The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1985/10/09 - Agenda Packet0701-02 o 10-9-85 P. C Agenda Packet o Pagel of 6 ?i J ' t s 1 i 1 • i 0 0 c ID � I tD U, cn ----- CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA K` c,�nro�,cq STAFF REPORT o � f ANh O F Z U > 1977 DATE: October 9, 1985 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Jack Lam, AICP, Community Development Director BY: Bruce Cook, Associate Planner SUBJECT: TIME EXTENSION FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 11853 - ROY E. DALY CON� S-T UCTION -K K residential subdivision for condominium p ,,poses, for 72 units on 5.71 acres of land in the Medium { Residential District (8 -14 du/ac), located on the north 11 side of 19th Street at Ramona Avenue - APN 202 - 171 -42. I. b.CKGROUND: The applicant is requesting a one year time extension for Tentative Tract 11853, as described above. The project was originally approved by the Planning Commission on October 28, 1981, and currently expires on October 28, 1985. The Planning Commission may grant up to 12 months of extension, not to exceed 5 years from the original approval. The developer is requesting the maximum time extension that may be granted fo1 >;his oap. An application for Design Review for Tentative Tract 11853, is being heard concurrently with this request for time extension. II. ANALYSIS: At the time of review for the previous timL extension, Staff identified the following inconsistencies with Development Code Standards: a) Interior site boundary dwelling unit sei:backs at 15 feet versus a 20 -foot required setback, b) no solar energy system for residential domestic wa',r needs. These items were not considered to be significant by the Planning Commission, and the Commission approved the time extension. No new inconsistencies have been found since the previous time extension for this tract. III, RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning ormissio grant the final twelve (12) month time extension for this project with the adoption of the attached Resolution. v�r ITEM A l PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Tentative Tract 11853 Roy E. Daly October 9, 198'x' Page #2 Respect ully submitted, Jack Cam Community Development Director JL:BC:cv Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Vicinity Map Exhibit "B" Approved Subdivision Map Exhibit "C" — Approved Detailed Site Plan Letter from Applicant Staff Report of September 26,_1984 Resolution of Approval - 81 -128 with Conditions Resolution approving Time Extension �11 El- .1 TENTATIVE TRACT NO 11853 SITE UTILIZATION AND RADIUS MAP 11L I L r- V NORTH CITY Or, ITEINI: TT 4lg53 RANCHO CUCAMONGA TITLE: fd(vif JL W� $POW PLANN51\U DIVISION EXHIBIT: SCALE:. R-3 Ra is'.3s 0'a-va. /0(Z.g /81 CITY 01 RANCHO CUCAIVIOi \'GA PLANNING DIVISI01N 11"EM: ? 119614 TITLE: %Wi ' FXHIBIT- �� SCALE= f� ' c--� NORTH n ff{ L� RECREATION AREA.— f POOL,WA.CAg 14 i rm*smm coos N0 14 N> a +fam-d /0�" A) CITY OF RANCHO CUCAIV[ONGA PLANNING DIVISIaN TYPICAL L'NR CONFlOt1RATIGN is wE aac.rca P�±N�(OVE? WaFE,� `N'OVENN GNAGE51 / Vs1N; AREti WH t2E J 5' a frw NUMBER NORTH ITEM: *r l' TITLE= Ran. EXHIBIT--"O" SCALE- Roy E. D aly onstruc.-Ction Corporation- 77M.177 �-RECEtVED_ : i . • CITY OF RANM"CUCAMONGq r PLANNIM.' DIVfSION i September 12, 1985 }. t,i`'AN SEP 121985 t ir�t8`9t�►tutl21t2t 4 P" i �^ i City of Rancho Cucamonga ,'.j LIPlanning Division t'P. O. Box 807 1:- l Rancho Cucamonga, California 917:30 Pttention: 'Dan Coleman ! ,t;E :I ( ' Associate Planner j fl 1 : , 1 !, { 'II' • , ..,. , 7 � l'} I i r I ' I -f ('• rI� Iat F Reference: Tract 11853 .� •Dear Mr. Coleman ,' I ! ,, I; I r , IY �, ithf3f ✓iF�tl1i'' - i ( ' r '? r 4+;•4 I, t. I �!:1 Ir+ F `` lei. 1!t ! I ` i (�l ! r��tl !r{{�t: G'' + •. ! On August 1 . , n It t D g 1985 'we sent you a request Tor a 90 -day sxtens�.oti' processing our above - described project.-'!:We ! hereby withdraw that request and request a 12 month extension per your conversation" with 1 s } l'• !j' ,tr this office this date. 'trl, Ir,ff jSf•� I(S 1t 1t F It� I'E i't' t {. : .I':� �.t lt.•l�.,!I j. , n��: }I 1 l!{S,)a liij�rili a l We hope that this extension will enable 1us to adaress and resolve .`! - };'f� I ri the problem areas outlined in your letter to 'us dated July 30, ?!1'985 _'!. ft71m saga r_ wu ect ',,Manager 1 '1 1 i•• , 1 - , � !1 tl �� t r Cl f A ll!!li.A.II�(! In kt��itl:r l,+l'• �.,! t ^c2 ?2�I Fa. :Ir > t*, w•.11;'!j +, i a 1 :. Il it •s , I t f t s sum Li l•�i� 14 4',f} � {! 41, ! l t =I A � {AS , tt.1 r�', el 1 t +t ( � l t.ta!'I tr r p'N1J 1 ttl,7a.!, s •.t ,1 t � 41 `I ` � ) � 1 f k Jr}.ii tly�{� 5 l r� E+i 1 {� }SJ fI} y }� 511 Lt F.Ii A�C¢Ty''It2ofyi•4 ,. �,�Zlr ?.i �� <i1$ Tta4�•l% }I •i• �. 0 rt '!L l ,.r �: �•., t i •. L[•,.�$il� . ,.Teti (714) 987 -8024 �asellne Rd o Sulte 208 ® Rancho Cucam j aan i •�t �j'i. lkrTS A CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: September 26, 1984 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner BY: Linda D. Daniels, Associate. Planner SUBJECT: TIME EXTENSION REQUEST FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 11853 - BARR947 IRVINE DIVIS,ON A total development of 72 c'ondomwiniums on 5.7 acres of land in the Medium Residential District (8 -14 du /ac) located on the north side of 19th Street at Ramona Avenue - APN 202 - 171 -42. I, BACKGROUND: The applicant is requesting a one -year time extension for Tentative Tract 11853, a_ described above. The project was originally approved bey the Planning Commission on October 28, 1981 and currently expires on October 28, 1984. The developer is requesting the maximum time extension that may be granted for this map. II. ANALYSIS: Since the approval of this project the Development Code has been adopted. Therefore, in order to consider a time extension the project was reviewed for conformance with the Development Code requirements. Due to the density of the project being 12.61 dulac, the project is being reviewed against the Optional Development Standards. Based upon this review, there were two areas found to be inconsistent between present Code standards and 'the approved plans. These inconsistencies are described as follows: I. Interior site boundary setback to dwelling ,unit The present Developmen+ Code requires a minimum ZO -foot setback from an interior site boundary line to a dwelling unit. The project, has 5 instances where a setback distance is 15 feet. This iv, the worse case in the project. Other setbacks proposed between a dwelling unit and an interior site boundary vary between li3 'Feet and 22 faet. These 15 -foot setback locations are identified on Exhibit "C" of the staff report. 2. Under the Optional Standards of the Development Code a solar energy system for the residential units domestic water needs i! required. Although the units would be pre - plumbed for a sola. energy system., the solar energy collectors are not requi; ^F:t with the original approval in 1981. R--7 ITEM D PLANNING COMMISSIO( TAFF REPORT Time Extension - Te— ative Tract 11853 /Barratt September 26., 1984 Page 2 f - These two inconsistencies in the past have not been considered by the Planning Commission to be significant and if corrections were made they would not alter the appearance or function of the project. The Commission does have the authority to grant a time extension under Development Code Section 17.02.020 C -7 for a map even though the project may ❑ot conform to present Code standards in total. Staff would also like to note that this particular tract and land area was not part of the 19th Street Corridor Study. III. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Division recommends that a one (1) year final extension be granted by the Planning Commission. Resp Et u) KY submitted, )W Rick /Gbm4 City Planner tjG: LD: jr Attachments: Letter from Applicant Requesting Extension Exhibit "A" - Vicinity Map Exhibit "6" - Approved Tentative Tract Map Exhibit "C'° - Detailed Site Plan Planning Commission Staff Report - October 28, 1981 Original Resolution of Approval Time Extension Resolution of Approval LIZ i E Ll iSOLUTION NO. 81 -128 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, CONDITIONALLY APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 11853 WHEREAS, Tentative Tract submitted byAmerican National Huusiing Corporation. applicant,"fort'the purpose of subdividing the real property situated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino, State of California, described as a residential development of 72 Condominium dwellings on 5.71 acres of land, locat�;J on the north side of 19th Street at Ramona Avenue -APN 202 - 171 -42 into 5 lots, regularly came before the Planning Commission for public hearing and action on October 28, 1981; and WHEREAS, the City Planner has recommended approval of the Map abject to all conditions set forth in the Engineering and Planning Oivisions reports; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has read and considerc.o 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 dope resolve as follows: SECTIGN is The Planning Commission makes the following findings in regard to Tentative Tract No. 11853 and the Map thereof: (a) The tentative tract is consistent with all applicable interim and proposed general and specific plans; (b) The design or improvements of the tentative tract is consistent with all applicable interim and iroposed general and specific plans; (c) The site is physically suitable for the type of devel- opment proposed; (d) The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage and avoidable injury to humans and wildlife or their habitat; (e) The tentative tract is not likely to cause -,pious 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. Resolution No. 81 -123 Page 2 (g) That this project will not create ad,terse impacts on the environment,and a.Negative Di-claratio.7 is isaued. SECTION 2: Tentative Tract Map No. 11853, a copy of which is attached hereto, is hereby approved subject to all of the following conditions and the attached Standard Conditions: PLANNING DIVISION 1. The desigr and material of the patio fences along 19th Stre..!t shall be restricted to a maximum height of 5 feet from the finished grade of the building pad. The design of the fences shall be subject to the approval of the Planning Division, prior to issuance of building permits. 2. The landscape treatment along 19th Street shall be improved to incorporate moundina which steps up to an low profile natural rock walls, as a means to soften the grade difference between the street and the building pad ei_vations. Details shall be in- cUded in the final landscape plans. 3. Tne Eucalyptus trees on the east property line shall be replaced 15' on center with a species of clean, fast growing trees compatible with residential land use. 4. The continuous interior Dedestrian circulation system shall be improved with additional texturized cross- walks at key locations and at the main entrance io the project. 5. The meandering sidewalk along 19th Street shall maintain a minimum distance of 2' from the curb, except at the drive approach. 6. A directory shall be placed at the entrance to the project subject to Planning Division approval. 7. All ground floor units shall have a contiguous 225 square feet of patio area. 8. The tot lot shall be contained within a defined area through design features suc;i as landscaping and earth mounds. ENGINEERING DIVISIONa 9. Revision or reconstruction of intersection drain at Ramona and 19th Street shall by done per Cal Frans standards and policies. RFsolution No. 8' 128 Page 3 l 10. Vacation of Ramona Avenue north of 19t be h reet shall accomplished prior to recordation. 11. Flood protection wall shall be installed along east property line to protect structures from overflow of Alta Loma Channel. 12. A joint use driveway agreement shall be made with adjacent property owner to the west. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 28TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 1981. PLANNING COMMISSION OF TH ITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: J� f e King, Cr a rman "°`--aly ui tine manning Commission 6 I, JACK LAM, Secretary of the Planning Commission of t Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolutioniwasodulynand regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission, held on the 28th day of October, 1981, by the following vote - to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Rempel, Sceranka, Dahl, King NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Tolstoy • N c4 r ►. � W y � XI 'I XI XI XI xI I •I � � � �� I v r -_ o o zo ..,` o�, . ..mac. a w w•- a' y y _ =+cam w Z Z:R El ~ ~ � •-• L Gu 4 VGC Uy r r �.G . .� • L�y.� . .pu 7;L N G 4L V tn n� N N 2 d O O��C pCL r r94G a Y YE ' '-blry ul^^ A ol `C ° ° A Dry. 9 9 °G{ � � �Li ^uO6 A O Oal r r Onpc ' A �u 0° C CY ^ L� Z pypi A A� c2clAn� F u i2 Diu p6 u om- qE u u.0 i ice? a Cam' u ua.,up p•• N N E Eln ' ' O ` `^ J L � Y O O u u� `a u_ � �'� � °A r r0 A V..O i iq E i i'$ V VV � . .• cr o � � °c.: � y� ° °vim ` `_N L u u u� ° �.'.. ^ ^•• e _ ° °m a ° i•1 7 . ._• o oz ' 'c.c �'. ° °'u a v ^" € €�+ r u uc`v - -s-.n i c lo '° o O Y .~. D •N A C C° i 6 6 ' o` .YO j U L C u u w> 6 6 c O Y o � =� � � J a � �G i ? � F- c i �� i° >� o omd c cd .:.i L Loo° v T To i i C y u ul c.� u uvy0i d da EA r_` , ,�`ns e ecnq u u q LL Z {.. �. O v CA a.° OOI OG u uVY C O . �•�En ° � �''� v V V C 4C°US 4 4ME du A CY A°G ` q.- O .^°io° � v uo v c f ii•a I Zo ^ �,. i M Y u o = o •t ^ t L•iJ C =.r 1 r`N 'aL Y r.n v C C OY au 'N 4 Su N V .. Oju_31YO t •aj n ;'n�� •O� t'^ cam u� _° ° ``y m c ..— u..N = - _� Few ° ±�O GCa g n cr•taa Cau pGa FuN n .^vL b L _ v° u ltd O rh.•C } �y ^gCOY �n ^ny t'c L Ly G=am ad `N w n In u` aD� c Fi ... q O•Cw0 O q L � •'LS.o N<U]`nC n_Y L.aT t �n . uL N �d Nd + A 4' _N pp y +f -€ uL ^� as "•,N rL Y;a O N • .•4C ly.•p. qu uL q ^V4� YLL E ` L = aINN7 u o uo °•' 2 Y y L ui c ` �^ CN !.V w Cdp n.°..r O. ccL� .. ; � � 2 p >T.G �m CNo C � .•. 0.� =iw � N` Vi t a.c, �. vlS� VM w ♦.NY y� N . y YdU c•L `�� N CCG° q n' L �� G° �a N cdY N Y i uECq c D LE u tea• ^L TO GL—Z LVa' mGm 1-•m 2 a <r y'•Li •°- c�T �n� 62d <iL NO u .... n aE is F° C >4C � N_uu �yo wo c ? N•.c. u T °'u a'� _ Nc .°.e�.•'•.i °vor a w Np GL ON Qp 1L x HEN aY LCE Ew -y�Nty N N 11 ! L LI Iw xa 6 ® C W 1 c �. u N E Y O _cr �•' •p-° l7 uL L ZEN a d •_^ cc dYC iiz owq -o• �' o �no�en_yL -•+uc a�,^_. O 4C L� mC� y� n ^u26L c.¢c a ubm _ �u°�y _ A Yc ud =a-t °. :�Y°a y. �o •e°. �$ p p° a O •p u u n r•n a <Y e •y d > $5 ,u= .°-' ..u.e o q ao °owe tLA Y UCQi.Y vm ^SN. a a^6 o cu N u .e _y e'• ^i-.V� c 6 ,�N y c o q y LV �' r 5 Z p u d .• • is ., E Eu y E nu CC �pCa w.' LOM�La yuL EY $ if d. DL _ Cq u`C�. Gy d ^CCU C� z'. 6.=. CU C bL NYC • ~E qy c.:bbu �C�`SUL y.s C�yLi 6�. ^.O� 6c Va .0 y _0 GL • b A NN cqp L� �L ZE V w u G c� L 6 yt6a> O G • l.0 L y 0 q NLyM Oa UN v n 0 °i,ati Im CLU O a j � L C b q u V y` m' •na v�u N `U C d V 4 as U N L' a y n q Y O •- xO j u c °° G 2 O� ''J S d..0 �' .a = p ` p _� U O i T.L. v N °a yc in qe NNU nays ^c y�T��."i ... Nc`a� '°°• =. �t.°� o� ��ipvi'•Y'^ _ L.hamu c cm.o ca oMH .m•.d LN n � O. UY i as my CC1 =. to y j oL y cC� �ym Qy r $Ya ooh Cw bqup Tm4 ra L. O F• jl•°. v,°'•w0 uoY _� - _ y l Y u °u•. vc� or. QfpE�C� `<f � ^ C <Ja� W6491u�0 E m w.y NAV N <h o KV w4oq pia y� Co6 ^MErc pp C{ O He � � w N _��GJj1 a • \' ) yO V .Yr C.Y r d �` u O O•+�p «'r u L � � Ri q� � � ^VU P ' �bf a OP eC •<v i_ ` •`.T CLN FGU...v Ce CO n.� Z L«r Q7Y 'L H •._n ya' C p C _ �•r Q � w .—.. oW �� 2L atlq qi `u �vC ^ °y .ny LaCOr IS ?7drN q0 ` N O u'aN 4N 4p6 V.q U ° ^' vgivC v _�� 402 �IJdu« Ca .°- Ct� 4.` ` a0 � �Dr F=w •qq UAF py `G — '41- L `• •3�� q c u ^ • q a p q J wt c — L N � Ouy a N «. L. U L 2 au Y .c q P' N w C C a �+ F V 4« ra ^ L 7 — N r<ib Y p' •_ < g —m d O 6 d«•� W U d O �..YU b4 �Dbb ° .G du ^q MYC —. NC •^ G' 6AC _ w Np 4«u ` io v<•.°a �b4 '� _ aw[LN�94• V y O Ly E •m�7n >p NV u•°r .ui4 Lu u� ° ?a C� cqU a.i_ i � �C P? •°,• =,.c 9�4 qu a yygy 4tL ^ .Q w C`� 119 l V t+C < .y. 4YV.YjY` `C 4 hmy,vdN N �oay = t ` :: ug� -.__ _ao V o.ry GV�1 4m !-Si 1� `� ZZ: N Ol i1 � U«� � I E •^ O C G q b q c n 0 �' 4u �.-..°.� mac- ' •�.Ea "�"d•`o iEO • v � �c ° °GO •Y°n oL < _� ^�° o aN N n a,° No Y DkT V � f -e° Lu i - uN > °e °Yy- itiz n- o�` ^�F qu •q-u °> y�.oE cv'O = o'� o=c a ±m`o'o i•4°e`i .° -'•tea >«y < q Z ¢C tip cq vd 6.v.. w-u H.f• Cti p�lyc4i?.�+ niN q FFqa. ��e> ` yld qv J �`c 59° gN'^dq q L...yY'n F�L •a — �T L i C_ pu i.� ° �i o T a u NS.nG � r 9PO Lpa � 4Y6 q ND P^ O •� rL >4 O�?o.'4pNCU� ^` Sr NC� wU ^ _ Y�'-C Y> E d G.'u U•^ °« d c2 Uc —L� =C d d.` m<ei; � H Nno oc < °N u ub ... e .LYE_ •ay o:.v c v . Tc� 9� °. •^ q °a m qa ° a i E „- bx`'"... °�` "uiN co °.�v °° -r. -',,z z.T 30 mi V d N Q «uu 4 V p„T. °uY T€ d��arEi au6 Ei %r y m t E q? I` r N6.�iu ` C� .rL qr E t =qC •F �� q cas> -Z2.2b qL- N °_ 'd.o a �• N °c G^ -lab .+ «a c pDU y�Ya yc ° Pzg °� L L.-�4 a it g `•ENT —7 F•L++� ."�q0 6NVOf 4. O`.aO B� GVbaV CG '° N by Gap ! `4q y •N � ^ Y M T « o v°rn 'c ow T " = .TE.. u IF fPj� N IW U ^ O 20 C Nva b3 e«Trn v cu Lou v .- bjy CNC N N � L•-y 4� r �. o t: _ on u,'oi Sc m v vY me 3 S C V_ u z✓ u N �. 04 - � w Vu icy ti b _.0 .y C• CV O LC Sq0 � p 9 � � u s. b� _ Nca .8 o Lb � c cnc° ��EVEVU r E 4 u u C ate. .� 2u Dr 9 L t Lu 5 ^� 6 _ _O L C d Y `O u IO �a c0 •. q� f L [-Ly` •� .� 76 N Warn U-5 .rn. •' �_ W ^ - ° a L Z4 U9 C«Oi �.O C COQ dOd _�L C •YiE CZ yd eL,r= . �� iu Y Inv.• •'°-'u C� "' •• d I rnu N I�1ij.` • � 0 Y M q v W V p L C YO •' U b 3 nE ne - a O� t I I I T « o v°rn 'c ow T " = .TE.. u IF fPj� N IW U ^ O 20 C Nva b3 e«Trn v cu Lou v .- bjy CNC N N � L•-y 4� r �. o t: _ on u,'oi Sc m v vY me d C C i° L c d V icy ti Tp L� L NN LC Sq0 -,o co s. Nca .8 o Lb � c cnc° ��EVEVU r E 4 u u C ate. .� 5 q v W V p L C YO •' U b 3 nE ne - a O� t I I I Ch T « o o Tu:c GN4p " = r «u= 2D CNC 5-20 _ N � « o t: _ on u,'oi Sc m v vY me d C C i° L c d V u LC Sq0 -,o co Nca .8 ^Ta "o Lb � c cnc° ��EVEVU r .•.° � a «drn .� 5 R N � x R • � I Ch � 272 0 � U's E 8� .� \ } f \ \ \ \ \ - = E Z ` f i / { } - !§ - _ 1 . �, z \ \ \\ . § - /EE _ \\ � 272 0 � U's E K?' L I r k RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION, APPROVING THE TIME EXTENSION FOR TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 118E3 WHEREAS, a request has been filed for a time extension for the above - described project, pursuant to Section 1.401.11.2 of Ordinance 283 of the Subdivision Ordinance. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission cond tiG ^?lly approved the above - described Tentative Tract 11853. SECTION 1: The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission has made the following findings: A. That prevailing econcmic renditions have caused a distressed irarket climate „'up development of the project. B. That current economic, marketing, and inventory conditin ^ mdKe it unreasonable to develop tae project at this time. C. That strict enforcement of the conditions of approval regarding expirations would not be consistent with the intent of the Development Code. D. That the granting of said time extension will not be detrimental to the pubic ealth, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. SECTION 2: The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission hereby grants a time extension for: Project Ap li.ant Expiration TT 11853 Roy E. Daly Construction 0 -tober 28, 1965 APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 9TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 1985. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Dennis L, Stout, Chairman ATTEST: Jack Lam, Secretary n I, Jack Lam, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City o1F Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was Huly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning. Commission of the City of Rancho Cucart,onga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 9th day of October, 1985, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: I i CITY OF MINCFIO CUCAMONGA c�C''MO,y STAYF REPORT _ z / r . O IO F Z U > DATE: October 9, 1985 1977 I TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Jack Lam, AICP, Community Development Director BY: Bruce Cook, Associate Planner SUBJECT: DESIGN REVIEW FOR TENTATIVE TRACT_ 11853 DALY CONSTRUCTION - Design review to revise the building elevations ar floor plans for Tentative Tract 11853 consisting of 72 condominium units on 5.71 acres of land in the Medium Residential District (8 -14 du /ac), located on the north side of 19th Street at Ramona Avenue APN: 202 - 171 -42. I. BACKGROUND: The subject tract was approved in 1981 as a tocal residential development. Daly Construction has taken over the project from the original applicant, Barratt, and while maintaining the same site plan is now requesting revised elevations and floor plans. II. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: li A. Action Requested: Approval of revised elevations and building floor plans for approved tentative tract. B. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North - Existing single family residence and Foothill Freeway right -of -way; Low Residential (2 -4 du /ac). I South - Single family residential; Low Residential (2 -4 du /ac). East - Church and vacant land; Medium Residential N -14 du /ac). West - Don Miguel apartment; Medium High Residential (14 -24 du /ac). C. General Plan Designations: Project; Site Medium Residential North Medinr Residential and Foothill Freeway South - Low Residential East - Medium Residential Ah West - Medium High Residential ITEM B PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Octof:,r 9, 1985 TT 11853 - Daly Construction Page 2 4M, D. Site Characteristics: The project site has two existing residences which will be removed or demolished. The property slopes uniformly from the north to the south at approximately 4 per cent, except at the north property line where the southern boundary of a steep knoll exists. The site is a former citrus grove with Eucalyptus windbreaks along the east boundary line. Approximately 91 trees of various types will be removed with 11 oak trees to be preserved. III. ANALYSIS: A. General: The site plan and building footprints remain unchanged from the original approval. This proposal is for a modification of buildirq floor plans and building elevations. Buildings are of a two -story townhouse design, and all units are two bedrooms with a _r ached f ,o -car garages. The proposed elevations a,e contemporary °, character with tapering roof lines and use of wood siding as a dominant element. Proposed roofing is a composition shingle. B. Design Review Committee: The committee granted architecctural Afilk approval with conditions as follows: 1. Upgraded roof material, such as flat tile cr thick butt hexagon composition or wood shingles. 2. Three exterior color schemes shall be provided. Staff notes that the Design Review Committee indicated thick butt architectural style shingles were compatible with the wood exterior. However, the Commission has since established a consistent policy to require upgraded roof materials, such as Spanish tile, concrete flat tile, or heavy shake, but not including composition shingles. IV. RECOMMENDATION: It Is recommended that the Planning Commission consider al' material and elements of this project. If the Commission cc,ncurs with the Design Review Committee then approval of the attached Resolution %uuld be in order. Respe t ully submitted, JACK LAM, AICP Community Development Director Is JL ;BC:das 3-11-2 PLAK IING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT October 9, 1985 TT 11853 - Daly Construction Page 3 E Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Vicinity Map Exhibit 118" - Approved Subdivision Map Exhibit "C" - Approved Detailed Site Plan Exhibit "D" - Floor Plans - Original Exhibit "E" - Elevations - Original Exhibit "F" - Floor Plans - Revised Exhibit "G" - Elevations - Revised Original Resolution of Approval #81 -128 with Conditions New Resolution of Approval with Conditions v -3 { TENTATIVE TRACT NO 11553 SITE UTILIZATION AND TRA ?IUS MAP L T7 I 'W'or'e ^_ ,q••� _ { min F j ..�,- y.u•rNpy osr� — � A I�{ •_ �e -i -- � t.'- y L•__ I .. _: j� FORTH CITY or ITEM: fr 1IT53 RANCHO CUCATTVIONL Gf TITLE: Vi i'i PLANNI \U DIVIS10,N s a E.YHIBIT- —A ` SCALE- '" I C', IC lu -C R-us"33 C--� 4c NORT,-i CITY Or, I T E IN 1: RANCHO CUCAMONGA TITLE: SdlAhifti "F&C PLANNING DIVISION EXHIBIT- -- 04 oov j-- —SCALE----� �r RECREATION AREA "3" » •, r _ .. 1'OOI.SGA.C+9ANA. t •iqA ' O`5„Y , t •�rti'ew. Y i �- ►. ox cur cd 1lY0E WAUfWAY- Tl'VICA� `�� S 1 __ AREA `vHElt(: 15' ap,Pzars NUMBER ? �•. � � _ R NUMBER IIIEL . - I NORTH CITY Or ITENI- TT 4185 RANCHO CUCAI/IOIxGA TITLE: P} , PLANNING DIVISICkN EXHIBIT: "r�� SC►LE-.- �- Ll I 0 0 i-Y Y Y- �.' mill �O K- .i Siy �� h • 121 � . Y Q nii t \ c0 Crry Or, ® -RANCHO CUCAI,10INGA PLANNING DIVISION ITEA I: TITLE�i --��. EXHIBIT- u �' SCALE= 3_% CIS Or. RANCHO CUC AI-vlo TGA PLANNi,NG DivisloN ITEM: - �j TITLE: - f- j.er.4�le;i�s_!` �.�.V+r� � F- XfiIB1T =" °1 SCALE- t'�, jo 11 CITY or, RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING DIVISIUN NOW TITLE E.Xlil 3IT " b 0° SCALE. 0-1-21 E r� RESOLUTION 140. 81 -128 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, CONDITIONALLY APPROVING TENTATIVE T0CT MAP NO. 11853 WHEREAS, Tentative Tract Map No. 11853, hereinafter "Map" submitted by American National Housing Corporation, applicant, for the purpose of subdividing the real property situated in the City cf Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino, State of California, described as a residential development of 72 Condominium dwellings on 5,71 acres of land, located on the north side of 19th Street at Ramona Avenue -APN 202 - 171 -42 into 5 lots, regularly came before the Planning Commission for public Nearing and action on October 28, 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. NOVI, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does resolve as follows: SECTION 1: The Planning Commission makes the following findings in regard to Tentative Tract No. 11853 and the Map thereof: (a) the tentative tract is consistent with all applicable interim and proposed general and specific plans; _ (b) The design or improvements of the tentative tract is consistent with all applicable interim and proposed general and specific plans; (c) The site is physically suitable for the type of devel- opment proposed; (d) The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage and avoidable injury to humans and wildlife or their habitat; (e) The tentative tract is not likely to cause serious Public health problems; (f) The design of the tentative tract will not conflict with any easement acquired by the public at large, now of record, for access through or use of the property within the proposed subdivision. • ��/3 Resolution No. 81 -123 Page 2 (" (g) That this project will not create adverse impacts on the AQX environment and a Negative Declaration is issued. IV I SECTION 2: Tentative Tract Map No. 11853, a copy of which is attached hereto,, is hereby approved subject to all of the following conditions and the attached Standard Conditions: PLANNING DIVISION 1. The design and material of the patio fences along 19th Street shall be restricted to a maximum height of 5 feet from the finished grade of the building pad. The design of the fences'shall be subject to the approval of the Planning Division, prior to issuance of building permits. 2. The landscape treatment along 19th Street shall be improved to incorporate mounding which steps up to an low profile natural rock walls, as a me ,7ns to soften the nrade difference between the street and the building pad elevations. Details shall be in- cluded in the final landscape plans. 3. The Eucalyptus trees on the east property line shall be replaced 15' on center with a species of clean, fast growing trees compatible with residential land use. 4. The continuous interior pedestrian circulation system shall be improved with additional texturized cross- walks at key locations and at the main entrance to the ,project. 5. The meandering sidewalk along 19th Street shall maintain a minimum distance of 2' from the curb, except at the drive approach. 6. A directory shall be placed at the entrance to the project subject to Planning Division approval. 7. All ground floor units shall have a contiguous 2G5 square feet of patio area. 8. The tot lot shall be contained within a defined area through design features such as landscaping and earth .mounds. ENGINEERING DIVISION 9. Revision or reconstruction of intersection drain at Ramona and 19th Street shall be done per Cal Trans standards and policies. Resolution No, 8} 128 Page 3 ` l 10. Vacation of- Ramona Avenue north of 19th Street shall be accomplished prior to recordation. 11- Flood protection wall shall be installed alo,.g east property line to protect structures from ovzrflow of Alta Loma Charael. 12. A joint use driveway agreement shall oe madn with adjacent property owner to the west. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 28TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 1981. PLANNING COMMISSION OF TH ITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: J f e King, Cha rmap ssion I, JACK LAM, Secretary of the Planning Coma-I ssi0n 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 o:' "ancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 28th day of October, 1981, by the following vote- to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Rempel, Sceranka, Dahl, Kirq NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: T(llstoy a � ° d L Y • F O Cu u y O° q L V - �. *i «.: � V M c:=° -' c c _$ Vic•_ 2 „ «m C 9H �� a 1a T^ Is Ic M C ^-° O. GL a �. y L .. 4� p O✓e_ ao °ry ` q ...r •�^ L 70 O - [°i d nC L � « GGA✓ D O u q rye T6 �c d .°. fir` WWx � C ... �°+ .. d •LO K r j c 9 O a ...-. C •n y. C y b G r wC YO 4 oYCw °° C EOL i dtLV ° "1' Ou3 N+dl o. s d O .n` > °p WQ i'c. A° CD b � Yo .cu ca na ,ai d.. «a co 1. cn "O NC o �adiN W N ° o 'C: Ip '^ o. w° W+ �^ «o OIE L« v _« � «L _Cuu° �.'•';C C.a 9Y°. •qt YV�pp•� —h ^_ n� uLu Cpd N n O q ^ U o� 9 2 y ad« C g 0 Y « M < u~ O d « N n n E d C C V u u Ley g6a2 9t °Or• q c}��u u° C q O u D OHO ^O ^ N GN o M L W L ]C F S -° Wes. 5.5.3 p« 2 dQ -Z,;; ce A L H.Q N sL v OEV I c _ Y c° VLC c =vow L ti c C w a_�ccj :y � °° v EG •+ O YO ^ o c• L b p q , _ N 4, :5 .O..h .°.yV E o� aq tlo x y s 4Y b ' 0 w =q L N r b N ��Ixl 0 E • F O Cu = O° q L _ n 2 „ «m C 9H �� a 1a T^ •Y �n A u 1Y M C ^-° �u� Gv^ d- lv • ' • ^ � fir` WWx � C ... �°+ .. d •LO K r j c 9 O a ...-. C •n y. C b G r wC YO 4 Z. i ° "1' aA `° ' °> `v ava•o i'c. A° CD b � Yo .cu ca na ,ai d.. «a co 1. cn "O y os W N ° o 'C: Ip � S: �° �� •uG'� 9NN �� „n Qy .�° '• v €Er a: 1! A •y re Y aC ^ m 'ala s.°. u�> V OI ECE L a p� yd 2 y u M 7 id G Ln cc H m uom uOp" -Z,;; A= tL o O 41 r• '- Ql O Q O A • t•J ma v ^oe > q -q a� . ' ° Z6 ° a q Q . s 2 o y W '- ' =O J « u cc 2 N ..i 4J Q - « a°pa + uE o+ ? d L Z « .;Ca� L0 . 6 aU L aO o � p c y n d d 0 t°c a « aYGi �c^ d G 72A �_ a dL o = `°C 0 q 7 C q A g LLI sz O ed r pN C Cc.m pN 1 � a ^n Y p c. LECJ d€> � A 9onGq 0« 0 �•_u Cj s C �� . � n I4 ^=�«L ..i ^ � + te°NNagy^ ° a y u y N + a=^u � .E n �COO «N q � M ° a rq • y v . ZF � o9T nG ' 4�� mNn ° au db„ ._ L u ti °« °d m au b•- ey` 'i `Oa > ^L E r e•v �d' ni.... {•- Z +.cp. c r. it .^>° pnl° H oA ad �pu itl �.qL q> > « HL ...:10 .°+e: =iw +.^ c° n« qw° =c ^u _c,..q 'wai- 5. N' v« ��`• ' V v .u. O i. Z s ^ c ni 1'•C F. >N. ` a o - a>T^ GO w r .., C r K`L ►d. .s. ` o G O 6Y « N •� X� C I 411 b ^ W 2CI X 01 •Ai • .N" w /i�C XI I �I E - +... L � b" is s• ^ N lu o � ' r « •�'`�'.°. - u .i �i c�N r �^ n o $ C�a °c a t'L'c:. c:�"o 2 c r '_' �, �O 2 -,° _a o N i •LO- Lo v° (�(r s u c e �..•'- ° q G G P v NT�OV Ey6 y r y u n ^ C16 L j O b i ° •� V� C +L u L.•+ L. U ZZ, O• ✓ L ..IN q °. O u q 1- E G 0 •` ° U O W N N 3 Y b o b L = S O C «° MO6 ^ CN VV� A s IF 92 >G n N O °� ^6� LLL M •.. Y .4>O•^a E A E0 4 CO O d u u e u D L T O N C b L li.2N Q Nuw 22a Gnm° 1=•q C > O d O M 6 x rd °� C•C-a- U�Nu A •fir 6 O Ir... I u 1� a O Y N O ._ .- G +^ u •_ j�� t°J 2.°_ 1'a V 6 O W c N } -.: Y EC C L• N= iu �' L O 6 O d C G OR. 4_ u L� b 0 �L rN°aO V _ ^ u OO.a.'OY O.UO -:;' d V O ALL �m MLN O.•�al+q q L '.`` '1i Lc C S� «° duy16 qF C¢ � u L pM�z^ Y 4 C t a 0� ° CL •- O •- S P L unOU >6i q 2 1^i1 + Y L L U 1` N d 01 �iO 13 - v T c N N Ev Q C C C ` ^ L 1•f Y Q L ^ 4i ^ C 6. b YL...C. ` U C d Ud y.•a. U'p� Ny O. •°i �•y i> fi�L) Lyi L">< 'agebltilU1 G� `�« �b Lei rFF y•O-° O C u ` � a .DO C i u� u ^ d .ONy N. � l`Y O O N d N r •.1M E° TL,^a N. j y 0^ G C U«L L. ,O E 9 U ? 6 CV�E pOYV '°•, LOLb +N•O C «�OVOd u- A.a ON (, C � � d W `0 u EN °n N6•.. �� ° C + �ON6 R? V' C•=.1 USG YuL vC•N ` CCU Y.p .2 % -:5 C °L •^ Y d L yd �� C U4 u+ Q� 2 +°•.r �'J1 0�! • N O uV �: •N...AOOC u C« RO _ O u -- a c u cc•o `` d LNy �c�N ov z dN ` !i of � C •-C .CI L 09 Et y.C-. {r Y ° C du m no O �� L E•'naL, bC � C �+ O.d •L �� 1 N 6 n aN > a 1Ff1{ O � I u° C Z. d ^ N y v Ez d a O O °' Y •� 5 ub.,°. •"� u > raV T ° UC•- Nr °� •Y i 2 O O. N $ � 01 t°i+.t+ ` °dam �6 Y N.. �c .Liu _ 0101 _ v + C- N �2q9 •L+ U Eny _ .- n � � N Vq � �n T 'a aL 2 {. u � u � ^ W11•+ °LL ^ Z 4 i 8 1L. j1r° N �••C•N•- !s X yL EA `u °Y.,.O� no • LoL. 01.. •.O ... �yy iwol 6a .�yq.- 6o16 �nr c0>1 ^fF• 1^k•..o< ccoc wr.� all c44 .. ...tip o •i 0 SAC y _ °n c.' .' c v �^. � G• u c ii Fda ��.._ � �� O r• o u� t.e ^ =.° I I y¢ ._. y y E =� �^ < � � �'.1 i _ i I' c TF Ur C 9.0 C u E a°i� T � O c .! G,•^ C C � b 4 C. q �C C7• C T O i "^ ` �� L va rs _Nr �•..'au` «•n yFie'an `Itc -� u p Yo q« '° c O'i 1cU u94 c uC H a �°u° ^GG 0. o0E a W q G °t C L N ti qo.q. ac a ^u elua .°. ..•y oc+ `v nL ocCa a °� ��•, K `on W N `aN � N ' u � N M v 'v' ti a.m `� °v '^ uc � °� i Ni.a Md.. °._ 'u o`v ' ^" � e,e ° Y000 ° °r•c O A Y a0 bu '_ � '��. •°.� I QGG L 0.gr Ud 6 G ^y � ` uC° -_Pau Lo Y v u �••Y�.F a L-E� dX� aH � G W �..� �N QIcCC ^ 2 OY o} _m N.cd --• Hv} da u °N nN.°. qN. eNO••u `w '° ad an =�.'_ •yv q +- vv "- zc o2q cm° °`.'� °u .°.« ,o•u- a'•>^Y a•'-° .<a n„°,;,?� �' bN E aam emu. L<t'•L ujCP Or La 9y 0. u ?O H�Gup COb g A NON q9 4y 6C.� AuA. .O .ue p.VO W � CN.. OU ;q ^= a NaL GNpU Cy Gu �..,y OicG d .^ q^ CC CL'i� L NO >•.••b uF 904 'rUN 7« � 7 6U9 r =.CYV P�� oa r-N ^. Lp` E ��° �n ^NN O1 r'd o2p j n�P.V ^C h N rM.i� u•Tf °.. 4_4M �7 ^.4 qT" O� O 6n •'i.'� N NOu oa dr.. G.YL O✓Aw6 Wm.i _ Y C Q� gym. Ln LI HL >o d 60�.0 CV1 QA M•ILTN QN OC.tn� < Ni i. >' uVN o N 9 a• U C ai C' cc `e i N W ^ L- G •Ne c O ._. ry11 f.� 1 C Y (]. N dgmk P'1 •.. u ^LO FOB 9 • Zp C C p�.0 u r•=N raC� n.••u E L L��.t E O 7e QC YGyt O u£W Oq Ga b9 07 GO ^may �� u�u .G` Gina p..� u' LYL. ^M �2i EFN •.aq r ^40u �..� €W u Luo `C •. �. r. un.�4 u �� mSt L� f: i• +1.� +u_uY BBG >.- CLH�i e" = > °�rY r. cu uud + q b u F v��t r g y.G L U E g N u .G £� SF NOS guN u � t G a G V 09 G G 96 �^ vC .•. quOr°...NidHn u 4-3 y v� �� u dq qC�W tT L� YC L. r.j� V O.••. •� •4o =nE Na•.' >42uN OIOC Y�qH Q >i. j �-c° wq'c a 6uu ��.,. rV Y G .w y L 'G •oa 01 • • a+Vr U u� Hr.." d L...r�,n FGuC VCNid 4 °yY � i V �^ ... Y r. ` YC yd U .E � �. f• 9' VO 4� La FaNpyr9y^ ° ^9n.;�a °. ^« nc acu!• Lya �"d Qco.°. r 4e ^vaq NN° Y� tip Ui O uG« •� -.an<r a W CS « « � °a f��la cN �� ^� @� aH G•r CL G....0 Yr°J�V C�LU �q ^� C LY. >. 2O 6 ^r. u�.'3 vL'E� -e�N �oo� .�, .•�q '^ cn c ?_ ."ao Cd`�q> uoTa nFH Gb `�' c•N -.cu •9r q ya Ta u s q ...` cN ou c o o c «4anLL =_. O`ouu yv �a Inc~ i_q `oFoya ^EEAa 9` a -G^avo� d., �1i Lea �� O V` NTi Y °>dN LON D CCU myui p, » .GO IIC _qr _N �u V6 °q .^.. c•fa 3>�t_V N' VON �r °u O d•. - «bE U ?'� ._H ~mod• �p N4 .... •^ H L9�Lt +_ O 4L N� >� Ogat CH W 4�4C'b r ^HU 6u�i MUi� " d `m HUL u HpNL6 CN _ u ^E Luq p .qn.. g i �4 N� a 7� ^u�9 k: 'o- L °,a�- L• Oyu tiLgFJ L.GSU sY r Oe GamFdN tom« U � o b H t OL «^ - °M"'^. 4d G «. EHTin ° r m �.. >N E > Y�i.. 0. L ^ U L O 0.0H 2>�.�.. .tiLL Y< N o^ N j J L ° O G E n O O E Y �'b.°dC� p.r. 4 V I V •� f1 QI H��j t"•HUM S. of L =',Y .°. =Yi ^� bt V .•++� °a .�. L dE C U C N MI O 1 • Q 2= y 0. V O O. U1• . O w N N i � � i 1- I � �� \ \\ x• . \ l 1 IQ i o ? ° 5 Ln M E«, v L A u n u ° ° •� L V C « � om � v a �woa p 9 L a ' 2G UV G� <O a F•O � N Y • vv Y Ao S� C a b v V T a L y COL qt E S `c d Li a o N � b N °•a E i Y y uAN Cr. vu Db E Y N nj E 0 n r i. /9 v a •Lf O _ O � U C•^ «7 `o a, 33 �o b 113 o"i n°co 6E C L ° T i C 0 t o 11-01 , q d V C n n Fa a 2 <.5 N wj N t -�L V o « « v 11,c a a Y SOD M S Ou v cc iu Th 'J c E.L Loa �' ow c `v A G N u V A L i cAY 11 y:. �y�`�• Aa Ea SA T CV O .-. L =u ... Y qcu °. AN St;� GA d0 6u CQ W t NAu vv Y Ao S� C a b v V T a L y COL qt E S `c d Li a o N � b N °•a E i Y y uAN Cr. vu Db E Y N nj E 0 n r i. /9 v a •Lf O _ O � U C•^ «7 `o a, 33 �o b 113 o"i n°co 6E C L ° T i C 0 t o 11-01 , q d V C n n Fa a 2 <.5 N wj N t -�L Rt �T o v cc iu Th a« eO c, E.L Loa �' ow c `v A G N u V A L i .E '-' •o v a'•iu - =u ... Y O4 NAu U 2 G G 4 L u cb O.'i A_ -0,on ca A `L a o Y o on Loa ` o'O F�461 c a L.o � Y CF pp ' C •• Oq°i E w N OL C « rnu L' AUC b T yr 0 � V 11 ncd 30 q �• w� ° Ao°iE aou � u «L v � vv Y Ao S� C a b v V T a L y COL qt E S `c d Li a o N � b N °•a E i Y y uAN Cr. vu Db E Y N nj E 0 n r i. /9 v a •Lf O _ O � U C•^ «7 `o a, 33 �o b 113 o"i n°co 6E C L ° T i C 0 t o 11-01 , q d V C n n Fa a 2 <.5 N wj N t -�L Rt �T iu sci a« eO c, E.L Loa CO b�c.` SG A Y YE A G N u ... Y .t+ud NAu �dn aL aci4q d��V cb O.'i at `^GC aCuY «9OY E w N OL C « rnu L' AUC b T yr 0 � V �. 30 q �« a v u q W � N 5i b b p' u O. J V ="4 C Z O d r lo X Ygc•q'u^ u�t a YW C^ 6 2 `^ O �.� LLr 6 N W ` Nr. ua N w p y� 'ac � N O O•r 4ti E n L.r. ♦'.aC N W Y 6M N b •� 0 O I 1 pl 0 0 Ln 11 ``U O tl �t N t a o y,o 'I°'luA •-n v ° c 'N'a � ° �4yy �fi Sc �u� r-� o� Cua uCa 1 uE,,.. �� N 2 waI OOiu � dG N uo .i4 C� °>` O. o O7u _ L Non do ° u o`•`. ° uoE u'u °e�v'Oio e �a� 474NY Cv? E� uu QO UG 6y `c ��a L' upOC 3l DG CnL - d � I I I o� tJay O GN GC 9.uC .°.c CO Z N 0 Ln 11 KI RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING DESIGN REVIEW FOR TRACT NO. 11853 LOCATED ON THE N/S OF 19TH STREET AT RAMONA IN THE MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT WHEREAS, on the 13th day of March, 1985, a complete application was filed by Daly Construction for review of the abcve- described project; and WHEREAS, on the 9th day of October, 1985, th-: Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission held a meeting to consider the above- dtsrrI bed 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 ,onsistent with the objectives of the General Plan; erd 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 ^rovisions 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 11853 is approved subject to the following conditions: 1. Slate colored flat concrete tile shall be the required roofing material for all building elevations. 2. Variation to the exterior colors shall be provided to reduce the monotony of a single color scheme. A minimum of three variable exterior color schemes shall be provided. 3. A final detailed acoustical analysis shall be submitted with the construction drawings to indicate mitigation measures necessary to achieve interior noise levels of 45 CNEL and 65 CNEL for exterior areas including balconies. All construction PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION October 9, 1985 TT11853 Daly Construction Page 2 documents sh..11 be consistent with the acoustical recommendations prior to issuance of permits. The final design and construction details including conf ;guration and use of materials shall b indicated in the working drawings subject to the' review and approval by the Planning Division prior to issuance of permits. 4. All pertinent conditions of approval for Tentative Tract 11853, as contained in Resolution 81 -128, shall be adhered to. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 9TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 1985. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCP140NGA BY: Dennis L. Stout, Chairman ATTEST Jack Lam, Secretary 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 9th day of October, 1985, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: I �', F ' U Ll 11 11 CITY OF RMMO CUCATAONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: October 9, 1925 T0: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Jack Lam, AICP, Commus.ity Development. Director BY: Howard Fields, Assistant Planner G�`o cnn�o�c? i x 1 r O O E � Z v> 1977 SUBJECT: TIM! EXTENSION FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 12256 - BIOCAL - The develnomant of twenty condominium units on 2. acres of land in the Medium Residential District (8 -14 dwelling units per acre) located at the northwest corner of Archibald Avenue and Kante Vista Street. APN 202-131 - 27,61=G I. BACKGROUND: The Applicant is requesting a one -year time extension for Tentative Tract 12256. The project ::as originally approved by the Planning Commision on November 10, 1982. On November 14, 1984, the Planning Commission granted the Applicant's first time extension for one -year which will expire on November 14, 1985. The maximum time extension available for this project is 24 months (a total of 5 years from the original approval date). II. ANALYSIS: During the granting of the first time extension by the Commission, Staff identified one area of Mconsistency with the adopted Development Code involving ti;e minimum garage setback from a private driveway of 5', which requires an automatic garage door opener. The Developer will provide all units with automatic garage door openers. The Commission considered this item resolved and approved the first time extension. No new inconsistencies have been identified since the last time extension approval. III. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: The approved Tentative Tract Map 12256 is in compliance wit t e City's General Plan, Development Code and Standards /Regulations. The extension of this tentative map will not cause inconsistencies with ordinances, codes and policies or be detrimental to the public heal +hy, safety and welfare. The extension is within the time limits as prescribed by State law. ITEM' C PLANN `, COMMISISON STAFF REPORT October 9, 1985 TT 12256 BIDCAL Page 2 1 IV. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Plann t;g Commission grant a two year time extension for this project through adoption of the attached Resolution. Respectfully lubmitted, JACK LAM, AIe Community Development Director JL:HF:das I Attachments: Letter from Applicant - September 4, 19855 I Planning Commission Report and Minutes - November 10, 1952 Exhibit "A" - Location Map Exhibit "B" - Natural Featurei Map Exhibit "'C'' - Trac. Map 12 5' Exhibit "D" - Detailed Site ',an Exhibit "F." - Landscape Plan Exhibit "F" - Grading Plan Exhibit "G" - Elevations -- kiibit "H" - Floor F'-.Ins ariginal Resolution of Approval with Conditions Time Extension Resolution of Approval September 4, 1985 City of Rancho Cucamonga 9320 Baseline Road, Suite C P. O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 SUBJECT: TIME EXTENSION FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 12256 I is Gentlemen: Please consider this Bidcal Corporation's formal request to extend the time on TT 12256. The previously approved tentative map is :n compliance with the General Plan. The extension will not cause any inconsistencies with the current General Plan or the time limAs prescribed by State law and local ordinance. As soon as final corrections are made, and some ',oan and bond situations are remedied, permits will be issued and building commenced. Sincerely, �--' Kenneth J. More President, Bidcal Corporation C CITY OF R.A.NCHO Ci QCAb.OJ -qGA STAFF REPORT DATE: November 10, 1982 TO: Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner BY: Curt Johnston, Assistant Planner SUB4_CT: ENVIRONMENT t. ASSESSMENT AND TE14TATIVE TRACT 12256 - BIDCAL - The development of 25 condominium units on 2.10 acres of land in the R-1 zone (R -3 pending) located at the northwest corner of Archibald Avenue and Monte Vista Street - APH 2C2- 131 -27, 61 and 62. Related File: Zone Change 83 -03 PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: This project consists of 25 condominium units on 2.10 ecres of land located at the northwest corner of Archibald Avenue and Monte Alista Street. A change of zone (ZC 82 -03) from R -1 to R -3 is pending and is also being considered on this agenda. Currently two houses and several other structures are located on the site. A drainage ditch cuts diagonally across the site from the r•.orth- west to the southeast. Numerous trees and shrubs exist.on the property as shown on Exhibit "B'. Contours on the site indicate a slope of approximately 3 percent running northwest to southeast. A block wall surrounds the property on the north, south, and west property lines. Zoning on the subject property currently is R -1 and R -3 as shown on Exhibit "A ". Land surrounding the project site is zoned R -3. The General Plan indicates that the project site is located along the dividing line between two land use designations; Low Medium density (4 -8 du's /ac) to the north, and Medium density (4 -14 du's /acre) to the south. Bordering the project site to the north and west is a mobile home park. A mix of older single family and multi-family units exist on the small residential lots south of the project. On the east side of Archibald, across from the site, is an approved multi- family project. C_ - 1.j ITEM G Tentative Tract 12256 /Bidcal ?lanning: Commission Agenda November 10, 1982- Page 2 As shown on Exhibits "C" through 'IF", 'the oroject consists of eight buildings with a total of 25 dwelling units. The proposed density is 11.90 units per acre. Each unit is a two -story townhouse with an attached two car garage (Exhibit "G"). Three floor plans are provided ranging in size from 1,015 to 1,207 square feet %'xhibit "H "). Vehicular circulation into the project is provided by a single driveway closely aligned with the Victoria Street right -of -way. Emergency secondary access will be provided from Monte Vista Street. In addition, the Applicant is responsible for a bicycle lane on the west side of Archibald. ANALYSIS: The project has been reviewed by the Design Review, Growth Management, and Grading Committees. Together with the recommended Coi;4'tions of Approval, the project is consistent with current resi- dential standards of the City. Pearly half of the site is devoted to public or private open space, including a large play area in the center of the project and private patios for each unit enclosed by a 4 -foot high wall. Existing vege- tation including maturF trees and shrubs along the west property line will be preserved to the extent possible. A recommended Condition of Approval requires the submittal of a detailed Sian outlining exactly what trees and /or shrubs are to be saved. With development of the project, the Applicant will be required to construct storm drains from the northerly boundary of the project to the railroad tracks approximately 1000 feet south of the project site. The cost of construction for the storm drain will be in lieu of drain- age fee. A reimbursement agreement will be prepared for the dollar amount of construction which exceeds the storm drain fee. On -site improvements include a 20 -foot drainage easement with an underground storm drain to replace the drainage ditch which exists on the property. DESIGN REVIEW: The Design Review'Committee recommended approval of the project with conditions tha the rear elevations of units facing Archibald Avenue be upgraded with add;tional trim. Colored renderings of the elevations will be available for your review at the Planning Commission meeting. Another condition recommended by the Design Review Committee, as indicated on the Resolution of Approval, requires that the concrete emergency access lane along the west property line be replaced by compacted granite with a turf overlay. C-S Tentative Tract 12256 /Bidcal Planning Commission Agenda November 10, 1982 Page 3 l ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: Part I of the Initial Study, as completed by the Applicant, is provided for your review and consideration. Staff has completed Part II of the Environmental Assessment and found no adverse impacts on the environment as a result of this project. If the Commission concurs with such findings, issuance of a Negative Declaration would be in order. FACTS FOR FINDING: This project, together with Conditions of Approval, is in accordance with the '^aneral Plan, Zoning Ordinance, Growth Manage- ment Ordinance and SubdiviiA on Ordinance of the City. In addition, the use together with the recommended Conditions of Approval will not 6e detrimental to the public health, safety, or general welfare of the public or private properties in the immediate vicinity. CORRESPONDENCE: A notice of public hearing was published in The Daily Report newspaper and public ;hearing notices were sent' to property owners within 300 feet of the project site. To dAte., no correspondence has been ARt received either for or against this project. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission conduct a public hearing to consider all input and elements of this project. If after such consideration the Commission concurs with the findings and Conditions of Approval, adop',ion of the attached. Resolution and issuance of a Negative Uetlarifti n would he appropriate. Resdegtfullyjubmitted, C1l OME ty Planner G:CJ:jr i Attachments: - Exhibit "A" - Location Map Exhibit "B" - Natural Features Map Exhibit "C" - Tract Map 12256 Exhibits "D" - Detailed Site Plan Exhibit "E" - Landscape Plan Exhibit 'T' - Grading Plan Exhibit "G" - Elevations (2 Sheets) Exhibit "H" - Floor Plans Initial Study, Part I Resolution of Approval with Conditions , Motion: Mov by Rempel, seconded by Mc Niel, carried, to adopt Resolution No. 82 -104, approvin the master plan for the 160 acres between Archibald, Hellman, 6th Street d 4th Street. Commissioner Stout voted no ause of his concerns relative to traffic. 9:07 p.m. The Planning Commission recessed. 9 :15 p.m. The Planning Commission reconvened. F. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND ZONE CHANGE 82 -03 - BIDCAL - A change of zone from R -1 (Single Family Residential) to R -3 (Multiple Family Residential) for 2.02 acres of land located on the west side of Archibald Avenue, north of Monte Vista Street - APN 202- 131 -61 and 62. G. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 12256 - BIDCAL - The development of 25 condominium units on 2.10 acres of land in the R -1 zone (R -3 pending) located at the northwest corner of Archibald Avenue and Monte Vista Street- APN 202 - 131 -27, 61 & 62. Senior Planner, Michael Vairin, reviewed the staff report. Chairman King opened the public hearing. Mr. Gene Karin, 20814 Roadside Drive, Agoura, representing the applicant, stated that all conditions are acceptable. There being no further comments, the public hearing was closed. Chairman King stated that some time ago the Planning Commission had more or less decided that tot lots should be included in developments such as this and asked if a tot lot has been provided for this project. Mr. Vairin replied that it has been and is shown on Exhibit "D ". Commissioner Stout stated that there are no sidewalks from the peal in the tot lot area and wondered if a meandering sidewalk shc,,ld be put in in that area. Mr. Johnston, Assistant Planner, replied that conditions 7 and 8 require sidewalks. Mr. Hopson stated that the CC&R's should set out that there will be no permanent structures on the turf block so that at some future time emergency access will not be obstructed. Planning Commission Minutes -17- November '10, 1982 W Motion: Moved by Barker, seconded by Stout, carried unanimously, to adopt Resolution No. 82 -05 approving =ne change 82 -03 and recom-anding such to the City Council. Motion: Moved by Hempel, seconded by Mc Niel, carried unanimously, to adopt Resolution No. 82 -106 approving Tentative Tract 12256 with the addcd condition that the turf block access remaLn unobstructed and that ;his be viown in the CC &R's. H. VIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 82 -20 - SHARMA - The development of a 3,691 square foot elementary school on 3/4 aures�;:a the zone, located at 9113 Foothill Boulevard - APN 208- 241 -09, Associate Pla er, fan Coleman, reviewed the staff report. Chairman King ask where the temporary trailers are and whether they ;could be used during constr tion or to house new students in order to have new construction. Mr. Coleman replied that the students in the existing school would not be affected in that the shif of playground area would be the only change. Chairman King asked what ha pp s to the playground when he puts up the temporary facilities, he constr ets the faci:?xty, where then is the playground. Mr. Coleman explained the required ;imum of playground space for preschool children as mandated by the State code *ndicating that there is more than double the space he needs for outside re eation. Chairman King asked why the applicant cant onstruct the permanent facility before putting in the trailer. Chairman King opened the public hearing. Mr. She --ma, 7775 Sunstone, the applicant, replied tha he needs the trailer for the time being as he does not have space and is no in a financial position to begin building right now. He indicated he t refuse children every day. Commissioner McNiel asked, aside from what is laid down in th text regarding conditions, what his plan is. Mr. Sharma replied it is to build a new school in Rancho Cucamonga. Commissioner McNicl asked how far into the future this would be. t Planning Commission Minutes X18_ November 10, 1982 C. �8 -N 1- y F• 4I Q R-1 �-T ~ > W o e e 7 MIGNONETTE 5T i �R-11 I ET I R -3 Low-Medium DensityWS Du Mobil Home Pork ,40NTE 'VISTA R -3 Medil m Density (4x-14 Du/Ac) Vik :VK1A PHI ?Ps�C D t m Qf f f' FORTH CITY Or, lTtil: �?r-,zzs� RANCHO CUCAMONGA TITLE. ' A.%_j p �� PLANNING DIVISIOiN EXHIBITI -A� �7SCALD N r -lifl' a z5 �4', r3 a� MO'NTS VISTA G � I r T d r m Z C m i 2� V NORTH CITY OF iTELM: `r-r IZZS(o RANCHO CU.CAMC1'GA TIT LIE; -4hrrzla PLANNI \G DIVislaN EXHIBIT- 2jZ!_____SCALE --&. s. __ <1- � o 'If N -TAf ,'E MAP -TRACT t� 1225 -- lf - - -- , �3T zyn.y, L� \ A � R Ir. 219'± f ES ST. ZONE •. R3; ! 