
plants into an area?
d. Reduction in the potential for agricultural
production?
y
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?
r%
b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare
or endangered species of, animals?
c. Introduction.of new or disruptive species of
~
animals into an area, or res, >'.t in a barrier
to the migration or movement cC animals?
v
._
d. Deterioration or removal of existing fish or
wildlife habitat?
4�
5. Population. Will the proposal have significant
results in:
a. Will the proposal alter the location, distri-
bution, density, diversity, or growth rate of
the human population of an area?
s%
b. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or
create a demand for additional housing?
_ V
—
6. Socio- Economic Factors. Will the proposal have
significant results in:
a. Change in local or regional socio- economic
characteristics, includi;g economir or
commercial diversity, tax rate, and rroperwS
values?
b. -Till project costs be equitably distributed
anion project beneficiaries, i.e., buyers,
tax p.yers or project users?
7. Land Use and Planning Considerations. Will the
proposal have significant results in?
i
a. A substantial alteration of the present or
planned land use of an area?
4,/•
b. A conflict with any designations, objectives,
Policies*, or adopted plans of any governmental
entities?
'�-
C. An impact upon the qulaity or quantity of
`
t4isti-: consumptive or non- consumptive
recreational
opporm -mot s?
—
Page
4
YES MME NO
8. Transportation. Will the proposal have significant,
iesults in=
a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular
movement?
b. Effects on existing streets, or demand for
new street construct.'.on?
C. Effects on existing parking facilities, or
demand for new parking?
t�
d. Substantial impact upon existing transporta-
tion systems?
Y
e. Alterations to present patterns of circula-
tion or movement of people and /or goods?
f/
f. Alterations to or effects on present and
potential water - borne, rail, mass transit 3r
air traffic?
g. Increases in traffic hazards to motor .rehicles,
r
I_
bicyclists or pedestrians? I
V
9. Cultural Resources. Will the proposal have
significant
j
results in:
a. A disturbanca to the into -Srity of archaeological,
paleontological, and /or historical resources?
10. Health_, Safety and Nuisance Factors. Will the
`
proposal have significant results int
`
a. Creation of any health hazard or potential health
hazard?
b. Exposure of people to potential health hazards?
c/
C. A risk of explosion or release of hazardous
substances in the event of in accident?
v
d- An increase in the number oe individuals
or species of vector or pathenogenic
organisms or the exposure of people to such
organisms?
e. Increase in existing noise levels?
✓x
r
f. Exposure of people to rotentially dangerous
noise levels?
S. The crraatios of objectionable odors?
h. An increase in light or glare?
Page 5
YES NO
0
✓
L
i
r f
_V
?1. Aesthetics.
Will the proposal have significant
results In: Y
a.
Tha obstruction or degradation of
any scenic
vista or view?
b.
The creation of an aesthetically offensive
site?
c.
A conflict with the objective of designated
or potential scenic corridors? .
=
12. Utilities and Public Services.. Will the proposal
Kae
a significant need for new systems, or
alterations to the following:
a
Electric power?
b.
Natural or packaged gas?
C.
Communications systems?
d.
Water supply?
e.
Wastewater facilities?
f.
Flood control structures?:
g.
Solid waste facilities?
h.
Fire protection?
.
Police protection?
J.
Schools?
k.
Parks or other recreational facilities?
I.
Maintenance of public facilities, including
goads
and flood control facilitiest
M.
Other governmental - �rvices?
R
13. Enerev and Scarce Resources. Will the proposal
C
have significant results in
a.
Use of substantial or excessive fuel or energy?
b.
Substantial increase in demand upon existing
Sources of energy?
c.
An Increase in the demand for development of
new sources of energy?
d.
An increase or perpetuation of the coF;_umption
of non-renewable forms of energy, when feasible
renewable sources of energy are available?
Page 5
YES NO
0
✓
L
i
r f
_V
Page 6
YES MAYBE NO
a. Substantial daYlction of any nonrenewable or \
Scarce natural. resource?-
14. Mandatory Findinrts of Si¢�ificance,
a. Does the project have the potential to degrade
the quality of the environment, subs,antially
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 c- animal community, reduce
the number or restrict the range of a rz;e or
endangered plant or animal or eliminate
important examples of the major periods of
California h.istorr or prehistory?
b. Does the project have the potential to achieve
short -tern, to the disadvantage of long -term,
environmental goals;? (A short -term impact on the
environment is one which occurs in a relatively
brief, definitive pcvfod of time while long- ✓,
term impacts will endure well into the future).
c. Does the project have impacts which are _
individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable? (Cumulatively considerable
Wr means that the incremental effects of an
individual project are considerable when viewed
in connection with the effects of past projects, '
and probable future projects). v
d. Does the project have environmental effects
which will cause substantial adverse effects
on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
I1. DISCUSSIJN OF ENL'I MENTAL EVALUATION (i.e., of affirmative anzwers to
the above questions plus a Discussion of Y €-nosed mitigation measures). ,
A:3 CA-
Ril.- Nu.'tS�(y{. �2at.�...�7 C��i ^M�t.G�G��c.A�r. s✓� .. fn.�....)i...i.�.iai;,,11•�,,.� 6� -1.-�„
C'_Gw�t�.f.�tns GLLCrJ
Q�
..mow oi..Z�.�•�'r6. � h..i..lvC.,.. 13. .�1,.,G� d- �•YLZJ'�.,, ,.�(.LWR��t. �..'1.y ;:i
- Page
7
IIL. DETERMINATION
�r
On the basis _f this initial evaluat_.n:
I find the proposed project COULD NOT hav east e££_ct
oa the envirnnm
ent and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION gill be p
gill be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant
effect on the environment there
� _
will. nit be a significant effect
in this case because the mitigation
measures described on an
attaefi.d sheet have been added to the project. A
NEGATIVE
DECLARATION HILL BE PREPARED.
I fird the proposed project XkY have a significant effL -,t on the
El envirnment, and ENVIR0101EXT
an IMPACT RE7u8T is required.
Date,
_r�—
Signature
r
lu
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCA,MONGA PLANNING COMMISST,ON
APPROVING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO. 85 -15 i.00ATED ON THE
NORTH SID='; OF 4TH STREET, EAST OF TURNER AVENUE IN 7HE
INDUSTRIAL -AREA SPECIFIC PLAN:, SUBAREA 6 DISTRICT
WHEKLAS, on the 24th day of October, 198.% a complete application was
filed by Don Valk for review of the above- d.tscribed project; ar-A
WHEREAS, on the 12th day of June, 1985, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning
(I mmission held a meeting to consider the above - described project
NOW, THEREFORE, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission resolved as
follows:
SECTION 1: That the following can be met:
1. That the proposed project is consistent with the
objectives of the General. Plan; and
2. That the proposed ` °usa is ire accord with the
objectives of the Industrial Area Specific Plan and
the purposes of the. district in +ich the site is
located; and
3. That the proposed use is in compliance with each of
the applicable provisions of the Industrial Specific
Plan; and
4. That the proposed usc, together with the conditions
applicable thereto, will not be_ detrimental to the
public health, safety, or welrare, or materially,
injurious to properties or improvements in the
vicinity
SECTION 2: That this project will not create adverse impacts on the
environment and That a Negative Declaration is issued on May 8, 1985.
SECTION 3: That Development Review No. 85 -15 is approved subject to
the fellow inc and attached Standard Conditions:
1. Provide a shared driveway appro -ch al ng the westerly
property line.
�7
Resolution No.
DR 85 -15 - Assured Mini - Storage
Page 2
2. Provid: 5' of landscaping on both the west and east
property line-, to include minimum 15 gallon size trees
every 2i' reet on center, flowering shrubs, and ground
cover. Also, berming shall be utilized against the walls
of proposed building,
3. Final design and construction details of the raised
planters within the exterior wall insets shall be
submitted for review and approval by the City Planner
prior to the issuance of building permit.
4. Provide details of a #olid view obstructing gate for
review and approval by the City Planner, before the
Issuance of building permit.
5. Provide special landscaping treatment along 4th St{aet
frontage (i.e., meandering sidewalk, rockscape, specimen
size trees and flowering ^*round cover,)
6. Provide undulating landscapxd berms a1;ng street
frontage. The berms shall have an average height of three
feet and have a maximum slope not to exceed 3 1/2:1.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 1 ?th !iAY O- JUNE, 1985.
PLANNING COMMISSICIN OF THE CIT" OF RANCHO CUCA.".NGA
6Y:
Dennis L. Stout, Chairman
ATTEST:
Rick Gomez, Deputy Secretary
I. Aick Pomez, Deputy :- r tary of the Planning Commissiun ! of the City of
Rancho Cuclmo:;ga, do hereby certify tia the foreeoiny Resolution was duly and
'igula.-ly introduced, passed, and adopted by th Planning Commissior, of the
"sty of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of .:he Planning Commission held
s,._ tho 12t,i day of June, 1985, b.- the following voce- to -w-it:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: OKMISSIONERS:
iL
1
I
J
t1 i
Z
C7
d
•O
i
d
L
0
O •yly- FcF .di. p U''• n c y O A i A LO Eio.� � '1 m «.
