Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1986/01/22 - Agenda Packet ....... TOT, l r 9 Ca w w (D 0 s1 w ro � w . 0 xro m N rr w N. N NCO Q m c.Aw� )s v. ? CITY OF a AGE\-DA 1977 - WEDNUSDAY JANUARY 22,1986 7:00 P.M. LIONS PARK COMMUNITY CENTER 9161 BASE LINE RANCHO CUCAMONGA,CA11FORNIA A C T 1 0 N L Pledge of Allegiance IL Ron Call Commissioner Barker,X Commissioner Rempel X Commissioner Chitiea XX Commissioner Stout X Commissioner McNiel X IIL Announcements APPROVED AS MENDED IV' Approval of Minutes 5-0 November 13,1985 V. Consent.Calendar The following Consent'Calendar items are expected to be routine and non-controversial. They-will be acted on by the Commission at one time without discussion it anyone has concern over any item, it should be removed for discussion. A. REMOVED FOR DISCUSSION A. DESIGN REVIEW FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 10076 '- APPROVED 5-0 LIGHTNER DEVELOPMENT - Design Review comprising 19 With understanding that staff single family homes on 6AI acres(L )roved 19 lot subdivision will include the realignment TT 10076)in the Low Residential(2-4 du/ae)District located of Banyan in the capital at the northeast corner of London and Liberty APN 201 improvements program when 251-050. (Continued from January 8,1986 meeting) possible. B. ENVIRONMENTAL PMESSMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT i B.C.D. & E. - APPROVED 5-0 REVIEW 85-47 FORECAST -A proposal to develop a two- story office building totaling 10,613 square feet on.66 acres located on the east side of Utica, north of-Civic Center Drive, in Subarea 7 of the industrial Specific Plan(Industrial Park District)-APN 208-062-08. C. DESIGN REVIEW FOR TRACT 10046 - LEWIS HOMES Design "Review of building elevations and footprints for a residential subdivision,of 18.9 acres into 27 lots located on the north side of Hillside,west of Hermosa-APN 201-532-1 <, through 27. D. DESIGN_REVIEW OF,LOT 20-26, 38-61 OF TRACT 12650-1 THE DEER CREEK COMPANY - The first phase, of development for Tentative Tract 12650, a residential subdivision of 147.16 acres in the Very Low Residential District(0-2 du/aG) into 225 lots located on the east side of Haven Avenue, sauth of the Hillside Floon Channel, north of Hillside.Road-APN 231-121-24. E. DES?GN REVIEW FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 11932 - C.T.K. INC.-Design review of footprints and building elevations for an approved Tentative Tract of a residential subdivision. of 2.55 acres into 10 lots in the Low Residential District (2-4 du/ac) located on the north side of Finch Avenue, west of Haven Avenue-APN 202-191-15. VI. Public Hearings The following items are public hearings in which concerned individuals may voice their opinion of the related project. Please wait to be recognized by the Chairman and address the Commission by stating your nacre and address. All such opinions shall be limited to 5 minutes per individual for each project. F. APPROVED 5-0 F. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIC .L USE PERMIT 85-38 VICTORY CHAPEL - Non-construction Conditional Use Permit to establish a:church in an existing building in a multi-tenant industrial park within Subarea 4 (General Industrial)of the Industrial Specific Plan,located on the northwest corner of Archibald and 7th(9618 7th Street)- APN 209-171-47. (Continued from January 8,1986 meeting.) G. APPROVED 54 G. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 9530- (Ootion 2 se ected - offer WALKER A division of 7.7 acres into parcels in the of dedication•for inter- 'ueneral Industrial District(Subarea 13)Located on the north change) side of 6th Street, east and west of We;w Rochester Avenue- APN 229-261-38. (Continued from January 8,1986 meeting.) H. APPROVED 5-0 H. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84-03-SAN GABRIEL VALLEY LABOR ASSOCIATION - A request to retain a. 720 square foot lTX60' trailer for temporary office space on a 15.25 acre site in t,e "M11 District, located on the north side of Arrow Highway, west of Cucamonga Creek Channel, 8706 Arrow Highway APN 207-211-01. 1. +WITHDRA'WN AT REQUEST L ' ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE OF APPLICANT PERMIT 85-23 - JENSEN VALLEY PLANT GROWERS - A request to install a trailer as a temporary office and 3 storage sheds for a wholesale nursery business on 21.17 acres of land within the Southern California Edison Cordiior located at 12050 Arrow Highway, easi of Rochester ;AIM 227-021-47,53,50. I r J.411 APPROVED 4.-0-0-1 J. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT A'r,D CONDITIONAL USE Rempel +abstained) PERMIT 85-42 -COLE SCHAEFER A request to operate a 24-hour emergency ambulance 'station with quarters in a tener:t space of ass existing building at the Rancho Cucamonga Business Park, 10722 Arrow Route, Suite 206,_in !Subarea 7 of the Industrial Specific Plan-APN 203-052-21. K. APPROVED F-O K. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 85-40 SLOAN-A request to operate a two station beauty salon including manicurist service within an existing health center (Star's Aerobics Fitness/Tanning Center)in the General Industrial District, (S:-yarea 3), located in the Cucamonga Business Park at the southwest corner of Arrow Highway and Archibald Avenue-APN 209-021-39(Portion). L. APPROVED 4-0-0-1 L. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 9612- Rempel abstained BARTON --A division of 13.22 acres of land it-o 3 parcels in the Industrial Park District(Subarea 7),located on the south side of Foothill Boulevard,V ast of Haven Avenue-APN 208- 351-48,49,&50. M. CONTINUED'AT-REQUEST M.. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 9180- OF APPLIC;V 'TO 2-26-86 LANDCO FINANCIAL CORPORI'._TION --A division of 6.47 gross acres into 3 parneis_in the General Industrial/Rail Served District, Subarea 2, located on the south s`de of 9th Street and west of Hellman Avenue APN 209-013-24, N. APPROVED 3•2 N. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN Rempel, Chi ti ea - No) AMENDMENT'86-OIA HAWKINS-A request to amend the Land Use Map of the General Plan from Low Density Residential (2-4 'du/ac) to Low Medium Density Residential (4-8 du/ac)for 13.55 acres of land located on the south side of Feron Boulevard,east of Archibald-APN 209-055-02, 03, 14. 0. 'APPROVED 4-1 O. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 9687- Undergrounding of 1i.nes TURNER-:TONES -A division of 9.23 acres into L �,arcels in not required on•4th St. the General Industrial Area (Subarea 14) located at the where 12 kV lines exist with northeast corner of Santa Anita an: 4th_Street - APN 229- 66 KV, 283-41&42. (Related File: DR 851-46) P. APPROVED 5-0 P. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 9670 R.C. ASSOCIATES 11-A division of 32.6 acres of land into 2 parcels in the General In,�47>trial category (Subarea 11) located on the north side of kx',Street,west side of Buffalo- APN 229-261-78. Related File: DR 85-49. VIL Ne w Horsiness Q. APPROVED '5-0 Q. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT NV: "{ REVIEW 85-49 - SANTA ANITA DEVELOPMENT 'E ` CORPORATION - A phased development, of a UR warehouse/distribution bidlding totaling 403,875 square feTet are ` with 255,950 square feet for Phase I on.18.33 acares of land -th in the General Industrial District(Subarea 11)located on the t th west side of Buffalo,north of 6th Street-APN 229-261-7$ :est ` (Related Fie: Parcel'Map 9670.) R. APPROVED 5-0 R. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT t.'V' REVIEW 85-46 - BONES The development of a 150,090 square foot warehouse distribution building and two light .,u industrial buildings totaling 41,100 square feet on 9.23 acres l of?and in the General Industrial District(SuF-3rea 14)located at the northeast corner of.4th Street and Santa Anita-AP3d. t 229-283-41 and 42. (Related File: PM 9687) ?9 VIIL Public Comments. <:or This is the time and place for the general public to address the : th Commission. Items to be discussed here are those which do not •ssic already appear on this agenda. LX. Adjournment 9:05 p.m. The planning Commission has adopted Administrative Regulations inn that set an 1L p.m. adjournment time. If items go`beyond that t .o time, they sham be heard only with the consent of the Commission. ..fiey The Planning Commission will adjourn to a workshop on February 31�..:3nni 1986 to discuss general revisions and .update of the Subarea;.to Regulations within the Industrial Specific Plan. The meeting'will etior be held at the Rancho Cucamonga Neighborhood Center, 9791 W ?? Arrow Highway,Room 4,beginning at 6:00 p.m. 4� s H•IhAM CMAFFEi PYGIDVALP RR•' _ t MAP Wilson � � i � •' • i CHAFFEY ,1 !. _ COLLEGE • ..•:. , .l 4- : \. 3 � �..FMI I i ti •frr , mm r tom ' • vKlou,W t,• s_ -- ---i __- =tacT F r. �110H5 PA CIOYa HALL Is cuu+n+u-ruasn c^u•.. Prmn_A,� .. OHIAH10.NFEHHafIONAL AINPOHI' CRY OF RAUC-Ij? CITY OF RANCHO CL'Ci�\'IONGk yam r- C. PLA.NL 1NR'G CO3N,&jISSI0N AGENDA 1977 WEDNESDAY JANUARY 22,198( 7:00 p.m. LIONS PARR COMMUNITY CENTER 9161 BASE LINE RANCHO CUCAMONGA,CAT ORNIA L Pledge of Allegiance U. Roll Call Commissioner Barker Commissioner Rempel Commissioner Chities Commissioner Stout Commissioner McNiel IN. Announcements IV. Aggro,a;zf Minutes i November 13,1985 V. Consent Calendar The following Consent Calendar items are expected to be routine and non-controversial.' They will be acted on by the Commission at one time without discussion. If anyone has concern over any item, it should be removed for discussion. A. DESIGN REVIEW FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 10076 - LIGHTNER DEVELOPMENT -Desic:u Review comprising 19 single family hotoes'on 6.9 acres(approved 19 lot subdivision TT 10076)in the Low Residential(2-4 du/ac)District located at the northeast corner of London and Liberty- APN 201- 251-050. (Continued from January 8,1986 meeting) B. ENVIRONMENTAL- ASSESSMENT FOR" DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 85-47 —FORECAST -A proposal to develop a two- story office building totaling 10,613 square feet on.66 acres located on the east side of Utica, north of civic Center Drive, in Subarea 7 of the Industrial Specific Plan(Industrial Parts District) APN 208-062-08. C. DESIGN REVIEW FOR TRACT 10046 LEWIS-HOMES` - Design Review of building elevations and fflotpcint—s�or a residential,subdivision of 18.9 acres into 27 lots located on s. the north side of Hillside,west of Hermosa-APN 201-532-1 through 27 I, E: ......... r D. DES_I_GN,REVIEW CF LOT 20-26,38-61 OF TRACT 12650-1- THE DEER CREEK COMPANY The first phase of development for Tentative Tract 12650, a residential subdivision of 147.16 acres in the Very .Low Residential District(0-2 du/ac) into 225 lots located on the east side of Haven Avenue, south of the Hillside Floon Channel,north of Hillside Road-APN 201-121-24. E. DESIGN REVIEW FOR TENTATIVE'TRACT 11932 - C.T.K., INC. -Design review of footprints and building elevations for an approved Tentative Tract of a residential subdivision of 2.55 acres into 10 lots in the .Low Residential District(2-4 du/ac) located on the north side of Finch Avenue, west of Haven Avenue-APN 202-191-15. Vh Public Hearing The following items are public hearings in which concerned individuals may voice their opinion of the related project. PIease wait to be recognized by the Chairman and address the Commission by stating your name and address. All such opinions shall be limited to 5 minutes per individual for each project. F. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 85-38 VICTORY CHAPEL Non-construction Conditional Use Permit to establish a ch-oreh in an existing building in a multi.-tenant-industrial park within Subarea 4 (General Industrial)of the Industrial Specific Plan,located on the northwest corner of Archibald and 7th(9618 7th Street) APN 209-171-47. (Continued from January 8,1986 meeting.) G. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 9530- WALKER A division of 7.7 acres into 2 parcels in the General Industrial District(Subarea 13)located on the north side of 6th Street, east and west of New Rochester venue- APN 229-261-38. (Continued from January.8,1986 H. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84-03-SAN GABRIEL VALLEY LABOR ASSOCIATION - A_request to retain a 720 square foot 121X601 trailer for temporary office space on a 15.25 acre site in tha t'M" District, located on the north side of Arrow Highway, west of Cucamonga Creek Channels 8706 Arrow Highway-APN 207-211-01. I. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 85-23 - JENSEN VALLEY PLANT GROWERS - A request to install a trailer as a temporary office and 3 storage sheds for a wholesale nursery business on 21.17 acres of land within the Southern California Edison Corridor located at 12050 Art°ow Highway, east of Rochester -APN 227-021-47,53,50. it J. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE 11 PERMIT 85-42 COLE SCHAEIER-A request tc operate a 24-hour emergency ambulance station with quarters in a tenant space of an existing building at the Rancho Cucamonga Business Park, 10722 Arrow Route, Stte 206,in Subarea 7 of the.Industrial Specific Plan-APN 208-052= 1. P 2 K. ENVIRONMENTAL,ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 85-40-SLOAN-A request to operate a two-station beauty salon including manicurist service within an existing health center(Star's Aerobics Fitness/Tanning Center)in the General: Industrial District (Subarea 3), located in the Cucamonga Business Park at the southwest corner of Arrow Highway and Archibald Avenue APN 209-021-39(Portion). L. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 9612- BARTON -A division of 13.9.2 acres of land into 3 parcels in the Industrial Park District(Subarea 7),located on the south side of Foothill Boulevard,east of Haven Avenue-APN 48 351-48,49,&50. M. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL AIAP 9180 LANDCO FINANCIAL CORPORATION;- A division of 6.47 gross acres into 3 parcels in the General Industrial{Rail Served District, Subarea 2, located on the south side of 9th Street and west of Hellman Avenue-- PN 209-013-24. N. ENVIRONMENTAL` ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT'86-01A-HAWKINS-A,request to amend the Land Use Map of the. General Plan from Tow Density Residential (2-4 du/ac) to Low Medium Density Residential (4-8 du/ac)for 1355-acres of land located on the south side of Peron Boulevard,east of Archibald-AP14 209-055-02, 03, 14. ` O." ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 9687- TURNER-JaNES A"division of 9.23 acres into 3 parcels in the General Industrial Area (Subarea 14) located at the northeast corner of Santa Anita and 4th Street - APN 229 283-41 dt 42. (Related File: DR 85-46) P. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL'MAP 9670-- R.C. ASSOCIATES 11-A division of 32.6 acres of land into 2 parcels in the General. Industrial category (Subarea 11) located on the north side of 6th Street,west side of Buffalo- APN 229-261-78. Related File: DR 85-49. ',r T a 11L New Business Q. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 85-49 - SANTA ANITA DEVELOPMENT' CORPORATION - A' .phased development of a warehousejdistributior, building totaling 403,875 square feet with 255,950 square feet for Phase I on 18.83 scares of land in the General Industrial District(Subarea 11)located on the west side of Buffalo, north of 6th Street-APN 229-:fit-78. (Related Fjle, : Parcel Map 9670.) R. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 85-46 JONES - The development of a 150,000 square foot warehouse distribution building and two light industrial buildings totaling 41100 square feet on 9.23 acres of land in the,General Industrial District(Subarea 14)located at the northeast corner of 4th Street and Santa Anita-APN 229-283741 and 42. (Rely:ed File PM 9687) V11L Public Comments , This is the time and place for the general,public to address the Commission. Items to be discussed here are those which do not already appear on this agarula. DL Adjournment The Planning Commission has adopted Administrative Regulations that set an 11 p.m. adjournment time. If items go beyond that time,they shall be heard;only with the consent of the Commission. The Planning Commission will adjourn to a workshop on February 3, 1986 to discuss ,general revisions and update of the Subarea Regulations within the Industrial Specific Plan. The meeting will be held at the Rancho Cucamonga Neighborhood Center, 9791 .arrow Highway,Room 4,oeginc ng at 6:00 p.m. 1 I Y MAP � .. , --------------------------- f , wrre. r 1aRwA • C cvArsfr Acc�ar.l•AAt� ` CRAFF" 1, CCLLf GE , � •� BAm.n ..mr, ♦ .�~ ii Suem., •I 1`.IA _ o , �LIriH$ PAp ��CIT TAMALL •' j y � f - ! . . Ti 0 cuc..nv..A_msn ccsw., xrcrgv.r p 0YfAR10 r'Irf RMAlmRAL A,R►ORI: C(TY OF RA:KItt<7 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting January 22, 1986 Chairman Dennis Stout called the Regular Meeting of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commis ion to order at 7:00 p.m. The meeting was held at Lions Park Community :enter, 9161 Base Line Road, Rancho Cucamonga, California. Chairman Stout then led ii the pledge of allegiance. MOLL CALL COMMISSIOQRS: PRESENT: David Barker, Suzanne Chitiea, Larry McNiel, Herman !Tempel,, Dennis Stout ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Brad Buller, City Planner; Dan Coleman, Senior' Planner; Nancy Fong; Associate Planner; Barrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer; Lloyd Hubbs, - City Engineer; Barba;, Krall, Assistant Civil Engineer; James Markman, iCity Attorney; Janice Reynolds, Secretary; Alan Warren, Assistant Planner,; Chris Westman, Assistant Planner ANNOUNCEMENTS Brad Buller, City Planner, ann ...,Ted that a letter had been received from the applicant for Item I, Conditional Use Permit 85-23,� Jensen Vailey Plant Growers, withdrawing their request for consideration' at this time. Barrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer, announced that the applicant for Item M, Environmental Assessment and Parcel Map 9180, Landco, had submitted a letter requesting continuance for one month. Chairman Stout opened the public hearing for Environmental Assessment and.. Parcel Map 9180, Landco. There were no comments. Motion: t,oved by Barker, seconded by McNiel, unanimously carried, to continue the public hearing for Parcel Map 9180 to February 26, 1986. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion: Moved by McNiel, se,.onded by Chit V unanimously carried, to approve the November 13, 1985 Planning Commission Kinutes with minor word changes to pages 14 and 19 as requestee �y Commissioner Chitiea. CONSENT CALENDAR A. DESIGN REVIEW FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 13076 - LIGHTNER DEVELOPMENT - Design Review comprising 19 singe family homes on 6.9 acres approved 19 lot 4 subdivision TT 10076) in the Low Residential (2-4 du/ac) District located at the northeast corner of London and Liberty - APN 201-251-050. (Continued from January 8, 1986 meeting) B. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 85-47 - FORECAST A proposal o develop a two-story office 6uilding totaling square feet on .66 acres located on the east side of Utica, north of Civic Center Drive, in Subarea 7 of the Industrial Specific Plan (Industrial Park District) - APN 2084M-08. C. DESIGN REVIEW FOR TRACT 10046 - LEWIS HOMES Design Review of building elevations anci footprints for a residential subdivision :)f 18.9 acres into 27 lots located on the north side of Hillside, west or Hermosa APN 201- 532-1 through 27. D. DESIGN REVIEW OF LOT 20-26, 38-61 OF TRACT 12650-1 - THE DEER CREEK C - The first phase of developmentor Tentative rac , a residential subdivision of 147.16 acres in the. Very Low Residential District (0-2 du/ac) into r-25 lots located on the east side of Haven Avenue, south of the Hillside Floon. Channel, north of Hillside Road - APN 201-121-24. E. DESIGN REVIEW FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 11932 - C.T.K., INC. - Design review of 0o pr n s an building elevations or an approve entative Tract of a residential subdivision of 2.55 acres into 10 lots in the Low Residential District (2-4 du/ac) Located on the north side of Finch Avenue, west of Haven Avenue - APN 202-191-15. Commissioner Chitiea requested the removal of Item A from the Consent Calendar. Brad _Buller, City Planner, advised that the Commission had received an addendum to the Resolution for Tentative Tract 11932 regarding the sound attenuation wall. i Planning Commission Minutes -2- January 22, 1986 Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded by Barker, unanimously carried to adopt the remaining Consent Calendar items., with the inclusion of the addendum to the Resolution for Tentative Tract 11932. Item A - Design Review For Tentative Tract 10076 --Lightner Lloyd Hubbs, City Engineer, gave an overview of the continuation of Banyan Street issue which was before the Commission. Mr. Hubbs advised that the continuation of Banyan through an S-curve to the east seemed to be a viable solution and suggested that the Commission might direct staff to look into this alternate as a future capital improvement project. Chairman Stout stated that the. Tentptive Tract calls for a temporary cul-de- sac at the end of Banyan and suggested that it be removed and substituted with a barrier so that it matches the other side of the street until such time as the street continues through. He suggested that the Desi3Sn Review be approved with the understanding that staff would be directed to make every effort to place the street continuation in the capital improvements program as soon as possible. Commissioner Rempel was concerned with not opening the street up so that a vehicle could turn around. Chairman Stoup stated that he didn't see the need for the expense of putting in a cul-de-sac since the street is 44 feet curb-to-cu,•b, which is wider than most streets. Commissioner Chitiea agreed with Commissioner Rempel and stated that there are other streets in this City designed this way which requires vehicles to pull into resident's driveways to turn around. Commissioner McNiel stated that the expense is not such that the cul-de-sac should not be provided and did not see this is as a major is4;ue. He stated that his concern was that the bridge be constructed to provide for the continuation. Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded by Barker, unanimously carried, to adopt the Resolution approving Design Review for Tentative Tract 10076 with the understanding ;that the continuation of Banyan will be placed on the City's i . Capital Improvements Program as soon as possible. PUBLIC HEARINGS G F. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 85-38 - VICTORY CHAPEL Non-construction Conditional Use Permit to establish a c urc in an existing building in a multi-tenant industrial park within Subarea 4 (General Industrial) of the Industrial Specific Plan, located on the northwest corner of Archibald and 7th (9618 7th Street) - APN 209-171- 47. (Continued from January 8, 1986 meeting.) Planning Commission Minutes -3 January 22, 1986 _v Chris Westman, Assistant Planner, reviewed the staff report. Chairman Stout opened the public hearing. Alex Nilson, applicant, was concerned with condition 7 of the Resolution which limited the use of the building for assembly or group meetings to the weekend and after 6:00 p.m. on weeknights. Reverend Wilson explained that a women's Bible study attended by approximately 25-30 people will be conducted on Tuesday mornings. He .additionally advised that a Bible seminar would be held for eight days in May and in November froxi &0 0 a,m. to 1 p.m. which wouli9 be attended by approximately 225 people. Brad Bulier, City Planner, suggested with regard to the bi-annual Bible seminars, rather than amend the conditions of approval for the Conditional Use Permit the applicant could apply for a Temporary Use Permit in order to gain approval for the Bible seminar. He advised that th:.iigh there may not be a problem with the women's Bible study, t:e seminars might be of a magnitude to adversely impact surrounding busineses. Dan Coleman, Senior Planner, suggested a modification to the Resolution which addressed the issue. Commissioner Chitiea asked if the api,"Icant would have all Uniform Bui'ding Code and Fire Marshall conditions complied .pith prior to,occupancy. Mr. Wilson replied that he would have all conditions met. There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Motion: Moved by Barker, seconded by Rempel, to adopt the Resolution approving Conditional Use Permit 85-38 with an amendment to condition 7 to allow religious assembly and group meetings wh;:'- exceeds the allocated parking spaces for this unit only during the weekend and after 6:00 p.m. on weeknights. The Bible seminar is to be handled under the Temporary Use Permit process. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER, REMPEL, CHITIEA, MCNIEL, STOUT NOES: 60MMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried G. ENVIP.ONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 9530 - WALKER - A division of 7.7 acres :n o 2 parcels in the Genera Industrial Ustrict (Subarea 13) located on the north side of 6th Str'aet, east and went of New Rochester Avenue APN 229-261-38. (Continued from January 8, 1986 meeting,) Barr, Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer, reviewed the staff report. Planning Commission Minutes -4 January 22, 1986 Chairman Stout opened the public hearing. Bud Roberts, representing the applicant, concurred with the findings of the Staff Report, Resolution and Conditions of approval. Mr. Roberts referred to Exhibit B of the report and pointed out t3at -the parcel size was actually .66 of an acre, not one-half of an acre. There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Chitiea agreed with all recommendations by staff, and additionally stated that option 2 to require an offer of dedication should be required at this time. Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded to McNiel of issue a Negative Declaration and adopt the Resolution approving Environmental Dsessment and Parcel Map g530 with the requirement for an offer of dedication fo., the intierchange to be constructed from the Route 15 Freeway to 6th Street. Potion carried by the following vote: A:ES: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEF, MCNIEL, BARKER, REMPEL, STOUT NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried H. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84-03 - SAN GABRIEL VALLEY LABOR ASSOCIATION -'A request to retain a 720 square foot j12'XF,0') trailer for temporary office space on a 15.25 acre site in the "M'-' District, located on the north side i of Arrow Highway, west of Cucamonga �°eek Channel, 8706 Arrow Highway - �# APN 207-211-01. Alan Warren, Assistant Planner, reviewed x ff report. Commissioner Chitiea asked if another trailer existed on the site. Mr. Warren replied that the temporary office trailer was the only trailer which existed on this site; however, the property immediately adjacent to this parcel also contained a trailer. Chairman Stout opened the public hearing. There were no comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Motion: Moved by Barker, seconded by Rempel, to adopt the Resolution approving Conditional Use Perr.*t 84-03. Motion carried by the followin; vote: AISS: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER, REMPEL, CHITIEA, MCNIEL, STOUT HOES: C014MISSIONERS: NONE Pla-, in ;sion Minutes -5- January 22, 1986. ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE wcarried I. ENVIRONMENTAL. ASSESSME!:T A140 CONDITIONAL UbE PERMIT 85-23 - JENSEN VALLEY A request to install a trailer as a temporary office and-a storage s e s for a wholesale nursery business on 21.17 acres of land withii the Southern California Edison 'Corridor located at 12050 tirrow Hig' ay, east of Rochester - APM 227-021-47, 53, 50. Chairman Stout advise' that this ,m had been withdrawn at the request of the applicant. �J. ENVIRONMENTAL- ASSESSMENT AED CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 85-42 - COLE SCHAEFER request to opera eta --four emergency am u ance station with q"arters in a tenant space of an existing building at the Rancho Cucamonga Business Park, 10722 Arrow Route, Suite 206, in Subarea 7 of the Industrial Specific Plan - APN 208-052-21. Commissioner Rie _stepped down from the podium and abstained from vote due to a possible c lick of interest. Alan Warren, at Planner, reviewed the staff report. Chairman S`. at questioned the licensing procedure for San Bernardino County. Chairman Stout opened the public hearing. Pat McAlmona, representing the applicant, responded to Chairman Stout's question by advising that there are no legal findings at this point as to what can be done with respect to the licensing procedure. Mr. McAlmond concurred with the findings of the Staff Report, Resolution and Conditions of Approval. Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by McNiel, to issue a•Negative Declaration- and adopt the Revolution approving Environmental Assessment and Conditional Use Permit C5-42.; Motion carried by the following vote: i AYES: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA, MCNIEL, BARKER, REMPEL, STOUT NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSTAIN. COMMISSIONERS: REMPEL -carried C: Planning Commission Minutes -6- January 22, 1986 K. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 85-40 - SLOAN` - A request to operate a two-station beauty sa on ins u ing manicurist service within" an existing health center '(Star`s Aerobics Fitness/Tanning Center) it the General Industrial District (Subarea 3), located in the Cucamonga Business Park at the southwest corner of Arrow Highway and Archibald Avenue - APN 209-021-39 (Portion). Nancy Fong, Associate Planner, reviewed the staff report. Chairman Stout opened the public hearing. Eva Sloan, Applicant, concurred with the findings of the staff report, Resolution and Conditions of Approval. There were no further cowatents, therefore the public hearing was closed. Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded by McNie1-, to adopt the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and Ccnditionai U-z Permit 85-40. Motion carried by the following vote; AYES: COMMISSIONERS: REMPEL, MCNIiL, BARKER, CHITIEA,. STOUT NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS NONE -carried L. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL CRAP 9612 - BARTON - A division of 222 acres of landinto 3 parses in the n us real Park District (Subarea 7), located-on the south side of Foothill Boulevard, east of Haven Avenue - APN 208-351-48, 49, & 50. Commissioner Rempel stepped down from the podium and ab,taia?d from vote due to a possible conflict of interest. Barbara Krall, Assistant Civil Engineer, reviewed the staff report, Commissioner Chitiea asked if parking had been addressed at this point. Ms. Krall replies; that any building on the vacant parcel would have to come before Planning Commission prior to construction and parking would be addressed at that time. Chairman Stout opened the public hearing, Jim Barton, 8409 Utica, applicant, stated that the reason for the change in the map was to put permanent financing on the building and to open up the parcel in the center to enable construction of the two structures and the parking structure. Planning Commission Minutes -7'- January 22, 1986 There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Motion: Moved by Ba^ker, seconded by McNiel, to issue a Negative Declaration and adopt the Resolution approving Environmental AssEssment and Parcel Map 9612. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER, MCNIEL, CHITIEA, STOUT NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIr':`rRS: NONE ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: REMPEL -carried M. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 9180 - LANDCO FINANCIAL CORPO I - A division of 6.41 gross acres into 3 parcels in the General Inaustrial7kail Served District, Subarea 2, located. on the south side of 9th Street and west of Hellman Avenue - APN 209-013-24. Chairman Stout announced that this item had been granted a continuance under the Announcments sectio„ of this agenda. N. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 86-01A HAWKINS - A request to amend the Land Use ap of the General Plan from ow ensity Residential (2-4 du/ac) to Low Medium Density Residential (4-8 du/ac) for 13.55 acres of land located on the south side of Feron Boulevard, east of Archibald - APN 209-055-02, 03, 14. Brad Buller, City Planner, reviewed the staff report. Commissioner Barker asked if the project was a market rate project, could the developer come in with a request for a bonus thereby increasing the density? Mr. Buller replied that a 25% density bonus could be possible which would increase the number of units from G to 1v. He additionally advised that this would require additional review by both the Planning Commission and the City Council, if requested by the applicant. Chairman Stout opened the public hearing. Tracy Tibballs, 10522 Wilson, Rancho Cucamonga, addressed the Commission on behalf of the applicant. Mr. Tibballs acknowledged that the 25% density bonus issue for affordable housing if requested would be addressed by the Planning Commission and City Council at a later date. - He requested approval of the General Plan Amendment from Low Density to Low Medium Density. r. F Planning Commission Minutes -8- January 22, 1986 F Nacho Gracia, 10364 Humboldt, Rancho Cucamonga, supported the amemiment and stated that he was happy to finally see the density reduceu to an appropriate level. Commissioner Barke- asked if Mr. Gracia understood that the density could come in at 10 with a densi,`y bonus for affordable huasing. Mr. Gracia replied that he would like to see wha' that would mean on a site plan, since he was not sure how that would affzct the number of dwellings constructed. There were no further comments, therefore the f.ublic hearing was closed. Commissioner McNiel stated that this was the density which was established as the one most suited for this }parcel and was glad to see it finally reduced to that level. Commissioner Chitiea stated that 4-8 is acceptable and could be compatible; however, was concerned with compatibility shoul the density increase to 10 under a density bows. Commissioner Rempel was concerned with the development of condominiums or apartments in this area of the City. He stated that this type of product is incompatible with the area due to surroun ding uses such as the inherently p 9 school on one 'side and the railroad on the other; therefore, could not support the amendment. He suggested that the project be developed under the terms of a Development Agreement. Commissioner Barker agreed that 4-8 units per acre is an appropriate density for this parcel; however, was oncerned with development at 10 units per acre under a density bonus. Chairman Stout stated that he had not changed his opinion that 4-8 units per acre is an appropriate density for the parcel. He indicated to the developer that when the Commission expresses strong concerns regarding compatibility at higher than 8 'units per acre this issue will come up in t`.: design ,phases, therefore strongly urged the applicant to consider this concern in their building program. Commissioner Chitiea asked if there was a way to tie a-development agreement to the land use amendment. Mr. Markman replied t'nat a development agreement replaces zoning not ;he General Plan designatfor. therefore, could not be applied to the land use amendment. Mr.. Markncin indicated that before this project goes before the City Council docunentution would be necessary to indicate that the people signing the application are authorized to control the land use on the property. He advised ,that if this documentation is not received, it would be necessary for the City Council to continue consideration of this item until it is received. Planning Commission Minutes -9 January 22, 1986 Motion: Moved by McNiel, seconded by Stout, carried to recommend issuance of a Negative Declaration and adoption of the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and General Plan Amendment 86-01A, Hawkins, to the City Council. Motion carried by the following voter AYES: COMMISSIONERS: MCNIEL, STOUT, BARKER NOES: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA, REMPEL ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried Chairman Stout announced that Item`R was related to the following item and would be heard concurrently. 0. ENVIEJNMENTAL-ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 9687 - TURNER-JONES - A division of 9.23 acres into 3 parcels in the General n ustria rea (Subarea 14) located at the northeast corner of Santa Anita and 4th Street - APH 229 283-41 & 42. (Related File: DR 85-46) R. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVr`,PPMENT REVIEW 85-46 JONES - The development of a 150,000 square foot warehouse distribution bui ing and two light industrial buildings totaling 41,100 square feet on 9.23 acres of land in the General Industrial District (Subarea 14) located at the northeast corner of 4th Street and Santa Anita APN 229-283-41 and 42. (Related File: PM 9687) Nancy Fong, Associate Planner, reviewed the staff report. Dan Coleman, Senior Planner, suggested that condition 2 of the project Resolution be added to the Parcel Map Resolution so that there would be no confusion that there is a requirement for reciprocal use of the plaza area to be recorded in the CC&R's for the parcel map., Chairman Stout opened the public hearing. Rusty Turner, Turner Development Corporation, addressed the access issue on 4th Street and explained that the access was necessary to accommodate truck traf,lic. He indicated that Ache site would be marketed for a large distribution building and felt that it mould be of benefit to have access off of 4th Street. Mr. Turner also addressed the issue of undergrounding utilities on 4th Street.- 1e pointed out that the poles will remain in place since the 66 kv. lines cennot be undergrounded. He requested that it not be required to underground 12 KV lines where 66 Kv lines exist. Jim Barton, 8409 Utica, Rancho Cucamonga, suggested that special consideration of additional access be given to larger parcels. He stated that 3 driveways in total is not a major amount when dealing with large parcels such as this. Planning Commission Minutes -10 January 22, 1986 Greg Lansing, 985 Alpine Drive, Beverly h,ris, supported the parcel map and Stated that one drive on 4th Street is an undue hardship on the developer. rs There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Barker asked for discussion regarding the utility undergrounding. Chairman Stout stated that it really doesn't make much sense in this case to underground the 12 kv and leave the 66 kv lines on the poles. Commissioner Rempel suggested a lien agreement to provide for the removal of the 12 kv lines at such time that something is done with the 66 kv's. James Markman, City Attorney, advised that a lien agreement would not be the answer since the then-owner of the property would bear the cost of undergrounding when the time comes. Further, that this would more than likely he accomplished through a utility undergrounding district. Commissioner Barker was concerned with telecommunication lines on utility poles. Chairman Stout agreed that the pollution of telecommunication lines is a problem; however, in this instance only 66 kv and 12 kv lines exist on these poles and felt that they could remain until such time as"%he 66 kv lines are removed. Commission Chiti'ea agreed. She stated that the direction •to underground utilities in the industrial area is done for aesthetic reasons and should be done wherever possible. Chairman Stout asked for discussion of the driveway issue. Commissioner Rempel supported the concept of the drive onto 4th street and felt it was essential to this piece of property. Cowii5sioner McNiel stated that he could not suppor the applicant's indication that a traffic study revealed that 4th Street is not going to be heavily traveled. He was concerned with a truck pulling out of a driveway onto a major street and suggested that the driveway be eliminated. Chairman Stout advised that secondary streets in thO industrial area were intended for use by truck traffic. further, th's one driveway may not cause an impact, but the cumulative impact of every 'ather applicant who wants one starts to add up. Therefore, he could not support the kiriveway access,-on 4th Street, '' Planning Commission Minutes -11 January 22, 1986 b Commissioner Barker stated that he could understand the applicant's desire for a driveway; however, was, concerned with trucks crossing traffic. He could support the concept if the driveway could be arranged so than: left turns in or out of the driveway were prohibited and if a deceleration lane could be provided; however,, in this instance it could not be accomplished and he opposed the driveway on 4th Street. Commissioner Chitiea stated that making left turns onto 4th Street could be hazardous, and did not support the driveway onto that street. Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by McNiel, to issue a Negative Declaration and adopt the Resolution. approving Parcel Map '9687 with amendments to Special Conditions G-2 to strike reference to underground overhead utilities in 4th Street, additional condition to reflect that reciprocal use of the plaza area is to 5e provided and recorded in the CC&R's prior to the issuance of building permits. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS CHITIEA, MCNIEL, BARKER, STOUT NOES: COMMISSIONERS: REMPEL ABSENT: COMISSIONERS: NONE -carried Co^.—i_sioner Rempel advised that the driveway onto 4th Street should have been allowed. Motion: Moved by McNiel, seconded by Chitiea, to issue a Negative Declaration and adopt the Resolution approving Development Review 85-46, with the removal of reference to undergrounding utilities on 4th Street in Engineering conditian 1, and reference to the drive approach on 4th Street in Standard Conditions I-5 and M-3. Motion carried by the following vote.- AYES: COMMISSIONERS: MCNIEL, CHITIEA, BARKER, REMPEL, STOUT NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE carried 8:35 p.m. - Planning Commission Recessed 8:50 p.m. Planning Commission Reconvened with all members present Chairman Stout announced that the following items were related and would be heard concurrently by the Commission. Planning Commission Minutes -12- January 22, 1986 F. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 9670 - R.C. ASSOCIATES iI A ivision of 32.6 acres o and into 2 parcels in the General Industrial category (Subarea 11) located on the north side of 6th Street, west side of 'Buffalo - APN 229-261-78.. Related File: DR 85-49. Q. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 85-49 - SANTA ANITA DEVELOPMENT - A phased eve opment o a warehouse/distribution building totaling 403,875 square feet with 255,950 square feet for Phase I on 18.83 arares of land in the General Industrial District (Subarea 11) located, on the west side of Buffalo, north of 6th Street APN 229-261- 78. (Related File: Parcel Map 9670.) Nancy Fong, Associate Planner, reviewed the staff report. Chairman Stout opened the public hearing. Joe Hyde, representing the applicant, addressed Special Condition 5 of the Parcel Map Resolution and asked for clarification that the condition referred to a slope easement and not reciprocal :access easement between the two parcels. He also addressed the condition for street improvement plans to be prepared and asked for clarification the', the addition or driveway cuts, street lights and trees would be made to existing plans on file. Jim Watson, 363 San Miguel, Newport Beach, thanked staff for cooperating in expeditious handling of project. There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. L Joe Stof , Associate Engineer, advised that staff concurred with the applicant's request regarding Standard Condition 5 of the parcel map Resolution. Regarding Condition B-5', he concurred that street improvement plans have been completed and it would be a matter of adding items to existing plans. Mr. Markman suggested modifications to condition 5 by replacing the first sentence of the condition with "reciprocal access easements for landscape maintenance", and striking "common roads, drives or parking areas". Barrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer, stated that in order to insure access to maintain the slope, the condition should be required of parcel two. He suggested that staff be directed to revise the condition Motion: Moved by ''arker, seconded by McNiel, to issue Negative. Declarations and adopt the v °ons approving Environmental Assessment and Parcel Map 9670 with staff n to modify conditions regarding the slope easement. Environmental Ass ss.. nd Development Review 85-49 approved as presented. Motion carried by the io; owing vote; AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER, MCNIEL, CHITIEA, REMPEL, STOUT NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE Planning Commission Minutes -13- January 22, 1986 ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried ADJOURNMENT Motion: Moved by,Barker, seconded by McNiel, unanimously carried, to adjourn. The Planning Commission adjournedto a workshop on February 3, 1986 to discuss general revisions and update of the Subarea Regulations within the Industrial Specific Plan. The meeting will be held at the Rancho Cucamonga Neighborhood Center, 9791 Arrow Highway, Room 4, beginning at t:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Brad Buller Deputy Secretary Planning Commission Minutes -1.4- January 22, 1986 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA �uCA STAFF REPORT � t F U DATE: January 22, 1986 19777 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Barrye R. Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer SUBJECT: TENTATIVE TRACT 10076 -REPORT ON STATUS OF BANYAN STREET ALIGNMENT A. Chronology 1. August 11, 3,982 - the project was initially presented to the Planning Commission. ATTACHMENT A shows the tentative map configuration.: ATTACHMENT B contains the staff report. References to the discussion of Banyan Street are marked with a vertical line on the right margin. for ease of reference on all verbal attachments. ATTACHMENT C contains the minutes of the meeting- ' ACTION: The Commission continued the project for additional circulation information. 2. August 25, 1982 the second submittal of the project to the Commission. ATTACHMENT D contains the staff report. ATTACHMENT E contains the meeting minutes. ATTACHMENT F contains the project approved resolution. ATTACHMENT G shows the area circulation plan in particular an alignment frr a future extension of Wilson Avenue. ATTACHMENT H shows what the Engineering staff considers to be the approved tentative map configuration. ACTION: The Commission approved the modified tentative map. 3. January 26, 1983 - Gereral Plan Amendment 83-2 was presented to the Commission. It propo, id the elimination of Banyan as a continuous street. ATTACHMENT I contains the staff report. ATTACHMENT J contains the meeting minutes. ATTACHMENT K contains the approval resolution. ACTION: The Commission did not approve the elimination of Banyan as a continuous street. 4. September 12, 1984 - the first time extension for the project was presented to the Commission. ATTACHMENT L contains the meeting minutes. Comment: The incorrect tentative map shown on Attachment A was presented to the Commission. ACTION: The tentative map was granted the time extension. U ITEM A PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Tentative Tract 10076 - Report on Status of Banyan Street Alignment January 22, 1986 Page 2 5. August 14, 1985 - the second time extension for the project was presented to the Commission. ATTACHMENT M contains the meeting minutes. Comment Again the incorrect tentative map shown on Attachment A was presented to the Commission. ACTION: The tentative map was granted the time extension. 6. January 8,_1986 the Design Review for the tract was presented to the Commission. ATTACHMENT N contains the conceptual Grading Plan for the D. R. ACTION: The project was continued for clarification of the alignment of Banyan Street. 7. January 13, 1986 - ATTACHMENT 0 contains a letter from the developer explaining his understanding of the project status. B. Conclusion as(3 eT upon the information contained in the staff files and the recollection of tbs Engineering Division staff members who were involved with the project, it appears that the alignment as shown on Exhibit N was approved by the Commission. RE�zpectfully submitted, Aft BRH:jaa Attachments ,. 14 THi CITY'O/.t411GNp GYGw MONY.1 C^GIfORM1A. � • TENTATIVE NSA �► TRACT N- 10076 M. � ii v4CtNT / Pto.avcD Tra'a� �. TaswslTww .o.weaj� 1 u��d DS e t° 1 x ' 88 O^ O r MAN DA. INi 'rwl .. I J 4 a.' 13 I a.�(. _ 10 9 8 • t~ -an ! cn ti Z n c r �15 16 17 IB f aso) (asrJ n.m+ �y t• Cneao) ! � AN 1 ..rr..veeGs RY �.r. 'C LAo A:.ao giW SLY/•egLLTy ZONm RI 10.r ✓ ROM, e.iwewu..0 rar.sr-`'�errstmc.�lo�n] :�I�I •. aeeo! •law, ♦.� "'i—ll—lt 1 — -�W.TIR4vfl1M1=S Os15YM]@iwetl" r � �.�- 1 w!� LLLWen.i.Gl�IICHa6I.bYttAYM6 MAT SYeb. v� �1 0.RataT IMleMMalii TaR qT/ QalO.iyi. i:TaAl Ylix h TI I.I..r + + p!l.GIM 21L►NR/I1Li! .I •• XTaG HA[TlsrAala Na Y aRYM anxcic ••••,_ 1} ' .anon.HrrNeq. Ca. ca..�aH Y�GT.aW NOWtacll O.. .. �r ✓RW.T'1 W., carve.....�..K,�,..�_,.�,>W.�..�.,,�r>. 1\TORTH - a.w.nww.lc..+a.YG1aRf1Tj/W1a�C.• a RNCflO CUCAMOIGA TITLE-, Lc--,r r, PLANNwG DIVncwr EXHiB[T-41SCAL.E.