1 • i C � r t �' -�•; Ii t �I��: y-ji Y t 5t MONTE VISTA; - STREET / r fV ^v1 E I NURTI-i CITY Or, ;tl: RANCHO CUCAMOiNGA TITLE: PLANNING DIVISIOi�t EXHIBIT ---%:! SOLE: Nom', � w ' LL Nx s k ..,N...• -.. — ti,,, ;%.. � 1L�-�EGEND aMu N`•• .r..n .r �a .In �.u40�N: T.P[ � i N. w.., •t %t, • n VMIT ` w W ,.t.t tw a.0 n •.nte �,m� a NYY.I.ICCS .) t �I [ 1 il , . .=.N NWf. � Ft II .°°" r•ww i iE� j1 wm w.,a.ww a ,I w .�. wN.vp wm J 11 w. Fw...vit ►:.. vn.f t / 11 ER rte ten•. L: �::i �,a• wN ., q� „ ,,� MONTE VISTA STREET lu_ � •-. SFr.. =d `*� f n..a »f . I I I\ORTH PENMlTeI� rgNC® �- -er•• --+ N• nn..._. `_�9L Etx105!JAt PATIO ►ENCC CITY or -�-�� RANCHO CUCAMONGA TITLE: PLANNING DIVISION EXHIBIT= SCALE- ft 'f 5 _ � c -ta C i , r LAND`fAFE, E54H--=. Crary Or RANCHO XCAiNIONGA K ANNING DIVISICXN FORTH ITEM: - -r IzzS I� TITLE. SGStw-4 -��t1 EXHIBIT: E� _ SCALE: N "T_ "r�s • _ El r� FORTH CITY OF RANCHO CUCPl "GA PLANNING DIVISIaN EYHI[3IT: "�" SCt1LE= _t1: r -sue c. -Iy r Mill III TUN .� ""' .l t VI. mnah- in CITY Or, ITEM. :Vr I :9� ��to RANCHO CUCAN1110' NGA TIME: OLE- PUNNING DIVISIONT EXHIBIT- eGw SCALE- _gall, _. $A Z_ C__ ks -I-- j ir ZL fuumz CITY OF ITE,� I: RANG.10 CU(( ANCIONGA TITI.r.,- eLWA-ncrm PLANNING . DIVISIUSI EXHIBIT- SCALE--ttr-s —.— -F 7- c ' \ (cl rl--1 60� 2 IRI l ' +; a DIM. tae, HA4idR §ertd. (+ i 1be w WK Ei It —' i' • .. ��.. t i rl m`� � •1 \�Ri��ll.IMI �� A F�:s�r!i SWU lr =.aD DM CITY Or, n ITEM: °T-r• )Zz -5'4- RANCHO CUCA,.Eylu, _ 1 `TITLE. •sr A - PLANNING DIVISION EXHIBIT. RESOLUTION NO. 82 -106 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCA!40Nc,A, CALIFORNIA, CONDITIONALLY APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 12256 WHEREAS, Tentative Tract Map No. 12256, hereinafter "Map" submitted by Bidcal Corporation, applicant, for the purpose of subdividing he real property situated in the City of aancho Cucamonga, COI. :ity of San Bernardino, State of California, described as a 2.10 ac,, site located on the northwest corner of Archibald Avenue and Monte Vi-,.a Street, iiitO 1 lot, regularly came before the Planninq Commission for public hearing and action on November, 10, 198;'; and WHEREAS, the City Planner has recommended approval of the Map subject to all conditions set forth in the Engineering ane Planning Division's reports; and read considered the presented at the public hearing, evidence NOW, THEREFORL, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does resolve as follows: ift SECTION 1: The 'rlann�ng Commission makes the Following, findings in regard to ',entative Tract No. 12256 and the Map thereof: (a) The tentative tract is consistent with all applicable interim and proposed gene-'al and specific plans; (b) The design or improvements the tentative tract is consistent with all applicaule interim and proposed general-and specific plrns; (c) The site is physically suitable for- the tvpe 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 - entative tract will not c,nflict t!ith any easement acquired by the publik- at large, now of record, for access through or use of the Prroperty within the proposed subdivision. Resolution No, 82 -1G� Page 2 (g) That this project will not create adverse impacts on the environment and a Negative Declaration is issued. SECTION 2: Tentative Tract Map No. 12256, a copy of which is attached hereto, is hereby approved subject to all of the following .: onditions and the attached Standard Conditions: PLANNING DIVISION 1. A directory shall ue placed at the entrance to the project illustrating the location of specific units. 2. Sidewalks shall be provided to the pool area along the rear and side of buildings 7 and 8. 3. The rear elevations of buildings 3 and 4 which face Archibald Avenue shall be upgraded with additional wood trim around the windows, or plant -ons. Revised plans shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Division prior to issuance of Building Permits. 4, The emergency fire lane along thf, west pro;-rty line shall be constructed of compacted granite with turf i_ overlay. 5. Existing vegetation including trees, and shrubs along the west property line must be preserved wherever possible. A master Flan of existing .vegetation shall be submitted prior to approval of the final grading plan as reauired in ..Standard Condition C -2. 6. The detailed landscape plans shall. include adequate provisions for screening adjacent residential units and the drainage course rear the northwest corner.of the property, subjec; to the review and approval of the Planning Divisiont. ` 7. The CC &R's shall include a;. exhibit showing all fire access and a provision prohibiting the obstruction or construction in those area,- ENGINEERING DIVISION s' 8. The developer shall be required to construct the Master Plan Storm Drain on Archibald Avenue adjacent to the proposed Tract from norther:; boundary to existing outlet structure at the SPRR. The cost of Resolution No. 82 -1 Page 3 the system shall be credited towards the drainage fee for the project and a reimbursement agreement per City Ordinance No. 75, will lae executed by the City for the contrioutions which exceed the amount of the fee. 9. The applican ". shall try to coordinate the storm drain work with that of the approved projects - Tentative Tracts 11173 and 11608. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 10TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 1982. PLANNING C ' ION OF TH CITY OF RANCHO C1I1AMO1GA BY• / • , f a ng, /Ch it act•#c-ary uT we r tinning commission I, JACK LAM, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, d;• hereby certify that the foregoing. Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 10th day of November, 1982. by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMI•IISSIONEiS: Rempel, McNiel, Ba -ker, Stout, King NOES: COMMISSION` None ABSENT: COMMISSIONS None ( -ao Ell V O p G M O c of t o '�' — c � G .�. ` o Pc• ^.". M� o ^pvl mac•¢ ju y � OC qCM v CU c� uuu6 Y vY W Eua qd � e.v L i.0 e m� -Y-• S i aoL� + N� M� L/C u aN L V p t .cV Ur �S'6q CSp• -- COC u L�LO aro j4� � ^ o•o•°v =�� `n n..� �y _ a b bu o� b o o.°.0 D G .�• U L u ED u uu vc ouc q u p u u° �� tv E ° uE = -_ v`• �� ^_� G q �. G _2 y? a °uM L L � •• uV - YO . .-^ Y ef.L°- � H .bL � G Sa � E O n d LY q+• O.4 4� ' • t0 �C .°., ' .o O� �.��.r r c q �� FY L ✓ c� yC ^ C� Cb C` � _ �.. LC if y iL= y G DN _ co nu Y L C V A • F a a� 0 E C u ro a C C b � M � .'-. � a9 e � s C r zy C iM f; z; ONw b 4iE • ` - Dog �° E NCrMj Nu. O v< 5 q J CO .-O C uC L� q m M G A ��•- L pi4 " •- N - '^ r N 9 N b2Y ca q d G V qc n O G u a D V < e.� a E n° E o u ZIP 6 n ijr7JJ�' a o ro p" V t1 u - -q Y np uNY Oap p - y D O� s o' Y o 4r o u vc c c q q.°M r u= � L IIiN q v q a s � a_ S -. b Y r N ` L O ` � n � O r •.- Lz ^G t � v vo t 4 •, I Iv _e wo ��t "__ C If Ec 3p " ?."� voo EL - �•� -M� •O_' `•a.tw LE_ c i, o. o s 4+ b s a N u E o c' I94' v eu - � N. b= _ ..N., y 0 O Q L A E a n O? O v `• - X0� 14 VSO �C bL ul S N i b`6 L Otu .`i•t.n Nir uELO °.°_.N. '°^ - = ° mI. =nom L�Ln (- ..-c' " c'i a.�'°.�o� b _^ D O r O b 6 5= N i y C b C C E V` O � �• N � � b L o •- � Er cE_ - °6 �"� Co �•V COr liuy c ^ -_ >o E v N.rt ��.0 ' �u S O.`•C > u4i i6 ol o W <., 'D u� L b r ^•� ° O C - w= G r•+ c C w ° L b - b L a N Y7 D•� =i _ p �L4A 4�Y4 �`•O L q ^ OOyI _N= u v oL u Lo mS yFVEbq �-= Jo + ^y. M LUE Na •w`� rL .=t 4 9v X40 yV C< a r•- 4_ c, c�i u rap 4C yMbL 4� De-iu rw � � L `C fir.. ao LN.x �v° �V Os LtiC r Or oYL C't pu T C G 4 40N> 4 OL L = • +C10 n��''r� q� uL w.ub mM cOi b_ pT �• N L _ G 4 A •� .�- L L r .. b C � N C• � t Y C d .nr Jy O 4 qp 4n C FGp0 > bJw�.�r 1c CE.p 9v .♦ 4 .� a a b c G. _o o. '� v = € c� °a b e � o.°„ L `o 0.2 G LrN 4`'° _., cL bce w .^ r•..�m`'v c:� x _ fit. q E to vu• uz b > _ 4� .C.,=• w n of NL qN °per O � V GSO pLG r•C � ^ n u� j v u ^y ctnT �n s Dyq Fce yN z oc = t Ea� N rL nt. =; R m ? r N° c % `•O NNUN 4M ^n ^� u �E E^ I r C S r C •_ L „ 4n Y 46 � C O c =n � 7' {. N -_ - L E u�r �O _�� S ` •, 1 1 • Q � _ ._O It 4q C� VTP c ,, q.3 c O C �^L uu V L Yr.. t]p` 46 un vu`.NV co `. ^� `yc''oY •'N• � o"~. y� ` - uY "� ° W� a ^ , a on s dog ay 6 -q �L _ACn pro cQ ti p0 _ ay"o - Yd N? dCF cO dp 76 O u N."O LI -lq" I.�.ci�y QN 6q rt_i.� G q Q O � G �p I L >O. p Y t _ V = 4a a mot ^EO µLL n o.'. C. nc�r`� __ � - _ _ �.•zd °�T _ - e. c° Y ro O L � TOS EEC9ro r. OW � •-i <^ py.2 v'. °✓ _ _ "Oro 3 �� q Yu q I' E u - v 4T --. Y J Y ry u dC�O ^__ - Ju,Y q•°-o• .^= a.'.r R CU y €OY �� CC GCO q c L G� .-Or pT.p =y .nI pd 79 w o = ^ »c uYN _- ^_`= >-i"e� "' _ ,°cc 3 �a cL4-"'n J. -i..� ^�`" a o.NT• �v_ - __ .. �'u oe e; L ^` - c7 `NIU C O•^ o .t o �. V J -AO QNNV 600ad" �vrocyiv Cu o °• V o,. BE YI y O V • �aE .vo e a • E y u o �a O Y ° v$o- _ e `o u _ • •.♦ C.OgG b =.� ' q Y s O _ y .l O v oq �♦� C n• � Y V s -r-o'z Yb 2 � S �•-p.� `cc e o y c v o u r u ` �♦ c o - � c CyM y� a.. m^ o ♦: q w v nz� ti� • ^ F � ?0 E n 2 4 C O. aG .e jE - vb• �.°p ° N� _ V e y c� 2:c n � to o� o a' �n o = o ou o a a..o y E .l O v oq �♦� C n• � Y V b V SW Io O =w o o u r qE� ♦ � c CyM ^ _ • ^ F � ?0 E n 2 4 C O. t p Y �.°p ° N� _ ri Y ♦ - R � q L 4 4 4 q 0 I I V e y c� 2:c n � to o� o a' �n o = o ou o a a..o y uu C .l O v oq �♦� C 6Ja` = u O � - R.2 p^u qE� cE CyM °t'Ep �.°p ° N� _ ri Y O L y q 0 _ CE 3 S 0 '^s p y u O e_• �t ` _ � 4 . •rtoa� au c'� aw.yun m � o 1 2' Ln C C9 r O n � M L C p _ OTu Ba O.2 coy° 72 t- c u._ .o �. i )1 ° vow C � u v 'v •i �'O Vz �•'�� V tJ ...may >C _ 'M �L� r C y al l.. V nv�i 0 ` y 4 !. L 4 GE-E L L 4 •u � G ^ a a 9 - rc- E K] RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CVCAMCNCA PLANNING COMMISSION, APPROVING THE TIME EXTENSION FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 12256. WHEREAS, a request has been filed for a time extension for the above - described project, pursuant to Section 1.501.83(b) of Ordinance 28 -B„ the Subdivision Ordinance; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conditionally approved the above - described described Tentative Tract 12256 SECTION 1: The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission 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, Plans, Codes and Policies and,. B. The extension of the 'tentative Map will not l ,*kely cause significant inconsist-sncies with the current General Plan, Specific Plans, Ordinamces, 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 ordinance. SECTION 2: The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission hereby grants a time extension for: Tract Appi4cant Expiration 12256 BIDCAL 11/10/87 AT-?ROVED l.ND ADOPTED THIS 9TH JAY OF OCTOBER, 1985 PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Dennis L. Stout, Chairman ATTEST: Jack Lam, Secretary f c -ate PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION October 9, 1985 TT 1225E - BIDCAL Page 2 I, Jack Lam, Secretary of the Planning Commissioc of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the forego ng, Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by _he Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 9th day of October, 1985, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: e oZg U KI El 2,, DATE: TO: FROM: BY: SUBJECT: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMON zA �UCAnIO� STAFF REPORT • a t 0 0 z F� Z U > October 9, 1985 Giiairman and Members of the Planning Com:aission " Jack Lam, Community Development Director ?oward Fields, Assistant Planner ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT Rc TEW 85 -32 - FORECAST - Construction of a two -story prveessional office building consisting of 9,994 square feet on 7 acres of land in the industrial Area Specific Plan (Subarea 7) Rancho Cucamonga Business Paris, located north of -Avic Center Drive, east of Utica Av?nue ( Lot 9) - APN 208 -662- 09 I. PROJECT AND SITE VESCRIPTIoN: A. Action Requested: Issuance of a Negative Declaration. B. Purpose: Construction of a two -story office building totaling 9,994 square feet. C. Surre,indinq Land Use and Zoning: Nort2: - Vacant, Industrial Park District (Subarea 7). South - Exist LSy;;t Industrial, Industrial Park District (Subarea 7). East - Vacant, Industrial Park District (Subarea 7 West - Vacant, Industrial Park District (Subarea 7). D. General Plan Designations: Project Site Industrial Park. North - Industrial Park. South - Industrial Park. East Industrial Park. West - Industrial Park. E. Site Characteristics: Presen "y, tha project site is vacant with no significant vegetation or land forms.. The site is rough graded with all street improvements in place, except for landscaping within the public right -of -way. ITEM D �� PLANNI' :G COMMISSION STAFF REPORT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 85 -32 - FORECAST October 9, 1985 Page 2 II. ANALYSIS: A. General; The project pruposal will consist of a two -story Frofess"cnal office building, which is part of the master - !�lanned exe -syive office - tennis center (see Exhibit "C") Vehicle access will be from Civic Center Drive with reciprocal access to the west and east parcels (Lots 8 & 10). B. Environmenia: As fart 1 of the Initial Study has been completed by the applicant.. Staff has completed Part II of the Environmental Checklist (see ,attached) ind found no significant adverse impact as a result of this project. Should a Negative Declaration be issued, the Community fevelopment Director will grant final approval of the project with standard conditions and conditions recommended by the Design and Technical Review Cammittees. V. RECOMMENDATION: If the Planning Commission can support Staff's findings, i;hen issuance of ; Negative Declaration would be appropriate Respectfully sibmitted, \`I am Community Development Director JL:NF:ko Attachments: Exhibit Exhibit E }:hibit "C" Exhibit "D" Exhibit "E Exhibit "F" Initial Stui - Location Map - Site Utilization Map - Detailed Satz Plan - Conceptual Landscaping Plan - Grading Plan. Elevations iy, Part TI 0701 -02 o 10 -9 -85 P. ®A enda Packet o Page -2 of 6 MOMENIMM 05 _ r i f Liu } INN r ^' - ...... IIC48{3DD1gpp 1pdDIIi1 QC ' OP > 7�1rimi� ®naara4oaal�aaamva ®tlrf�maa�ma ®mesa■ i r M R & on /'°'Ra3ECT _. Future City ® s T 1. i all — r. m GC M a a ®seTi- w cr 7 I.S.P. L M a mm_.-j RON IND- 1S -TRIAL SPECIFIC PLAN R jr m __ =__� I.S.P ! i'F H NOI;TH CITY OF imI: P--R X9.5"'_ 3;1. I1 .1\ 'C ro CUCA" /10NG) TITLE �.oGe4rityiV MAC PLANNING DIVISION, " EXHIBM -- - -SCALE J — RRven j g 9 e a �~ e Ell mi n = r a itA n ![ 3 6 �e pppppp F^ e_n c� �s o• _a �° J 1 f LZI Im ��•�11M4/g1��,q i to ++ Is F F3 5 7 f Sg A, E € sa ! Jli I �\ c '� _ •.� ! PO i it m u �� z C CITY OF RANCHO CUC&,uONGA PART II - INITIAL STUDY E%VIF.O%MENTaL CHECKLIST DATE:_.49 lff APPLICA :Tjl $,- FILING DALE: t�� /�,c^rS'� LOG NUMBER: PROJECT:d_ PROJECT LOCATION: I. ENVIRO`NIENTAL SNPACTS (Explanation of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required on attached sheets). YES tVXYEE NO 1. Soils and Geoloev. Will the proposal hav,: signi�icant Ak results in: a. Unstable ground conditions or in changes in geologic relationships? b• Disruptions, displacements, comPac_icn or burial �- e of the soil? c. Change in topography or ground surface contour intervals? v d• The 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 gonditons? f• Cikanges in,erosion siltation, or deposition? g. Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as eartaquakes, landslides, mud- slides, ground failure, or•similar hazards? ate' k h. An increase in the rate of extraction and /or use of any mineral resource? 2. X11010cy. Will the proposal have significant results in: D -g Li l t F Page YES iaYBE `0 a. Changes in currents, or the course of direction of flowing g stxeams', rivers,, or ephet:eral stream channels? 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? / C/ 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, either through direct additions or with- drawals, or through interference with an aquifer? Quality? Quantity? C/ 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? 3. Air Quality. Will the proposal have significant J 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, affecting air movement, moisture 1 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? f/ b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, tare or endangered species of p ants? ✓ c. Tntroduction of new or disruptive species or 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 thi 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, distr.- 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 'r actors. Will the proposal Ftave significant results in: 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 beneficiaries, i e., buyers, tax payers or project users -. 7, Land lfse and Planning ConsidCZscions. Will the proposal have significant results in? a. A substantial alteration of the present or planned .land use of an area? b. A conflict with any designations, objectives, Policies, or adop,ed plans of any governmental :ntities? C- An impact upon the qulaity or quantity of existing ca,7sumptive or non- consumptive recreational opportunities? C) ?aee 3 Cj YES • lu Page 4 YES `!AY3E NO 8. Transnortztion. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Gene4fztion of substantial additional vehicular movement? b. Eff •'-ts on existing streets, or demand for new street construction? C. Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new parkins? / d. Substantial impact upon existing transperta- V 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. 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. Health. Safetv, and Nuisance Factors. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Creation of any healti, 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 organisms? e. Increase in existing noise levels? l f. Exposure people to potentially dangerous noise levels? k• The creation of objectionable odors? h. An increase in sight or glare? t, CPage j 11. Aesthetics. Will the YES Y_4YSE - proposal have ; ignificant results in: a. The obstruction or degradation of vista or view? any scenic / b. The creation of an aesthetically of site? r v — C. A conflict with the objective of designated Cr potential scenic corridors? 12. Utilities and Public Services. Will the proposal have a significant need for new systems, or alterations to the following: a. Electric power? b. Natur' or packaged gas? c. Co =.unications systems? — 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. f;overn Other mental services? / 13. Enerev and Scarce Resources.' Will the proposal have s�gnificapt _I. results in: s 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 consumptio of - non renewable forms of energy, renewable eY when feasible sources of energy are available? ,. D -SQL - Page 3 6 YES MAYBE NO e- substantial depletion of any nonrenewable or scarce naiural,rdsource? 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 level:-, 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 Califc1nia history or prehistory? L b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short -term, s to the disadvantage of long - ter:, environmental goals? (A short -term it:.pact 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). v/ c. Does the project have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (Cumulatively considerable means that the incremental effects of an individual C project are considerable when viewed in corm ection 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 ENS +Itpl!LvVTAL EVALUATIOV (i.e., of affirmative the above answers to questions plus a discussion of proposed mitigation •measures). i x J 3 Pace i III. DETEP1ON )n th basis of this initial evaluation: I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be preoared. 1�I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in Lhis case because the mitigation measures described on an + attached sheet have been added to the project. A NECATIrZ DEC .kRA[ION WILL BE PRyPARED. I find the p+-!Posed project :L4Y have a significant effect an the j 1 envirnment, and an F- N%IIRON'�.NT I ;FACT REPORT is required. Date /6�� ' Sig pCu.- Title R EM O E CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: October 9, 1985 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Jack Lam, AICP, Community Development Director BY: Curt Johnston, Associlte Planner G�CAAg'o of o FI Z Uli > SUBJECT: RESOLUTION OF DENIAL FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL LAN AMENDMENT 85 - - PORLSA request to amend the General Plan Land Use Map from Medium Residential 4 -14 du /ac) to Office (in conjunction with the deelopment of a senior citizen congregate living and care facility) on 4.85 acres of land located on the south side of Foothill Boulevard, west of Cucamonga Creek, west of Vineyard Avenue - APN 208 - 211 -20, 21. RESOLUTION OF DENIAL FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AMENDMENT 85 -07 PORLSA - A request to amend the Development Districts Map from Medium Residential (8 -14 du /ac) to Office /Professional (in conjunction with the cevelopment of a senior citizen congregate living and care facility) on 4.45 acres of land located on the south side of Foothill Boulevard, west side of Cucamonga Creek, west of Vineyard Avenue - APN 208 -211- 20, 21. The above described General Plan Amendment and Development District Amendment were reviewed at the previous meeting and determined by the Planning Commission to be inappropriate. Staff was directed to prepare the attached Resolutions recommending denial of the amendments to the City Council. Recent changes in State law require final action on all General Plan Amendments by the City Council. lly submitted, Ja�:1a�-Lam — Community Development Div-„tor JL:CJ:ns Attachments ITEM E/F 1977 RESOLU 70N NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING DENIAL OF DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AMENDMENT NO. 85 -07 REQUESTING A CHANGE IN THE DISTRICT DESIGNATION FROM MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL TO OFFICE /PROFESSIONAL FOR 4.85 ACRES LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD, WEST SIDE OF CUCAMONGA CREEK, WEST OF VINEYARD AVENUE APN 208 - 211 - 20,21. WHEREAS, on the 15th day of July, 1985, an application was filed and accepted on the above - described project; and WHEREAS, on the 25th day of September, 1905, the Planning Commission held a duly advertised public hearing pursuant to Section 65854 of the California Government Ccde. SECTION 1: The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission has made the following findings : 1. That the subject property is not suitable for the uses permitted in the proposed district in terms of access, size, and compatibility with existing land use in the surrounding area; and is 2. That the proposed district change would not promote t,e goals of the General Plan Land Use Element and Development Code. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission does hereby recommend denial to the City Council of Development District Amendment No. 85 -07. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 9TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 1985. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Dennis L. Stout, Chairman ATTEST: Jack Lam, Secretary r Resolution No. Dev0 opment District Amendment No. 85 -07 Oct)ber 9, 1985 Pago 2 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 9th day of Octrber, 1985, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: F" 1:1 LIZ 0 RESOLUTION NO. Aft A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING 05NIAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 40. 85 -04B, REQUESTING AN AMEK'?MENT TO THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has held a duly advertised public hearing to consider all comments on the proposed General Plan Amendment 85- 04B; SECTION 1: The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission cannot mi3Fe the following findings: A. The Amendment does not conriict with the Land Use Policies of the General Plan. B. The Amendment promotes goals of the Land Use Element. C. The Amendment would not be materially injurious or detrimental to the adjacent properties. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission does hereby recommend denial to the City Council of General Plan Amendment 85 -04B. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 9TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 1985. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE C "—' OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Dennis L. Stout, airman ATTEST: Jack Lam, Secretary 1, Jack Lam, Secretary of the ?lanning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduc(l, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 9th day of ,tober, 1985, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: !CSENT: COMMISSIONERS: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT e a ' F Z U DATE: October 9, 1985 1977 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Jack , ,n, Community Development Director BY: Dino Putrino, As3istant Planner SUBJECT: TIME EXTENSION FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 83 -02 - BARMAKIAN - The development of six (6 ) industrial buildings totaling 25,032 square feet, on 1.7 acres, in the General Industrial Category (Subarea 1), located of the north side of 8th Street, west of Vineyard Avenue - APN 207- 271 -53, 54, 55. Related Files: VA 83 -02 and Parcel Map 7912 1 BfLAGROUND- On March 23, 1983, the Planning Commission approved evelopment Review 83.02 for 18- months, with an expiration date of September 23, 1984. The Commission later approved a one -year time extension for Development Review 83 -02 to expire on September 23, 1985. The applicant's letter dated September 19, 1985 requests a time extension because of delays related to drainage. II, i.NALYSIS: A review of the development plans and the building elevations indicate that -the project is caLcisistent with current development and design standards; and that together with the Variance 83 -02, the project is consistent with the objectives of the Industrial Specific Plan. Since the applicant has now resolved the drainage problem and is ready to re- submit plans, t)e Planning Commission may grant a time extension for up to 18 months based upon the Development Code's maximum 4 -year approval period. III. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of an 18 -month time extension to expire March 23, 1987. U Jack Lam Community Development Director JL:DP:ko ITEM G PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TIME EXTEMSION FOR DR 83 -02 October 9, 1985 Page 2 Attachments: Letter from Applicant Exhibit "A" - Vicinity Map Exhibit "B" Industrial Specific Plan Subarea 1 Map Exhibit "G" - Site Plan Exhibit "D" -• Elevations Exr+ibit "E" Grading Plan Original Resolution of Apps -oval N). 83 -46 Time Extension Resolution of Appraval C=,' ca SAIRMAKIAN September 19, 19852 AR! c fnoPFccl lN vs e® P�NVfgCa DiVfN NGA SeP24198O 71 &�9a1D�11��i11�i3c41SPAY �6 Mr. Dan Coleman City of Rancho Cucamonga' 9320 Baseline Road, Suite "C" P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 RE: DR 83 -02 - Extension Dear Mr. Coleman: Our firm is requesting an extension of DR 83 -02 which expires on t� �3� Enclosed, please find a check in the amount of 5 $62.00 for the filing fee for the extension. We are requesting this extension due to the length of time involved to solve•the problem of drainage of said property. We have now resolved this problem and are re- submitting our building plans to the Building and Safety Department. If you have any questions, or need additional information, please call. Sincerely, 1 T 4�B4RMAKI 0 PANY Vincent St nton Project Coordinator g VS:sm F, Enclosure 9375ARCHIBALDAVENUE SUITE 101 • RANCHO CUCAMONGA CALIFORNIA 91730 714- 987 -3014 Development • Brokerage - Property management Architecture • Engineering �- 3 1 FIG. IV-1 LU ARROW o heio So * 06 a o -N 0 O 0 0 aubarea 2 Al 8, W +! ti 6 -10 CITY or, RANCHO CUCAi-vloN,,GA LANNING DIVISla-4 TITLE: P EXHIBIT-2A!-_ SCALE; 141-5. 11 774� o -N 0 O 0 0 aubarea 2 Al 8, W +! ti 6 -10 CITY or, RANCHO CUCAi-vloN,,GA LANNING DIVISla-4 TITLE: P EXHIBIT-2A!-_ SCALE; 141-5. 11 I OrIVAS" et=Lgvsucu! ----------- ----------- — IT, 77I-iumm , - n 4.:t - 14 PLff I NORTH CITY or, RANCHO CUCAMojNGA TITLE: PLANNING DIVLSON EXHIBIT. �"V' SCALp. z I CITY ®I, Urukl: -OP- 193 Wit,_ RANCHO CUCAI ojNGA PLANNING DIVLgCXN EXHIBIT: "F-4 SCALE:�.'rS. C-1 - �c •I NURTH Ll D � tlza►at�G -�. Gaye. ='E -- — °�._ - -._.._ ___..�- .,ra -- -- `.�._.— .uuwa�eru►axemwe.essnen _ .__ .. _ _..-- _ _ '-'.`• � _._r. � "^' � ��' •- ^- .'.�:. ...tee -- �•- .i'�'IeI16 �.•rf 1V w` vi.au N.as� :- J( n.ny vtana B a- too" rt nv n na LDGA F ��•�` -��•: /f� 8LD02 SLDG.3 r, `r BLDGA BLDG.S •"'_'Y 4' r2..+..i �J °'- ys �'r r t_ "._ij' ''1: a t• ' 1 4 r r•f, ' �� j �'— .._�.t •— - 4---- �_ —.__— _. —_._. -�.. _- ___EIGHTH uTAEEI' .._ »__ � .._ �......r•,. �: ® .e n..& L£GFNQ ' ` �rL•a:i�e. ""r'n ++i wl...w;i E y�i +v I••..0 nr..ul .. . ++� xrna•maa O n•+N •fir+- LNrN1re rusn•v rI ..�I ✓w.n:. i�rrr.w •`Y1 timer ni N�. - is HTNI •.l.. n /n.w I fir.. r.....N.wru. NIh /N •N .•,•yM carutTe lIOCK csTUaawut. CITY Or RANCHO CLTCAMO\TGA PUNNII\U DIVISION NK)RTH IMM: DP- 9-2, oz- TITLE: gg � E)CHIBIT: "F" SCALE: MM 5 RESOLUTION NO. 83 -46 A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO. 83 -02 LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF 8TH STREET IN THE GENERAL INDUSTRIAL CATEGORY (SUBAREA 1) WHEREAS, on the ?1st day of January, 1983, a complete application was filed by DWLC Architects for review of the above- described project; and WHEREAS, on the 23rd day of March, 1983, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission held a mee,;ing to consider the above- described project. follows: NOW, THEREFORE, the Ran ^.ho Cucamonga Planning Commission resolved as SECTION 1: That the following can be met: 1. That the propo <iid use is in accord with the objectives of the zoning Ordinance and the purposes of the zone in wh1cii the use is proposed; and 2. That the proposed use, together with approval of Variance 83 -02 and the conditions applicable thereto, •will not be detrimental to the public Adk health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; and 3. That the proposed use. together with approval of Variance 83 -02 s in compliance with each of the applicable provisions of the Zoninr Ordinance; and 4. That the proposed project is consistent with the General Plan. SECTION 2: That this project will not create adverse impacts on the environment and that a Negative Declaration is issued on March 23, 1983. SECT' That Development Review No. 83 -02 is approved subject to the following ns and attached Standard Conditions: PLANNING Gam,, ON 1. The exterior elevations facing 8th Street and the parking lots shall be finished with a heavy sandblasted treatment. Details shall be provided on the construction drawings required prior to issuance of building permits. • Resolution No. 83 -46 Page 2 ENGINEERING DIVISION 2. All pertinent concitions for Parcel Map 7912 shall apply. 3. The drainage area under the Railroad bridge shall be graded and paved to the satisfaction of the Railroad and the City Engineer. 4. Drainage facilities shall be provided along the north and east project ticundaries and shall be capable of handling 100 -year frequency storm through a combination of. drains and surface flows with adequate inlet ano outlet structures to control debris. The system shall be designed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. S. Drainage facilities shall be provided to protect adjacent propertieF from diverted water flows to the extent of 100 -year ,corms. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 23RD DAY OF MARCH, 1983. PLANNING COMMISSION HE CITY F RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: �yerman R mpe ia rfr(ant ATTESt' ^� =y�,�w Secretary of the Planning Commission I, JACK LAM, Secretary of the Planning Commission of -the City c 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 23rd day of March, 1983, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: MCNIEL, STOUT, BARKER, JUAREZ, REMPEL NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE �— t i L u O O z p �n u °cYcc aq o-co d d 0 ••tea � o G �_ A bQ .reo °c s� ✓G e 0y mmuv :; q Via' •^ ✓ �'�' r= Z- no q�:.: O. qp i'^°N�d :G 4^ S v9 E S` ry•i `UU a '� = YOCV. uM ✓r .�6 q O4 K.0 d=am r b.� E C U...E``00 •O q b O � d L q • E � U� d N u h rT• O K c b � ` O�Y Mq �HC� ^_d yN0 ��y b ci q� �6 > SY vLgiL .�C NL ^Vq Ey � q0• N .r. n L ^n d•.c- d^ a �b .- Ou W� � Qtq a� O GEgN =E OO^�>o 9w � • 40 yw.. d ✓= o0 Y L ^✓ �V y a:G � U'L N AEY C Yq. q�E� ✓° .. ' u r O - tiGO- A E q b d d a •L.• C q E ^_ q �� ✓ Ate✓ °c °o d Y} S� c ^Od C.NN qA ad f✓4iy N� C ^• WL�gq�D 0. �Y ^ L"Nh D A N J A g o a^i V G 1M � p q 6d q✓ C � LN du_N q� q Y G Y91y p A t qy Y c A ^ v Ali d UC •di6 Gq LO,dC CEtN i. _ yj_ ^O S w ✓q. _ d C ^ .-�✓ ^ O -0tfi Aw AO' M O• _ �`o y95 c.dc✓ p lnE A✓ y a A y�M G ^.A� w!�«E T To p d CW °0 •`,• a< w ^ u y``4 urJ N�� cN H ✓ Nc ZY =c� ✓y. ~� A b b N r •�.. • A Q 4 p S a Y •". EE E E w R ` y q N d O V d'^ 4 N w • Y.a> ` fi s� VV2r E dV u Y O u c U ✓ d Y Gd q ^ 6 b b. -._ _ �.c � q q L �� 6 .d N T ✓ _ :+1�PO °. o. 6w °ic n @v�o.n 4A 6.O i- qN O of a GY � ✓v uq✓ rn ti� / I OII �� `. ..� r•I 1 ��. �I �� Y J 4cL0 O. i L u O O z p �n u I d 0 E c e 0y aq✓ �r db« S` ry•i `UU uNE w eo «. ✓u° •'° tin °° nc�s ° G y ^cam H ✓ ddV O�Y Lq.. w0.✓q O E > C L °9 ✓ p N4 yw.. d ✓= o0 4� =.CEO Oc �� LV �y0^ �V y a:G q�E� ✓° A � p •nm N�f � >rn Ad+' CfL-^ ^ v Ali a °'",'"„ ^a.^A c� Via✓ c ^60 ' q_ • .c N w. � � �`o Q✓ A •r� ^. p cL�. E.•. y0 A de ^4 ^OUtai� c6c 6 .d dG E:G F v CC ^ « a EE BE � Y J 4cL0 O. L u•^yy A Q�� Y � C d ^ u� r Y V• EO 4 Ng O O O A. Y � F O. L` r 0 6 Y •L+ 6 N � 0 U G O 4 j ti N •QV-•~ J • N 1.1 O N � •�I I O Ss�• Pms D N uo M•N"G4 °N °e vlo �'E NE'N Ct tct u`oc2 y,C CQ u6zL u °o"a O^ O. « ^ N `o> t4�Gti it A M U �o N L L� L� K d Y° `c e E« a n d NreL 6c E c'E= o p L G_ q n C 6 1 T^ n L Y N Y b ES 'OL Yom.° Y�c Nut,. ' C°I�mgE iN°w W9�1r°n..0¢Z Y N G `I W 79 a= 0 i Z Z,- b Y Y D• Y. y C n � •'• d a d .+ C O Pn g gip« G F�; rrVd��OL EIi�> °G Gr YCO P E yyaY j 9 9 u` =E .NE L Lu •.0 ... rn 0 li k ks' G E u L Coto e u fir -y �.t.. e° au N pZ- 2 - N ' E L C ty q C 'p^apNE ° d2 j � �Eu E EC��,uu° V y EU-1 a c cq z z Kc �u to pNN'pyla °+ °sue N i ^LY is EY q a Sq °— s~ Y u° Ord G «° ° °gpYG �$ BE. u E n O F ti E o L° y n a U n o 0 r g a r^�TC' G C C j N C 6 n V qNp ON L CO... Op NY p^ ca aC oy =t �'•u'^y• -• nt •, E iEaY as n.�� °q 'Geu `u a'G,, vuLG° ° N.... o •-e c O•pG,`2 •u rLN N C e°yuL� LO :0!Z, Y a u =N' C C o.�L.O a ° o 6 =° DO.r C .N,. z. y U o O. u OD2r��N2� F• N . GaN ^{ V Im> O O Ss�• Pms D N uo M•N"G4 °N °e vlo �'E NE'N Ct tct u`oc2 y,C CQ u6zL u °o"a O^ O. « ^ N `o> t4�Gti it A M U �o N L L� L� K d Y° `c e E« a n d NreL 6c E c'E= o p L G_ q n C 6 1 T^ n L Y N Y b ES 'OL Yom.° Y�c Nut,. ' C°I�mgE iN°w W9�1r°n..0¢Z Y N G `I W 79 a= 0 i Z Z,- b Y Y D• Y. y C n � •'• d d d d .+ C O Pn g gip« G GY O.�i n.. r` ^t uV E yyaY j 9 9 u` =E .NE L Lu •.0 ... rn 0 li k ks' G L ° L Coto e n y ' 2 2 - N ' -z g •' ^ 'p^apNE ° d2 j � �Eu E EC��,uu° V y EU-1 a c cq z z Kc �u w VN o p pNN'pyla °+ °sue N Na°• c ° -= ^ ^LY is EY q a Sq Y u° Ord G «° ° °gpYG �$ BE. u a ^ ^ c A ° ° m L ° b bl ^I G O\ 11 C 1] 1 M Aa 1 ° u c .c C E a. — ^�uOLi _ �0.yY 47 M C9LUa M RYYM� Ob MDO > .� qT `D.I ✓ � NC q O N vc ..c.V c t O nu N.p O �• - DO S nYq W f. �N n� .°r u � � v °e emu° � uo- •c n, YCbNM q C cR r°+Yq a•� 2 �— '••C °4 OU C p �dN w • U.r.. T•A.O ggOl nYV � �qA - o =VL p.°. � N Y ° 2?Q Loa � n ice° '• • N,V r° U4�Uflt c.y'�= &= ova CRC Ly =oq N u.^ W��~ "CC.r r6 !6— q �� C C N Q, r � � '^• V Y. LI Z..°C- 4 N p C rr G D 0 S'��6 FR D P.9 ELUr tar WN Nr4C y�q ' �- CNV OO D y 9 Cam.. > Vy a LNa � d«w TNOw Gust y'r' r �1 N pF.r 8"=''O ✓- 6 W L O u °6° � � b R a '.' b CD y � N OqW •mss PC « °6Nr D.b N Od! °q r'> qr° DqL N y u G�.' dL.4 Ry`Dy CUiCdC. NOyq +. °d LC H« O•b '� uD Na a " r{. "321L Ya qy •_,q` yi �� N.0.a DUL z•ni rn ^ i .r =..� c.ZigN Prw. DC Gn „ •^30° PMT 9 N 3 u W V� r2n20 d� UdN� c •�R ^ t' O M tCM N'c'N4r«it c " @ rG3 4RK SN4u dq Z—z G4 .bC GON rC+a. U Y•nA Lu �d �JL r - ^ u. G _ °r q�iT= U ^� 1.5 q °arn o A V 1tl b 1z . Gnu Y Z.; ttO \�{I Y G•«•. p5q.� � c > D L 'I tE O iJ r .w� u e F Ta°M R 1 M Aa 1 ° u c .c C E a. — ^�uOLi _ �0.yY OK M C9LUa M RYYM� Ob MDO > .� qT `D.I ✓ � NC q O N vc ..c.V c t O nu N.p O �• - DO S nYq u^QC w"°.D v N Z.4V NN O V ..«c.3 OC C �� V «g VM N� w4 S . Fi« d G 0 °C9 �Y•w YCbNM q C cR r°+Yq a•� 2 �— '••C °4 OU C p �dN w • U.r.. T•A.O ggOl nYV � �qA NUC zqN ^L o id so M o 4 °strnci R « Va ^o".c..n Va �« qQ ° 2?Q Loa " °aY .a �`u a' u N,V r° U4�Uflt c.y'�= &= ova CRC Ly E.=if QOr ydi Rvy r N u.^ W��~ "CC.r r6 !6— t aI V wr. C.? r _ CC `•..L.^ YCO, uT� aq «p3 0 CNV ^E. — nb M a UhiT�� .�c'o� ZG Nd Ca. dGT t ^A Cam.. > Vy a LNa � d«w TNOw - ` . n° cNO� o ��9�j . ° . mn N> �:, a c ou of u °6° � � b R a '.' b CD y � N OqW •mss PC « °6Nr D.b N Od! °q r'> qr° 9P v—n ."-. j•�U.0 �N.« N y u G�.' dL.4 Ry`Dy CUiCdC. NOyq EMS E` 6U UM.v� -9 «mac ^RNU r .U.E M U CSO•.` L=NG a�M aNwOy .sa rUti C G F Cc c ✓ �� aNUid Gw• V N� LVV L ti,9 t' O M tCM N'c'N4r«it c " @ rG3 4RK SN4u dq Z—z G4 .bC GON rC+a. U Y•nA °- VTN4 •.0 N.a. "q <,� r. JLU A V 1tl b 1z . 1 M Y/- o aaI Et T� � � E •`aE .� V T.� qpd JE d `y u1 Dy aL° «Z d dEgq 0 E o u ° Tr vt fLULIL u � do u y r r •� D r°� V E'^ � U u�mi ^ q c 0 x V y g d N d a qEa O ^o % D C s L Rf �� dO1 q~ •� F tom- u••• d C r dcpj � E _c = S `• aT qw.p N D.ua •VHV Wuu �6 14 <I � tiI NI 14� Y E - a L � h a p C•.cy ��9 _ •c..q�� O. EO.-. D•a y �a uULT UO r q Cui _ y .n q �Cpy` OV D a - Cq 0. � D •nU L «�L _r qsi o� °p uE c ny=y �ur ooiy Lay' $60 nw.a r_t Eq E o o•`u ` o t; F, dNE dt?rCE 1. = _ ° LN nq 6n w SC D _nd �pup. aYi • EN o f Y 1. N Yu ZV-;iS w yUe� ^ •� _� unnv '� •� N N V N 6 o N° 0 6� E S L m a a 0 u u 0 C• T d O• O•u C C q - Ir 6 q O _ D uI°• o rl J Y/- o aaI Et T� � � E •`aE .� V T.� qpd JE d `y u1 Dy aL° «Z d dEgq L °�q•`o E o u ° Tr vt fLULIL u � do u y r r •� D r°� V E'^ � U u�mi ^ q c 0 x V y g d N d d o•ry rAE �qL dr V v q F V at7dm V n v W�D•V o L � - nEuY Y u e E UDq D'9 uC CLw°. y E 4:.E V „ E o „EF„�N r .7 •- aqi '� LO o r U S d 'n C o L °Ly 6> u ° y j• W n :L N� N CI day 'a 2LIL VIG E o u ° Tr vt fLULIL L cu° Y M d W d o•ry rAE �qL dr V v q F V at7dm V n v W�D•V o L � - nEuY Y u e E > FEE O q E O^ L Od d q o O ON ^ E •D C O ° wd L cu° Y M d W V d c d a qEa O ^o a y o q E D C s L Rf r � OeN � C Tc u••• d C r dcpj � E `• aT qw.p N D.ua •VHV Wuu �6 14 I Y« 9^ V v T N •Oi• O a a 3 O •n u p o. N t u. 1 1 hJ �I p J7.^ -.L O G .a Y E r6� w ari C L c 0 NV YDr S N 2 hz Tic— o'v'`o .°. c •^ <.a °, a/ w _pu O'L L Eu yV_ mS u E C y L L S O E N O N o 9 7 11¢a E d o. r c c =u E .Cpl _E Y Z"`m d N E c D n = o L L Y •� 1 c T c E O Boa EG M � aw�lC C T 4a N o d r LC q W d �O.r Y« 9^ V v T N •Oi• O a a 3 O •n u p o. N t u. N N p J7.^ -.L O y E C YvJa =. .a Y E r6� w ari C L c 0 NV YDr S N 2 aNO Tic— o'v'`o .°. c •^ <.a °, a/ w _pu O'L L Eu yV_ mS L`.L.RY C y L L S O E N O N o 9 7 E d o. AO c c =u E .Cpl _E Y Z"`m d E c D n = o L L Y •� 1 c T c E O S q Ypi+v N. ova W. � Los ... �• tziu Ti sl .w, W c �°° c T� 9-g,. r `a u L wriU hnW �•.r••.O N OHO CU 6-r W�NLLt^.t =�R yp y; t A— O _ SI �I o •°` yN Lv M � aw�lC C T 4a '^ O• 9 t. L o d r LC q W d �O.r Y« 9^ V v T N •Oi• O a a 3 O •n u N t N N p q C AE uwi09 v v c� O I d Ntl C C v 6 9 •r L6 y E O� nCT q•� C L N y A N T N y y L L S O E N O N o 9 7 L ar b c c E _ 9 Y •� 1 c T c E O S q O y O.p ^ 9-g,. r `a u o, y; t A— O _ C1 c LOJN a�y � L E u a^v cu .t ..• o •°` c.°..o by ". evv_ Ea NE mI I � 1 / «: \ EL ~ \ § ~�- \ i § \ an . [a 22 EL i § \ an . [a 22 RESOLUTION NO. AOL A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION, APPROVING THE TIME EXTENSION FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 83 -02 WHEREAS, a request has been filed for a time extension for the above- described project, pursuant to Section 17.02.100 of the Development Code; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conditionally approved the above- described project. SECTION 1: The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission has made the following findings: A. That prevailing economic conditions have caused a distressed ,market climate for development or the project. B. That current economic, marketing, and inventory conditions make it unreasonable to develop the project at this time. C. That strict enforeemen,`. of the conditions of approval regarding expirations would not be consistent with the intent of the Development Code. D. That the granting of said time extension will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materiiilly injurious to properties or improvements in the vii :inity. SECTION 2: The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission.hereby grants a time extension for: Project Applicant Expiration DR 83 -02 Barmakian March 23, 1987 APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 9TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 1985. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Dennis L. Stout, Chairman ATTEST: Jack Lam, Secretary 1 i PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION TIME EXTENSION FOR DR 83 -02 October 9, 1985 Page 2 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 9th day of October, 1985, by the following vote -to -wit: AYE;: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: I C=�— \g Em E- E CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT GAO rVCAM.9 2 f n a � O p F Z U > 1977 DATE: October 9, 1985 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Jack Lam, AICP, Community Development Director BY: Nancy Fong, Associati Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 85.20 -'HUYT +.UMBER - A request to construct an 8,000 square foot warehouse building addition to an existing home improvement center and the development of a Master Plan on 2 acres of land in the Office Professional District located at 7110 Archibald Avenue, northwest corner of Base Line Road and Lomita Court - AP" 202- 151 -33. I. BACKGROUND: The Planning Commis ,-ion at its regular meeting of Sept- ember 11, 1985, held a public hearing ?nd continued this item to this meeting. The purpose is to allow time for the applicant to revise the elevations. The applicant is requesting a continuation to November '?, 1985, in order to have enough time to complete the revisions. (See attached letter). II. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commiss ;s,. continue Conditional Use Permit 85 -20 to the November 13, 3-485, regular meeting. 1;R;:, Jack Lam, AICP Community Development Director JL: NF: ev Attachment: Applicant's letter of request ITEM H — REC�tVE ®_. DIiY OF RANCHO C�Ak10NCIA { PLANNING DIVISION I AN CLf oil 1985 718191101ll121112A41S 6 nn I E d' TT[r M" D A XW! TTn nT1. I A 1% /rnWTP A ......_ DATE: October 9, 1985 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Jack Lam, AICP, Commu�iity Development: Director BY: 'ch ;,eyer, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: CONDITIO.'AL USE PERMIT 85 -13 - SHAW - A proposal to locate a caretakers trailer on a Christmas Tree farm, located on 12.8 acres of land on the south side of Baseline, east of Rochester Utility Corridor - APN 227 - 161 -33 I. BACKGROUND: At their September 11, 1985 meeting, the Planning Commission continued this item and directed Staff to contact Southern California Edison to discuss any discrepancies between Edisons and the City's requirements or Conditions of Approval. During his presentation, Mr. Shaw, the applicant, reported that Edison had certain concerns in regards to defining "caretakers" residence and "modular trailer" and the installation of the landscaping. On several occasions, Staff spoke with Mr. Churk Soper, from Southern California. Edison's Property Management Division. Staff was able to clarify caretakers quarters and modular trailer and explain the City's policy on landscape installation to Mr. Soper. On September 17, 1985, Mr. Soper was sent a copy of the September 11, 1985, Planning Commission Staff Report. After reviewing the staff report, Mr. Soper indicated that he had no problems with the City's requirements or Conditions of Approval. II. ANALYSIS: The final alignment of Base Line has been determined. xh € hibitt "C" shows the approximate location of this site and the dedication required for the future right -of -way for Base Line Road. Landscaping /Irrigation plans along Base Line will follow the Victoria Landscape Standards which requires a minimum landscape setback of 21 feet (see Exhibit "D"). The landscape setback is subject to site plan review on a case -by -case basis. Considering the project consists of nursery stock storage, the minimum 21 -foot setback appear appropriate. Currently, the City is working with the William Lyu, Company and Southern California Edison, to relocate the Edison �'ght -of -way (see Exhibit "E "). The proposed relocation would shift the right- of-way sixty feet easterly to achieve the proper alignment of Day Creek Boulevard. However, this portion of Day Creek Boulevard would not be constructed until Victoria Lakes develops in 5 -10 year. ITEM I III. FACTS FOR FiNDING: This project has been determined to: A. Be in accordance with the General Plan, the objectives of the Development Code, the purposes of the district in which the site is located. B. Together with the Conditions applicable thereto, be non - detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare, or materially injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity. C. Comply with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code. III. RECONMENDATION: Staff recommends approval through adoption of the attached Resolution and Conditions of Approval. Respectfully s bmitted, Jack Lam, AICP Community Development Director JL :JM:cv Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Location Map Exhibit "B" - Proposed Site Plan Exhibit "C" - Base Line Road Exhibit "D" - Landscape Setbacks Exhibit "E" - Proposed Relocation Exhibit "F" - Photographs Resolution of Approval w_� Conditions 1—a KE 2 w- Tf V.4 J.0 Ll L�C'\ 'Aanhefl sRx+na�il � , � tN uivx KEaics• �-�� "'�� 15 GgLt.cv.( CotJlfl�nlgZ j � •• r'�sia�.E, 1 s�.k; ! — 15 GAL C�e.YtY�IIZ^ , kXAno1J LFAU40& mince¢ i xem SHED G� NORTH CITY OF ITE% -t: RANCHO CUCAXU.L\GA TITLE: S1T:� . PLANNING 'J-IVISIQN EXHIBIT. -3- SCALP_: >,I�S lu A � F�KISflht� '�AVEM�N� i 14 NORTH CITY OF ITGbI: 40 RANCHO CUCA.MONUA TITLE = BASEt_ NIE tz Q PLANNING DIVISION EXHIBIT. C- SCALE: 1 -s TYPICAL EDGE CONDITIONS MILLIKEN, HIGHLAND, BASELINE, FOOTHILL Section at Commercial Land Uses mins+rsutw 3'�' to�i high psdut�iwer waL� Run. sreia. � suitimuorc. C LN NORTH CITE' OF IMM. RAN -CHO CUCAMONGA TITLE- Y�+� PLANNING DIVLSICXN EXHIBIT =_ - Q _ SCALE; CITY OF RANCHO CUt:AMONGA. PLANNIN r, DIVisiaN 1 -I HEUELEIN NORTH rrEl�t: — TITLE: 2?Pa6'D • P*l-rA EXHIBIT. j5- Sr-ALE. Xrs i I 8i co it W i I � i i O• rp! i !r r I i NAP it z it Ci i i WI i • i 1 7 fI Z 1• IL Ids r W i i 0 j 1 � i 1 I 1 EXISTIh3 i RA.w. 60' SHIFT 1 1 ki • RPROPOSED A•W i CITY OF RANCHO CUt:AMONGA. PLANNIN r, DIVisiaN 1 -I HEUELEIN NORTH rrEl�t: — TITLE: 2?Pa6'D • P*l-rA EXHIBIT. j5- Sr-ALE. Xrs 1 I. ulcam 1•c....r_r.. = .' - _ - _ E�K 13-F I N C� TIZAI Lifk ITELM: TITLE: �FiCStDGr°ir"t�'c �� EXHIBIT. SCALE-. NO porn SroGK, 0,1D t3A5� U N£ �Laly � �S�UtJ� ? .AtNTED Srcc -I-�. [Tr-,1: TI T L.E- �• JO irk CYiZIkPN S E \HIBIT- SCALE- 1-9 El E� 6 1 Io - 1, 7 1 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 85-13 FOR SANTA'S PRIDE CHRISTMAS TREE FARM ,.D TRAILER LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF BASE LINE, EAST OF ROCHESTER IN THE UTILITY CORRIDOR I)ISTRICT WHEREAS, on the 16th day of April, 1985, a complete application was filed by Robert Shaw for revi-aw of the above-described project; and WHEREAS, on the 9th day of October, 1985, I-e Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider the ahove-described project. follows: NOW, THEREFORE, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission resolved as SECTION 1: That the following findings can be met: 1. That the proposed use is in accord with the General Plan, the ob ' Jectives of the Development Code, and the purposes of the district in which the site is located. 2. That the proposed use, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimbntal to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. 3. That the proposed use complies with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code. SECTION 2: That Conditional Use Permit No. 85-13 is approved - subject to the following conditions: PLANNING 1. The removal of all non-conforming structures, signs and trailers within 30 d4ys of this approval. L-A E" 2. If the applicant desires to maintain a trailer, it shall be of modular design and upgraded with deb mg, arbors, trellises and landscaping within six (6) months of installation to the satisfaction of the City Planner. Approval of trailer location shall be obtained from Southern California Edison. The applicant shall contact the Building and Safety Division to obtain appropriate permits prior to installation. 3. Landscape and irrigation along Base Line per Victoria landscape standards shall be installed within six (6) months from approval date. Detailed landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Division within sixty (60) days of this approval. 4. The retail sales of trees will not be allowed. Further, sales s all be liiiited to wholesale of plants grown on- s,,'te. Sale of fertilizers, tools, pots and other non -plant items is not permitted. Seasonal sales of Christmas trees will be allowed with an approved Temporary Use Permit. S. Failure to comply with the Conditions cf Approval will result in revocation of this Conditional Use Permit. ENGINEERING 1. That the trailer be protected from flooding by raising the trailers' pad and or constructing a diversion wall or spike up stream prior to installation. A design for the flood protection measure must be approved by the City Engineer. 2. All materials, including the trailer, to be stored on tFa site shall be secured to prevent floatation and possible damage to downstream property. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 9TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 1985. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Dennis L. Stout, Chairman ATTEST: Jack Lean, Secretary t -\a 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 9th day of October, 19*85, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: 12 lu ILI 1 \L1 L J P O_ h � °u u ° O o 2 y H 0 t F w 'ql u N S N O 6 A N b O v A °a u 2 w d � QY {L NFFE Z O U �h cn N n W C 'ipi TL 4 a m � � v r C O E d � d � u s �O� a udw W G qv l6- F n m z N u ipe e L� Rau rz �~ E • a- K °oz <u r G -S d+l TY L L j 0.�Nq EY ,$ c, cA Nroi vA C •R-Y �CC.C��GNC 1 m T c i EaL C.M.. dw"L C RY Gqw N r r LR A�°cuaM °^ ^L o� 4GW.Ca nk_EE G I NS �r1�u °AOEL "o�cN o D A eC. Nd Wd NC=Y rq ° D L KY. N� A I- rs 11 0 - ��LaCl�a•w.uK d qq LOi �_� A V� .+a AL N�Ir. ^C _dd N6CaLi u°i 0,.-U LO y�daC Y�-Ut R. 6 .Y � d�1q Gq GO 9; C +p E Ndu 9�-- l'a LV �d yy AM• N :moo. • p6L�E Qy�gY .-qM 1°rr C ' �p A� °z.•G. � 07y OC¢p °9M y6t rVq o6E�.t a q 6F�LCyUNU°+''n01U 6Adula ..6.20. O.aYg�� C V LYOd, D way° -. °'n�1OrN�c.4 «.« = ^.ta +°, L.r q'•' .°.i �d� a °.t6 V ca �amdc.- °�YU oc�o�w. Ymo �� *. do p Q� .'1 LgNdCN _E CU�I -° dMd U.0 O:0.0 >An � •eM d O LcL =aY d�E� qK 2 446LOGRi 0��.4+.•. c�' quq�0 •.Ai uar�- E�9Y Ua. q d u ^^'�tY ouu 2u Na R°:Y C�LU E60LL°. in dY .O c �. d . ... day "4 d> e.-3�O nN.... a CO ^ A4 CW°.� G4 Ey�y`O. N Ky�� WrG�FIN 2 u gNYCN 0 o �� .ld� Ny CTa r0- qCl� >.�.0 Yy. I AC a R^ q�O Gcap ' of °JC yu Cµ A ^EUa Yq�dN Y^ O�y. •�- �V1�4jO.�u °R �ALRV 9.'.d .+.Y qLM '. 4 q0. ^,••i G °a.YV w•=i• .N-pC^ �uEE n'G.Idr'OM . NL O�WV Cf YK Aon � off. Y.NC C..�uC LOi `>^� M �t`,qC A�q qWap 61°-o GyY M �YG aCl9 ycQ EQr gtuiV lot• C Y 2° dF L C Oiva N.�{r{....� �C N��C� CC ��y� 6Cd Y M O O y •ril d 6 Y M Q N p1 Y 2 4 0 g m L 6 L p tt M m L J P O_ h � °u u ° O o 2 y H 0 t F w 'ql u N S N O 6 A N b O v A °a u 2 w d � QY {L NFFE Z O U �h cn N n W C 'ipi TL 4 a m � � v r C O E d � d � u s �O� a udw W G qv l6- F n m z N u ipe e L� Rau rz �~ E • a- K °oz <u r G -S d+l TY L L j 0.�Nq EY ,$ c, cA Nroi vA C •R-Y �CC.C��GNC 1 m T c i EaL C.M.. dw"L C RY Gqw N r r LR A�°cuaM °^ ^L o� 4GW.Ca nk_EE G I NS �r1�u °AOEL "o�cN o D A eC. Nd Wd NC=Y rq ° D L KY. N� A I- rs 11 0 ��W.l1 C4:gd tll lI T4.T^ w �w^d�b db du b LE waW 01 - . C a M .. t M L b N W 6 y. O r u t p u U p �• 3 q q N O N V a^.. j a G N..� g-N yltr'1 �.'v 6• �YyO Lo N... O••N ^OW UL,O TLC b •� ^rN ip • p A E Y _r !+ N p1 A 9 d W ._' ° M N rte' 6 L S« b CNN W O Ln ° N G —sag �Oq 3L pq0 A...pA 9°' °'. -C4 ''• y Zq 6L C� HE WN oQrO nd dNti 6L nT = »va' Y.F�`� ^p�p+^C%4 MT..C..y LU^ % =y 4• ,�C„bN -. ++y VV ndL Y b 4 d.^,Nju Nfj w rG•s �q L WW.N F Y " AO°• EO. O• UL =U Vn+wWO T'Y °N yd N W`o. = 96,t q L V V C L~ d g N 9 N GQ = 4a W L^ d y w N Ab Mggcg R.aOi N Y O y L V p Q cH'Y 3� • de p nti� FdO.0 R6Li d ^O glE:r' m ^CF.�. C3+N,.nNL GYN 'N j.F,..C.u.T+ q0. MO M ,iuc✓ dt 4• u L M M .A. p •� O B "` M y L 4 N A Qr d W ^p• G A W N N C • W T � 4. F. N 4 N C. q .t � p ^ ALE s R o0 dC3 41v � C3gY Vr fl' Vy N bq Ov Tay p9 N2.�m.N C,i cs`O NN'.... OMrd Q6 Y aE °I °y 6m CE6� Y. dr CqO EL^'l Y.X4 -_CYNHy ^4' q�b� ^ nt L Lq °LYC 6Cit »A A Nlr. a T NW ^ Y G ^N C ^NO ° � N i Y 3C(m(m�� ,?d MT d d V N v OqO ^d O VF^ U GL =4y^ 7 w CuC . �L W.CTl Y � 6Aj � rY q U M U 6b d 3 q L Y q L YL1 d O4Q - U ^Tc N °b0 W R'd g .M yW Ay ^�. il4Y t. W V Vb p pW GC >G E... w '° .- o .'^• as �K Euy p CMU VIr 1/1MNN4 Z EN dti rN aCW »Y V+O+r6 W�ri CC z t 2 N0.Q Iz u 1 b3i O. Ly CL dT ^ C.^` q bA: •Yb4.b .0 M14CI yl W]1Fd d^^ % p qc N W L �Ta~iO '4.. WV �3 r 1.10. ycNV 20alAU L d N V2,.. UE pb 1°r.�l CPS 6p .0 OA yW� LN OQ y3Q �O c•` ' a^ q L 0. N i q r.1 d' c a > q 9 r G'•" L .2-2. LO V br Tu d^ LOO 0.M W+^•Edib 601 ^^ Or °3F yU TI C y L N a N N gg. W�'1° bNjyrN OqE u^ T � Fao10r LEUC wGN.L 9a pGV N Y O •�'� ^^ O R H O E� �y q.Y O Q'° C V L C .•+. C E Y C' 3T MF. gT N V ii MNyM p U�qb iC11 '6.W tp Rq NA r �A.L 4 33Cy1 Nd N� . I b n Y 0A1 i d J C L y 4 ` w .+ G E> y1 y y N L y O✓ � A ^- u 1 E �> NY'4 'W a01C3 AEG FO aFi? ^ ='F wn nW Y LIM VcpRE � V'•'. 31y O L ,mcY .- •-"emu 3'OW w' `- ��La'P.•A� �< c Actin I rLN� 01a �� a 1n �a yoc cd ce1 •dQa .'.i...� i M m-�.$tci4u .,, .�. qN V„ yF YnM GAG cdy SC yV•^=N QUOrV L WCAM yNW1.a C. N LL.� w A iW. V _. Q C b C p W .A O a u « L O w a'O'^1T >ya Q °V aNp„ T^ WC.