.•6 oY 06E
Oq E LAY u
6^ uCa. .^0 Y O�Y �Ayd- do Yq SM AL
� L b d
'
pc L A T E Y u T E Y Y O O O y d N9 n 0 d n p u.L. N�
.pnS 2a" >OG�O'tA+A•2 9u 0y+ C�N AV uo =tV E
� ^ ay app. W q C6 u.Ar ^ r �Ldi CGN C.OaA CO
It
,'O.YE«iurL O'aV c jyi9 EG ^dN�:
6 u d Apo ^py d NL
N O w9A •�Od YO ^q0
N.LTa Ga PC a.• LC ^x ^O
pae. ^�yvLl«W.AG a.L9'd. q�Y� NFC' LLq>
EEy .Li•�Ly L
O 6
AO� Y ^d OLiN :5UqV pc6.ipOpf� dVC —C4 EQ^
O p c g d V o N+ G. N u• C. E E O L OG.d -1 u A.
w.VY� ..EC Ca CY yd 6xd' �c w
+y-A N d
yL AdY� 6'.u.Ayti
6
� 72
6 IY.tg p92NLNI.4� ;'OCaN CUM 6N.x -dMS 40<m Ft ¢L 641
m
2
Z
J
n
O
v
o
v
2 N
ti
G
ec
�.aLaN�o
o.
LL
M
N
o iA EN_
> L�aut q��T
C
�
d• O^ Y u N •r a> 6
IN
J y A n
p d
•aoo N oEa
•
U aitw n
� 9 q
q0 �NyCa�z d
nCS {l p
N
� A •
A c V A L d A
^"O
�,-`
Z w a c.d.•
pN�ee EAE p OOT
Is
E 2 ~
E pY
=p
pnc
c3 n a
N
1
� O
17.
�`t•`
vv
y/
F 4 � O
pp
dcCtc
L�
J 6ac
N tia2 O. �
p. L�u
'o d N
A FL•..A d�L u >y =..
tFi O
Jr
�I
pl
pL
J
4 Y ti ( I
G W X/'
I
/?, a o
ff
u°
u d N O ° q O O. 0 p
y O E • q
a=+ p O
•C
a E d
N T i u°c v°d y Gy
Spd TC
N o n0 b q we
O lCd
E ° o nd
ne
C >O C
I.y
rLa�
O`Ntt9
bsNYC tom
EcE< b d
� °=
W, 4 -..a
4J
N
u t >aOd
yTc O dY Odq
_ YL
•O
q
° >99Y
.au
°NN • d 2' Fb^�'
qq
YE
NMa
b °�u�co
��6V W
NE>
�T,dd
d °t ^o
m n
O
Y W Yq
NW
a
~
qq •
C�Ot
oUUUC °
0 a0^
L
CVU rT °j
q~
9^.M
� L C�6 60
q cyy G
a
Ld
� 0p
T p°CC EE6T L
E
L O dxi^
CC'
�yy
KEdO..n
•U;
Cv°ivb� N•Z+vOiNL 22�91U
H
�)
6W wHyyw�6 W+� ^.S
O.
r1l N
O0
t;
mI
1
n
1
.6 F0
N
Z5 c a Y
�
uaoT+c`v
q
9-4-'
c= Zo
3.+..° ...
m gc V
° e.
00.._q
qc.
�Y
EqE
K20910
d
° x 6 N
G �y
C T
NTN Yo
C Ga Y b y U L
q0
v !�q VLEy2cE
Y Q c E i� O Y u 0
du
N
^� 61► E O c 0 N U a-
yNE
UvAA. qb L6.
D
^1L'INU
N CN
E.r
C
r +
c
�GN
dq y� C° LE
�L ^Y O.�N
•G� �u N5
1
°UO
6 w2^° TiLCp9^
L4
60QC
atC=
A LN LysE
°O 9
0�
2 cy w.a
b gQ0xN~
O W xNL q
¢ C
N=
N q u s b rn L o LL
u QV n V
O
c t E
Y
O9 N "L �.c'.p
c
Ny.,
CE �.npq
L E H
V 4E .q�M
bnV
tr
d
tY
d y S
UW dH V
OTH.E
9a 9
b
E� c ^N �O
` nL 6Y O. Nip
d uc CY9
09
•� q °YNU
c = �qqd •
CY d CT ~ ^`�
O Mc ,C Ot
Ct N °Ot`F
O O
qi Y
d O
C
°�
LEq d
a 3 qa °Ad
c tl L
C O
° T
9ts�
A D
Ot�
c
a rca q E
f N m
?C.q '
d '
GOtI
d N L°E
6 n,L
N° L O K •°- N a N. q
K U N 9 4 d m r Ot +�
!� .• •+ f r g 4 6
.
.y A
/?, a o
Lj
sd
`oy
N�aAO
aL.
p6
a
m�
q.;
°.- o
o..
Ys ei
cv °el`
'• 'g- >m
Ask
-1
a 6
N
DU A9
d...
m
d
+ V 9 Oy
^
O n
° p
p �O
u
b
d
y
uL
' 0
°2A
o...°•
•� �=•
eyo bNyy�'1
�aq N.
E
Ny
>i^
4q LN
t<
=L
`^yay Ac
S H
d
Lt
I
d 1-2
CE
EZ dO1� 5
u SS
.N-Iq
n-24
^ LL
9 d p
<
L 6 O Q
y
'
Cu10.1
c0
S 'c-
In � O N
rb <
C
EA
°
�'.
dOV°i
d.0
.n AAN
9�9 3 Old of
°^
L L
Oui
N9
T
Kt
E
60Nh.6
.r4i 4V 6v
E w E a
t t ++
Q..v.jn
W66 «tA.�°a V°-
•�
CI Nf
d0
OI iy
IC
O
d R
o9a..
a
-uG
sd
N�L
9j
p6
v
m�
q.;
E
t mC°q'
O
EE
C.0
C U
O c
6�nN
C
nO c ^
Vaa'c
L d C
c�
�1
p6
c
Yd
q.;
q<.O�
O:C4C�n
.tr
_
G.a
^
u g i
7
a d
d
j
b
d
y
uL
E
Ny
>i^
4q LN
GZ
=L
`^yay Ac
^a
Lt
ca..°
a66
dga Va t
vuyy
u SS
d O
n-24
^ LL
9 d p
<
L 6 O Q
y
'
L=
w 0
y
blr
u n
yy
A N N b E L
rb <
C
t •
dpt N9
L V
°
OILL
V
V
mE bd
D. <
°^
L L
Oui
N9
CE
60Nh.6
.r4i 4V 6v
a-ovl
Qp6
Q..v.jn
W66 «tA.�°a V°-
i
it
— oa
cEa
a
a
e
Ya
^oi
c
cu
oJ�
y ^i
E
a
a�
T6
^QE
FOOL
triZ
y> H
C�
aE
q C
oN%an
1 O C .G •
nE G'.�L
>`x.
no
pmd
N
E
^
y C
^ 3
q
1
G: V
Lu.
Ltf .O.r
v
C N
w+L 9S G
.c.
Z -
ao
Gn ... a
N
4J
U
a °q
NO
c
y
o
Opri ym d
=.Li
N
V
'U qa=
nA
TZ A �
O
u u
dr j
O 51
dip
.ti and
t �Y C
N E u= a
EA
o
y
LY°
'«.y _
Y �9 ay
F
En
n9a
wd
6y '^^
ELN
O�uM
°A
mu
YN
c2
A
EO j
d it
db
. aU 0
qNca
qud LL n
j..q
yNO
m a
�Ly
CEO v�
a u
N
^Oa
s
zd
^
^ O
=Y d
L
d t ^b
yN0 a
r].0
a �E Dyd V
N y
_
yc
cG
•
a—
^GQ
dtr¢O
O Y
�N ~
ad+E2 H
��
09•�b.°- 'E Tay
ad yj V 06 €
^
dd
p
T of
p—i L
G
y-
E d d
—
y`E„O �^ d
_^ upi>^ n N
q N
N LZ N
u.."—
yam^
uu =:y
N l
eLi ad.
ca
O
Ica
YEEn� &u '^o
F
3
saN
nl aY
° CV=i
mENC.«
N9 J
�V=
OYNGTL°. MAy Td N
_
V
N d6
LOm
d O
n h
.i.
N�a�... rL. .Eq
LyC L °
9 ME .�
�9q
F6
SLIa.1�1,..a
f `7,
J,
GaLLN '6 +io Y-O IIA
^
6Ya
^
V
6 N
rno�
O
4nm
L N d
O°
i
it
— oa
cEa
a
a
•Y�O
s9 a
O d
Yd
N90
naN
NUN.
E. D d�.
N
pmd
y
Nua
L
'
NO
Q
Tu>
216
=.Li
V
'U qa=
nA
C
.�
On
p. C
T.E
Oyy
o
y
LY°
'«.y _
Y �9 ay
F
En
n9a
wd
6y '^^
ELN
O�uM
°A
mu
�_
N
WO1
0r
9
db
L«
°a
aq .�G
yNO
r].0
d9dx
... c
N
F
d
Or O' g
yC. yV
a
° TN
q
WS
n9 E.