__g- 'S. t CITI OF RANCHO CUCA.AONGA cLc aro� STAFF REPORT Ii7 1977 DATE: August 11, 1982 TO: Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner BY: Curt Johnston, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 10076 - WILSON A residential subdivision of 19 lots on 6.9 acres of land in the R-1-20,000 zone (R-1-10,000 pending) located south of Banyan Street, east of Archibald Avenue APN 201-251-63 & 64. Related File: Zone Change 81-04 PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION : This project consists of 19 Eingle family lots on approximately- 6.9 acres of land located soutt. of I Banyan Street, east of Archibald Avenue (Exhibit "A"). A change of zone frrn R-1-20,000 to R-1-10,000 is pending and is also being considered on this agenda. The site is currently a citrus grove with a slope of approximately I 5% from north to south. A Metropolitan Water District right-of-way i( borders the property along the north side and a portion of Banyan Street extends into the site on the nG^thwesL corner. At the south- west corner of the site, two future streets border the property. In addition, a 20-foot wide drainage ditch e;,tends along the south boundary of the property and Alta Loma Channel, a 50-foot wide par- tially improved flood control channel, exists to the east. Surrounding land u'.es include vacant property to the north and south with single d: family homes on various lot sizes to the east and west. The surround- ing zoning is shown on Exhibit "B". I Lot sizes within the project range frum a minimum of 10,000 square feet to 15,000 square feet at the end of the cul-de-sacs (Exhibit "C"). The natural topography of the site is to be preserved as much as possible with only grading for the streets as shown on Exhibit "D When this tract develops, the developer will improve Alta Loma- Channel from the existing spillway, located approximately 100 feet north of the site, to the south boundary of the project. Improve- ment of the channel is necessary for the project to pass the Growth Management point rating system. N—4 ITEM D /U f�'• r r �t t Tentative Tract 10076/14ilson I Planning Commission. Agenda August 11, 1982 Page 2 ANALYSIS: The proposed street pattern resulted from a numbar of site constraints. The location of the north-south street was de- termined by the future roads entering the property at the southwest corner and by the existing Banyan Avenue connection to the north across the MWD right-of-wa.�. The location of the southerly east west street was -hosen to provide proper flood control protection. In place of the natural drainage Citch, a 42 inch reinforced con- crete pipe will be provided down the center of the street. Placing this storm drain in the street provides good access for maintenance and increases overflew capacity by sheet flowing in the street, Banyan Street is show" on 'Se General Plan as an east-west collector street. The initial design of the tract map had Banyan extending all the way through the property. However, based on recommendations by the City Engineer, in conjunction with other design issues, the street pattern was altered. Two issues concern the Banyan Street connection. Between Haven Avenue and the project site along Banyan, numerous homes on 60-70 foot frontages exist. The increased traffic associated with the collector street could create traffic safety hazards. The cost of building a bridge across Alta Lorna Channel was also considered. The Engineering staff does not believe the; amount of traffic generated would justify the expense of the bridge construction. x A conceptual master plan for adjacent properties prepared by the Applicant is shown on Exhibit "E". The intent of this sketch is to demonstrate that surroundi7g properties can be reasonably de- veloped. The exact street pattern will be determined when the adjacent land is subdivided_ As an example, the southerly street of this project may be a 90° knuckle curve which would provide a north-south street through the adjacent property, DESIGN REVIEW: When reviewing this project, the Design Review Com- mittee considered the Banyan Street connection, grading, and solar orientation, The Committee felt that the proposed design was accept- able considering Banyan would not be a '.;trough street. The Con~,,;,ittee recommended approval of the Tract Map. Al Ask buffering. He stated that he sees no reason for trees for the provision of shade. iVOW am Commissioner McNiei asked why the preschool will accept children up to the age of 12 years. Mr, Ledermann stated that.there is a need for after school care for children of that age and they provide an afters chool program. Commissioner Stout stated that this is a good use 'or this site which will benefit the convnunity and he was happy to see it. Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded by Barker, carried unanimously, to adopt. Resolution No. 82-77 approving Conditional Use Permit No. 82-12 and issuing a negative declarat`on•with the -provision a good faith effort be made to I move and preserve the existing palm trees and that shade trees not be required in the play area. �O7,6) G. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND ZONE CHANGE_81-04 - WILSON ->A change o, e from - ing a ami y Resi entia square foot lot minimum) to R-1-10,000 (Single Family Residential - 10,000.square foot lot minimum) for 6.9 acres of land located south of Banyan Street, east of Archibald Avenue - APN 201-251-63 & 64. City Planner, Rick Gomez, reviewed the staff.report. Commissioner Barker asked if any of the homes in the 2-a dwelling units per acre which were outside of the 300-foot area were notifiedi of this proposed zone change. Mr. Gomez replied that only homeowners within the 300-foot radius had been notified. Mr. Barker stated that this is one of those instances where property owners just outside of the required area should have been notified because of the proposed da. -ity change to the adjacent property. He indicated that this is horse property where currently there are two existing trails and adir- mt property owners should have been notified so that this could be taken into consideration. Mr. Hopson stated that the rules for notification are applied uniformly and under the statute only those property owners within a 300-foot radius must be notified. He indicated that the City requires the developer to furnish labels so that this procedure can ,take place, and if the 300-foot radius were not set, it could mean that property owners within a 500-foot or 700-foot radius would have to be notified. Planning Commission Minutes -5- August 11, 1982 /f '. C Commissioner Barker stated that this is somewhat the same discussion that the Commission had before, but the point still remained that some people were on vacation and did not receive notification. Further, that'the property below did not receive any notice and what is 'being proposed is an increase in zoning which could have an effect on that property end its use. Commissioner Stout asked if this property would include improvements to the Alta Lama Channel, and what kind of channel this would be. Mr. Gomez replied that this would be a trapezoidal channel. Mr. Bose replied that the major consideration is that this be some type of concrete channel if Banyan were to be extended. Further, there would be driveways fronting on the street and there would not be high traffic volume. Commissioner Stout stated that the City went through a great deal of trouble to straighten Amethyst out and there is a lot of traffic through there. He asked if some type of traffic survey had been done. Mr. Bose indicated that a study had been done at the time the General Plan was being considered and the plan for traffic is to extend Wilson to Carnelian which will ultimately take traffic away from Banyan. Commissioner Stout indicated that he was partial to Banyan and there has been a large effort made to make it a good street across the city. He.indicated that he was concerned with traffic that would be funneled down to Lemon. Mr. Bose explained the reason for directing traffic in that manner. Commissioner Barker asked if the Alta Loma channel is the trail that is to go south to Santa Fe and contact Cucamonga creek as far as the trail system is concerned. Commissioner Rempel stated that Alta Loma Channel dumps into Hermosa and that + are would be right of way on both sides of the channel. Commissioner Barker asked if it is known what access will be available from the Water District and if the trail will be north or east and west. Mr. Gomez stated that the connection can be in the street right of way and that the trail is to go in a southerly direction; however, the exact location has not yet been determined. Chairman King asked Mr. Hopson how the fact that an elementary school had previously been shown on phis site would affect the zoning of this property. Mr. Hopson replied that the elementary school had been shown as an option and that the fact that this had been shown on the General Plan does not mean that it would carry the General Plan designation on this property. He indicated t Planning Commission Minutes -6_ �) August 11, 1982 1 m ! that the density is low and medium and any one of several categories could fit i on this site. ' Chairman King opened the public hearing and requested that public comment fin: restricted to whether zoning of R-1-10,000-15,000, or 7,200 was appropriate. Mr. Jerry Wilson, 387 N. Second Street, Upland, representing the applicant stated that,he agreed with staff's recommF:-.ations and thought that the zoning they have requested is appropriate in light of the General Plan designation for the area. He indicated that equestrian trails can be accommodated in the. right of way on the east side of the property and they would qualify that depending on whether the Flood Control District would allow use of the easement. He indicated further that if this is a condition of the map, then they would be happy to grant the easement either to the Flood Control District or to the City for the equestrian easement. Chairman King asked if there were any comments from the public as it relates to zoning. There being none he asked if there were any comments from the Commission on the same subject. Commissioner Barker stated that the property to the southwest is horse property. He further stated his concern that when looking at the map, the property to the west fronting onto Archibald and the property to the south might be surprised if the properties went to 10,000 or less._He indicated that for the property owners who 'have been here for a longer period of time and who purchased the larger pieces, they no longer have around them property like theirs and eventually the area will no lr ger be compatible. 'He indicated that this would be the case even if access were to be allowed. He raised concern with the fact that there is no practical buffering between these properties. He indicated that because of the impact this zoning would have on the lifestyle and trails in the area he is not in favor of increasing the density of this piece of property. Commissioner Rempel stated that having sat on the Planning Commission for the last four and a half years, one of the things that has always been brought up is that a dividing line is needed in order to protect the equestrian area from the rest of the City. -He indicated that the dividing line would be Banyan and nothing south of there would be protected. Further, the area north of there would be totally protected. He indicated that this was the assumption of both the Planning Commission and the City Council. Commissioner Rempel stated that there had been no comments from the adjacent property owners when they spoke of zoning going to 10,000-and 15,000 square foot lots during the General Plan hearings. He indicated that if the Commission says that the zoning should remain where it is, they are saying that anything below the arbitrary line should go the same route, and it is really not the best to say that. He indicated that there are a lot of people in the equestrian area who say they do not want horses. Further, that it is not necessarily true that the lots on the southwest corner are large lots and that they will be divided off, because they already have been. He indicated that the Planning Commission and City AOL Planning Commission Minutes -7- A r., ugust 11, 1982 Council have gone a long way, and more than any other City, to develop an equestrian system. He indicated that this should be looked at from a practical standpoint because of the improvements necessary to build out the Alta Loma channel simply because when you start to divide larger lots the cost' becomes prohibitive. Commis-ioner Barker indicated that the property owners to the south NW not received any notice of this zone change. He asked if the Commission, is talking about Banyan being a dividing line and asked what kind of protection can be given to the people on the southwest corner so that they are not boxed out if the project comes in. Commissioner Rempel stated that this would be done through the General Plan because they have one-half acre lots and through the zoning. Chairman King stated that the only comme►,t he has is that he is uncomfortahle with 10,00 square foot lots. He indicated that he would prefer 15,000. He further stated that he agreed with Commissioner Rempel on some of the points he made. He asked the Commission if there is consensus on the discussion relative to the size of the lots before they go any further. Commis;inner-Barker asked Chairman King what he was saying about the 15,000 square foot lots. I . Chairman King stated that if it were his choic he would like to see 15,000 i! square foot lots but he did not feel that 20,000 square foot lots were appropriate. He indicated that if it was V choice between 20,000 and 10,000 square foot lots, he would choose 10,000. Mr. Lam stated that the Zoning Ordinance allows horses on a minimum 15,0001 square foot lot. Mr. Gomez stated that when the previous zoning change was made there was not a gradation and it would in essence mean that the lots would go from 20,000 to 10,000. Chairman King stated that knowing that Banyan is a kind of dividing`I'Tne, it- would seem that there is some type of gradation. He indicated that if—the Commission continues with that kind of approach it would be better if they went with 15,000. Commissioner Rempei stated that the Planning Commission has said it before and it will say it again that there will be no problem protecting the people with equestrian property and that they will have access and can use the trails there. He indicated that this City has committed itself to protecting equestrian rights in the City. Commissioner Stout asked what the lot sizes are on the other side of Alta Loma Channel. Planning Commission Minutes -8- August 11, 1982 Commissioner Rempel stated that they are 8,500 square feet. Commissioner McNiei stated that the question before the Commission is whether this should be R-1-20,000 or R-1-10,000 and whether there should be a zone change. He did not feel that the question of whether this_should be R-1- 15,000 was relevant. Mr. Hopson indicated that this could I)e relevant and indicated thaf the Commission must make a zone change even though it may be consistent with the General Plan Designation and also do-As not have significant impacts on the surrounding property and environment and you might say that there are other designations that are allowable that will have no impact. Commissioner Stout stated that 10000 square foot lots was all right with him. Commissioner McNiel stated that the property owner should ponder an alternative request to the zone change. He indicated his concurrence with the comments made by Chairman King: Commissioner Rempel stated that there are two things that the Commission must recognize when it is debating a project: one is the cost of money in this day and age when you request an applicant to come back for a decision in 60-90 days. The other is that if a piece of property is within a certain area in the City that there is a demand for a certain lot size. He indicated that when a certain lot size is demanded, you are saying that_a certain price must be paid for that property; What you are saying is unless you can afford $150,000 for a home and if you only have $90,000, you can't live here. Alk Mr. Wilson stated '.hat he had been doing some calculations while the Commission has been talking'about this project and at today's prices it would cost approximately $200 a foot for the channel improvements. He indicated that if over 600 feet of improvements are required it would be economically infeasible for the property owner to go ahead if this is 15,000 or 20,000 square feet. He indicated that the equestrian use will continue until the property owners decide they no longer want horses in this subdivision. Chairman Kin.^, asked for a vote on the zone change. Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded by Stout, carried, that Resolution No. 82- 78, Zone Change 81-04, be adopted establishing a change of zone from R-1 20,000 to R-1-10,000. and that a negative declaration be issued. Commissioner Barker voted no because of his concer,, that no gradual reduction in zoning is taking place andhis further concern that this will eventually himpact on those properties to the southwest of this proposed subdivision. Commissioner Stout asked if there wasany indication on what the extension of the bridge would cost if there is a rectangular box culvert. I Planning Commission Minutes -9- Augustll, 1982 frt; s Mr. Bose replied that at present there are no cost figures, but that it would be cheaper with a box culvert. Commissioner Stout asked with respect to the alignment with Banyan at Mandarin, what effect would it have on traffic flow if it were connected to Mandarin and then went on to Banyan. Mr. Bose replied that it would not reduce traffic, all it would do is slow it down. Commissioner Rempel stated that the offset at,Turner would cause considerable problems if you wanted to put traffic through `there. He indicated that Banyan does not cross on a straight line as it is an offset. Mr. Bose replied that it is only offset by a few feet. Mr. Bose stated that the City is studying this to see if it can be realigned. Commissioner Rempel stated that he has been talking to some people who live there and they do not want Banyan to go through with their need to back into the street. Mr. Barker stated that because of the cul-de-sac on lot 72 there is nothing that the City is limiting its future options. Chairman King opened the. public hearing. Mr. Wilson stated that they have been redesigning this property since the City's incorporation. He indicated that this tract had been submitted when this area was the County and it did not get past the old Land Division Committee. He indicated that one of the exhibits shows the construction of Banyan Street which was designed to tie across. He further indicated that Associated Engineers and Mark III came to them and requested a drainage easement within the future Banyan Street right of way. Further, they constructed improvements to approximately the limit shown.there so there is a partially improved and constructed street. -He indicated that if there is discussion to extend Banyan that would be the best point. He indicated that" the plan they have submitted is in the City's and their best interest and requested that the Planning'Coranission approve the design as shown. Dr. Kanokvechayant an adjacent property owner, addressed the Commission and requested some time to speak to Mr. Wilson. Mrs. Marie Pollack, who owns a piece of property to the west, spoke of density and stated she did not know why Banyan curves through the Municipal Water District easement instead of going straight to the east. Mr. Hopson stated that if there is an existinghouse constructed on lot l just whre Banyan curves down, the street alignment is cast in concrete without a conJemnation action by the City., This is, assuming that whoever owns the land Planning Commission Minutes -10- August 11, 1982 would not give the City the easement to .have Banyan, go jtraight across. He Affik stated that this is a backward way of saying that if that tract was approved', it was locked into the street alignment without exercising the City's ability to condemn the house that was built on the lot when the street was jogged down, Mrs. Pollack stated that she had always anticipated that Banyan would go through and asked if there wasn't some way to get rio of the house. She asked if the City could exercise its power of eminent domain. Mr. Hopson stated that that requires City money to be spent which it presen:ly does not have to spend and would be within the City's power to condemn. He added that there may be a problem with joining. Mrs. Pollack stated that the house that is there is Very sub-standard and could noL. last long anyway. Mr. Hopson stated that Mrs. Pollack must be talking about another house. After discussion, it was clarified that Mrs. Pollack was mistaken about the location of the house she had been referring to. Mr. Joe DiIorio, R.C. Land Co., stated that he was involved in the Foothill Community Plan and indicated that this happens to come down from Highland Avenue. He further indicated that he has gone through this with Lloyd Hubbs and Banyan has been shown to connect in the General Plan. He indicated that it would be'relatively easy to connect Banyan at Milliken with a bridge going AMN over the flood control channel. Mr. DiIorio stated that there is an alterna- tive and that would be to use the MWD rig;it of way. Although it looks expen- sive, he did not Feel that any property would have to be condemned. He felt that by extending Banyan it would solve the traffic problem and would be in keeping with the General Plana Dr. Kanokvechayant stated that after talking to Mr. Wilson, she has changed her mind about protesting this tentative tract. There being no further comments, the pubidc..hearing*was closed. Commissioner Stout stated that he did not feel the City should foreclose the possiblity of Banyan going straight across even 'F it is on the Metropolitan Water District right of way. He further stated that the only thing he would be concerned about is whether the right of way meets at Haven and the effect it would have on the extension across Haven south of Chaffe+: College, Chairman King stated that this is premature and should come back with some exploration of through access. Commissioner Stout felt that the Commission r,hould explore the options. Mr. Lam stated that staff will bring back an analysis to the Commission. Planning Commission Minutes ill_ August 11, 1982 Mr. Hopson stated that generally state law sets up time periods on how long a public 'body has toapprove a tentative tract map without the applicant's consent to postpone action on the project. He instructed the Commission to approve or deny the project because of the 50-day time period involved in the processing. }} Commissioner Stout stated that Mr. DiIorio had'brought up a point relative to P the General Plan and asked if this would require an amendment to the General Plan since a street is being discontinued, Mr. Hopson stated that Mr. OiIorio is correct if it recornmends a change to the master plan of streets in the General Plan; however, he does not know if this is the case. He stated that without the applicant's consent this project must M either be approved or denied. Commissioner Barker asked if this project is denied, could the applicant come back. Mr. Hopson replied that the applicant could comeback almost immediatc:y and that is why when an applicant is faced with the prospect of denial, they agree to'a postponement. Chairman King reopened the public hearing. Mr. Wilson asked for a two week continuance of his project. 1 The public hearing was closed. Chairman King stated that this is not the type of issue which can be dealt with in two weeks. He indicated that this will be continued and perhaps within that time some options will be clear. s., Motion: Moved by Rempal, seconded by Stout, carried uflanimously, to continue Tentative Tract No. 10076 for a two week period. 