- AANONq ¢ ^dam 00 � u C ^' L L N �6 r F aTi �� ~ G b •^ W q^ � p Q d y o C L. L N N E R d C FOl C N v L W N T Y Y d. bl L O Y. A^ c L d 9L P C O b N ^ M C c o S •'• L Lb A� 3 V �..c.. aAG Nc 16 c 9..C.A Lib W qd....E Cyn aW+Q�O ~� ^r. Y'��N 'd.00U t~ WC 6LU0 �AyQOA .� ?CF�y '^y"•r'T G P1 Lb CW O19 N5C CN N��i� ^p + fOi Wpb. ^q VpWN V O NU y dd^. q.L qNC , r° Naas 1°r r GTL .pN£ L y°•, 2. di b EyC FdC�3xA L c Y FPCY MYCW� tip. ON N�4_/+ Y ^' NV VA >. GNb ci OLb� Gam. �C gObe^'�F�116iLW{� LQ °Ny~ a+6 L~ LEeNd 0 dC C alV d 3A G L qC 01�d d01...... q > �'••�° y a W ^•Cb> O,Wy GyNr O O.EE h..r ,C Otq W..g.. GtL .°� .� 01L r.30 V ULOLpw b R G .� p0. C^ L. A _T R 9 0 .•. U 4 C � U. b r d N O � d. i W A V Lq d W u a U O W O L O E. } C 9 II L G � N 6 1= s N c a K.O• n ° `C t� 6.0 c E L s n O A N19S GV ..1Yb Q.W AM Q1...�. + - «YNLO TF^wCn�Kga N wed w 13 11 L O A O qL O d a Cy 01t O a iLdC N i.Iy O T O O y► V1 u' Z qY L T b L EY Y C tiw qx OX .°p. ► IY qai q� cOGO ydlI Y =i a°i'q n�o -° bYM"C Iua� « c °u9v L6 WN N �. I^ •pL POq GV =,UiOd L IPyw qSI' ►O t M I 1t d ° 6 ° Y y.► L y� O N d ► Y d y q'oON• -• U° I O ^ .•OV =��0 H G Eiiv it I -.'o Nu ► djAy w ^l U pp G y p N IG � qO qy L y q Y �_L q L 0^ O` Y L a C> •a N � I ►+ (7 USIy^ YI p^�; N.y -O O U N `da • yY =NC Z a ^ y IVN >► NYw• yYp yu ^ y~� Y, `Iy �yL 1q. i010 SL V Yq Y. y =_ 2► NNq d1 Vb�� L'AC ° ° ►N Waq dy.Or.M {9 °I '^a p o olpi� 1 H=x a.q °^ 0o o ^< °L NLa ��°�vy.•wycmuq�rc No�pY eq 'G°c.°..+ aqo n c ,alq � dN d^ OpOO d=N da MYL Ay O O6i'� qu °N� T IN ►° ^o•-I ►nyyN LqG GL �CNyd � ►� «N i`eytCl E N d d y a ►� 4. N K n y N C N dN t Y Y Q C� CC q '.+.aid .3 V �a1 ovd nib ►° I U I N I la+ a I n 4 N I •_ nw ° 6 y O •� I O.^ Y. a E C N L _ U Y R W► UG b ►LOY wbL EN G EN Eu .•q Ldp nLL VO dPI�.�YLL7Ay >� LNV NN L6.0 6a•= q ° �OIp«N NO`IL C�•`O-- Ndo6 >jC A9 •Nloy E w •.`-U E d ady P o t -..2 € u o db L RI NI SDI ^I Y r O� > E1 6 0 d IA Gb °E S. u �^_, u YS Lac �n °n N., E.+ c i`n M oy rs o,y aIUp a= Ion c.c� Yn dO dg1L £R eya rd Eu q•._ p°T yi_> a IL Iq z ' N�, Ly >.•. •a,,b y �.a ba I G2. dI Ob dN W pd N `Q LT6y UN Or L6 G1 b -`p aa> Ydae 'va D =I r q9 a s .Oy dO cTap KO'NE g2 ~a�i nN o�o a - =aG oML =Y. udid A .,n 22.3 NN•r..i �'► Td L�•° �+b�^ pr,N y• �m Q�Ir� do I GN � ^Qq • L9N d b► by0 V� :la CY �` > u �I Eu NY y n► UI 6Y= i ON m `O^ t E ►W L °I se O p w 6.• TE L I q '^ G Y N h ♦ ► ► I O ut A V3u M ° •4 N A p N n 9' u Ir .p d CC E ► V d N u L •r p y w Y C N> M y 0 OLL y . < p• Q OL L L` N i y C9 y Nay M y I E y .+ .-. °• G d N 'Gp'G^N9y E a T p n` V L N .2 S Iva [. ► L Y J t < Y{ y E I O ► r C QU Ga.i 60 HO ►I C> G V c6 4. L Y 9 a 4G6 <NOi• WLL n�NMV 1f. b I ^ I ` 6 N �� !•f ♦ N m C Iy C; W 13 11 ,�` C9 S Q•a EY r� � dy Y O o y • L�u ,� Oj. yO 2N�LLq qN.�T G .v da •+... qN� C= d.q .0. �o c� aq L•�.•o= 'vu Y • K.yv GM C'= q L Q' �Sy GEdY ° > rYG ~� G M V O O° Qa A •"` C q C -25 d y qTn Nq � -Z2 paOiV •n •n= i L v+�+s^ o gi r uq EC O d r O• � i.^ r A l -LOiWL U P•r oNV d ?6d xgLN u N Y aA ...• d.°+° M G•_- Y'CCq EE 9 5 AO N q+• GC` tyPOA.•. �.N. YG T`d,q G ^> t N V W Y p G A O b�p N3� c.�•tnQ� Y'•N„ �` pp A^ L may^ O A C L EE y•a. T E CYNp� ,Vr yCr Win.- d^V SC N 't—M. Y L .Y _yea 6 L n✓ O. Y• cn�6 R E N � Y �m 0... •- NNgG. •at Cq rx me H 4DA <� =ACCd la- 40.•ta Yf� aLiod o a4 z-k •O� q 1�� p G� C� c ^dG� °.q-•c � � R yQ u C li o�uai u e rOd L 0 • V e� Y i. a+LM dy Y N N o y ,� Oj. yO 2N�LLq qN.�T G .v da •+... qN� C= d.q "� »•a e. c� aq A uCq S � .+✓ O g m V d G p ° g d W V Ear U ? aO3C9 a ~� G M TE W 'O q4.V> CO6d€ U9 »B as LO n ' yam^ '•'.« 9tiu� Lam.. a LNUEq d r O• � i.^ r A l -LOiWL U P•r oNV d ?6d xgLN u N t7 e ...• N S ° ^ I..0 AZ� Y°dO r0 a+LM Ad 9MC, VL Y AvN NVA da •+... qN� C= NN A uCq bt G, U ^ d G Y n ' yam^ '•'.« G p z'Lop rn -2°Z O pp •� y ;am.m • +t+ A °d d.°+° a° aa• tqC d d q Y1 Y N �YY i. T`d,q .u'O E�avp NUO -hs p � AN N > Y Np•^ �` N`q • O Ny ^ O � °p Y• LT d y T E OOH y ^ACN: C yNY q qn �yy �Aa �Ld^ '�° E GLpu ��t N �a� L` a NNgG. •at Cq rx qv0- qVN �1.d »SQ m� ^° ONpfd. �"� add s;qm q.� .•�� 79 Ya. ,o L.°, z^ .. dN? qra� c �dregr r -�>[ �ona' ni` `dau^ pcv� w� N=•d,+ c=`o N.�cd �. a. A •u C��uq u ci°' 'O w.Cd c � ion q Pq`p^ Nca 1D101 '0.°c CCYY t VE00 �`" c OOL+ yGLb _ `y Ir ~CNNw dN NLY ^a. YEq� 6 = 1.^.. `9LL COY O• L r a.wL r N .0 Y M N N+• 2 O^ �OiGO 1 4 E� u p n N =C� L W C N •� y .t, c d E O E^ `� w�L wp= O° Ey DEL 6> Y O O. Li• V •T ~I til �� N� �I � ^l N� ` 4 y00 p'}C ✓t M�nW � C C d NOAC ^M pyq u' o ^ao rnE fj up�.9.. a' a Crn Ntll iN4 Om'S Y4Y p a V 'ON O Ask N d {.� M•-d >C. }�.-6 CV NL y «r a,•.•. r O� V W « • 6 W 4qGION � O YyN NO a 4d Z yj° AYq wx NG..°r r•Y °j ai AaN '^ 30'. 4 W. Z ` e�ou y� �NU L 3. NY •O L l��r sjC 4.r, °O ~G u @Nr YN 6 AE�pGhL" u O Q O 6d � u ♦.- 4y ^ O CCRO @�.Oq Y°.�Y. yx° no V°-O n V 0.Y; Na 0.q d G aYU ' ym ..atC 8w. 4 .•«°. Yi r Ow TI NE p« c C« a xdp Y¢ p�C «d • NCY nNLN ygaaV'^+ N Y LdyA Laai da'N �� a NR vrit � °O O AyNG� O. °a 1= i Y . C ^O ~ Y LULL iy+ Y C q o q& G• N °� qw HYi. wI .Y.i� aovu`o -. s > 2 ea•�.L. of u N uo o° Lc .- .°.��vaa' � D d > 4 O O OOrW GW •-IN U9 44 oGM ryi p 6 V-r+ Iz LLC� y�Y'« lm�ayG 'C ^m ° C Yp^ Y '^ yp L "'R 'o 0 N Nup Lp u� y Tl G Y °L YC d'6NC aJ ...0 � L L N • YYg6 as dq.1�Q� xo °a Y c •° -.qY. a mm.�,.c •+� b N b� d0. Yy NgNn G �GT 4? FG: rN a nEy 6 I .-. q vq bOy L� _ G O°� yqu C� -19.4 C4uaY+.,g u MLOy-- EE Y�6 a Tq 9.F � 6y YN u..• -° MgNY. CO~«l " No dou c NLV?`��a MM °1$sn c� 4N br..°Ys T1q CQY 5Z-' 1-L C yL �4 LV Gp x_51 Oa Yi O Nu 6 L'�'p N NYCR CiL M OmYY �m xEE bC D >.Y Y�Y O L_ V uC•- ^ G6C Yw ° Y 4q + N �� yQy��• 4Y..O N WNO •' WYLQ �6 u 109 nx NN 4r 60 `. 01V� « N.A+ot � L LW � YxrY 9 N i... u v 'u °z z.� < oL m •Gm o`� p o Y CCE Y@ Y •� Go 4^ -..G Y y.G � O o O. rVT„ G E s N oo °u NNE q N L ui <a .O 6. 9 Q <I Y 4 L � tl e: V y� N« m ^p ^c Y " Z; Y V L "Vr'd pY YT "° ^wy yNO N a a9 • •' LNG Y �O u9 uoY ECE U Gqr `N. G N Q Yin° ri o; r uao K x {T iL q' c u'�Sl" °�°e °n$ v '"« "° •4o a N9 aGO �utoe A � �= n•' °�AQw �qC • 9yy^ aCYL °y`O•N x CN LPY••'Y ^M EL v5.O Wl CMG C°fldW' qy?y n�L,d� ° pU6 q� n V°a°. G � + >YC na cY nV4 al ^qr•. CY N�. Yg V{x1 "�° O �^ a G% p°�'G°a�yV 0 &6 & & &1 •°,. NELQ NL= dO C G� V 6� CLAY .G °� OGdIO _ OL p R4 Ct °6 ® "` Y O•� G N Ly Oj .• y3F E 4 V d° � p ml V O YQ 144 �aN O yNLY bN�V„L °p 6L 4.-.W D. c y:= Y�OM .GOC Z y WA Y LAaw yi.. N Mfla 4 ut° 6Y �Nr Ci. p ~uf +.0 tT^ V �ep �y LN Via. m.L-?A ZN N vs N6W a•°- QO. aSiY ��•Owr NO 6WY ^� Qtl iiu 1.� %Li9GiV+ ^O oG 4. WMNLLi� 26 UV �I �I ml •Q N « aeN.roo L � L LW � YxrY 9 N i... u v 'u °z z.� < oL m •Gm +•G 4 4 L y CCE Y@ 4^ -..G Y N � O o O. rVT„ G E DJ o ui <a 9 Q >y�^ �O u9 44 ECE U Gqr `N. G N Q dal 6 Q L V •~ ri o; N I.1 L s S O " 9 0 4f� Q O y 6q L Y M O W H N J o O = n++ N � O o O. rVT„ G E DJ o ui <a 9 Q <I E d N u � I 1 C 1 tl e: V W •G w N -ao ti L 0 r to " 9 ocy zarFl o y 6q L Y M O O a o O = n++ N u v c EE iCr° O. rVT„ G E o 9 Q <I E d N u � I 1 C 1 to M ^_ T + M Co 0 O y c Co N C O � �° W a.« Na 4 N9 4.ti a Y d ^ 2 au + d 6Y Y L M h C Y N ss «+ g + C N vv ti c q L p q $$ ^ io, q Y« • Nwo n ^O ue S a 0 V p y C C V O } a T C •d � °• c V� ? cY yV '�LFd �c cs 2% V N Yx+ d � Y V n e y Y « Yw g C IL O., °m N� �w w°. �ci a0 GN V w N •r u E 4°Y C6N • Y O 1� V H '^! Ln a'a 'y Y YC Ll a N M 4 C •� pp � FtI °� • Cp r.Y i n. •°iY Y2.°,. yL1.E �C C .Cq q °.• NES ONE ri 40� ^c •L.• npc� •� O aI ri r !n u � M ^_ T + M Co 0 O y c Co N C O � �° W a.« Na 4 N9 4.ti a Y d ^ 2 au + d 6Y Y L M h C Y N ss «+ g + C N vv ti c q L p q $$ ^ io, q Y« • Nwo n ^O ue S a 0 V p y C c,..,v i � •d � °• c V� °t cY yV '�LFd �c cs 2% o°fin Yx+ d � Y V n e y Y « u g C IL n tluN I�� u E 4°Y C6N S•pHp •C V�1 YYO C .+L� ��a O � � x C G O � S N U F R n Y O C r T � r s •• au �u on vT N C Y NG q w Y V O C a, CC @ u a rp, w V V ^ Y yV aci w � ^ N A M1 I -GZk Yy ^ Y 6 t y! w +• M Y p C q O q ,q V V tl N N.Lq C v `N a r N N C i V G � y aoc �• cp' NR 4ary �W m{ ai nL1 N or ° YVO Y ..Na 0 LLLL~ =0 Y. + O C Y L.•y N O yyV�� V vL qF•y a � o • Y L�12 Q� y o ` Y a � Y L O M n O M W a v N � � �i ca q � io ss v n aW �� O r•y w O L ••C. .c Y i.? nti C« ! E A c 11 E CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA 0, STAFF REPORT s : d r O O U �> DATE: October 9, 1985 1977 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Jack Lam, Community jevelohment Director BY: John R. Meyer, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: ENVIROVENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 85 -24 ON MEDIC-AL —A nroposai to establish a l -t;nur emergency ufance and dispatch office in an existing buildirq located at 9921 8th Street (Subarea 5 of the Industrial Specific Flan) - APN 209 - 201 -16 I. PROJECT AVj SITE DESCR PTION: A. Action Requ ^sted: Approval of Conditional Use Permit and issuance of a Negative Declaration. B. Purpose: To establish a 2'-hour ambulance service. ;. Location: 9921 gth Street (within existing Pierre Biane Brothers {Winery facility). D. Parcel Size: 6 acres. E. Existing Zoning: Subarea 5 (General Industrial /Rail Served). F. Existing Land Use: Winery. G. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: Nort - Low Residential. South - Industrial Subarea 5). East - Industrial Subarea 5). West Industrial (Subarea 5). H. General Plan Designations: Project to - Genera Industrial /Rail Served (Subarea 5). North - Low Residential. South - General Industrial /Pail East - General Industrial /Rai'( ServeJ. West - General Indt!srrial /Rail Served. I. Site Characteristics: 'the site is an old winery facility. ITEM J PLkdNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ANN CUP 85 -24 October 9, 1985 Page 2 F] II. ANALYSIS• A. General: Canyon Medical service has proposed to locate its ambulance servica within the old Pierre Biane Brothers Winery site. Currently, 'this site is being sub - leased to individual industrial users. Canyon Medical,, classified as a public safety service, is required to receive an approved Conditional Use Permit at this location. They are locating in an old residential structure on the perimeter, of tha site. Adequate parking fo, this use has been provided. B. Envircamental Assessment: Part I., of the Initial Study has been completed by staff. It has bean determined that there is a potential impact on noise. The arbulances siren wil' aenc� *ate temporary noise levels that could be annoying to surrounding neighborhoods. This use, however, will not exceed the 65 Ldn performance standard set forth in the Industrial Specific Plan Liable III -6j for Subarea 5. III. FACTS FOR FINDINGS• This project is consistent with the Industr -!41 Area pec:fic-Man and the General Plan. The proposed use toge with the recommended conditions of approval will not be detrime a to the public health or naterlally injurious to properties vicinity. IV. CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised as a public hearing in th' e D.y Report Newspaper, tha property posted and the notices were sent to grope -ty owners within 300 feet of the project site. V. RECD MENDATION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission c,nsider all material and inpu, rsgare;ng this project. I` after _ such consideration, the Coaniss,�n tan s!_sr,�ort the Facts for Findings and •t a Conditions of Approval, a:.o-,rtion of the attached °esol«tion would be 'appropriate, Respe 461y submitted, Community Dvelopment Director dL:dM:ko •Attachm- 6s: Letter from r,p� Exhibit "A" - Lr. Exhibit "F° - Site r" Initial Study Part I3 Resolution of Approval with Conditions J _ 0 C sop 60. Noith 13th Avenue Upland, California 91786 f` (714) 946 -6658 August 5, 1985 ` Planning Commission City of Rancho Cucamonga City Hall 9320 Baseline Road Rancho Cucamonga, Cal_fornia 91701 Dear Sirs: Th_q letter_ will serve to fulfill Re^uirement 3 of the Request for a Conditional Use Permit. Canyon Medical Service, Inc., proposes i:o establish general administrative, dispat•:h, and operational ambulance offices at the site most commonly referred to as 9921 East Eighth Street, Rancho Cucamonga, California. This office AOL t will be occapied on a twenty -four hour per duy, 365 days per year resis. The !CC maximum number of emplo•eE3 to occupy the buildi-ig at and given time wilt aP eight. The Conditional Ise Permit is request ^d for this site in ar;cordance with appropriate City Or inane,.: applicable to the property in rmestion. e If I may be of further-service, Tease, eo rot hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, names X. Latipow President k, Canyon Medical, Service, Inc. 3X /mo Y j tt. ^ i 8TH ST. �4it �pN 4� s\ \t/ En. ►�oYEES .ANO VeAi`„f/'Y 3 ; `,i a c..avca�Ces llp EN naNCE -3 /10' �\� \• EKISrIN4 oLfT EyA • �,G � � W 47 tillLQtNG- GAPE VjKFyARD /\mil % R u t LA I (( s FP4cCS 0 ANA OMvE4)gys At2E 1�2F- �icIST(ti((� I CHAIN LINK 3 c(oq PENCE I ` 83' � fly Lam( 169' A -PNpIT - A Z X12• —_ ;• u'47, CHAIN L1Ntq ifK(G 14' � NURTH CiT T OF ITENI - RANCHO CUCAMOTNTGA TITLE: X17 PLANNING DIVISION EXHIBIT. �_ SCALE- J -� �4it �pN 4� s\ \t/ En. ►�oYEES .ANO VeAi`„f/'Y 3 ; `,i a c..avca�Ces Ys' �\� \• EKISrIN4 oLfT EyA • �,G � � W 47 NURTH CiT T OF ITENI - RANCHO CUCAMOTNTGA TITLE: X17 PLANNING DIVISION EXHIBIT. �_ SCALE- J -� N R DATE: ' APPLICA`i: FILING DATE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PART II - INITIAL'STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST PROJECT LOC.II:ION:_ /S -ID I. EWtIIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (Explanation of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required on attached sheets). Im YES MAYBE NO I. Soils and Geology. Will the proposal hays significant t:esults in: a, Unstable ground conditions or in changes in / l* geologic relationships? / b. D.Lsruptions, displacements, compaction or burial or the soil? c. ,Change in topography or ground surface `m- contour intervals? d. The destruction, covering or modification of any % unigae geologic or physical features? 1/ e. Any Potential increase in wind or water erosion of soils, affecting either on or off site conditons? f. Clianges in erosion siltation, or deposition? g. Exposure of people or property to geologic ha-ards 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. btydrology. Will the proposal have significant results in Pa$e ? YES ','`aYBE No a. Changes in currents, or the course of direction Of flowing streams; rivers_, or ephemeral stream / channels? b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface water runoff? c. Alterations to the course or flow of flood Waters? I 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? J Change g• g in tha uantit 4 y of groundwaters, either through direct :Zdditions 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 Feople or pzoperty to water related hazards such as flooding or seiches? _ 3. Air Quality, Will the proposal have significant insults in: a. 'Constant or periodic air emissions from mobile or in6irect source ? Stationary sources? b. Deterioration of ambient air quality and /or interference with the attainment of applicable / air quality standards? c. Alteration of local or r- gionai climatic conditions, affectin-, air movement, moisture or'temperature? 4, Biota _ Flora. Will the proposal have significant results xn: - Aft a. Change in the characteristics of species, incl: ding d versity, distribution, or number P of any species of plants? Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of plants? - 1 (I A ?age 3 YES `kYBE No c. Introduction of new or disruptive species of plants into an area? d. Reduction in the potential for agriculturalJt 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? L 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 :'ish or wildlife habitat? 5. Population. Will the proposal have signi-icant results in: a- Will the proposal Uter the location, distri- bution, density, diversity, or growth rate of the human population of an area? b. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? _ - 6. Socio- Economic Factors. W7U1 the proposal have significant results ia: a- Change iu local or regional socio- economic haracteristics, including economic or commercial diversity, tax rate, anu property values? b. Will project costs be equitably distributed among project beneficiaries, i.e., buyers, tax payers or project users? 7. Land Use and Pianni - Considerations. Will the proposal have significant results in? a. A substantial alteration of the present or plan•,ied land use of an area? b. A !,oRfliczwith any designations, objectives, P,jlicies, or adopted Plans of any governa.Fntal entities? f C- An impact upan the qulaity or quantity of existing consumptive or non- corsumptive — Y recreational opportunities? Y Page k r� YES MAYBE NO 8. Transportation. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Generation of substantial additional vehi:ular movement? l ,% b. Effects on existing streets, or demand for new street construction? L 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 f potential water - borne, rail, mass transit or air traffic? J/ g. Increases in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? 5. Cultural Resources. Will the proposal have r significant results in: a. A disturbance to the inteZrity of archaeological, paleontological, and /or historical resources? 10. Health. Safetv_z and Nuisance Factors. Will :he _ proposal have significant results in: a. Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard? b. EXIOsur(a of people to potential health hazards? u- A r.tsk of explosion or release of hazardous r substznces 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 noise levals? f. Exposure of people to potentially dangerous noise levels? g. The creation of objectionable odors ?. h. An increase in light or glaze? r� A Page 5 YES `_AYBE NO 11. Aesthetics. Will the proposal have significant vt�sults in: a. The obstruction or degradation of any scenic I vista or view? I b. The creation of an aesthetically offensive _J site? c. A conflict with the objective of designated _J or potential scenic corridors? 12. Utilities and Public Services. will the proposal have a significant need for new systems, or a3ter;,ci_Qns to the following: a. Electric power? b. Natural or packaged gas' c. Communications systems? d. Water supply? Y e. Wastewater facilities? f. Flood control structures? g. Solid waste facilities? r / h. Fire protection? i. Police protection? J J. Schools? J k. Panes or other recreational facilities? _ J 1. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads and flood control facilities? _ m. Other governmental services? 13. Energy and Scarce Resaurces 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 reX sources of energy? r d. An increase or perpetuation of the consumption of non - renewable forms of energy, When fea.;ible renewable sources of energy are available? _ (M TS J WY A2r5E Arr r AttcNr3 � Zue so r¢ WPr- L4dAp `�ee2 Yr5►rttat'1. Jcle ='r¢'049 M4Y CAO-' E �tfsFFt' IRR1i:}'(1 ' J -�1 (l Page b YE.; MAYBE NO e. Substantial depletion of any nonrenewable or scarce natural resource': 14. Mandatory Findings of Significance. - a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantiaYly 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 ani=_l 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 Crlifornia history or prehistory? d1 b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short -term, to the disadvantage of long -term, environmental goals? (A short -term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of titae while long- term impacts will endure well Into the future). Y 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 view..d in connection with the effects of past projects, and probable future projects). d. Does the project have environmental effects / which will cause sue;stantial adverse effectu Avj on human beings, either directly or indirectly? _ II. ' DISCUSSION OF EMITRONM'MAL EVALUATION (i.e., of affirmative answers to the above questions plus a discussion of proposed mitigation measures). (M TS J WY A2r5E Arr r AttcNr3 � Zue so r¢ WPr- L4dAp `�ee2 Yr5►rttat'1. Jcle ='r¢'049 M4Y CAO-' E �tfsFFt' IRR1i:}'(1 ' J -�1 (l III. DETERMINATION On the basi., of this 1:1tial evaluation: onfthe environment, and j andacNFCA IVENDECL�ITIONiwillibenrrepared. I find that although the proposed project could h,ve a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a e'.gnificant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATI':E DECLARATION HILL BE PREPARED. ❑ I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the envirnment, and an ENVIRONMENT IMPACT REPORT is Qui;ed. Date 64-1 / /•��( /I Race 7 LA IM W RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.. 85 -24 FOR THE ESTABLISHING OF A 24 -HOUR EMERGENCY AMBULANCE AND DISPATCH OFFICE 10CATED AT 99218TH STREET IN SUBAREA 5 WHEREAS, on ti:a 30th day of August, 1985, r complete application was filed by James Latipaw for review of the above - described project; and WHEREAS, on the Pth day of Oct0er, 1985, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission held a public hearing to cons der the above- described projer .. NOW, THEREFORE, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission resolved as follows: SECTION 1: That the following findings can be met: 1. That the proposed use is in accord with the General Plan, the objectives of the Industrial Specific Plan, and the purposes of the district in which the site is located. 2. That the proposed use, trgether with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. 3. That the proposed use complies with each of the applicable pwovisions of i:.he Industrial Specific Plan. SECTION 2: That this project will not create adverse impacts on the environment and that a. Negative Declaration is issued on October 9, 1985. SECTION 3: That Conditional Use Permit No. 85 -24 is approved subject to the follow;ng conditions: 1. This approval shall run with the applicant and shall become vnid upon a change of ownership or the use ceases. 2. Approval of this request shall not waits compliance with all sections of the Industrial Area Specific Plan, all other applicable City Ordinances, and applicable community plans or specific plans in effect at the time of occupancy. E' 3. Any signs proposed for this Conditional Use Permit shall be designed in confornl�ince with the _�— 1Z' PLANNING COMMISSIC "4 RESOLUTION CUP 85-24 Cctober 9, 1985 Par 2 review and approval by tyz Planning Division prior 40 to installation of such signs. 4. If the operation of this ambulance facility causes adver *e r,rfects �.toor the surrounding uses, the Conditional Use Pe" -iiAt shall be brought before the Planning Commission for their consideration and possible termination of such +"se. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 9TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 1985. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO WCAMONGA BY: •Denais L. Stout, I. airman ATTEST: Jack Lam, Secretary 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 introdurd, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of tha Planning Commission held ;,n the 9th day of Oc"aber, 1985, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: E 0701 --02 o 10 -9 -85 P.C. Agenda Packet o Page - of 6 E in- DATE: TO: FROM: BY: SUBJECT: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT GtJCAryp�C9• � s n O O V ? October 9, 1985 i97� Chairman and Members of the Planning ;;ommission Jack Lam, AICP, Community Development Director John Meyer, Assistant Planner ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 85 -10 - PULLIAM - A request to install a trailer as a temporary office for a building supplies sales business on 3 acres of land within the Southern California Edison Utility Corridor located at 12051 Arrow highway, west of Devore Freeway - APN 229 - 121 -27. I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action Requested: Approval of Conditional Use Permit, :; to Mn, elevations and issuance of a Negative Declaration. B. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North - Utility Corridor, Wholesale Nursery South - Devore Freeway East - Flood Control and Devore Freeway West - Vacant, Subarea 9 C. General Plan Designations: Project Site - Utility Corridor North - Utility Corridor South - Devore Freeway East - Flood Control and Devore Freeway West - Minimum Impact /Heavy Industrial I. Site Characteristics: The project site is relatively flat, with building materials on display in the front portion of the parcel and plant stock on the rear. II. ANALYSIS: A. General: Building supplies and sales is a permitted use within Subarea 9, of the Industrial Area Specific Plan. However, the ITEM K PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Conditionai Use Permit 85 -10 - Pulliam October 9, 1985 Page #2 El installation of a temporary caretakers quayzers does require approval of a Conditional Use Permit. Subarea 9 carries a General Plan Designation of Minimum Impact /Heavy Industrial, and therefore, allows outdoor storage. The ISP states such storage areas shall be screened within 120 feet of the property line. Further, all outdoor storage within 600 of the Devore Freeway right -of -way, shall be screened from public view from 'be Devore Freeway. Through the use of dense landscaping this can be achieved at this site. The Planning Commission has recently recommended approval for an amendment to the ISP which would change this site from Subarea 9 (Minimum Impact /Heavy Industrial) to Subarea 13 (General Industrial). This use is permitted in a General Industrial District and all conditions would remain applicable. B. DesigniTechnical Review Committee: The Design Review Committee has recommended of the project ^•pith the following improvements which the applicant has agreed to do: 1. Upgrade the trailer through the use of decking, arbors and landscaping. z. Installation of a 45 foot landscape setback area along ;grow. C. Environmental Assessment: Part one of the Initial Study has Teen completed by the applicant. However this project lies within flood zone "A ", (100 year flood district as determined by FEMA). To mitigate this, the Engineering- Division has required that the trailer oad be elevated or a diversion wzll or dike be constructed upstream. In additia.., all materials within the trailer must be secured to prevent floatation and possible damage downstream. Staff has determined that the project, together with the Conditions of Approval, would not create any adverse impacts. III. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: This project has been determined to: A. Be in accordance with the General Plan, the objectives of the Industrial Specific Plan, the purposes of the district in which the site is located. B. Together with the Conditions applicable thereto; be non- detrimental to health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to property or improvements within the City. C. Comply with each of the applicable provisions of the Industrial Specific Plan. iC -a. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Conditional Use Permit 85 -10 - Pulliam October 9, 1985 Page #3 AdNk IV. CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised as a Public Nearing in The Daily Report newspaper, the property posted, and notices sent to all property owners within 300 feet of the project site. V. RECOMMENDATION: It is recon ended that the Plc wing Commission consider all material elements of this project. If after such considerations, the Commission can support the Facts for Findings and Conditions of Approval, adoption of the attached Resolution would be appropriate. Resp ctfully su fitted, Jack Lam, AICP Community Development Director JL:JM:cv U Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Location Map Exhibit "B" - Proposed Site Plan Initial Study Part II Resolution of Approval with Conditions K3 4-,3 F C C ... .......... 31t10� /H1Q!l�ii '.;.�: o.•.yJ'M�1S'a....... TI LOS lfllYO � %1/ 1l/ 111 i : 7 1 / 7 717 1/77 1171 / , ---------------- ------- fntY9 f QOM ✓� trnucii OC7 tY: c•c^ ��i.osia� 8 8 �C� � ��/ a 0 i ;, W 2-Vi to X90 V r tip fii P7i e, Va CD cob o-, eq�yC�o �' La c1p 33 04 CcOaOC7 6\ -SST 6Qao NCB At,�D VEND- CITY OI';l RANCHO CLTCAMON� GA TITLE: _S,l-� PLANNING DIVISIOiN EXHIBIT.---A5 SCALE: NORTH CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PART II - INITIAL STUDY ENVIPOtiMENTAL CHECKLIST DATE: APPLICAXT:�11_1_ FILING DATE:__yj1_7 Zr LOG NUMBER: GU PROJECTr' - r1 PROJECT LOCATION: 14' I. ENVIRO`MENTAL IMPACTS (Explanation of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required on attached sheets). MAFBE NO 1. Soils and Geoloev. Will the proposal hays significant _YES _ results in: a. Unstable ground conditions or in changes in geologic relationships? b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or burial of the soil? / C. ,Change in topography or ground surface contour intervals? d. The destruction, covering or modification r _ 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? f. Changes in erosion siltation, or deposition? g. Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mud- slides, ground failure, or'similar hazards? / h. An increase in the rate of extraction and /or use of any mineral resource? 2. Hydroloev. Will the proposal have significant results in: Y — Page 2 1 LA YES MYBE N0 a. Changes in currents, or the course of direction Of flowing streams, rivers, or ephemeral stream channels? b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or 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, either through direct additions or with- drawals, or through interference with aquifer? an Quality? Quantity? h. The reduction in the amount of water other- wise available for / public water su - plies? / I- Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding )r seiches? , 3. Air quality. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Constant ors periodic air emissions frc,m 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? S 4. Biota ' Flora. Will the proposal have significant results in: AL 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? LA c. Introduction of new or disruptive species of plants into an area? d. Reduction in the potential for agricult+l .i 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, dis ° --ri- bution, density, diversity, or growth rate of the human population of an area? b. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? 6. Socio- Economic Factors. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Change iu 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 beneficiaries, i.e., buyers, tax payers or project users? 7. Land Ilse and Plannine Considerations. Will the proposal have significant results in? a. A substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? b. A conflict with any designations, objectives, Policies, or adopted plans of any governmental entities? C. An impact upon the qulaity or quantity of existing consumptive or non - consumptive recreational opportunities? 'age 3 YES `L4yBE `0 1 1 Page 4 a YES 8. Transrortation. Will the, proposal have ;L4Y3E NO results in: significant a• Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? J b. Li fects 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 goods? f. Alterations to or effects on present and potential water— borne, rail, mass transit or air traffic? g. Increasas in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? AVk 9. Cultural Resources. Will the 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 have significant results in: a. Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard ? / b. Exposure 'if people to potential health hazards? �. C. A risk of expfosion 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 noise levels? f. Exposure of people to potentially dangerous noise levels? / g. The creation of objectionable odors? r h. An increase in light or glare? a Page S 40 11. Aesthetics. Will the proposal have significant results ino a. The obstruction or degradation of any scenic vista or view ? / I +, The creation of an aesthetically offensive site? f c. A conflict with the objective of designated or potential scenic corridors? 12. Utilities and Public Services. Will the proposal have Y a significant need for new systems, or alterations to the fol�oving: a. Electric power? % b. Natural or packaged gas? c. Comm aications systems: % d. Water supply? I e. Wastewater facilities? f. Flood control structures? f g• Solid waste facilities? h. Fire protection? 3. Police protection? J. Schools? k. Parks or other recreational facilities? 1. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads and flood control facilities? m. Other governmental services? I 13. Enemy and Scarce Resources- Will the proposal have s� �gnificant results in: i a. Use of substantia :. or excessive fuel or energy? f 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 consumption ~ of non - renewable forms of energy, when feasible renewable sources of energy are available? Page 6 YES M_i "Y3E NO _ ` e. Substantial depletion of any, nonrenewable or scarce natural resource? 14. Mandatory Findings of Significance. a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environments, 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 crrmmunity, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of Califor +a 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 impce on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive perird of time while long- / term impacts will endt.re well into the future). _ c. Does the project have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively F, considerable? (Cumulatively considerable means that the incremental effects of an F individual project are considerable When viewed to conne_tion 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 EM URO*N1404TAL EVALUATION (i.e., of affirmative answers to the above questions plus a discussion Of proposed mitigation measures). III. DETER` MINATIO1 4� the sis of this initial evaluation: I find the proposed project CO= 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 an':ironment, there Will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on a, attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIt, DECLARATIO,4 WILL BE PREPARED. I find the proposed project :LAY have a significant effect on the envirnment, ..id an E,%TlRoNM. %qT TVDA1, Date Page 7 I d La RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO r'JCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE r,..MIT NO. CUP 85 -10 FOR A TEMPORARY CC9FTAKER'S FACILITY IN CONJUNCTION WITH A BUILDING SUPPLIES AND SALES YARD LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF ARROW HIGHWAY, WEST OF THE DEVORE FREEWAY IN SUBAREA 9. WHEREAS, on the 22nd day of July, 1985, a complete application was filed by John Pulliam for review cf the above- described project; and WHEREAS, on the 9th day of October, 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 It That the following findings can be met: 1. That the proposed use is in accord with the General Plan, the objectives of the Development Code, and the 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 healt`^, 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 the environment and that a Negative Declaration is issued on October 9, 1985. SECTION 3: That Conditional Use Permit No. 85 -10 is approved subject to the following conditions and attached Standard Conditions: Design Review: 1. The remova, of all non- conf,rmfijg structures and signs within 30 days of this approval. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION Conditional Use Permit 85 -10 Page f2 2. The trailer shall be upgraded with decking, arbors, trellises, and landscaping within 6 months of approval date, to the satisfaction of the City Planner. 3. Landscape and irrigation is required; 1) along Arrow Highway per Industrial Specific Plan landscape standards and 2) fast growing and dense trees and shrubs along the east property line and 3) fast growing and dense trees and shrubs along the west property line within 120 feet of front property line. All above conditions shall be installed within six (6) months from approval date. Detailed landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Division within sixty (60) days of this approval. 4. The retail sales of trees will not be allowed. Further, sales shall be limited to wholesale of plants grown on -site. Sale of fertilizers, tools, pots and other non -plant items is not permitted. 5. Failure to comply with the Conditions of Approval will result in revocation of this Conditional Use Permit. Engineering: 1. That the trailer be protected from flooding by raising the trailers' pad and or constructing a diversion wall or dike up stream prior to installation. A design for the flood protection measure must be approved by the City Engineer. 2. All materials, including the trailer, to be stored on the site shall be secured to prevent floatation and possible damage to downstream property. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 9TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 1965. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Dennis L. Stout, Chairman ATTEST: Jack Lam, Secretary ,Y-`1 4 11 E s PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION Conditional Use Permit 85 -10 Page #3 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 Ccinission held on the 9th day of October, 1935, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMi :SIGNERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: t ♦� ~y ad.�iUOLU 1.> CO•^0 Y'yo •_T ,OMr•�f -� NAG boy L 1 i� wO eu°o•~, vi mid•° -� =� an. n .- °ii ^u '° .og�c �e a .r. o'er oa Aw'~ '. +'• °M�OY m�Y ~9O• Ypy jC aE C9 d••,•W. d�Y Z dENA ?n ~emu ^v "��.qY +q'•'�n 9n+C ~6 yq^ E 6 41 i 1.1 41 � oSN jd�a~• p.0 •e �' ^E cUML vo Ya~+a. rn6.� dDO a ^L a €�N... •� Cd =y«aY.Eaui ^qx 9+L+0 ~O �.o� YYN^ TL4. •EEV~ ~.�.. • L n u 9r.a+2y~i a L O C •� mod '54 ,Cr•N EE bdM c^ y9 EV�uy� L N G ACUq aC Ny�AC j '•' NNC yAC°� aV 6C °•n^ ^ . u •v oY.nsm � � "_° cAw�.'• u>°T qnn ^�u~i ` .�..N �;n�c.°a . VLoLy� adv a1 u- E mZN.n -was ari.1N �UyO °o+ 60 OY+ o ~duQ C'QEQ^ °dUy ..EC ^bY.� auYfa �•.•U.L YU AN u ` O�u2adi v3+°..E a ad+Y N�q`yL L�•y NdN ,rTN•Qiys U LRTC d 1O�aM mY+ 6N�fC�3 60am !L6L 6U m NJ I HI I 0 y o� •� } y E n n• L C= v o E y C N 6^ � •o A u.V •' I � � C u O O o o H v CNI � Y N dpMt.r ~....�.•• ENT °uu �^ ECpa+Y H Wr�U U •C.. J io G 6 7 Co ^ T^ cLOGd C N o E g a 1•• >r.a pt N �] LL U U M a 2 '• LLL _•nNiY. 1M, o 2 N 6 V Y d LT A C n.~. >•V 6 1 A YnN O. O 00 A 6 V O N d ^ '`� C-14 ss .Q O " C �°. t •o, ° y9 of ^O i U N �~ N N Q 6 o •U.• H d N N E c L y r Eu d c` u N L b O L L+ C O q.LY6 °d 2• A Grvc! A t EN2� L �NN . Nau .= yNlp iplwOw Cam! . S ^ —D L G `0yr na�q cNN EO° °0.^. u �p°^oO nC L 3 bY.Nym 9 ECld d —L 9N «c oz$a nv2,�q �mL.mcua o,ii� vL U ° b L. — q° ~ g T d L %' n E s C o E Q1 .� c 4 _ A N .0 u b A N O c 1Li1�Y.c �oYd M �� TS L O• r a 7 2 9Ngi Q oo�N �.-N CC .q =YC oa xa.u�' �vY�T9dy `Lr cm 'c°€ .co .°.« �r nca r'. N Ei. Q �aHd auN 1-2 o z'a 'OY u �cc y > A Y Ta N.°. • CE6b Lo d 7 �Oy �LO p. Ot y ONLO o- 2—CA ° y pm 01 .J-y- u3L o.cL O E c O. nCU -c;u `br EV qd•�W �Y d�y� 9 t ^Came cqu� i Y ° NT LLN% b Wb�FpU3 N ^ I IjI LgCN+- C Qa NnL e '� V G� b� m %2 CQ N Oq L021 +ECr N2cai9 GC i L!r^ L9 L C wdr°.q _N 0fy A � o .+N E N d �T.N GOE MO nn OUL C qY d Onp q S D al�x .°r LEyC �` So yy2L Qum? a c ON O° ♦' ,� q c,v yo -zo N L r q� � N V Q q i N � r u L g c p Y% �� q IF �Ngp9Y .D aCNd UcoOD� rd� Nc0 OC �L ~aL++C• �.,yA .... 0166 bN L NN cEr p6 ^ uuu pL u .rd ENV �ii�'^ .emu vHi: ° cc eT`Nq Wyc c� `u90 �° �� i w � f• i1D °aND m �^ Y�bo 1c N Yv NyYw :., ` mq mL Nu a Lc-. y =oQ a �i.^ d CdQ^ itl C Nyr wL �]Ca Lt CSC ^. Nub eN Nr oV r -99ywt 0e Voro ^.0� Ue•d.n LU u OL TtiF 9n e n•^0ppu p d o . C GaL E b J t.0 rtY Vd cal d`CC N Ld^O� ^CC�a NOC >daf�Yq b a cLrn ^r qEV h` 011r°0 uL am T° .-.uLL LYq at gLuNNolL9 jL gGOV U>•,��I t°i di Lc.Ob. Qc6LG ^'. LV16 HL N09 R�vuip N.0 ^^ r� a >6.dL CE °UV�UN Yuny'O Iv aono °10 a O1u 0000mG��`A O LgC1 P ELCW 1_ A d u 0 a ^ O A= p� c O p L a c h l y • E i O A Wa�.c v W '4A ^n aAr'ui�o .' EvvUI A m~ uo +° Y�QOeu °WC ^am z °- i Ei A OSA r PV T o.. u L qUN Ca.dO NN^ y UHY.� Wa A`NNdO .�y LyY GpLjNUAi T -. °wO� SL �4.y >C ^ Vy� C y.cA i�CD (, GJ •p C pA W dON �^ ar°� Od V -Gpwgi Oy no9°L'a� GT °�. WAx °.�� nv �v °1.y.. •'-cdN C.a' .9 Ac°.r� G A^ qy ( �� aA° Cd >wC VNdd VA- «m ~Cp y °a0° E��o • �'C^ i o Ogtiy WLO�^ nits u A i0 C c LO WOOL _ NL ` •� ° M Q d 0 V N L O K W.2'. L "0 N W G W G y6a.0 ^x Ate' W ^N L AA 80> nw rA.• G C7 �W W al. G WY V. r Ca { L°a AU.0 OlLbf �6C LN i o% d «M ma •Ed em LAN _ n -° c .v oo °fin- v'cco ^a c 0. ° N W '. W M I Q• h^ A•� 6 �i N I S N' O F N t n Nf I v N u'+ r= 4> a �o N o. O Q A C P � ml I r•) Cau m°, G _ a L ^ mc�c n O,c a 6 c a ° _ .•.E n =ae q • CL N� i y -d q= _ '1 «. 0 Cp �'°' 2 eLx P • tea« a �pT. g qin ruv a ^L N6 NOdP vOy c Eu N^ 9T Lqa> 0. L ea c p- "v^oa ua�v ^ 2 �c y qU '" pa nr ca` °G u qa=i quo G Q C La C 7 Ep L � LC N V v ua z a G �� Nd •-_ nC uT `•ey u0i ° O dda ^du !I. 'A' V A C °a. 0 SqA rLi Udy = A^ =T CY° Euui n�o OnWpC Eu .- 0, yqCyr Td am vA r>01. �°A Aq ^AEd n «P C C a f• �Aq€ n ^a� �e� �� y °`bd Yo a u G = o �u 6 au�v q .:� `y NO -pi V - 62L - N.y Nj �u W- u P AE.z aW c m. �.e Yo.- • °at '9 °W' °d G NNyq v ni c. QMMO 6 A 0 4oM I� CN Zt d ON+C•N E �L L QV 60 1- Q06 QNGN Wb 6M N.°rV N T N M A Np Yy N `a c 6•.r.y •Ya d T °. w.P � O � ° cvm �cNi q ,U, yoA. 000c --79 s u E'O Ems• ....da is Ei o oa naCl a a0 Z. �ao cm od Nu t n u •i' uu i � E p K�j9 •� p 0 N O y C d •aEpq C O d L L �'o ydE =mod wuo piz y a� •v mid.T •v u o d i0 io° N PTO= SIG ry•n d'Nn0 3 EL.a R Imo. T •o `a c c a an ray •� C u w w.P � O � ° � E �cNi q qi " "" adT s E ° n • •L• Q --79 s =2 a Y QY ^' oa naCl a a0 01- ° m N vc° o�0i d° �LL o du "'do •° w° L '. tdL Cdp q6 dY c m I T v «di" o e€ d cow =_o W L C ' E a y a N j Y y o v c y E ', C 4 •UN Or9 p'o E U<.d LCAjCJt a<1WE a °natE In O�ati� o � o o t� C° NO Zi ^ F d «dd au y °ya°.•d E C� r mEiu ` to m c y o U ETay = L con i dv y �• d L'^ •v W n N 6 Ya d N \ m S N ! °I cr- no S d O y x °Nia ^n uu `gin O dT mn ' E C ^6 do 'yV1� A ° N o C q �' c G ^� • q° U y « E 6�q �Ly d9 Y N p •y'` y vw aY L a�io i•' a 1p= qa uyi � a Yq 4�� yEne dy rn'c_1` Laos¢ E 2 a w •+ d u 6 u 6 ,0 V' C Z 41 U d •n O 0. YE coa vc=rny= « d N C y E 6 O J•LC >C d ^n ° oot ^+x =No o. T �a ME u ° aqi N � c N �n a l i udi moa cE u d 0 o O d L cC+ aVe ^ YEv LLm'au 9 Y .d- E W � tl� x L Lt ^ o aii u � w E 9 �= 6 v iE d u + O x C do ^ q NO as mo NCF .«i%nd W NV W U U C x 9 M W E Y a W T %u c E � n L E a dLL L « O. q O cp n E � L �hN L am N N L G o L O% c F ... q w w + w ro E w W a q ua _ .r ^ m:;; E .. .n u °v ¢ n ¢� nL o c v C 6 NI QI NI NI UYp ,^ d a� « q C L 1O L � a q. d.. d o 1 u d �� O U• WI 9 NI J N d - d « ^ M q O n E � L 2 L O EET^ � E a ° .`� v W oNC N N L G o L O% =9 C duY ^ + w ro GN Y d9 ^ «6 O d C d ° ua _ .r ^ m:;; E .. .n u °v ¢ n ¢� nL o c v C 6 NI QI NI NI E d « q C qa 1O L O q. d.. d o iR= 9L d« N nLl L G Y q n« � «EE H O u9Fi L.^ 60 .�� ^D qi O O 9.°•UU L d D1 d.W rno .-•� �L HN QUu f0 u L d n d°a c ^ M q O r� 2 L O EET^ � E a ° .`� v W oNC dv� a a Fyn L V L • c � d o W •`-gap a « a a Y u •- EV9n -o og E ° � > Z 3 W GN Y d9 ^ «6 O d C d T O T ua _ .r ^ m:;; E .. .n u °v ¢ n ¢� nL o �IY.Y •¢ V.L. NI QI NI NI �I NI cI 4I NI 1I C O c L ° u I I- d� q« O LL ZE« u LCM �C -i N€ xam� udN m6 da ? ^CZc a c q E 6 Y Y A n °m >O 6 V O.ON L ° v a N u T C L C u.-u d C NYV V1� ¢�q0 Op+O•Er•L W a Y Ln O s so . � \ \� \� \ \ � � �� ( � \} \ \� \ \� A ■ � � \ A \ � m m 2 2 \\ \ j\ � � / � � �� \ � � � \ \� �• }� / /�� } j §f � \$) \ { ! ( 7!! � 'u \ owm �2 rl �IW � ul o )\ ) j \ � go Z Ce \ Zo 4; ea ;I2 \ j j LA CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: October 9, 1985 c��'MQA 0 0 U ��> 1977 E TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM; Jack Lamm, AICP, Community Development Oirecter BY: Nancy Fong, Associate Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTA "ASSESSMENT AND TEN'iATIVE TRACT 12991 - 3F�9O NNE eesidentia subdivision art design review for ogle family lots on 8.9 acres of land in the Low Medium Residential District located at south side of Lemon, 500± east of Archibald Avenue - APN 201- 252 -21 & 22,. I. ABSTRACT: This project has not received approval from the Design Review, Technical 'Review and Grading Committees because of design issues and technical issues such as; architecture, drainage, . grading, and circulation. In addition, the required easements and /or dedications for flood control access road have not been provided. The applicant, however, has insisted upon full Planning Commission review of the proposed subdivision. Therefore, the tentative tract map is now before the Planning Commission but with a recommendation for for denial without prejudice. II. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action Requested: Denial without prejudice. B. Project Density: 5.8 dwelling units per acres. C. Surroundin2 Land Use and Zonin : ort - Single family homes, new single family homes under construction; Low Residential District (2 -4 du /ac). South - Abandoned railroad tracks, vacant with approved 78 single families (Tract 12914) and 59 townhouses (Tract 11928); Low Medium Residential District (4 -8 du /ac). East Single family homes, vacant; Low Medium Residential District (4 -8 du /ac). West - Unimproved flood channel, vacant Low Residential District (2 -4 du /ac). ITEM L PLANNIING CO114ISSION STAFF REPORT TT 12991 - SHELBOURNE October 9, 1985 Page 2 D. General Plan Designations• Project Site - Low Medium Density Residential. North - Low Density Residential. South - Low Density Residential. East - Low Density Residential. West - Low Medium Density Residential. E. Site Characteristics: The site currently contains one rest ence, two garages, and a large storage building. The site slopes southeasterly from Lemon Avenue at approximately 6% grade to the south property boundary at approximately 3p grade. Existing t'reES consist of approximately 40 Lemon trees and large Eucalyptus windrows located south of Lemon Avenue and along eastern property boundary. F. Ap licable Reaulai:i ,)ns: The Development Code permits subdivision of single family lots in a Low Medium Residential District at 5.8 du /ac under the base Development Standards. III. ANALYSIS• A. General: The developer initially submitted this project last April 79-85. The project was reviewed by the Deign Review, Grading and Technical Review Committees where the Committees have pointed out numerous design and technical issues that the developer elected not to address or resolve. Such issues as; repetitive elevations, roof Materials, circulation, drainage /grading, abandoned railroad easement, and flood control. B. Issues for Planning Commission Consideration: 1. Design Issues: The developer has proposed four floor plans P-4 t variations to each floor plan (see Exhibit "K"). Design Review Commi` - reviewed the project and fined that the elevations for the four floor plans are re. 'filar in design, and that there is no proportionate mix istribution of the four floor plans. Both Plan 1150 and Plan 1250 have been placed on 17 lots and 18 lots respectively, of the total 49 single family lots (see Exhibit "G "). The Design Review Committee determined that the proposed project conflicts with the General Design Guidelines (Section 17.08.0400) of the Development Code in the following provisions: E a) Design Theme: A project must provide a recognizable Aft design theme with variations to create visual interest. IF t PLANKING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TT 12991 - SHELBOURNE October 9, 1985 Page 3 b) Architecture: The architecture should consider compatibility rith surrounding character, including harmonious building styles, form, size, color, material and roof line. Individual dwelling units should be architectural concept should also comp invent t e grading and topography of the site. c) House Plotting: A project should provide for streetscape variety and visual interest particularly in the Low Medium District through anqling houses to the street, side entry' garages, or reverse plotting. The Design Review Committee recommended that the developer revise the project and the elevations to comply with those identified General Design Guidelines of the Development Code. 2. Technical Issues: Both the Technical Review Committee and Grading Committee were concerned with the proposed tentative tract design as it may have potential limiting effects upon the future orderly development of the area bounded by Lemon Avenue to the north, flood channel to the east, Archibald Avenue to the west and abandoned railroad property to the south. The issues associated with this project are; drainage, grading, unimproved channel along east property line, unused railroad property to the south of the tract, circulation and lots fronting nn a collector street (Lemon Avernus) : a) Drainage: Both the origiiial and revised drainage plans, ut ize a system that goes through rear yards and side yards of single family lots (see Exhibit "D "). This type of drainage system is unacceptable for the following reasons: It would be extremely difficult to gain access to the system for maintenance and reconstructions; secondary flow path is not availabe if the catch basin of the terminus of the cul -de -sac were to be plugged by debris. Further, it did not provide a means of the draining of the adjacent property to the west. The Committee felt that a street connection between the two cul -de -sacs extending to the property to the west ANIL would provide the best solution to these problems. t L-3 PLAHNIING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TT 12991 - SHELBOURNE October 9, 1985 Page 4 b) Grading: The proposed tract design necessitates t'!e extensive use of retaining walls as shown in Exhibit 14111. The Grading Committee is particularly concer ied with the height of the retaining wall between Lots 24 -27 and Lots 23 -21 (see Exhibit "L"). The residents on Lot 23 -21 would be exposed to a total wall height of 15 -16 feet. The Grading Committee felt that a re- design �:f this tentative tract as shown in Exhibit "E" would lessen the requirements for retaining walls and its height, and it will be more sensitive to the natural contours of the area. c) Unim roved Flood Channel Along the East Pr ert Line: Staf has instructe the developer to contact an Bernardino County Flood Control District (SBCFCD) to determine the required improvements for the flood channel. It is usual practice that the developer obtain written comments from the District, supply a crpy to the City and incorporate the design into the tract map. The developer has not forwarded a copy of the subdivision map as requested by SBCFCD. Based on previous approved tracts that abutt the flood channel, the minimum requirements include a structural block wall, a building set back from the chatmel and the dedication of right -of -way for an access road along the channel. Therefore, compliance with these requirements is essential for flood protection while the sntback and access -road extra dedication will affect the lot size and the plotting of houses d) Abandoned Railroad Property to the South of the Project —i a Committee is concerned with the -foot wide abandoned railroad property located south of the project site. Exhibit "C" shows the relationship of this strip of railroad easement to the site of the idjacent projects. The strip of abandoned railroad casement could beco,,�, a public nuisance by being a fire hazard due to weed growth and a breeding ground for vermin. The project site is the last portion of the undeveloped property that can be logically absorb this strip of land, more so than the approved tract to the south. A conditon of approval for the tract to the south (Tract 11928), required the developer's cooperation to acquire this abandoned railroad easement. According to the developer of this Tract 11928, he had contacted the railroad company who has verbally agreed to sell the railroad easement. In ` L-14 PLANNIING COMMISSION STAFF REP1RT TT 12991 - SHELBOURNE October 9, 1985 Page 5 addition, past developers had been required and successfully obtained portions of the railroad property (Tract No. 9567 located at the northwest corner of Highland aVenue and Hermosa Avenue). Staff recommends that the developer of this project should acquire the 44 -foot abandoned railroad easement prior to the project being considered by the Planning Commission. The redson is that the Subdivision Map Act states that the City cannot delay recordation of a final map if the developer cannot fulfill a condition requiring improvements on property which he does not control. e) Circulation: The Committee was concerned with the orderly evelop:Aent of this avea as shown in Exhibit "B" as well as providing a secondai;- access to the westerly vacant parcels. Both the Fire District and the Sheriff's Department, members of the Technical Review �ommittee, have stated that they prefer the cul -de -sacs to be connected providing a looped street pattern. As discussed under t.* drainage issue, the loop street system and its extension to the westerly property will resolve the drainage and grading concerns. Staff Recomaendations: In order to find the best solution to the problems associated with this proposed tentative tract design, staff has developed an area master plan showing the general street patterns and lot tiering configurations as shown in Exhibit "E" Master planning of this area would provide an efficie:it overall circulation system, would resolve drainage and grading problems associated with this tract, and would eliminate lots fronting on collector streets such as Lemon Avenue. C. Environmental Assessment: Part I of the Initial Study has been completed y the applicant. Staff has completed Part II of the Evironmental Checklist and determined that the development of the subject site could expose people: and property to water- related hazards, such as flooding. However, this could be mitigated through the construction of the storm drain facilities and completion of flood channel improvements per the requirements of San Bernardini County Flood Control District. Since the developer, at this time, is unable to provide an acceptable drainage system as well as incorporating improvements designs for the flood channel. staff has determined that advar;e environmental impact co,Ad occur as a result of this project. \-- 5 PLANNIING COMMISSION STAFF REPe4T TT 12991 - SHELBOURNE October 9, 15185 Page 6 11 IV. FACTF FOR FINDINGS: In considering a residential project, the Planning ommiss` Commission make the findings listed in the attached resolution. Further, the Development Code establishes absolute policies and design guidelines which all residential projects must comply with before approval. However, it is the recommendation of the Design eR ew Committee and staff that the proposed project does not meet these findings. Therefore, the findings listed in the attached Resolution o- Denial gas supported by the following facts: 1. The proposed building design, site pla,: is iiicoosistent °,.aith the General Plan Design Guidelines of the Development Code regarding house plotting to provide streetscape variety and visual interest and ar --hitecture that provides distinguishable individual dwelling units. 