N LZ N
p
Zq6
y q4N
T�
LLNdp
gal
saN
3y0 Y;E
is Mxo�
O.O y N
dQ.N
yt TL
_
N
Taq
YGCC
M > €E
G^py
`. uN
yQ
c ^y
u
nodc
ul
uO
Eqc
pGEdC
TLL To o
pdq�
V
6 N
rno�
O
4nm
L N d
O°
L BELL
L 1 S
tali �.Ei E.2.
La P-
. O 0.
OWwP
... d
CAE.
V ° ° oeE
y10
d
°1yti: c
v
9
u
_
�
Wes•.° -. my
LNa �O�
Ono
OU KL
..O -.�� d
2 G
O
yEa'. Tea
Y
°o
m-
Jz
c
qa
Nn cE
�qq
aL'vi
Nr
o u
EN4
Nag 2
y vy V
c L^ �G
a
+q+°.aUN
u
aaui aTiW aE�
...�
U!p. un
C C
G
I
••
° C
d NO�
"A
oo
u t o o
n .e 2 d c
tOG
V
60uV0 Oq
d
N> _
>• °O OY°.
Y V € S Y
dLd
da°a.6L
° O
2 u
N Uv
Cu
w J
,
to
•
9d
O�U O Y
y U
c
^V °
U�V
•.y
—
29. 6
ud6N OI
v
+- �a
O OI
0.6
d
W 6 w q
d N � W C Y C
` A 9 U �'•
° q Y q
' u
q —
u n L,E
m^ N v
C d> q n N L
N
U ^
L 2
0-u
u�
"G
wo 6rnrai HO
¢ q
a.
Y
-
w
v
uoo
$ G
d
y T G i
V
L
U
L
v
" j\
d o
qO
v
n
ug c
°
L C G p
Y
X= 2A
FFa C y 0
c A q
C p
m
y EnE
C L
N T
°
Y C
« Y
E
I
v b
yP °�
�U
u
a d O�
^
�Y '
LgvG
N
^
Y
��.r' •
"a aY
�«
Y YdL a
_ d
Y dcyu
n
^'a
«
^L "
am a eL
o s
m >N
S y
a
N S
T
n
C
m
L
G
e
u
o E d
d$
V G5
A
77
a
e
C^ N T E
N`
y G
`
E_
r
wt
-o
ECE N C
E O.
. =o
dN4CL
LW...
u qYG E.• ^
Ern c�
4L tj.�
0 q
°NUV
+
TE Nd
r C
UL
a0
.-.a ys.
° G
D•qa
^0
S. LU
d "O
•O y
4
n �'u
L
y
V°
2
d
Cb. DX
E '• 6 LN
C
pGm CAL O1L
`yaLd
�
d ti.
L
n
>' r 6
pga�i
N�
O
V d 46
L udi
01
N�
CGNM H MM
NC
as >G
MN W
c'q
^
\v1.6w
-
w
v
uoo
$ G
d
y T G i
V
L
U
L
v
" j\
d o
N a
c'`i wa
n
ug c
L C G p
N �q
.° m
FFa C y 0
c A q
C p
d
d q
n n
Q
I A !E
k C d
° C Y
u
dl C
L
•O
N q n y
A Y
Y ~ O
v b
E 6 M u
EE
p�u w
.x
r e
EpU
q
SU
x
�p
aSiq
E
N> otm
Oy.
p
C^ N T E
N`
y G
`
E_
r
wt
-o
ECE N C
E O.
. =o
dN4CL
Na
WS
vov o°
um NG
Ern c�
4L tj.�
0 q
ti
LA
3
w �
9
V
L
" j\
E
�o
n
ug c
L C G p
N �q
.° m
FFa C y 0
c A q
L C
^
o
o
k C d
° C Y
u
dl C
L
•O
N q n y
A Y
Y ~ O
w
6
E 6 M u
LA
3
ot°
O-�
W C
uA G
CEO
•.• N >
O
O N
d u
YM INO.I
Z p
QL6
-t �^
OJ. P.
G Y Y
U N d M
rA •d
L.uil ^O
09 C
1 J U.p
O
«L
TIZ G!• C.
L u. y
I
2
c a
t
q
V �
N L
O
u
W
«
N
LO.6
d bI
N V
d IOr V
N W
NK E
D'N
cC
O
`
d In
C
p C O ..�+ 1 Y r
dE V
«
N 9 y
a N
a
9 w Y b.
6 u a
.U-L
fNti
V A`
i S
6N
w
d.O C
a C�
A
rte..
LY d
U d..G.
a
��
Td
L it
$ N o «
O�L
'o
.`• �e.
«
2 0
LLm
N C
2 L
go
O
9 O
N C` d
rc dY' Lb'
Ndw
C
rA Cam.
d Y G�
8
y G
r
o: L
L
q« qd
ty C 4y
r
�p
\`
rrn
5.
'N
L E
u
Yp'
poet..
o
N
d
ot°
O-�
W C
uA G
CEO
•.• N >
O
O N
d u
YM INO.I
Z p
QL6
-t �^
OJ. P.
G Y Y
U N d M
rA •d
L.uil ^O
09 C
1 J U.p
O
a0 O
TIZ G!• C.
L u. y
I
O
3
vI
d 6
«
N
—
..
q
6 d
q
�
U
Yy
•N J YL
F� V
C
YE
«
2 0
LLm
N C
2 L
go
O
9 O
N C` d
N S
LL
_
q« qd
-'O b
�p
rrn
5.
'N
L E
oho od
Yp'
poet..
o
N
aI"'
do. _
di
UuFr
rN pq
'
�G 6
Y.
b\ COI
VOI
�L
Iqr
�V oW
—q
r
r•N
0
^
O.Y
OI d
p0 «9 uY
406 qyE w
LY d
V`} C
•�Y
9N^ VV
G�Mr
C
f O w
OU' 900
F c z 6 0 N
q
dv_1 Y
LCI
Gu
d
�
�
I NI �1 QI I
bl ^I
0 cl;
I
II
Ex
2
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
BY:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
STAFF REPORT
0 ,l,C9
z r �
0 0
June 12, 1985 19i7
Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
Rick Gomez, City Planner
Curt Johnston, Associate , Planner
LAN BENTSEN MASTER PLAN (DR 84 -22 ) A review of the
master plan previously approved with DR 84 -22 (Lan Bentsen
Apartments), for conformance with Ordinance 259 (Master
Plan requirements), on approximately 40 acres of land
located north of Highland. Avenue, south side of Lemon
Avenue, east of haven Avenue.
I. ABSTRACT: The City Council at their May 1, 1985 meeting approved
revisions to the !-faster Plan Overlay District and directed the
Planning; Commission ti review the approved Lan Bentsen Master P'ban
as it relates to th;. new Master Plan Ordinance. The Commission
should provide direction and inteepretation to Staff as to how the
Ordinance should be applied to future phases of the Lan Bentsen
Master Plain and other future master plan projects. A consensus by
minute action is appropriate for Staff direction.
II. BACKGROUNO/OVERLAY DISTRICT: A copy of the revised Master Plarl
Overlay District and staff reports describing the revised Ordinance
is attached for your review. The basic intent of the Ordinance is
to provide for neighborhood compatibility and insure a harmonious.
relationship between existing and propu:�1 uses. To accomplish
this, the requirements for a Masten Plan 4Zeic expanded to inc'ude,
greater site planning details, and a statement of arch itect+traJ
intent and /or conceptual elevations, to determine how the
architectural concept; relate to other buildings or project n the
area. Specifically, the Master Plan must address architectural
style, various product types, form, bulk, height, orientation, and
materials. Wis;i respect to residential projects, the specific
intent is to 0termine density and housing product types which
enhance neigh},-rk.nod compatibility.
III. ANALYSES: The Lan Bentsen Master Plan consists of a 68 page text
with graphics including a discussion of the surrounding area (land
use, zoning, circulation, runoff, etc.), design concepts ksite
plan, architectural form, landscaping), drainage, and traffic
circulation. In addition, an expanded Initial Study /Environmental
Assessment was prepared.
ITEM S
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
Lan Bentsen Master Plan - DR 84 -22
June 12, 1985
Page #2
The basic element of the Lan Bentsen Master Plan is a conceptual
diagram which -indicates common spacE, building areas, vehicular
circulation and parking, and pedestrian circulation and density
tansfer. The density ranges from Lemon Avenue (7.1 du!ac)
transition south to the future Foothill Freeway (31.5 du /ac)
(Exhibit 9-211). Architecture for Phase I was approved with the
application for OR 84 -22, but the final design for later phases may
vary. The approved plans for Phase I is shown on Exhibits "C -1"
through 11C -811.
Land uses and zoning surrounding the Lan Bentsen Master Plan
includes Low Residential (2 -4 du /ac), and Low Medium' Residential
(4 -8 du /ac) to the North; Medium Residential (8 -14 du /ac) to the
east; the future Foothill Freeway to the south; and Neighborhood
Commercial to the west. The most sensitive transition is to the
north where single family homes in the 4 to 5 unit per acre range
exist or are in the planning stages. Within the Lan Bentsen Mister
Plan the first row of units represents approximately 7 uni' per
acre but quickly transitions to 14 units per acre. "n to of
density transition, does the commission feel this is adequate: its
the intent to create compatible streetsc-ape views, or should a more
significant transition be provided?