8:40 p.m. The Planning Commission recessed 8:55 p.m. The Planning Commission reconvaned E. TERRA VISTA PLANNED COMMUNITY - LEWIS DEVELOPMENT COt9PANY - A request for reconsideration of several land use issues; location of the City Park, the size and nature of the Community Commercial Center, and the location of neighborhood shupping centers. E Rick Gomez, City Planner, reviewed the staff report, stating that three issues would be discussed. Planning Commission Minutes 12 August 11, 1982 41, CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA d S'sioa A o ao•Gc�,� 1 STAFF REPORT O DATE: August 25, 1982 1977 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer BY: Shintu Bose, Associate Civil Engineer SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIIE TRACT 10076 - WILSON A residentia subdivi;ion of 19 t6 or, 6.9 acres of land in the R-1-20,000 zone (R-1-10,000 ending), located south of Banyan Street, east of ArchibalL Avenue - APN 201-251-63 & 64 During discussion on Tentative Tract Map 10076 at the Planning Commission meeting on August 11, 1982, concerns were raised regarding the status of Banyan Street from Archibald Avenue to Hermosa, and the Staff was directed I to conduct a circulation study for this area. Previously, some residents of the tracts east of Alt; Ln, ? Channel (Tracts 9290, 9381 & 9427) requested a study by the Staff to consider the effect of extending Banyan. Street across the charnel. Tile study resulted fig a Staff opinion that there would be an adverse traffic impact on the residential neighborhood east of the channel in which most of the lots front onto the street. Traffic counts taken in 1980 show a count of 900 average daily traffic on Banyan east of Amethyst. A copy of the traffic count survey is attarhed for your review. The traffic on Banyan, in our opinion, is not'expected 0 be much higher at ultimate build-out of the City, and its affect an "he surround- ing streets will be negligible. We will be presenting, in the near future, to the Planning Commission for their consideration an amended General Plan proposing to discontinue Banyan Street at the channel and to extend Wilson Avenue from its present terminus at Carnelian to Amethyst. In order to receive an approval on the subject tract map prior to amending e General Plan, the app icant's engineer has Submitted a revised ten a ive map for Plannin . ommission s consideration in Which provision has been Kept to extend Banyan Street, i require . He has also expressed his-d—es—i-re-1fifft he may e aFFowed tio—procee with the original design of the map provided the General Plan amendment as mentioned hereinabove is approved prior to recorda- tion of the final map. ITEM C i Motion: Moved by McNiel, seconded by Stout, unamiously carried, to continue Environmental Assessment and Zone Change 80-02 to September 8, 1982, Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded by Barker, unamiously carried, to continue Environmental Assessment and Parcel Mao 7511 to September 8, 1982. Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded by Barker, unamiously carried, to continue Environmental Assessment and Parcel Map 3383 to September 22, 1982. C. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 10076 WILS01 - A residential subdivision of 19 lots on 6.9 acres of land in the R-1-20,000 zone (R-1-10,000 ;pending) located south of Banyan Street, east of Archibald Avenue - APN 201-251-63 and 64. Shintu Bose, Associate Civil Engineer, reviewed the Staff Report stating that this item was being brought back to the Commission per their request. Mr. Bose stated that the previous design. called for a cul-de-sac street which would discontinue Banyan Street. After staff's review, it was discovered that a General Plan amendment would be required to discontinue Banyan and that staff' would be preparing an amendment for the Commission's review in the near future. Mr. Bose stated that the applicant had revised his map in light of such an amendment. The applicant was also requesting that, shorld the General Plan be amended, he be allowed to redesign his tr.•act back to its original design. Commissioner Barker stated that the possibility of using the Metropolitan Water District: easem,:nt as an extension of Banyan had been suggested that the previous meeting, however was not mentioned in the report. Mr. Bose replied that staff was still looking into this possibility along with several other options which would be brought back to the Commission at the time of the General Plan amendment analysis. Commissioner Barker stated that item 6 of the proposed. Resolution was worded as IS' the General Plan amendment were approved to discontinue Banyan Street, this would be the only condition to allow the applicant to design the new street into a standard cul-de-sac. He further stated that if Banyan were °i continued through the Metropolitan Water District property, 'Mr. Wilson could still come back with a proposal to return the new street to a cul-de-sac. Mr. Bose stated that if Banyan was not taken to the present location, it may go through the Metropolitan. Water District property. Commissioner Barker asked if it would be possible to clarify the language of that condition to reflect that intention. t Planning Commision Minutes 3- August 25, 1982 Ales � Mr. Bose replied that the condition. could be clarified. Chairman King asked if the Me•ropolitan Water District easement bordered and fronted the northern side of this tract. Mr. Bose replied that it. did. Chairman King a�I:ed if staff had hoked into the feasibiity of extending the street over the Metropolitan Water District Easement. Mr. Bose replied that staff has not done an in-depth study of this, however felt that there would be some problems in extending the street over this easement. Mr. Bose stated that there was a spillway located at the portion_ of the basin where the street would be coming across that easement and that it would be a little difficult to build any kind of a bridge over a spillway. The second problem is that the area of haven Avenue in question has already been given to the church project for parking purposes by the MWD and staff is not sure that a right-of-way in that area can be obtained. The third problem is that the existing Banyan Street and the proposed extension of Banyan would only have 100 feet between the two intersections, thus impacting traffic. Chairman King opened the public hearing. Jerry Wilson, engineer for the-project, addressed the Commission stating that he saw soma problems with the conditions of approval, however felt that `hey were items that could be worked out with staff in a matter of days. Commissioner Barker asked if the dedicated easements allowed enough space for equestrian easements. Mr. Wilson replied that the applicant was already dedicating 14 feet along the projects east boundary to the Flood Control District for the construction of a channel. He further stated that there were two designs under consideration, one being a rectangular channel which does not require a great deal of right-of-way then the 14 feet would not be necessary. However, 1f the dedication were needed, there would not be any area left to dedicate. i Commissioner Barker asked if that had been taken into consideration by Engineering. Mr. Bose replied the possibility of using the Flood Control easement also as an equestrian easement would be looked into. Commissioner Stout asked the applicant if he would still want to name the street Mandarin Street even though it aligned with Banyan Street if the General Plan was amended. Mr. Wilson replied that it would depend on if the City changed the name of Banyan east of the City. Planning Commision Minutes -4- August 25, 1982 - , t� Commissioner Stout replied, that it seemed if the streets aligned, they should. have the same name. Mir;hael Vairin, Senior Planner, stated that the naming of the-streets does not o(ecur until tentative map approv„l is given. These names were placed on the m1p by Mr. Wilson, and subject t1, approval per the Street Naming Ordinance. Pail Draper, a property owner in the vicinity of the project, addressed the Commission Stating his main concern was not with the tract itself, but with the streets and flood control. He asked how the water was going to be handled coming out of the _irk III tract above the project. Mr. Bose replied that there would be a pipe under the street that would carry the water back to the chimnel. Mr. Draper stated that the water goes thrt)ug2: Mr. Miller's house when it floods now and he didn't see how a pipe could be installed that would be large enough to handle all the water. Michae. Vairin, Senior Planner, s,:ated that the :,€ze and type of pipe would be determined through hydrology studies and if the study shows that there is not a pipe large enough to handle the flow, other measures will be taken. There were no further comments and the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Rempel stated that one of the criteria established in the Street Naming Ordinance was that there would not be streets that were off set and carried the same name. Fhrthar, that if Banyan is carried north into the Metropolitan Water District Easement, the street should definitely be named Banyan. Commissioner Barker asked if there was any way Mr. Draper's concern could be directed to one rf the staff to mitigate regarding the drainage of this property and if tie property owners in that area would be r `.ified of the results of the hydrology study. Jack Lam, Community Development Director, replied that if Mr. Draper would leave his name and telephone number with staff, they would notify him of the results of the hyrdlogy study and also at that time he could view the design of the proejct to see how it would affect his property. Mr. Lam further stated that all the drainage design details are done at the design stage, which is after the studies ace complete. Further, that tho Conditions of Approval are worded so that the applicant could not receive final approval of the project until he could show through hydrology studies that the drainage would be taken care of. Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded by Stout, unamiously carried to adopt the Resolution approving Environmental A3sessment anc Tentative Tract 10076. I Planning Commision Minutes -5- August 25, 1982 'A AYES: COMMISSIONERS Rempel, Stout, Barker, McNiel, King NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None j ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: None D. VARIANCE 82-02 - GARCIA - A request to reduce the required rear yard setback in order to constrilas a room addition in the R-1-10,000, zone located at 8621 Lemon Avenue - APN V-1-511-09. Rick Gomez, City Planner, reviewed the Staff Report. In addition, Mr. Gomez presented the option of directing staff to prepare .a Zoning Ordinance Amendment, which would maintain the rear yard setback, and open space, yet allow for additions to occupy a maximum of ap—oximately 301, of the rear yard with a minimum 5 foot setback. Mr. Gomez s.tited that staff alt that the applicar_t's rejue:at could be adequately adds^ad by this amendment along with other request-s which might arise in the future. It was further recommended that the applicants withdraw their request, receive a. refund of their fees, and return with their request after the 45-60 day time period which would be required for the zoning amendment to take effect. Chairman King asked how long it would take from tonight's date until the applicants would be ready to proceed on their project. Jack Lam, Community Development Direct- , replied that the Modification to the Ordinance would be introduced to the Cummission at their next meeting, in two weeks. If the Commission approved the modification,, it would be set for the City Council agenda for first reading in advance and then be set for the second before the Council two, weeks after that date. At that time, :;here wou�a 2e a 30 day referendum period. Mr. Lar, further stated that the problem first came up when the City Council modified the setbacks in :-,xeveral areas as a result pf the General Plan in order to get an open rural feeling in the City. This modification in setbacks makes it very difficult for the residents in the Existing areas of the City to make additions in their structures. Staff was recommending an amendment to the Ordinance to allow the encroachment into the rear yard area as long as a certain percentage of open space was retained,. ti Chairman King opened the public hearing. Linda Garcia, applicant, addressed the Commission stating that she and her husband had applied for and were granted a permit to construct the -room addition two years ago, however financially had been unable to begin construction. ',•fnen they applied for a new permit a month ago, they were informed that the requirements had changed and a variance would be necessary h to complete the process. Mrs. Garcia further stated that if they. were to withdraw the request, there was no guarantee that the Ordinance would be approver: and felt that too much time would be let. f �. Planning Commision Minutes -6- August 25, 1982 �. r RESOLUTION 1i0. 82-81 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, CONDITIONALLY APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT 113P NO. 10075 WHEREAS, Tentative Tract Map No. 10076, hereinafter "flap" submitted by J.M. Wilson Civil Engineer, applicant, for the purpose t , subdividing the real property situated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, Cou•Ity of San Bernardino, State of C.liforiia, described as a residential tract subdivision on 6.9 acres of hand in the R-1-20,000 zone (R-1-10,000 pending), located south of Banyan Street, ee.st of Archibald Avenue - APN 201-251-63 and 64 into 19 lots, regularly came before the Planning Commission for public hearing and action on August 25, 1982; 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. NO41, THEREFORE, the Planning L-)mmission o` the City of Rancho Cucamonga does resolve as follows SECTION 1: The Planning Commission makes the following findings in reg&rd to Tentative Tract No. 10076 and the flap 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 de- velopment 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 ^)f the tentative tract will not conflict with any easemenc acquired by the public at large, now of record, for access through or use of,the property Aft within the proposed subdivision. [-,Sr r% f /4 ® F Resolut No, 82-81 Page 2 (q) That this project will not cr ete adverse an the environment and a Negative Declarationa impcis issued. SECTION 2, . attached hereTION 2: Tentative Tract Map No. 10076, a copy conditions and the attache�laStandardConditions: P of hsch i subject to all of the follou',1a PLANNING DIVISION 1• A minimum twelve (12) foot landscape parkway to include trees, ..hrubs, ground cover, and irri- gation shall be provided along the east s%de of Banyan Street through the mWD right-of-tray, FNGINEERING DIVISION 2. Instailati-on of an improved concrete chann?l for Alta Loma watercourse from the structure to South tract bo soiTlway undary includin structures shall be required. The co of.9 cutlet st ' . channel shall be credited to the storm drain fees for the oro ect and a reimbursement agreement will be executed in conformance with the City Ordinance No. 75 to cover contributions which exceed the amount of thee may be waived if and when Alta SLomahis Chanre nelirement Assessment District is formed. 3• A letter from Flood Control District acceptine the design of the channel and adequacy right-of-way width shall be obtained Priorttov recordation of the map. The appiicant shall meet the requirements of the Flood Control District for this channel construction. i 4• The Portion of the existing Banyan Street shall 6e reconstructed to provide a smooth connection to London Avenue to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, I' 5- The final design of Mandarin Street shall Provide a four-foot parkway at the end of the temporarycul de-sac. 6• If a General Plan Amenu:zent is a Banyan Street or to realign it to to discontinue the a PP1i'cant a differe nt en . . a standard r .all redesi n P4 t location, s regular g Mandarin Street to provide g cui-de-sac, Resolution No. 32-81 Page 3 APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 25TH DAY OF AUGUST, 1982. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Jeffre King, Cha rman { ATTEST: ' 1 Secretary of the Piamm�g�£amrrrlssion I, JACK LAM, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 25th_day of August, 1982, by the following vote to-dit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Rempal, Stout, Barker, McNiel, King NOES: C014MISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None r an; ijam lidi- yr La Sri' c Q $ 3Atl r t EIS1FCt�3H. uj 7C i� �7- `iy h C2U��t Igl— `4593� — Qf�tC !. m n r 14 Tµ6. °try Ot•RA4GN0 CV GHMTaNGi, C�,SIlORNr4 'k TE_N ATIVE MAP `�R AST N 7 �,.r. >,•4.r�r..r....r. �._ ! LOT S1,lIIlNR).!¢JSitR41r¢Vrr CMrfM,ICr..T •Rcr,rrt w.e L/t•+RW[bS Dl�.sw m[w4tf va, llGletaD M1'C(t[':'af!ONNIR) STATC a! C•[rlDwN W ![frS.IDM DONALD V. AwD DONNA MA&ANNO J.M.Wf(TON.CIVIL ENGINEER r2»+rsusv atvD, stow,u. oa,N r.•e wwus (PH 6TP's52 VP44D,<[•Ai64 AUGUST, 1181 ' Rf4ar JAM,.1101, MWIA!!,rte%. A!• lljr 1 ur 'L.- rsw we.zo/x i F ;kpppp pp `c� sG.�NT � ProwseD Ttll•6.• 5 t! ' �.4 \ I r / :LHvnL cNnN HCi 5•• TRy1<tTWN •ro MClj � ' "• ' ry'r�6rNRR¢'s 1. �s 0�,"D,ir+oi ��►. wa,an 88 �• o D t 25 Q) tz ,. �� MSS•erY. v'rw aW t•at...n.w . A�Voer45E�M Wr`y PoC•N'v ),RD uC 1 lb �gReM 4 V Pbr4 lY' • 4\ 1 i� j+. wow i��'?4Y.. y04C R1 S ►rotes.. - +S��1 ���\..L��+� 1 •J\ !a s�rw,zowt!Rr.Zo.Door, ' t `j� i,`iu•^F"i �T a�� ... !. s �y f.4 K 6.y CR �M� L• I (p, tv i11[SYh![V LWANpYtK(yyr(ry rvi[4eiaT4rLt• y � ��� + t' 'i� • �.SCWL• ffTG l is MDtf.u<tJ•K N C[,W.vq r . C cT4 !.MlMINTS iSR T r n. SSSJJJ , f t aot vTv rn/ALre .•� •,� !N 4 TtA[P{a ryiwS 1<cp t!Orr4lW at!!tY I,-�j�. -_.� J . m Tr rL.,-t r\44 vws luw.Mwt•rwrauyornutcr.' �1 tu--'1•�'^� ♦ ¢g1lN ro rw rHwN,,T l ap0,4. ��.. Y rlll!'r..' \ SC•w cT'A 4r KWW,L[. , •`'f'��^��• r r;K[Sreub[[sv+N WRIT T.1 N144 '!. ltt,wlbflOM _ c1�KtIGT1Ytw tl[Cf.TI[%Y(YiTR,1l.ldrl•ty •IWrWLy �p��y.r�� Yr�r`i .....� �j 4.Y1w\r!�•w{R �'+-r"-r• R~ u,1SGJ.�.'•• T e,.Ta ST CCT•a _^''�• Sri .. •n CITY OF RANCHO CUCAN ONGA r!cCAnro STAFF REPORT r ' . 2i f n FDATE: January 26, 1983 0 FPlanning Commission ,� > 1977 FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer BY: Paul A. Rougeau, Senior Civil Engineer SUBJECT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 83-02 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - A revision of the Circulation Element of the General Plan of the City of Rancho Cucamonga concerning the continuity of Banyan Street and Wilson Avenue SUMMARY This proposed amendment is for the purpose of establishing the continuity of Wilson Avenue between Carnelian Street and Amethyst Street and breaking the continuity of Banyan Street between Archibald Avenue and Hermosa Avenue. Currently, the General Plan shows Wilson Avenue as a secondary arterial begin- ning at Archibald Avenue and continuing east to Milliken Avenue. Banyan , Street is shown as a collector street running from Sapphire Street east to Deer Creek. BANYAN STREET Banyan Street exists physically from west of Sapphire Street to slightly east of Archibald Avenue, although some portions have not been fully widened due to lack of fronting development. Where fully improved, it is a 44-foot wide, 2- lane collector street. Banyan also exists from Alta Loma Creek to Haven Avenue as a 2-lane, 41-foot wide street, fully improved except for the south side immediately west of Haven Avenue. While street width is now, or is planned to be, the same for both of ';he above segments of Banyan, the character, of the street is entirely different in e� h. West of Alta Loma Creek, most house lots do not front onto Banyan and o " those which do are mostly 1/2 acre lots. There are about 10 lots of 10,000 s.f. or less fronting the south side and 35 1/2 are lots along the north side in this two mile length. This portion of Banyan has served as a cross-town collector for quite some time and has attained a stable level of traffic. All future development 'along it will be designed with lots fronting away from direct access to Banyan. East of Alta Loma Creek, there is a total or 63 lots, all of about 7,200 s.f. size and thus small setback, fronting Banyan Street in less than a mile. The lack of continuity of Banyan has kept circulation local in nature,' even with the recent cDnnection to Haven Avenue. Development of property on this por- tion is compete. Because of the numerous, shallow lots in this area, it would be inacrisable to connect it with the westerly segment and encourage its use by non-local traffic now having adequate circulation via Archibald Avenue. Ah ITEM F ®._ !I've♦ Planning Commission S of Report ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSM ... AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 83-02 Page 2 Auk METROPOLITAN WATER DISTRICT RIGHT-OF-WAY Continuation of Banyan to haven via the MWO pipeline right-of-way is not feasible due to the presence of roMplex metering and control equipment at the Haven end of the strip and the blocking Of a connection back to existing alingment by a new church. Such an alignment would also serve no additional local streets aloig this route. WILSON AVENUE Wilson Avenue currently exists as a Secondary Arterial from Carnelian Street to 1/4 mile east as a completed section and from Amethyst Street to Milliken Avenue 's a largely undeN431oped roadway planned for improvement to Secondary standards. While its terminus at Archibald Avenue, as currently shown, would provide a vaijgable alternate via Haven and Milliken to Archibald Avenue, further westerly extension would greatly increase its service to the City. Between the west City Limits and Archibald, only Carnelian Street will provide significant capacity for traffic bound south to get tn east-west arterials. Beryl, Hellman and Amethyst have all developed with many lots fronting them and causing friction with the "collector" character of the traffic using them now and in the future. Continuing the development of Wilson Avenue as an ' east-west arterial from Amethyst west to Carnelian will relieve the smaller north-south collectors of much of the increased traffic in th? future. qW The alignment of this extension is across undeveloped property except for a house at its connection with Amethyst Street. The alignment was part of the county master plan of streets and some right-uf-way offers exist. The exis- tence of one house on the alignment is not seen as a serious obstacle since the ultimate connection will be many years away. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Staff has completed an environmental assessment of the proposed amendment and has determined that there will be no significant environmental impact. Part I of the initial study is attached for your review. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Commission receive public input regarding this proposal and, if deemed appropriate, recommend approval of the amendment to the City Council. The amendment would add Wilson Avenue to Figures III-3, the Circulation Plan, as shown on Exhibit A and delete Banyan Street between Archibald Avenue and Haven Avenue because its function would be reduced to that of a local street between these limits. A resolution is attached providing for such a recommendation. *Rectfully sub tted, ��as- f Lq WOl blltl 0 v L; - - G\LIFOI,NIA � I w Ao gas ml Tim Beedle, Senior Planner, reviewed the scaff report recomm:nding that 'onis item be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of February 17, 1983. Chairman King-announced that the review of the land use 'portion of the Specific Plan had been completed by the PlanningCommission and advised those wishing to address specific pieces of property to attend the City Council meetings and express their concerns for the Council's consideration. Chairman King then opened the public hearing. Cecil Johnson addressed the Commission recommending they accept the Specific Plan_ Alex Catania addressed the Commission stating his desire to have the 20 acres of his property which was split between Very Low and Estate Residential designated under one land ul,e. Bob Flocker addressed the Commission stating that the number of dwelling units proposed for Etiwanda should be consistent with the General Plan and suggested that the drop from 10,000 dwelling units to 7,000 was too low, Larry Arcinage addressed the Commission stating that the Specific Plan was a g.iod compromise and supported its adoption. John Scherb, representing the Myohoji .Temple, addressed the Commission statin g. that he didn't recall discussion regarding the widening of Etiwanda Avenue d sked the Commission to address this issue. an There were no further comments and the public hearing was closed. Chairman King called for the motion. Motion: Moved by Stout, seconded by Barker, unanimously carried, to continue General Plan Amendment 83-01B to the Planning Commission meeting of February 17, 1983. F. ENVIRONMENTAL sSSESSMENT APID GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 83-02 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - A revision, of the Circulation 8lement of the General Plan of the City of Rancho Cucamonga concerning the continuity of Banyan Street and Wilson Avenue. Paul Rougeau, Senior Civil Engineer, raviewad the Staff Report. Chairman King asked if the Met-MPolitan Water District was approached with the i prospect of Banyan being continued through their easement. d Planning Commission M, ,tee _10_ January 26, 1983 Mr. Rougeau replied that they were not and staff was basing the feasibility of " continuation on an observation Of equipment on the alignment on Haven Avenue. Chairman King asked if there was a way to jog Banyan in 7the area of Haven in some other fashion so tha* it wouldn't interfere with either' the church or with the MWD. Mc. Rougeau replied that it would have to go north, which would take a portion of the flood control basin creating a poor alignment and still be very cloys tin� to the exi,, 8 Banyan. Further, that there would be a problem with rhea- put the median opening. p to Commissioner Smut asked if the continuation of Banyan hadn't alrea6y been approved for the other side of Haven? Mr. Rougeau replied that it had; however, the exact location has not been set and the only thing that had been determined is that it should align with existing Banyan. Chairman King opened the public hearing. There were no public comments and the public, hearing was closed. !airman King stated that he would like to see the Banyan aspect explored further. In terms of major arterials, Chairman King stated that Bany,+n is a more appropriate location in terms of dealing with greater amounts of t;-affic and is more centrally located than Wilson to carry east-west traffic. Ilso, Banyan should be studied as to whether it is feasible to ccntinue it th -�ugki the Metropolitan Water Districts easement. Commiss.