2. The proposed subdivision design, site plan is in conflict with the intent and purpose of the General Plan regarding access and circulation in terms of limiting and impacting the orderly future development of adjacent vacant properties. 3. The proposed subdivision design site, plan and building design is inconsistent with the Absolute Policies of the Development Code in regards to providing master planned drainage facilities so as to adequately dispose of surface water run off or alleviate grading constraints. 4. The development of this proposed project could have a significant impact on the environment with regards to exposing people or property to water related hazards such as flooding, when the potential hazard is not mitigated with adequate drainage facilities and necessary flood channel improvements. t'. CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised as a public hearing in newspaper, notices were sent to property owners within 300 feet of the project site and a large 4 x 8 sign was posted at the site. VI. RECOM MENDATION: Staff recommends denial without predudice through adoption of the attached Resolution. Respe tfully submitted, Jack Lam Lam _ _ ,_- Community Development Director JL:NF:ko L -� Jon C7 PLANKING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TT 12991 - SHELBOURNE October 9, 1985 Page 7 Attachments: Letter from Applicant Responding to Design Review, Grading and Technical Review Committees Recommendations Exhibi,; "A" - Location Map Exhibit "B" •- Site Utilization Map Exhibit "C" - Railroad Easement Map Exhibit "D" - Applicant's Proposed Drainage Plan Exhibit "E" - Area Master Plan Exhibit "F" - Tentative Tract Map Exhibit "G" - Detailed Site Plan Exhibit °1H" - Grading Plan Exhibit "I" - Cross Sections (2) Exhibit "J" - Conceptual landscape Plan Exhibit "K" - Elevations Initial Study, Part II and Addendum Resolution of Denial. �__ - 1 K. 9C. ENGINEERS, INC. CIVIL ENGINEERS,, PLANNERS AND CONSTRUCTION CONSULTANTS J.N. 365 September 9, 1985 Cammmity Develogtent Department Planning Division City of Rancho Cucamonga 9320 Baseline Road Suite C Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 Re: Tentative Tract 12991 - Grading Review CmTnittee Attention: Loyd Coolsby GentleIen: Submitted hereath are four copies of a revised grading plan for Tentative Tract 12991. The reiisions have been made based on the comments which were received during the technical review meeting held August 6, 1985 and a discussion with Loyd Goolsby on September 5, 1985. is As a result of the above, and a meeting with City Engineer Lloyd Hubbs, an underground storm drain pile has been proposed from the end of the most westerly street easterly to the east street and then by easement to the Alta L m Wash. This has eliminated the easenen"'_ and surface drainage on the must southerly lots. These lots all drain to the street. During the meeting With Loyd Goolsby on September 5, 1985, it was agreed'. that any developmt. plan would involve limited cross lot drainage for lots facing onto Lemon Avenue and the plan as now shown meets the cri- teria of the City. An area has been reserved for a future storm drain easement to serve the undeveloped property to the west of Tentative Tract 12991, if that property developes in such a way as to require an easterly storm drain outlet. Your early review and approval of Lois revised plan is requestFA. Sincerely, K.W.C. ENG-* , TNp. L. C. Bevington lt�, RCE 8420 LCB:sp Enclosures 720 SOU H RAMONA AVENUE, SU1Te 104 s CORONA, CALIFORNIA 91719 • 7'!,734-2130 K.W.C. . MOWERS, INC. CIVIL ENGINEERS, PLANNERS AND CONSTRUCTION CONSULTANTS J.N. 365 August 26; 1985 RECEIVED Lloyd Hubbs, City Engineer AI. }C1 2 's8i City of Rancho Cucamonga 9320 Baseline Road CITY Of RANCHO CUCAMONGA Suite C ENGINEERING DIVISION Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 Attention: iir. Barry Hansen Re: Tentative Tract 12991 Dear Mr. Hansen: It is the opinion of the Shelbourne Development Corporation, the pro- posed developer of the r=perty, that the proposed aasic street and lot layout which was developed after considerable study and consuitation meetings with the City staff meets the Codes and Regulations of the City of Rancho Cucamonga and is the most productive and livable arrange- ment which can be used. The developer and F.W.C. Engineers have reviewed the caments of the Technical and Design Camtittees regarding Tentative Tract 12991. There were seven concerns raised. Each of these concerns has been considered and is camlented on in the following material. Technical Review Cammi.`.tee 1. Storm drains, - including drainage of the cut de sacs and the property to the west. By realigning the lot line between lots 13 and 14 ant 1y an ease- ment between lots 42 and 43 to the west property line, an underground L•torm drain system can be achieved with the longest portion of the storm drain which will be in an easement being less than 250 feet. This is certainly an acceptable length, particularly with the man - holee to be placed in the public streets. The total length of storm drains in easements will be reduced by approximately 250 feet and the number of stom drain manholes in tract easements would be reduced to zero. 2. Alta Lama channel The future development and the constructir- - ,.uired in the Alta Lora channel was reviewed with the San Bernardino Environmental Public Works Agency -Flood Control Division. Included in this review 720 SOUTH RAMONA AVENUE, SUITE 104 a CORONA, CALIFORNIA 91719 a 714/734-2130 Lloyd Hubbs, City Engineer City of Rancho Cucamonga August 26, 1985 Page -2- was an examination of comments and requirements on land subdivisions adjacent to or affected by the Alta Lana channel. The basic outflow from the retention basins north of the proposed development will be east into a major drain in the Haven Area. At this tip, the County of San Bernardino does not have design plan or requirements for the Alta Lcma channel. They stated that they would approve a plan whicl`s included payment of the drainage fee by the developer and the construction of a structurally designed perimeter i,iall on that portion of the tract which iL. adjacent to the channel. This is an acceptable arrangement to the developer and would appear to be fair and equitable to the developer, City aid County. 3. Contact AT & SF Railroad The developer has started the process toward acquiring the AT & SF right of way and will do so if the AT & SF Railroad is cooperative as to -time and cost. Apparently, the old AT & SF right of way has been sold to developers in other cases in the vicinity at a reason- able per- square -foot price. Adding the adlitional aLea to the tract would cause minor charges but oc:ild alla,,,w wider lots and thereby more of the larger units. 4. Sewer line and water linesjeaseirent needs The Cucamonga County Water District has stated: a. They will require a six -inch (6 ") main in each street but the lines will not need to be interconnected. b. Sewer line outlets can be achieved in three different manners: (i) If the condo developnwit to the south proceeds, sewers can go directly to the south, through the condo easements to Highland and east in Highland. (ii) If the single - family develolment to the southwest proceeds, seiters can be through easements and streets to highland and west to Archibald. (iii) If neither project proceeds prior to Tract 12991, sewer lines would be built to Highland and east to existing sewer line, with a reimbursement established 1 _ 'k c- Lloyd Hubbs, City Engineer City of Rancho Cucamonga August 26, 1985 Page -3- for any develr •sent using the scnmr line. The relater District has ;reed to help in obtaining necessary easements. Design Review Committee 5. Revise mix of units Tl.e high percentage of plans 1150 and 1250, at the expense of plans 1350 and 1450, was caused by the requirement of a 35' building set back on Lemon Avenue. Where the set back is afront -yard set back, no material change occurs; howev-- -r, the 35' side -yard set back as opposed to the normal 23' side -yard set back had a substan- tial effect on the corner lots and several of the lots in the same tier. The developer is also very interested in achieving as many a; possible of the larger (plan 1350 and 1450) housing units. Particularly if the AT & SF right of may can be obtained, the lot tiers on the north/ south portions of the streets can be widened and an increase made in plans 1350 and 1450. 6. Tile roof /asphalt roofs The developer uses a high -grade asphalt roofing material which is as expensive as tile roofing and has a comparable appearance. Several of the currently accepted tile roofing materials are of questionable appearance and have maintenance problems. The developer would there- fore request that this item be left open with the burden of proof of acceptab =lity incmmbent on the developer. 7.' Contact with AT & SF Railroad See Item 3 above. Shelburne Development Corporation and their engineer have spent considerable timz and expense in developing the current plan. Tentative Tract 12991 as submitted meets the zoning and development codes of the City of Rancho Cucamonga and will be a very salable and livable development. It is there- fore requested that with the minor changes discussed above that Tentative Tract 12991 be set for a hearing before the planning oamiission at the earli- est possible date. Sinoercly, L. C. Bevington RCE 8420 LCB:sp L -X\ f42 � Parl'I I i I X PAR. N0.26 139 0 '34 Cy3). or. i h 8w.r as. (62 Par. Par. 3 14 J a 5.80 A C .64AC 2 E1 E acI i Z5 28o- � @ 9 2 j4pprrved V M 351 Qt, Cf I _ _ 4.3AG 2.9AG. 4.4AC. v luo t AC V (8. Par.3 Par. 4 ' Q � Q•� o a //IHdIM CONS'f►^KG�701i a• . � E uJ (`,, Par 1 Par. 4 "; - /a 3S'J �Cr' Mao - .PAR [N0 27 MR0 M+ - r /L /lJ SOI J CAeRA/J®uo f42 � Parl'I I i I X PAR. N0.26 139 '34 Cy3). or. i h 8w.r 13 n T. TI Ti P-99/ 14 J a 5.80 A C rov E1 E v I 28o- I j4pprrved V M 351 Qt, Cf I 4 61AC. 2.9AG. 4.4AC. v 8. AC V (8. Par.3 Par. 4 9AG) Mlt Cs�,yl►� ;� \ �e►IaSE�� MAP 1804.36 -8H - .PAR [N0 27 MR0 Al- (e E: Iaryn� I. GS AC I i I X PAR. N0.26 139 5.6 AG M/L 13 n T. ft-941 '� 14 J a 5.80 A C rov 1� 7;T, tiW6 �\\ a 2y I j4pprrved V I ? � V HiGHLAPJD-- o(; ITEM: -7r/.z 7 TITLE- ' EXHIBIT: SCALE: NORTH t iY M. � pv "•�J .a �' t �. ° rR ' •a ` 1 Y t y ,7G z'4 A j r•µ mot!" , � � r +. � y � F ,i3 'fi'�� .E,ti -2f. 7k �`�7� � '�:�, �'r`• t�° „ +� . aS' � �, � y` "• ' � �,' ` �,,[ �.� � ��Y,�� M iii •i.�. �, � 1l ,�,^"n`; :r. .= c- r.:�:'3t:R .� ��_�- .�',tC'.r,:A .,,, �L �'y a uj '^_ , , 1• .. ,. . � ~ ^� _ _..i ",. mar �._ _._. N f �a Gx � rt� °r Il` Clraaael tlrdiea��on — — —— _ • 1 cl • I ei ARCHl614L/J AVE A Q� ` U U a •a"Sir Z . 134 I a i I F � Proprsed I � I Lof 19ap }y —o-2 . c f I - - - -- —I . i _ I I ARCHl614L/J AVE A Q� ` U U a MACT NQ 42T3 45 Aft.-, X-.!. It" 2 27 1 26 2 62FL- fl 46 Z. 29 2h L 1147 ! —sj w It LI, 1 4.0 30 S 45— 32 to 17 is 44 43 34 Is- 42 12- 14 4t 38 13 40 J, 2 11 — 39 3a 2. I MCMAT 1AM) U. C5�1 NORTH QN CITY OF RANCHO CLUAMONTGA RANNUNU DIVOON ITEM: Tnu. EXHIBIT. —, � SCALE.-- L - L -%-) 0 'TRACT &Q MMV LEWN aM0WA4W.• A0 5I�GW.42 " wmnmwo, UAAW Ar --MICAUT IAM CITY OF RAMMO CUCWTONTGA TrMn-E. PLANNING DIVSM EXHiBrTr.- ScAjL u r_V NORTH 'TRACT &Q MMV LEWN aM0WA4W.• A0 5I�GW.42 " wmnmwo, UAAW Ar --MICAUT IAM CITY OF RAMMO CUCWTONTGA TrMn-E. PLANNING DIVSM EXHiBrTr.- ScAjL u r_V NORTH r J •1 CITY OF ANCM CLEUVIONTGA PLANNING DIVISION It y� REUININQ WALLS s� u of ri _SCALE - ,.e _ \ - , c, i 411 <.a jr r •aY I u ?EIMrATIVE.TRACT AI► NO. 12991 'CMWIEV `a. Coet% o4 San "erdlao .. I �*• sue FWAMON" CA. tqT[ TMW WASTM � AAA lFJd01i TREED. �flOIlC DIA0.iTER'J v TO IV i �R.• t1 it A r J •1 CITY OF ANCM CLEUVIONTGA PLANNING DIVISION It y� REUININQ WALLS s� u of ri _SCALE - ,.e _ \ - , c, ro"C 6RQv.• Oi7CN •� A S� MqX. fi//GH /N/NG WACL 13Gfo 4 PqG 4/my-111- 77M is � C.�tM„ �(p •� RET W,gC4 LQT 2/ CITY OF . RANCHO CUCAMONGA PUNNM DIV MN SECTION A-A ( WEST It ) e F i iW �REi. wA[L 0 i SECTION B —B (NORTH R) NORTH ITEM: RXHIBTT: SCALE- � III E LA 5 Mqx. RIG q WALL OR FEn LOT 3 /PET. WA(4 w z z d �r p SEMON C-C w ii(EAST FL) f L dT rt� PRD 4556.E SEMON D -D (SOUTH FL) 1-4,16 ! 23 TrrLE: VINI EXHIBIT: SALE: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PART II — INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST DAT£ • 009.0 APPLICANT: A F ING DATE. '`f•/ LOG NUMBER: 029 �� - , PROJECT: 41 IIA161.e A, JjLY e .+T PROTECT LOCATIAN:_ j Si nF i ,.Lto�l 5?1y:t i' I. ENIIRON"IENTAL IMPACTS (Explanation of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required on attached sheets). 1. Soils and GeoloRv. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Unstable ground conditions or in changes in geologic relationships? b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or burial of the soil? C. Change in topography or ground surface contour intervals? d. The destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical fe —ures? e. Any Potential increase in wind or water erosion of soils, affecting either an or off site conditons? f. Changes in erosion siltation, or deposition? YES MAYBE NO _ V V __V111 _ v 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. Hydrol'ogY. Will the proposal have significant results in: Page 2 YES MAYBE NO a. Changes in currents, or the course of direction Of flowing streams, rivers, or ephemeral stream channels? b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface water runoff? V e / — 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, either 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? 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? V 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. Reduction of the numbers of any unique,•rare f ?age 3 YES X&YBE No c. Introduction of new or disruptive species of plants into an area? d. Reduction in the pote.itial for agricultural production? Fauna. Will the proposal'have significant results in: a. Change in the characteristics of species, including diversity, distribution, or numbers v" of any species of animals? b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered spec�es 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? v 5. Fopulation. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Will the proposal alter the location, distri- bution, dersit diversity, or Y+ y, growth rate of the human population of an area? b. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? 6. Socio- Economic Factors. Will the propusal have significant results in: 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 beneficiaries, i.e., buyers, tax payers or project users? J/ 7. ?and 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, - bjectives, policies, or adopted plans of any governmental r entities? c. An impact upon the qulaity or quantity of existing consumptive or non - consumptive, Page 4 YES I.AY3E No 8. Transportation. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular / movement? b. Effects an 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 andlor goods? f. Alterations to or effects on pre:ient and potential water - borne, rail, mass transit or air traffic? g. Inceases 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. Health. Safety, and Nuisance Factors. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Creation of any health hazard or potential health % hazard? y b. Exposure of peo p le 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 noise levels? f. Exposure of people to potentially dangerous noise levels? g. The creation of objectionable odors? h. An increase in light or glare? Page 5 YES :L4YBE YO 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? 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 .he following: a. Electric power? �^ b. Natural or packaged gas? C. Communications systems? d. Water supply? e. Wastewater facilities, f. Flood contrcl structures? g. Solid waste facilities? h. Fire protection? I- Police protection? J. Schools? k. Parks or other recreational facilities? _ I. Maintenance of public facilities, including / roads and flood control facilities? v M. Other governmental services? _ V 13. Enerev and Scarce Resources. Will the proposal have significant i results in: a. Use of substantial or excessive fuel or energy? b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing SOW.-es of energy? i .; c. An increase in the demand for development of — new sources of energy? d. An increase or perpetuation of the consumption of non - / renewable forms a` energy, when feasible J renewable sources of energy are available? i Page 6 -. YES `AYBE N0 e. Substantial depletion of any nonrenewable or scarce natural resource? J• 1 14. Handatory Findings of S- 9nificance. a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially re4�ce the habitat of fish or wildlife species, cause, a fish or wildlife population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to elimina z a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the ra•::ge of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major poriods of / California history or prehistory? V' b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short -term, to the disadvantage of long -term, environmental goals? (A short -term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of time while long- term impacts will endure well into the future). �. Does the project have impacts which are f` individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (Cumulatively considerable means that the incremental effects of an ?ndividual project are considerable when viewed { )L connection with the effects of past projects, l and probable future projects). �f d. Does the project have environmental effects ,1,ich will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? _ II. DISCUSSION OF M11110N`fENTAL E%*ALUATION (i.e., of affirmative answers to the above questions plus a discussion of proposed mitigation k measures). G III. DETE MINATION On the basis of this ir`.:ial- evaluation: I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on tha 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 WILL BE PREPARED. F7 I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the envirnment, and an ENVIRO'TIWT MPACT REPORT is required. Date Signature Title Page 7 IM I ADDENDUM TO INITIAL STUDY PART II FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 12991. 1. Soils and Geology (c) The development of this project would cause excessive cutting and filling of the natural contours even thoaqh the cut and fill in cubic yards are balanced. This proposed grading concept could create excessive 2 to 1 slopes and excessive use of retaining walls and the height of the wall. A re- design of the subdivision and master planning of the area could reduce the excessive use of retaining walls, reduce wall height and lessen the amount of grading. 2. Hydrology (b,d) The construction of this project will increa.e the amr nt of paved surfaced area which could result in an increasing amount o* surface water run off and a decrease of the absorption rates. The proposed drainage system for this project will not provide adequate drainage facilities in mitigating the surface run of for the following reaons; a) it would be extemely difficult to gain access to the systems for maintenance and reconstruction, b) a secondary flow path is not available if the catch ' basins at the terminus of the cul -de -sac were to be blocked by debris, c) it did not provide a means of draining the adjacent property through the west. Further, the flood channel to the east side of the property boundary, being unimproved, may expose people and property to water related hazards such as flooding. This could be mitigated through providing the necessary flood channel improvements as approved by San Bernardino County Flood Control district. 4. Biota b The development of this project may result in affecting the survival of the Eucalyptus windrows along the northern property uoundary and the easter property boundary. Should the developer need to remove those Eucalyptus wind.dws, it should be mitigated by planting new windrows per City Standards (Eucalyptus Macalata at 8 feet at center, 5- gallon size and need not be staked). 10. Health, Safety, and luisance Factors (a, b) A 44 -foot wide abandoned railroad property is located south of the project site. This strip of abandoned railroad easement could become a public nuisance by being a fire hazard due to weed growth and the breeding ground for vermit. The developmer should mitigate this by acquiring tie abandoned railroad property and integrate it into the development of h.s project. 7. Land Use and Planning Considerations (b) Although, the proposed project with the subdivision design, site plan could comply with the minimum Basic. Development Standards of the City's Development Code in areas of density, lot size and setbacks, i. has the potential to achieve short term to the disadvantage of long term goals of the General Man. The reason being that the proposed project may have a potential limiting effect upon the future orderly development of the area bounded by Lemon Avepue to the north, the flood channel to the east, Archibald to the west, and the abandoned railroad easement to the south. This could be mitigated by providing a master plan of the -.rea relating to circulation, drainage and access. 11 'r 0 E K3 D RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION DENYING TENTATIVE TRACT 12991 AND DESIGN REVIEW :,OCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE N: LEMON AVENUE 500 EAST OF ARCHIBALD AVENUE IN THE LOW 66IUM REST62NTIAL DISTRICT WHEREAS.: on the 'Lst day of August, 1985, a complete application was filed by Shelbourne Development Csmpany for reviev4 of the above - described project; and WHEREAS, on the 9th day of October, 1985, the Rancho Cucamopga Planning Commission held a. public hea0 ng to cons'.der the above - --escribed project. NOW, THEREFORE, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission resolves as follows: SECTI,'t 1: That the Planni ?q Commission makes the following findings in regard to (entative Tract 12991 and Dssign Review.: 1. The proroscd building design, site plan is inconsistent with the General Design Guidelines of the Development Code regarding house platting to provide streetscape vet ety and visual interest and architecture that provides distinguishable: individual dwelling units. 2. The proposed subdivision design site plan is in conflict with the Intent and purpose of the General Plan regarding access and circulation in terms of limiting and impacting the orderly future development of adjacent vacant properties. 3. The proposed subdivision lesign site plan a.id building design is inconsistent with the Absolute Policies c� the Development Code in regards to providing master planned drainage facilities so as to adequately dispose of surface water run off or alleviate grading constraints. g. The Development of this proposed project could have a significant impact on the envi- onment with regards to exposing people or propert.,) tq water related hazards such as flooding: when the potential hazard is not mi2iaate4 with adequate drainage facilities and necessary flood channel improvements. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION TT 12991 and Design Review October 9, 1985 Page 2 SECTION 2: Tentative Tract 12991 and Design Review is hereby denied based on ncnns stency with the provisions, intent and purpose of the Development Code, which was adopted to implement to goals, policies, and objectives of the General Plan. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 9TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 1985. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RAOCHO WCAMONGA BY^ +Dennis L. S tout, Chairman ATTEST: adk Lam, Secretary I, Jack Lam, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of gaucho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the fovegoing 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 head on the 9th daa of October, 1985, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS:. NOES: COjiNIISSIONERS: ASSENT: CC'1RISSIONERS: CA 10 CIn" OF RANCHO -JUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: October 9, 1985 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Jack Lam, Community Development Director BY: Nancy Fong, Associate Planner ! Cg a l v. �K Q O U > 1977 i SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTA'. ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 1'131 - ROBERTSON HOMES INC. A condominium subdivision and design review for 164 units on 11.71 acres of land in the Medium Residential District (8 -14 du /ac) located at the northeast corner of Vineyard Avenue and Arrow Highway - APN 208 - 251 -11, 23. Related file: DR 85 -17. EN`.iRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 85 -17 - ROBERTSON HOMES,INC. - A residential development of S condominium units on 11.71 acres of land in the Medium Residential District (6 -14 du /ac) located at the northeast corner of Vineyard Avenue and Arrow Highway - APN 208 -251- 11, 23. Related file: TT 13131. I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Actio,: Requested` Approval of condominium subdivision, site plan- elevations and issuance of a Negative Declaration. B. Density: 14 du /ac. C. Existing Land Use: Vacant. D. Surrounding Land Use and Zonin North Apartments, vacant wit approved 122 townhouses; Medium'Residential District (8 -14 du /ac). South - Industrial use; General Yndustrial. East - Bear Gulch Park, Medium Residential District (8 -14 du /ac). West - Condominiums; Medium Residential District (8 -14 du /ac). E. General Plan Designations: h JER Site Medium Density Residential (4 -14 du /z!c). North - Medium Density Residential (4 -14 du /ac). South - General Industrial. East - Medium Density Residential (4 -14 du /ac). West - 140ium Density Residential (4 -14 du /ac). ITEMS M/N - PLANNING COAMISSION STAFF REPORT TT 131ST & DR 85 -17 October 9, 1985 Page 2 11 F. Site Characteristics: The site is vacant and relatively level with 2 slope. Vegetation consists of weeds and a row of Eucalyptus windrows to the northern property boundary. An existing single family home abuts the project on Arrow Highway, while another existing single family home abuts the project on Vineyard Avenue. G. Applicable Regulations: The Development Code permits multiple family dwellings in the Medium Residential District at 14 du /ac undar the Optional Development Standards. II. ANALYSIS, 4. General: The units are arranged in two -story stacked Units lined up into 8 and 12 -plex configurations. The unit sizes proposes range from 704 square feet for one - bedroom unit (74 units) to 986 square feet for two- bedroom units (90 units). 'file main access to the project is provided on Arrow Highway with a seccndary access from Bear Gulch Road. In order to mitigate adverse environmental noise levels, the buildings are set back behind the acceptable noise level contour from Vineyard Avenue and Arrow Highway as shown as Exhibit "G". The proposed elevations are of contemporary architectural style that consist of concrete tile roofs and clapboard siding, with a eariety of roof heights od architcctural detai,s.. The recreation area is centrally incated with greenway linkages throughout the site where the average common open space per dwelling unit is 1657 square feet (53;x). Amenities provided include; tennis court, recreation room, tot lot, swimming pool and jacuzzi. The main access to the project Js provided on At-row Highway with a secondary access from Bear Gulch Road. B. Design Review Committee: The Design Re,iew Committee has reviewed the project —and found that the overall site play. arrangement, style of architecture, open space areas and density comply with the intent of t "e absolute policies in the areas of density, height,, scale, architecture, and neighborhood character. The Committee has recommended approval of the Droject subject to consideration of wind mitigation through l,ndscaping. C. Out- Parcels Issue: Two existing single family homes abut the proposed project (see Exhibit "C "). Both single family homes have non - conforming setbacks and are 'but of character" with the surrounding m0 ti- family development. Ideally, the parcels should be incorporated into the project, The Developer has contacted the two property owners in an attempt to acquire their properties. According to the broker representing the :ieveloper, both property owners show reluctant - to sell the 1411) -.2 I& PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TT 13131 & DR 85 -'7 October 9, 1985 Page 3 property and have proposed a selling price of $250,000.00 for Out - Parcel A and $140,000.00 for Out- Parcel B. Attached for your review is a cop; of the broker's letter to the two property owners. If the two Out - parcels are not incorporated into the project, full street improvements fronting the parcels could remain incomplete for some time in the future and present a general unfinished appearance to the streets. Even if the developer could acquire and add the lots to his project, the land could only be used for completing streetscape and adding open space areas, without yielding more dwelling units. Further, the Subdivision Map Act states that a local agency cannot refuse approval of the final map because the developer cannot fulfill a condition requiring improvements on property which he does not control, which in this case, is the requirement of street improvements and /or acquisition of the two parcels. The City would then have to proceed with condemnation proceedings at the developer's expense. The Planning Commission may, have the following options to consider: Option 1: The developer should attempt to acquire the additional right -of -way to comp;gte the minimal street improvements. The following conditions should be added: a) The developer shall attempt to acquire appropriate dedication along the frontage of the "out parcels" and construct curb and gutter across said parcels. In the event the developer is unable to acquire such dedication, he shall be required to widen street pavement fronting the "out parcels" to as close to the outer edge of the existing street righ'6 -of -way as possible as judged by the City Engineer. He shall also provide a plan and construct all pavement markings as required by the City Traffic Engineer. b) An access easement over the interior loop street extending to the out - parcels for future access to said parcels shall be dedicated upon the final map. Impact: This option does not impact Out- Parcel B as the street hag been widened. If the developer cannot acquire the necessary dedication (approximately 8 feet) from the Out- Parcel A, the street could still be widened and could be transition from adjacent curbs with asphalt berm. By limiting access of the two 'but parcels" from Arrow Highway and Vineyard Avenue, future redevelopment for these 2 lots would be more integrated with this project. However, the single family homes and other accessory structures still have non - conforming setbacks and are out of character from the surrounding multi - family development. 14 -3 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TT 13131 & DR 85 -17 October 9, 1985 Page 4 Option 2: Req -lire the developer to acquire the additional dedication for right -of -way improvements. The following conditions would be added: a) The developer shall construct street improvements fronti)g the "out parcels" and obtain sufficient street dedications to construct said improvements. In the event that the developer is unable to acquire the appropriate street dedication and has requested the City's condemnatie process for the additional right- of -wiav, the developer shall pay for all expense of such condemnation per .he Subdivision Map Act and b) An access easement over the interior loop street extending to the out- parcels for future ;access to said parcels shall tie dedicated upon the final map. npt: This option would not impact "out parcel 8" as t ;Je shacreet already has been widened. As for out - parcel A, both curbs and gutters would be lined up and fully improved with the development of tais project, however, some kind of transition design should be provided for sidewalks. Limiting the access off Arrow Highway and Vineyard Avenue also would allow the redevelopment of these two out - parcels to be more incorporated into this oroject. However, the single family homes and other accessory still have non - conforming setbacks tmd are "out of (.::aracter" from the surrounding multi-family development. Option 3: Require the developer to acquire the two out - parcels and incorporate it into landscaped open spaces. Im act: The legality of requiring the developer to acquire out- parcels is questionable. Further, the State Map act states that the City cannot delay the approval of the final map because the developer cannot fulfil a condition requiring improvements which he does noti control. The City would then be involved in the condemnation process where the developer shall pay for all expenses of such condemnation per the Subdivision Map Act. The City would also be establishing a pr!cedent regarding condemnation of private property for development. D. Environmental Assessment: Part I of the Initial Study has been completed Py the applicant. Staff has completed Part II of the Environmental Checklist and has identified one adverse environmental impact. Noise: This project will be impacted by roadway noise up to 70 Ldn from Arrow Highway and Vineyard Avenue. Mitigation: The noise study recommends the following mitigation measures: a. A 4 -foot landscaping berm along Vineyard Avenue and Arrow Highway shall be required. b. A final acoustical report to provide mitigation measures for interior noise reduction (45 CNEL) in compliance with Tip-_' 25 standards shall be required. ,A/ /N PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT 'T 13131 & DR 85 -17 October 9, 1985 Page 5 Based upon this review, staff has determined that there will not be a significant impact in this case because of the mitigation measures as described have been added to the project and the Conditions of Approval. Therefore, issuance of a Negative Declaration would be appropriate. 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, sz1ety, cause nuisance, or cause sianificart 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 acid Ci +y Standards. IV. CORRESPONDENCE: This item has be.n advertised in The Dail v Reoort, newspaper, public hearing notices were sent to all property owners within 300 feet of the project site, and two 4 x 8 public notification signs were posted at the site. The developer, on September 17, 1985, conducted a neighborhood meeting to inform the concerned residents of their proposed development. Unf)i•turately, none of the invited residents attended the meeting. V. RECCMMENDATION: Staff r - commends that the Planning Commission consider all material i7nd imput regarding this project. If the Commission concurs with the findings, issuance of a Negative Declaration and approval of TT 13131 and Development Review 85 -17 through the adoption of the attached Resolution and Conditions of Approval will be in order. Respectfully si!bmitted, e CommuniJDeve pme nt D4cy JL:NF :ko Attachments: Lette: From rncerngd Residents Developer'4 Letter of Proposed Neighborhood Meeting Dever ;,Pr's Letters to Out- Parcel Owners Cxnibft "A" - Location Map Exhibi` "B" Site Utilization Map Exhihi- "C" - Detailed Site Plan Summary Development Table Exhibit "D` - Conceptual Grading Plan Exhibit "E" Conceptual Landscape Plan JUk Exhibit "F" - Elevations and Floor Plans Exhibit "G" Noise Contours Initial Study, Part Il and Addendum Resoldtion of Approval with Condtions July 22, 1985 Rancho Cucamonga City Planning Commission City Hall - suite "B" 9320 Baseline Road Rancho Cucamonga, Calif 91730 Gentlemen: J On May 19, 1985, I moved into the Mulberry Place townhouse' development, located on the northwest corner of Vineyard and Arrow Route. For the past eighteen years I owned a single family Swelling in Los Angeles County which was located fourteen miles from my place of employ- ment. During the past few years I witnessed the steady iecline of my neighborhood and many other once fine neighborhoods. In the course of an assignment, a co- worker in Environmental Management compiled demographic data which demonstrate) a strong correlation between high crime rate urban blight (we used the teran "impacted areas ") and a transient population where landlords are essc- itially absent from the community. Imagine my consternation when I discovered thv adjacent, northeast corn w of Vineyard and Arrow Route is being develope! into 184 apartme:e- u::f;;. I now live forty -five miles from my place of employment and have quad- i rupled my house payment, only to discover that Rancho Cucamongs is ma?cing the same mista$e my previcus community made. We are promoting the influx of large transient populations who will have no vested interest in the maintenance and improvement of the property they occupy or the community the populate. Situated as we are on the fringe of industrial zoning, we are susceptible to becomming the traditional " lum" area unless careful planning intervaie�. I would urge you to carefully reconsider and if posbible eliminate this Proposed apartment complex and devote as much or our area as possible to single o.: multiple ewner occupied dwellings. cerely, I '"C�u�GO�= ZZyyii l Phyllis Ann Graff 8433 Autumnhill Place Rancho Cucamonga cc: City Council 6he Planning Associates Jonathan Petke, Inc Hardy M. Sfrozier, Inc 3151 AIRWAY AVENUE SUrE S.1 1 COSTA r4E5A.. CALIFORNIA 9:524 V14).556-3260 September 3, 1985 Dear Concerned Resident: .01)0 ` Op � m� -Vo � 9 ,y � s F o, o j`� 0� 4Qt Robertson Homes invites you to attend a brief meeting on September 17, 1981, at 6:30 p.m., to be held, at Woodsong Village located at 8255 Vineyard Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga. The purpose of the meeting is to familiarize those residents, who have written or called the City, with another proposed Robertson Homes project, Villa Mirage, located at the northeast corner of Viaeyar3 Avenue and Arrow Route. The meeting should last no longer than an hour and tours of the residential complex will be conducted by resident manager, Donald Garabaldi. We look forward to seeing you on September 17, 1985. Please RSVP to Mrs. Fran Gruenthal at (714) 556 -5200 by September 13, 1985. If you have any further questions, please call and speak to Mr. Hardy Strozier at (714) 356 -5200. Thank you, HardA. Strozier HMS: ftg LIST OF NAMES FOR MEETING ON SEPTEIBER 17, 1985 at 6:30 P.M. AT WOODSONG VILLAGE: Phyllis Ann Graff Charles Rick Bob and Karen Meade Nancy Fong r i HIA) - 9 a MEMORANDUM DATE: August 20, 19$5 9` 4't 9'i�CO T0: Robert Pfeil as cc, -'0 2r�1E2 -,9" soy oyc9 FROM: Rick Hughes ? ,.r RE: Small Parcels, Vineyard and Arrow VC? Rancho Cucamonga, California �o•CON, AttacLed are copies of the certified letters sent to the er-O ttiao property owners that we have yet to put under contract at the above referenced intersection. w F�oF As noted in the letter to Mr. Helfer you can acquire his Qw� "INT parcel for One Hundred Forty Thousand Dollars ($1110,000.0o% geo net of commissions. Ms. Chiorino will not ,- espond to my letter but I have apprcaehed her through another broker, RT Steve Lucas of Lucas Land Company; about six months ago. HUGHES At that time she indicated she would not sell for less than ca Two Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars ($250,000.00).. Both prices far exceed the value you would expect to realize by adding them to your development. A realistic value would be ten (10 %) to twenty (20 %) percent of what they are asking. Give me a call if I can be of further- c:ssistance in this matter. . fours truly, A JC-- Rink A. Hughes R.T. Hughes Co. RAH :maj Enclosures �r MflU a E S\c�. C04., ; i oF�fNT PP�¢W R:{: AJGHES Mmov CE \TER . S..dpmele, Salle 717 nu.An; CA 97707 4724J3564J65 1 f July 22, 1985 c and Mrs. Frank Hclrer VOS Vineyard Avenue aneho Cucamonga, CA 91730 :ar Mr, and :ors. Heifer:. You are probably aware, the Lozier Corporation has :gently sold their property, at the coraer or Arrow and .Aeyard, to March /Brookside, a general partne.'ship. They Ive, in turn, contracted to sell the property to Robertson Imes,. lbertson Homes has asked that I contEct you regarding the lssibilities or purchasing your property to add to their :fisting development plans. I am the real estate broker who .ndled the Lozier transaction and should you be inter e s ted, am available- to discuss the possibilities or a sale with U. ease give me a call, collect If you wish, a'. your earliest nvenienca. I st regards, ek A. Hughes T. Hughes Company, Inc. H:maj K w7T.+� lzt•Lf� fI � e�tc� r,7t(• 1E1303H RnI11aU �IL3C:e0 5:4tC1CeStltOf':ICC �3'.W ; 4 . 0 x .m x a o> �_. pq0 a - Y•ll q`FQ $$� -a= ooh\ Z ( il, y 4 Q =I§ 3 L,l, a. i i -•co ,,, N W Op�ENi tR9Q�i. R.T. { G ES i n"r1oS CE.CTER i�S�uJ rh, Suite 7I7 E. CA 97707 (714)$S 6-656S i i i M�N -/0 July 22, 1985 Ms. Connie Chiorino 9006 Arrow Highway Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Dear Ms. Chiorino: As you are probably aware, the Lozier Corporation has recently sold ttieir property, at the corner or Arrow and Vineyard, to Parch /Brookside, a general partnership. They have, in turn, contracted to sell the property to Robertson Homes. Robertson Homes has asked that I contact you regarding the possibilities of purchasing your property to add to their existing development plans. I am the real estate broker who handled the. Lozier transaction and, should you be interested, I am available i discuss the possibilities of a sale with you. Please give me a call, collect if you wish, at yot^ earliest convenience. Best regards, Rick A. Hughes R. T. Hughes Company, Inc. RT.9: ma j go r z_ t` S �o? aL a 3 3 ;.� °sm e 'M 333 U91 1 i .- El U 'Z-.-"-J-t :..f t_ - 771- , ME LS.p NURTH CITY OF ITEIM: PLANTCHO CUCAMONGA TITLE PLANNINIC DIVISKIN EXHIBIT. SCALE---,, �'_ * 13. )701+ -02 0 10-9-85 P.C. Agenda Packet'__ o Page .4 of 6 11 UNIFORM APPLICATION .� RESIDENTIAL PROJECT ,m SUMMARY DEVELOPMENT TABLE Project Name Villa Mirage Reference File No.:3 Location Northeast corner of Arrow Route/ (Staff Use Only) General Plan M Vineysrd �� Development District , PROJECT AREA - Gross (Intl area to centerilne of abutting streets): Net (exclusive of dedication for major external and secondary sheets): DWELLING UNITS (Based on Not Area) SlQgle Fsmily Detached S;Fple Family ,AttachedlrownhouselDuplex Csndomindum Apartments Total AREA DISTRIBUTION (Based on,Nat Area) Building Coverage Landscape Coverage Vehicular Area (Intl. parking) Common Open Space. Private Open Space Useable Open Space (common & private) PARKING Uncovered Carports Garages Guest Parking Recreation Vehicles Total: Ratio (Spacelunit): 6 gT. NUMBER 164 164 ACRESISO. FT. 1.58/69,234 6.23/271,795 3.52/153,576 6.23/271,795 .42/18,100 5-6-/289,895 12.28 acres 11.71 acres NET QeISI 14.0 14.0 du /ac.' % OF NET AREA 13.5 53.24 30.00 5s.24 3.58 56.92 LIST OF /AMENITIES N Of Spaces 1,10 16,F Amenities will consist of common - swimming pool areas with a Jacuzzi, recreation building. Meandering 41 walks placed throughout the project providing a "park- like" atmosphere. �A tot lot is provided with play structur -a. 1.77 HIA) '/'7 KI E ] UNIT W SIDE UNIT'A' SIDE NORTH CITY Cri! ITEM: RANCHO CUCAMONGA TITLE- PLAMING DIVISM EXHIBM--_A�1_ SCALE.___,.,- 9 UNIT'B' SfDE �. IMD UNIT'S' END CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONTGA PLANNING DIVISION w- UNIT ' ' SIDE ✓ V NORTH ITFrbI: TITLE= jjr�S /A?s.�1P EXHIBIT: SCALE= �(% -/O M UNIT T' SME tiu:i -L rw, V NURTH I CITY OF ITFm: _fir 3131 /P.Q-q- RANCHO ICUCAMONGA TT u: PLANNING DP'vLSION EXHIBIT-� -SCALE , Ii REC. BLDG. EAST NIT A )R SO FT. 31 REC. SLOG. SOUTH EFOROOM 11 BEDROOM NORTH CITY OF ITEM- 7MI 5 _L RANCHO CUCAMONGA ,PL kNNUWCv DIVISION EXHIBIT- SCALE- 20 L 12 lii' •• li Dmcl it SAM rip, UNIT B a7s so FT. EFOROOM 11 BEDROOM NORTH CITY OF ITEM- 7MI 5 _L RANCHO CUCAMONGA ,PL kNNUWCv DIVISION EXHIBIT- SCALE- 20 L 12 t LANDSCAPE ELEVATION PARKING LOT ELEVATION lfIIKE lRaNE OORa 11f EEl COIDNNf aND pEfYf R} ENO CONDIt1pNf OI —r •ICONO. COI .1 61pf[I fIEY' . ►auNMp 4.1. IMO.1 `t`• E• /Rf [t flEv tay , 1 h a � , e:°4a a � � sv.� I = � • TYPICAL SECTION CARPORTS NORTH CITY OF ITM RANCHO CUCAMONGA, TITLE: PLANNING DIVOOiN EXHIBIT: scALE• �^ Asubs -P-9 be= and buildings 15-5V NORTH CITY OF ITEIM: I AI�TC�IO CUCAMONGA TM E: FILAWING DIVLSIQN EXHIBIT'-44-k- SCALE: �- ARROW R O U TE Figure 3. Location of CNEL Contours Relative —� -- _ to Project Site at 2nd Floor Elevations = NOTE- Contours take into account litigation provided by 4' �— land aCAP ing berm and buildings I/ ) NORTH 6' Q! S' V� J� O i CITY OF ITEM: r'" !z ]E -M CHO CUCAMOITGA TITLE: L. T -, ®°ww% / PLANNING DIVISIOiN EXHIBIT: _SCALE- /L//,V - 2-S Ii. l CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PART II - INITIAL STUD`? ENVIR" iENTAL CHECKLIST DATE • ! ",� e7— APPLICAN-r: F 110 ,ATE: ,t /Q- g+� LOG NUMBER: /CCEP7�r? A pFiF�T PROJECT: /6 51 !79/IaDC 7-n PC r,�Q�1?�� As rMr42Ti��ioAiTs PROJECT LOCATION: I. ENVIRO%M. NTaL IMPACTS (Explanation of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required on attached sheets). EN YES kYBE N3 1. Soils and Geoloay. Will the propusal have significant results in: a. Unstable ground conditions or in changes in geologic relationships? b. Disruptions, displacements, Compaction or burial of the soil? c. .Change • -,i topography or ground surface COP_ _r intervals? d. The 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? f. Changes in erosion siltation, or deposition? _� ✓ g. Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards _ such as earthquakes, landslides, mud- slides, ground failure, or•similar hazards? h. An increase in the rate of extraction and/or use of any mineral resource? 2. 2Xdr, olo . Will the proposal have significant results in: L111 KI KA Page ? 1 YES ;MAYBE 10 a Changes in currents, or the course of direction of flowing streams, rivers, or ephemeral stream channels? b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or 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 anv body of water? / V e. Discharge into surface waters, or any alteration of surface water quality? f. Alteration of groundwater characteristics? g. Change in tie quantity of groundwaters, either through direct additions or with- drawals, or thr:,ug3 -- 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 flooaing as or seiches? 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,o£ 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 v/ 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? V b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of plants? �"f )-ZS _ Page 3 a. Will the proposal alter the location, distri- bution, density, diversity, or growth rate of the human population of an area? b. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? 6. Socio- Economic Factors. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Change in local, or regional socio- economic characteristics, including economic or commercial diversity, tax rate, and property values? 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 land use of an area? b. A conflict with any designations, objectives, DolicIPS, or adopted plans. of any gover Wc-tal entities? c. An impact upon the qulaity or quantity of existing consumptive or non - consumptive recreational opportunities? H/ A) - 2� V YES MAYBE No C. Introduct; nn of new or disruptive species of into plants 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 number3 of any unique, rare /^ or endangered species of animals? 1 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 i results in: a. Will the proposal alter the location, distri- bution, density, diversity, or growth rate of the human population of an area? b. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? 6. Socio- Economic Factors. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Change in local, or regional socio- economic characteristics, including economic or commercial diversity, tax rate, and property values? 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 land use of an area? b. A conflict with any designations, objectives, DolicIPS, or adopted plans. of any gover Wc-tal entities? c. An impact upon the qulaity or quantity of existing consumptive or non - consumptive recreational opportunities? H/ A) - 2� V Page 4 YES "k NO B. Transportation. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular moverant? f \/ 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 goods? f. Alterations to or effects on present and potential water- borne, rail, mass transit or air traffic? g. Increases _a 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, /or and historical resources? 10. Health. Safetv, 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 potential health hazards? 0/ C. A risk of expldsion or release of hazardous substances in the evert of an accident? d. An increase in the number of i.dividuals -� or species of vector or pathf.nogenic organisms or the exposure of people to such organisms? / e. Increase in existing noise levels? ✓V f. Exposure of people to poten.ially dangerous noise levels? g. The creation of objectinvpUe odors? < h. An increase in light or glare? sC:_ is C r //,) '�� Page S YES `;AYBc NO 11. Aesthetics. Will the proposal have significant AM rasultS in: no IqW 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 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? v! d. Water supply? _ ✓ e. Wastewater facilities? ✓ f. Flood control structures? f Alk g. Solid waate facilit_es? J h. Fire protection? / i. Police prot ,n? j. Schools? j k. Parks or other recreational facilities? 1. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads and flootr control facilities? M. Other governmental ,arvices? 13. Enerev and Scarce Resources. Will the proposal have significant w results in: a• Use of substantial or excessive fuel or energy? b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy? V c. An increase in the demand for development of rc.. sources r of energy? % V d. An increase or perpetuation of the cons;.nption of non - renewable forms of Energy, when -1 • ible renewable sourer of energy are ev ailab3.e. Page 6 YES MAYBE NO e. Substantial depletion of any nonrenewable or scarce natural - resource? V 14. anc?!i Findin s of Significance. a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantial.., reduce the habitat of fish or wildlife species, cau-,a a fish or wildlife population to drop self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the rang- of a rar- 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 tc 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, definiti7 +e period of time while long- term impacts will endure well into the future). ,Lf c. Does the project have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively III 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? IZ. DISCUSSION OF EN"VIRONxENTAL EVALUATION (i.e., of affirmative the above answers to q/ues/tlons plus a discussion of proposed rmi tigation measures) . Page 7 IIl. DETE3.'�f_ INATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: ❑ I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATI09 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 WILL BE PREPARED. ElI find the proposed project "M have a significant effect on the envirnment, and an ENVIR0NMItT IZMPAI.T REPORT is required. Date Si nature Title '— AOL 1 1AJ ° 30 � i ADDENDUM TO INITIAL STUDY, PART II TT 13131JDR 85 -17 2. Hydrology (b) construction of this project will incr -- the amount of paved surface area which could result in an increase in the amuv, :)f surface water runoff and a decrease in the absorption rates. However, the proposed drainage system for this project will handle this increase. 4. Biota (a), (b) and (c) The developer is preserving the existing Eucalyptus windrows which is located at the northern property boundary. In addition, the development of this project required the planting of new trees at the rate of 50 trees per gross acres with 20% of them being specimen size, 70% being 15- gallon size, and 10% being 5- -gallon size. This will result in adding a variety of plant species to the site. 8. Transportation (a) The development of tail project will cause an increase in vehicular "traffic. However, Vineyard being a secondary Street and Arrow Highway i" being a major thoroughfare are designed to handle such increase. 