The revised Master Plan Ordinance repuires "various product
types" The Lan Bentsen apartment project includes single story
four- plexes and two - and three -story stacked flats. In this case,
Neighborhood Compatibility was addressed by transitioning the
building height. Does the Commission feel this is adequate, or are
actual changes to the product type such as single family detached
units and /or townhomes necessary to meet the intent of the _
Ordinance?
E IV. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission should provide direction
F to staff re ative to interpretation of the revised Master Plan
Over'iay District as it applies to the tan Bentsen Master Plan, and
k future master plan projects. Specifically:
A. In what manner should density transition OLCur:
Depth of transition area
Product type (single family detached, duplex, or
townhouse)
B. What revisions to the Lan Bentsen Master Plan are
necessary for future consideration by the Planning
Commission.
i
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
Lan Bentsen Master Plan - DR 84 -22
June 12, 1985
Page #3
tr
Re)pectfully submitted,
Ri
A
RG:CJ :ns
,tachments: Exhibit "A" - Location Map
Exhibit "B" - Lan. Bentsen Master Plan
Exhibit "C" - Approved Plans for OR 84 -22
Previous Staff Report
Master Plan Overlay District
Correspondence from D. G. King
CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA
PLANNING DIVISION
Em
NORTH
-
ITEM: f'L"
TITLE- trt .R- rro,J�
EXHIBIT- -'E! SCALE.
�I
U
:
LYNNEHA4VEN _....,,,� key �_.
commumrry
RANCHO CLJCAR/EWWA. CA. �" [�•eWm� �. � ,,,,,;
(-DRTH
CITY OF ITEND
RANCHO CTuCAMONGA 'FIT LE:
PLANNNG_DIVISION LWBIT- S -1 SCAL.Is-
� S
I THIS DENSITY TRANSITION SHOWN FOR PHASE ONE. IT IS TYPICAL FOR ALL PHASES
Of - area to the north is zoned LM 4 to 8 Unitt per acre
_ LEMON AVENUE
2.25 acres net 1 18 Units: 7.11 units per acre. r.at I
`2.80 acres gross 1 18 Units: 5.71 units per at 'a gross
center of drive �
2.84 acres / 40 Units: 14.0 Units per acre net
center of
acres net 190 Units: 18.51 Units per acre net
center of
open space spine
CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA
PLANNING DIVLRCXN
�r
El
TITLE - ? e ew r �vsrnf .wsrw,,j
EXHIBIT. S - 2- SCALE: -'
s-f�
El
-..
R NCHO CL'QUVIONGA
PLANNING DIVISION
ITaI: - D-4 _ ,,I Zz
TITLE - c-�; y kot A& yt .1 m
EXHIBIT: Sr_ALE-
S'
Ott
l' ,( • �t'1'.
e�a
� I'll ,
ffa
w
s i \{1-
-�
7
S
_ _ c
MIR
■
e
FT IFn
,:.
auItouvo TVPK tvz
LTWO STGR*n
ome.owo Tvea rv-oa
crwo aTGQT]
CITE' OF ITEM:
RANCHO CUCATVIiONGA TITLE- z✓L- 'M:r(an:s
PLANNING DIMS aN EXHIBIT= SCALE.-.=
U
THE
CRANCROM
ARCHcracm
Wc
LYNNEHAVEN
COMMUNITY
RANCHO CUCA11 ONGA, C�1.
BLEVATIONE
t 1
Auma NO TIP
ITwo ETORYa
EIilNit mum'TYPE. /1 -AE - BUILOCNO TYPE II.AB
• (TWO Wawa
{
lilt 1
i I ntVICrs
MUILOINO TYPB Vj cj BUILOINO TYPE VI.C.1 fTWO BTORY3 BUIL 1NO TYPE vi-c.0 TWp ETOR r
BD'1/B�nl -0f'siv'�
CITY OF
RANCHO CUCckI /10'k TGA TITLE: Cc.c— UAri ,- ,vs ,
PLANNING DINTISIaN EXHIB[T -_4::L& _SOLE= f
�v
UMMINO TV" %Ml oja .tlCf.OfiVi, T'YPR VVF.G
CTWO ANO TNRGY ■TOR1/3 CTWO AIVOTNRIIn STORY?
HE
THE
RNTRV IMFIYM 4T B PMU-TR.' - CMNCR' T
AFCHrrOM
i" Ri , J
ELAN VIRW
. �L.
CITY or,
IW RANCHO CUCAMONGA TITLE: t%t_s-y4xrta,1
PLANNING DIVISION E,XHIBIT:.? SCALE-
5
L aVE1C'I/�O�I E,Y '.0 0 CUCAMCNG "# . CA.
auvwatew�s au..QUUo
TTne -
RMwns iTOw O(ay.owo :
� cTwrea TV" v a-al
oroRV3
t
CTMSM ,a TYPO V -AO Ou2GINO TYPO v -Aa au2cwo TYPO 1x -O,Oa
(TMRellt OTOwY3 (TYIR.6 OTORV7. (ONO OTORV3
2HE
A AY
IIJC
WrC Y3 s
IX-CIA . Runas.o TVws, u(C,/= w
h - (ONO OTORVI. iL7,/0-.,• -O�r_
CITY OF ITEM:
RANCHO CUCAMONGA TITLE — �t�y<tTic�t^S
PLANNING DIN'ISIO\t EXHIBIT: G- 9 SCALE: ��
r
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA �ucanro
STAFF REPORT � °9A
o' o
F �$ Z
U >
1977
DATE: April 17, 1985
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner
BY: Dan Coleman, Senior Planner
SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMEFT
85 -01 - An amendment to the Ranchn Cucamonga Development
Code, Title 17 of the Municipal Code, regarding Master
Plaits.
BACKGROUND: The City Council dire..ed Staff to prepare an amendment to
the Development Code to clarify tia intent and application of the Master
Plan process. The Planning Commission held a V,:blic hearing on April
10, 1985 to consider the above described item and recommended approval
of Developmltnt_Code Amendment 85 -01. The only item of discussion was a
considers an to include language further defining variable product
type. lne Commission felt it was unnecessary to further define the
term, therefore did not recommend any changes to the proposed
amendment. The attached Planning Commission Staff Report fully outlines
the proposed amendment.
RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommends that the City
Council approve Development Code-Amendment 85411 through adoption of the
att hed Ordinance and issuance of a Negative Declaration.
Re ct ly s mitted,
Rick Gome.
C t la er
!Attachments: Planning Commission Staff Report April 10, 1985
I Planning Commission Resolution
City Council Ordinance
S - /_s'
I
PLANNING COMMISSIO�TAFF REPORT
Environmental Asse ent & OCA 85-01
April 10, 1985
age 2
fourplexes as a transition to the two and three story apartments to
the south. The Master Plan process may also facilitate discussion
of other design techniques to provide transition of density, such
as, 'open space setbacks, dense landscaping, architectural scale and
mass, grade changes, etc. Further, large scale master planning of
areas of 50 plus acres may be appropriate to ensure variety of
housing product type and architectural ✓tyle to discourage monotony
and address the housing'-needs of a divergent population as
encouraged by the City's General plan housing Element Policies.
III. PROCESS: The Masti6 Plan process is used in conjunction with a
development application (e.g., tentative tract, conditional use
permit). Therefore, the criteria for evaluating the Master Plan
are threefold: (1) absolute policies for residential projects, (2)
development standards, and (3) design guidelines as specified in
the C9ty's Development Code.
The proposed revisions to the Master Plan Overlay District, as
shown in the attached revised Ordinance, are intended to clarify
and expand the language regarding the following:
a. Applicability of the Master Plan requirement to
specific parcels (17.20.030 -8),
b. Master Plan content (17.02.030 -C2), and
c. Approval process for Master Plans (17.02.030 -D2).
IV. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: Staff recommends that the Planning
Commission make the findings required pursuant to Division 13,
Chapter 6, Section 21166 of the Public Resources Code that would .
not require subsequent or supplemental Environmental Impact Report
and recommends issuance of a Negative Declaration. This finding is
based upon the fact that Development Code amendment implements the
existing Goals and Policies of the General Plan which were fully
analyzed with regard to environmental impacts during the General
Plan EIR.
LZ
V. CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised is a Public Hearitgl
is The Daily Report newspaper. To date, no correspondence either
for or against thproposed amendment has been received.
S /6
PLANNING COMMISSIOt a'AFF REPORT
Environmental Asses "s -ent & DCA 85 -01
April 10, 1985
Pa, e 3
VI. •RECOMM.NDATION: If the Planning Commission determines that the
proposed amendment can farther implement the Goals and Policies of
the General Plan and Development Code, adoption of the attached
resolution recommending approval of the proposed amendment and
issuance of a Negative Declaration to the City Council would be
appropriate:
R_gpectf ly submitted,
b
yRiJ as
City Planner
RG:DC:ns
Attachments: Init!,-'<< Study, Part II
Resolution
Ordinance
s
i,
C.