^ner Stout agreed with O airman King's comments regarding Banyan, however hated that Wilson as a major arterial is a good idea and couldn't e.ee why a choice had to be made between the two. Further, that he would like ;o see the Wilson change put into effect, but also see Banyan further studied. Commissioner Barker stated that he did not want to surrinder Banyan as being a major div5:ded access and would like MWD contacted to determine the feasibility of co,5tinuation of Banyan through their easement. Commissioner McNiel concurred that a major thoroughfare is necessary. Vice-Chairman Rempel stated that he did not want to preclude Banyan from being a major arterial, but the chanceq of getting the City to pay for a mile of street at $3 Million to $4 Million up there are slight. Mr. Rougeau stated that this is an important point in that the entire portion of Banyan from Alta Loma Creek to Haven would be at the City or public expense because there will be private development to require installation. Further, that if the Commission desired, he would come up with an exact cost estimate at a future meeting. Planning Commission Minutes -11- January 26, 1983 Vice-Chairman Hempel stated that available funds are'going to be ased more for l the freeway or some type of thoroughfare in the freeway location rather than ~ the continuation of Banyan. Chairman King called for a motion. Commissioner Stout stated that he would make the motion if it would also include study of keeping the corridor open and bending Banyan back down to where existing Banyan Joins Haven. Vice-Chairman Hempel stated that this would be very costly and would also eliminate the church's parking area, which would require them to find another pawing location. Chairman King stated that cooperation with the MFIJ and having their equipment moved on Haven 'ilong with the cost figures should also be included. Vice-Chairman Hempel stated that the motion should not totally abandon Banyan as going through, but at the same time put money into things obtainable for the City to get. Chairman King asked if the Commission wanted the item to be brought back? Vice-Chairman Hempel replied not until something positive could be obtained. Ted Hopson, Assistant City Attorney, stated that the Commission might wish to set a specific date ro that the item would not have to be readvertised. Vice-.Chairman Hempel suggested that it not be brought back in the near future because staff wouldn't have time to do an adequate study with all of the other protects they are working on. Mr.-Hopson replied that CenemNl Plan amendments can only be heard three times a year and his concern was that the middle cycle is generally for city-..initiated amendments, ar,d if it is missed it won't be be- 1 agr.in for a year, Chairman King asked if the motion made by Commissioner Stoat still stood? Commissioner Stout replied that it did with the inclusion of those items previously mentioned. This motion was seconded by creNiel, unanimously carried. AYES, COMMISzIONERS: Stout, Mc Niel, Bar*.er, Hempel, King NOESt COMMISSIONERS: None s }} Planning Commissii' Minutes January 26, 1983 f1 ff s ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None -carried- Vice-Chairman Hempel asked if there was a date on having Banyan brought back. Mr. Hopson replied that it would be continued to the next amendment cycle. Chairman King asked for a motion reaardin¢ Wilson Avenue. Motion: Moved by Hempel, seconded by Stout, carried to adopt the proposal regarding Wilson Avenue., AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Rtmpel, Stout, Barker, McNiel NOES: COMMISSIONERS: King ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None -carried- Chairman King voted. no for his previously stated reasons. � att +t G. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PLANNED DEVELOPMENT 82-06 - TENTATIVE TRACT 12320 - L & G - A change of zone from R-3-T (Multiple Family Residential) to R-3lPD (taltiple Family Residential/Planned Development) and the development of 116 .,ondominStm_s on 6.98 acres of land located at the southeast corner of 6 ehibald Avenue and Victoria Avenue . APN 202-181-07, Dan Coleman, Associate Planner, reviewed the Staff report .recommending inclusion of the requirement for a tot lot in the Resolution. Vice-Chairman Hempel asked for clarification of drainage on the east side across the other project. -Mr. Hougeau replied that the other pro?.et has an underground storm drain designed in one of its streets and if this project goes in first, some type of semi-improved ditch would have to be put across that property in an easement until that project is developed. Chairman King opened the public hearing. Pat Meyer, 200 E. State Street, Redlands, California, addressed the Commission stating that he ,represented the applicant in his concurrence with the staff reports however, wished to clarify one point in that this project is a four-plex developn:�tnt and not a condominium project. He asked for clarificatiin of the connition requiring the applicant to be responsible for a master planned storm drain from loth Street southerly. Since there was another development to the north, he asked if they wouldn't be required for that portion of their property. L Planning Commission 'Minutes -13- January 26, 1983 — � 4 RESOLUTION NO. 83-10 i A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, RECOMMENDING AMENDMENT TO THE ADOPTED CIRCULATION ELEMENT OF TilE RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL P`.AN TO THE CITY COUNCIL WHEREAS, the City Ccuncil has activated the optional General Plan Amendment cycle, and WHERLuS, the Planning Commission has held a duly advertised public healing to consider all comments on the proposed General Plan Amendment. NOW, THEREFORE, 3E IT RESOLVED, that the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission does hereby recommend that the City Coi,ncil approve the following amendment to the circulatiLn element of the Genera, Plan. attached.SECTION is Figure III 3 shall. be amended as shown in fxhi4it "A" "-� SECTION 2: It is recommended that a Negative Declaration be adopted for this General Plan amendment, based —_m t4e completion and findings of the Initial ."udy. APPROVED .AND ADUPr`D THIS 26TH DAY'OF JANUARY, 1983. PLANNING OMMISSION OF 7H CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA r BY: J r Ki C i an A TE e ecretary g" omission I, JACK LAM, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regula-;y introduced, passed, and adopted by the Manning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held or. the 26th day of January, 1983, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: REMPEL, STOUT, BARKER, MCNIEL,. KING NOES: COMMISSIONERS': NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -^•� ��'if F�1 �"'� �.��•°� �'�'r�',:� - �s vr-� k i:�� 4.ty 13 z .. t c ,.1 x r �. � �. t n a'b �,* '` .: R f �7 t �n t, ` ` � * �� t i �.s �ti �'S: ? b±f r: i �=k♦�� � � .�.;_. S t ' ' ^Z� z' Y 4 � -t Y � f �y � t �q �� K ` + __ I^ •��e a i•kl. 4� n n ;;r .. ... z"" � S 4 � ,F�M { y +: ♦�,,, - o 4 y; � ""'� a r •`t �.a" �. ¢.: k� I•�• L. ----,. . �, .� ,... ' ' A ti } �,;. i o� F � �e£ r �: M� 3t' ) 1 � .v ,� ,. y �.�� =x �� ,1c � use � ��4 11 0. TIME EXTENSION FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 10076 - LIGHTNER A residential subdivision of�9 lots on 6.9 acres of land in the Low Residential District, located south of Banyon Street, east of Archibald Avenue-- lp APN 201-251-63 &p64. Commissioner Barker requested clarification that Banyan would be continued. Following_discussion it was determined that Banyan would be continued and that the applicant would be notified that a General Plan amendment is not contemplated; Mandarin does not exist as a street; therefore, a temporary cul-de-sac is unnecessary. Motion: Moved by Barker, seconded by McNiel, carried unanimously, to adopt Resolution No. 82-81A approving P. time extension for Ten W ive Tract 10076. PUBLIC HEARINGS K. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 8s45 SERO AMUSEMEN- - A j division of 37 .ores of and into 3 -parcels in the MH Medium High) Residential and O/P (Office/Professional) districts located on the northwest corner of Haven Avenue and Arrow Highway APN 208-344-01,04, Raul Rougeau, Senior Civil Engineer,.reviews the staff report. Ch% ` •man Stout opened the public hearing. Mr. Richard Avent, 930 Redding Way, Upland,, representing Se Amusement, states his concurrence with �'he staff report and advises he e i iswer any questions. He furtrer ctatas his agreement to the requiremc fov a master plan for this site. Mr. John Fenn, vice president of Lincoln Prop:rties, 10100 Santa Monica Blvd., Los Angeles, states his agreement with all conditions of the parcel map with the exception of items 11 and 12 which needed clarification. Fgllowing Mr. Rougeaus's expla,.-sti,%n of -tem 11, the applicant states agreement and asks that item 12,. rey4:-6 eoent fc,r a masker plan , parcels 2 and 3 be reviewed by the Planning Commission prig, Lo their development. Further, . 'at item 2 referencing a lien agreement be aiaended to provide subordination ci the City in Grder for they `o obtain a construction loan. Follawed. included discussion and clarification of the subordination agreement to be in the lien agreement and development of a master plan for this parcel, it is moved by Barker, secotidev by Chitiea, carried unanimously, to Plann%n Commission n MinutesAft September 12, 1984 y� r Aft, L APPROVAL OF M1,iUTES' Motion: Moved by McNiel, seconded by Barker, carried, to approve the Minutes of the July 24, 1985 Planning ` Commission meeting. Commissioner Rempel abstained from vote as he did not attend that meeting. CONSENT CALENDAR A. DESIGN REVIEW FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 85-08 AJA - The construction of six 1- and 2-story garden office buildings on 8.5 .cres l.cated at the southeast corner of Aspen Avenue and Laurel StiQet:in the Industrial Park District (Subarea 7) APM 208-351-024. A-2. TIME EXTENSION FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 10076 - LIGHTNER A residential subdivision of 9 dots on 6.9 acres of land in the Low Residential District, located south of Banyan Street, east of Archibald Avenue - APN 204-251-63 & 64. Motion: Moved Jy Ch-tiea, secondeO by McNiel, unanimously carried, to adopt the consent calendar. PUBLIC HEARINGS B. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 85-19 - LEDERMAN Construction of & 5,0 square foot general retail center on 3.2 acres of land in ;he General Commercial District located at the southwest corner of Foot..ill Boulevard and Ramona Avenue - APN 208-301-1.5 through 17. (Continued from July 24, 1985 meeting.) Howard :Fields. Assistant Planner, reviewed the staff weport. Mr. Fields inijicated that staff eras concerned with the lack of ,andscaping proposed for the front cf the buildings; therefore, suggested that Lees planted a minimum of 30-feet on center be required for the front elevation of the building. Chairman Stout opened the public hearing. Ken Lederman stated that the developer was concerned with the liability of the foun¢•iin/seat'.ng in the plaza area at the southwest corner of the project, as required by the Conditions of Approval. Mr. Ledermann suggested that the applicant be given the flexibility to develop an alternative design for this area. He additionally wa3 concerned with the type of trees being required on the front elevation. Planning CGmmission Minutes -2 August 14, 1985 AOk :r . v y r fps .,�- ,�;--�• •..,. � .�, i ffiffil q1 �Jr� �1tta1 , LIGHTNER DEVELOPMENT January 10, 1986 City of Rancho Cucamonga 9340 Baseline Road ` Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Re: Lightner Development — Tentative Tract 10076' Attention: Brad Bueller - Planning Director Dear Mr. Bueller: In reference to the above noted project, and in light of the comments noted at the Planning Commission Meeting of January 8, 1986, we would like to take this opportunity to state our understanding of the facts pertaining to the alignment of the proposed Banyan Street through our development. Lightner Development Company purchased the property after tentative approval 'had been obtained for a custom-lot subdivision on the site allowing nineteen (is) residential lots and requiring Banyan Street to conwa.:t to London Avenue in a "T" type intersection. Shortly after purchase of the property fron; the original owner, Lightner Development applied to the City for an ^:ctension of time, which was granted at the Planning Commission Meeting of S'.ptember 12, 1984 and subsequent extension of time which was granted by the Planning Commission on August 14, 1985, to extend the tentative approvals to August 25, 1986. At the earlier Commission Meeting for the time extention some concerns were indicated by the Commission with respect to the approval alignment of Banyan Street, but no revised conditions were imposed on the project altering the initial conditions of approval for the development. It is our understanding that the initial Banya,l Street alignment as - "T" intersection with London Avenue is the requirement that has been imposed by the City, and we have proceeded accordingly. We r would have major objections to deviation from -hat approved alignment at this point in time and would strongly object to any such modification '-^ ,ur project pertaining to that realignment. " We hope this clarifies our understanding of the matter, and encourage prompt resolution of the problem on the part of the City so as not to further delay our right to develop the property in an expeditious fashion. Yours very truly, Geo .,ght President LIGHTNER DEVELOPMENT 390 North Euclid Avenue.Suite 202 •Upland,California 91786•(714)W-2817 cant,Lic.No.9329768 ^ 3 - CITY OF RANCRC CUCAMONGA c.CAM STAFF REPORT �nP r Er. O P) 4 U �7 > DATE: January 8, 1986 1977 TO: Chairman ani Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Howard Fields, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: DESIGN RCVIER FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 10076 LIGHTNER DEVELOPMENT - Design review comprising 19 single-family homes on 6.9 acres (approved 19 lot subdivision TT 10076)_ in the Low Residential (2-4 du/ac) District located at the northeast corner of London and Liberty - APN 201-251 050. I. BACKGROUND: On August 25, 19PU2, the Planning CoLmissior approved a tract subdivision only for Tract 10076. The applicant is now requesting review and approval of design elevations for 19 single family homed. This review will comprise the second phase of residential construction in the immediate area. The f_Yrst phase under T2ntative Tract 12523 ;s directly 'south and is fully constructed with units currently being sold. II. ANALYSIS A. Gereral� The elevations have a contemporary style of architecture incorporating stucco exteriors, red and gray tile roof r_aterial, brick veneei,, and wood pant-ors. Some units will have a chimney feature, which is consistent with Phase I (Tentative Tract 12523). All units will present staggered-(t 5 feet) front yard setbacks for visual intevest. There are three one-vtory elevations anel 1 two-story elevation, with 2 floor plans per elevation for a total of 8 different product types. ` B. Design Review Committee: The Committee reviewed the design elevations and recorm-ndad approval subject to ,upgrading the architectural detailing around the windows> (wrst elevation 1600 series) for unit on Lot 8 (Banyan Street). The Committee also required a sight line study for units on the south side of Banyan Street looking southerly to the rear elevations of units on -iberty Street. The results of the sight-line study -' (Exhibit "F") indicate that, views into rear yards will occur from 2-story units on the southside of Banyan. Two mitigation measures are suggested: 1) plotting single story units only on the southerly side of Banyan, "andition #9), or 2) dense tree planting along Vence line, (Condition #10). The A -3"7 ITEM A PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT January 6, 1986 Tentative Tract 10076 - Lightner Page 2 W:Isaptual landscape plan (Exhibit "D") proposer a total of 156 five-gallon.Western P.edbud trees on the slope. A roar of 15 gallon size Evergreen trees are recommended for planting on the north side of the fence. A 6-foot high wood fence r.,ll be placed at the'tap of the slope with minimum 3-Foot landing (see Exhibit °F"), Finally, the Committee recommended provision for landscaping maintenance by homeowners for Lots 6 and 7 on Banyan Street until fuwure street connection is made. III. RECOMMENDATION: Staff 'recommends that the Planning Commission approve the design elevations through adoption of the attached resolution. Respectfully submitted,` Brad Buller City Planner BB HF:das Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Location clap Exhibit "B" Sits Plan ExbibAt "C" Elevations Exhibit "D" - Landscaping Exhibit "E" - Grading Plan Exhibit "F" -'Sight-line Study Resolution with Conditions Previously Approved Resolution with Conditions for Tentative Tract 10076' r �f r, .✓ l fill!'. 3 ar �S paw A I. n O A nj ' �^� �.. Vp B'-'.^o it US �3 m • n� 12 9 qz ^. O Y jj S - .cn� v rt oa <. ram, s.,.�o o•` �c n� =�ram. ' .b•• r � O 00 o. 3 n N =r AIM; A C n: 2 S M 6: l"l 11y1aaa t R O m A n3t.. ?• A u. a o.ea oa.. �s iz "u �� np,� o.u� oin M as •n my u. _ oar o .p A{ _ N v Af N {� •C akA. A T �.: N-f �w to AC.D O•p T .O� ao '��jx L`•C.b fglai 7LIT .� m'o D.� �pAO.nv: �Q b D1p� t]•� Ay�1 O,r\O p�a�4 .. '03 .r 1 3 O O n cZi n 3 a�0 7A3 2a .ontr P'oiR v RAtr=q.R�RI O o w� <n.o e 1 10 4T A �pn c oo = wait! moo _ ay ro c n u a pj..^. o n onN. Eli ,G soma. G N rS9 yRR D< fS:e��3 1.I6 /. A � I O T T L Nil Film �7Nw O A CSR }r`5 � r N6 ID lwRr w Ra.AE � • .� • � Im �� Iq. 1•N I• 1N. IN fib � on Olp S S�. ��. 6.n•) y Eli is am- Mai Eli �.O e� n r r�0 N D i > T > a ? — Z. N- C S a all as 7 r r0�0 "' p,r9 S •� S�?� DfO y�N 1 3 Gpa star a.• R �D N p OO .C� �.0 d y � .. N� qS 1r FBI r 'Y ao 00 0 V a 0 on ry I co ca nm all err oo w +� Raw M pi r m -• ro t.{y 1,, r= m3 o�N •.:p i 'A nW b� +i r if N Ba 7.lam �• • � � ND' rr P C) 7 y:b M1 A�• r A tp T a s n a Y.a o, u c v �N aim a aN m a. n as n- oA�z y� na. vn. C. o +A ar 'w X N H� i r p ry < r p 41;y r�f'.� -n O 6 A l •�1p A 1p G. �C A SA ,4 M • �1 a t _ I An a �.13 Q 4 i pOM o � ri ( L EEL-- ! J i 'Q'sNyslatr - �. I ! toms ISIS. If a i� =I ;f t I ?��oRriz PLANNING DIZ/ISI(aN EXHIBIT:— gig" SCALE.____ i I 1 ` m e ♦ i 1 r1 t y � r_ i Y JIM .,` i. l C i El i s m F11• , I � I r r c . � If t- ` a o s 6L �j i . � i' C �e du _. dC.1 _ v__ t T � x f .t� f ij � t= LL �F6 3 /. U •n t r . i t 3 I S ;,�.R 'A i I L' r yp�y t 3� . t I • t Y i L. t a { r------ — -------1 B q I I I t ; ' £ a tl� c eio = s 1 C3 =3 a f Id F Z ' rt .Fa { llt[tTT•TttT 11 _ C tug o Y _ ti. 2335 gal y.a' � s t S� a 3 c �� �.iai r�lF.—�va•�-s—• 2C 9 3 zla — 14 y � D itPIP G W -rr rr[rr j}a ry • ,E ri,t=o =% if UP �r � ! m e 1 y. � yslai4 It =irr y rtyt,ri !rii=i —•—a: 1 i Liz l e ( 1r�i Vie.}si p t7i r 1.FFit! � oil gga�dd H !=1l�Ftri li il"li =i \ r#?. - =i 7a1.. a. ' i'iiitl 1 _!= i y,fi7-� _,• 1 ..�m. � t� j�S;�i Zr !i- a cq� �o '�• t��i'i �il P m CLAtNY1P4(i PLAN �_ n•c.�s I '�., 41 .i toosa�momlv¢'raeeess�ta� ��, � LL._L _ cs,aowasttr .J ♦ 4 I IS - MISS is �� .�;,�� �+ �.rxr•� 1 moll Ws"L Dom lit Sul��e/4 _ 1!!��!!' �! ,•1 WOR ging ago— � 1 6 wl i ___ ._, .:---: 1►� �f f .1... _ � 1 ;.� $ � I ' � � !� Jl 1� ,_ 3 ( r d ' � � � I` s _ � /; b a ; f F � ` F .. AO m. a s �c _ �i. N i P� 3�-�f �. y��� � �o .c.� � �� ,`' �� r �k. �, � � � +� ' � , x i � .� ' s � jjj 'R7 i - ��.. �s. �� _. Y;� � �_ � 'i 3 S J � �0 RESOLUTION NO. 82-81 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCH'S CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, CONDITIONALLY APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP N0. 10076 WHEREAS, Tentative Tract Map No. 10076, hereinafter "Map" submitted by O.M. Wilson, Civil Engineer, applicant, for the purpose of subdividing the real property ;situated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, Country of San Bernardino, State of California, described as a residential tract subdivision on 6.9 acres of land in the R-1-20,000 zone (R-1-10,000 pending)', located south_of,Banyan Street, east of Archibald Avenue APN 201-251-63 and 64 into 19 lots, regularly came before the Planning Commission for public hearing and action on August 25 1982• an d 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. THEREFORE, the Planning Commission o"r the City of Rancho ' CucamongF, does resoive as follows: 'SECTION 1: ,The Planning Commission makes the following findings in regard to Tentative Tract No. 10076 and the Map 'thereof: (a) The tentative tract is consistentwith 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 de- velopment proposed; i (d) The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage and avoidable injury to humans and wildlife or their habitat; j (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. u Resolut( NO, 82-81 Page 2 (g) That this project will not create adverse on the environment and a n impacts issued: Negative Declara ion is SECTION 2: Tentative Tract Map NO. 10076 a copy of which is attached hereto hereby approved subject to all of t he following conditions and the attached Standard Conditions; PLANNING DIVISION 1. A minimum twelve (12) foot landscape Parkway to include trees, shrubs, ground cover, and irri- gation shall be provided along the east side of Banyan Street through the MWD right-of-way. ENGINEERING DIVISION 2• Installation of an improved concrete channel for Alta Loma watercourse from the existing sPilleay structure to South tract boundary includinq structures shall be required. of the The cost outlet channel shall be credited to the storm drain fees for the Projectand a reimbursement agreement Ask will be executed in conformance Ord wuti Hance: No, 75 the City to cover y exceed the amount of these fees. re which may be waived if and when Alta Loma Channelirement Assessment District is formed, 3• A letter from Flood Control District acceotino the design of the channel and adequacy of the- right-of-way width shall be obtained prior to recordation of the map.. The applicar." shall meet all the requirements of the Flood Con,.;cl District for this channel construction. 4• The portion of the existing Ban reconstructed to yan Street shall be London Avenue to t'provide a smooth connection to Engineer. he satisfaction of the City 5• The final design of Mandarin a four-fr-,t e Street shall provide parkway at the end r de-sac. the temporary P y cul- 6• If a General Plan Amendment is approved Banyan Street or to realign it to a di f to discontinue the applicant shall redesign Mandarin�Streetttoo a standard, regular ciil-de-sac. Provide - � — sa Resolution ;lo. tia2-81 Page 3 APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 25TH DAY OF AUGUST, 1982.. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Jeffre King,Chd rman c ATTEST � Secretary of the Planningission' I, JACK LAM, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the •Foregoing Resolution waF duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 25th day of August, 1982, by the following v'ite- to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Rempel, Stout, Barker, McNiel, King AWA NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None i �1 , L� "� O b d U v y � O i• — O �• p .� W _y �% G n T E c O E t o ' c s - C` ? E yP t„ Cs G UI C'; - <' N c o u — " oa e G uM >.... f LC Up. „y A r _ _ u = e�Y yq a o,c_ 6. 00 o m. ^uo G � � cC GEO G•N q � G9�.. py ��L � O V7 y0 N C N G C 7. p C A —a O. U c j•. ,v C C O O O - O I a o u e o p F V a u O L O b W r O • N I�f O NL r 4o d O y�I IS •�N pr Lp .O. M �G �,` f..l ✓J n3.O n E4 Eb.. •4. C_ > S w.q �.G �'b�Q C � dt v�pL c Ar r O S2 u 6. G E O�~2 O ✓ GG` 2 N yy EY C� A q �CyiV i p S C t E Em— u M n O H O C O Asa �Go> �.Ge 35 u.2 N to N Ci \_J11' c N o. 6_ ^ G" u m NEE n a c � 7= t uc L 2GL O� CL CLd -N E. =2' O _ uG �u� 99 4grei' r _n d0 S to r_ � >.0 GG zts a •d r d> L L l '% d G O !•Gcu C.