10. Health, Safety and Nuisance Faci:ors (f) Nose: This project will be impacted by road noise from Vineyard Avenue and Arrow Highway. A noise s':udy had been done per the requirement of the General Plan and has provied the following mitigation measures: a. A 4 -foot landscaping berm shall be required along Vineyard Avenue and Arrow Highway. b. No further mitigation measures are needed for balconies and patios and other active open space area as all of these amenities are set back behind the 60 CNEL noise contour. c. A final acoustical report to provide mitigation measures for interior noise reduction (45 CNEL) in compliance with Title 25 Standards shall be rsquired. M /,v - Ic KI RESOLUTION NO. A RESO1'JTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO UCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, CONDITIONALLY APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 13131 AND DEVELOPMENT /DESIGN REVIEW 85 -17 WHEREAS, Tentative Tract Map No. 13131, hereinafter "Map" submitted by Robertson 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 a residential subdivision for condominium purposes on 11.71 acres located at the northeast corner of Arrow Highway and Vineyard Avenue into 1 lot, regularly came before the Planning Commission for public hearing and action on October 9, 1985; and WHEREAS, the City Planner has recommended approval of the Map subject to all conditions set forth in the Engineering and Planning Division's reports; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has read and considered the Engii,3ering and Planning Division's reports and has considered other evidence presented at the public hearing. NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does resolve as follows: SECTION 1: The Planning Commission makes the following findings in regard to Development /Design Review 85 -17 and Tentative Tract No. 13131 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 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. H/J 33 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION TT 13131 & OR 85 -17 - ROBERTSON HOMES October 9, 1985 Page 2 (g) That this project will not create adverse impacts on the environment and a Negative Declaration is issued. SECTION 2: Tentative Tract Map No. 13131, a copy of which is attached hereto, is hereby approved subject to all of the following conditions and the attached Standard Conditions: Desiqn Review 1. A 4 -foot landscaping berm shall be required along Vineyard Avenue and Arrow Highway for sound attenuation. 2. A final acoutical report to provide mitigation measures for interior noise reduction in compliance with Title 25 Standards (45 CNEL) shall be submitted to the Planninq Division for review and approval prior to issuance of building permits, 3. The existing windrow at the northern property boundary shall be replaced with 5- gallon Eucalyptus Maculata (Spotted Gum), 8 -feet on cente.• and need not be staked. 4. Special landscaping treat_ant shall be provided at the intersection, of Arrow and :ineyar0. 5. At least one hundred twenty -five cubic feet of enclosed, weatherproof, lockable storage space is to be provided for each unil,. This storage space shall be in addition to that 0,dinarily contained within each unit. It may be either within or exterior to, but shall bear a reasonable locational relationship to each unit. Tentative Tract 1. Construct catch basin on Vineyard Avenue to tie in with existing catch basin on the west side of Vineyard Avenue. 2. Traffic signal relocation, if required, shall be completed by the developer. 3. The developer shal' attempt to acquire appropriate dedication along the frontage of the 'but parcels" and construct curb and gutter across said parcels. in the event the developer is unable to acquire such dedication, he shall be required to widen street pavement fronting the 'but parcels to as close to the outer edoe of the existing street right -of -way as possible as judged by the City Engineer. He shall also provide a plan and construct all pavement markings as required by the City Traffic Engineer. 4. An access easement over the interior loop street extending to the out parcels for future access to said parcels shall be dedicated upon the final map. a PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION TT 13131 & DR 85-17 - ROBERTSON TOMES October 9, 1995 Page 3 5. A final tract map shall be recorded prior to issuance of building permits. 6. Texturized pedestrian, connections to adjoin the Bear Gulch School shall be provided and be interfaced with the pedestrian connections provided b;; the developer to the north (TT 12835). 7. A pedestrian crossing across gear Gulch Road to the City park shall be provided. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS OTH DAY OF OCTOBER, 1985. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Dennis L. Stout, Chairman ATTEST • Jack Lam, Secretary 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 9th day of October, 1985, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: hf�.tl - 3S S E f ~ � O O H N 6 0 s v a an a i L A O a u Y V •Z... `ry r n, N °ono �a °.°. •YU Nac drn z« Y .- n.Td. ac;v '^n QA ;.2 g I °.e v�AY LOD TL4V � 9 I O O j « Y'• A a N C L c d q C'• �� Y A A L Y2 O d'pY0 d ay q6 G ~ ad~E��d�« ^N 6.G-A C «A A,^ O�QLYYm O.�c A AuY �N Gdd O. D.rE^N >q UC�o L did CL9 S�V CUar y N �y.0 G O 0 anU^ 6j R�NaL+^i0 iEr A�N6 Cpr Cd ^U «�� Y,LOF p� ti L) 6J OD At C,.. ^�d�u .mac AYdA Y,^ E O dcONOW d uMi ° A d «° yano d inn Gy Nr .n 0 G d •e.. d� E d.-. q N d V d L « — o -G a A c o q AU 2 L LNUSmyt nau u C.G°'a u NN dY nL Y.ae N Z. GON Eo .N-Eo ^ u EwoEEnaLLG.Aq EE -w- ^ Y uLO ...En n d u AG ^d LG L d A �� W � O a CYANYpC A O �.A D•� ••- ANL qNYE 60 ^G ACUI^ A °ad.�. N<•.A.y 'uMN O'rOC� Z Z o •+ EO.0 au^ La�"'°Ny LOi °' dy.' CCIgd AN X Z NL`-2 A p�W.ti, Cd e.-.a L C W tYC'YO Ydrn aL aY 5 E 13 L OOEE a d€ Vi EC•- O Lam ^TO Ned NN�L LY UYi� �� O E d�ii'. Q� t_tN G i 6 tl m S E f ~ � O O H N 6 0 s v a an a i L A O a u Y V •Z... `ry r � N O M'.dOACNpO •� ' L ^^ y A E n n • W FE d d LN AO�O Y L q 6g n y L O YVa A r V d aWi 6'n C T GOY NG Q EqO cd9 J • s0 '• O+d• '¢ N d w- O L py ^;dG TL4V � 9 I O Y U� wOyy�Y.yN °q N Y2 O d'pY0 D — Z N Ouy ^ Y EE y N ~ ad~E��d�« J n'O A Aa qO� H r ` a 1� �a 6 G e n uN Y d N W u A 4rn uCUYUwLG ti V0 F J < °u h N Af Q LA I El I1 m uClu^ pruE of a Lp c • -�� 17; N nuyo °ua r`uu�usc pd d M O tv uL „o ^.ace 'o- dT.y e' o0 L n u A C 9 d >. - u 1 p- O H---- ` C: L rya ; n� A C d L d p O w N E p N c p4 Oa u N d A> d y^ a nT q N t l aE •^cR Ic IZ!o Q1 Np cc Oy2i�L csu - •'. ctE N -. do Lzt_l drir o.ui 4. c u ^aq pd E4 � .O °r t >oA �T o 2 a qAU CL VSO Ea bu. iOd TV.d °^ L a �EN�Va� rco iO@ AuN l• yU >.,G <t W ^O rNirE? dr-gN ASE . JR V q .Od O� 'j dN NLrC6il�cn. O t Y-Nmn' 'omAU N.- ya oL LdOr^ ny � - °mLt u•^r u u« q.r Aooc c E 6 acicao a� rCi O a C S". w d c ry^ y 3 Q H U^ N d N 7 L Gm c uLt Cr GAUW N Cq .L EOrediy�i'as'� qLN ^C N C.O.- C«�� d CO G L �y A N 08., >rd d 0 0 ~ u p> Ate' Sa qt ArOdua Or qV nC Mw. -•" yuy N �CUa 6D nY_CN Yqv Ea qd4 «L«A9 dd NL Lui- _pp u�C ue wgEGgD 9. T�`N C° t°ida d- OqL �.D u�� ^ r••r y .^ 6E -6`6\\ CNY d- N�NN V 2 2 Ndt°J CqC C 4-oNN WM -6 W -^ j C 6 ti . NN66 V a pr. ?E yy of L. di�N N A aC .tea �a • R5 N uu L'G nrco a^°cLN U2- OL �Od jd0 O • p L9 �`� -6 - L.6 FNL rE w i a`IOa .N.r v S.G C W a c �•. to p^ N u ENE r o. .. _n a �' K c i- -u -C c c� q J b'AJ ona aqi taL O n �Ei`.a =lr-.E ° rr�r- E- ? 'a0d dPQ., ci ~Y L> d9 ^jGNyC �Or�M.L C �wN 0, u G L�� r GN do p^ .°.r V �•q ~t C ty A " Y^ °`a d G 'r�,•• - -m a uq E.° AiG��Tu Nu u= aniu An u2Ca�`q d.Y yi EY ur°n uwy L4 qoT. v dNWa - — °ray O y' A N >dpr a--z. v >i '� c onpA r°`uy .a0 �.,qE.. >O° A E a �uYy Orc Jq na N 1d"L a0LL d >� NL. nt C ° tTa pC CE dLw AnOA N n - un AY.+ Cp. Gq T W'9 y� a� c d c .aa a> q Edv ItC •� a = °V Cyf qLL�' " a _ N o N .C�rdM ccNC c c«O~n0 ~ oo y r°- �; 0 ¢rno a,c� Na in root wo rtNOU ¢O6 '•end, n GU uo na m «T�� dd dCn�E cz I I I I M /.cl —3 9 I1 m Z 4, U 'N n O d YWYI CCUG c0 a O1� ufa Lqa°+ �r 01U E.ILV q ^..0 d AI CO ^O6 c/L S9p VdN�<: YE'.T r 0'wY `� n C g6r.�r -OwY.° Yn CJ�� CY L N d C w 1. Y D Y O r — V of wn q 0 —_ L Y° q V y Y q L I C n o h u O Q1 d O D o e u •T• aLi o v _• d y' o ^- � o ^Y 6 d w v w q Our , r q • dL cL ^o O7 v1ri1 •yyN �� L^ q —T y d —N °tea VLd N N T m ^OUO L I a+q i°oNQ aN L.ggGC Npddu aYJd y— C9 —.Or Pq0 MYx dL0 GN nL r9yw4.COLiNOiV' of �C oSu E4 ve �o Yw NuTr.r°e oai� " _ u� Noo do V,w CuyiV r O� u1•Iq d° ^qN 9 >�cY d at '.. aTa�> ° Uw dO qa+L plp� q q C.- aCipGnv'^na �o . 01 L. c a. 0 d° tk"Z " z N 8" o ti dd E EN ✓Lr^N - u N — E L C d .+ aLip N V L>a N ^ •mr c0 qNN U > .1 -2 dT �O^ . u t ^ Q` l 2.2 Y 2.4 E nG U u> Q—n ECt.r O ad L.1 < 1nn Z' h f N t < N Y •-.� p1 019 6 0 Q g w 0 G < Y li 0 9 p N { CsY d V E01 -1 Is L ' dd ° o nn °O cc oIna m�a°oo °d Y •- N o . OM C L L r u� F- q w 01nw V.a Cq y N= Y c L.1t G ZG q0C O: 01L n 6 E Y1 Z.2 Bw YOM q V Y _ L OuL • uY.q~ O,.yC L >d d YI Y d +A NN q9 LL uE~�c GL q O�V d p d + N O q y y O c 6 L 6 a T p Z V MYG V9d .O —q DLq Y dL.—.. C qo 9 NNM� aay �y sqr T^ I� KL Ey 01q.�E° N y •• ^oa ha N ia1. a v"`o moo. ++0.�� .YaTy nd O.m N N ^LL V c l0 Y — qOC n a.T up 9d c c `oq n di ari — .cod d� C u0 Q �o^ N ... wq q L� O1 ya d c 272 dnG,. -E 01— _om No �p u nc�.... a°..Y. °q.= nu mid nN jai p q tiu �1rYl�n u v N N N a+ •• n dLOC T!� Q ^TL Ea �ECi No ¢aim' a ¢aN i=n« <u ¢v i-`o N.-.LO hoc N n YLr po N;l b c N M /N -.39- W Yc2 ¢.. ELy^ Qq _ • O�O Yp�� O�Vd C� C9d Op OQ j P Sr O ^r � NtL ^N E ^K Cub yLL�O L ? U F mwtNi �x oy�O YN- C T... • y L^ o d C Y.-. Y y .E L C C y u- 15 wl u4 °O�as nN. L.L V - L q r _- d` ` y u d y u C q p O r L adM V S2 o o - p 4J 1, x ^ N o Eq U " IS- Y L L'% u.A y u Y o v s `mu ate= a Y. q_ yet a E: 5- �'Ea u cane. ^�.- - Qo '" ao r0� Lp°CO ati. ECE C °=.Y yJ «_OW. YG �Y ym_ O1 ^y g •�'N �9 �CYV S4 OM -'c2 N V p0 ^ dyy q u yqo Nam nsLC O y -N � ysyay ° °ud.°- pETa,y F� t y C L y q p S H t S q C` v V y s V p p. L M YO E Y yw n y q.. d ° C Y O y`« L1 u O 9..C.. N'• y N °' y°j ..• C uwc.^ -. aC�9� °Da m tee. t°a� �EO�M �vr.7;Yy LEY °a. .0 N l °�.-. •.,. J '^^ ON nGdd 4€ M q 4 n� -v .v°. -.i qh L• ^OAT q V C c o�• °OL nio vsi L4 L ... quE. vA 4uu� o��Nq q9A N4o =LING HAG' N F•j'W t.. 1�N 6 ^ o- qV0 N Ua S ^oa E A'U -AK gM nC4 L Y P O y L p�N Nq4 OYa C f NL� ^ 6 yV. ^c _ �cua Ly V` qa� '° =a°a° E.°a. `" � �°`• you T`a Qaq v aRw ZZ C mY 4 aN aViU = G=0 p a9 E Ly. YYo d.o N Gayer ;>�.0 uTiyLV � OWp•� L uL y 6 Cv`O Yta.•TC • �U.q pN^ -'L r„aq • N YqL Ly Ln t_ q L q LLn U o vqm L�'iY m ^"qq c` Cop` LY Nip p gE yu ^ mu _o =yy9 CL yy CaN o u9 cO c T -aYUq _y pp Ur 4N. L1 u a g L -• q e. q E c.1 o CE .0 u u ... ` °° y Y �.N1 Ua V M«^^. q _P�p L Vic.°. `Gi p•Ly ` E � L 1 0 L y Yn O4Nr U W {•.. W E 2 6 Y.Y y O T.. v Q! •n L d i00 u �Cw gCOC�t C.6+•^ u u W ^'OY QQ y1 L u npCY1 atE Y M u O. gCg C Y w Y Y NLUet OA C YY ^ ^� w 019. O E d V^ q r ^ O ^ qN �wNPp �Nrn � U � � �ONpGL r�0. w�� Tat�•L ^ C Y pL1 L v279 1E ego C ~ O d u np^~Y•gE �^ C dq Tyy a orL.. L. �. y Y w MY S � i .0...• Y C N E O .r• E.•.... A f N N� OI W HC C Y g O • C �'C N tY �1 L E q Q.^ a Q O. L ~ C O•w' W E "aa .= Y ^iN[� N •1 Y °eq.ec 4 .emu � V " ' y.. .•• PC OI•u EE UoT.Nw YL q u N �F `� n L O Y L a Y G 'y i i~ Y O °!f v ^.o .Y. `.^c EE ppu�°.`u ^ V ^N.yOO aw i p ZA a °'0�` iO1 O .Y-E p • AeY oN to YA c LG ... qAq s �.. ° " c�� uOq c d Y > O O f? OY�W. 01•°. til �NI 8 \\ NI w'I 64 C-6LC HI ��I 4UM ^t cq �•rn o.� a Y nY. O c = a Y •N• oa c 0 W c.5 a�eY y^um um CC O VV 01 q' O Yp. w.N %w• p 6 A _` 9� ° cYY V.V V c L G L Y` V^ OI000. WC.YC �' Ydgp1 C�O� � ^TOC Tt }IM qY•^ u. O O qqa c Y u L YO. ao nc � P4 uo� v�La m'a `racAw >• U AY Ate' .CND FF CO A Y.rO L . 9 quuC NYj�t. r C �U 4 p0= tz A iy Q UYNC °6.iTOq YquuM Y� u� 1pVY °r `•`°,^' gYY .'•,� Y'• �`e SC v� w°.. uw aU `j ^Cq °$ ` V.+.o °NoAY O O �E r;� hu. oc nEYoi n yk^ q °i C °. V u Q V- C a u TJ fir,• °mop ^^ �d u� q •Y_c o Y O �,�u.>..q ,E Le °,°i C O �.arivp my u C� SQL C - � O u u ^ 6 �. MN Vw r• Y d°I OJf L Y �. NYVN� Q Y 9 Y <V40 � O N YI q Q OG+•E ^L WNV W YU �R 1`'10.2 w w N� !.I fI �I ��I !��•I VI 11 vd - a�oc u u LW 2 m c .d.. v � m E n v p y �n au _ Q v` � do° •- d tiw d d S r u S w 2 L E 9 N J Dtd F E— ca 6` N a eEid �E A 20 e Ca � od 20 J L c nV Eo• E 6A `CL WS O �+A NC KL U— W ' E d O 1 E �v 'c v NO�Lp G L O G o N L F C♦s T u AEq F AE". L I n� V � LEu iF n un S � O O � A E o d c x T9 L i Y qda Q u w Y d 6 u E 6nU �N I 1 t0 OL- o ov s d e L Y d AOL a o o� =�o P^ u u y N = uPC - ` `A LW d N O Y A c ° u 9 -. .^ u u i Y y A V i i n u Ewa n uEa,�O. �'^ c c L Lad >n �t '- \ d T Tu uUd N Ny^ d N9 F dt i 2 m c .d.. v � m E n v p y �n au _ Q v` � do° •- d tiw d d S r u S w 2 L E 9 N J Dtd F E— ca 6` N a eEid �E A 20 e Ca � od 20 J L c nV Eo• E 6A `CL WS O �+A NC KL U— W ' E d O 1 E �v 'c v NO�Lp G L O G o N L F C♦s T u AEq F AE". L I n� V � LEu iF n un S � O O � A E o d c x T9 L i Y qda Q u w Y d 6 u E 6nU �N I 1 t0 1 E �v 'c v NO�Lp G L O G o N L F C♦s T u AEq F AE". L I n� V � LEu iF n un S � O O � A E o d c x T9 L i Y qda Q u w Y d 6 u E 6nU �N I 1 t0 u O �d Y lY L w v � U U C � O 4 O yN O LL A } 0 0 o - ° ua c 9 N yN. Y U A ^ • C N P a. �A ac m u o^ A 7 y W h u nub ao i� V N qa W w O w � n« N N NN = u ww. L 4 Ot N r�•v.lc. ¢ow a.'.. vza' o A D N C N EU q r N N o I W C V C W � UNw o ^y cu L G. d nor m q 4 N a.Y.. ol r A �u by NA yi it « ate' EE Grd rt ASN +r+tr. � 9✓ gt L .6 w C d LL V k^ Q a ti9w OrN <^"v�i Qr ?1�`\ LLG. •SL J4Ula \Oyu u O �d Y lY L w v � U U C � O 4 O yN O LL A } 0 0 o No � • �H Nn LY is °m a 9 N yN. Y U A ^ • C N P a. A 7 y W h o L ao i� V N qa W w O w � n« N N NN NL C O P > u ww. L 4 Ot N r�•v.lc. ¢ow a.'.. vza' o aru «L w d o upon d V gz « mu'u� N H Y a 9 r Ac�m c OQ A � A 9 A LU C .0 cya iW ^' u Wr V .z • V ar u cz e),o - f z 2 a E d N V L u � N O « F O U V w z •°• W h C n � S O r Y rCn `L OW UV Lwt. 6L 6 2 O Ll El L E CITY OF RANCHO C UCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: October 9, 1985 T0: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Jack Lam, Community Development Director BY: Howard Fields, Assistant Planner GK`o �LCk4royc� 2 t n v, U.f > SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 85 -17 FOR KIDS ONLY - To a. low construction of a 9,260 square foot preschool an 1.18 acres of land in the Low Residential Di -trict (2 -4 du /ac) located on the south side of Base Line, eat` of Turner - APN 1077- 061 -09. I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action Requested: Approval of a precise site plan, elevations. and issuance of a Negative Declaration. B. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: Nort - Mile home park, Low Medium Residential (4 -8 du /ac). South Existing single family ; Low Residential (2 -4 du /ac). East - Existing single family; : -.ow Residential (2 -4 du /ac). West Vacant; '.ow Residential (2 -4 du /ac). C. General Plan Desi nations: rooject Site - Low Residential (2 -4 du /ac). North - Low Nedium Residential (4 -8 du /ac). South - Low Residential (2 -4 du /ac). East Low Residential (2 -4 du /ac). West - Low Residential (2 -4 du /ac). D. Site Characteristics: The project site has a grade differential of 3.5 t from Base Line Road with the remainder of the site sloping at 3% from north to south. An existing single family residence, and accessing structures currently occupy the site, and have been slated for removal. The site has a number of medium -size nine trees worth preserving along the east property line and one 30" (dia.) tree adjacent to the front entry (see Exhibit "H "). The developer has indicated a desire to preserve or re- locate as many trees as possible. E. Applicable R_e_gulations: Day care facilities are allowed in residential `ist� districts subject to the granting of a Conditional Use Permit. ITEM 0 1977 i PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CUP 85 -17 October 9, 1985 Page 2 II. ANALYSIS: A. General: The project proposed envisions a 9,260 square foot child- care /elementary facility comprising one large building (administrative /pre - school) connected by a breezeway /patio to two smaller classroom buildings in the rear (see Exhibit "C"). The remainder of the site will be devoted to paved /sand play areas, playground equipment, and nature area. The site will have a combination 6' high block wall with large specimen size trees along the west, east, and south property lines for screening and bufferin play areas from the adjacent residential neighborhood ?see Exhibit "G"). This facility will have approximately 124 students with a student /'teacher ratio of 10:1. The following is a detailed breakdown of the student population: Pre - School = 80 students, 9 teachers Elementary = 25 -40 students, 1 teacher The project has adequate internal circutation and sufficient parking area to mitigate vehicle stacking problem_;- In addition, 32 on -site parkin!-, stalls are provided with a drop - off zone for students located adjacent to the front entry ;see Exhibit "C "). B. Design Review Committee: During the Committee's initial review of the project, the following comments were provided. Realignment of the drive approach towards the front 'entrance of the building and elimination of the circular turning aisle (see Exhibit I'D "). Enhancement and up -grade of proposed architecture (see Exhibit "F ") in terms of a design statement and compatibility with neighborhood character. As a result of Committee's comments, the applicant submitted a new architectural program (see Exhibit "E") designed more to a scale for children. Further, high windows were added for more natural lighting and window levels were brought down to accommodate children. The elevations wer, scaled to residential proportions and unique architectural elements were provided to have a positive effect on children. Staff notes that the proposed architectural style is significantly different from the neighborhood of tract homes to the east. The building is setback 200 feet from Base Line and dense landscaping is provided along the east property line. C G a 11 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CUP 85 -17 October 9, 1985 Page 3 C. Technical Review Committee: The Committee reviewed ar;d approved the proposal subject to fire - protection measures incu porated in the building design, access gates at the east and south property lines and 26' width fire lar• from the adjoining southerly street (Kinlock Avenue). D. Environmental Assessment: Part I of the Initial Study has been completed by the app leant. Staff has completed Part II of the Environmental Checklist and found that the site is subject to noise levels, in excess of 65 Ldn. General Plan policies consider noise levels between 60 Ldn and 70 Ldn to be "conditionally acceptable" for schools and require a detailed analysis of noise reduction requirements in the building design. The noise study will be required as part of building plan check. Playground areas are located at rear of site and are shielded by buildings and would not exceed 60 Ldn, therefore, do not require noise mitigation.. A copy of Part II of the env'. *onmental checklist is attached for your review and consideration. If the Commission concurs with said findings, issuance of a Negative Declaration would be in order. III. FACTS FOR FINDINIS: The project is consistent with the General Plan and Development Co e. The project will not be detrimental to adjacent properties or cause signifi -rnt adverse environmental impacts. In addition, the proposed use 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 The Daily Report newspaper as a public hearing. The property was posted and notices advertising the public hearing were sent to all property owners within 300 feet of the project site. In addition, a neighborhood meeting was held on Tuesday, October 1st to receive input from the surrounding neighborhood. V. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission consider all input and elements of this project. If after such cons Aeration the Commission can support the facts for finding, then the adoption of the attached Resolution and issuance of a Negative Declaration would be appropriate. Respectfully submitted, ,lack Lam Comur;ity Development Director JL:HF:ko O -3 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CUP 85 -17 October 9, 1985 Page 4 Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Location Map Exhibit "B" - Site Utiiization Map Exhibit "C" - Revised Site Plan Exhibit "D" - rriginal Site Plan Exhibit "E" - Revised Elevations Exhibit "F" - Original Elevations Exhibit "G" - Conceptual Landscaping Plan Exhibit "H" - Grading Plan Initial Study, Part II Resolution of Approval with Conditions Ll y� (�1 e � n N y. O x O O i O n 0 m i N 9 a O O 3 El 7 lu El no Z i x wi Wi Ll LU _74 'A lu av T 4 li i Ox e A f F � � • I I ' t� i n L mm Im- • *-4 �N� R� m m D m r m D O Z b � Mf O ,c m +� r m �• D O Z O k2&01,56;47-) e�eV -770 < n T_ : m r m F D O z C) r D o CO cn O O 9 U) oaf itz i > a os u o >> °c e e� i� 4 n� �z O cn :.., .�_ ::" m m D m r m D O Z b � Mf O ,c m +� r m �• D O Z O k2&01,56;47-) e�eV -770 < n T_ : m r m F D O z C) r D o CO cn O O 9 U) oaf itz i > a os u o >> °c e e� i� 4 n� �z O m m • ' �we 1i l 1 iF S F .yeti' m •��lN� �'�1i�71oNs . 3 N. l� y� „m® am e O ► m I� I r At t> t a ra ► m CITY OF RANCHO CUCAYONGA PART 11 - INITIAL STLTDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST DATE:__ APPLICANT: FILING DATE: ,j0We7o / , /�Ar.��LOG NUMBER: co , PROJECT: PROJECT LOCATIO;I:_��pW d��AS�GiUV I. ENVIRO%M.NTAL IMPACTS (Explanation -af all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required on attached sheets). - YES MAYBE NO 1� Soils and GeoloQv. Will the nr' sal have significant results Jr.: a. Unstable ground conditions or in changes in geologic °relationships? -� ')isruptions, displacements, compaction or burial 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. Any potential increase in wind or water ^� erosion of soils, affecting either on or off site conditons? / f. Changes in erosion siltation, or deposition? ✓ Z. 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. Hydrology. Will the proposal have significant results in: Page YES MAYBE No a. Changes in currents, or the course of direction of flowing streams, rivers, or ephemeral stream channels? b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or 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 characterise."? g. Change in the quantity of groundwaters, i either through direct additions or with - drawals, or through interference with an It aquifer? Quality? Quantity? h. The reduction in the amount of water other- wise availa;>le for public water supplies? I. Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding or seiches? 3. AirAir Q� uality. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Constaut or periodic air emissions from mobile or indirect sources? J Stationary sources? ! b. Deterioration of ambient air quality and/or interference with the attainment of appli -,able air quality standards? c. Alteratisr., of local or regional climatic conditions, affecting air movement, moisture o'r 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: �. ?aee 3 YES `L4YBE 90 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, distrit,ation, or numbers of any species of animals? b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare / or endangered species of animals? ✓ c. Introductiotc 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. Poulation. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Will the proposal alter the location, distri- bution, density, diversity, or growth rate of the human population of an area? b. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? 6. Socio- Economic Factors. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Change in local or regional socio- economic characteristics, including economic or commercial diversity, tax rate, and property values? b. Will project costs be equitably distributed among project beneficiaries, i.e., buyers, tax payers or project users? ✓ 7. Land Use and Planning Considerations. Will the proposal have significant results in? a. A substantial alteration of the present or 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? .� Y Page G YES : ±4Y9E NO 8. Tranwortation. Will the proposal have significant C results in: a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? b. Effects on existing streets, or demand for new street construction? C. Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new parking? d. Substantial impact upon existing transporta- tion systems? / e. Alterations to present patterns of circa -a- tion or movement of people and /or goons? f. Alterations to or effects on present and potential water—borne, rail, mass transit or air traffic? _ate g. Increases in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists / or pedestrians? 9. Cultural Resources. Will the proposal have significant results in: OC 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 of people to potential health hazards? _ c. A risk of explosion or release of hazardous Y substances in the event of an accident? d. An increase in the number of individuals or species of vector or pathenogenic organisers or the e;"posure of people to such organisms? e. Increase in existing noise levels? f. Exposure of people to potentially dangerous noise levels? .._. g• The creation of objectionable odors? h. An increase in light or glare? �A j C)— E 61 I. 8 Page 5 YES u4YBE 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? c. A conflict with the objective of designated / or nential 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? g. Solid waste facilities? / h. Fire protection? y i. Police protection? J. Schools? / k. Parks or other recreational facilities? � 1. Maintenance of public facilities, including _L001 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 rr energy? b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy? J L� c. An increase in the demand for development of new sources of energy? -ice d. An increase or perpetuation of the consumption of non - renewable forms of cYt:gy, when feasibly /enewable sources of energy are available? Page 6 YES MAYBE NO e. Substantial depletion of any nonrenewable or C scarce natural resource? 14. Mandatory Findings of Sicnificance. a. Does the project have the potential to eegrade 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 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). / r. 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 ht;man beings, either directly or indirectly? II. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION (i.e., of affirmative answers to the above questions plus a discussion of proposed mitigation measures). B) &° RAA►dq ACJT165' WILL j9F ZvArd3E0T?O )gppp004e_ aty flfa Ni (moo w+M t rTEE gND 13tuLL) /NJ Z)Cpr 414 C0MP&4.,1aE -rO C17t RF_dP1,AT70AAtS, 26) .SCA4R,Sr_ RA$.J -VAF 1414-1- 'NCa6'9S'F_ rsttiE -to 7-HE C0#V&'rA&LC- ?t0AJ of IWVe46J ti 1R '/ €$. ALLt9VEC7S Of A2lq(ag5E tvtCl $E L.LN�E2 ^FIDE DIeECTCag o1'tl4E C►Ty �NG�N�,r� r5 DES( .5WcgMa . 45 Gout slaEi�iiac, t vfflc.l { �r "E2s s�2a ir+ E(E e omaiE2t o-(- Vn7kaE of r �j �p$�J t`7` 2a�PCT Wtt,4 RE(�Gai2E R N7AM&- PtAAi -RrZ Cl af[E &T Gt9>rlM6Afts (,0/4 1 G14 W + LL WEGESS t P_*7e_ NEW SreE -r Ca- /ST2aC. d- PFk2•kcHx, WIC4 Ba MwDa& +°fie z/R.1rene'v OVA V -&e- Cr:rr� 02y�f.�c.��^'TroN�aG E,�T<dl �E,f� !'jve/PS �I?d�►'!/a.; ep� �,e0 .�E$rj.�yy�^ �7�/1�$ _ �E(%EG�s ��✓ ?F_er/.21 '� . /�,� �7�7 -� ,,,d�SP*S C'c��,�'sC� ' T�� DE.usE <9irll�.s'c�a„vf �.v6 .Sau,d� .S F'2 Ld. J2a p,�2Ty Ci tJE ,rS Scf�, Ec� y`�y c rf/Ois� CEO/ C'o�vsv lF��cs G'Elw.�J 106 •rya ?O c•P� Q ?a 1-4V;2W -71a (%tTiYdiZ �'�i/�d.rtryrE.v'T wiGG S�st� /lrOrsc,+ Aew 0-\g Pace 7 III. DETER`INATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. 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 DECLARATIisN WILL BE PREPARED, I find the proposed project 1,MY have a significant effect on ti-e envirnment, and an ENVIRO.Y.%MNT L`D'ACT REPORT is required. Date Signature//f Title _ I El 40 i RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 85 -17 FOR KIDS ONLY, LTD. LOCATED SOUTH SIDE OF BASE LINE ROAM, EAST OF TURNER IN THE LOW RESIDENITAL DISTRICT WHEREAS, on the 5th day of June, 1985, a complete application was filed by For Kids Only, Ltd. for review of the above - described project; and WHEREAS, on the 9th day of October, 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 1! That the following findings can be met: 1. That the proposed use is in accord with the General Plan, the objectives of t, .e Development Code, and the purposes of the district in which the site is located. 2. That the proposed use, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially 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 the environment and that a Negative Declaration is issued on October 9, 1985. SECTION 3: That Conditional Use Permit No. 85 -17 is approved subject to the following conditions: Design Review.: 1. Rubber coated wrought -iron fencing be incorporated along both sides of front elevations. 2. Provide seating in the rear patio area. 3. Utilize brick pavers within front entry. 4. Provide combination seating area /raised planters within front entry. C) -a\ PLANNING COMMiSION RESOLUTION CUP 85 -17 Octobe- 9, 1985 Page ' 5. Submit details of nature area for review by City Planner prior to issuance of building permits 6. Rear portion of site shall be planted in accordance with conceptual landscape plan. 7. The applicant shall submit state licenses for all three specific student populations (infant care, pre- schoolers, and elementary) to the City Planner prior to issuance of bui ,ling permits. 8. Provids all 24" box size o:,- larger trees along Base Line frontage, mounding ,meandering sidewalk and alluvial rockscipe. 9. Pro+:id:,; canopy shade trees within and around parking lot at a rate of one 15- gallon size tree for every 3 parking stalls, sufficient to shade 50 percent of the parking area at solar moon on August 21, instead of Cypress. 10. Provide combination of dense landscaping and decorative screen walls along east, west and south property lines for screening and buffering, particularly plat areas, from adjacent neighborhood. 11. Provide sidewalk connection from Base Line sidewalk to sidewalk along east side of parking area. 12. Provide sidewalk along east and south sides of parking area shall be separated from parking ::ith a decorative metal fence. 13. Existing Pine trees along east property line and one 30" diameter tree near front entry shall be preserved in place or shall be relocated elsewhere on -site for preservation. A written report from qualified landscape architect or tree arborist shai, verify the detail; of preservation or relocation. Any trees that cannot be transplanted shall be replaced in kind with mature specimens. The written report shall be submitted together with a Tree Removal Permit pursuant to Ordinance 37 and a detailed plan shawing existing trees and relocation /replacement. 14. All trees to be saved shall be enclosed by a chain link fence prio to the issuance of any grading or building permit and prior to commencement of work. Fences are to remain in place during all phases of construction and carn.�,t be removed without the written consent of the City Planner until construction is complete. o -aa C 11 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTIPN CUP 85 -17 October 9, 1985 Page 3 15. A detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements and needed noise insulation features included in the building design shall be prepared by an acoustical engineer prier to issuance of building permits. A ir.aximum interior noise level of 45 dBA shall be adhered to. 16. Expansion of this use beyond 120 _tudents shall require modification to this Conditional Use Permit approval. Engineering: 1. Developer shall extend the 8" drainage pipe and /or provide a concrete or A.C. swale to Kinlock Avenue to prevent eeosion onto public streets to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 9TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 1985. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: C7nis L. Stout, Chairman ATTEST: _ Jack Lam, Secretary 1, Jack Lam, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rani Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly ant regularl3° introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of t{a City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on thy: 9th day of October, 1985, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: C> - a3 .�. yri emu.. w.LH tl _uoduys Nq cn q .-a v�.c .•v q Ais d Nvr o ow P-q tic :, •'y. -.a L•- ,•.�oc�MC ^.r.s «� q -Ho j .. �yy0= =O9L9r WC Oq y `GL q t yOq 04 E � � n L d c'H' vi °�ud`�.t+ 6 N uoy� Nd� `Y p�� +m na'uY w■ 4.1 4° Y^ n L •+ U e � w E N�o9E G'c^VT V C Y^ V` = ��CC� 9 YwO•.G 9 cQ4 yY+ = Et6 Ir Y d�0 p0. Y6O. `E N� 4 ^ � v�y-� a~n6 ^Vew u v A ACO6 u•. >C�M ^Y^e Da ^ ^L CGH so Oy LE�.CEE6 YO. cq�^ N m.0 r V d nNr.�N A N Y 6 N CND M r ^T N � "�yc q =yH dQ Ny COtl gPat+ sw�l10 L CH G NqC q��C ^@ � y V NCp �Y °,j pN GEYY a0•�^ E.�C Ya �Nia'O `n6 ^YL `C ^N E' Car VY[ - q.^ U��¢YIN Law�..y� da.^H y. w'+�N NC - a o. y Ai v O Z ij d •O Z d i W ^g M O T e OC. L .n- O >I,o a V . I a A 9,o'. a .� ' H.'A � N L dq C ° E w N a tU ° E A . = A uOO o ` q L «O rOL . v 'o ^ a` ^ u x o a u a. ` > q : c• C y Lu 9 N sq uu O .c N E � x a • b O C p '. rce '^� NyA Y 4 VY °i.g AVogc E a V A N .NO G� .n2 -t LcY C vq .:i �a�p a° ^aLa�o Ata ` co ^~ A'g ' yia o�Q`y°' o >�vd. -. O. -- 6�Aa•Tnud ".Si."a`.�ma •'.o H.:. �,H « «. � asiY $� z V L AgEi tee'°. t�Na.- NYagi. =N d cu �`G ' S o xua Y -o-^«r n 'L N p NL.O LV^ga a`fC�.+w.tV VCS Y fg��a p 6E H O^ d A G L i as N q� Nrn .-A RMOY .LYt re OIOT m C Eu° dOa C pp� �dt.V� a�i SD D1_uv°.xW � Ay �� O.USL YS « C cd yc NOt. PAti Cr A _'c° Y.Gw ua Lam. +V yy q° y.V+i .�V Ay Ea9 PgjyY 'r -B t,-4 o u o.. B, t .. Ly °etc no VV N° Y.LyO pO C ^2..^OD Oflt• �� ].o�� OVCVM OCy 4 E n P OV VV wV ¢ n u Y of ,On u�i y jc S .t'. d ti � e� AA E�t.s G .d.°..Sr..w Y «� n W �.~+ d ' Z 6 y..La «a vyi R O c u 1 va Yom, e.- q.�Yd _c: > A <.< - �aw..e r x— mC °rai.x- 'wL axs -N Gy T„G- L d�bq >a�q a z u «�* �Aa �rba Acau `.o u >o NA ^ °c.Lw x N vz.. oL aofc �oep^ ao��LU d�Gd Oaa o UL a q L• To n N N yM�x �dA qY u N��qu AadiyY Nd.°G�irG_ E^ Vaal dai4 GL �' q ^Y L= N9cEi.N y.-. _ xl >9M urLO.N.J .R y LOS« n^ tyi«U � Ol 1�d°.Oaq N' ...0 TO gO..a6 LA mi -. tr OV N ..yuu NO�yu e nUi.r� 'ZL d2 °may maudi� °c j '.FO1c «. ^� .+ °o,Le� .yn a I L 2 ~ 'v ° 2 NO L w p CSq OlD w u� NN c.O.,ay M1Z° 7 Lrv°a OQ^j6 v V Q1QY n L 0 Gn.�..'^�OO OO M.Gyd O L°° vT q:0 O y q 0 V qx�y.. apTyq � yV G a9r•M E ON da 6� d9 +- .S,.O..T ,yi. Onsu EE ua�gMNN.a�q -c�'aG a�y� j�. A x y� d-1 MV N U �� 3V ry i VoTNA� f..IOY NL u° V . . L m 6rao 6.a:6 ...r6 1"'L McI.A ¢�N� qA O LC ^ V' ��V 6d�aaM O.�� Y u°. y L O E T 6Y H. YxCN IL..Gigq A.n C] CJ� OlV 4C6l YC ?SAM -Ct OId l" L Af COD OI.�Y'L > >O 9.YN c« o7;1 Ell C. Y a = C Y ~� SO 'CD,'��v�LUTL CC�Y9 ' gCVL ^d�obaso r N Y _N L pY Y- ••yqN ^OL VL Cy`L�N i ^A q}N Y � t9� 6Y°dI Y5'_s d Yid1tNN r • ^w Ca b y YZ V �N'c� �� .nN`o o.••.^io °L'ai �n «�^ Y pN`°°w a YY t Y G ^ q.✓ o N , A o '^ q a b -S '19 N C L C l g N •„� M. O. 6p T 01 Y O C W Y U `LN' 4. uN VYw..NyN �„ .-:a N..S V vfd Off' u 17q Yd VYw° �C Hp^O. 9T„�p Ns c v ` owF C �CO A♦ _ An C�O`i N. Off. .M9u ^ 9N�S cYC o Nis LaN a. & 8 N , ` A S'° YVY qV �.YCNY Y d p� Y.f GO.Y TOOK S N M Y ^J t T T pp pE N C IS ° L•'.S OGu •� yy ^G Y Y O 92L Q l Lj U 99 C ou ^� -ds Ap 6 s ^ u N u^ A Y N a -« d7; _ o N� pi Q `• N >uo a = ^ti A ww, e O 6 uae L a a M � =p ° 2 N 1!I �.w•- L 5- q w CY"N•N Z Td C S- vd �> • ° •r9 ^o�+o q^ L q C` L'�"OC ,=-4 o, VYyj cQ Q1y V N A Y% C q i ovw. � opp aw'q r nViV Y� 6C 22 =..K J dC^ Z! Y nN N Y N L�p^y A ` Y O yI OwbV I u Q« O «gym NY ° O. d M.9My • w Ems. � V d A g V �•unt i iww 6u J � C] CJ� OlV 4C6l YC ?SAM -Ct OId l" L Af COD OI.�Y'L > >O 9.YN c« o7;1 Ell C. Y a = C Y ~� SO 'CD,'��v�LUTL CC�Y9 ' gCVL ^d�obaso r N Y _N L pY Y- ••yqN ^OL VL Cy`L�N i ^A q}N Y � t9� 6Y°dI Y5'_s d Yid1tNN r • ^w Ca b y YZ V �N'c� �� .nN`o o.••.^io °L'ai �n «�^ Y pN`°°w a YY t Y G ^ q.✓ o N , A o '^ q a b -S '19 N C L C l g N •„� M. O. 6p T 01 Y O C W Y U `LN' 4. uN VYw..NyN �„ .-:a N..S V vfd Off' u 17q Yd VYw° �C Hp^O. 9T„�p Ns c v ` owF C �CO A♦ _ An C�O`i N. Off. .M9u ^ 9N�S cYC o Nis LaN a. & 8 N , ` A S'° YVY qV �.YCNY Y d p� Y.f GO.Y TOOK S N M Y ^J t T T pp pE N C IS ° L•'.S OGu •� yy ^G Y Y O 92L Q l Lj U 99 C ou ^� -ds Ap 6 s ^ u N u^ E A^ 9 a -« d7; _ o A A q C9 _ Y N >uo Y uae L a ati u� pA �o Y6, 5- q w CY"N•N Z Td C S- ya NqN N �> • d� E u u om L q C` L'�"OC ,=-4 o, VYyj cQ Q1y V N A Y% C q i G L L N ^ 6C 22 =..K J dC^ Z! Y nN } Q« O «gym 4p N H pN QC> Ka Y'YCO� C`a 6 m� _ 2 ' uoe >oY YEN AM NYq� °a S M 9 u� Ou M =� r v y � �zus EN c N a ^ v. O^ y N pL L =� NL y`• i yp ar` U L G vuut • u =u ` N r > -E bi + i a u�o asa „• t � r L ca °o cod= O.p PA. V C A ^ =a egpu C q _ i p Nw� ^ A ..°. A K N O N N J 0 q -:,-L / W cn mdI •SYC EMy� Q� COQ rNV CA OF4: Y -"., YOA Oµ yr% CMG =..ly L O m P �rOty Lnan yd. n4. �N90 GO L�or L C 4 =a DV � L 29 tiO Y. YyY• do.G 3.9 Y� J i�d` L�tLi6V m D1 m> d� C61 9NLW(e NAG IPi. p�U4. CNNLL.AV AY++T Z •u' C: � E 6� W O y 0. Lr mN r W zt A� r A0. y bye .bWO QLO..N LLN H M .m..0 A =r +a wdm +% K N �". tl•'t mae' Z mE Q A yo Lqq a. pY aO+m v y v Ohm O''_L �3AAC u <l rW�N _Y ari m4.Y LMNVAI mV .�i N' ` -5:1 n V M M^ L.. Eu A may 0 v0.—+ y •' O E .-Ztl °Oym.E t- G W n LtO.'CUY JI {I MoNE n�yA C.Y. C ^t rtl OIEO2 oA F601 ue" _Cy EIr. �AyaU m' w 9 J vy '�A'5L°L' N qoy G ^ ; cY •C v' O� G.c a O .cv� o aY m6n E N mays cglry an Y C a; tl u N .0' Cp .y. a m pYTO � A^ j6 w1. YYLY mss• �'� �nuL JOI W owO. tJ �n rEE 4G .G. ami m o O{E!. -:9 ' C d r � U m Gy ¢ M� ^ jmyL ° t .OV .l C6e q A YOI A A 6n�w eyiy mmo �nm° `151 HN�N I�t 1-t a ZZ19 ° -I i-E A Ir c � � F tl-v CI Vtl I L 36>.GY yIX %vc 4a WC N L a' °4C rjl •� 6iI .. ra -1 IN ` Y O U NC y `j`ilr-i Nm4Ui W Yc E Vat° a+'r ANY 9 �u N u Q9E y�. m AOL> AP Y c C+ Y A GEL a° -5.2 a <Y ,2 w tl +A �Y961 V LaA No n06 G d La'.O. fl S L� 6 _ d• C'� T M N� a[�CC c2 O u ^9 ud oA °y E=L wLL..tl1N .a a' UY F are aoY .9� «LO °L Cd t yiY jl C d�CY i9 ^LA aM� n� e a.-- 00 r -- . ..wOs - ra roero i B` a c o".Q 0. a c avY�' A yc a o'^^ �Caa2c. r dpi GEOL r L A o2 �P @@ WO a1T �... c r r L m O C v_ '^ G 9 G 'I C L' .n.y cb dvrOi a C yNM qL mr N ... n.'c+l EL NA�6 T� r_vN AGd . o v q `d9 �a QyC 'c° uui r s r^ OI AE N OCY d ^a0i2� .. A r.b U Ca jC E06a tl4 uN� 9 anY �u m d c2vp C — U E ?•r T TOO ml's'.° a54 v-qW .✓ 77rW um 0pp0_u C�� UNA qt �.E.l yOC v NLCm .C. c+ L wC ^ LqC °`i 3wr �ydY N EQ E.r.".. 11 Ua N Sa^ JLEr 6 F- —A Qn.ss O In WV WE \ \I \ \ \0.{iY 1 ` �I o f 1 1 lu D Z 4j U d •n 0 L Z ul 11 s °oo r cSE cN 9u ^.vY �C YE u^ y L EE T LyrL d fa � N u t o O.O 1`• W� q � � { n q 9 l NA Oq O N qO E«� OO ro u >�• NO YY9C - NLN. L r C 9Nm�. L m �- 660 .O�° C� ytA w -LC 1 � ��a^ BOA m•qA q wTU cw O i,'n qN� To "'iii OINK •- E qu� NL �I ? G L uqN pLf °�C'1 >a aYtiC nqy ay Ekb ON ` COV L dL Co a -mZ L'„Y VO dN.. ^q y ^oa.�� Ot NOC..i qcr �+ F a Y-�y 9 y L= y '� Y EOVEw gun Y°. L.. d�O p ^S�. dOL • ,� A q 4 V ^. NE1YC aTi °M� d° A • � SLOG � M Y Z'^ S] CC y0. S; 6 AldN°iuna LN c Oe� �E L S A N C a > O T Y O F O 6 q �I a Y ,� � GIUo W� J NI � R p� N 1•II C • \oLi � � c`� 1 CO Cy 9u O:uA Jn'f u LC� y L �C YE u^ y L EE T LyrL d fa 6 c a 9Nm�. L m �- G 2 u q o . mR° .2Y O C: .• j N A d O. C iv.r• rn n y r G xqN S) �^ �uy; Y Ldq Zo N ^M NQ � O�uY _ Ze Y N u° • ,°O' dG0 ^LC N OOx C ` D N N �6�Ld O.O Ly V L ED POp ayq 66O� br N j d° A • � J a S; 6 YY N'x3 LN c Oe� �E L S A N C 1 qac O G^ E^ 1 O F O 6 q �I a Y da u0 a•O�y �i O'er Y€ G•J N'O cE CO r a *1 1. aEY t W Si Go WYU 1 1 m�UY �p L.�6T NL 'Q� 60 NI � R p� N 1•II C • \oLi � � c`� 1 Ln CO Cy 9u O:uA Jn'f u LC� y L �C YE u^ y L EE T LyrL d fa y Oq 9Nm�. �°ra0 Aq °s C.n o . mR° .2Y a Oy�O >yOqu W _ x iv.r• rn n y r G xqN S) �^ �uy; Y Ldq Zo N ^M NQ � O�uY _ Ze Y N u° • ,°O' dG0 ^LC N OOx C ` D N N �6�Ld O.O Ly V L ED POp ayq 66O� br x N d «a^ a y E O q 4 a.v aLiz �e N'^ q L S A N C 1 qac O G^ E^ 1 O F O 6 q �I a Y Ln u L e W 3 9 x v a Lc ` s V «o ^ o = E 9 p•yW 1d ny Loo v c •+ n n x Sy .r Ya j v1 Gym <^pc Fu c u u y p s o earn ndpjOO oa ^ .yi.�xaar° NA 9^ w E N� y eLi d p F S ... u mv a 22 , c'oCOv°i 5` of cz N 4^ Yl V m T r w x 0 .. Io °°00 • i. Ob u�`C t a L °U y y = . Iqr- •,� O.i..l �, d ^rte y� W ..oL va a°' ° ;.uo c _ ° c �aT ^Z C ^•d+ �OLNE YW aiu N a°iN M I.y =u i'' Y¢. �] iLN L Cl N O1wy pV °L N EO62W N � i 2. ''— r'O •± n '' °ic . `.-° nE .°w dW NQy.°. r W F W 6 L y m n w •O �^ Ey E° LA Cd =qY y ar q ^ qy iOG OimpN er^ LN 4 G4.L .^ V 3. IN aC yd V a �G{ Y LV L d AA° W V^ y a y d° AL CW uY C"in W 5+. y L n dD «^ y L 6= R7 Np G E L Eye ° p.'• a ^N aw 9{L d L T G r a n d u E d� ° C Lp T .G1a T2 . C L e p v _ L C t L J 6 L � �• N c 6 c L 6 EL N � o Y GM_C dgiU Aa'i'pgL°, �W LLq Oa°•� S L L U L p L n^ N TL G tl w y y N V W Ny o..,r £G^ dY N �� u L e W 3 9 x v a Lc ` s V «o ^ o = E 9 p•yW 1d ny Loo v c •+ n n x Sy .r Ya j v1 Gym <^pc Fu c u u y p s o earn ndpjOO oa ^ .yi.�xaar° NA 9^ w E N� y eLi d p F S ... u mv a 22 , c'oCOv°i 5` of cz N 4^ Yl V m T r w x 0 y J ti 6 j � F c^ k jYc os X N'QS uE G 6 � W v u W F W 6 L y y�N= tiQ W Sc Ix i °a =tee o L G t L W ANNF a L dC y N y a 6 a N L r N o n y� V y L A • 9y E+y- d d �q u c A aqu 0 Tr i G mpd G p p c a ^ ya 4 v Ew >NV 1 C l` aY 1y" a i - O u y do NEg S N u� `�• 9. 9E a�n ° axi y EQ t y N `. EG TW. �i1 c oe �� per. Cd Y:C CO N� Y '°NO � V G Q •r�Y u G a y A � Yp y 4 W •.. q0 �`L Y N L N d i N M E.• L C w T V w y ca EO T ^A N V- 4 c n�yt V ` YQ 9 NcLm a d W c I YN tE AU C� G y E L ^c °� NQ q d u G O m D C G u V •' A L L cY yd d� u .• °WQ Y d E O q0 EO C N U °1UN Y L37 U Aye A �p Vdy pW w I C 43 9"u o u mark Wz u�3� QM QE crrar� =a w°. Ilk o wl ° �.. uy sA O d0 i - O u y d A L. L d6 O a E s Aa 09 M yd Yp q0 �`L Y C1 uV� O w y ca EO T ^A N V- 4 c n�yt V ` YQ 9 NcLm a �o ea �^� W c T Y�O yZt pd d YNA p NQ � T 2u G �d u N cN yD C Y L37 U Aye A �p Vdy pW w I C 43 n'G m ° °° °O° . L u mark Wz u�3� D H� QM QE 7 d O � NI oz \O � ~I T V IE El OTTV r%V T1 A T.TnT.TA OTT!' A TRl�A7f. A I. BACKGROUND: The Planning Commission approved Conditional Use Permit 82 -23 on October 13, 1982 which currently expires on October 13, 1985. The purpose of this public hearing is for the Planning Commission to review. and consider; (1) modification to the conditions of ,approval related to the expiration of this CUP and (2) review the church operation to insure consistency with the conditions of approval. 11. ANALYSIS: The Planning Commission may periodically review any Conditional Use Permit to determine if it is being operated in a manner consistent with the conditions of approval and a manner which is not detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare or materially injurious to properties of the vicinity. The conditions of approval require that the premises be used for group meetings only during the weekend and after 6:00 p.m. on weeknights, that the use not create parking problems or adversely effect adjacent businesses or properties and that all City laws should be compliei with at all times. No complaints have been filed by tenant� concerning the church operation or parking. Further, the rhurc+ fully complies with Uniform Building Code and State Fire Marshall Regulations. The church has a .alid permit to conduct a place of public assembly (50+ persons). III.. CORRESPONDENCE: This item was advertised as a public hearing in the Daily Report Newspaper. Notices were sent to all property owners and businesses within 300 feet of the site. In addition, public i;earing notices were posted on the property. ITEM P v_- STAFF R1EPORT....� / f cue r O O F � 2 U > 1977 DATE: October 9, 1985 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Jack Lam, Community Development Director BY: Dan Coleman, Senior Planner SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 82 -23 - ALTA LOMA CHURCH OF CHRIST - Review and consideration of a time extension and conditions of approval for an exist °.ig church located in the Cucamonga Business Park at 9581 Business Center Drive, Suites A, B, and C. I. BACKGROUND: The Planning Commission approved Conditional Use Permit 82 -23 on October 13, 1982 which currently expires on October 13, 1985. The purpose of this public hearing is for the Planning Commission to review. and consider; (1) modification to the conditions of ,approval related to the expiration of this CUP and (2) review the church operation to insure consistency with the conditions of approval. 11. ANALYSIS: The Planning Commission may periodically review any Conditional Use Permit to determine if it is being operated in a manner consistent with the conditions of approval and a manner which is not detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare or materially injurious to properties of the vicinity. The conditions of approval require that the premises be used for group meetings only during the weekend and after 6:00 p.m. on weeknights, that the use not create parking problems or adversely effect adjacent businesses or properties and that all City laws should be compliei with at all times. No complaints have been filed by tenant� concerning the church operation or parking. Further, the rhurc+ fully complies with Uniform Building Code and State Fire Marshall Regulations. The church has a .alid permit to conduct a place of public assembly (50+ persons). III.. CORRESPONDENCE: This item was advertised as a public hearing in the Daily Report Newspaper. Notices were sent to all property owners and businesses within 300 feet of the site. In addition, public i;earing notices were posted on the property. ITEM P PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CUP 82 -23 October 9, 1985 Page 2 1 IV. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends tha+ the Planning Commission 'rind that the CUP is being conducted in an appropriate manner and adopt the attached resolution modifying the conditions of approval and granting a ne extension. Res ectfull ubmitted, Jack 4:am Community Development Director JL :rjC:ko Attachments: Letter- from Applicant Exhibit "A" - Location Map Exhibit "B" - Site Plan Original Resolution of Approval 82 -96 New Resolution of Approval 0 / (J ! /'CJ GZ�t I� L ✓�- 'ULI•it�¢iL.��l iL�CA —ti. 12z, 9�Ltt -t /�!•t -C.�- �% L�'1•f[..�''L�Ztit�"4�G- tiliaii _ .. V S.�' �/,��+�.c-- U.,-�l G�-- c..lc� . f'�%t.�.�..L�[�. .•va.. � -�s�t— u� 2-, p-3 �l ( I wwwm GUNWRAL CITY OF ?=a RANCHO CUCAI\40,NGA TITLE: y PLAMP,1ING DIVISION EXHIBIT- �WSCALE-.q' C'-� NURTH - 1 ARROW _ t JIIIIIIillill Jlilllllllil �' Ililllllllll JIIIIIIII III 111 Id11T11Tf Ulilli� 11(� `1L1111111LIiIIt.L11 111111111111II ;�1111ULW111F•"-111IL �.�- 7........ I �iIIIIIIIIIIIIIillllil 11111111lilllli h 1 r t.;�',Iltl�� ...,- L1LIIJJ) III �11((({L JIII(IIII �, •,•!! I _ _ _ I, = c�t .•nun:_ I� i(lil IliliTT 1 a 1 \ °�'� ( 1111111�� )III��II�(�nlll�llilli_I�lllq R 111111B C 7 NIiu.1LU11(T_►�Ilui �1J11a1WJ� s N t t t _ _ e 21 Y I _ IJ lllllillllilllllllllllll111 .1111111111171JJ rJjT TU1f1;11 1111(111,111111111 1i1jJUj(ul(lu_tl 1011lllllllllll)III11�,1(� III I�� 1 aCUCAMONGA BUSINESS PARK The areas marked indicate 57 parking spaces, the majority of which would be available to Alta Loma Church of Christ on evenings and weekends. NORTH CITY OF ITEM -0jR _420-Z5 �ALliCHO CUCAMOIN TITLE; PLANNING DIVISION EXHIBIT.-'13" SCALE- M.T.S. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAyONGA PART II - INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONIMENTAL CH£CVJ IST DATE: APPLICANT:_. G • �'��" " ` "�' �� FILItiC DATE: LOG NUMBER: PROJECT• �ROJFCT OCATIGN: / I. EYVIRTZIENTAL IMPACTS (Explanation of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required sheets). on attached YES KAYBE NO 1. Soils and Geoloev. Will the proposal have significant r results in: a. Unstable ground conditions or in changes in geologic relationships? b. Disruptions_ displacements, compaction or burial of the soil? c. .Change in topography er ground surface contour intervals? d. The 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? / 'f f. Changes in erosion siltation, or deposition? g. Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mud- I_ slides, ground failure, or'similar hazards? fh. An increase in the rate of extraction and /or use f of any mineral resource? c. X442 -10QV. Will the proposal have significant — results in: P- �o Page 2 YES LA:BE No a. Changes in currents, or the course of direction. Of flowing streams, rivers, or ephemeral stream channels? b. Changes in absorption rate;;, drai.,age patterns, or the rate and amount of surface water runoff? c. Alterations to the course or floc of fload waters? d. Change in the amount of surface water in any body of i 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, either through direct .additions or with- drawals, or thrc ,-gh interference with an aquifer? Quality? Quantity? h. The reduction in the amount of water other- wise C available for public water supplies? ✓ i. Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding or seiches? -_ 3. ;fir QualitX. Will the proposal have significant III results ins a„ Constant or periodic air emissions from mobile or indirect sources? / Stationary sources? -- b. Deterioration of am3ient air quality and /or 1-;.>_rference with the attainment of appl_cable it quality standards? c. Alte,a'tion of local or regional climatic conditions, affecting air movement, moisture or temperature? �•C 4. Biota Elora. 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 .adangered species of plan s? sL Page 3 .. Introduction YES `L4YBE_0 of new or disruptive species of planzs into an area? d. Reduction in the potential for agricultural production? / Fauna. Will the proposal'have significant results in: a. Change in the charagteristics of species, including diversity, distribution, or numbers of any species of animals? b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique;. rare _ — /L or endangered species of animals? / C. Introduction of new or disruptive species of animals into an area, or result in a barrer 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, 'istri- bution, density, diversity, or growth rate of the human population of an area? / b. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? 6. Socio- Economic Factors. Will the proposal have significant results in: , a• Change in loral or regional socio- economic characteristics, includ:Ing economic or commercial diversity, tmt rate, and property values? 7z b. Will project touts 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 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 nan- consumptive recreational ".ies? / opportuni �- g Page L A YES \LkYBE NO 8. Transportation. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? b. Effects existing streets, or demand for et new street construction? f c. Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for , new parking? d. Substantial impact upon exist._ transporta- tion tion systems? l 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 - born, rail, mass transit or air traffic? g. Increases it traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or 'r iestriaas? r ?. Cultural Resources Will the properal have Significant results in. a. A disturbance to the integrity of archaeological, pal-ontological, a /or :d historical. resources? 10. Health. Safety, and Nuisance Factors. Will the proposal have signii-, ant 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 :n the event of an accident? / e d.. An increase in the numbe* of individuals — or species of vector or pathenogenic organisms or the exposure of people to such organisms? e. Increase in existing noise levels? f. Exposure of people to potentially dangerous _ noise levels? 9. The creation of objectionable odors? h• An increase in lighc or glare? A Page S 11. Aesthetics. YES .4Y3E NO Will th_ proposal have significant results in: a. The obstruction or degradatiola of any scenic vista ,ar view ?' b. The creaz_on of au aesthetically offensive site? /! c. A conflict with the objective of designated / or potential scenic corridors? 12. Utili and Public Services. Will the Troposal have 1/ a significant need for new systems, or alterations to the fallowing: o. Electric power? b. Natural or packaged gas? ! c. Communications systems? d. Water supply? e. Wastewater facilities? f. Flood control structuYes? R. Solid waste facilities? / h- Fire protection" /♦ 1- Police protection? J. Schools? k. Parks or other recreational facilities? (� 1. Maintenance of public facilities, including w roads and flood control .'- cilities? M. Other governmertal services? 13. "nerv- and Scarce R� esources- Will the proposal havO= -- significant results in: a. Use of. substantial or excessive frel or t_Lergy? b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing .� SourCLS of energy? _. C. An increase- in t$e demand for development of ,uew sources of energy? d. An increase or perpetuation. of the consumption - o., V.- renewable foams of energy, wL.en feasible renewable sout•ees of energy are avaiiable? 0701 -02 o 10 -9 -85` 'P.0 agenda Packet o Pale -5 of 6 EA 1U. Page 6 YES LOMBE NO e. Substantial repletion of any nonrenewable or scarce natural resource? 14. Mandatory Findings of Sitnificance. 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 :are 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 - terra, 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 nonsidetable? (Cumulatively considerable means that the incremental effects of an individual project are considerable when viE-ed 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 ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION (i..e., of affirmative answers to the above questions plus a discussion of proposed mitigation measures). I IZL. DE7",?�SI`hTIUV On t`i basis of this initial evaluation: I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the efivironmec.t, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared I find that although the proposed project could have a Ftpnifi,;ant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effi.ct in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached bheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED. I find the proposed project NAY " envirament, and an ENVIRONMENT Date Page 7 : r.. f� C RESOLUTION NO. C? -96 . A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 82 -23 FOR THE CHURCH OF CHRIST LOCATED AT 9581 BUSINESS CENTER DRIVE, SUITES A, B, & C IN THE GENERAL INDUSTRIAL CATEGORY (SUBAREA 3) ZONE was filed HbyEAlta Loma Church foChresteforr'rev9ew, ofcthelabove- described project; and WHEREAS, on the 13th day of October, 1982, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning COMission 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, together witF tie conditions applicable thereto, will not be detr rental to the 1p public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; and 2. That the proposed use will comply with each of the applicable provisions of the Zoning Ordinance. SECTION 2: That Conditional Use Permit No. 82 -23 is approved subject to the following conditions: PLANNING DIVISION 1. This use shall be permitted at this location for three (3) years from the date of approval. 2. Group meeting may occur only on weekends and after 6:00 p.m. on weeknights. 3. No church activities will be permitted which exceed the available parking or cause adverse effects upon surrounding businesses. Should any problems arise, this Conditional Use Permit shall be brought back to the Commission for reconsideration. 