ORDINANCE NO. 259
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING TlT_2 17, SECTION
17,20.030 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE, REGARDING MASTER FLAN
REQUIREMENTS
The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, does
ordain as fellows:
SECTION 1: That Section 17,20.030, Master plan Overlay District,
hereby amenddto read as follows:
is
L,'eti3n 17.20.030, Master Plaa Overlay Distl ±ict
A. Purpose The intent of the Master Plan rrocess is to -plan
ahead" and look beyond the limits
Of s particular property
tor i307'v e circulation, d ainaWe and neighborhood
Overiai',371ty proBlems. The purpose of the Master Plan
Dverla, nistrict is to establish procedures to address the
special or unidue needs or characteristfes of certain
areas designated by the General Plan or Specific Plans and
to assure a harmonious relationship between the exl9an,g
and proposed use, and to coordinate and promote . the
community improvement efforts of._hoth private and public
resources.
H. Applicability
1 All areas specially designated as Master Plans on the
Land Use Plan of the General Plan
shall be considered
areas where preparation Of a conceptual Master Plan
shall be considered mandatory.
2. Any other areas may be considered areas where
preparation of a conceptual Master Plan if in the
Opinion of the -City Planner the application or project
site involves un '
unique characteristics, oraveraisest constraints or
development policy substantially more
31gnifi syt than
generally pertain to applications.
3. All development within a Master Plan Overlay District
shall
comply with the intent of Master Plan as
approved by the Planning Commission. However, it is
-iot
the intention of the master planning 1.mce7a to
limit the flexibility to develop alternative
.*-jutions
consistent with the intent of the Master Plan.
4. There shall be no minimum or maximum area requirement
for a Master Plan Overlay District.
C. Administration
II
1. Establishment or Overlay District. The Master Planned
District
may be applied Sa combinationwith any
development d4,atrict pursuant tc Section 17.02.060,
- Amendments. A Master Plan Overlay District shall be
designated the Development
.upon District Hap, by an
asterisk after the reference number identifying
each base district, for all areas designated by the
General Plan as required by the City Planner.
AOL v
-1
Page 2 No. 259
e
g j
2. MasterPlan Requirements. !Where required, by Section
17.20.0308, a conceptual Master Plan shall be
submitted for approval together with any development
application, and considered as a Part of, unless
Specifically exempted as provided for by Section
17.06.030A. Applications for a Master Plan shall be
filed with the Planning Division in a manner
prescribed by the City Planner. At minimum, Master
Plans shall indicate, through graphics and text,
conceptual building locations, conceptual subdivision
layout in residential areas, overall circulation,
Points of ingress and egress to both public and
private streets, parking lot layouts, conceptual
grading and drainage, areas to be used for landscaping
and plazas, and .pedestrian circulation. Areas
intended for common use, such as shared access,
reciprocal parking or pedestrian plazas shall also be
identified. In addition, a statement of architectural
intent and /or conceptual elevations shall be submitted
to indicate how the architectural concepts including
style, various product types, form, bulk, height,
cr entaticn,. and materials relate to other buildings .
or proJecfs within the planning area. Further, the
Master Plan shall indicate implementation,
responsibility for and phasing of necessary
Improvements. The conceptual Master Plan shall be
reviewed for consistency with the purpose of this
section, Absolute Policies contained in Section (I
17.08.050, design guidelines oftha base district, and
the n_riteria contained in Section 17..06.010.'I
D. Authority
1. The Planning Commission shall hold a public hearing on
each application for a Master Plan. The hearing shall
be held simultaneously with the development
application for which the :!aster Plan was prepared,
and shall be set and notice given as prescribed in
r Section 17.02.110 Public Nearinge, Upon completion of
the public hearing, the Planning' Commission shall
approve, conditionally approve, or deny the Master
Plan. If the Planning Commission denies the Mater
Plan, their decision shall be final unless appealed to
the City Council within ten (10) calendar days (see
Section 17.02.080).
2. The Planning Commission may alter the Master Plan and
impose such restrictions and -.aditions as it may deem
necessary to ensure that the Master plan will be in
harmor: with the intent and purposes of this section
and with the adopted plans and policies of the City
�tad/%r
guidelines as approved by the Planning
Commission.
r
E. F *itdings The Planning Commission shall make the same
findings required for approval of the related development
application as set forth by this Code.
w SECTION 2: The City Council finds that Development Cade Amendment
85 -01 is an implementation or the General Plan goals and policies and t:7at the
General Plan Environmental Impact Report adequately covers any potential
significant adverse impacts. Further, the City Council finds that no
subsequent or supplemental environmental impact report is required pursuant to
r Division 13, Chapter 6, Section 21166 of the Fublic Resources Code.
Specifically, the City Council finds that.
r_ /9
A
` Ordinance No. 259
Page 3
A. No substantial changes are propose; in any goals or
policies which would require mayor revisicns to the ETE.
S. No substantial changes have occurred with respect to the
circumstances under which the profs-It is being undertaken.
C. No new information on the project has become available.
SECTION U A Negative Declaration is hereby adopted for this
Development Code Amendment, Cased upon the completion and findings of the
initial Study.
SECTION fit: The Mayor shall sign this Ordinance and the City Clerk
shall cause the same to be published within riftean (15) dayr aftar its
passage at lease once in The Daily Report, a newspaper of general circulation
Published in the City of Ontario, California, and circulated .n the City or
Rancho Cucamonga, California.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 1st day cf May, 1985.
AYES: Bright, Buquet, Mikela, Uahl, King
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
JOa Mi a s,. Mayor
ATTEST: 1/ 0I
Beverly A.�Authelet, City Clerk
I, BEVERLY A. AUTHEIET, CITY CLERK of the City of Rancho Cucamonge,
California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance was introduced at a
regular meeting of 'the Council of the City or Rancho Cucamonga held on the
17th day of April, 1965, and was finally passed at a regular meeting of the
City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga held on the 13t day of May, 1985.
Exer,:ted this 2nc day of May, 1985 at Rancho Cucamonga, California.
* Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk
Daa ®12[mral
assoniates - plannersz!D
The Planning Commission
c/o Kurt Johnson, Associate Planner
9320 Baseline Road, Suite C
-Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730
4 June 1985
Page I of 7
RE: LYNNEHAVEN MASTER PLAN REVIEff
Mr. Chairman, members of the Planning Commission:
On 1 May 1985 the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 259 which
amended specified portions of the Master Plan requirements. The
council then referred the unapproved (phases two and three)
portions of the Lynnehaven Master Plan to the Plan-ning Commission
"...to see if it is in conformance with the intent of Ordinance
No. 259."
Since the Lynnehaven Master Plan was found by the Planning
Commission to be in conformance with the intent of the Master
Plan regulations prior to Ordinance No. 259, 1 will address only
the changes made by the Council through adoption of Ordinance No.
259. Since the Ordinance is relatively short, I have included
each portion of it below with my comments regarding how the
Lynnehaven Mastt: Plaa does indeed meet the intent of the
Ordinance. I sincerely hope you will find this information
helpful in your review.
9375 Archibald Avenue.
,�jle212 Rancho Cucarnotina. CaVnrnia 91730 (1141987-7077
4 June 1935
Lynnkhaven
Mas_ =:r Plan Review
Page 3
B. Applicability.
S. All areas specially designated as Mister Plans on the
Land Use Plan of the General ?Ian shall be considered
areas where preparation of a conceptual Master Plan
'ha l be considered mandatory.
2. Any other areas may be considered areas where
preparation of a conceptual Mister Plan if in the
opinion of the City Planner the application or project
site involves unusual site development constraints or
unique characteristics, or raises questions of
development policy substantially more significant, V
generally pertain to applicatiens
3. All development within a Faster Plan Overlay District
shall comply with the intent of Faster Plan as
approved by the Planning CG: mission. However, it Ys
not the intention of the master planning process to
limit the flexibility to develop alternative solati=s
consistent with the intent of the Faster Plan.
u. There shall be no minimum or maximum w.ea requirement
for a Master Plan Over.ay District.
This section changed the text only for paragraphs nu''.ers 2, 3,
and 4. Paragraph 2 gives the City Planner authority to regiiire a
Master Plan on sites not so designated by the General Plan.
Paragraph 3 clarifies for the developer and the City the intent
that a Master Plan is coordinative and advisory; that flexibility
to alter a master plan will remain so long as the overall intent
..,of the Master Plan is r;aintained. Paragraph 4 provides that a
Master Plan may be large or small. It also replaces the prior
paragraph 4 which stated "Responsibility for preparation of a
Master Plan shall lie with the property owners within a Master
Plan Overlay District or the First developer." This statement,
in my opinion, is important and was perhaps deleted by accident.
It can save a lot of staff explanation of process and costs if
replaced in the code as a new paragraph 5.
Since the Lynnehaven site was already designated as a Faster Plan
Overlay District, the changes to this section do not affect the
Lynnehaven Master Plan.
A June 1985 Lynnehaven
Master Plan Revi.:!w
Page 2
ORDINANCE NO. 259
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING TITLE 17, SECTION
'
17.20.06 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE, REGARDING MASTER PLAN
r
REQUIREMENTS
The City Council of the City *f Rancho Cucamonga, California, does
ordain as follows:
SECTION 1: That Section S7•d0.00, Master Plan Overlay District, is
hereby amended to read as follow:
Section 17.20.030 Master Plan Overlay District
t
A. Purpose The intent or the Master Plan process is to "plan
ahead" and loos: beyond the Units of a particular property
to solve circulation, drainage and neighborhood
k
compatibility problems. The purpose of the Master Play
Overlay District is to establish procedures to address `h,
special or raique needs or characteristics of certain
areas 'designated by the General Plan or Specific Plans and
{
to assurs a harmonious relationship between the. existing
and proposed use, and to coordinate and promote 'the
community improvement efforts of both private and public
resour`es.
i
This section, (section 1) morn completely elaborates on the
`
purpose of having a piaster Plan overlay District. The intent '
here is to assure that a project is not considered it isolation
from characteristics and attributes which will affect or be
affected by surrounding properties. This change clarified the
shorter statement that existed in the code.