• O Oi Ct� E Eu - r r Sa qr 0'ot 9L _ u c.c.u. y49 9L Y ya. cS L•✓ 3b pc-•• N.G rO OL �.' LC .L LIE Or tuid �Szo -Cj �o u 9CL Y.n u2 UO U is H•u 6. y UY� N c sN E. � G G.f� �. ` aJ 1-2 w0 4a W4Y iLi:.�O NquN E LEE 1 ''.. N � a �r � O• Gn 6.n ant�OL Si�oG rr � - ss a =T tj �.4 t i — o a d L V o E 01 N G M Y a — o�y� -.. � Y . W v _ 2� i - ° O q 2 a p p 6 C a= — �— W• dam tiD n C 1J 0 3 u °L J €a '4 Na O u = 0• - L _ o ou O _ � 41 TU 4 Z S =I L v Y = u �q0 4u• GJ.2:«� O�V•�.data c� ! Ce �� y, T L L AAC V O w, rL♦ t a4:p S T Au - a" 'o. p c 4� m. � � q` o a. e a v o c i♦ ,� u a NO a... v U jp tViy C F� '� O O. c j G p T C.♦, � T �A G `4 G� •] >N O¢ U S V„ O w<. L a l P.� '�G O. _�.La '^�, U c N Y . 2 td+G ..d o G.c i � o c o �� da o c W `.'♦ N.. z •-,e W «` „ 1 'I �11 N J C E c« V u L ` � C T C 71fI 4 4 T d � � �� �Nj• �pP 0. �� z o o a� ,Lnn G co EA A CC Ca J L y E N G= C a q 0 T V O S P C A O 4 c o C L „: L A „.0 U -GO AT>V N.T♦ Ga G e5/ L d E .♦ S 4 au G u.. _W L I � C`J �L O._' G<O F C C r. a O�4 r:y O a- ` - C aM „ ♦ OYy TEE _a C „ G y _ i y E i O .e`.1 C�e 4 �. r.. ;COG. „ UV v4 F Lq �O t � C Od.� a .� „p d N � I � � uW ���`i A.+ L•<4 cn „N n C 2 o� u ? o a._C 'k 'y vaN. LLl NElm L V .+ .- `^ t � _ s-7 i y f A C _ C ow o o ct c d c^ Um O Lei y C 1 o O` Y d •Q 6 y A A y i M.i d 3 4+ u. �f v a M L 4 GUI a 'Y LL C Y Y CpL _ d 2 C CC.� ay Va O L Lt ti a 6 O O d d -1 up �U.tp. E w E N Ca ice^ 0.4y O A.. AO C N J 6 p d 0 tt p y O Vq C 01 d�OA O C LdAU Vp 7y O wI O Z d� O V QJ a �sl .iL CV 1..0 GlNG .1 Y Va rL-1 2 01 r�jafi RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION r APPROVING.DESIGN REVIVW FOR TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 10076 LOCATED AT TAE NORTHEAST CORNER Or LONDON AND LIBERTY IN THE LOW RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT WHEREAS, on the 13th-.day of November, 1985, a complete application was filed by Lightner Development for review of the above-described projects and WHEREAS, on the 22nd day of January, 1986, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission held a meeting to consider the above-described project. follows:: NOW, THEREFORE, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission resolved as SECTION 1: That the following can he met: 1. That the prrAnosed project is consistent wi-,.a the objectives of the General Plan; and 2. That the "proposfQ use is in accord with the objective of the Development Code and the purposes of the district in which the site is located; and Aft 3. That the proposed use is in compliance with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code; and 4. That the proposed use, together with the conditions applicable -thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to p.,operties or improvements in the vicinity. SECTION 2: That Design Review for Tract 10076 is approved subject to the fo owll ing conditions and attached Standard Conditions: 1. All pertinent conditions of Tract 10076 as contained in Resolution 82-81 shall apply. 2. All perimeter block walls as shown on the conceptual grading shall be provided for as indicated. 3. A 6-foot high wooden fence shall be placed at the top of the slope with mini mum 3-foot landing, as shown on Exhibit "F", sight-line study section. 4. All fencing shall be consisTent with design and }` materials on first phase (Trarc 12523). 5. Provision shall be made for landscaping maintenance by homeowner for Lots 6 and on Banyan Street, until future street connectioi. is made, subject to review and approval by City Planner prior to building permit issuance. 6. Developer shall be required to provide additional architectural detailing to all corner units along London Avenue, and construct corner-side yard and return wales with consistent masonry materials. 7. Developer shall provide au'diti nal architectural treatment to west elevation of 1600 series unit on Lot 8 (Banyan Street). 8. Material sample board shall be submitted to the City Planner for review and approval, prior to building permit issuance. 9. Developer shall only plot one-story units along the south side of Banyan as mitigation measure for views into rear yards to the south. IAmk 10• A dense planting of 15 gallon size Evergreen trees shall be planted along the north side of the fence at the rear t�f lots 7-13. APPROVED AND ADOF-'-n ?HIS 22ND DAY OF JANUkRY, 1986. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE a RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: benm s L. Stout, airman ATTEST: Brad Buller, Deputy Secretary I, Brad Buller, Oeputy Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly intro,+uced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Lucanonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 22nd day of January, 1986, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: OMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: a n u�iO S 6C;Nl b 9 t! i C ••S N n _1 e•O� n9 d.br. ? �. 9 p Sl .I�tC S O y A O n A N O n C Jt\ O ?nn �_a.� Y rd O O.tv 4• A \ aa {\� m rRn �, y a � 2 b d n rp y Z��>b9•RQ. G� 2 O H 0 j bOf ESN �O �N�{ �Aki�] V �nNO Oy.O n= Vp G CPJN3Nq 3>Cn.N n—in �3 ydn n r • Tfqp b N O n 9 n.<'fS nr �$: a6604 �' WO r NONE �n9gig � V N 64C y..b �. .< o o•sa u4p .t N. . o. SapN �� ��M�n3 ~ J mt d0•G `� �a d Ay 1pg lN'1�1. �' 3 �• S p yA VOb lnn�nn N:. �. 3 fj uxi 6 Sy n Oa ? �. '9 3 2 3r0 ... O > O NO a 'LL6N T N Oi�dN. n�cyr�i.... as A a S = i p N n - C AL g,3 N dN n III ono �m d � utia poci p nx a N n N l b ?N S G O N A a O• 9: ..W d 9 �N r'C 3 g { ♦i D• N w nOi N3 � 223 ��.�^Q o a CfrO O y, ?b [11yily �l y 3 T AN KdS. vl Oa �G P V •� v o. nd� N.w�j rna Pe3So(°dma @ ' p3 F[I yS dy d: O nN 30qq yN. NOO 6 Nn 6 a� a sax>-. 033 V ' az i�rnw n..iao a3 m rvm an�n t ao n� � D 30 �,-' a vseba� O d ` O S 3 <BA yn b..p ."� O b b O b 3 p• i O`d Qa 't0 v.•6 3 � bra � 3S. Sy.3.� Pp'.i b p kbµ+ u u ao c P p b T 'n b.n o..y�, io. o• N a,n b3N OS3 lO bpO� ryry �6 W ON�C +� O,a'�' fO 660 w A.�A NO £ by y nOy yQp db. p ;:� p•C'P. O—y; P?gym y�O. P tCqp; �nN= -.0 Zt £ A 6 G Z S O A +'tl b o A R�OaP 6 >n N > O I _ 6 if nS C 30C+n y�p P Ad�1v. IIA GyG < N +bA e•p CN�p Ns. O� �» A d0 n1� -3w O+O.N.- GG A n pn• J.Y 9. Obj �Nn 6n 3.N'. D >>O 3+l O F.q p 6 0 3 _S n a G p.a N n i b E 45, lo- S '.p O N..o 4 aAm , b. bG.O� pa p6 � y T o. y n. quo°' o w v S�m� rva'm mu S N � b • P�p'r- an. n tie 1 OYW O.OZ i+ m 1 O C3£ n A(e £_4AN SO O amf;n �O 51 a 33fffeee T. y p•'�Gi.9.3W�. S•i • �. b 6 10 j�0 bb 4 O N m 6� A ". Y ry b n` b.+j b Oa .1 O l •.= G.n•.a ZA BPS N� N Y nS3 T�b O O N b.6 b ~S O P n 11 b --y A O�p ei 10 S a '•. O n�p O t� 6 j,0.fb �6 �:A A V� P �� p N Nye �y p;p t� N .O N Q 6T o ^ d y o =T b �+ V b�0��O R Z O N %b n'n �.p P Z.0 6 .�•.G y� ni. C S --O. O N V .' s. ... WE P n dOB u O y� S�K.�Sb O l`�. b £ . . 3.J.. 1`. p�IC d6b :� n 3.yA h. O P n.• S S .. a. � 6 3� N S O/�n'01 P O O �.. •A.,d�� (s. � �Q NpN a ?^.- ati s^a �5 Otnl+O b NO b• nPR;SD+n NON. a nb�N VS-Z mm 1n`3�l 6 n•A. 6(D 4�(n-.y' . '.1- �C A`C.Nb a�P.'1 Yin O� i • ,- r m P ' ip.N e.O.Om �;Na aGI D NO-� 6y AD NO-1 Sy < p.D p,NnJ r r O G gip• �n 'a �. .O 4iroi 6Am E'n O — �6 ro 3 u C y n:I O d d a •y O' O 3 LOGO• 1.I91ro 6_K 'a SN6 O � O.T A Tl.ym p b N s Q°i O i G j ro D 3 _Y m a p'G f D e^i •�. Z Ojn� S 1<b yN n.." C p v;11w io a A ; O r�< �Da 3 Qn »» Y Sr 33 Yb�q N j7:� Oa 61 G n p N N O OCON.A ^9b GS G Tn inN �Q VN�. Na mi. �� e N 1ya Z� v 3 n�ro +N o� a 10 GS oro' TO 6 bV W O Or � O.Dries p G t r ' 9;O_Z. ,O W n o6 N 3 ro :d j6 O� s3 tq °G R� or r Auroir F r G� My G Wp)ro AA6 T x6 is I •,• ro a C ro O r N iy /.p °c:r•m^ •"' o nu' a N5.'o•a� za a N �tl ro'...m Wn Grin1 W� 6 G9 •-•o r�. ry. y�.a O o A ` a�G r 07 z 00 P Rip n 6T7 091� ry b y ro ^ ro 3�uy S3 Ga^� � W � a= r »p •O 3 ? O' ro O N 0a f ZOn O r\ r O ^ ro C�. �• r W'i. C G.O.N. T N 0 ^s _ q C N R 0 •O. i roA 6 T roTA.� ^ �G ^^ G 1i bN �N c'1• tit: a A. � � O ••7r. A[Gy nevi ') m T7 t I S c�.N p _ oo� Cr ao3 AA6 lC.<yp Op A -+ °11 •. ani 1p� ab .aim o ze in •�. 7 1j II1I T (1 1I 11 3 <l Z33 03 p0 G A Ob 79" 3t1� ,c _e'Ng r r. Ip r rOp1 Y3 �b G�..06 6��. O.N• 9. y ,� F N NZ.y U. v.. O r TE 3 = g ox.,rc r nm a_.o� � `an. :ia scab G m om,.�r- C Z 2.S on n �tJaS r0 ♦ L tl0 f a, 4A 6. - Sj r N n ?.� o. q r Imo GSA n^ -,eN� no W A �q O Nb O nrN y e•m.- r3T C SE � c r � `1 N. �. Yaa O p 09 O y O Yc r6 N,^ ' Or r O n 3 bOa i0 Jp O A J. J. O O v(qj Q6Nb. 10 fld S O.R� �1S O IC ON 6'CA V.R O� - �Z rro t - Pnb er O b tATCC= fY O G,. i ONT'Sn 4� a n m �l T♦t2<v y y. C w �p ZE ZV �N q♦t. p pN op� n.C� fry' �O O �3 �+�0 Ompr nE w qnB=N N 33N.. �O� m �� Rr.w R C O m� ryry�( n,�`�EOO ,.A ..� 3y Y =uA + a , CO o n n �± q RO`•C� L NAB Sr y r-.n jAnIBL .`� ♦SQr _ o• u^n. .� 3 p d o`c m�4 n r -f'^o 'v A Y 'p er ee r m 9TplC = •`rE� r A Vtptp r^<3 N 6 TnS a S •-lt O t.� �O N mC' p36.p. A♦CN IpE ry1 3a la � 0' p1 r'qI 1 yy 0 G 6 ti♦?. 'CAD R. -mm.. sp aB.- A09n WE ♦mR �` S m� rN O `Yre 11 YMN m Pn C am =R 0 02n n 1 p Sb S .p a Z d. 3 R Tjy '=mN"E r N m po a+� �.. n p-� " p�4 r �• a r d {T�". p p'w0 O b �R3 m --N O nIN Oryo l rim W 3 �cn-•. O t1 N 6 CNN xm y n'Wi 1C JCS G. r n. r=' p p a N N.. " tam 1 :• iq iN� is � i�, i•(J'��� i ►W I b.D O•T �.A 20 OC c� vc nn m pHm v' ob v 03 3rOO O N6n OC O O• n �n w <6 nr 6 Ip.�r.r. 3 �b ,wp �• N C u >..r6C GO baVa p d9 �r 9 Td �. v r,r p0 N ...f0 b.• � .^ y.Y 2 n.�.v �O N6 . O r 9 V •C o aN GA A Our Rv •i y.0 �N 6Q yh 00 a ryry w 9 b ra 3 p N y3 y> pC up 30- S Q �O �N A. NC C� R pn. 6 An 52 4."•- A. 9C1 rp bq 7 7. �Qn j a>. r ry O n p p 0 2 y p d O >O B r b CIO..r C.6 b6 N ro i •C6r IY n •• tp n i fp •CP �9b m b W U7 1 O r n A b r 6� ;n. �O a n O•Op R O. C r N W O p R ry P r 3 > n Z ny ZZ 0 12 o 3 n 7 66�9 OO,c A tD..gn y r•+• NO 9N ~ IM ti N �00 NtG 1C.b N ac •a� m.n .. s B a>'� Q, non a 3 a�� 3 . 1 r� mom.. A rvR.�Td np� 31 NK.nN N.^Qb tiH�. 3P'1N3 cd nd p`tn mu o � Or u. O�� 3 No• N � O T,p0 O N J zm oNallo o. N O Z 9 N Og3 t m �....• Cp' �33 3. n 2 R� 2>> y?•t+S j p0 o IS NKN Apd� Tn [�• n�6 O O n Z N n Y p i p O 9 r 6b n 0 jj 6>0' y a p.nR pia• Nd A N 3 V 124. r Or bA7.N 6 /� 'f.. 1j u�i O�O��C l•Oi�N — CITY OF RANCHO CUCAIVONGA C�CAA[r)� STAFF REPORT C V DATE: January 22, 19$6 1977 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: John Meyer, Assistant Planer SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 85-47 - proposa o eve op atwo-s cry Office building totaling 10,613 square feet on .66 acres located on the east side of Utica, north of Civic Center Drive, in Subarea 7 of the Industrial. Specific Plan (Industrial Park District; - APN 208-062-08. I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action Requested Issuance of a Negative Declaratiion. 8.. Existing Land Use: Vacant. C. Surrount,tng Land Use and Zoning: —orl W Approved or -ce ui ing, Subarea 7. South Approved office building, Subarea 7. Efist Vacant, Subarea 7. Wast Vacant, Subarea 7. 7. General Plan Designations: rojec ite n ustr�a ark t North - Indastri'al Park South - Industrial Park East - Industrial Park West - Industrial Park E. Site Characteristics: Existing rough graded pad within an approve Ice xecu 've Tennis Center, II. ANALYSIS: A. General The subject property is part of the Master Planned Tennis xecutive Center (see Exhibit "F"). The proposed site plan is consistent with the conceptual master plan. This project has been reviewed by the Technical and Design Review Committees. Upon approval of the Negative Declaration, the Ciiy Planner will grant final approval of the project based on the conditions recommended by the Design and Technical Review Committees. ITEM B PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DR 85-47 Forecast January 22, 1986 Page 2 B. Environmental Assessment: Part I of the Initial Study has been completed by the applicant. Staff has completed Part I? of the Environmental Checklist and found no significant adverse impacts nn the environment as a result of this project. If the CommissiLi concurs with staff's findings, then issuance of;a Negative. Gaclaration would be in order. III. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recancmends issuance of a Negative Declaration for OR 85-47. RespeGtfuly submitt Brad Buller City Planner I , R8-JM:ns Attachments: Exhibit "All Location Map Exf'Sit "B1/ - Site Plan Exhibit "C" - Building Elevations Exhibit I'D" Conceptual Landscape Plan Exhibit "E" - Grading Plan Exhibit 'IF" - Master Plan for Tennis Executive Center Initial Study, Part IL i ' ioolt�ComtwNtifO. - 1 1 Law and Justks Center , Vacant Vacant „ •,.,, W �.4 W > Clvte genter OIgM Complex •"•' 0. OfflCe ttugdl-C-1 ,f ��..�y once eWaouro Grte Centeq orWo I - Light Induftral C,%noex # ` Shopping Center - 7 i • l SITE `ITIt MATIOG MA? ) L 1 NORTH CITY OF ITEIM: RANCHO CUCAMOiTGA. TITLE:-4X-VtfC�- h(A-V PLANNING DIVISION EXHIBIT:k --SCALE- t t . I _�� ennY.;.T►.e1MT t • � � � Omer owpq Adlk -�•„-Tom,---. ' p1 I eaoM Tr.sIM om..emm.e j S17E PLAN NORTH CITY OF ITG\4. RANCHO CLCAMOj-\'GA. TITLE: .S rT� Wit_ JK/ PLANNING DIVISION EXHIBIT. .SCALE: _ i 1._'�� `•".'_'P.���:•` � tea. West Elevation South Elevation w .l East Elevation North Elevatior NURTH CITY OF ITENI• RAICHO CLTCAMO\TGA TITLE: -�1,knc��•v PLANNING DIVISI(),N EXHIBIT. (Q SCALE. I [�41M•T�•.OIM I it 10I Y F...... p PROFESSIONAL W ••t L-� OFFICE BUILDINO- x Two-Story) 7. �..• yam= ' \,f f. Xp A � 4 r. 4. rat CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPE PLAN C� Typk[i Stro[t S[oUon nbRTH CITY OF - ITEAM.• AI�'CHO CL7CAIVI \TGA Tinr-: ,l A�i, `r TAN PL MINU DIVISION EXHIBIT: SCALE- E .ts � �f wA ,lam _`�tJ-t•4�. S�', 3 f'• t v PROFESSt SIONAL L 1 `p `'r V-1 1 OFFICE BUILDING LOL1 1 , '� .� • , ..1. t. •:� y • 'Ze^ I` �� � -- ..,.-�— _ _— `� ,Attu._.;:LbS' �` r-«,�•� ) t 1p II . - € e+1-1.n.•atm o1n eIna) 1 (FF 1172SI I CONGEPTUAI�GRADING PLAN FORTH CITY OF ITEvt: RANCHO CLCA.MGNGA TITLE: EXHIBIT: _SCALE-_-_- --- PLANNING DIVISI0, r. S ,,R EEf n � _ t .. r aL Mm CVrMR NORTH CITY OF IT LNI: ,A�N RANCI-I0 CUCAiMO.NL GA. TITLE: ;N PLANNING DIVISION 1rXHIBIT:_[;' SCALE _ F;��g CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PART II - INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONxIENTAL CHECKLIST DATE: j APPLICANT: FILING DATE: LOG NUMBER: D�L C?S-[f PROJECT:_ Z- iQ..Y ���� j PROJECT LOCATION:_ ',./—s y r7 C 4- A, o/C_ GE Y�it'1Z l%r2_ I. ENVIRON!ffiNTAL IMPACTS (Explaratior of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required on attached sheets). YES MAYBE No I. Soils and Geoloev. 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 d -'estructia n, 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 depa_ition? !f 7. Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mud- slides, ground failure, or•similar hazards? Ph. An increase in the rate of extraction and/or use of any mineral resource?AOL _ 2. Hydrol.& . Will the -proposal have significant results in: � v-w Page 2 YES "_4YSE "o 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 gronndwaters, 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 anc,,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. Binta Flora. Will the proposal have significant results —in: a. Change in the characteristics of species, ANIL Including diversity, distribution, or number of any species of plants? b• Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of plants? , YES KAA3E `0 c. Introduction of new or disruptive species of plants into an areal d. Reduction in the potential for agricultural production? Fauna. Will.the proposal'have Significant resul':_q. in a. Change in the characteristics of species, including_diversity, distribution, or numbers of any species of animals? b. Reduction of the numbers of any, unique, rare or endangered species of animals? c. Introduction of new or disruptive species of animals into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? d.. Deterioration or removal of existing fish or wildlife habitat? 5. Population. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Will the proposal alter the location, distri AIMLbucion, 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?' 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, policies, or adopted plans of any governmental entities? c. An impact upon the qulaity or quantity of existing consumptive or non-consumptive recreational opportunities? r� -�l ?age r. YES LaIEE \'C' 8. Transportation. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? b. Effects on existing streets, or demand for new street construction? C. Effects a 2ixisting parkin; facilities, or demand for new parking? d. Substantial impact upon. existing transporta- tion systems?' e. Alterations to present patterns of circula- tion or movement oz people and/or goods? f 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, Safety, and Nuisance Factors. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard? b. Exposure of people to potential health hazards? c. A risk of explosion or release of hazardous substances in the event of an accident? d. An increase in the number of individuals or species of vector or pathenogenic [` organisms or the exposure of people to such organisms:? e. Increase in existing noise levels? f. Exposure of people to potentially dangerous noise levels? g• The creation of objectionable odors? Aft h. An increase in light or glare? a Page 5 YES LaY3E 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 potential scenic corridors? 12. Utilities and Public Services. Will the proposal have a significant need for new systems, or alterations to the following: a. Electric power? b. Natural or packaged gas? c. Communications systems? d. Water supply? k e. Wastewater facilities? f. Flood control structures? € g. Solid waste facilities? h. Fire protection? i. Police protection? f: J. Schools? k. Parks or other recreational facilities? I. Maintenance of public facilities, including loads and flood contt•ol facilities? m. Other governmental services? 13. Energy and Scarce Resources. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Use of substantial or excessive fuel or er!ergy? 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 t` of non-renewable forms of energy, when feasible renewable sources of energy are available? D-13 ?age 6 YES *AYSE VO de e. Substantial depletin of any nonrenewable or scarce natural resource? AUIL IzS 14. Mandatory Findim of Significance. 7je a. Does the project have the potentialto degrade of the qu,^,lity of the environment, substantially �- gab. reduce the habitat of fish or wildli.fe species, 01 cause, fish or wildlife population to drop u5-_ below,.'self sustaining levels, threaten-to pl- eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce I the number or restrict.the range of a rare or - la- endangered plant Gr animal or eliminate .am;: important examples of the major periods of is: California history or prehistory: jec b. Does the project have the potential to achieve to short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, 11 environmental goals? (A short-term impact on the is environment is one which occurs in a relatively :in brief, definitive period of time while long w; term impacts will endure well into the future). c. Does the project have impacts which are 1 individually limited, but cumulatively ? considerable? (Cumulatively considerable 4e means that the incremental effects of an ro individual project are considerable when viewed a . in connection with the effects of past projects, f and probable future projects). je d. Does the projec� '.Lave environmental effects ::au- which will cause substantial adverse effects __. ng: can human beings, either directly or indirectly? -_IOtiti IZ. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRON!-T.ENTAL EVALUATION (i.e., of affirmative,answers to the above questions plus a discussion of proposed mitigAtion measures). I� AML NW f Pare 7 III. DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial evaluations �--1 I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a signiftcant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant eff,.ct ` L in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL SE PREPP.RED. �---� t find the proposed project MAY,have a significant effect an the envirnment, and an MIRO.NMENT IMPACT REPORT.is required. Date Signature Title r� II CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GUCAmroi STAFF REPORT Z�•t�' c9c o F� z U, > DATE: January 22, 1986 1977 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Bruce Cook, Associate Planner SUBJECT: DESIGN REVIEW F, ` TRACT 10046 - LEWIS HOMES - Design Review o u oi.ele"�io'ns and of�3lts for a residential subdivision of 18.9 acres into 27 lots located on the north side of Hillside, west of Hermosa APN 201- 532-1 through 27. I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action Requested: Approval of precise plot plan, grading plan, indBuilding Toorprints and elevations for unit development on a recorded tract map. B. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North - Vacant; Very Low Residential ( less than 2 du/ac) South - Single Family under construction (Tract 10047); Very i, Low Residential (less tt:an 2 du/ac) East - Primarily vacant with isolated Single Family Residential; Very Low Residential (less than 2 du/ac) West Out parcel with a single family homt-, flood control channel, Single Family Residential tract; Very Low Residential (less than 2 du/ac) C. General Plan Designations: Project Site - Very Low Residential (less than 2 du/ac) North - Public facility/park site South - Very Lcw Residential (less than 2 du/ac) East - Very Low Residential (less than 2 du/ac) West - Flood Control Corridor, Very Low Residential (less than 2 du/ac) D. Site Characteristics: The project site lies in the northc:-ly portion of the City at the foothills of the San Gabriel mountains. The site slopes and drains to the south and west. with existing grade between six and seven precent. Abutting to the west is the Alta Loma Channel. A the southwesterly portion of the site is an out-parcel with an existing single ITEM C 3 - PLANNING COtM1ISSION STAFF REPORT January 22, 1986 OR for Tract 10046 — Lewis Homes Page 2 family home and various accessory structures. Two parallel Eucalyptus windrows traverse the site in an east-west direction. II. ANALYSIS: A. General: The Development District is Very Low Residential which requires 1/2 acre lots and is conducive to ".Estate" type homes. Four building footprints are shown, r8riging in size from 2,395 square feet (1,780 square feet living area) to 3,589 square feet (2,760 square feet living area). Floor plans show three and four bedroom units, and all modals are single-story and come with three-car garages. A variety of elevations are offered with each footprint with architecture characterized as "Ranch" style. Two parallel Eucalyptus windrows traverse the site in an east-to-west direction. These trees will need to be removed to accommodate approved street and house pad locations. A Tree Removal Permit has already been issued for Lots 1 through 4, and a permit to remove trees for the remainder of the tract is currently under submittal to the City. The Planning Commission has indicated that they would like to review and consider Tree Removal Permits. Past Commission action has been to require tree replacement per the windrow replacement policy when trees are removed in a situation such as this. Wherever possible, replacement trees should be planted along the established (Exhibit 6F'�)"grid" pattern of the original windrow system S. Design Review Committee: The Design Review Gomn.,Itee has reviewed t e projected recommended approval subj nt to conformance to the following conditions: Site Plane 1. Indi:via.;ar lots shall be graded to conform to the following standards: a. Minimum 15 foot unobstructed flat area (2 percent slope or Less) a(Ijacert to the garage side of house. b. Minimum 10 foot unobstructed flat area (2 percent slope or less) adjacent to side of house opposite the garage. c. Usable, flat rear yard area (2 percent slope or less) adjacent to the house with a 20 feet PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT January 22, 1986 DR for Tract 10046 - Lewis Homes Page 3 average dimension and a minimum dimension of 15 feet. 2. The driveway for the unit on Lot 16 should be designed so that the horseshoe is southerly of the garage. 3. Drive approaches should conform to City Standard for 2-car garage (W=16 feet). Driveways can flair out to 3-%w width outside of the public right-of-way. 4. The developer should provide a masonry perimeter wall along the side yards- adjacent to Hillside Road on Lots 1, 24 and 23. The walls should be of a decorative design compatible with tk. architecture of the dwelling. The walls shoul be set back a minimum distance of 5 feet behind the back of walk and should be landscaped and irrigated by the developer. 5. The developer should provide a 6-foot high decorative wall along the cide yard of Lot 17 adjacent to Evening Canyon Way. The: design of the wall should be compatible with architecture of the dwelling. The wall shall be set back a minimum distance of 5 feet behind the back of walk and should be landscaped and irrigated by the developer. 