4. Public assembly or other large group meeting: shall Aft not occur until such time as all Uniform Building Code and Title 19 of the State Fire Marshall's Regulations have been complied with. Resolution No. y Page 2 5. Preschools or schools are not allowed by this permit; however, this ;hall nct preclude nurseries or Sunday School. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 13TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 1982. PLA4defe MMISSION OF THE CI OF 0 CUCAMONGA BY: !' g / rr an r 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 regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 13th day of October, 1982, by the following vote -to -wit! AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BA:X(ER, McNIEL, STOUT, REMPEL NOES: COMMISSIONERS NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: KING lil Di I RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 82 -23 FOR THE CHURCH OF CHRIST LOCATED AT 9581 BUSINESS CENTER DRIVE, SUITES A, B, & C IN THE GENERAL INDUSTRIAL CATEGORY (SUBAREA 3) ZONE WHEREAS, a request has been Filed for a time extension for the above - described project, pursuant to Section 17.02.100; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conditionally approved the above - described CUP 82 -23; and WHEREAS, on the 9th day of October, M5, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to review the operation of CUP 82 -23, pursuant to Section 17.04.030(G); and WHEREAS, the building complies with Uniform Building Code and State Fire Marshall Regulations; and WHEREAS, the church operation is being operated in a manner consistent with the conditions of approval; NOW, THEREFORE, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning C=aIssion resolved as follows: ' SECTION 1: That the following findings s can be met: 1. That the proposed use is in accord with the General Plan, the objectives of the Industrial Specific Plan, and the purposes of the district in which the site is located. 2. That the proposed use, together with the conditions applicable thereto, wiil not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially , injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. 3. That the proposed use complies with each of the applicable provisions of the Ina,j:*,trial Specific Plan. SECTION 2: That this project will not create adverse impacts on the environment and that a Negative Declaration was issued on October 9, 1985. SECTION 3: That Conditonal Use Permit 82 -23 is approved subject to the following modified conditions: 1. This approval shall run with the applicant and shall become void and expire if the church operation ceases. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION CUP 82 -23 October 9, 1985 Page 2 BY• • _ Dennis L. Stout, Chairman ATTEST: Jack Lam, Secretary 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 9th day of October, 1985, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: AM 2. The operati -n of, the church shall comply at all times with the. -Uniform Building Code and State Fire Marshall's regulations. 3. The offices may be used for public assembly or other large group meetings only on weekends and after 6:00 p.m. on weeknights. 4. No group meetings will be permitted which would exceed the rvaiiable parking or cause adverse effects upon abutting businesses or properties. I•,' such problems arise, then this item will be brought before the Commission for their consideration and possible termination of such use. 5. Pre - schools or schcols are not permitted by this permit however, this shall not preclude nurseries or Sunday School. 6. Failure to comply with Conditions of Approval or applicable City Ordinances shall cause the suspension of the Conditonal Use Permit and possible revocation of the Conditional Use Permit by the Planning Commission. 7. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development Code and all other applicable City Ordinances. 8. This Resolution shall supersede Resolution 82 -96. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 9TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 1985. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY• • _ Dennis L. Stout, Chairman ATTEST: Jack Lam, Secretary 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 9th day of October, 1985, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: E E Date: To: From: Subject: Background: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA MEMORANDUM October 3, 1985 1977 Planning Commispiion Dick MayerQ- i Pr ono. ject Coordinator REQUEST FOR CONSIDERATION, PRIVATE OPEN SPACE CREDIT FOR TRACT 12040 - D.G.KING, ASSOCIATES A request for the granting of 50% private open space credit against park development fees, as provided for under Section 16.32.030 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code, for the Meadowood Village Project (Tract 12040), located on the northeast corner of Arrow Route and Turner Avenue- APN208- 34.1 -11 A request (copy attached as Exhibit A) was received from D.G. King, Associates for Planning Commission considerat on to grant 50% open space credi'- against park development fees for Lhe Meadowood Village Project (Tr-.Act 12040). The potential for granting up to 50% seen space credit is available under Ordinance 105 -C of Section 16.32.030 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code. This Ordinance provides the opportunity for a developer to obtain up to 50% credit against park development fees if they meet the requirements specified in the Ordinance (a copy of the Ordinance is attached as Exhibit B). The Meadowood Village Project does appear to meet the criteria established . by the Ordinance. Once recorded, the CC & Rs for the'project will satisfy conditions 2 & 3 of the Ordinance and will not be able to change without City Council consent. A copy of the CC & Rs is attached. The Park Development Commission has reviewed zhe project and based upon that review recommends that the Manning Commission grant the developer the 50% open space credit. The Park Development Commission did, however, believe that the only open space areas within t'ie project eligible to receive open space credit were those identified on Exhibit C (attached). The area they consiiered acceptable consisted of approximately 4.12 acres, not the entire 14.81 acres of open space referenced in Mr. King's letter. Under normal circumstances, the park development fee for this project would be $177,651.36, based upon 328 units to the acre at $541.62 per unit. With the granting of 50% open space credit, the park development fees would be $88,825.68.. ITEM Q Page tao /Memo /Meadowood Recommendation: The Park Development Commission recommends that the Planning Commission grant 30% private open space credit against park development fees for the Meadowood Village Project, contingent upon the recordation of the CC & Rs for the project with content acceptable to the City.. DM /js D. E E E E 009012120 associates • planners The _:ancho Cucamonga Planning Commission The Rancho Cucamonga Park Development Commission c/o Jack Lamm, Director of Community Development 9320 Baseline Road, P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 6 August 1985 Page 1 of 4 RE: Request of consideration, private open space credit per Ordinance No. 105 -C Ladies and Gentlemen:. Please accept this request for consideration par the requirements of Ordinance 105-C. I am making this request on behalf of The Anden Group for their Meadowood 'Tillage development (TT12040). Because of the significant qu zity of useable open space along with the recreational ,aenities provided we hereby request a 50% credit toward the parkland fees. Ordinance 105 -C provides that several findings must be wade by the Planning Commission. For your evaluation I have noted each finding required followed by an analysis of how we believe this requirement is met. Ordinance No. 105 -C requires that the following standards be met: (1) That yard, court areas, setbacks, and other areas required to be maintained by the Zoning and Building provision. of this Code shall not be included in the computation of such private open space. The Meadowood Village development contains a total of 14.81 acres of useable open space, which represents 62.7% of the total site. Of this total, 3.74 acres are set aside as private open space and 2.56 acres are set aside as required setbacks. The remaining common open space amounts to 8.51 acres and represents 36.05% of the total site. This resultant common open space is equal to 283.66% of the minimum standard of 3 acres. Because the site plan provides almost three times the minimum standard for useable open space, we believe the maximum open space credit is appropriate. A California Corporation ❑ Land Planning and Design ❑ Enviroi i mental Analysis 10722 Arrow Route, Suite 616, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 (714) 987.7077 The Rancho Cucamonga Plan ing Commission The Rancho Cucamonga Park Development Commission 6 August 1985 Page 2 of 4 (2) That the private ownership and maintenance of the open space is adequately provided for by written agreement. (3) That the use of the private open space is restricted fo-- park and recreational purposes by recorded covenants which run with the land in favor of existing and future owners of property within the subdivision and which cannot be defeated or eliminated without consent of the Council. Enclosed with this letter are the covenants, codes, and restrictions (CC &R's) that will be placed on this development. You will note that these conditions are satisfied within these CCaW s and that they cannot be changed without Council approval. (4) That the proposed private (common) open space is reasonably adaptable for use for park and recreational purposes, taking into consideration such factors as size, shape, topography, geology, acceas, and location of the private (common) open space. Zie open spaces provided within the Meadowood Village development is composed of essentially large useable areas. These major open space: areas are logically linked to each other and to all residential (condominium) units. The common open spaces provided in this development are not just "adaptable" for park and recreational purposes, they are designed to facilitate recreational use. These open spaces also include both active and passive spaces of significant size and character for a residential development. (5) That the facilities proposed for the ope.. space are in substantial accordance with the proviaions of the recreation and parks element of the general plan for the City and are approved by the Planning Commission. EA- AM The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission The Rancho Cucamonga Park Development Commission 6 August 1985 Page 3 of 4 (6) That the minimums open space for which credit will be considered is three acres and provides a minimum of four of the e*sements listed below, or a combination of such and other recreational improvements that will meet the specific recreation park needs of the future residents of the area: A. Children's play apparatus B. Family barbecue picnic area C. Game court area D. Swim pool with adjacent deck and ancillary facilities E. RecTeation building The Recreation Element of the General Plan is found a- s primarily on pages 100 -114 of the General Plan. We believe this finding can easily be met- The Meadowood 'village development provides : =,r_e than twice the minimum facilities required. In addition, the children's play apparatus will be from the same manufacturer and similar type as those found in Bear Gulch Park! Specifically the development meets the four criteria as follows: A. Children's play apparatus 'one required, two are provided B. Family barbecue picnic area .one required, six are provided C., Game court area .one required, two regulation tennis courts are provided D. Swim pool with adjacent deck and ancillary facilities .one required, two are provided E. Extra facilities: in addition to the stated criteria list the developer will also install: 'two shade structures :two spas 'jogging paths throughout *ten recreation, vehicle storage spaces a- s The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission The Rancho Cucamonga Park Development Commission 6 August 1985 Page 4 of 4 In summary, we have worked hard to prepare a design plan which will, as much as feasible, satisfy a significant portion of the recreational and open space needs of the future residents of Meadowood Village. The development does not "just meet" the minimum standards, but exceeds them by almost 300 %. For this reason we believe that the maximum open space crAdit of should be granted to this applicant. Respectfully submitted, D.G. Ring As /s /ociate * Planners ' Donald G. Ring, Ph.D. Principal DGK:sgd Qk �o / L ORDINANCE NO. 105 -C AN OUt"TANCE OF Tat: CITY OF R -ICHO CUCAMONGA, CAL::FOELNIA, ANEN "TNG SUBSECTION E AND F OF SECTION 16.32.030 OF M- RANC110 CUCAMONGA MUNICIPAL CODE RELATIVE TO PARR AND REC:tEATIONAL• LAND DEDICATION REQUIREMENTS The City Council, of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, does ordain as follows: Section 1: Subaection E of Section 16.32.030 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code is hereby amended as follows: "Credit for Private Oven Soace" Where private open space for park and recreational purposes is provided in a proposed subdivision, and such space is to be privately owned and maintained by the futur3 residents of the subdivision, such areas may be credited igainst not more than fifty percent (50%) of the requirement of dedication and development for park and recreation pur ^uses, as set forth in this article, or the payment of fees in lieu thereof, as set forth herein, provided the Planning Commission finds it is in the public interest to do so, and that the following standards are met: (1) That yards, court areas, setbacks and other open areas required to be maintained by the zoning and building provisions of this Code shall not be included in the computation of such private open space; and (2) Th "t the private ownership and maintenance of the open space is adequately provided for by written agreement; and (3) That the use of the private open space is restric :ed for park and recreational purposes by recorded covenants which run with the laci in favor of the existing and future owners of property within the subdivision and which cannot be defeated or eliminated without the consent of the Council; and (4) That the proposed private open space is reasonably adaptable for use for park and recreational purposes, taking into consideration such factors as size, shape, topography, geology, access and location of the private open space land; and (5) That facilities proposed for the open space are in substantial accordance with the provisions of the recreation and parks element of the general plan for the City and are approved by the Planning Commission; and (6) That the minimum open space for which credit will be considered is three acres and provides a minsimur,, of four of the elements listed below, or ' a combination of such, and other recreational improvements That will meet the specific recreation park needs of the future residents of the area. C,— —7 6c1uw+ 5 Criteria List A. Children'spiany apparatus E- Family barbecue picnic area C. Game court area D. Swim pool with adjacent deck and anciliiary facilities E. Recreation building The subdivider requestiing consideration for private open space credit shall, as part of the submittal filing, include: i. Written request for such consideration by the Planning Commission; and 2. Submit detailed plans and specifications for areas and improvements within such proposed private open space. The Planning Commission shall, as an element of the review for private open space credit, solicit comments and recommendations from the Park Develapment Commission on all such applications. Section 2: Subsection F of Sectior< 16.32.030 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code is hereby amended as follows: "Credit for Private Open Space — Planned Communities" Whets private open space for park and recreational purposes is Provided in a planned community and portions of or all such space is to be Privately owned and maintained by the future residents of the planned community or publicly dedicated and maintained by a special assessment district, credit against the requirement of dedication for park and recreational purposes, as set forth in Section 16.32.020 G shall be determined through the adoption of the planned community teat; provided, however, that the park standiird for the planned community is the same as for any other development and that the planning commission finds it is in the public interest to do so, and that the standards for private open space, as set forth in Section 16.32.030 E, are met. E Section 3: All ocher portions of Ordinance 105 shall remain in full . force and affect. Section 4: The M ryor shall sign this Ordinance and the City Clerk shall cause the same to be published within fifteen (15) days after its passage _ at least once in The Daily Report, a newspaper of general circulaciom published in the City of oncario, California, and circulated in the City of Rancho {" Cucamonga, California. �� '- U u E f Am% r260A•A-WbF .r .r u 4Aef1 tef♦A�n• TOTAL WE AREA: 25.6 Anse 1005 USEABLE OPEN SPACE 1461 Agee t>Z7%. Rivets Om Sbace, 914 Acres . Rewred.SetbacW 2.56'4ree . - - 11 &W r CnUMM OPEN SPACE. 0.51 Acres 90.1'5:.:" 11 �F k, -;" I. .ABSTRACT: At the previous meeting, Planning Commission di -ected Staff f to prepare an amendment as described above to be processed concurrently with the land use change from Minimum Impact /Heavy Industrial to General Industrial, on the property at the southeast corner of Arrow Highway and Rochester Avenue. The intent of the amendment is to avoid future conflicts which may arise between existing heavy industrial uses and firms locating in the surrounding area designated for General Industrial development. II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: With-*- text of various sub r::as in the Industrial Plan, a sE is provided for Special Considerations. Included in rent Special Considerations for Subarea 8 are potential conflicts oetween General Industrial uses and Industrial Park uses to the north (Subarea 7), as well a, screening outdoor storage within 60r' feet of the Devore Freeway. Subarea 13 lists Special Considerations such as abandonment of a portion of the Rochester right -of -way, and completely screening any outdoor storage areas visible from public view on the Devore Freeway. The language to be added ?or both Subareas 8 and 13 is proposed as follows: Class C Perfor. :,ante Standards of the adjoining Minimum Impact /Heavy Industrial area (Subarea 9), allow existing businesses ar.14 future Industrial uses which produce. noise, particulate matter and air contaminants, vibration, odor, humidity, l.eat, glare or high intensity. Uses sensitive to these conditions, such as precision manufacturing or office projects, should consider these factors prior to locating in the vicinity of Minimum Impact /Heavy Industrial property, ITEM R CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA C'.JCAbtp STAFF REPORT a�z DATE: October 9, 1985 1977 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Jack Lam, AICP, Community Development Director BY: Curt Johnston, Associate Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND INDUSTRIAL SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - CITY OF RANCKZ CUCAMONGA - An amendment to the Industrial pecz it an ex; forSubareas 8 and 13 (General Industrial), adding lanC use considerations related to performance requirements of the adjoining Minimum Impact /Heavy Industrial category (Subarea 9), and existing businesses. I. .ABSTRACT: At the previous meeting, Planning Commission di -ected Staff f to prepare an amendment as described above to be processed concurrently with the land use change from Minimum Impact /Heavy Industrial to General Industrial, on the property at the southeast corner of Arrow Highway and Rochester Avenue. The intent of the amendment is to avoid future conflicts which may arise between existing heavy industrial uses and firms locating in the surrounding area designated for General Industrial development. II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: With-*- text of various sub r::as in the Industrial Plan, a sE is provided for Special Considerations. Included in rent Special Considerations for Subarea 8 are potential conflicts oetween General Industrial uses and Industrial Park uses to the north (Subarea 7), as well a, screening outdoor storage within 60r' feet of the Devore Freeway. Subarea 13 lists Special Considerations such as abandonment of a portion of the Rochester right -of -way, and completely screening any outdoor storage areas visible from public view on the Devore Freeway. The language to be added ?or both Subareas 8 and 13 is proposed as follows: Class C Perfor. :,ante Standards of the adjoining Minimum Impact /Heavy Industrial area (Subarea 9), allow existing businesses ar.14 future Industrial uses which produce. noise, particulate matter and air contaminants, vibration, odor, humidity, l.eat, glare or high intensity. Uses sensitive to these conditions, such as precision manufacturing or office projects, should consider these factors prior to locating in the vicinity of Minimum Impact /Heavy Industrial property, ITEM R PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPGRT Industrial Specific Plan Amendment 85 -04 October 9, 1985 Page #2 III. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: Staff has completed the Environmental Checklist and found no potential significant environmental impacts as a result of the addi <. ^nal language which clarifies an existing situation. If till mission concurs with these findings, recommendat'lzi, for issuance of a Negative Declaration would be appropri 7."e. 1V. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: To approve the text amendments, the Commission must determine that t)e following findings can be made: A. The amendments do not conflict with the land use policies of the General Plan or the Industrial Specifi! Plan. B. The amendments promote the goals of the Land (Ise Element. C. Th nendments would not be materially injurious or detrimental t, J ac,nt properties. V. COR' NCE: This item has been advertised as a public hearing Tv .he ',Y Report newspaper. VI. RECOMMENDATION: A Resolution is provided recommending approval to the City Council of the Industrial Specific Plan Amendment and issuance of a Negative Declaration. Respectfully s mitted, Jack Lam, AICP Community Development Director JL:CJac. F �_a lu 2 P �- 3 a � e LL b .8 e a S $ s. y5 3= 3 0 3 SUBAREA 8 Ask General Plan Designation General Industrial Primary Function Subarea 8 extends north of Arrow approximately 1000' east of ClevelanJ to the east Plan boundary including a portion south of Arrow along the eastern plan boundary. The area functions. to provide for General Industrial activities and - 1-3r a transition area from the Heavy Industrial, .�„,, located north of this subarea. North of Arrow.. acid west of Milliken, the industrial uses should be allowed to continue and expand with all service according to the development standards of the plan. Permitted Uses Custom Manufacturing Light Manufacturing Light 'Wholesale, Storage, and Distribution Agricultural Supplies and Services Automotive /Light Truck Repair -Minor Automotive /Truck Repair -Major Building Contractor's Offices and Yards Building Maintenance Services Building Supplies and Sales Business Supply Retail Sales and Services Business Support Services. Communication Services Eating and Drinking Establishments Laundry Services Recreation Facilities Repair Services Administrative Civic Services Conditional Uses Medium Manufacturing -Heavy Wholesale, Storage, and Distribution Administrative and Office Animal Care Automotive Fleet Storage 'Automotive Rental Automotive Service Station Convenience Sale.:, and Services Entertainment Fast Foot Financla ?, Insurance and Real Estate Services Food and Beverage Sales Heavy Equipment Sales and Rentals Medical /Health Care Services Personal Services Petroleum Products Storage Public Assembly Public Safety and Utiliti; vn- ',ices Religious Assembly iv -41 Access and Circulation SUBAREA 8 (Continued) tight- Of-Way - Day C.-aek Boulevard Milliken 0 tight -Of -Way - Arrow Etiwanda Rochester 54' Right -Of -Way - All other Local Streets Ift 5' 22f j 22ft. 51L 441 54'ft.11: Minimum Parcel Size One -half ( }) acre Setback Requirements Average (Measured from ulti- Landscaping Parking mate face of curb) Day Creek Boulevard 45' 25' Milliken " Arrow Rochester Etiwanda All Other Local 25' 15" Streets Landscaping Requirements 12% of net lot area Iv -42. SUBAREA 8 (Continued) Performance Requirements Noise: The maximum allowable noise level of any useshall not exceed 75Ldn as measured at the lot line of khe lot containing the use. Where a use occupies a lot abutting residentially zoned land ", the noise level shall not exceed 65Ldn as measured at the common lot line. Noise caused by motor vehicles and trains are exempted from this standard. Vibration: All uses shall be operated so as not to generate vibration discernible without instruments by the average persons beyond the lot upon which the source is located. Vibration caused motor vehicles, trains, and temporary r .)nstruction or demolition is exempted from this standard. Particulate Matter and Air Contaminants: In addi- tio.i to compliance with the AQMD sta -Rards, alt use- shall be operated so as not to dmit particu- late .,:'tter or air contaminants which are readily detectable without instruments by the average person beyond any lot line of the lot containing such uses. Odor: All uses shall be operated so as not to emit matter causing unpleasant odors which are percepti- ble to the average person beyond any lot line of the lot containing such uses. Humidity, Heat and Glare: All uses shall be oper- ated so as not to produce humidity, heat, glare or high - intensity illumination which is perceptible without instruments by the average person beyond the lot line of any lot containing such uses. Special Consideration Due to the potential conflicts between uses within this subarea and the uses within the industrial Park Category of adjacent Subarea #8, building set- back from abutting property for Medium Manufactur- ing and greater intensity shall be no less than ',5'. Both the potential park site location and fire station location are shown to indicate approxi -, mate location. Development within 600' of the Devore Freeway shall have outdoor storage areas completely screened from view along the freeway. Because of the existing rail service, users .with rail service needs are permitted within the area west of Milliken Avenue. R. _ �= iv-43 FIG. 1V -13 SUBAREA AREA 13 CIRCULATION IMM 120' R.A.W. 100' R.O.W. sMMLIMMMMMW� 88' or less R.O.W. RAIL SERVICE -! i i i i- Existing ++++++ Proposed TRAILS /ROUTES 0000 Pedestrian 0000 Bicycle c:i© MuRegional -A oc Special Streetscape/ Landscaping Power Line/ Utility Easement Access Points W 0 400` 800' 1600' Note: Parcel lines and lot contigmatlons are shown as acproximation only. , SUBAREA 13 General P13n Designation General Industrial Primary Function This subar<a is located between New Rochester and Devore Freeway, south of existing industria3 users by the ATESF railroad tracks and extends to approx- imately 600' north of 4th Street. This area is adjacent to the Devore Freeway and is subject to design considerations regarding views from the Devore Freeway. Uses allowed are primae•ily light and medium manufacturing. Permitted Uses Custom Manufacturing Light Manufacturing Medium arwfacturing Light Wholesale, Storage, and Distribution Automotive /Light Truck Repair- Minor Building Contractor's Offices and Yards Building Maintenance Services Business Supply Retail Sales and Services Business Support Services Communication Services Eating and Drinking Establishments Laundry Services Recreation Fac.jities Repair Services Administrative Civic Services Con.litional Uses Heavy Wholesale, Storage, and Distribution Administrative and Office Animal Care Automotive /Truck Repair -Major Automotive Service Station Building Supplies and Sales Convenience Sales and Services Entertainment Fast Food 'Food and Beverage Sales Medical /Health Care Services Personal Services Cultural Public Assembly Public Safety and Utility Services Religious Assembly t�l KI SUBAREA 13 (Continued) Access and Circulation it -Of -Way - 7th (west of Devore Frwy) t -Of -Way - Nees Rochester 54' Right -Of -Way - (Old) Rochester All other Local Streets O 22'tt. 22it. sit. 44'It. Seft.R W Minimum Parcel Size One -half (z) acre Setback Requirements Average (Measured from ulti Landscaping Parking mate face of curb) 7th (west of Devc -e) 45' 25' New Rochester it It (Old Rochester 25' 15' All other Local Streets Landscaping Requirements 12% of net lot area -C� IV -68 Performance Requirements SUBAREA 13 (Continued) Noise: The maximum allowable noise level of any use shall not exceed 75Ldn as measured at the `at line of the lot containing the use. Where a use occupies a lot abutting residentially zoned land, the noise level shall not exceed 65Ldn as measured at the common lot line. Noise caused by motor vehicles and trains are exempted from this standard. Vibration: All uses shall be operated so as not to generate vibration discernible without instruments by the average persons beyond the lot upon which the source is located. Vibration caused by motor vehicles, trains, and temporary construction or demolition is exempted from this standard. Particulate Metter and Air Contaminants: In addi- tion to compliance with the AQMD standards, all uses shall be operated so as not to emit particu- late matter or air contaminants which are readily detectible without instruments by the average person beyond any lot line of the lot containing such uses. Odor: All uses shall be operated so as not to emit matter causing unpleasant odors which are percepti- ble to the average person beyond any lot line of the lot containing such uses. Humidity, Heat, and Glare: All uses shall be oper- ated so as not to produce humidity, heat, glare or high- intensity illumination which. Is perceptible without instruments by the average person beyond the lot line of any lot containing such use. Special Consideration All development in this area shall be required to completely screen from public view on the Devore Freeway any outdoor storage areas. Future consider- •ations will be made for abandonment of a portion o° Rochester right -of -way. Future development between Old Rochester right -of -way and Devore Freeway will be limited because of the inherently small lat depth of parcels within this area. 9,—\<D IV -69 E RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF TN.E RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF INDUSTRIAL SPECIFIC PLAN AMENOMENT NO. 85 -04 R €VISING THE SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS FOR SUBAREAS 8 AND 13 CONCERNING PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS OF ADJOINING MINIMUM IMPACT /HEAVY INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has held a duly advertised public hearing to consider all comments on the proposed Industrial Specific Plan Amendment 85 -04; SECTION 1: The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission has made the following findings: A. The Amendment is consistent with Policies of the General Plan and Industrial Specific Plan. B. The Amendment promotes goals of the Land Use Element and Industrial Specific Plan. C. The Amendment would not be materially injurious or detrimental to the adjacent properties. SECTION 2: The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission has found that this project wi'il not create a significant adverse impact on the environment and recommends issuance of a Negative Declaration on October 9, 1985. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:. ` 1. That pursuant to Section 65850 to 65855 of the California Government Code, that the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga hereby recommends approval on the 9th day of October, 1985, Industrial Specific Plan Amendment 85 -04. 2, The Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council approve and adopt Industrial Specific Plan Amendm it No. 85 -04. 3. That a Certified Copy of this Resolution and related material hereby adopted by the Planning Commission shall be forwarded to the City Council. i R-~ \ Resolution No. Industrial Specific Plan Amendment 85 -04 October 9, 1985 Page 2 APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 9TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 1985. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Dennis L. Stout, Chairman ATTEST: Jack Lam, Se :retary 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 meld on the 9th day of October, 1985, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: 9'--\.;L 11 11 E 11 11 OMTV n..1 u eunun MM AM()wr_e - STAFF REPORT DATE: Octiber 9, 1985 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Jack Lam, Community Development Director BY: Dino Putrino, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: MINOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 85 -17 -- EQJI - A consistency etermination etween the Foothi 1 Corridor Interim Policies for an exterior remodel to Eq +pi's restaurant, located at 10006 Foothill Boulevard APN 1-077,621 -26. 1. BACKGROUND: On September 11, 1985, the Planning Commission determined that Minor Development Review 85 -17 is inconsistent with the Foothill Corridor Interim Policies (FC =P). The Commission gave the applicant the opportunity to re- design the project in order to meet the Interim Policies. II. ANALYSIS• A. General: The applicant has redesigned the proposed remodel to Equi'� restaurant, addressing the FCIP design criteria and design element.- of the approved adjacent shopping center project (see elevation plan). The proposed project incorporates the use of covered walkways, the roof, ivory stucco, and arched windows. In addition to the proposed structure remodel, the applicant is also proposing streetscape landscaping to the extent pratical from the curb to building front. The Design Review Committee has reviewed the new elevations and felt that the design does not reflect the community heritage image of the City, as stated in the FCIP, nor relate well with the adjacent shopping center project recently approved by the Planning Comission. III. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission should review the proposed project Fe-Fe gn and make a consistency determination. If the Planning Commission determines that the project is consistent, the Commission should approve MDR 85 -17. If the Planning Commission determines that the project is rot consistent, the Commission has two (2) options, they are 1) deny MDR 85-17, or 2) direct the applicant to continue working with staff on revising the plans. ITEM S PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT MDR 85 -17 EQUI October 9, 1985 Page 2 Respect ully sub itta:, Jack Lam Community Development Director JL:DP:ko Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Vicinity Map Exhibit "B" - Site Plan Exhibit "C" - Elevation Plan Exhibit "D" - Shopping Center Elevations September 11, 1985 Staff Report Foothill Corridor Interim Policies E Ll PLANNING W" "'SSION STAFF REPORT MDR 85 -17 mqui October 9, 1985 Page 2 Attachments: Exhibit "A - Vicinity Map Exhibit "B" - Site Plan Exhibit "C" - Eizvation Plan -Exhibit "D" - Shopping Center Elevations September 11, 1985 Staff Report Foothill Corridor Interim Policies WI Vtl ✓ V NORTH CITY OF ITEM \.I: N M-bp, 65-0 RANCHO CUCATWO'NUA TITLE: VI C M -r�('. rJA PLANINM DIVISION EXHIBIT: 4 k SCALE: LP CC:;E T M" M.tL i�aa 91701 ! . 31•�o'r'�a h �w!wr.nrrm w ✓ V NORTH CITY OF ITEM \.I: N M-bp, 65-0 RANCHO CUCATWO'NUA TITLE: VI C M -r�('. rJA PLANINM DIVISION EXHIBIT: 4 k SCALE: U N N 1 c0 L/ 1 -�_ F F` � I 1 1 E tl0_1{ I { N i f 2 i I r i i i j I a� CL Ul CO v i t� EF C" C _o C� L M S-b �WW tV E- F x 0 z c� a U > o U vU z m LAI moll �` �s'•� '' �� ,� )•_ lug '� �,; �;,,%, ,� .r.�`.� � �}_, V �{� ,, err � a ! n •, IF •4 z Q � st i It 1� ®- 0 O J S-b �WW tV E- F x 0 z c� a U > o U vU z m LAI moll lu U Z_ A � d }- � v v 11 u S -7 z O J w c N �! VI LV p G � T J U C� z U a z ® 1 LLI J -j V5 LU W VI 1 y , FF ry � F' r- U > �a v EA Ll i cl z I 1t� +. is � `---- I` I ' Aq fl . � v iLl a O Q W LU Z H O Z j E- t F a 0 6��V) O U > D B U� "a.. m aft Eli IRK I 31 it i L .1 1:3 E zA mmm jig 14 T Z= as of c %J3 vp I 7:2 ._A C). U sow" ruv-Aylo 1. w E .,LAMING ELF<NTIQM fii Oy 11 CITY OF ITELM: " N" - t:6bP— e35 - 1-7 RANCHO CUCAMONGA TITLE: kAAMMAI ELOA =6n( 0 DIVISION EXHIBIT- -P 3 SCALE- t4T5 S- L ttl If SECTION ELEVATION D-D PARTIAL SOUTH -WEST ELEVAt10N T E: I• M ool- T ou LWTH ELEYAJ10 L'- NORTH CITY OF ITEM: " l-l" -KbP-- 156-1-7 RANCHO CUCAMONGA TITLE: h'1ZF= PLANNING DIVISICXN EXHIBIT-. D 4 SCALE. __LAI S -13 EAST ELEVATION s [E C NORTH ELEVATION AREL Tq NLRTM ELEVATION AREA 8 M ill�lll� a■ua uu■ 11 S a �M' DI v V NK)RTF I CITE' OF ITMI; tI 0" . �ic��Z 95,5-1-7 RANCHO CUTCATVIONGA TITLE= _ 7769 iFrLaF1�i4771%u S PLANI`IING DIVISION cxHIBIT =.Q _ S SCALE- NIT-5 —CIA s KI L RIOT -- DATE: TO: FROM: BY: SUBJECT: CITY OF RANCHO CU%AMONGA STAFF REPORT September 11, 1985 Chairman am Members of the Planning Commission Jack Lam, Community Development Director Dino Putrino, Assistant Planner MINOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 85 -17 EQUI - A consistency de`ermination between the Foothill Corridor Interim Policies for an exterior remodel to Equils restaurant, located at 10006 Foothill Boulevard - APN 1077 - 621 -26. I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action Requested: Preliminary review for consitency with interim Foothill Corridor policies. B. Purpose: Upgrade exterior. C. Parcel Size: .66 acres 9. Existing Zoning: General Commercial E. Existing Land Use: Restaurant F. Surroundinq Land use and Zoning: North - Single Family „ esidential, Low Residential South - Mobile Home Park, Medium Residential East - Restaurant, General Commercial West - Vacant /Approved Commercial Center, General Commercial G. General Plan Designations: Project Site - Commercial North - Residential South - Residential East Commercial West - Commercial H. Site Characteristics: The project site is located within the Foothill Corridor study area. • s� (o MINOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 85 -17 EQUI - A consistency de`ermination between the Foothill Corridor Interim Policies for an exterior remodel to Equils restaurant, located at 10006 Foothill Boulevard - APN 1077 - 621 -26. I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action Requested: Preliminary review for consitency with interim Foothill Corridor policies. B. Purpose: Upgrade exterior. C. Parcel Size: .66 acres 9. Existing Zoning: General Commercial E. Existing Land Use: Restaurant F. Surroundinq Land use and Zoning: North - Single Family „ esidential, Low Residential South - Mobile Home Park, Medium Residential East - Restaurant, General Commercial West - Vacant /Approved Commercial Center, General Commercial G. General Plan Designations: Project Site - Commercial North - Residential South - Residential East Commercial West - Commercial H. Site Characteristics: The project site is located within the Foothill Corridor study area. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Minor Development_ Review 85 -17 - Equi September 11, iy5 Page #2 II. ANALYSIS: The proposed project is being reviewed by the Planning Commission to determine consistency between the project and the Foothill Corridor Interim Policies. The existing building is a legal non - conforming structure within the study area. The Foothill Corridor Interim Policies emphasize design and technical standard consistency at the time of redesign of existing non - con,- irming structures within the study area. The overall goal for Foothill Boulevard is "to establish a high quality, attractive, ar.', unifying design image reflective of community heritage... ". The remodel would upgrade the exterior of the building and provide some landscaping. The proposed design does not provide the design elements identified in the policies that reflect community heritage: "river rock /fieldstone walls, exposed beamwork, vine arbors, covered walkways, or arcades and curvilinear gables The adjacent Kanter project which was recently approved s' Auld serve as a guide for compatibility and heritage (Exhibit "E "1, The existing restaurant use is a permitted use and compatible with the ultimate uses on the surrounding properties. The interim policies for non - conforming structures in terms of landscaping (E.3) states that "streetscape landscaping and irrigation shall be required to the extent practical in conjunction with substantial exterior remodeling of existing structures inV077ing the issuance of building permits ". According to "his poi? ;, landscaping anc irrigation from existing curb tc building front, ,lay be required as a condition of approval since building permits are required for the proposed remodeling. Currently, the streetscape area is paved and the proposed project includes small planter areas against the building, Costs fnr landscaping the emir, .frontage could range from $5 000 to g_ III. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission should review the proposed project and make a consistency determination. If the Planning Commission determines that the remodel i,; consistent, the plans will be forwarded to Design Review Committee. If the Planning Commission determines that the remodel is not consistent, then the applicant should be directed to work with Staff on revising the elevations. Respectfully s mitted, 4 Jack Lam Coninunity Development Director PLAIINiNG COMMISSIDN STAFF REPORT Minor Development Review 85 -17 - Equi September 11, 1985 Page JL:DP :cv Attachmen:Fs: Exhibit "A" - Vicinity Map Exhibit "8" Site Plan Exhibit "C" - Detailed Site P1aniLandscape Plan ?:thibit "D" - Elevation Plan j Exhibit "E" Kanter Elevations .� Foothill Corridor Interim Policies is (.DRAFT = REVISED BY C.C. 10 -2 -95) FOOTHILL CORRIDOR IMMIN PO'_ICIES INTRODUCTION 1 The following Goan Statement and Interim Policies are provided to guide the decision making process during preparation of the Foothill Boulevard Corridor i Study. The policies address basic land use and urban design issues unique to j the Foothill Corridor, and are intended to be applied in conjunction with the Development Code, whichever is more restrictive, unless specifically addressed by these policies. The boundaries of the Study Area include commercial, office, and residential properties along Foothill Boulevard, ranging from the west city limit at Grove Avenge to Deer Creek Channel, and from the Devore Freeway to the east city limn at East Avenue (Exhibits A -1, A -2). GOAL STATEMENT Goals define community aspirations and intentions. The following Goal for Foothill Boulevard attempts to synthesize a complex set of issues dealing with land use, urban design, traffic and circulation, and economic viability into a comprehensive, v^.derstandable and achievable statement. To establish a high quality, attractive, and unifying design image reflective of community heritage, and provide a viable setting for a balanced mixture of residential and commercial activities with safe and efficient traffic circulation and AOL access. Based on this goal, the following Interim Policies are provided to address development related issues during preparation of the Foothill Corridor Study. LA S- \g A. General Regu rem�nts: Preliminary Review Time Limits /Extensiot:" E1 INTERIM POLICIES A.1 A.2 A.3 A.4 Prior to processing Development /Design Review applications within the study area the "lanning Commission shall conduct a Preliminary Review to determine consistency with the Interim Goal and Policies contained herein. The intent is to provide direction to the applicant and staff early in the review process and avoid undue time delays or expenditures. Submittal requirements for a Preliminary Review shall inc Ie a Site Utilization Map showing the relationship of the site to surroundig property and improvements. a conceptual Site Plan, and a description of the proposed use.. Additional information may be requested as deemed necessary by the City Planner., i Approval of development proposals, except subdivision maps, shall lapse eighteen (18) months from the date of approval. The intent is to allow early re- evaluation of projects not ye*_ constructed for consistency with the adopted Foothill Corridor Study or other then current City standards. Time extensions for any development proposal within the study area subject to a lapse of approval may be.granted, in twelve (12) month increments and not to exceed a total of four (4) years from the original date of approval, subject to any inconsistent provision of State law, and the following findings: a. The proposed land use, project design, and conditions of approval com ly with ail applicable pro.isions of the Foothill Corridor Interim Policies; b. The project is consistent with the policies, standards,. and requirements in effect at the time of the extension. S--N9 c. The granting of said time extension will not be detrimental to the public health, safety,'or welfare, or materially injurious too properties or improvements in the vicinity. d. Current economic, marketing, and inventory conditions have made it unreasonable to develop the project prior to this time. Compatibility: A.5 All land use and development proposals shall be compatible with ultimate uses on surrounding properties, particularly residential uses, and mitigate potential conflicts to the extent practical. Mitigation measures may typically include, but are not limited to, "sster Planning, transition of build,.ig height, architectural form and density, landscape buffers, sound attenuation, reduction of wind turbulence, visual barriers and /or grading conditions to disrupt line -oF- sight concerns, and alternative circulation and access. B. Land Use: The intent of the following policies is to provide a viable setting for a balanced mixture of residential, commercial, office, and other activities of community wide significance compatible with surrounding land uses. General Plan Amendments 8.1 Appi c6tinns for General Plan Land Use Amendments are discouraged. Prior to approval of any such amendment, how (-4er, the Planning Commission shall make the following findings: a. The proposed amendment is clearly consistent with the intent and purpose of the interim policies for the Foothill Boulevard corridor. b. The proposed land use is compatible with ultimate uses on surrounding property. C. The proposed land us% will not create significant traffic or circulation impacts. 1 S -ao LA- d. The proposed land use will not be detrimental to properties or improvements in the vicinity. Development Districts Amendments B.2 Development District Amendments boundaries may be considered if consistent with the General Plan Land Use Element and Interim Policies, and where necessary to achieve more logical and efficient land usi and site planning patterns. The intent is to allow flexibility during the Master Planning process and provide a tool to. achieve the objectives of the Interim Policies. Land Use B.3 Current Land. Use regulations within the Study Area shall remain in effect, except that the following limitations shall apply during preparation of the Foothill Boulevard Corridor Plan. The purpose is to avoid land uses which may have adverse aesthetic impacts, until such time as design guidelines and technical standards are established to deal with specific areas of concern. A com lete list of ermitted and— co nditions �ermitte uses is rovi ed an the attached nter Re ulations for the Foothill Boulevard Corridor. Fxisting or previously approved businesses and buildings shall be allowed to continue under current rggulatory provisions of the City. The following new land uses shall not be established in the Office /Professional and General Commercial Districts within the Study Area. Expansion of existing uses identified below shall be allowed su ect to therov�sions of"he Interim Po icii 'es fu., the Foothill Boulevard Corridor and Development Code Standards. - Animal Care Facility with exterior kennels, pens, or runs - Cemeteries - Equipment Rental Yards - Ice Machines (outdoor) Mini- storage for public use - Recreation Vehicle Storage Yard - Vehicular Storage Yards The following new -land uses may be established in the Office /Professional or General Commercial Districts within the Study Area (see attache(- Interim Use Regulations), subject to the approval of a Conditional Use Permit. - Carpenter Shop or Cabinet. Shop - Drug Stores and Pharmacies (CUP in OP District only) - Nurserie3 & Garden Supply Stores - Plumbing Shop and Supplies - Second Hand Stores and Pawn Shops - Spiritualists C. Master Planned Development: The purpose of this section is to provide for integrated development at the earliest possible time in the review process. Master planning of defined areas will avoid development of single parcels of land in a manner which prevents or precludes future development of adjacent parcels in the best way feasible. The specific intent is to recognize and solve problems before they occur and take advantage of opportunities while they exist. , Master Plans Required C.1 A conceptual Master Plan shall be required for Planning Commission review in conjunction with development proposals wherever necessary to assure integrated development, enhance harmonious and orderly development, mitigate site constraints on adjoining property and maximize land potential. Boundaries /City Benefit ;.2 The area of Master Plrus shall not be confined by individual lot lines, but determined by logical planning boundaries and site conditions as required by the Planning Commission or City Planner. Master Planning beyond " S -aa the boundaries of spertific project sites ij intended to benefit the City by cocpdinating Land use and site c' planning to enhance opportunities for quality development consistent with the standards for Foothill Boulevard, de- emphasize "strip - commercial' by creating organized groups of structures and uses, and provide for efficient utilization of land. Content C.3 At a minimum, Master Plans shall indicate conceptual building locations and orientation, overall circulation, points of ingress and egress, parking lot layouts, transit stops, landscaped areas, and pedestrian nodes, and circul -tion. In addition, the City Planner may require other information as deemed necessary to assure consistency with the intent of these policies. 0. New Development: The intent of the folTowing policies is to establish a high quality, attractive and unifying design image which promotes a sense of identity and reflects community heritage and to provide for safe and efficient traffic flow i and optimum vehicular and pedestrian access within the corridor. Architecture D.1 The architecture of new construction shall be sensitive to the heritage of Rancho Cucamonga and relate to nearby structures of community significance. Design elements may include, but are not limited to, river rock /fieldstone walls, exposed beamwork, vine arbors, curved parapet wars, and, covered walkways or arcades. D.2 All applications for new development within the study area shall include a written statement of architectural 'intent indicating how the project is i sensitive to the heritage of Rancho Cucamonga. Pedestrian Orientation D.3 Site planning, including building orientation and parking lot configuration, shall enhance pedestrian connections on and off -site. A continuous pedestrian system is required in all new projects with connections between buildings, parking t s -ate areas, street adjacent sidewalks and transit stops. Amenities shall be provided such as plazas, shaded seating alcoves, expanded walkways with surface treatment, texturized paverien- across drive aisles, raised planters, trash receptacles, and drinking fountains. In addition, outdoor eating areas are encouraged. Combined Access 0.4 Through the mister planning process, driveways onto Foothill Boulevard shall be coordinated for consistency with existing City access policies (i.e., 300' driveway separation) to the extent practical, regardless of parcel width. Public Transit 0.5 Public transit facilities shill be considered within all master plans. Convenient pedestrian access shall be provided from designated transit facilities, such as bus stops. Streetscape Design 0.6 Streetscape design elements for all new projects shall b, coordinated for consistency with the guidelines for Foothill Boulevard in effect at the time of development, including intensified landscaping with specimen size trees, berming, and meandering sidewalks. In addition, street furniture and alluvial rockscape and monument signs may be required where appropriate. Landscaping D.7 Landscaping shall be designed to create visual interest and variety to the streetscape, enhance building architecture, buffer views of automobiles, screen utilities and service areas, and distinguish pedestrian spaces from vehicular areas. E. Non - Conforming Lots /Structures: The purpose of this section is to allow continuance of existing uses and buildings under current conditions, and promote consistency of design and technical standards throughout the study area at the time of development, conversion, or redesign. Master Planning E.1 New development and /or conversion of existing residential buildings to a new use is permitted on non- conforming lots, provided such development it an t lu Landscaping E.2 E.3 integral part of a Master Plan development consistent with the Interim Policies for the Foothill Boulevard Corridor'' and Development Code standards. The boundaries of such a Master F'an shall be determined by the City Planner per policy C.2 above, and should provide for consolidation of substandard parcels. Regardless of parcel depth, all new development shall provide a minimum 45' building seth.ck and average streetscape landscaping (measured from the ultimate curb face location) on Foothill Boulevard. Streetscape landscaping and irrigation shall be required to the extent practical in conjunction with substantial reconstruction, renovation or exterior remodeling of existing structures along Foothill Boulevard involving the issuance of a building permit. - 1='� 5 CDD;ltY tom, r /. /�� RA-- �..rUTi�'�lYli NGA PLANNING DIVISION ITEM: TITLE- -52VAWAMWA EXHIBIT- -A -I SCALE: S -a4. E 11 11 V � FORTH 47ITY, OF ITEM: j5MIZW&& SPdAW. tutiNCHO CUCATTV19 GA Tri-LE: M* F,`Is -. PI NINU DIVISION EXHIMT: A -P, SCAI.)r- -a-� (DRAFT: REVISED BY C.C. 10 -2 -85) Development Code Interim Use lieRUlations - Foothill Boulevard Corridor Study Area Uses listed in this Table shall be allowable in one or more of the commercial districts as indicated in the columns beneath each commercial district. .1 ere indicated with the letter "P", the use shall be a permitted use in that district. Where indicated with the letter "C ", the use shall be a conditional use subject to the Conditional Use Permit process. In the event there is difficulty in categorizing a given use in one of the districts, the procedure outlined in Section 17.02.040 shall be followed. UMRIM USE REGULATIONS FOR COMMERCIAWOFFICR DISTRICTS USE OP NC r a, A. Offices and Related Uses 1. Administrative and executive offices. P P P 2. Artist and photographic studios, not P P P including the sale of equipment or supplies. 