The Lynnehaven Master Plan ,does fully meet the spirit and intent
of this section because circulation, drainage, architectural,
density, grading and design among other considerations were
exhaustively analyzed in detail by the Commission, the Council,
and the Staff.
,j
4 June 1955
Lynnahaven
Master Plan Review
Page 4
Aft
C. Administration
1. Establishment of Overlay, District. The Halter Planned
. District may be appli,eC 1a c €mbinatioa with any
developmeat distrSet' pursuant to Section
17.02.060,
Amendments. A Master Plan Overlay District shall be
designated Upon the Development District. Map, by an
asterisk °•" after the reference number identifying
each bass district, for all areas designated by the
General Plan as required by the City Planner.
This section changed how a Master Plan Overlay District will be
called out on the Development District (zoning) Map. The change
"MP"
is from to an asterisk " *" The text was amended to add
this designation to all areas designated by the General Plan. I
think a typographical error omitted the word "or" in the last
sentence ...by the General Plan (or) as required by the City
Planner." With the addition of the word "or" this section will
be consistent with Section 17.10.030(B)2.
Since the Lynnehaven site was already designated as a Master Plan
Overlay District, the changes to this set ;'_ :on do not affect the
Lynnehaven Master Plan.
2. Master Plan Requirements. Where rewired, by Section
17.20.030D, a conceptual Master Plan shall be
submitted for approval together with any cevelopment
application, and considered as a part of,-unless
specifLcally exempted as provided for by Section
17.06.030A. Applications for a Mastcr Plan shall be
filed with the Planning Division in s manner
p.zscribed by the City Planner. At inimum, Faster
Plans shall indicate, through graphics and text,
conceptual building locatious, conceptual subdivision
layout In ,- esidential areas, overall circulation,
Points of Ingress and egress to ' "h public and
I private - streets, parking lot layrnics, conceptual
• grading and drainage, areas to be used for landscaping
and plazas, and pedestrian circulation. Areas
intended for common
use, such as shared access,
reciproc"i parking or pedestrian plazas shall also he
identified. In addition, a statement of architectural
intent and /or conceptual elevations shall be submitted
to indicate how the architectural concepts including
style, various product types, form, bulk, height,
orientation, and materials relate to other buildings
or projects within the planning area. Further, the
Master Plan -.shall indicate implementation,
responsibiLc � ror and phasing Uf necessary
improveLent.. ' Tta conceptual Master Plan shall be
reviewod for consistency with the purpose oP this
section, Absolute Policies contained in Secti ^n
17.08.050, design guidelines of the base district, and
the criteria contained in Section 17,06.010.
4 June 1985
Lynnehaven
Master Plan Review
Page 5
This section. significantly expands and elaborates on the
submittal requirements and considerations to be included in a
Master Plan. These requirements essentially repeat the items
included within the Lynnehaven Master Plan, and seems to be based
upon many of the lessons learned from the City's first
residential Master Plan.
The Lynnehaven Master Plan anticipated the needs set out in this
sectioa. All '.opics noted above were included within the
Lyi.nehaven Master Plan. The PlannIng Commission was provided
�opies of that plan which may be reviewed to verify. I have
included a few select excerpts from that plan for. y9ur
information. The intent of this section is that the Commission
must have more than just broad general diagrams and text; the
master plan must accompany a development project application. and
detailed exhibits. The Lynnehaven Master Plandid this.
D. Authority
1. The Planning Commission shall aold a public hearing an
each application for a Master Plan. The hearing shall
be held %imultaneou3ly with the development
application fox- which the Master Plan was prepared,
and shall be set and notice given as proscribed in
Section 17.02.110 Public Hearinge� Upon *,,mplatica ar
the public hearing, the Planning - Commissio... shall
approve, conditionally approveg or deny the tiizter
Plan. If the Planning Commi-sion denies the MzsVer
Plan, their decision shall be final unless appealed to
the City Council within ten (10 calendar days Oea
Section 17.02.080).
The Planning Commission may alter the Fastpr Plan and
impose such restrictions and conditions as it may deem
necessary to ensure that the Xa3ter Plan will be in
harmony with the intent and purposes or this section
and with the adopted plans and policies of the City
and/or guidelines as approved by the Planning
Commission.
This section sets forth processing steps not ihcluded in the
prior code.
The L_vnnehaven Master Plan precisely followed the process statg�d
above. In addition, because the intent of public meetings is
citizen awareness and citizen participation, the applicant
scheduled three separate neighborhood meetings with over 650
notices sent out to inform and receive input from the
neighborhood.
4 June 1985 Lynnehaven
Master Plan Review
Page 6
E. Findings The Planning Commission shall make the same
findings required for approval of the related development
application as set forth by this. Code.
SECTION 2: The City Council finds that Development Code Amendment
85 -01 is an implementation of the General Plan goals and policies and that _r
General Plan Environmental Impact Report adequately covers any potential
significant adverse impacts. Further, the City Council rinds that no
subsequent or supplemental environmental impact report is required pursuant to
Division 13, Chapter 6, Section 21166 of the Public Resources Code..
Specifically, the City Council finds that;
A. No substantial changes are proposed in an) goals or
policies which would require mayor reviblona to the EIR.
B. t10 substantial changes have occurred with respect to the
clreumstancas under which the project is being undertaken.
C. No new information on the project has become available.
SECTION 3: A Negative Declaration is hereby adopted for this
Development r de Amendment, based upon the completion and findings of the
initial StuG_..
SECTION 4: The Mayor shall sign this Ordinance and the City Clerk
shall cause tie ssame to be published_ within fifteen (15) days after its
passage at least once in The Daily Report, a newspaper of general circulation
published in the City of Ontario, California, and circulated in the City of
Rancho Cucamonga, California.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this tst day of May, 1985.
AYES: Wright, Buquetr Mikels, Dahl, King
_NOES: .None
ABSENT: None
.-.
- Jon Mikels, Mayor
ATTEST: t
f
- Beverly A. Auihelat, City Clerk
These sections deal 'with state requirements for public findings.
The findings made by the Planning Commission in approving the
Lynnehaven toaster Plan meet the intent of these sections,
4 June 1985 Lynnehaven
Master Plan Review
Pane 7
Aft
7C. REQUEST BY DAHL. Moved by nahl,, seconded by Wight to have the Raster Pro-
posal by Bentsen referred back co the Planning Co=ission for review for all
areas not yet approved to see if it is in' conformance with the iacent of Ordi-
nanee.No. 259. Motion c�Oried.4 -0 -1 (Huquetin opposition)... -
It is always mo, a difficult to be the first of a new system.
Lynnehaven was Rancho Chcamonga's first complete Master Plan for -
a residential project. As such, the process took much longer
than other future master plans will (because of the lessons
learned here). It was an educational process for all of us.
The key intent in the Master Plan requirement ,,teems to be the
concept of smooth tram "6yions. This occurs when adjacent
development.4 and land u .— become and remain "good neighbors ".
The assurance of each , " phase . having a proper transition is called
out in the Lynnehaven Master Plan on page 35, ;,aragraphs 2 and 3,
and beginning on page 50. Each phase will b distinguished by
different product types bu'., will have coordinated open - space,
parking, circulation, and—landscape plans. Throughout the
process we have worked closely and coordinated design plans wii-th
a�`Iacent property owners and 'developers. while the process has
been long and hard for all concerned, we think the results in
this case are exemplary.
Respectfully submitted,
Donald G. Ring, Ph.D
Principal
Representing Lan entsen ItCerests
cc: Tom Benson
Wayne Johnson
C.P. Lange
CA
�m
a
THIS DENSITY TRANSITI('N SHOWN FOR PHASE ONE. IT 1S TYPICAL FOR ALL PHASES
this area to the north is zoned LM 4 to 8 Units per acre
LEMON , !iNUE
2.25 acres net / 16 Units: 7.11 units per acre- net
2.80 acres gross 1 16 Units: 5.71 units per acre gross
.enter of drive
7
2.84 acres / 40 Units: 14.0 units per acre net I
center of drive
� I
4.86 acres net ! go Units: 18.51 Units per acre net
I
center of
open space spine
5.40' acres net / 170 Units: 31,48 Units per acre net
8.22 acres gross / 170 Units: 20.68 Units per acre gross
E
L TOTAL SITE
C _ 15.35 acre
18.72 acres
Lynnhaven
Master Plan
Page 64
Vcntz � I the aspect of bigness or sameness
- I Major :pen
IZ
r r` 0 %. space spines give orientation
aid tie the phases together
The use of water provides
an element of serenity
fit• y�i .,'`:'�:.'
By continually accenting sm2
an intimate character } v ach
phase provides a forested aspect I
lJogging paths will connect and avoid roads
J
COMMUNITY CN`. RACTER !