6. The units on Lots 20 and 27 should be reoriented such that house fronts face a., to Briar free Place and Evening Canyon Way, respectively. Architecture• r � 1. Intensify the upgrade treatment for ndel I-..1_? 4T by continuing the horizontal trim shown on the front elevation across the left side elevation. 2. Revise the roof line on Model 436-B to either: a. Put a gable roof over the fro-it yard bay window, or b. Extend the eave line on either side of the bay i window to eliminate the roof projection and provide a continuous roof line. G -3 PLANNING COM14ISSION STAFF REPORT January 22, 1986 DR for Tract 10046 Lewis Homes Page 4 3. All roofing material is to be tile. These comments have been included into the Conditions of Approval. C. Grading The Grading Committee has reviewed the project and oun�the grad=ng concept to be in conformance with all applicable regulations and standards. However, in their review of the grading plan, the Design Review Committee felt there should be parameters to establish m'nimom setbacks and level areas from structure to slope to insure adequate access and acceptable areas of usable yard space adjacent to the house. These parameters have been included into the Conditions of Approval. III. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: This project is consistent with the Development o e and the General Plan. The project will nrt be detrimental to adjacent properties or cause signif;cant environmental impacts. In addition, the proposed use and site pl n, together with the recommended Conditions of Approval, are in compliance with the applicable provisions of the Development Code and City Standards. AOL IV. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission consider all material and input regarding this project. If the Commission concurs with the Facts for Findings and Conditions of Approval, adoption of the attached Resolution would be in order. Respectfully su'-"itted Brad Buller City Planner BB•BC:das Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Location Map Exnibit "B" Subdivision Map Exhibit "C" - Site/Grading Plan Exhibit "D" - Equestrian, Trail Details Exhibit "E' - Conceptual Landscape Plan Exhibit "F" - Master Tree Removal Plan Exhibit "G" - Elevations Model 436 Exhibit "H" Elevations - Model 1-129 Exhibit "I" Elevations - Model 1-147 Exhibit "J" Elevations Model 1-150 Tract Resolution of Approval No. 80-85 Design Review Resolution with Conditions C a Nt > oii( ------------------------------ ———-- 14 �Ih J h bL'T'.�� _ ,-F___^ ._-___ ___^_ -__� ' 1_ _-_ .. r-------- '� 1 t---------- _! I ` I 1 It --- -----� p-------------------- --- 1 --� ------ ! I L -----—--- r ---- -- ----------1 ! ---- -I I ! I I -i r----------! 1 ! I i 1.1 ------F---- -----� 1 ---------+-----------4 5 t----------I 1 I I ! t !- ---- �------- 3 w V y, g p Vda ° F H ^ n3yS 5 ° J g 9�pt t • ee tt 4 },ya4w �xc � it /''••✓ �_�� �f_I id°..��"2�..:.�..:.;' °$^a0°°oe •^..:-: �•..lkCs� � ! �� t ,.tom�! f�r�� f t �fii :�v6 f,°�` � �� v r xK ' A Wei a! � la at, ,t :i[i,j; 3 i 1 3 p !1 i � {{ dI { �z= o • w m 1 . -° + e i ii= =3 I ,1 a( �, i li sz !! iq,; ii!ti !1 7t l;li 1{! !(1 i i! a fi(l a 00 1 7j ;je,l ail;; �� it:lt i!}s;}{j =s � 'i' I! ; !il{i iQ 11P ii } it }i j} !' �' } 111 me � s � • a s a i �1a z OU Oc + i I n,i 11{ f 1.4 l 1 3=1 at1. ja[ 47 :1 f illill) till{$ l�l� \ � y r a i• I ' i 1 iTi y �, 1 I rt � i 4o a j 2 :+tl� m F� L! 1 �� is ��'_. ��„ � •. �'�'.� �' ,x otf �,J{(}���7f`'� _�__.`�� ��.. ,ram '•`:• �_ i a��'fl ` �r t� s `�•g r x�r i .r�� M t i•� � tt _' IN ;a iii i f i4 is Etta ii3 i i3}ty i t ff f {fi ? { 1 S g a�!,t i z t 13f 7 7 ai �!; Fi 2 _ ' �t i b�3} j �j i}} SE f f t• � _ t 2 i. ..f 3} }3s EE It '} II t ili F,t3}x}Is ij tf f 9 f S t5El�f i'i it7tt[..tlat ti tit t�...I,��} 9�..`t{1� c V I { • tq 3-1 x f. �} ii I E - ! { �{• , i � 1 iF}' � ti � ! � ,S�i,3{i f ti ixi ! p 3y 3rF'i' S}f l i, ,j i i,,It T. 3 i3 ES Esf{ }t R 3 jiE t1}�i i3iE i1ta 3 ;} t:; ii}i i giatl ' r r , 4i • it It T t` pTr 2 `.'��if sL � ,* 99 F'^^'^nY.— i.jli Fi_t •- �i t II3FM ki 10 4 Ask U 3 c IN! / a I / !� /`''l� ! � ,( /�l / � I '+;.�, � � y .,fir� i �1•-_i.�, IL Jill ANMA \� , •• w: ^..Awl _ - `� �fIt • is. 2 ' 0 22 � J1 tt�µ't► [�` 'yti i°`•�sU*-'��r'�'..y.�yrs. ..e- .•. -t�:.++. gyp'.. �+', .2'�. S►' S�,yf�a}�s�Y w�s►:�"..F�✓x,�r:.t i�7' ��k• 4.. Ott-,?''�+%'S1 ,��,-'�' Ate. IRE Lq,i wl yyyy;,1 1y.�1 ".. '�' f/"._� ^ice / ►` /~��'�4)� '4.�i..F'F.r +t*Ki, a,3'ct �.y.i✓;i%��^�.� � icy,-„1�4Y�.�� cC��1�- 1s� K� -14 is ��}i�1�'4 t-G.• r ;i ur � �. ♦i' ram. ` ter. s s `! a`r ems?=�� ��•y'�� � ® Jo o a O mz OV W4v (L HV e� u�eo.g zc .1� �o Ir tl [ - o ]j s Q r-o W C ) A. A. 7 ! •�� `�'§ ¢� � � p � orb 14 Y > If —44 lit f. ' z �ZZ 1 6 V Of! - OU ��UQ t \ �c Cam. -�_..•_ / •, .. it �_`�,. t � � ��� 1�"' 'r'°� ►'`� ,ate _. ��.P �{'�1��'� i� � +j p rwrav*n-w vn�a+stxn_- I� 9�OO9 1nYtl1 wenoanro do 5anoa su+ai VONOWVono OHONtla �MOIirA]t)1NOY.,fifC�' S 11 o0 0 W V V � : i� a� a i "'0"low6 YINtlOinYO j0 S3WOH SVA31 'VONOWYOno oik .`il — _ .- EI JL�I lae�5�o0 I i � ❑DOI 00 LLI aj i i E e7> ' �I u F��•� nl 5 ; ' II III►11 � .� � � III�I�Ii�II�Illll� �� �e5t t• li;�y it ,,� WFm - I tf,� �.Lco.�•r �A aweo�Yo c sum vallown R ' r El' X Fq W L i .... �'� - rurvamrrmssnwswn - POOL Lovul vmmottera io sah0+4 su+n t t I j . i i '�aat�rars �1' Y 1 1 P 0 r�I Ij - ® Uo x =1 t 2 j � Q I r � I m� Q I Z. • t �s It Y a�oil I� y o E3 3 3 Ij S 'i4'j r �C ter; tFF `i Fit I nl� ad • 1�'•IIIIIIL;I I I Ii R r � ; ; t4!1 I IJ r lr r r. I A riptl�lll Ilui�it!i:u �� I � I � '� tr'r'jli III''il \�III�I 4S ��\\�11U a— `i I ltr I� 'll�' � •u ^ t a F• y : � e i 3 ON W .®r ou ®r A a 2:NO .?I.. Nj r Qp\s y t I. ! a n W F I / J S k u �t rr Z f .tags C{°ixi;. 1p: j ®❑ 4 QF >o 4 F t xS Ng a: i it Illjingy I � Ja � . 1 t�ilul�ill�lin � i un" IIt� 1114� n: i�ii11�11) PIia.1.LIL l Xtt ak T. III• i 111 Sypu,S sLj�s4 � °4 a:L � �8 i . _ ' tuilyir�l Drool last vwaodrno do sawoH su�ai p _— VONowvon0 OHONtlIt �i,aara.�3 ar �c r 4 i r o LL' LL I i I r f .: •t 1 }�h-Q oit, U, j rat Y .s�Z; •f ..� d I "Ti s io 3. a • YuF a s yy9 \ 9 6 .o �a Q Oz i 11 Y0 � ttFtF'} l i 4 I I a Q� Ir_ ;d =g ;'L',_is � 3 `� � N .�� {r • -J jF r NI ao 1 !r°o g s F , F Z O 41 Fil 1 _:GQ ` 6 �y i r � — y4y 3 4 d a°yy F 9 y i a: f °7 i GVOOt.13VUl Y..,�ow�ao s3wosi'sux3i VDNOvivono OHONVB ^MPIYI.Yp 1MOY1 UG0,1 YY1-{ 9 Y � ( I . L_a 177 4 1. r ti a 2 ti p l �w8 ;�.: Y&WAI JlO 63WO 6YA37 — .> 14 C1MS1.1-PAa09-1' 46 , 1 gill lc.. 1 I • 'B It IPLj 1. si� � ,�• .ter � P-. QCD ! rFrs�SJ 1 Ili TT I, • w uj �- 11 _ i cl II - 3ifiY •l - ��. I _� �!(t: - •p s; � alb 1 1 ri I'i 11 ge 11 h ®L7 II L� ;lit o t ViNtfGlIT'�lO 83Wpi SLAA3(7,�•LJ ,��id� YJN06Y70f74 OH�NYtl = `.. i E �nY LMIYC) 'JM�)q �Z Q 3 l �� lss:asl3 i i 1 � r ! —r 9 _ .� ✓ae• 2� W _ a w EEEEB iii-s t - a ` c.-ag ®��� + ��s �'��. M� ®-� J, ;1 U� >£ �..+! _'� 4 �L ���_ �� f V i('I� '�, �® • 1 wum ��illfl� 'ii��®_ (� '1� r` .!', K � EE'���',r ;� i, �� ' .� � - tf3 ��l i E Ir {E{31 � � 4 ��. ���;f�����►1� 9�w 5 i r� i�'E! t�; �'�� �� �' �!ldt1�E �.— �- +-� �_ :� ;r t; :+ �� � "�i11a16ii 17417Y � 9YO+MJ ISAlr:Slvtl1 .�...���.:S..w *�'�'1 V•JNOL VOf70 OH�Nt+H \� y jil i _ -11 ya' ' to CIO �C0 ` W vl —_. •,� gat �l. J gyp �-+ I I•,\ I I � � s;F 1 LI t- ai �13� W E-=--� � ——tee i $ t•� - I YF� I I :33 9WOOL anryy V'JHOL4V0(70 OHO a �r� ' _ a i id _.11 = L, 1S JJJJ� � 11! r an i 1 1 i : It,— } 1 } 3 1 W a 1 11 ! y�\ ✓� to } o t =i vwnoinr0 an s3woN SLM31 tlJNOWVOttO OHONVB :.� 1111rA313 1NOW 0-lolr-1►1-1' r r -- n LU iL ❑ i ii1011 pM77 D 9Vo0t l�t!!i �=_�-=.��•�--�—: mom OM ONaNVU c'i� 4 F 7 t 1 laa/ Y ❑ s 13 X I it y i! L..�i i� Ca z'\� a Q � _` jo. 10 : It3 vld ''r• x,-�t•�Z 3 r ---- 33'C� 8 E bli;! —Pre lei I tfia 3¢ fill - `��•\ a .i o - ! = is --.�._/ Q7'Q1-0 o - =. 6 F' C1�end� f Pac c a Pe 3 cif 7, -� OIOOL n� 1J Mo ,�oZ El b i t ED a; I �l t i `- 5 �76C - {, - ruJgJIW�j047RYu'477g1 - - wii i a 90007.17Vtl1. VINtlOi1�V'�i0 93WOH SIM3'1 - i - tlYJNOWtlDf1O OHONtlB •ou n7 aRa Y:acw J t•� � i y Y Y ARL 1p LLI i a s F a. W tc 13 Ilk LL is Fo { f - 11 e V6NOwvono OHON7ki Lag CL 1_ra !t e " to .J _ LLJ,. ,14CL 1 4 LI L_ Hr z _J Z U w �i ---.----- r _ ;1 9 3_3j ?- ` -- - -- N s g sa it 7 . F r r! D VJNouvio J OHoNYH --'-^ Ask Fqb B 9►OOL 1avul _ vYitlOi�tY7•'O S3N.W SIm3'1 voNowvono ON9NV8 waaYY»aaMo+ra-aow-are-a y _Y .. • WWOJ aYYrM �� Q �. i �. ❑ IM ❑ i 0 00. Z J LL a p i 3 l YN1 - = 'vwaomiYo s�irx:siM3i 94901 Iowa OHONVM .`.~.---• _ all mr a i (D/ L ' ZI Dat -er s r y 3 j� � a� q• •s � _ F a5`S�t� Sx9 F'I i i � -Y �-- _- �L ��• 72=.�R�§,Ci 4 s F$ j§p S \zpi r� 33a1 o{a �� I . 3l Ei2i jV � ,,C�aiS e'i�F Y i�it. if� \ -& �'}y• ii;1e :� ILsrQ , ! 6 a,a ��� • ; a�s YWtl03t7V�:j0 S31'10H SIM2Z .- :., m-owvono oaoNva 1 flOW Lill l✓2 I� I `a 3 { 3g i it u d 1� i "H -Y--- weaum_lo. _ i - Moot lortll TM sire__ a rlNeodnvodo sawoa�5lM31 6 _ VDNOWVD00 OHONVH ai em.o a-u }' ' 12 a -� if 1 + m Z O i i ❑ LU a LU El sk } I 1 Y i 7 9100L 1 09tl1 v.• �� �S aoNowvono oHONva CI•U 9 I I Y,ao 09 ' Y Uj �m E I _ 41 p) as e _' D= • �I �y�i �` r�. �C . i{ a r 1' fQ i I LLJ � W S' i Lr•-q�- -F3- i LL . it� - Z � •s ��3.7�'� , I ���� �-� ,$F u F3. 8 ; J ,LI. 3 _; � 14L - II 7_ 3. ' �- 7 O �I A a �vmm"4 v 9Y0041OYtl1 - �_ 0 6�M � V9NOWWORO OHONVH �— — - r sq �i L��- SSLS S= �� •� Yt • +. S S S}S. l0 •I . ., o .:is-01�• q q KrV, a ' a wLU co y o } . ;, _ �+ e I • a .__.—. vwYo3mrrass�wxsu.n-_- vwaoenv�ios3Wo11:suA3i mivnnno OHOAOL Ntli! aourn�3L+oaiswss-s - S vAdi. ,E n LL 1p W �= do GB"GVAM n — VONowvono oHoNva rt Y 4 � t ;a 1 }E _ ,1 �F Y t � 1 Rif 21 ;� 1 �!s Fac 11 zlTi 30 LU i r?r riI, i t x � K - • w• rb d• _ .,__ �yfi3-3d�LMw-iuil� + Sty,`.. rauvo woo_ �F. � �r 9r001 l]�tll .. VONOWVO0o OHONVU 7 4=� +�+f f•----- -ram— ---1 + 1.4 3vd + ?4:t•ai LL I I Wi p o 1 Y. I J ' j K{ C iS •` W s _ I 'OCD -i RESOLUTION NO. 30-85 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION; OF THE CITY OF RAVCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, CONDITIONALLY APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 10046. I WHEREAS,,Tentative Tract Map No. 10046, hereinafter "Map" submitted by The Anden Group, applicant, for the purpose of subdividing the real property situated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino, State of California, described as a tract subdivision on 18.8 acres in the R-1-20 zone located on the north side of Hillside, west of Hermosa - APN 201-Q82-03 and 04 into 27 lots, regularly came before the Planning Commission for public hearing and action on December 22, 1980; and WHEREAS, the City Planner has rec6,vended 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 presznted at the public hearing. NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho CCucamonga does resolve as follows: SECTION 1: The Planning Commission makes the following findings in regard to Tentative Tract No. 10046 and the Map thereof: (a) The tentative tract is consistent with all applicable interim and proposed general and specific plans; (b) The design or improvements of the tentative tract is consistent with all applicable interim and proposed general and specific plans; (c) The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed; (d) The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage and avoidable injury to humans and wildlife or their habitat; (e) The tentative tract 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. t the proposed subdivision. C L4-7 a Resolution ;io. 80-86 Page 2 (9) That this project will not create adverse impacts on the AWL environment and a Negative Declaration is issued. SECTION 2: Tentative Tract Map No. 10046, a copy of which is attached hereto, is hereby approved subject to all of the following conditions and the attached Standard Conditions: "t. Engineering Division 1. At the time of underground utility installation and prior to installation of street improvements, the developer shall contact the appropriate cable television company for the :rea and make arrangements which would give the company the opportunity to install cable at the time of trenching. If the cable television cv.zipany does not install cable, then the developer shall install conduit and pull boxes throughout the tract. Such detailF shall be shown and verified on the imprc-,!n,,ant plans. 2. Master planned stormdrain shall be required as follows: a. Design and const<< - ,tion of an adequate concrete lined channel over Al i Loma drainage course frem the north tract boundary to the south edge of Hillside Drive shall be required. b. The length of the Hillside Drive crossing of the charnel shall be based on master planned street width, and shall be designed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and San Bernardino County Flood Control District. C. Inlet structures at north tract boundary and an r outlet transition structure at end of street crossing shad be required. "he outlet structure shall be adequately designed to protect the downstream end of the existing channel from erosion and overflow. t d. An improved drainage facility or a part of the master planned stormdrain shall be provided within San Bernardino County Flood Control District drainage easement at north tract boundary unless a waiver of this requireme t is obtained by the applicant from the Flood Control District. e. The existing 80 foot wide drainage easement within the subject tract shall be dedicated in fee to the Flood Control District. k F.esoiution No. 30-35 Page 3 r f. The design and improvements of the storm drain, s facilities shall be done in conformance with the Flood Control District's standards and-1pecifications and to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. ' Approval and permits for the storm drain construction shall be obtained from the Flood Control District. g. Reconstruction of Hillside Drive shall be required on the approaches to the required channel crossing. A 26' wide pavement shall be provided for the approaches with a profile to match the ultimate design of the street. h. The cost of constructing the storm drain facilities shall be credited to the storm rain fee for the project and a reimbursempnt agreen,int will be executed per Section 8 of the City Ordinance No: 75 to cover the contributions which exceed the amount of the fee. i. The cost of constructing Hillside channel crossing including reconstruction of approaches shall be credited to the system development fee for this project. A reimbursement agreement, at the discretion' of the City Council, may be executed to cover the cost of the construction which exceeds the fee amount. .3. A private off-site drainage easement shall be required to convey drainage from any lot to the proposed channel through private propert'. 4. All existing easements ithin the fL-ture right-of- way are to be quit claimt-, alineated as per the City Engineer's requirements, pr•r4, to recordation of the tract map, 5. Final plans and profiles shall show the location of any existing utility facility that would affect construction. 6. Concentrated drainage flows shalt not cross sidewalks. Under sidewalk drains shall be installed to City standards. 7. Existing City .)ad requiring reconstruction, shall remain open for traffic at all times with adequate detours during actual --onstruction. A cash deposit shall be required tc cover the cost of the grading and paving, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, the cash deposit shall be refunded. t Resolution No. 30-,5 Page 4 8. Adequate provisions shall be made for acceptance and disposal of surface drainag_: entering the property from adjacent areas. 9. Letters of acceptance from downstream property owners shall be required where runoff from the tract flows onto private properties. 10. Private draip;­ ;asements with improvements for cross lot drainag ' be required and shall be delineated on the final map, 11. All interior streets withir: this subdivision shall have. sidewalks on at least one side. The location of such sidewalks shell be shown on the Final Map and shall be subject, to approval by the City Engineer prior to recordation. 12. Prior to Final Map recordation, the feasibility of Hillside Rai. redesign shall he investigated to provide adequate space for sidewalk and other improvements within Hillside Rd. parkways. AP' ED A.ND ADOPTED THIS 22ND DAY OF DECEMBER, 1980. PLANNING COMA 't1N OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Richard Dahl, Cha'ttnan 1 ATTEST. S :retary of the Plalming Comnission I, JACK LAM, S.:<retary 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 Conmission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 22nd day of December, 1380 by the following vote to-wits AYES: COMMISSIONERS: King, Rempel, Sceranka, Dai NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ` ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Tolstoy DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AML --�; STANDARD CONDITIONS Subject: dd 10,04<� Appl icar,t: -,Qf� M7F-4 �'2--cc"P Locatio;r: N.;a ra 5/f:- r—F-- ^ AasiaL Those items checked are conditions of approval. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DIVISION FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING "uNDITIONS: A. Site Development _ 1. Site shall be developed in accordance with the approved site plans on file in the Planning Division and the conditions contained herein. _ 2. Revised site plans ind building elevation^ incorporating all conditions of approvai shall be submitted to the Planning Division prior to issuance of building permits. 3. Approval of this reqL !Sf shall nct waive compliance with all sections of the Zoning Ordinance and all other applicable City Ordinances in effect at time.of Building Permit issuance. V 4. The developer shall provide all lots with adequate sideyard area for Recreation Vehicle storage pursuant to City standards. 5. Mail boxes, in areas where sidewalks are required, shall be installed and located by the developer subject tc approval by the Planning Division.. 6. Trash receptacle areas shall be enclosed by a 6 foot high masonry wall with view obstructing gates pursuant to City standards. Location .shall be subject to approval by the Planning Division. 7. If dwellings are to be constructed in an area designated by the Foothill' Fire Districts as "hazardous", the roof materials ;lust be approved by the Fire Chief and Plar==ning Division prior to issuance of a building permit. _8. A sample of the roof material shall be submitted to the Planning Division for review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. J/ 9. All roof appurtenances, including air conditioners, shall be architecturally integrated, shielded from view and the sound buffered from adjacent properties and streets as required by the Planning and Building Divisions. t/` 10. Prior to any use of the project site or business activity being commenced thereon, all conditions of approval contained herein shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development. C � � 1 r( (C 11. A detailed lighting plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Division prior to issuance of building permits. Such plan shall indicate style, illumination, location, height and method of AML shielding. No lighting sNail adversely affect Idjacent properties. 12. All swimming pools installed at the time of initial development shall be solar heated. 13. Texturized pedest.:•ian pathways across circulation aisles shall be provided throughout the development to connect dwellings with open spaces and recreational uses. 14. All trash pick up shall' be for individual units with all receptica s kept out of public view from private and public streets. 15. Standard patio cover plans shall be submitted to and approved by the City Planner and Building Official prior to occupancy of the first unit. 16. All buildings numbers and individual units shall be identified in a clear and concise manner, including proper illumination. 17. Solid core exterior doors, security dead bolts and locks shall be installed on each unit in this project. 18. Security devices such as window locks shall be installed on each unit. 1.9. All units within this development shall be preplumbed to be adapted for a solar water heating unit. 20. Energy conserving building materials and appliances are regzired to be incorporated' into this project to include such things as but not limited to reduced consumption shower heads, better grade of insulation, double paned windows, extended overhangs, pilotless appliances, et: . 21. This development shall provide an option to home buyers to purchase a solar water heating wilt. 22. Emergency secondary access shall be provided to this tract to the satisfaction of the Foothill lire Protection District. lam` 23. local and Master Planned Equestrian Trails shall be provided throughout the tract in accordance with the Cquestrian Trail Plan for Alta, Loma. A detailed equestrian trail plan indicating widths, maximum slopes, physical condition, fencing and weed control in accordance with city equestrian trail standards shall be submitted to and approved by, the City Planner ,prior to approval and recordation of the final map. V 24. This tract shall form or annex tc a maintenance district for maintenance of equestrian, trails. 25. This project shall provide percent of affordable housinc and/or rents, in conformance with General Plan housing policies and the housing criteria defined in the Growth Management Ordinance. Affordatility shall ARL be determined by current market rates, rents and median incsne levels at the time of construction of the project. Proof of this provision shall be submitted-to the Planning Div sioii prior to finalizing building permits, and occcparicy of the units. B. Parking and Vehicular Access 1. All parking lot landscaped islands shall have a minimum inside dimension of 4' and shall contain a 12" walk adjacf,nt to parking stall. 2. Parking lot trees shall he a minimum 15 gallon size. 3. All two-way aisle widths shall be a minimum of 24 feet wide. 4. Emergency access shall be provided, mainten,nce free and clear, a minimum of 24 feet wide at all times during construction in accordance with Foothill Fire District requirements. 5. All parking spaces shall be double striped, 6. All units shall be provided with automatic garage door openers. 7. Designated visitor parking areas shall be turf blocked. _ 8. The C.C. & R.'s shall restrict the storage of recreational vehicles on this site unless they are the principle source of transportation for the owner_ 9. No parking shall be permitted within the interior cirulation aisle other than in designated visitorparking areas. C.C. & R.'s shall be developed by the applicant and submitted to the City Planning Division prior to issuance of building permits. C. Landscaping 1. A detailed landscare and irrigation plan shall be.submitted to and ,unproved by the Planning Division prior to the issuance of building permits. leA 2. Existing trees sluill be. retained wherever possible. A master plan of existing trees showing their precise location, size and type shall be completed by the caveioper. Said; plan shall take into account the proposed grading z,nd shall be required to be submitted to and approved by the Planning Wivision prior to approval of the final grading plan. C a 3. Existing Eucalyptus trees shall be retained wherever possible and shall be trimmed and topped at 30'. Dead, decaying or potentially dangerous trees shall be approved for removal at the descretion of the Planning Division during the review-of the 'Master Plan of Existing On-Site Trees. Those trees which are approved for removal may be required to be replaced on a tree-for-tree basis as l �,jvided by the Planning Division. 4. Street trees, a minimum of 15 gallon size or larger, shall be installed in accordance with the Master 'Plan of street trees for the City of Rancho Cucamonga and shall be planted at an average of every 30' on interior streets and 20' on exterior streets. 5. A minimum of 50 trees per gross acre, comprised of the following sizes, shall be provided within the development; 20%-24" box or larger, 70 15 gallon, and 10%-5 gallon. 6. All landscaped areas shall be maintained in a healthy and thriving condition, frc4 from weeds. trash, and debris. ! 7. All slope banks in access of five (5) feet in vertical height shall and are 5:1 or greater slopes be lar:dscaped and irrigated in accordance with slope planting requirements of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Such slope planting shall include but not be 'limited to rooc'ed ground cover and appropriate shrubs and trees. All such planting and irrigation shall be continuous;y maintained in a healthy and thriving condition by the developer until each individual unit is sold and occupied by the buyer. Prior to releasing occupancy for those units, an inspection of the slopes shall be completed by the Planning Staff to determine that it is in satisfactory condition. In the case of custom lot subdivisions, all such slopes shall be seeded with native grasses upon completion of grading or an alternative method of erosion control satisfactory to the Building Official. Irrigation on custom lot subdivisions shall be provided to germinate the seed ;and to a point 6 months after germination. 