3. Clerical and professional offices. P P P 4. Financial services and institutions. P P P S. Medical, dental and related health P P P services -^n- animal related) including laboratories and clinics; only the sale of articles clearly incidental to the services I�rovided shall be permitted. 6. Prescription pharmacies, (also when P P P located within a building containing the offices of 5 or more medical practitioners) P P P 7. Public buildings (lib;, -ry, city and county buildings, special districts and post office). S. Public utility service offices. P P P 9. Public safety facility police, fire, C C C ambulance and paramedics). Ex s -aa INTF91M USE REGMATIONS USE OP NC GC 10. Related commercial uses (blueprinting, P P P stationary, quick copy, etc,) when incidental to an office building t5r complex, B. General Commercial Uses 1. Antique shops _ P p 2. Adult business (see special requirements _ - C per Section 17,10.030) S -a9 3. Animal Care Facility (animal hosaitai, veterinarian, commercial kennel, grooming). a. Excluding exterior kennel, pens, or C P P curs. ' b. Including exterior kennel, pens, or - - -* runs. ' 4. Apparel stores. - P P 5. Art, music and photographi: studios and C P P I supply stores. r &. Appliance stores and repair. - C P 7. Arcades (see. special requirements per - C C Section 17.10.030 F.) 8. Athletic and Health Club, gyms and P P weight reducing clinics. I' 9. Automotive services (including nw*_arcycles, boats, trailer and camper) ti. sales (may have repairs as ancilary C - C use) b. rentals - _ C c. repairs (major engine work, muffler _ _ C shops, painting, body work and upholstery) d. Coin -op washing C C C e. Automatic washing C C Ca * Denotes change from Table 17.10.00 of tN Development Code S -a9 INTERIM USE REGULATIONS USE OP NC GC (f) Service or gasoline dispensing C C P stations (including minor repair such as tune -ups, brakes, batteries, tires, mufflers) (g) , Parts and Supplies - P P 10. Bakeries (retail eni5 ). - P P 11. Berber and beauty shops. P P P 12. Bicycle shop. - P P 1 P P I& Bluepwit and photocopy services 14. Boat and camper sales and services. - - C 15. Book, gift and .stationary stores (other C P P than adult related material). 16. Candy stores and confectionaries. - P P 17. Catering establishments. - - P 1.8. Cleerting and p =ssing establishments. C P P 19. Carpeater shop or cabinet shop. - - 0* 20. Cocktail 1 :ninge (bar, lounge, taven) including related entertainment. (a) Operated independent of a C C restaurant (b) Accessory to a restaurant C C C 21. Commercial recreation facilities. (a) Indoor usEs such as bowling, C C P theaters, billards, (b) Outdoor ar-s such as golf, tennis, C C C basketball, baseball, trampolines, etc. 22. Contractor yards (screening of outdoor storage required). 23. Dairy product stores. - p P �-- 30 ir INITRFM US. REGULATIONS 44. 1dini -stor use (no outdoor storage). USE OP NC GC 24. Department stores. - P 25. Drive -in businesses, including theaters. - C C (other than fast food restaurants) 26. Drug stores and pharmacies. C * P P 27. Equipment rental yards. - - 28. Fsst -food restaurants. C C P 29. Feed /Tack stores C P 30. Florist shops. P P P 31. Food stares and supermarkets. - P P 32. Furniture stores, repair and upholstery. - P P 33. General retail stores, - P - P 34. Hardware stores, - P P 35. Homo improvement centers. (a) Matndial stored and sold within P P enclas >d buildings (b) Outdcor storage of material such as - - C lumber be building mate ^ials 36. Hotels and Motels. C P 37. Ice Machines 28. Jaritoral services and supp:!e— C P P 3. Jewelry st °iris. P P 40. Laundry- self - service. P P 41. Liquor ::tares. P P 42. Kiosks for key slops, film drop-., etc. in - C C parking lots. 43. Lcah.. - y r 44. 1dini -stor use (no outdoor storage). INTER'4 USE REGULATIONS USE OP NC GC Mortuar * C 45. es C C 46. Motorcycle sales and service. _ C 47. Newspaper and magazine stores, printing - C P and publishing. 48. Nurseries and garden supply stores; - C * C provided, in the NC eistrict, all euioment, supplies and material are kr;pt within an enclosed a, ea. 49. Office and business machine stort.s. C P P 50. Parking facilities (commercial) where fees C A o are charged. 31. Political or philanthropic headquarters. l; C P 5" Pet shop. _ P P 53. Plumbing shop and supplies. - _ C* 54. Photocopy P P P 55. Printing shops. _ P Afflk F;. Restaurants (other than fast food). (a) With entertainment and /or serving; C C P of alcoholic beverages 0) Incicental serving of beer and wine P P P but without a cockta;l lounge, bar, entertainment or dancing 57. Recreational Vehicle Storage Yard 58. Shoe stores, sales and repair. - P P 59. Second -hand stores and pawn shops. - - L* 60. Shopping Center subject to provisions in - C C Section 17.1n.030 -F.5. 61. Spiritualist r°_adings or astrology - - C* forecasting. 62. Sporting goods stores. - P P 63. f Stamp and coin shops. _ P P h f� INTERIM USE REGjLAT'ONS ` USE up NC GC 64." Swimming pool supplies. _ p p 4 65. Tailor. - P P ` 66. Taxidermists. _ C * p 67. Television, radio sales and service. - p p I 68. Tire sales and service. _ _ C 69. Toy stores. - P p 70. Towing service (without vehicular storage) * - - C 71. Travel agencies. p p p 72. 'Transportation facilities (train and bus, C C C taxi depots). 73. Truck and trailer rental, sales and service. - - C r 74. Varietv stores _ p p D. t blie and semi - public uses 1. Day Care Facilities C C C 2. Convalescent facilities and hosp talc. C - C `- 3. Private and public clubs and lodges, C C C including YMCA, YWCA and siu.ilar youth t group uses. 4. Educational institutions, parochial, private C C C (including colleges and universities). i 5. Libraries & museums, public or private. C C C R 6. Parks and recreation facilities, pt-blic or C C C private. 7. Publi , utility installations. C C C 8. Vocational or business trade schools. C C C 9. Churches, convents, monasteries and other C C C religious institutions. S- 33 • V s -3y INTERIM USE REGULATION. GC AUL U>E OP T•iC D. - Accessory Uses 1. Accesory structures and uses customarily P P p incidental to a permitted use and contained on the same site. 2. Accessory structures and uses customarily C C C incidental to a conditional use and contained on the same site. 3. Caretakers residence C C P 4. Amusement Devices, per Section - P P 17.10.030 -F. E. Temporary Uses 1. Temporary uses as prescribed in Section P P P 17.04.070 and subject to those provisions. 2. Temporary office modules, subject to C C C provisions in Section 17.10030 -F.4. w V s -3y 2 11 LIN nrmv n4P 13 AATOT n f4 Tr A RR YWIA STAFF REPORT U. -NTE: October 9, 1985 TO: _ irman and Members of the Planning Commission FRO`M.: Jack Lam, Community Development Director BY: Dino Putrino, Assistant Planner SUBJ¢:CT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84 -14 - VETERANS OF FOREIGN WARS - A one -fear review of the Veterans of Foreign Wars meeting hall within an existing building with a lease space of 5,000 square feet on 3.47 acres of land in the General Industrial (Subarea 3) Category located at 8751 Industrial Lane - 4PN 209- 031 -74. I. BACKGROUND: On August 8; 1984, the Planning Commission approved Conditional Use Permit 84 -14 with a 12 -month review period. The Planning Commission required that the use be monitored for 12 . month to ensure that it is being operated in a manner consistent with the Conditions of Approval and aaplicable City codes. II. GENERAL :ANALYSIS: As indicated In the August 11, 1984, staff report (attached), the VFW facility is and will ccatinue to be used for bi- nonthly meetings and an occasional dinner- dance. These activities continue to occur in the late afternoons and evenings during the weekday or on weekends. According to the VF!4 post commander, most of the activities occur on the weekends. There is also ample parking for the surrounding industrial uses and the 'IEW post together. The VFW membership has not increased in the past year, maintaining approximately 110 members. However, it is anticipated to reach 250 persons. Upon talking to the b�-lsiness owners within the surrounding buildings, staff has concluded that there is no conflict between the VFW post and the surrounding businesses. in fact, the surrounding business owners have expressed their appreciation and gratitude for the efforts made by the VFW in maintaining the property. The conditions of approval require compliance with the Unir"orm Building Code and State Fire Marshall regulations. Recent Inspection by the Foothill Fire District indicates two requirements remain to be completed, they are: 1) installation of a fire alarm, and 2) repair an existing door. As of September 26, 1985, the VFW has yet to meet these standards in entirety; however, according to Susan Wolfe, of the Foothill ''ire District, the VFW are working diligently to complete compliance. ITFM T PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CUP 84 -14 - VFW October 9, 1985 Page 2 III. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission r_quire completion of the Fire Districts requirements within 90 days. If net completed, the CUP will be brought back for consideration of revocation. Resp ctfull �bmitted, s v� Jack Lam Community Development Director JL:DP:ke Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Vicinity Map Exhibit "8" - Site Plan Exhibit "C" - Floor Plan Foothill Fire District P1ae Check Report Foothill Fire District Letter to the Applicant Foothill Fire District Notica of Violation August 8, 1934 Staff Report, Resolution of Approval with Concitions, and Minutes ate. L ntjD -3AV iD cL 0, 03 - - - 7--V7 GNI 17 I VCJ3 c,r CIL SW4� . zol LL tv 3 ui IA 74V��y 00 / | � � � « QS3 $� ¥ ± � � . ƒ $6� | m $ � ƒ � _ � � 2 $ t 2 a i & � % NMI Wa 517dN| < I � .� 3 � � \§ ..� E � �� n w z `s wa�ooa rg 00000000 000 's;sfloo lilta 1 � c t3 v � r rs2 E_ X t!) C �, � z lU41ri11"L liu+ ,W.L.7'1'Xlta r OCCUPANCY NAME:—Upland-Rancho Cucamonga VFW Post 8680 CHECKED BY:S.D.Wolfe ADDRESS: 8751 Industrial Lane _ DATE CHELKED: 072484 Items noted below are to he accomplished /corrected prior,to issuance of p t Corrections are to be resubmitted tc this department for review. FIRE PROTECTION EQUIPMENT AND SYSTEMS 1, X Fire extinguisher(s) will be required. The size(s), type(s), number and location(s) will be determined by this department. Installation is the responsibility of the owner /occupant and required prior to -occupancy (see attached). 2, An automatic fire extin wishing system is required. Building construc- tion plans shall have an approval stamp From a licensed structul:al engineer. Plans shall be submitted to the City of Rancho Cucamonga and approved by this department and the City of Rancho Cucamongat prior to :'.nstalli,tiLn or issuance of a permit. 3.� The automatic fire sprinkler system, including all controls, shall be electronically supervised, with signals terminating at the fire department dispatching facilities. The proposed method of supervision shall be submitted with the fire sprinkler design. Approvals will be required prior to installation. 4. X An automatic fire extinguishing system shall be installed for the cooking area. Plans shall be submitted to and approved any this department prior to installation. An approved hood and duct system shall be installed (see attached). S. Approved fire hydrants) are required (s Be attached). ?fans shall be submitted to and approved by this department prior to installation. G. An approved, supervised smoke detection system is required. Plans shall be submitted for approval prior to installation. A copy of the service contract shall be provided for fire department files.. 7._ Tenporary fire protection `.dcilities will, be required during building construction. The contractor and /or developer shall contact this department for specific requirements prior to commencing construction. FIRE FLOW RECMIREMENTS 1. X Fire flow mall be a minimum of 2500 5pm, at a minimum residual pressure of 20 jsi, for a duration of 2 hours. Calculations developed by a civil engineer or the Cucamonga County Water District, substantiating that the fire flow will be provided, shall be submitted to this department prior to plan anoroval. 2.� Fire flow has been previously provided. _XITS EXIT CORRIDORS 1. X Exit signs shall be posted above required exit doors as noted, and illuriinz'sed at any time the building is occupied. light intensity of exit signs -_Nall be not less than one footcandle at floor level. Exit sign colors shall contrast with the walls, with letters not less than 3/4" wide and 6" high. 2._ All exit signs shall be on circuits which -,hp .11 be separate from all other circuits in the building and indepe..d =ntly controlled. 3.X Exit door hardware shall be approved panic type and installed as noted on plans. State Fire marshal listing numbers for panic hard- •ware shall be submitted to this department prior to installation. 4. X Exit corridor doors shall be State Fire Marshal listc-d and shall include automatic door closing devices, 5. X Vertical exit corridor wall finish shall meet Class. I flame spread ratings. Horizontal exit corridor wail finish shall meet Class II flame spread ratings. DECORATIVE MXTEt',IAL 1. X All drapes, hangings, curtains, drops and other decorative material that would tend to increase tt,, Fire and panic hazard shall be made from material which is not flammable or shall ae treated by means of a flame retardant solution or process approved by this department. 2. X All interior wall finish shall meet Class III flame spread atings. 0 AIR CONDITIONING EQUT_PIIENT 1. X_ Any air conditioning ducting penetrating an exit corridor shall have a State Fire Marshal listed and approved fire damper installed. Dampers shale operate by products of combustion devices. State Fire Marshal listing numbers shall be submitted to this department prior to installation. FIRE DEPARTMENT ACCESS 1. Fire lane(s), cul- de- sac(s), hammerhead(s) or turn - around(s) shall be constructed as noted on plans (see attached), 2%IERGENCY LIGHTING 1, X If the building-is subject to occupancy during night time hours, emergency lighting shall be installed for all areas of the building. Plans and specifications shall be submitted to this department for approval prior to installation. Emergency lighting shall be installed for all areas of the building. Plans and specifications shall be submitted to this department for approval prior to installation. r ROOM CAPACITIES 1. X Room capacities have been calculated not to exceee the fallowing. An occupant load sign, which shall be approved by this department, shall be posted in subject room near an exit. LOCATION, MAXINUM PERSONS MAIN HALL DANCING /DINING _ 267/125 SECOND HALL DRINKING gg PLAN RESUBMITTAL'- 1._ Resubmit copies of plan pages as indicated below, and all othe, pages ,.. as necessary. OTHER ' <�,�,Qjc, b¢ SGticihti'tCtd {a - c�r. % SabmitAn 8hNll" reduction of the site plan .fee this departmentQe fcrr�t permanent fries. Bone-- i-�14- REMARKS: According to the revised occupant load, thin is an 1-3 occupancy, which means it can share a common wall with the occupancy to th- U. east, which is a B -2. a 19c ON aN F- WWT160 oN 0NlDITIO&Is _ L)OT it y. .. ' •. • " ! J �/ •i t'd i 1 \ ` t J ; 4' • ♦/ �� #Mtn ..t f '• '• • •'` °' ` ' z` ! IEWER SIGNATURE ..� i r S k MP <Y� �.r f S ` z z { .� rr¢ ti . 'x v,'` t`` Zf" =»1' tT'Ys�C'�x •. �'+'c''r �?.j,: ,,;,;�'TRh _ � t-t ,c } -fit .,. 1 .. ` t"Lr °.�:'Srf A a ix• YAK .c :k silk. y.��.+P1� -ti. �A w 'et set +�w i"�- irig•`�•i" s��, t�' ^.S + - ^'.fi�i� '. � ,��wW +t�'.<�•y..,` �� ' 7 1 .JS+xii. ��G.�1R::C��•,`.�« tY A.'�4G! �,'r A h� � Bus•irmss�Kame '✓ FLk) C 9istrict h, Strer' Address4aswj Date I �tkv% e-- NOTHM OF VIOLATION' PUBLIC ASSEMBLY r At a recent fire and life safety inspection by this department, your premises were found to rMuire correction of the items checked billow. h VM OK NR VIOLATION Provide and maintain adequate lighting at ell times so all persons can readily find, distinguish, tnd use ways of egress. Provide and install approved* exit sign(s) at the following location(s): C._ c �_�1[ ` y r i t (t� n 1S Lam - c. i 3. O O ( ) Provide and install approved* emergency lighting at the followinq location(s): � A.. ,f`�Ct)mm,eoz{ B. . C. 4. () {) (W—"Fixed' be provided and /or maintained as Follows: G. (iri'l) ( ) Fire extinguishers shall be provided and /or maintained as follows: 4 A - Install B = Service C Relocate D = Repair TYPE NEED LOCATION 6. i) O (4---'Automatic sor�nkler system tested date. Deficiencies requiring correction: 7. O O !: Y' :e alarm system tested _;_ _ date. Deficiencies requirin3 correction: provide ,ind in.tali approved panic hardware* upon the following doors (existing locks upon the-e P--1111 F lel l be remoyea 1_ + 1 g. t ' ) ( ) Prrvide proof of approve flame iatardant treatment !if the follcwfnqq items or decoraVons (failure to provide State Fire NarsW certification will sult in our testing of samplc(s) of owner's e se, as ne ssary) + J k � —T- 0701 -02 o 10.9 -85 P.C, Agenda .Packet o Page -6 of 6 Page 2 of 2 paces `� cf + , � "e- VN Or NA �^^ 10. ( j ( j Provide and maintain electrical wiring correction: INN-%. a. „d _ -. _ Business Nam? Business Adre VIOLATION is ces in a safe manndr.�Deficiencies requiring rte. Provide and maintain storage � n a safe mpney. Defier c ;es requiring correction i2. O ( Provide and install occupant load signs as direrted (letters and numhers mini -im1" k4,.a :. Fire lanes shall be main"ined unobstructed and posted with an aooroved, sign. Sign specifications provided by Fire District. 14. O (W('!) Address visible. Numbers minimum 3" high on contrasting background. 15. O (`7 i ) Complete Applitation(s) for Permit(s) for the following: C. 16. ( ) ( j V /" Items referred by Fire District to other agencies for joint follow -up, enforcement, etc.: A. B. C *footnote: Specifications for appliances, or appurtenances, locking mechanisms, pioin and wiring required by this is notice shall�be submitted to Fire District for approval ri to instal �ec X. A 'scale diagram will probably Se required. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS: L n V(In s r0 0 An I n CORRECTIONS SHALL BE ADE IMMEDIATELY A reinspection de determine compliance will be conducted a Si d �-' �; QQPM barring a fire department emergency. If you have any problems or question u. please contact the under ignea prior to t , reinspection date. rA� Signed: �.e ) � � MC/1 t ent n, or — 1 iii e, Notice Delivered to :„ (Company Pipresentativ ignature) FOOTHILL FIRE DISTRICT P. 0. Box 35 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91701 (714) 987 -2535 DISTRIBUTION• Original - Fire Prevention Bur_au Copy - Company Representative T -�o ` °a-e_ W . jj District Street Address � �1 (Ljm Date _ z QcS Mau &II NOTICE OF VIOLATION PUB A c ASS SEMBLY i s Ate recent fire and life safety inspection by this department, your premises +were found to require correction of the items checked below. VN OK NA VIOLATT.'.4 ti ( ) Provide and maintain adequate lighting at all times so all persons can readily find, distinguish, and use ways of egress. Z. O (�) Provide and install a:- 7roved* exit sign(s) at the following location(s): A. 8. C. e 3. () ( ) ( ) Provide and install approved* emergency lighting at the following location(s): A. B. C 4. ( ) ( ) (L.Y Eixed automatic fire inguishing system* shall be provided and /or maintained as follows: I ut Q � 5. C✓1 t ) ( ) Fire extinguishers shall be provided and /or maintained as follows: A = Install B = Service C = Relocate 0 = Repair TYPE NEED �? LOCATION A p f_LC� � L� LU&,r1k., -1 ii. ( ) O (/1"^ Automatic sprinkler system tested date. Deficiencies requiring correction: 7. O ( ) (--f pi re alarn system tested date. Deficiencies requiring correction:. Provide and install approved panic hardware* upon the following doors (existing locks upon these deers shall be reapveed) 9. 41, ( ) ( ) Provide proof of approved flame retardpnt treatment of the following items or decorations (failure to provide State Fire marshal certification will re-At in our testing of sample(s) at owner's e4wse, as tessar ): -1 �. 1 , / ! "1t!tdl r 1 c J411 rfY i-1/V`1 •7 °c. ^i '? 1.i a-.•.1 'Lk;d ., r �.(- i1+ /•1. )'Yt it I Page 2 of 2 pages�� Business Name _Ua_ Business Adress VIOLATION° Provide and ma* ain electrical wising and appliances 1P a safe manne Defic�'eAciep reauirin c /orrrrecttiwonA: -'��,{ ��'�°y� mot, "� • _ A!�_ij t(fi Ate_ 1 n� �e 4TYJ 0 i-.� _m�`313d3+� • f _ il. ( ) O Provide and maintain storage in a safe manner. Deficiencies requiring correction 12. O (LX (. ) Provide and background): 13. ( Fire lanes shall be maintained - unobstructed and posted with an approved sign provided by Fire District. 14. ( ) ( / } Fudress visible. NumNers minimum 3" high on contrasting background. Complete Application(s) for Permit(s) for the following: on contrasting Sign specifications 16, 1 ( ) (X/Items referred by Fire District to other agencies for joint follow -up, enforcement, et .: C. 'footnote: Specifications for appliances, appurtenances, locking mt^nhanisms, piping and wiring required by this official notice shall be submitted to Fire District for approval prior to installation. A scale diagram will probably oe required. ADDITIONAL COMMEUTZ CORRECTIONS SHALL BE TDE {{IMMEDIATEELY ,1 �1n A reinspection to determine compliance will be.conducted one aj - i Nis-!;- s,S C ?. 6 02 I barring a fire department emergency. If you have any problems or questions, p ease contact the undersigned rp for to the reinspection data. ire Department Kepresenta,-ivej tilt e Notice Delivered to: "'0.— (Company Represents a Signature) I F00THILL FIRE DISTRICT P. 0. Box 35 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91701 71 4) 987 -2535 DISTRIBUTION: Original - Fire Prevention Bureau Copy - Company Representative 1 ,� ; -2 r :Re-dh 11 Rre. P. O. BOX 35 - 6623 AMETHYST ST. - RANCHO CUCAM.NGA 91701. (714)987 -2535 Sep .ember 6, 1985 Mr. Matt Hogue, Commander Jeterans of Foreign Wars, Post 8680 8751 Industrial Lane Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Dear Mr. Hogue: As a result of a reinsoectioa conducted 'September 5 to check compliance with a Notice of Violation dated August 23, 1985, I am left no choice but to ;write you this letter of warning. Most of the violations noted in August were not corrected. This fact is jeopardizing your Conditional Use Permit ay allowing your occupancy to cont_,Aue to operate in an uis3fe manner. I must also advise you it has come to my attention your facility is required to have a fire alarm system in accordance with the Uniform Fire Code, Appendix III -C. I have enclosed a copy of the alarm description. I have explained to the Fire Marshal this is the fir3t time you have been told about having a fire alarm. He has directed the following shall apply to the VFW occupancy: 1. Within five business days'of receipt of this letter, you must inform us in writing if you intend to install the fire alarm system. 2. If you do not choose tc comply wi+ , the fire alarm requirements, the Fire Marshal will order the large assembly room to be padlocked. closed until the fire alarm is installed and all other deficiencies in this room are corrected. , Eliminating the use of the larger room will accomplish several things: 1. It changes the occupancy classification from an A -3 to a B -2. This means none of the curtains in your building have to be flame - retardant treated. -T t V Mr.. Ma`.t Hogue, VFW September 6, 1985 page two 2. It negates the requirement to have a fire alarm system by reducing the total occupant load below 300 persons. 3. It means the panic hardware does not have to be repaired or adjusted in the Main Hall. Any questions should be directed to Chief Almand during the week of September 9. I have scheduled a reinspection for September 19 at 2:00 p.m. Failure to correct all violations by the 190h will result in our recommendation to revoke the Conditional Use Permit on your occupancy. I again solicit your cooperaticz in bringing the VFW up to minimum fire and life safety stan0ards. Sincerely, Jim OtY1 Susan D. Wolfe Fire Prevention Inspector enclosure mbm r? peas `i In lu DATE: TO: FROM: BY: SUBJECT: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMOr4 GA STAFF REPORT �o CgCA tiol, F' zR Z August 8, 1984 1977 Chr;rman Members of the Planning Commission Pick Gomez, City Planner Linda 0. Daniels, Associate Planner CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84 -14 - Vrd A request to operate a meeting hall and to serve alcoholic beverage in an existing building with a lease space of 5,000 square feet on 3.47 acres of land in the General Industrial (Subarea 3) category located at 8751 Industrial Lane - APN 209-011- 74. I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION :° A. Action Requested: Approval of a Conditional Use Permit as provided for in Section 17.04.030 of the Development Code to establish a site for public assembly. B. Purpose: To establish :a meeting hall for the Veterans of Foreign Wars, Post 8680 Upland- Cucamonga. C. Location: The east side of Industrial Lane, south of 9th tret_,___9751 Industrial Lane D. Parcel Size: 3.47 acres E. Existing Zoning: General Industrial (Subarea 3) F. Existing Land Use: Industrial light manufacturing building of approximately--F9—,MO sq. ft. G. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North Light manufacturing industrial buildings; zoned General Industrial - Subarea 3 South - Light manufacturing industrial buildings; zoned General Industrial - Subarea 3 East - Vacant land; zoned General Industrial - Subarea 3 West - Light, manufacturing industrial buildings; zoned General Industrial - Subarea 3 PLANNING COMMISSION F REPORT CUP 84 -14 /VFW August 8, 1984 Page 2 H. General Plari Designations: Project Site - General Indus North - General Industrial South General Industrial East - General Industrial West General Industrial trial - Subarea 3 Subarea 3 - Subarea 3 - Subarea 3 - Subarea 3 I. Site Characteristics: The property is developed with one building with the majority of its floor arer, �c-skgned for light manufacturing activities. Tre front portion. of the building does contain office area which is where the subject use is proposing to locate. The general area is developed similarly in terms of building design. location and use. There is an improved paved area for parking for the industrial building. II. ANALYSIS: A. General: The applicant is requesting approval, of a CUP to allow approximately 5,000 square feet of a 19,000 square foot building to be used as a meeting facility for the Veterans of Foreign Wars organization. As indicatfd in the attached letter from the applicant, the facility will be used for the bi- monthly scheduled meetings, an occasional ;inner- dance and bingo on Thursday nights. The activities of the VFW post are noted as occurring in the 'ate afternoons and evenings during the weekday, or on weekends. The membership of the VFW post is presently at 108 and is anticipated to reach a maximum of 250 persons. The Industrial Area Specific Plan does allow public and semi- public uses to locate in the General Industrial (Subarea 3) category subject to the Conditional Use Permit process. Staff review of the activity shows that the majority of the activity of the veterans organization will occur in the late afternoon and evenings or on weekends. Alcoholic beverages are proposed to be sold on the site beginning at 2:00 p.m. each day. Staff does have concern with this aspect, but only with respect to the starting time. By starting this activity at 2:00 p.m. there .would be an overlap of time between businesses surrounding the proposed use still engaged in working activity and the VFW post. By beginning the sale of alcoholic beverages, as well as all VFW activities, no earlier than 4:00 p.m. there would be minimal conflict with the surrounding industrial uses and the VFW post. The sale of alcoholic beverages that will occur on the premises will be to VFW members, family or guests of members over the age of 21. This would tend to mitigate the possibility of the establishment of a bar open to the public. �f p �(,o PLANNING COMMISSION 5C F REPORT CUP 84 -14 /VFW August 8, 1984 Pzge 3 There is also ample parking arEa for the industrial uses and the VFW post. Although there is no striping in the paved parking area, staff calculates th ::t there is enough area for about 90 spaces. Due to the arrangement in time with the majority of activities occurring separately, these 90 spaces would satisfy both the industrial uses and the VFW needs. B. Development Review Committee: The aggregate occupant ir.:ad, as indicate by the Foothill Fire District, is as follows: Lounge 15 persons 2nd Hall Fixed Seating 9 persons 2nd Hall Loose Seating 8 persons Pool Room 6 persons Seating Area 11 persons Main Hall: Dancing Area 267 persons Dining Area 125 persons The Foothill ,ire District has also reviewed the plans submitted by the applicant for its special requirements. The District has had conversations with the applicant as far as providing necessary aisle ways, occupancy load signs, and fire extinguishers. The applicant has indicated that the organization can comply with the specifications of the Fire District. III. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: The proposed use, together with the applicable conditions, will not be detrimental to the •public health, safety, or welfare, or materially detrimental or injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. In addition, the proposed use is in accordance with the objectives of the Industrial Area Specific Plan, and the purposes of the Subarea in which the site is located. IV. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the proposal and adopt the attached Resoiution. Res�tf y submitted, VAttachments: Exhibit "A" - Letter from Applicant Exhibit "B - Floor plan Exit?bit "C" - Location Map Resolution of Approval �� r RESOLUTION NO. 84 -76 A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNINr, COMMISSION APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 84 -14 FOR A MEETING HALL LOCATED AT 8751 INDUSTRIAL LANE IN THE GENERAL INDUSTRIAL CATEGORY (SUBAREA 3) WHEREAS,' on the 16th day of July, 1984, a complete application was riled by VFW Post a680 for review of the above- described project; and WHEREAS, on the 8th day of August, 1984, 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: 1. That the proposed use is in accord with the Generai Plait, the objectives of the Industrial Area Specific Plan and the purposes of the Land (Ise category it which the site is located. 2. That the proposed use, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to th.,- public health, safety, or welfare, or material'y injurious to properties or improve.7ents in the vicinity. 3. That the proposed use complies with each of the applicable provisions of the Industrial Are. Specific elan. SECTION 2: That Conditional Use Permit No. 84 -14 is approved subject to the following conditions: 1. Any proposed changes to the ganerai activities pertaining to the use as described by the applicant in this application must be reviewed by the Planning Commission prior to those changes commencing. 2. Prior to the use of the building or business being commenced ,thereon, the existing building shall be made to comply with current Uniform Building Code and State Fire Marshall regulations. The applicant shall contact the City's Building and Safety Division and Foothill Fire District to discuss these requirements. f-(- ptvic,r !.;- p/ 4 —4-ce � T ,� Resolution No. Page 2 APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 8th DAY OF AUGUST, 1984. PLANNjW -I OMMISSION OF T'iE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY • 6X7 Dennis L Stou airman ATTEST: r is z, Deputy Secretary I, Ric Gomez, Deputy Secretary of the Planning Commrssion of the City of Ran& Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regu*Warly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commisslon of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Com L51, nn �210 on the 8th day of August, 1984, by the following vote -to -wit: AYFS: COMMISSIONERS: REMPEL, BARKrR, CHITIEA, McNIEL, STOW NOES COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE E is } r- 5� PUBLIC HEARING-^ B. ENVIRONMENTI TOEWS - The establishwent of a 4- bedroom Bed and Breakfast Inn Within the Christmas House historic landmark on .89 acres of land located on the west side of Archibald Avenue and north of 6th Street in the Low Residential (2 -4 du/ac) designation. Senior Planner, Tim Beadle, reviewed the staff report. .Chairman Stout opened the public hearing. Mr. Jay Ilsley, co- applicant, ind°.cated he has read the staff report and has expressed concern with street tree and garage requirements. Mr. Art ?ridges, Alta Loma resident, supported the bed and breakfast inn concept indicating it will be an asset to the community. There were no further comments and Chairman Stout closed the public hearing. There was Commission discussion on use of the house for small wedding receptions, landscaping and tree types, reuirements for a garage, who the reviewing body should be, and meandering sidewalk. Motion: Moved by Barker, seconded by Chitiea, carried unanimously, to adopt Resolution No. 84 -75, approving Conditional Use Permit No. 84 -15 with a delay of 4 -5 years in the requirement for a garage subject to review by the Design Review Committee, limitation to wedding receptions based on the number of available parking spaces, crape myrtle trees to be integrated into landscaping, and the issuance of a Negative Declaration. . hairman Stout cautioned Mr. Ilsley that if there are problems resulting from receptions, the Conditional U.3e Permit would be subject to review by the Commission. C. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84 -14 - VFW - A request to operate a meeting hall and to serve alcoholic beverages in an existing building with a lease space of 5,000 square feet on 3.47 acres of land in the General Industrial (Subarea 3) category located at 8751 Industrial Lane - APN 209- 031 -74. Senior Planner, Tim 9eedle, reviewed the staff report. The Commission requested investigation' of conformance with ABC requirements and whether business clgsing times had been reviewed. Chairman Stout opened the public hearing. Mr. Gene Barnes, 6123 7th Street, Junior Vice Commander of Upland - Cucamonga Post 8680, advised they have an approved ABC license and that only VFW members and their guests are allowed. Mr. Barnes requested reconsideration of time restrictions set in the resolution. PLANNING COMMISSION MWITES 2 T —a c, 11 August 8, 1984 � C Mr. Barnes requested reconsideration of time restrictions set in the resolution. There were no further comments and the public hearing was closed. Following brief discussion on parking space availability and possible conflict with industrial uses, it was determined that the Conditional Use Permit be brought back for Commission review. Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded by Barker, carried unanimously, to adopt Resolution No. 84 -76 approving Conditional Use Permit 84 -14, with the deletion of Condition 2 in Section 2 of the resolution relating to time limitations, and directi.... to staff to bring this item back to the Commission for review twelve (12) months from this approval. D. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 8653 - GOLSTEIN AND MAC BETH - A division of 5.717 acres into 2 parcels within the General Industrial District (Subarea 3) lc —ated at the southwest corner of 9th Street and Archibald Avenue - APN iA- 031043. Associate Civil Engineer, Shintu Bose, reviewed the staff report and replied to Chairman Stout's question relative to the division of parcels at tr;: time. Chairman Stout opened the public hearing. There, being no comments, the public hearing was closed. Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded by Chitiea, carried unanimously, to adopt Resolution No. 84 -77, approving Parcel Map se33 with issuance of a Negative Declaration. a a r i e E. ENVIRONMENTAL " -dFMENT AND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT 84 -02 - Amendments to the Rancho Cucamonga Development Code, Sections 17.02.110, 17.08.090, 17.07.050, and 17.02.020, Title 17 of the Municipal Code, in relation to time extensions, public hearing notification, transition of density, neighborhood compatibility (side plan design, landscaping, open space, grading, architecture), and preservation of viewshe . Rick Gomez, City Planner, reviewed the staff report. Chairman Stout questioned the lack of provision for notification language to govern single family detached housing in large projects as it relates to infill. Mr. Gomez explained how this category would be covered within the propose) amendment. Commissioner Rempel questioned conflicts between the General plan and the proposed amendments to the Development Code as it relates to affordable housing and whether this has been reviewed by the City Attorney to be sure there are no conflicts. PLANNING COMMiZSION MINUTES �, _ a \ 3 August 8, 1994 i F r El 4,J C 2 11 hTTtT AL1 D A A7/'t -_eA rtr I. BACKGROUND: On September 14, 1983, the Planning Commission approves Conditional Use Permit 83 -13, with a 24 month review period. The Planning Commission required that the use be monitored for 24 months to ensure that it is being operated in a manner consistent with the Conditions of Approval and applicable City codes. II. A ALYSIS: A. General: The Moose Lodge membership has increased from 60 to �9 g0 persons; however, the normal attendance at any one function is approximately 35 to 40 pe-)ple, according to Mr. Sonny Schilling (Moose Lodge representative). Most of the Lodge's activities take place primarily on weekends, with an occasional meeting during a week der evening. Upon speaking with the surrounding business owners, it was discovered that the operation of the Moose Lodge and its activities has noi. caused any conflicts. The original Conditions of Approval for CUP 83 -13, require compliance with the Uniform Building Code and the State Fire Marshall's regulations. According to Susan W:Nlfe of the Foothill Fire District following the Fire Districts requirements have yet to be met: 1) fire extinguisher installation, 2) ex": signs, 3) illuminate exit ways and other minor items (see attached Foothill Fire District plan check report). ITEM U Sai.i�l' F RL PORT k�. n p G DATE: October 9, 1985 1977 TL: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Jack Lam, AICP, Commukiity Development Director BY: Dino Putrino, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 83 -13 - LOYAL ORDER OF MOOSE - A two-year review '57 t e o Lodge meeting a in an existing 1,550 square foot, industrial unit in the General Industrial area (Subarea 4), located at 9375 Archibald Avenue - APN 210- 071 -48. I. BACKGROUND: On September 14, 1983, the Planning Commission approves Conditional Use Permit 83 -13, with a 24 month review period. The Planning Commission required that the use be monitored for 24 months to ensure that it is being operated in a manner consistent with the Conditions of Approval and applicable City codes. II. A ALYSIS: A. General: The Moose Lodge membership has increased from 60 to �9 g0 persons; however, the normal attendance at any one function is approximately 35 to 40 pe-)ple, according to Mr. Sonny Schilling (Moose Lodge representative). Most of the Lodge's activities take place primarily on weekends, with an occasional meeting during a week der evening. Upon speaking with the surrounding business owners, it was discovered that the operation of the Moose Lodge and its activities has noi. caused any conflicts. The original Conditions of Approval for CUP 83 -13, require compliance with the Uniform Building Code and the State Fire Marshall's regulations. According to Susan W:Nlfe of the Foothill Fire District following the Fire Districts requirements have yet to be met: 1) fire extinguisher installation, 2) ex": signs, 3) illuminate exit ways and other minor items (see attached Foothill Fire District plan check report). ITEM U PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CUP 83 -13 October 9, 1985 Page 2 III. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission require full compliance of the Foothill Fire District's requirements within 90 days. If not completed, the CUP will be brought Fack for coTsiderat-ion of revocation. Respectfully ubmitted, Jack Lam, AICP Community Development Department JL:DP:cv Attachments: EW %It "A" - Vicinity Map Exhibit "B" Site Plan Foothill Fire District Plan Check Report September 14, 1983 Staff Report Resolution of Approval (83 -11) and Minutes r j r C-1 J J. :GOAL 6 put r� yy s 8J. • I Q7 1 a d Ac rya Z Pct , MR Acre 0 � su AC VA; �� YMI eC Y7 ILS J ma 42 W03".4.28 i 138A= PAA a _ ' r�roCi w �fOJe� RL ! 1O•YK�I fYrauC Par.3 r 1 A=SAH BEAt!ARp1H0 (� v NORTH CITY OF I _ ITEM: RANCHO CUCA moiNGA . TITLE. VI C PLANNING DIVISION EXHIBM_' SCALE. Jars 9 C y,• e 2 22 4 4 s ac v NORTH CITY OF I _ ITEM: RANCHO CUCA moiNGA . TITLE. VI C PLANNING DIVISION EXHIBM_' SCALE. Jars C, L [F` 7�71 v ji; 77L III rill,, I LLJ y -n i i i i I, zi 0., U LI t I I I I I I CITY OF R.ANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING DIVISION -4 ITEM. C-UP TiME7do EXHIBIT. SCALE:.LLr5 �A E E Z NURTH Foal ill Fire P]I3©TEC li IONS DISTRICT P. O. BOX 35 6633 AMETHYST ST. a RANCHO CUCAMIONGA 91701 (7141987 -2535 PLAN CHECK REPORT Plzn Check ;_, NI ,A Occupancy Type Building Type A Yards + AFES p + 9,uestionn regarding any of the items checked shall be directed to the Foothill Fire District Fire Safety Division. Development Name _ Address/Location Phone FIRE PROTECTION EQUIPMENT AND SYSTFI. ++.5 (J2 u DU4 1._P MU V-CL e a Fire flow shall be a minimum gpm, at a minimum residual pressure r'FD Ordinance #1 of 20 psi, for a d ation of hours. Actual fire flow has been dete:mi ed to be gpm. 2. R PRO Ur e A Fire e ir..buis�.. will be required. The fire department shall be UFC- 10.301(a) notifies prior to occurancy of the buildings for the approval of the CAC T- 19,3-29 size, types and locations. 3. An automatic fire sprinkler system(s) is required. Plans shall be . UFC -10. 09 submitted to the Foothill Fire District, through the building de=artme CAC T -2 , CE 2 -33 for approval prior to installation. FFD Ord nance Nil 4. The automatic sprinkler system controls shall be electronically LFC -10. 10 sutervised (see attached). The method of supervision shall be approved by the fire department prior to installation. 5. An automatic fire extinguishirg system shall be installed for prose - UFC -10. l5 tion of cocking areas. Three sets of plans shall be subm- -ted tc .1-e fire department for approval prior to installation. 6. An automatic fire extinguishing system for protection of equipment UFC -10.3 1(b and /or area is required. Plans shall be submitted to the 2_ooth'_11 Fire District, through 'she building department, for approval prior to installation. 7• Approved fire hydrants a� required see attached). Water sy,te^ FFD Ordi ante H1 plans showing both existing and proposed mains and hydrants shall UFC -10.3 1(c) be submitted for approval (Foothill Fire District) prior to issuance of building permit. Fire hydrant markers (blue dots) will be required (see attached). 8. Temporary fire hydrant facilities will be required during building FF1? Ordi :ce N1 construction. The contractor and /or developer shall contact the fire department for specific requirements prior to commencement of construction. 9. _ UFC- 10.307 CAC T -24, 2 -809 2= 1009,2 - 1063, 2 -i4o9 Fire alarm system required. Plans shall be submitted for approval (Foothill Fire District) prior to installation. State Fire Marshal listing numbers of all components shall be provided tt Foothill Fire District. u -'s FOOTHILL, ME DISTRICT Plan Check Report Page Two FIRE DEPARTMENT ACCESS 1• Fire lanes ,will be required (see attached). FFD 0 dina�#i 2• Building access (man dcors) for firefighters will be required FFD Ordinance #1 every 150 lineal feet of exterior walls facing access (ie roadway, parking lot, fire lane, +^ Ek''l=G 1 2_ Approved exit signs will be required. Sign colon- shall cor_prast Ur-C-12.114 with the walls, with letters not less than 3/4" aide and 6" high. CAC T -24, 2 -3312 2• Exit signs shall be illuminated at any time the building is UFC -12 r4, occupied. Light intensity shall be not less than one foot - CAC T- -3312 candle at floor level. 3.1 Exit sign illumination shall be electrically wired on circuits UFC- 12.111: separate from all others in the building, except that 1 lame in each sign mai- be wired from a circuit supplying other outlets. 4• �V Exit sign illumLration shall be electrically wired on circuits Lr,- 12.114 separate from all. others in the building, except that one `_ma shall be electrically powered from storage batteries or an outside generator. 5 Exit ways shall be illuminated at anytime the building is Ur-C-12.113 occupied with light intensity of not less than. 1 footcandle CAC T -24, 2 -3312 at floor level. 6• X11 Exit corridors will be required, and constructed in accordance UFC- 12,105 with the Building Code. CAC T- 4, 2 -3304 T. Exit corridor walls (hallways) and ceiling finish shall mee` CAC T- 4,Table Z2 -A Class -rI flame spread ratings. 8• Vertical exit corridor walls (stairways) and ceiling �i ' CAC T- c g nisi ^able 42 -y shall meet Class I flame spread ratings.. 9° V Exit corridor doors, frames and closing devices shall be CAC T -24, 2 -3304 State sire Marshal listed and approved. 10.; h- U'— dL@— ,L__Exit door latching devices shall be State Fire Marshal listed rC 12.104, 25.106 and a- �e1�C VIOACtWQJ�•� _�,. . rproved. Ci�t; dA� LA O C CAC T -24, 2 -3303, +' o 'j^°r�L�jYir 2 -3316, 2 -3317, QlLamj on 'O • i7LOMOW diQ � 2 -3318, 2- 3319 u• V Exit doors shall swing in the direction of travel. CAC T -24, 2 -3303 FOOTHILL FIRE DISTRICT Plan Check Report Page Three MRGE.^ICY LIGHTING MW 1. See lcel ®w-" CAC T-2Z, _Z773-12 UFC -12 -113 2.8�� CAC T -24, 2 -3312 UFC -12 -113 Emergency lighting shall be installed for a:.l areas of the building. Emergency lighting Ena.11 be installed for all areas of the building if the budding is subject to occupancy during nighttime hours. HEATING, VENTING AND AIR- CONDITIOMG EBUIPNM 1• ) A HVAC ducting penetrating an exit corridor and /or fire wa71 UFC- 12.105 shall have installed an approved fire damper '.isted by the CAC T- 24,4306 State Fire Marshal. All dampers shall oven byproducts of combustion devices. Listing numbers shall be provided to Foothill Fire District. SMOKE REMOVAL 1• yy A, Smoke vents and /or a smoke removal system will be required. FFD Ordinance #1 Specifications shall be submitted to this der rtment prior to approval. DRAFT STOPS l• VU A, Draft stors will be required and shall be constructed in r.D Ordinance #1 accordance with the Uniform Building Code. DECORATIVE MATERIAL lsitn�e? _Any drace, Flanging, curtain. or drop and /or other decorative UFC-25.103 material shall be flame retardant treated as approved by the CAC T -24, 3.08 fire der:rtment. A letter spec;.ying the method to be used shall be submitted for approval prior to treatment. 2•�t (3Al2eCi1 _Interior wall finish shall meet Class III flame spread CAC T- 24,Table 422 A rating. ROOM CAPACITIES A'TD /0'R EVACUATION PROCEDURES 1• R SL_ Room caracitr shall be posted with a sign having tin_ree 1UFC- 25,114 inch high letters and numbers and contrasting with wall CAC T -24, 3301 color. The sign shall be posted at a location as approved -- -_ by the fire department. PERSONS r AM P� 2. � Y l ed Eva•cuation procedures shall be reviewed and approved by LAC T 13, 3.09 the fire department. These procedures shall be posted at a location approved p¢ by the fire department. FOOTHILL FIRE DISTRICT Plan Check Report Page Four BUILDING IDENTIFICATION 1. Re0 � The building and /or tenant address shall be posted at a UFC- 10.208 tors picuous location with numerals and /or letters a minimum of 3" high and in contrasting color to the background. 2• P A directory shall be sted at UFC- 10.208 development. The directory shallebee lighted2and clearly legible from a maximum distance of 20 feet f,-cm the entrance roadway. The directory shall include but not be limited to the location of all buildings, which shall be identified (alphabetically/numerically), access driveways, and fire hydrants. A detailed specification of the direc� cry shall be submitted to the fire department for approval prior to installation. KEY BOX 1.---W P' One or more key loxes will be required. UFC- 10.209 PLANS SUBMITTALS 1' �dfe� Subc copies of the following plan pages: UFC- 10.301, 25•112 CAC T -24, 3.28 2. O K Submit a final site plan for fire sujvress' shall be such that the site plan shall be clearly size shall not exceed 8 1/2" X 11 ". The scale legible. The BUILDING - TENANT USE nl1g. Submit a letter ind ?satin g f speci + �c use of the building, 'which shall include, but not be limited to: A. Method and type of storage B. Operations and /or processes FF�S � ,, 1' --C-L Fire apartment plan check fee in the amount of FvD Ordinance #6 shall be paid to Foothill Fire District prior to issuance of building permit. GENERAL 1• _ Final constructicn plans, including and stamped by the fi•_e department job set, must be approved REMARKS U -8 A i � Jh HF Or S. --------2ro' ------_--- _- _-____ la'cgi- �-SF / o*m| | ! —f� / - | `4-q �'- � . `4-q t� Ii w o t° c � � � Z I�Gh� C f� a � o � Wig,g e o! D r 9 .29'0'• — 1 1 7 ®m ._ ' Fl,I 1a--10 7=— LAI 11 �J A CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: September 14, 1983 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner 8Y: Frank Drekman, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 83 -13 - LOYAL ORDER OF MOOSE - The establishment of a Moose Ledge in an existing-15-5 Vsq. ft. industrial unit in the General Industrial area (Subarea 4), located at 9375 Archibald Avenue APN 210- 071 -48. PROJECT AND_ SITE HSCRI1' "70N: The applicant is seeking approval of a Con itio al se Permit -f-(2 a Moose Lodge to conduct regularly scheduled meetings in an existing industrial complex (Archicenter) located at 9375• Archibald Avenue (Exhibit "A") The proposed use will occupy approximately 1550 square feet of the industrial center which may be expanded in the future. The Moose Lodge, as an institution of approximately 60 members, will occupy the industrial building once a week on Tuesday evenings between the hours of 8:00 and 9:00 p.m. Social activities consist of Sunday morning breakfasts and occasional Friday and Saturday evening. dinners. Attendance at these functions usually equates to between` 3-s•40 people. It is anticipated that future membership may reach 100 members. At this time, a women's chapter may be invited which will meet bi- nonthly. Presently, the proposed site is designated as General Industrial. Institutional uses are permitted, subject tc the approval of a Conditional Use Permit by the Planning Commission. ANALYSIS: Primar- Issue - Parking: The major ',';sue related to institutional uses locr thin in ustrial areas is parking availability. Presently, appr> + six parking spaces have been assigned to the applicant's industri4 `.e, (Exhibit "B") with an additional 174 spaces provided after hours i,- the institution's use. However, overlaps of industrial and institutional uses may influence and reduce the total number of available parking stalls, ultimately impacting adjacent businesses. Although many of the businesses currently in this center do not have overlapping hours, a commitment of the majority of the spaces within the center tc this tenant would cause future problems for other businesses if they choose or desire to expand their hours of operation. lA - Ej ITEM H PLANNING COMMISSI,( STAFF REPORT Conditional Use PE "iit 83 -13 /Moose Lodge September 14, 1983. Page 2 E Previous Institutional Approvals,* In general, institutional use within industrial buildings are perm-rfted for a limited period of time, typically two (2) years. In addition, most institutions utilize these structures only on a temporary basis, pending relocation to a permanent site. Lastly, previously approved institutional uses have located in industrial park areas which are required to provide a higher parking ratio, thus reducing the risk caused by overlapping activities. ALTERNATIVES: The following alternatives are submitted for Planning ommis� sign review. It is recommended that the Commission re�,iew and consider each alternative to deteemine the optimum scenzrio. The Commission may wish to approve the applicant's project subject to the provisions of the chosen alternative and the conditions of approval which appear on the attaches Resolution. Alternative 1: Approve the CUP for a period of two (2) years. Limit the total numher of available parking stalls to one stall per 75 square feet of floor area. Limit parking to the area surrounding the Moose• Lodge industrial suite (20 stalls maximum). Alternative 2• o Approve the CUP on a permanent basis (no time limit). o Limit parking to one stall per 75 square feet of floor area. o Limit parking to the area surrounding the Moose Lodge industrial suite (20 stalls maximum). Alternative 3• a Continue review of the CUP cnd request the applicant to explore the improvement of the vacant lot to the east of the project siLa for use as permanent parking. If a permanent parking lot large enough to accommodate the applicant's proposal is provioed, the Commission could consider approval as a permanent location. Alternative 4• o Deny the project based upon anticipated parking problems related to overlapping uses. CORRESPONDENCE: A public hearing notice was advertised in The Daily Report newspaper and public hearing notices were mailed to property owners within 300 feet of the subject property. To date, no correspondence has been received either for or against this project. U PLANNING COMMISSIC 3TAFF REPORT Conditional Use P& wit 83 -13 /Moose Lodge September 14, 1983 Page 3 RECOMMENDATIONS: It is recommended that the Planning Commission review and consider all input and material relative to this proje.t. A Resolution of Approval, with Conditions is provided for your consideration, Depending upon the Commission's cturse of action, �,A - madification of the attached Resolution may be necessary. RespttfuIly submitted, 1� Rick Gome'h- - City D anner RG:FD:jr `Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Location Map Exhibit "6" - Site Plan Correspondence Resolution �,A - RESOLUTION NO. 83 -111 A RESOLUTION OF THE 'RANCH 0 CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 83 -13 FOR THE LOYAL ORDER OF MOOSE LOCATED AT 9375 ARCHIBALD AVENUE Its THE GENERAL INDUSTRIAL AREA (SUBAREA 4) ZONE WHEREAS, on the 17th day of August, 1933, a complete application was filed by the Loyal Order of Moose for review of the above - described project; and WHEREAS; on the 14th day of September, 1983, 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 propu,ed use is in accord with the General Plan, and the purposes of the ,ne in which the use 11 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 py.4osed use will comply with each of the applicable provisions of the Zoning Ordinance. SECTION 2: That this project will not create adverse impacts on the environment and that a Negative Declaration is issued cz September 14th, 1983. SECTION 3: That Conditional Use Permit No. 83 -13 is approved subject to the following conditions: PLANNING DIVISION 1. This use shall be permitted with the Planning Commission to review after a 2 -year period. 