PHASE ONE TYPICAL 23
Figure No.
Donald G. King and Associates
S-3o
1 44,
4
n�
air
Hsu r
� �
lid
-'=
81111
U' I a�,l a� i 1 yylir II !a ♦� c k J 3
s Q d
ilm
I�
a
3z
t� s
4 �i hill F,6
;� � air � , -ti• �;�' }s `' �
Z;. �` fll ���'�j f``�.�� -• 1 a ;I✓ y �`bJ� ' �� - Y •,�r, �Sj f
(. :—F_ .� ''`i `y, •tip a! 1 n tt i-
tt i I i' l �k� !♦ -1 , 0
za
Si
i ['� _ ♦� r••+�,1,/`,:* \'�1 �_,�, {♦J`''.
`, �3 _ 1h _ �f � `rYt1♦ �l /.;<�[1 �.•�t �� l. �.��
� C � 1 �i \ S! R +n\ � ) S: _:t �•J f � 1557£ �3
vri� ,J '.% , : ;;ic• ;�
'
k 1. i� f�, '''�" � `. "., �• `—� �� � • I
�11
E
4
I
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
STAFF REPORT
DATE: June 12, 1985
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Lloyd B. Hibbs, City Engineer
SUBJECT: 1985 -86 Capital Improvement Prog
•
1977
Attached for Commission review is the recommended 1985 -86 Streets, Drainage
and Beautification Improvement Budgets. Also included is the Long Range Needs
Priority for your consideration and adoption. You will note that the major
portion of the City's capital funds are dedicated to projects currently in
progress from past budgets. Fends available for programming this yefr aee as
follows:
o STREETS FUND $1,080,000
o DRAINAGE FUND $ 550,000
o BEAUTIFICATION $1,100,000.
For analysi purposes, the staff has categorized projects into three
categories:
o CAPACITY - SAFETY PROJECTS
o PAVEMENT REPLACEMENT AND RECONSTRUCTION
o TRAFFIC SIGNALS
The proposed budget includes approximately 65% for capacity safety, ?2% for
pavement replacement and reconstruction, and 13% for traffic signals.
It is difficult to compare pavement management types of projects riith those
related to public safety, but without a major commitmRnt to repair and
preventative maintenance, the City's pavement system will eventually reach a
state of deterioration that results in a loss of our greatest investment.
As a final note, I would like to point out the category of Non - Prioritized
Projects listed on pages 6 and 7. These projects have not been prioritized
because of the relationship to future development and other projects. Some of
these projects have been discussed by Commissioners and the public on past
occasions. Staff would not recommend funding commitments to any of these
projects at this time but have identified them as previously expressed or
potential future concerns.
The proposed program was reviewed and approved by the Advisory Commission at
i +e IAoy 91 141r, mna +-inn
ITEM T
PLANNING MMMISSION STAFF REPORT
1985 -86 Capital Improvement Program
June 12, 1955
Page 2
i
RECOMMENDATION
w Staff reanwnends approval of the attached budget, attached resolution and
priorities for the 1985 -86 budget year.
Respec fully submit d,
LBN:1
Attachments
t
T- a-
G
12
_1_
STREET
IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM 1984 -85
f
r
PROJECTS IN PROGRESS
*1.
Project
ArchibTAve. Reconstruction
Limits
Fourth St, to Base Line
Bud %et
x1,300,000
Fund
FAU/
SB325
*2,
Turner Ave. Widening
Feron St. to A.T. &S.F.RR
$150,000
HUD/
COBG
*3.
North Town Street Improvements-
Acacia, Belmont, Cottage
$168,000
HUD /
Phase IV
and Eighth Streets
CDBG
*4.
Archibald Ave. Sidewalks
Focthiil to Base Line
$61,000
SB821/
Sidewalk Grant
5.
Base Line Road
Hermosa to Haven
$350,000
Gas Tax/
Widening & Reconstruction
Systems
E
Traffic Signal
i 6.
Archibald Avenue
North of Base Line
$200,000
Gas Tax/
Widening & RxR
Systems
@ Southern Pacific Railroad
7.
East Avenue Reconstruction
Highland to Summit
$240,OCO
Gas Tax/
Systems
8.
Arrow Route Widening &
Grove to Archibald
$400,000
Gas Tax/
Reconstruction, Two Phases
Systems
Split At Vineyard'
9.
Ninth Street Widening &
Grove to Archibald
$400,000
vas Tax/
Reconstruction, Two Phases
Systems
Split at Vineyard
10.
Lemon Avenue Widening
Archibald to Hermosa
$300,000
Gas Tax/
Reconstruction Bridge over
Systems
Alta Loma Channel
11.
Grove Avenue Phase 1
Eighth & RxR
$250,000
Ga; Tax/
Signal, Coop with Ontario
Systems
12.
Grove Ave. Phase 2 Widening
Chaffey to Foothill
$400,000
Gas Tax/
including signal modification
Systems
@ !Ninth and Arrow Route
13.
Hillside Road Widening
Southwest corner @
$30,000
SB32
Archibald Ave.
_1_
3
-
14.
Frosect-
V�ineyar Ad venue Reconstruction
Limits
La�:ne it an to Base Line
Bud et`
00
Fund
SBM5
in conjunction w /Red Hill Park
15.
Archibald Avenue Reconstruction
and Drainage; Cooperative Agree-
- Lemon to Banyan
$300,000
Systems
ment with Lightner Development
16.
Hellman Avenue Widening -
Church to the S.P. RR
$60,000
Systems-
17.
Church Street Bridge over Deer Creek
Cooperative Agreement with Lewis
Homes
$150,000
Systems
18.
Hermosa Avenue Reconstruction -
Mignonette to 19th St.
$40,000
Systems
19..
Rama -i Avenue Reconstruction
S.P. Railroad to 300 feet
$100,000
SysteR. -r
and Drainage
S/0 Victoria
Dra', ?;e
TOTAL
$4,999,000
0
FUNDS AVAILABLE
TO BUDGET $1,060,000
*Projects funded with restricted funds
_
PROPOSED 1985 -86
STREETS AND DRAINAGE
BUDGET
r"
ROAD IMPROVEMENT BUDGET - ESTIMATED FUNDS AVAILABLE
$1,080,000
PROPOSED PROJECTS
BUDGET
1
LOCAL STREET PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE
$100,000
2
LOCAL STREET RECQNS7RUCTION
$250,000
Hampshire, Devon, Malachite, Leucite, Klusman,
Jadeite, Misc. Alley Cp. %struct -on
3
VINEYARD AVENUE - RECONSTRUCTION
$10,000
Arrow to Foothill Blvd. - Design Only .
4
TRAFFIC SIGNALS
$210,000
1 - Vineyard & Ninth
2 - Base Line & Beryl
3 - Arrow L. Hellman
5
HIGHLAW', AVE. BRIDGE AT ALTA LOMA CHANNEL STREET
CONSTRUCTION DESIGN ONLY (iwclude street reconstruction)
$30,000 I
6
ROCrES E'R AVE. @ SANTA FE RAILROAD CROSSING DESIGN &
Railroad Applications
$20,000
7
1911 ACT PROJECT DEVELOPMENT (see attached -lisp: of locatians)
$20,000,
8
DEVELOPER COOPERAYIVE PROJ.Ei.TS
$100,000
9
CIRCULATION PLANNING STUDIES
$50,000
10
HERMOSA/'TURNF.R IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
$29_ 0,00.0
Design and reserve funding
Al
TOTAL BUDGET $1,080,000
I
J � 7
t'
Y;
i
f
;r
DRAINAGE FUND PROJECTS - ESTIMATED FUNDS AVAILABLE $550,000
1 ETIWANDA'DRAINAGE SYSTEM - AREA 1 & 2 '$100,000
System Design
2 HERMOSA /TURNER iMPROVEMW PROGRAM $450,000
Design and reserve funding
TOTAL BUDGET $550,000
RECOMMENDED
CEAUTIFICATION PROGRAM 1985 -86'
PROJECTS COMMITED
1,
Misc. Archibald Avenue
$50,000
Z.
Carnelian St. - 19th St. to Banyan and Base
$250,000
Line Rd., Carnelian to City Lints
PROPOSED BUDGET - ESTIMATED FUNDS AVAILABLE
$1,100,OOG
1.
Carnelian. Street - Base line Rd. to 19th St. _
$250,000
2.
Haven Avenue Medians - Arrow Route to 19th'Str-,,t
$250,000
Coop. Project with Developers
3.
Base Line Road Median
$20,000
Haven Avenue east, Coop with
Le:l s Homes
4
-ase Line Road. Parkways
$50,000
Misc. Locations Carnelian to Haven
5.
Nineteenth St. Parkways
$100,000
Misc. Locations writ City Limits
to Haven Avenue
6.
Foothill Blvd. - Median Island
$430,000
and Corridor Design Elements
I
LONG RANGE - STREETS AND DRAINAGE
IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
CAPACITY AND SAFETY PROJECTS
PRIORITY
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
ESTIMATE
1.