2. Group meetings may occur only on weekends and after 6 :00 p.m. on weeknights.. 3. No institutional activities will be permitted which exceed the available parking or cause adverse effects upon surrounding businesses. Should any problems arise, this Conditional Use Permit shall be brought back to the Commission for reconsi,eration. \., —\'A C C Commissioner Rempel stated that he thinks the parapet will be about a foot high and the way this project is laid out you would see Lhe air conditioning units on the roof eve!: with a 2 -3 foot parapet. He felt that the two lines, that of the roof and the parapet, should not blend in and the slides that were shown by Mr. Barmakian of the La Verne project show parapets ghat are not very high. Mr. Barmakian replied that he would be happy to go with Mr. Rempel to the Family Tree project in La Verne, Further, that he would draw a perspective to show that if the parapet is 30 inches high the duct work Pill not be seen by the houses to the north. Commissioner Barker stated that he is not big on looking at equipment on a roof. Further, that he would prefer something that the total Planning Commission has seen rather than the recommendation from Design Review. He indicated that he would prefer she original design with z guarantee of hiding the roof apparatus from the surrounding residential area. Chairman Stout stated that he, too, liked the original proposal with the air conditioning units screened off and the dense landscaping. He indicated that he would like to see landscaping between the northern units and the southern units so that the project fits in better with the single family residences. Chairman Stout did not think that the flat roofs fit in with the homes and the property to the north. Chairman Stout indicated that if the applicant provided the landscaping and the change to the original design, this project. would not have to come back t.) the Design Review Committee.• He indicated further, that the catch basin must go in aed be completed by this project. He stated that if the applicant felt this issue to be unfair, he could appeal it to the City Council, explaining the process to the applicant. The consensus of the Commission was that tae roof design be changed to the original proposal, the requirement for the catch basin stand, landscaping be provided as a screen on the north side for the single family homes, and that the applicant work with the engineering division on the pipe extension. Motion: 13oved by Rempel, seconded by Barker, Carried unanimously, to adopt Resolution No. 83 -109 approving Parcel Map 8100 and issuing a negative declaration. Motion, Moved by Barker, seconded by Rempel, carried unanimously, to adopt Resolution. No. 83 -110 kith the modifications set forth by the Commission and issuing a. Negative Declaration. H. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 83 -13 - LOYAL ORDER OF MOOSE - The establishment of a Moose Lodge in a 1550 square foot unit oz an industrial complex, in the General Industrial area (Subarea 4), located at 9375 Archibald Avenue - APN 210 - 071 -48. ^.ity Planner, Rick Gomez, reviewed the staff r ?port. Chairman Stout opened the public hearing. Planning Commission Minutes -b- September 14, 1983 Mr. George Rushe, representing the Moose Lodge, advised that he wr -ild answer any questions the Commission might have. Chairman Stout asked Mr. Rushe if the Lodge had a preference for an.., of the four alternatives listed in the staff report. Mr. Rushe replied that they would hope for a permanent conditional use permit, but barring that, they would hope for the best. He provided background information to the Commission on how long the Lodge has been established and the agreement with the landlord, Andrew Barmakian, regarding parking spaces. Chairman Stout asked Mr. Rushe if he felt the parking spaces to y3 adequate and whbcher it is the intent of the Moose Lodge to use this as a perm -, ant facility. Mr. Il.she replied that is their intent until or unless they outgrow this facility. Chairman Stoat explained what the Commission has done in the pas:- with institutional uses such as a church and the provision for a time extension. Mr. Rushe replied that if that is all they can get they wou. d accept it and reapply in two years. He indicated that they would hope to be able to buy their own facility. Chairman Stout asked if their organization intends to have provisions for an alcoholic beverage license and whether Uney would apply for one. Mrs. Rushe replied that they intend to apply for one <it a later tine; however, the sale of alcoholic beverages would to to members only. Mr. Whiten Chestnut, a Moose representative, spoke in favor of the application and indicated that if adequate parking spaces are unavailable, members are lost. Chairman Stout asked Mr. Brmakian what percentage of his complex is rented at this time. Mr. Barmakian replied approximate?`; 90 percent and that only the east half of the front building on Sixth Street is not leased. Commissioner Me Niel asked how many of the renters have extended or weekend hours. Mr. Barmakian replied that the only tenant would be the Moose Lodge and no one is c ?en on SaturIays or Sundays. There being no further questions or comments, the public hearing was closed. Planning Commission_ KiT.utes -7— September 14, 1983 Commissioner Rempel stated that perhaps the General Plan should be looked into because eventually other groups will want a facility and there currently are no provisions as to where they should be built. He indicah.ed that they will develop traffic when they get going but this use is quite similar to the institutional uses. Commissioner Rempel suggested that this be approved with a orovison for automatic review in two years. Commissioner Barker asked what the difference is between the automatic renewal and the automatic review. Commissioner Rempel replied it is the cost factor because they would have to reapply. Chairman Stout stated that in the evening hours there is unlimited parking and asked if the applicant would have some problem with a condition that limits the parking to evenirti% hours only. Mr. Rushe stated that they do have Sunday breakfasts. Commisioner Barker asked if the wording "group meeting" has a connotation that they can still have an officers meeting. Chairman Stout seated a group meeting would require more than six parking spaces. Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded by Barker, carried unanimously, that Resolution No. 83 -111 be adopted approving Conditional Use Permit 83 -13, requiring an automatic review of this application in two years and with a limitation of 40 parkirg spacer. Mr. Gomez asked if there would have to be a condition so that this CUP could be recalled at some time. Mr. Hopson replied that such a condition is not* required because it exists implicitly under condition no. 6 of the resolution. 8:25 p.m. The Planning Commission recessed. 8:35 p.m. The Planning Commission reconvened. I. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 83 -16 - HOUSER - The expansion of an existing pet hospital into a contiguous unit located at 8681 19th Street in the C -1 zone - APN 202 - 024 -11. Mr. Gomez, City Planner, reviewed the staff report. Commissioner Barker stated that the applicant's letter states that there will be no animal holding structures at the back wall or at any common wall in the building .., minim3ae noise; however, the modified presentation proposes a dog run area next to the common wall of another building. Mr. Coleman replied that that is considered a cage Planning Commission W nutes -8- September 14, 1983 E El 11 OTMV OTP R AW 40 (.TTr..ATdT0Nr.A _..f`A A.- STAFF REPORT DATE: October 9, 1985 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Jack Lam, AICP, Community Development Director BY: Curt Johnston, Associate Planner 9 c7 � Iz F� ;z U SUBJECT: HUNTERS RIDGE SPECIFIC PLAN - CITY OF FONTANA - Planning commission review of land use alternatives for the Hunters Ridge Specific P1ai, on 580 acres of land within the City of Fontana, located on the north side of Summit Avenue, east of San Sevaine Creek, west of the Devore Freeway. I. ABSTRACT: The City of Fontana is currently preparing a Specific Plan for the Hunt Club property recently annexed. The consulta:.. selected to prepare the document; the Planning Center will present three preliminary land use alternatives to the City Council on October 16, 1985. Prior to this date, the Council is requesting informal comments from the Planning Commission. The Commission should focus their review of the alternatives on impacts of the project as they relate to Rancho Cucamonga. II. BACKGROUND: The City of Rancho Cucamonga has an opportunity to comment on the Specifi^ Plan as provided for in a settlement agreement with Fontana. The agreement resulted fy °om _Litigation filed by the City upon action by LAFCO removing the property from the Rancho Cucamonga Sphere of Influence and annexing it into the City of Fontana. In summary, the settlement agreement establishes that the gross density of the property will be no more than 4 units per acre. The City of Fontana shall require paym -nt of school impaction fees and any other fees which may be dentified as i.,�cessary mitigation in the EIR or Specific Plan. The two cities agree to cooperate in encouraging a regional park west of the site in the area of the San Sevaine Creek. In addition, the agreement specifies that three land use alternatives be presented to the Rancho Cucamonga City Council and their comments will be given "serious consideration by the City of Fontana ". III. ISSUES: At the time of the agreement, the City was concerned with the following issues: Unit Count: As shown on Exhibit "A ", the only access to the site is currently through Rancho Cucamonga, -a the total number of dwelling units within the project has a direct affect on this City. The Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Land Use Map originally ITEM V PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT HUNTERS RIDGE SPECIFIC PLAN - CITY OF FONTANA October 9, 1985 Page 2 designated the site Very Low Residential (less than 2 du /ac) and Hillside Residential. Land Use Transitions: The area within the City of Rancho Cucamonga south of Summit Avenue is designated as Very Low Residential (half - acre lots). Development on the site should provide an appropriate transition. Circulation: Major access to the site is provided by an extension of Cherry kvnnue. The Etiwanda Specific Plan shows 'Cherry Avenue and Summit Avenue as only two lanes adjacent to the project. Increased density on the site will necessitate expanding the road widths. Draina a Facilities: Development of the property will increase runoff any impact downstream properties, unless adequate improvements are planned. E Services /Commerical: Considering the isolated location of the property, adequate schools, parks, water and sewer, and emergency Alm service:, must be provided. In addition, traffic will pass through Etiwanda traveling to and from commercial facilities. IV. SITE DESCRIPTION: The 580 acre site is generally in natural condition with few imprr��ements. Buildings on the site include a club house for the Hunt Club, a stone residence and maintenance sheds. F1oud control improvements include a diversion dike and levee on the west side of the property and'flood control levee crossing the southeast corner of the site. Electrical transmission lines cross through the north- central portion of the site. In addition, a MWD right -of -way traverses the southern portion of the site. LAND USE ALTERNATIVES: As mentioned, The Planning Center has developed t ree an use alternatives„ The number of units in each alternative ranges from the low of 1705 up to 2141. Approximately 350 acres of the site will be developed as residential and the three alternatives show average net densities ranging from 4.6 units per acre to 6.0 units per acre. Primary access is provided off Summit Avenue by a northerly extension of Cherry Avenue. A brief description of each alternative follows: Alternative One is based on the concept of graduation of density, from the most intense along Summit Avenue (Commercial, Multi - Family) to the least intense at the mouth of San Sevaine Canyon. This alternative calla for 1947 units on 350 acres with an average Ash density of 5.6 units per acre. Approximately 25% of the units are multi- family. Townhouses, apartments, and a five acre commercial 6.; i P PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT HUNTERS RIDGE SPECIFIC-PLAN - CITY OF FONTANA October 9, 1985 Page 3 G site are located along the north side of Summit Avenue. 'jalf -acre lots are proposed at the north end of the site. Secondary access is provided to Summit Av.-.:,,ie and a connection to the east is planned. The major disadvantage of this alternative relates to land use transition and circulation. The townhouses, apartments and commercial zoning at the south end of the site would be incompatible with half -acre lots south of Summit Avenue. In addition, townhouses and 60OU square foot lots are proposed as a transition to the ,possible regional park along San. Sevaine Creek. Regarding circulation, the street pattern directs traffic to Rancho Cucamonga with only secondary access to the east. A positive element under this alternative is the attempt to incorporate some of Me existing mature vegetation .(Peppers, Eucalyptus). IM PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT HUNTERS RIDGE SPECIFIC PLAN — CITY OF FONTANA October 9, 1985 Page 4 A i - R:NAi I 1 r* -. r I i '® 21Y ,r (,L7.WYl Uf �uLG 109 rs.a Htltar5a8.$d Ins! %� gar riww�+u iu Lac ass M5 sao �nr N/ "O Ir V- q mi �m d� PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT HUNTERS RIDGE SPECIFIC PLAN CITY OF FONTANA October 9, 1985 P-.ge 5 Alternative Two calls 4or a high intensity core about half way up the site Commercial and Multi- Family), with densJties gradually decreasing both to the north and south. This alte;.,.native is also the most intense. of the three, it proposes 2141 units on. 354 acres of land with an average density of 6 units per net acre. Approximately 35% of the units are multi - family and another 44% are single family on 4500 square foot lots. Single family homes on 2 200 square foot lots are located on the north side of Summit and Along the extension of Cherry Avenue. Half -acre lots are located in San Sevaine. Canyon. Secondary future access is shown to the east. The proposed density of this alternative would create the greatest impact on Rancho Cucamonga. The vast majority of units are either multi - family or single family on 4500 square foot lots. Also, i,. does not appear that the proposed intensity considers the slope of the land and grading impacts. As the Commission is aware, side and rear yard slopes significantly reduce building pads and yard areas, particularly on small lot subdivisions. Given these factors, massive grading and the use of retaining walls will be necessary to m?intain the unit count. E, 4 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT HUNTERS RIDGE SPECIFIC PLAN - CITY OF FONTANA October 9, 19P5 Page 6 aLT��Na� v� Fvwml g � + V —In u 'JiP? f� S9 7LDaf7�1CC �f Jb4 iiD sJ Avio tL wf ifd fY �L"> 4wk fz fif 1710 !K k1 Tm 1{J MC SW 10.1 Rpww.w* %IJ 111 N% 9.f W!kt W, e EM EI Ah a L PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT HUNTERS RIDGE r ECIFIC PLAN - CITY OF FONTANA October 9, 198; Page 7 Alternative Three has the lowest density with 1705 units on 370 acres. The average density of resid-intial property is 4.6 dwelling units per net acre. Half -acre lots are shown on the north side of Summit and along the extension of Cherry. Apartment units at 20 dwellings per ��re are proposed at the mouth of San Sevaine Canyon. No commercial use is provided. Primary access from the east is planned. This alternative calls for a lower mit.count, half -acre lots along the south project boundary, and lav „,r single Family lots along San Sevaine Creek, and primary circulation to the east. The area of concern is the apartments in San Sevaine Canyon. Though of limited effect on Rancho Cucamonga, the proposed diet density of 20 units . per acre will have a severe impact on the character of the area and will require substantial alteration of existing land forms. PLANN HU COMMISSION STAFF REPORT HUNTERS RIDGE SPECIFIC PLAN - CITY OF FONTANA October 9, 1985 Page 8 ALT R A►TI E 3 r�a � 0 r a � 0 l �t 1 ?JMIA�RL '1.6 aSa 4tI ISI fA0Lf4ai AR f:t Ip 4> "OWNa ti jai go n� Tuk" / Its, It, 91 I9d 117RT4�Ji 60./ 1E! N:9 tI�?L ad IV$ % v 'b Em E 13 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT HUNTERS RIDGE SPECIFIC PLAN - CITY OF FONTANA October 9, 1985 Page 9 VI. SUMMARY: Ka one alternative seems to provide the optimum scenario with respect to impacts on Rancho Cucamonga. However, Alternative Three appears to be the most acceptable in terms of its relationship to Rancho Cucamonga, in that it incorporates several characteristics important to the City, as outlined below: 1. Total unit count is somewhat lower ( ±1700 du's), reflecting more sensitivity to site constraints and surrounding land uses; 2. A circulation systw, which depends heavily on access to Duncan Canyon (to the east), rather than emphasizing Summit and Cherry Avenues; 3. Half -acre "estate" lots adjacent to Summit Avenue and other areas designated for less than 2 du /ac is the Rancho Cucamonga General Plan; 4. Lac., of commerical or other intensive use activities; and 5. A mix of dwelling types (single family vs. multi - family) more in tune with existing and planned development in the area. In addition, the final concept selected should facilitate the following: 1. Preservation and sensitivity to existing natural features and land forms, particularly in regard to mature vegetaticn and grading; 2. Sensitivity to natural hazards, such as slope stability, flooding and seismic conditions; 3. Integration of San Sevaine Creek into the design of the project through appropriate orientation and land use transitions; and 4. Regional trail connections as outlined in the City's General Plan and West Valley Foothills Plan.. VII. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission should revie�i the proposed alternatives as they relate to the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Comments should be referred to the City Council by minute action for their review on October 16, 1985. Y -q PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT HUNTERS RIDGE SPECIFIC PLAN —CITY OF FCNTANA October 9, 1985 Page 10 R sp ctfully submitted, Community Development Director JL:CJ:ko Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Location Map Preliminary ]raft - 'Hunter kidge Specific Plat: Ll St, ,A, . v r• yw / L'"Y J Ill R� + ) 't = v }.t+ 'i ✓'fix `t`1 �'�:.��`Lt(i. \�! t, b t l' L= .:Q 1�� : �_ !' i .F \r!`.i �(i(�.G ` ✓rte s• ,j+c �� . zoo .;•�:;� v� In�� ; ��' /i �'3i % ul tr 1,/�ti ��'�'. -/ .J \;-' \�7i' ) 1 . .. t �., `—'�•'� �' tlt/.ii0'tC •� t � / o, � t lvJ��tl- l }.+�� , ../Ir SAN GAB EI. M T S - i\� -`?; +��li2 rL^r'• r t i) ` i.�iJ�ft 1�`�: /'•;t\�':,�'�,t+...�...�.� � .. f �t _..�� J \�-i ✓r wry. �r�:�� . �t �,��.J _ �1�• /t ir.• •+ .`i� -•- •� .!`�~ +�� \rte }� Y �` ��S�I—'.� �, � f`_/ .' '•! +� �r� �� f_'' i pieµ �. .i_i ":�_,� `-J "..r^��..`\;;�: i i�� r� ---•. . —UN M RO`lED.�., i �r -•-�� ... .. �, ••�� .-� _� DRAINA GE COUE`iSE tij LU 22, 22 • /; 9 �1.._ Z -_� : o J �:.,..�•'£� �•- ` 'EVE+ /� i J�ft�l�ib. •wa.. e, f• � e 1 _ I 'LRESERVOIR NLOPITH _ CITY OF ITE:,\I- AUU SIC" _' hd4 RANCHO CUCANMUNGA TITLE: a-OCAMCu Ma o PLANNING DIVISUN EXHIBrr. SCALE. 1 P -3446 EXHIBIT Land Use Spry Hunter's Ridge Development Program Fiscal Impact Analysis Alternative 1 Alternative 2 AlterWive 3 Dwelling Units - - Land Use /Product Type Per Acre Acres Units Acres Units Acres Units Residential Product Estate 2.0 31.3 63 31.3 63 71.3 143 7200 sf lots 3.5 97.0 341 42.6 150 It 0 428 6000 IF lots 4.5 1112.6 507 54.0 244 b.- 155 45W sf lots 5.5 66.0 363, 171.8 946 --7 500 Townhomes 12.0 23.6 283 44.0 538 19.3 231 Apartments 20.0 19.5 390 10.0 200 31.3 244 Total Residential 350.0 1,947 354.3 2,141 369.8 1,705 Other Land Uses Commercial S n @.0 0.0 Schooln 8.0 8.6 8.0 Open Space 152.0 150.5 137.4 ` Ouasi Public 71.0 3.0 7.5 I' Parks 11.5 11.0 9.7 II Equestrian Center 0.0 0.0 14.6 ' Strv!ets 46.5 Q.0 33.0 F Total, All Lard Uses 580.0 580.0 560.0 i Sourr- -: The Planning Center; and Robert Charles Lesser and Co. IM AAi.AL31 EXHIBIT 5 Projected Population at Pnject Build -0et by Develoment Alternative Hunter's Ridge Dre:lopaent Program Fiscal Impact Analysis Population Factors (1) Land Use / Product Type Pop. 101 DUstAc. Pop. /k. Alternative 1 AV-w3 ative 2 Alternative 3 Residential Product Estate 3.21 2.0 6.4 202 202 459 7200 sf lots 3.21 3.5 11.2 1,095 02 1,374 6000 sf lots 3 —i 4.5 14.4 1,627 783 510 4500 sf lots 2.59 5.5 14.2 940 2,450 1,295 ToKnhoees 2.59 12.0 31.1 733 1,393 598 Apartments 1.99 20.0 39.8 776 _ 3% 486 TOTAL 5,374 1y709 4,722 (1) Used upon data from the C31iforni Department of Finance. Source: California Department of Finance; and Robert Charles Lesser and Co. PLANNING GUIDELINES, GOALS AND OBJECTIVES It is the policy of the City of Fontana to allow major urban development to occur only after a Specific Plan has been prepared and adopted for the area where the development is proposed. This specific Plan shall be designed and devel- aped to implement the goals and objectives of the adopted General Plan. In keeping with this policy, the following planning objec- tives have been developed. These illustrate the most rele- vant guidelines from the City's General Vlan which apply to Hunters Ridge. They are clustered into four logical cate- gories -- community design, housing, trans;)ortation and public ficilitles. These aetegories allow the translation of General Plan goals, policies and objectives into a less complicated set of guidelines for the Specific Plan. 1. Commu ?ity Design Goal It is a goal of the General and Specific Plans to create a sense of place through the design of the community. Community identity and efficiency should be achieved. a. Community Identity objectives I) Need to create and enhance community identity through innovative community design; 2) To provide a superior quality and imaginative residential environment; 3) Create an identifiable community with a quality image; 4) Create a theme and level of development '-hat will become the character for the northern portion of the City; 5) Reinforce neighborhoods and urban units; b) Improvo recreation and aesthetic qualities; 7) Allow alternative forms of density compensation, where appropriate; 8) Provide recreational, cultural and social oppor- tunities to ceet the needs of the planned com- munity, and 9) *'se open spaces, to create a visually pleasing environment, as well as to distinguish City and neighborhood boundaries. b. Community Efficiency Objective:: l)" Provide .-commercial facilities if marketing report identifies to meet the retail and service needs of the planned community and, where feasible, with convenient access by bicycle and by foot, as well as by automobile; 2) Organiae educational, cultural and recreational activities in close proximity to one another and conveniently accessible to their p `,ential users; . 3) Coordinate residential development to encourage an integrated residential area with maximum flexibility and access to the regional circula- tion network; 4) Integrate various housing types in close proxim- ity to commercial areas; 5) Locate schools and parks together whenever pos- sible. c. Community Enhancement Objectives: 1) Preserve windrows and other existing trees; 2) Replace trees which need to be removed for urban development; 3) Promote pedestrian circulation with integrated parks and trail systems; and, 4) Use open space, landscaping and urban form to strengthen identity and image. 2. Transportation Goal it is a goal of the General and Specific Plans to pro- mote an efficient transportation system which is envi- ronmentally acceptable: a. Efficiency Objectives: 1) Circulation that is responsive to regional con- siderations; V' J( 1.:J V 2) 'Promote greater efficiency in transportation through logical placement of land uses and intensities; 3) ' Locate basic public facilities and services in such a relationship to their user groups so as fo minimize the -need for supplemental transpor- tation systems; 4) Promote land use patterns that encourage non - motorized modes of transportation; S) Connect schools, parks and commercial areas -by trails when possible; 6) Provide adequate right -o£ -way and improvements for bike lanes when called for in future street dedications; 7) Provide pedestrian facilities that are direct and convenient, with safe and dir -:ct pedestrian acces-ibility between residential areas, schools, parks and shopping areas; 8) Integrate the development of bicye;le routes and pedestrian pathways in areas of nev development; and, 9) Encourage the utilization of such routes for commuting as well as recreational purposes. b. Environmental Objectives: 1) Design streets and trail systems to reduce length of trips; 2) Establish specific programs designed to improve targeted ,tiajcr arterial function and appearance; 3) Establish special treatments for corridors; 4) Create a program establishing a theme and quali- ty controls for major boule4ards. 3. Housing Goal It is a goal of the General and Specific Plans to pro- mote development approaches and techniques which provide a broad range of housing types and opportunities, archi- tectural variation and a pleasant living environment. V -1-7 a. Housing Opportunity Objectives: 1) Provide for the housing needs of all segments of population within Fontana; _ 2) Develop more residential opportunities appealing to the upper--spectrum of the homebuyers market; 3) Create land use opportunities that provide the maximum amount of flexibility at implementation levels and encourage the free- market system to provide a maximum variety of housing types; 4) Provide major incentives for a variety of hous- ing opportunities through a complete housing mix; 5) Provide a range of housing choices throughout _ the planning area that will meet the needs of all age groups, household types and income groups. b. Architectural Objectives; 1) Encourage opportunities to mix different, but compatible, residential densities and -�rchitec- tural styles. 4. Public Facilities Goal It is a goal of the General and Specific Plans to locate f. basic public facilities in such a way as to make them convenient to the community, efficient and inexpensive and to promote the health, safety and welfare o) the residents of the City. a. Convenience Objectives: 1) Provide for multiple uses of flood water drain - age and retention areas; 2) Connect schools, parks and local commercial areas to residential areas by a system of path- ways and trails which utilize easements, excess rights -of -way, etc.; and, b. Efficiency Objectives: 1) Plan for the timely, coordinated construction of utilities; V -1g I 2) Develop innovative solutions to current develop- ment dilemmas such as storm drainage systems; 3) Locate schools, parks and other public facili- ties together whenever possible; and, 4) Perpetuate "natiural'•dra'inage patterns` wherever possible. 5, Issues, Constraints and Opportunities The previous sections convey a sense of the large con- text within which Hunters Ridge was conceived. This section documents the localized issues, constraints and opportunities which apply to the development site. Some are similar to City -wide issues; others are peculiar to this Specific Plan. In light of this framework, preparation of Hunters Ridge Specific Plan has been accomplished through a process of data collection, issues analysis, formulation of alter- native plans and selection of the preferred concept plan. Plan workshops and review sessions have been held with the Planning Commission to solicit input from interested parties, determine the direction most bene- ficial to the City and direct preparation of the Specific Plan document, reflecting modifications agreed upon during the process. A number of issues, constraints and opportunities affecting Hunters Ridge were identified. These factors have been instrumental in shaping the Specific Plan, its development guidelines, and standards. This responsive - ness to local issues, constraints and opportunities is the najor reason the plan will be a st�ccess in meeting the City's development objectives. a. Issues. 1) The need to mitigate onsite and downstream drainage impacts associated with development; 2) The need to mitigate traffic noise impacts along the Devore Freeway, the proposed Foothill and the planned major arterial highways, 3) The need for strategies to reduce cumulative air quality impacts; 4) The desire to capitalize on the site's excellent mountain view; 5) The need for a diversity of housing types; 6) The need to provide far adequate public facili- ties and services, including means of financing; 7) The desire to create a quality, unique community design with identifiable residential neighbor- hoods supported by parks, schools and trails. 8) The need for an efficient, yet aesthetically attractive system of arterial highways and collector streets; 9) The desire to create consistent and attractive streetscapes; 10) The status CIf planning for major sewer, drain- age, water, znd school facilities which are esse.atial for.development of the area, given the current inadequacy of such facilities. 11) The need for provide for necessary onsite improvements, offsite improvements, interim improvements and participation in the funding of offsite and interim improvements; and,; 12) The necessity to consider the City's fiscal condition and resultant variety of infrastruc- ture financing mechanisms, including developer contributions, and assessment districts. b. Constraints 1) Lack of sewer, water and flood control facili- ties at both local and regional scales; 2) Adverse air quality conditions; 3) Semi -arid climate; 4) Fire hazard from chaparral vegetation; 5) Existence of the Alquist- Priolo Special Studies Zone through the central portion of the site along the °ucamonga Fault; 6) Expanse of the San Gabriel Mountains Alluvial Fan onsite; 7) Stream and wooded canyon to be preserved; 8) Severe fiscal limitations on local government; 9) School overcrowding at all grade levels; and, 14) Uncertainty regarding timing of Foothill Freeway implementation. c. Opportunities 1) City desire for quality development; 21 Potential for competitive housing prices; 3) Active planning completed or underway by gor,•ern- mental agencies responsible for public facili- ties and services; 4) City experience_with and commitment to the spe- cific plan tool; 5) Existence of Historically Sig ificant Struc- tures; 6) Estate lots with views of the valley; and, 7_) Adopted Foothill Freeway route as part of the State Master Plan of Freeways. Land Use Concepts A tabulation and description of the merits of the three land use plans follows: ALTERNATIVE I "WINDROW PLAN" PRODUCT TYPE DU /AC AC DU PRODUCT % Estate 2 31.3 63 3.4 8000 S.F. Lot 3 97.0 291 15.8 6000 S.F. Lot 4 11 450 24.5 5000 S.F. Lot 5 7.8 189 10.2 3600 S.F. Lot 6 28.2 169 9.2 Townhomes 12 23.6 283 15.4 Apartments 19.5 390 21.2 Subtotal 350.0 1,835 100.0% IZG" ? NVN11SE -:S Aim g:*4 L.-* 4b use (VIA School 8.0 Open Space 152.5 Quasi- Public 7.0 Commercial 5.0 Park* 11.5 Balance to be negotiated within utility easements Roads ** 33.6 TOTAL ACRES 567.6 *Required Park (23.0) * *Roads shown are not included in residential summary. Plan Features -- Highest density to the southern third of site. -- Primary and secondary access off Summit Avenue. -- Commercial site at Cherry and Summit Avenues. - -Loop streets off of major arterial to create a more resi- dential scale. - -Major arterial with expanded right -of -way for pedestrian, trail and tree preservation. -- Preservation of some of the windrows throughout the proj- ect. - -At terminus of ,trterial a spatially open feeling is made with quasi - public, school and parks. - -The major loop road in the middle area is smaller with a special read section with pedestrian trails and cul -de- sacs that open on to the loop. - -Large estate lot are in the most northerly section of the site. LI LA ALTERNATIVE 2 L,r O U%G-5 AINA -P °COKKUNITY CE&rER' PRODUCT TYPE DU /AC AC DU PROP,22f $ Estate 2 31.3 63 2.7 8000 S.F. Lot 3 42.6 5.6 6000 S.F. Lot 4 54.0 216 9.4 5000 S.F. Lot 5 480 21.1 360( S.F. Lot 6 0 480 21.0 Totahomes 12 37.8 453 14.8 - Apartments 10.0 200 8.7 Apartments 40 7.0 230 12.2 Subtotal 354.7 2,280 100.0% School 8.0 Open Space 150.3 Quasi - Public 3.0 Comnercial 5.0 Park* 11.0 Balance to be negotiated within utility easements Roads" 35.6 TOTAL ACRES 567.6 *Required Park (28.5) * *Roads shown are not included in residential summary. Plan Features -- Single primary access off Summit Avenue. - -Lower density at the southern pori:ion of the site. - -The very lowest density housing along entry road and Summit Avenue frontage. - -Major arterial with expanded right -of -way through the lower two - thirds of the site. -- Highest density in the middle portion of the site. - -Open space /park uses at community core internal t) devel- opment to provide pedestrian linkage. i V '�1 - -The core is - Anchored by school /park site at south and com- mercial to the north: . -- Estate lots to the north. LA S_,hool 8.0 Open Space 137.5 Quasi- Public 7.5 Equestrian Center 14.6 Park* 9.7 Balance to be riegotiatec within utility easements Roads ** 20.5 TOTAL ACRES 567.6 *Required Park (20.0) * *Roads shown are not inclur.ed in residential summary. Plan Features - -Major arterial through project. - -Low density at southern portion of site. - -Loop road off ar»rial at the lower two - thirds of site. -- .4eighborhocd loops have expanded right -of -ways for pedes- trian circulation. -- Higher density in the middle portion of project. ALTERNATIVE 3 5ga P -_b1SW NVM - NEDITERRKNEAN VILLAGE PLAN' Cy L-AT-410 LSE MAP PRODUCT TYPE DU/AC AC DU PRODUCT Estate 2 71.3 143 8.9 8000 °S.F. Lot 3 122.0 3 2.2.8 6000 S.F. Lot 4 352.2 141 8.8 5000 F -F. Lot 5 348 21.7 3600-S.F. Lot 6 211.2 127 7.9 Townhomes 19.3 231 14.4 Apartments 20 1.31.3 244 15.2 Subtc�+ 369.8 1,600 100.0% S_,hool 8.0 Open Space 137.5 Quasi- Public 7.5 Equestrian Center 14.6 Park* 9.7 Balance to be riegotiatec within utility easements Roads ** 20.5 TOTAL ACRES 567.6 *Required Park (20.0) * *Roads shown are not inclur.ed in residential summary. Plan Features - -Major arterial through project. - -Low density at southern portion of site. - -Loop road off ar»rial at the lower two - thirds of site. -- .4eighborhocd loops have expanded right -of -ways for pedes- trian circulation. -- Higher density in the middle portion of project. U -- Highest density product type at the northern portion of project, the intention is to create a Mediterranean Village in the hillsides, housing types would be uphill and downhi:.l off a reduced road sectior. - -North of major arterial before the Mediterranean Village is devoted to open— space "uses, i.e., parts, schools and equestrian center. V `OL"5, HUNTERS RIDE° ENVIRANP -MTAL ISSUES Site Location and Description The subject property is a 568 -acre north - south oriented parcel located three miles west of Lytle Creek at the southern base of the San Gabriel Mountains in the'northern portion of the City of Fontana. (Exhibit 1). Summit Avenue and U.S. Interstate Highway 16 form the southern property boundary, and San Sevaine Creek, channelized in the south - ern, level portion of the property, runs along the western boundary. To the east and north the property merges with cultivated f4elds anQ the steep- ysidid ridges and canyons of the San Gabriel Mountains, respectively.. The area is essentially in a natural condition with few improvements -. It appears to hie been recently utilized as a hunting club. Interstate e- ectrical transmission lines cross the north - central portion of the pm.,o :ty from east to west. A utility power line extends no%:therly through the upper northern portion of the site. Eucalyptus trees are fairl, common alongside the dirt roads. A" give grass and scattered brush otherw.,se cover most of the areas. Other than a clt house,: a stone residencs, a small fishing pond, bird pens, aai�=ter;ance sheds and dirt roads, the only major improvements are z flood control diversion dike and levee on the west side of the site and a flood control levee on the southeast side. A couple of small water reservoirs anif sociated irrigation lines are situated in the vicinity of the electrical trans- mission lines. It is understood `_' &t they are supplied by a pipeline originating from old adits in the canyon floor farther north (elevation 2200+ feet). Masona:y ruins are located near the northern reservoir. They are thought to be those of an old winery built during ttie last century. - opography The property is situated astride San Sevaine Canyon and along its alluvial outwash plain, at the foot of the San Gabriel Mountain,, The southeast corner of the proposed development ab.,ts against Duncan Canyon Road which parallels the Devore Freeway. An approximate overall elevation dif- ferential of 1100 feet is present from the north to the south at the site. V _;Lo E LJ As shown in Figure 2, the southern and broader portion of the property consists of almost level terrain subjected to cultivation for over 100 years.- The elevation of this cul- tivated,terr.ain ranges from 1520 to 1760 feet above sea level, with overall drainage to the south primarily via channeliszed San Sevaine Creek along the western boundary and a flood control channel that cuts through the southeast corner of the property. Above the elevation of 1800 feet -- the effective break -ir.- slope of the San Gabriel Mountains -- the prperty narrows to become alr.ost coterminus wieh the steep :ides of San Se•.airse Canyon. At the northwest corner of the property there is a large spring, directly in the bed of can Sevaine Creek, that is reported to produce a constant supply of irrigation and drinking water. The highest point on the property is 2620 feet above sea level at itd northeast corner. Geological Hazards soils The approximate north one -third of the property (north of the electric tran3irission lines) is included in rugged far- rain of the San Gabriel Mountain foothills. Locally, the foothills are � r3e, ° =ain by layered metamor�..Uc rock. The rock units and ,_rig_.ng the site are expected to be rippable to depths on the order of 40 feet. However, large diameter boulders can be expected to be generated and present handling and grading constraints for sedimentary earth materials removed from the property. 01-fficulties during utilities ct.astructiol± should also be anticipated. The east flank of San Sevaine Canyon is covered by older terrace deposits rising as much as .approximately 150 feet above the canyon floor. The western edge contains younger alluvial soils and the southern portion is predominan.ly older alluvial flats (see Exhibit 3). Constraints Excavation for site development should be kept to minimum depths. Consideration should be given fo',^ incorporating large diameter boulders in deeper fills or otherwise removing them to designated disposal areas. All soils expos ^d at the site are suitaule for use in struc- tural fills- However, boulders over one foot in diameter will present grading constraints. Large boulders will require special handling and treatment and utilization in deeper fills. Building pad areas will re,luire ove-- excavation and recompac- tion of at least two to three feet to remove boulders and facilitate foundation construction. Some thought should also be givsn to underground utilities construction. These too, could require overexcavating to remove boulders and backfilling with boulder - cobble free gLaaular material. This should also be selective material, poseaibly generated at the site. Based on the types of onsite earth materials, road base preparation utilizing imported materials is not anticipated. After base preparation of- onsite materials, it is expected that asphalt ci;n be paved on native soils. Faulting and Seismicity As shown in Exhibit 4, the Cucamonga fault is believed to extend across the site in proximity and generally parallel to the electric-, transmission Sines. This tault is the eastern extension of the Sierra Madre fault system which experienced a magnitude 6.5 earthquake during February, 1971 in San Fernando Valley, The eastern part of the Cucamonga fault has also experienced non-damaging earthquake activity in recent years and is included by the State of California Special studies zone. Since the 1871 San Fernando earthquake, the absence of con- tinuing S L smic activity along the Sierra Madre system (Cucamonga, fault) makes the establishment of recurrence intervals for the Cucamonga fault nearly impossible. How- ever; it is possible that a reglay of the magnitude 6.5 San Fernando earthquake would be a likely recurrence somewhere along the fault system during the next 100 '_o 200 years. Sllch*an event (th' maximum probable event) 'f ap' centered at the site, would very likely cause ground ruj,:`;-_e aln,,, the fault and generate peak ground accelerations of over c.65g. A magnitude 6.5 =halo^ would be comparable '.o an intensity of VIII to IX me urea on the Modifiee Mercalli Intenc- ty Scale. The subject properly is also situated in an area which could be influenced by the San Jacinto faint zone a- San Andreas fault zone approximately four miles and eight miles to the t northeast, respectively. Both fault zpaes are also located within an area which could Subject the cite to around shaking in the event of a sev, art —Pke. Tne San Jacinto fault is considered t(, i._ --;kct:,ve major system in Souther - alifornia. The system is considered to be t. itially the atost c.. 11 a Constraints Based on the location of -the site to the faults discussed above, it is anticipated that appropriate building setbacks will. be required for any proposed development physically located near mainbreaks and any branches of the Cucamonga far.lt: Seismic parameters based crt a fault investigation and conformation with catest Uniform Building Codes and other local ordinances can be expected to satisfactorily mitigate the effects of potential site ground shaking. Secondary Seismic Phenomena Secondary hazards generally associated with intense earth- quake ground shaking are liquefaction, seiches, flooding (dam-or levee failurr.) landsiiding or falling rock, seis- mically induced _clement a,,d nround rupture. Other than consideration for seismic ir.du ---4 settlement, no secondary seismic hazards are anticipated it this time. Constraints Additional comprehensive geotechnical investigation is required to adequ?:ely address the potential for seismic induced settlement onsite. AIL this time, recommendations will be adequate to mitigate Inii constraint. Slope Stability Slope Analysis is shown in Er'iibit 5. Except for surficial "slumps" associated with weathering or accumulation: of soils covering ' -hese slopes, no gross Instabilities were observed in the metasediMentary rocks exposed at the site. The westerly edges of Terrace deposits exposed in Sa: sevaine Canyon have been scored by stream flcw over th- years and presently yield natural irregular westerly facie: eroded slopes as high as approximately SO feet. These slopes do not display any indications of instability and appear to be standing satisfactorily in their natural zondi- tion. Constraints it is anticipated that natural slopes will require stability analysis to verify the needs for set -back regsirements from top of slopes exposing Terrace, deposits. Surficial slumping may require removal of unsuitable material. This is expected to be minimal with respect to overall site grading. Depending on boulder conditions encountered during slope constv,ctiony an equipment width r_,lacement fill slope may be required for cut slopes graded J.n Terrace deposits and alluvial fan deposits. i 1-,,, 6 -n addition, selective grading may be' required for fill slopes to pre3vide uniform slope surfaces. Drainar-fFlood Control A co- )'e of small water reservoirs and associated irrigation line are situated in the vicinity of the electrical trans - ►nission lines. In addition to intermittent stream flow in the San Sevaine Canyon, ground water occurs in adits exca- vated in metamorphic rocks underlying Terrace deposit north of the Cucamonga fault zone. It appears to be of sufficient quantity to supply the needs for existing site facilities. Ground water south of the Cucamonga fault zone ranges between 200 and 640 feet. Whether or not more readily available, larger quantities of water might be available in of above the fault zo`.a are not known by us at this time. A. man -made flood control diversion dike and levee channel- izes San Savaine.Creek waters along the western edge of the property and a flood control levee crossing the southeast corner controls flows originating further, east. There is also an unimproved drainage course along the eastern prop- erty boundary (see Exhibit b). Constraints Subsurface ground water conditions are not expecte' to pose any significant constraints on site development. There are a significant number of phreatophytes observed in the San Sevaine Canyon. Although no springs or seeps were observed, this coul i be <: potential limited source of ground water, and should be further evaluated. Flocd control improvements appear to have mitigated flooding potertials for the most part. N :_vertheiess, depending on the intended use of the east portion of the property, some improvements may be necessary to direct anc control runoff in the meandering unimproved drainage course. Biology Preliminary research has revealed that there are a number of distinct biological habitats within the site boundaries. Exhibit 7 depicts the rough location of the areas described below. In the northern portion of the property, the lower slopes of the Zan Gabriel Mountains exhibit native chaparral and scrub vegetation. Much of the slopeland has been grazed over by sheep. The upper reach of the creak in San Sevaine Canyon V _3D exhibits native woodland species such as white alders, canyon oaks and California black walnuts. Bullock Canyon contains a mix. of riparian vegetation which extends south- ward downstream from the canyon. The alluvial fan at the base of the San Gabriel Mountains is characterised by alluvial fan scrub containing species of sage brush, buckwheat and deerweed. With the exception of the eucalyptus windrows onsite, the southern portion or the site is predominantly grassland. Constraints Further biological analysis is required. It is anticipated that portions of the Eucalyptus windrows should be retained. I£. development is planned for the northern portion of the site, sensitive vegetation may be found in the Bullock Canyon and north San Sevaine Canyon areas. Cultural Resources Preliminary investigation has indicated that there are no prehistoric archaeological sites recorded on the subject. property. Five areas have been identified onsite which contain structural remains 'in varying degrees of preserva- tion or modifications of landscape by intensive human activity. Exhiuit 8 illustrates the locations of the -yeas that may contain historic features. III t Area 1 contains a po_entia..ly historic limestone quarry, two circular pits excavated into solid rock and a low drainage diversion wall. Arca 2 contains a ranch house (probably dating around 1840), a small building (may have been used as a winery) and a cir- cular water reservoir. Area 3 exhibits the remains of a foundation of a saw mill and two additional water reservoirs. The trace of a wagon or stage coach road are the only poten- tially historic features within area 4. Area 5 contains a wood frame house faced with river cobbles built in 1918. The house is in excellent condition and is currently inhabited. Constraints A cultural investigation of the property should be performed to determine the hi3toric4,1 significance of onsite features. Pending completion of this report, some features may be pre- VV served and protected. a ll ) th 00 7- ......................... . .. Z, 22 22 Zr ;1.27 -27 HIGHL LOCATION MAP A7, . 711 V0, ri AN GABRIEL MTS.'-' n ci ND AVE A SPECIFIC PLAN HJUNTE : I. 03, PRERARED BY THE I . - - . RIDG C: CITY CF FONTANA E--- - EXHIBIT 1 - -�— _TOPOGRAPHY /ii r , !��' ♦�..;l y1r` �� l\'ll,�,✓ � �`p F�. (`..Tilly �IV �1�\v�Ji f-'" ._I .--i.r _ t •�. � �nf ri • ,•+• i tl a-cf: �r �� `a i'`�) t�l��. °ov '� /il• /��lrl1 ' r �. �.:G —''� T �; ti1 Jr t� ♦ Mist �� \c- /�.• ) :``lV.. ��/�•;�,3.', lni yl �' a _:y� - t ` )'.* r UL.ra• L y %( � •'i�_ � J) ;�.,:i� L if'• t� ut 4X`- '^ �-� '+t i {�'�• �il.,'><� [- t \� �l f��' >t�.� 4l �.a� / �� ` l •tj�;�•.!..• eete 'i ••,. c`�� y -, _ /� R y t a iii a��, tt,� a_ ) � •,-- =_ '_ f fit•:.'t. 1' ?. !.;L .- 'a`,._-- ��%1,�t 1� �I. �. �,.�'� �I��., ` Lf,4_.y 1.,.! �. � . r 1- �,.s` \,r.ir "\ - r/ivii'ti,{• [i ` 9t�•� r• J, � ^_ i 1,' •z,iti :f.00� r tv�`J%Il�`�%(f r ��'�� f '- i - if l� �;'�� . •Q-.P rLz),f.� ri-- I � , `��-.. �%P'.'�,,lj( �� /� 1 `'j /`t�let.�•� l ��::�� M.: r � r` -C ..�- \/� t( �, :...r '•✓ `1•, 1 ��a'�..,lf }1/3!'x; fR�%� � 1, ' r� �, �Lj \�1s�';i��:! �', � �^r ` `�'�(1 �`-"1 `� i �7 J •�,1 `�''"�.ti'''��1 >S �i� ✓a �"" �1�' ^� ''/ 11r /'r t/� �•^�I,,,��y..�fp1�"� ✓y l�i1 �L, j� r -�.. r •'i. YC t * rt t �V:l �, %i T,j� N (�.�. i� � i� N %' �,- r ..��'\,, �� y psi .r� � �,t tar✓'" � n� J " �^-'`�•�'t lil.��' ✓ ! •_•- ;_ _„j�.. -° j "z- _ OOH f ,J !�, � � : �♦ 1 +lY♦ v i „i..>...s.: ` }yam"°' ♦ i �' i,.1t•.1 f._. "��_r; /�—'� /taw% ' ```• F /' 22 : 22 -� Zy Tani ly2 =_— � • �'UNT� I �A SPECIFIC PL; :J ARID C i �C TY OF O TANA T ,. , l _ EXHIBIT 2 -A SOILS J1 (t•x r. 1 .: -' 1.1 "•:�.1 • ♦l { .,\Na 1�`'Z/�.• J�. I ��'.' ^ r� t •. }% t I ' -f t� I '�I! grit V M `�Vf� �r ?U" A l ., llZ 15 t♦ !'� ,� 1 �: Prof •••• � ,, (Y�,r•�� J + i ' I ,vr Ill \J' `il ,l : • r ` �� 4t � V �, \��.J _' ./- _♦�0 -�M1I� )'•� !may`. ♦ r� �. 'f �,`•`� : ✓J r _ t • J (, � 7 .` Nlt .: ._� t _`•70 001 �= i r r_: =v�L .... • I'� at 4��tuldti rraJ<t�ll�r • I ,�--- � zy. >c �'I tr atl�l ,[li tl�,e,r. _ -. J _ ��! . r i� • s• 17 r i/, 4,: (201, i OHI— _ —sxs� 44" Id 1914 i� F 'j til' it YI • 22 [2 ,I"I.I�.ilJlie ry(u1�tr !wi Fr I _. t711r L91•IM t — i _ r, �� i � F 11 � 'I D� Itp'•'F"�l5 al �I:v.11l�d'RVJ'�I — _m� a- aaaaa< s_asase 1.. LEGEND '•. psi— .Younger Alluvium Oolt— Older Alluvium (Flats) f �.2 t�' Oo12— Older Alluvial Fan 1 j ma �� Ex _ Pref— Metamorphic Co 1: I SPECIFIC AN I dU T R , � e R RIDGE I {PREPARED By THE I P:- FRIDGE I CITY OF FONTANA I � ..r�� . EXHIBIT 3 , v��-rt IA SEISMIC HAZARDS t� !I tom• "`' if ! V ' _ i J �/ L rr ♦ c 1.� ^� c C_ . �' t -^� ll ,/ , /fit t �v j° a► ,.. _r' �.••. 22 EOM` "1 • r - }'mot HUNTERS ' �A SPECIFIC PLAN �,�� ,,,NTERS � � 2 .' •• (PREPARED B`t THE i'1_� RlDGc I CITY OF FONTANA I EXHIBIT 4 1 2 - - - � C AINUt.W. 9G .�Y LEGEND 0 -10% SLOPE 1 I] 11 -15% SLOPE ' + 's " "•rr . 10 -25% SLOPE 26% AND OVER I i j 3 ' i IA SPECIFIC FLAN :" ERS,i "` iHUNTI I , RIDGrl PREPARED BY THE 11 - ICITY_OF E= FONTANA I :=~ .:� � EXHIBIT 5 DRAINAGE/FLOOD CONTROL 1 '� �1;�� „ � �\ � �� ✓� .mss i /�,r,�i��tl,' t� \t o��, r titer, �,t7t f `cc,;, ey i—•• -% )1 �j t 7` -Pr'Ti St"r .� � � � (1 /11 � `; J - -�(J i$ •�'rLlr�/I+ �rl , 7)i1��r }� ?l�lf� + " �.y�ss��.►►ca%��1 ,,./i�..f `t+ �iiL1�11� •l-��t��l�� \ (,t ��. N, °.'�f rrti 1!(\ ��S + /�' f � i l4.Kj� ! ; r9....'• r• „�i �; „ "'�%�'� �•,,�a : �,{ 'i t f ttr`��- .r/ (,� fY (?,lam' �'�� .� t?^ � r ,� . 1A+'�'�SJfi� 1 '; `��i . ir°J t .Sw �,•, 1: y, BAN GABRIEL MTB �- } �l`i4 zi Ir ii3Athl7RGE CO:�as� Z t I "vlJ > a e✓i 1 = z:. H� �a !'7" �� :A SPEC IFiC PLAN 6 �,1 t (ilDr PREPARED BY THE, c , ;ITY OF FONTANA ! — t EXHIBIT 6 VEGETATION 171 LA t--IGRASSLAND - EUCALYPTUS WINDROWS =.....,RIPARIAN NATIVE 4`4*WOODLAND M]2�CHAPARRAL SCRUB 11A SPECIFIC PLAN UNTERS I iPREPARED BY THE 17 RIDGIE CIT','OFc'ONTANAiy��— EXHIBIT 7 I P—aa - COW VEGETATION 171 LA t--IGRASSLAND - EUCALYPTUS WINDROWS =.....,RIPARIAN NATIVE 4`4*WOODLAND M]2�CHAPARRAL SCRUB 11A SPECIFIC PLAN UNTERS I iPREPARED BY THE 17 RIDGIE CIT','OFc'ONTANAiy��— EXHIBIT 7 I P—aa -