HermosaiTurner Improvement Pro rarn
$3 -5 million
f is program combines the wi ening,
reconstr-ction and installation of Master
Plan Drainage facilities from Eighth Street
to the outlet of the Alta Loma Channel north
of Nineteenth Street. This program would remove
hazardous bottlenecks
from 26th St. to Santa Fe'
Railroad, at Foothill Blvd., Base Line Road, the
Southern Pacific Baldwin Park line between
Victoria and Mignonette and the railroad
crossing ut Ramona and the Southern Pacific
Railroad. The program would be phased from
Foothill Blvd, north as funds become available.
2.
Highland Avenue at the Alta.Loma Channel
$100,000
ri ge 7 ed n g.
3.
Rochester Avenue at the Santa Fe Railroad
and Eig -Street'- Widening Crossing
$200,000
and
Protection.
4.
Upper Hellman Improvement Program
$1.5 million
Connect Bery -Ke lman Storm Drarn to the
_
Cucamonga Storm Drain and widen ;Hellman
from the Southern Pacific Railroad to
Monte Vista Street.
5.
Base Line Road Widen;-ng•and Storm Drain -
Etiwanca
$2.6 million
Avenue to Interstate 15.
6.
tower Hellman Improvement Program
=
$2.5 million
Insta ation o stol' drlinfrom Cucamonga
Creek to Foothill 8Ivd. including widening
and pavement reconstruction. Improvement
of hazardous railroad crossing at Hellman
and the Santa Fe Railroad -- Phased Construction.
7.
Base Line Road Widening -
Archibald Avenue to Layton St. (candidate
$150,000
I
for 1911 Act),
!!!
8.
Arrow Route Widening and Reconstruction -
rc i a „ 6 Turner.
$500,000 -
PRIORITY
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
ESTIMATE
9.
Archibald Ave. Realignment at Highland
$210,000
Avenue 300 f eet.south.
10.
Bfr '1 Avenue Widening from Lemon Avenue with cap
$180.000
Tor-th frontage of Alta Loma Jr. High
School) - install sidewalk.
Storm Drain
$210,000
11.
Carnelian Avenue Widening and
$60000
reconstruction Calle del Prado to Vivero.
'
12.
Seventh Street Railroad spur crossing
$100,000
'
between ,enter and Haven Avenues.
13.
Church Street'- Center Avenue to
$80,000
Haven Avenue (widening).
MISCELLANEOUS PROJECTS
Candidate
1911 Act Assessment -LE s
1.
Archibald Avenue - east side
$30,000
south of Peach Tree. north of Wilson.,
2.
Ramona Avenrie - east side
$12,000
north of Mignonette,
3.
See Base Lire Road Project _(7)
4.
Beryl Avenue S/0 Heritage Park
$30,000
Non- Prioritized Projects Identified
1.
Hamilton Street Extension -
$70,000
lfermosa Ave. to Deer Canyon School
(Recommend incorporation with Hermosa/
Turner Improvement Program or Park Development).
2.
Milliken' Avenue Grade Separation -
$4.0 million
at Santa Fe ai roa ,
3•
Railroad Crossings as needed
$100,000 +ea
Milliken t t e S. Rai Tr oad
Roc a ter at the S.P. Railroad
O Avenue at the S.P. Railroad
e3 rse•-FITT. at Santa Fe Spur
Etiwan a Avenue at Santa Fe
-o-
- *
Baker Str eet at Santa Fe
Amethyst Avenue at Southern Pacific-,
���a�Cree- at S.P. Railroad
Szth Street at Spur line east of Archibald
Avenue
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
ESTIMATE
Haven Avenue Grade Separation at
$3.0 million
Santa Fe Railroad
5.
Etiwanda Avenue Curb Replacement Program
$292,000
6.
Lion Street - install curb, gutter and
$8,000
sidewalk or, frontage of Lions Park
7.
Calle Vejar - Cul -de -sac Street at
$20,000
Bear Gulch Park
8.
Konocti St. Cut -de- sac - Street
$20,000
at Bear Gulch Park
9.
Drainage Master Plan Implementation
$20,000,000
TOTAL
$27,510,600
Aft
I PRIORITY
$11,390,000
I1 CANDIDATE
1911 ACT ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS
$42,000
III NON PRIORITIZED PROJECTS
$27,510,000
$40,942,000
1
t
*,
/J
LONG RANGE
_
PAVEMENT'REPLACEMENT
AND
RECONSTRUCTION
PRIORITY
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
ESTIMATE
1.
Vineyard Avenue - Arrow to Foothill
$100,000
2.
Highland Avenue - Hermosa to Archibald
$100,000 .
3.
Ramona Avenue - Victoria to 19th St.
$80,000
(combine with 1911 Act Widening)
4.
Ramona Avenue - Stafford to Church
$25,000
5.
Banyan Avenue - Beryl to Amethyst
$95,000
6.
Haven Avenue - Highland to Wilson
$640,000
7.
Hillside Rd. - Archibald to Alta Loma Channel
$90,000
8.
Victoria St. - Ramona to Hermosa Ave.
$40,000
9.
26th St. -- Turner to Haven
$170,000
10.
Haven Avenue - 4th St. to 19th St.
$1,500,000
11.
Jersey Blvd. - Haven Ave, to End
$250,000
12.
Sapphire Street - Vicara to Almond
$30,000
13.
8th Street - Vineyard tc Archibald
$350,000
14.
8th St.,eet - Turner to Haven
$180,000'
Coordinated
with completion of development activity (listing
not prioritized).
i
1.
Beryl Avenue - Base Line to Nineteenth
$280,000
2.
Amethyst Avenue - Base Line to Hillside
$350,000'-
3.
Turner Avenue - 4th St. to 8th St.
$220,000
4.-
Baker Avenue: - 8th St. to Foothill Bjvd,
$315,000
S.
Etiwanda Avenue - 4th St. to City Limits
$1,550,000
-g-
r ;'
PROJECT DESCRIPTION ESTIMATE
6. Hermosa Avenue •- Alta Loma Basin to End $300,000
7. 4th Street A City Limit to .City Limit $1,500,000
8. Residential Street Reconstruction $1,900,000
(Total reconstruction of street 20 yrs +)
TOTAL $6,415,000
1
I
I
V
i
_y.
TRAFFIC SIGNAL PRIORITIES
i PROJECTS COMMITTED AND IN PROCESS
1. ARCHIBALD AVENUE AND FOOTHILL BLVD,
2. F.RCHIBALD AVENUE AND SIXTj; STREET
3. ARCHIBALD AVENUE AND NINETEENTH STREET
4. FOOTHILL BLVD. - HELLMAN AVENUE
5. FOOTHILL BLVD. - TURNER AVENUE
6. FOOTHILL BLVD. - VINEYARD AVENUE
RECOMMENDED SIGNA! PRIORIi.. BASED ON EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUME
($70,000+ Each)
I. Vineyard & Ninth
2. Base Line & Beryl
3. Arrow & Hellman
4, Haven & Fourth (2)
5. Base Line & Amethyst
6. 19th & Beryl (3)
7. 19th & Amethyst (3)
8. 19th & Hellman (3)
9. Carnelian & Red Hill Country Club Drive
10. Carnelian & Vineyard
11_ 19th & Jasper (3)
12. 19th & Hermosa (3)
13. 19th & Sapphire (3)
14. Archibald & 9th Street
15. Maven & Church (4)
16. Haven & Civic Center
17. Foothill & Baker
NOTES
1. Scheduled by CalTrans for FY 1986 -87.
2. Subject to participation by Ontario - schedule uncertain.
3- Subject to participation by CalTrans - presently unscheduled.
4. Need determined by development on Baker or Church. May be installed
r a.,. a.g`r� . >..1 �la.� p' i • "�. ^ire ' ar.7C _ rrwtf l t f3.' Ve".
E�l -10-
1
RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF' RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING
COMMISSION RECOt1MENDING APPROVAL OF THE 1965 -66 PROGRAM,
FOR COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENTS AND LONG RANGE MAJOR STREET
AND DRAINAGE, TRAFFIC SIGNAL AND BEAUTIFICATION
PRIORITIES
WHEREAS, on the 12th day of June, 1985, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning
Commission held a meeting to con9ider the attached propose-. Capita)
Improvements Program; and
WHEREAS, the Rar.:ho Cucamonga. Planning Commission concurs in the
I recommended program as proposed; and
WHEREAS, the proposed program conforms to the e7ements of the General
Pia..
G NON, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Rancho Cucamonga Planning
Con;rission hereby:
SECTION 1: Find that the attached Program of Community Improvements
and Long Ran— ge greet, Drainage, Beautification and Traffic Signal Priorities
are iir conformance with the General Plan of Rancho Cucamonga.
SECTION 2: Recommends approval of the attached propose.! Program to
the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga for its adoption.
SECTION 3., Further recommends that said Program, be reviewed and
updated on an annual basis as a part of the City budgetary process.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 12TH DAY OF JUNE, 1985,
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY Or RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY:
ennis L. Stout, Chairman
ATTEST:
Ric omez, Deputy Secretary
I, Rick Gomez, Deputy Secretary of „the Planning Commission of the City of
Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and
regularly introduced, passed, an adopted by the Planning Commissirj of the
City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the 'Planning Commission held
on the 12th day of June, 1985, by the following vote -to -Wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT; COMMISSIONERS:
% -13
A