8. All parkways, open areas, and landscaping shall be fully maintained by a homeowners association or other means acceptable to the City. Such proof of maintenance shall be submitted to the City prior to issuance of building permits. 9. The front yard landscaping, and an appropriate irrigation system, shall be installed by the developer in accordance with submitted plans. 10. The final design of the Perimeter parkways, walls, landscaping and. sidewalks shall be included in the required landscape plans and shall be subject to aPprovai by the Planning Division. 11. A minimum of specimen size trees shall be planted within the project. 12. Special landscape features such as mounding, alleivial rock,.speciman size trees, and an abundance of landscaping is required along C - SLI D. Signs 1. Any signs proposed for this development shall be designed in conformance with the Comprehensive Sign Ordinancp, and shall require review and approval by the Planning Division prior to installation of such signs. 2. A uniform sign program for this development shall be submitted to the Planning Division for their review and approval prior to issuance of Building permits. 3. The signs indicated on the submitted plans are not approved with this approval and will require separate sign review and approval. E. Additional Approvals Required 1. Director Review shall be accomplished prior to the issuance of a Building Permit. 2. Director Review shall be accomplished prior to recordation of t*",e final subdivision map. 3. Approval of Tentative Tract No. is granted subject to the approval of Zone Change and/or Variance/Conditional 'se Permit 4. This Conditional Use Permit is granted for a period of mor,th(s) at which time the Planning Commission may add or delete conditions or revoke the Conditional Use Permit. V' 5. The developer is require: to obtain the following signed statement by -purchasers of homes which have a private or public equestrian trail on or adjacent to their property. s, In purchasing the home located on Lot ' Traci on I have read ti?e C-C. & R.'s and understand teat said Lot is subject to a mutual re•• ciprocal easement for the purpose of allowing equestrian traffic to gain access. j Signed Purchaser �. Said statement is to be filed by the deve'oper with the City p prior to I occupancy. 6. *:rior to approval and recordation of the final map, or prior to issuance of wilding permits, when no subdivision map is involved, written certification from all affected School Distr*cts, shall be submitted to the Department of Community Development which states that adequate school facilities are or will be capable of accommodating students generated by this project. Such letter of certification must have been issued by the School District within sixty (60) days prior to the final map approval in the case of the subdivision map or issuance ofpermits in the case of all other residential projects. 7. Prior to approval and recordation of the final map, or prior to the issuance of building permits when no map is involved, written certification from the affected water district, that adequate sewer and water facilities are or will be available to serve the proposed project, shall be submitted to the Alk Department of Community-Development. Such letter must have been issued b the water district within sixty (60) days prior to fina-r'map approval in the case of subdivision or issuance of permits in the case of all other residential projects. for projects usira septic tank facilities allowable by the Santa Ana Regional Water Control Board and the City, written certi- fication of acceptabiiity, including all supportive information., shall be obtained and submitted to tie City. S. This approval shall become null and void if the tentative subdivision map is not approved and recorded .or building permits issued when no map is involved, within twelve (12) ragnths from the approval of this project unless an extension has been granted by the Planning Commission. 9. This subdivision was not submitted as a total development package and is required to reapply for a point rating relative to the design section of the Growth Management Ordinance prior to final approval and. recordation of the mr,,p if the subdivision ;,r ,Ding to be developed as tract homes. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING DIVISION FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: F. Site Development 1!' 1. The applicant shall comply with the latest adopted Uniform Building Code, Uniform Mechanical Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, National Electric Code, and al', other applicable codes and ordinances in effect at the time of approval of this project. V 2. Prior to issuance of building permits for combustible construction, evidence shall be submitted to the Foothill District Fire Chief that water supply for fire protection-is available. V 3. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for a new residential dwelling unit(s) or major addition to an existing unit(s), the applicant shall pay development fees at the established rate. Such fees may include, but not be limited to: City Beautification Fee, Park Fee, 'Drainage Fee, Systems Development Fee, Permit and Plan Checking Fees, and School Fee. 4. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for a new commercial or industrial dive'.-Foment or addition to an existing development, the applicant shall pay tievelo.ment fees at the established rate. Such fees may include, but not be limited to: Systems Development Fee, Drainage Fee, Permit and Plan Checking Fees. 5. This approval shall become null and void if building permits are not issued for this project within one year from the date of project approval 6. Street names and addresses shall be provided by the building official. Aft L - s� 7. Dwelling units shall be constructed with fire retardant material and non-combustibz roof material. B. All corner dwellings shall have the building elevation facing the street upgrade with additional wood trim around windows-and wood siding or plan-ons where appropriate. - G. Existing Structures 1. Provide compliance with the Uniform Building Code for property line clearances considering use, area and fire esistiveness of existing buildings. 2. Existing building(s) shall be made ko comply with current Building and Zoning regulations for the intended ase or tie building shall be demolished. 61' 3. Existing sewage disposal facilities shall be removed, filled and/or capped to comply with appropriate grading practices and the Uniform Plumbing Code. H. Grading 1. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the Uniform. Building Code, City Grading Star:dards and accepted grading practices. The final grading plan shall h_ in substantial conformance with the approved conceptual grading plan. Aft 2. A soi"is report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer licensed by the State of California to perform such work. 3. A geological report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and submitted at the time of application for grading r;an check. t� 4. The final grading plan shall be subject to review and approval by the Planning, Engineering and Building Divisions and shall be completed prior to recordation of the final subdivision map or issuance of building permit whichever comes first. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE ENGINEERING DIVISION FOR CO*UANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: I. Dedications and Veh -cess V9 1. Dedications sha made by final map of all interior street rights-of-way and all nEcessary easements as shown on the tentative map. S•� 2. Dedication shall be made of the following missing rights-of-way on the following streets: r� additional feet on�/i//src�� mod• additional feet on additional feet on Z3. Corner property line radius will be required per City standards. 4. All rights of vehicular ingress to and egress from shall be dedicated as follows: 5. Reciprocal easements shall be provided ensuring access to all parcels over private roads, drives, or parking areas. 6. Adequate provisions shall be made for the ingress, engress and internal circulation of any trucks which will be used for delivery of goods to the property or in the operation of the proposed business. J. Street Improvements Construct full street improvements including, but not limited to, curb and gutter, A.C. pavement, sidewalk, drive approaches; parkway trees and street lights on all interior streets. W/2. Construct the following missing improvements including, but not limiteC to: CURB & A.C. SIDE DRIVE ST'tEET A.C. WHEEL STREET NAME GUTTER PVMT. WALK APPR. LIGOTS OVERLAY CHAIR RAMPS OTHER Q.51VIE Sh &eal r Try- 2'£ rCcr L his ioGC. ter! V3. Prior to any work being performed in the public right-of-way, an encroachment permit and fees shall be obtained from the City Engineer's Office, in addition to any other permits reggired. 4. Street improvement plans approved by the City Engineer and prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer shall be required, for all street improvements, . prior to issuance of an encroachment permit. ts'45. Sur_ty shall be posted and an agreement executed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the City Attorney, guaranteeing completion of the public improvements, prior to recording of the map or the issuance of building permits, whichever comes first. IE 6. All street improvements shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, prior to occupancy. 7. Pavement striping, marking, traffic and street name signing shall be installed per the requirements of the City Engineer, r — 5� K. Drainage and Flood Control 1!� 1. The applicant will be responsible for construction of all onsite drainage facilities required by the City Engineer. 2. Intersection drains will be required at the following locations: 3. The proposed project falls within areas indicated as subject to f7oodir.g under the National Flood Insurance Program and is subject to the provisions of the program and City Ordinance No. 24. ✓" 4. A drainage channel and/or flood protection wall will be required to protect the structures by diverting sheet runoff to street,cg To'6X(s71.lr-c c4a144Q_ (cnc 7-- 11-0a0 -CAIST 7741kc7 Sou rc,c . 5. The following north-south streets shall be designed as major water carrying streets requiring, a combination of special curb heights, commercial type drive approach(.s, rolled street connections, flood protection walls, and/or landscaped earth berms and rolled driveways at property line. 6. Condition K-4, above, may be reduced, at the discretion of the. City Engineer if adjacent development precludes the need for any portion of the mall. L. Utilities V'1. All proposed utilities within the project shall be installed underground including utilities along major arterials less than 12 KV. ✓2. Utility easements shall be provided to the specification of the serving utility companies and the City Engineer. ✓ 3. Developer shall be responsible for the relocation of existing public utilities, as required. 4. Developer shall be responsible for the installation of street lighting in accordance with Southern California Edison Company and City standards. 4 ✓ 5. Water and sewer system plans shall be designed and constructed to meet requirements of the Cucamonga Ccaanty Water District CCCWD), Foothill Fire District and the Environmental Vealth Department of the County of San Bernardino. A letter of compliance form CCWD will be required prior to recordation. ✓ 6. Approvals have not been secured from all utilities and other interested agencies involved. Approval of the final map will be subject to any requirements that may be received from them. M. General Requirements and Approvals 1. Permits from other agencies will be required as follows: A. Caltrans for: Aft B. County Dust Abatement required prior to issuance of a grading permit) t/ C.. San Bernardino County Flood Control District D. Other: c - sq Z. A copy of the Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's)-and Articles of Incorporation of the Homeowners Association, subject to the approval of the City Attorney, shall be recorded with this map and a copy provided to the City. , I! �l 3. Prior to recordation, a Notice of Intention to form Landscape and Lighting Districts shall be filed with the City Council. The engineering costs involved in Districts Formation shall be borne by the developer. 1// 4. Final parcel and tract maps shall conform to City standards and procedures. C ,.s RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COK4IS31ON APPROVING DESIGN REVIEW FOR TRACT 10046 LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF HILLSIDE, WEST OF HERMOSA IN THE VERY LOW RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT WHEREAS, on the 20th day of November, 1985, a complete application was filed by Lewis Homes- for review of the above-described project; and WHEREAS, on the 22nd day of January, 1986, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission held a meeting to consider the abov.--described project. follows: NOW, THEREFORE, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission resolved as SECTION 1: That the following can be met: 1. That the iroposed project is consistent with the objectives of the General Plan; and 2. That the proposed use is in accord with the objective of the Development Code and the purposes of the district in which the site is located; and 3. That the proposed use is in compliance with each of j the appl5cable provisions of the Development Code; and `. 4. That the propased use, '0gether with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the l pub7ic health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. SECTION 2: That Design Review for Tract 10046 is spprov9d subject to the foTToaing conditions: Site Plan: 1. individual lots shall be graded to conform to the following standards: a. Minimum 15 foot unabstructed flat area (2% slope or less) adjacent to the garage side of house. b. Minimum! 10 foot unobstructed flat area (2% s%ipe or less) adjacent to side of house opposite the . garage. c. Usable, flat rear yard area (2% slope or lest) adjacent to the house with a 20 feet average C PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION January 22, 1986 DR for Tract 10046 - Lewis Homes Page 2 qF dimension oral a minimum dimension of 15 feet. _O 2. The driveway for the unit on Lot 16 shall be designed �so than the horseshoe is southerly of the garage. 3. Drive approaches shall conform to City Standard for two-car garage (W=16 feet). Driveways can flair out to 3-car width outside of the public right-of-way. 4. The developer shall provide a masonry perimeter wall along the side yards adjacent to Hillside Road on Lots 1, 24 and 23. The walls shall be of a decorative design compatible with the architecture of the dwelling. The walls shall be set back a minimum distance of 5 feet behind the back of walk and shall be landscaped and irrigated by the developer. 5. The developer shall provide 6-foot high decorative wall along the sideyard of Lot 17 adjacent :o Evening Canyon Way. The design of the wall shall be compatible with the architecture of the dwelling. The wall shall be set back a minimum distance of 5--feet behind the back of walk and shall be landscaped and irrigated b the developer. P 9 y P 6. The unity on Lots 20 and V shall be reoriented such that house fronts face onto Briartree Place and Evening Canyon Way, respectively. 7. Retaining wall ex osed"'to p public view shall be decorative. r 8. A Tree Removal Permit shall be obtained by the applicant prior to the removal of any trees, and prior tc the issuance of grading permits. 9. Equestrian Trails shall be fully improved and developed by the developer to conform to established City Stindards for Equestrian Trails. final details shall se included in the landscape plans to be submitted for the review and approval of the Planning givision. 10. A detailed landscape and irrigation plan shall be submittedto and approved by the Planning Division prior to the issuance of building permits. PLANNING CO'MibS1ON RESOLUTION January 22, 1986 DR for Tract 10046 - Lewi's Homes Page 3 11. Curb depressions with standard drive approaches shall be constructed in the City parkway at entrance 1G afl ons to equestrian easements for local feeder trails. Architecture: 1. Intensify the upgrade treatment for Model 1-129-T by continuing the horizontal trim shown on the front elevation a:ross the left side elevation. 2. Revise the rooflino on Model 436-B to either: a. Put a gable roof over the front yard bay window, or b. Extend t_%e eave line on either side of the bay window to eliminate the roof projection and provide a continuous roof line. I 3. All roofing material is to be tile. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 22ND DAY OF JANUARY, 1986. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA f' BY: ennis L. Stout, Chairman. AIiEST• Brad Buller, Deputy Secretary y I, Brad Buller, Deputy Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held }. on the 22nd day of January, 1986, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: CONi,ISSIONERS: C -(o> PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION January 22, 1986 DR for Tract 10046 Lewis Homes Page 3 11. Curb depressions with standard drive approaches shall be constructed in the City parkway at entrance locations to equestrian easements for local feeder trails. Architecture• 1. Intensify the upgrade treatment for Model 1-129-T by continuing the horizontal trim shown on the front elevation across the left side elevation. 2. Revise the roofline on Model 436-B to either: a. Put a gable roof over the front yard bay window, or b. Extend the eave line on either side of the bay window to eliminate the roof projection and provide a continuous roof line. 3. All roofing material is to be tile. ilk APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 22NO DAY OF JANUARY, 1986. , PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAM00A BY: Dennis L. Stout, Mal an: ATTEST: Brad Buller, Deputy- secretary I, Brad Buller, Deputy Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 22nd day of January, 1986, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: C01-3MISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, rye Xro STAFF REPORT c'`a �� O� O UI > DATE: January 22, 1986 1977 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Bruce Cook, Associate Planner SUBJECT: DESIGN REVIEW FOR TRACT 12650-1 - THE DEER CREEK COMPANY - Design Review for Lots 20-26 and 38-61 of Tract 12650-1, a residential subdivision of 147.11 acres in the Very Low Residential District (0-2 du/ac) into 62 lots located on the east side of Haven Avenue, south of the Hillside Flood Channel, north of Hillside Road APN 201-861-7-13; 201-354-1-13; 201-333-1-15; 201-313-2-12, 14; 201-373-1- 24; 201-384-1-16; 201-393-1-19; 201-404-1-15; 201-243-15- 22; '201-063-13-27. Alk I. BACKGROUMD: Deer Creek is a Master Planned Community of large, equestrian-oriented, estate lots encompassing about 290 total acres. 'The original development consisted of 293 single family lots ranging in size from 3/4 to l acre. In 1984, the Deer Creek Company resubdivided that portion of Deer Creek above Hillside, about 150 acres, into 225 lots with average lot sizes being decreased to about 1/2 acres. Tract 12650-1 is a Recorded Map that subdivides the westerly 44 acres into 61 single family lots, with the easterly 103 acres being a remainder parcel (Lot fit) for future subdivision of the remaining 164 lots approved with the tentatihe i map. II. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action Requested: Approval of precise plot plan and building footprints and elevations for unit development within recorded tract map for a single Family subdivision. B. .Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North - Vacant, Creek Channel; Very Low Residential (0-2 du/ac) South Single family homey (Deer Creek Community); Very Low Residential (0-2 du/ac) East - Vacant; Very Low Residential (0-2 du/ac) West - Vacant, single family homes; Very Low Residential (0- Alh 2 du/ac) ITEM D PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT January 22, 1986 DR for Tentative Tract 12650-1- Deer Creek Co. Page 2 C. General Plan Designations: Project Site - Very Low Residential within the Equestrian Overlay (0-2 du/ac) North Very Low Resitit+ttial ('0-2 du/a,), Flood Control Corridor South - Very Low Residential (0-2 du/ac) East Very Low Residential (0-2 du/ac) West - Very Low Residential (0-2 du/ac) D. Site Characteristics: The land slopes southward at approximately an 8 percent grade. Vegetation consists of indigenous shrubs and weeds with minor rock outcroppings. Small clusters of Olive trees are located at the northern and mid-portion, of the project area. No. significant land form or vegetation exists within that portion of the site proposed for development with this project. III. ANALYSIS• A. General: Thi'3 project is a continuation of the development of the Deer Creek Community. Four building footprints are proposed as follows: Model Floor Area Number of Bedrooms Number of Stories #10 2,530 sq. ft. 4 1 #11 2,791 sq. ft. 4 1 #12 2,800 sq. ft. 4 1 #14 2,943 sq. ft.* 4 2 * 1,751 square feet - first floor footprint) All proposed floor areas exceed the 2, 500 square foot minimum required as a Condition of Approval with the tentative tract application. All models are provided with 3-car ga. -Ages. -'Proposed architecture is of a Spanish/Mediterranean style. combining stucco exteriors with tile roofs. Front elevations of all models are provided with architectural embellishments expected of high-end, estate homes. The project site is within the Equestrian Overlay area, and the tract map shows a continuous and interconnected local feeder trail system at the property front. This front-loaded equestrian trail system is consistent with that already provided in the developed portions of Deer Creek. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT January 22, 1986 DR for Tentative Tract 12550-1- Deer Creek Co. Page 3 Auk B. Design Review Committee: The Design Review Committr.z approved the project subject to the following recommenda•L nn : 1. Carry architectural detailing, i.e. window trim, soldier course, etc., throughout all elevations. 2. Drive approaches to be standard 2-car width through public parkway and then flair out to 3-car width on private pooperty. 3. Where equestrian trail crosses driveways, concrete should be treated to produce a non-slick surface. These comments have been included into the Conditions of Approval. C. Neighborhood Input: Wher. the Planning Commission approve Tentative Tract 32 50, this action was appealed to the City Council by homeowners within the Deer Creek Community. The homeowners were concerned that the smaller lot sizes land presumed smaller homes) would not be ^ompatible with existing development in Deer Creek. The Planning Commission decision to approve the Tentative Tract was upheld by the City Council, but Deer G:cck homeowners still maintain an active interest in Future development within the Deer Creek Community. The submitted plans have been presented to the Deer Creek Homeowners Association-Board—and other interested personss The Board has sent to the Cit written correspondence indicating their support for--t-he--s-ubmitted desiqns. IV. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: This project is consistent with the. Development Code and the General Flan. The project will not be detrimental to adjacent proper�:ies or cause significant 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. V. CORRESPONDENCE: Although this is not a public hearing item, notices have been mailed to all Deer Creek homeowners adv%sing them of tonights project to be considered by the Planning Commission and inviting their comments and input. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT January 22, 1985 DR for Tentative Tract 1W,0-1- Deer Creek Co. Page 4 Am VI. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning•Commission consider all material and input regarding this project. If the Commission concurs with the Facts for Findings anrli Conditions of Approval, adoption of the attached Resolution would 5e in order. Respectfully submitted, Brad Buller City Planner BB:BC:das Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Location Map Exhibit "B" - Site Utilization Map Exhibit "C - Natural Features Map Exhibit "D - Tentative Tract Map Exhibit :T' Building Floor Plans Exhibit. "f" - Building Elevations Exhibit "G" - Plot Plar. Tract Resolution of Approval No. 84-45 Letter from Deer Creek Homeowner's Association Board, Letter of Notific,tion to Deer Creek Residents Design Review Resolution with Conditions Aft { , FC VL 4 FC R Hill • : 1 M.•itYX � 0 i FC We FCLM Lid® NORTH CITY Or, ITGN/: RANCHO CLC-�.IQNGA TITLE: PLANNING DIVISION L'\IIIhIT a SCALD 1 jj '��_ tPa ,fir•1ACh ,vo Pa JA 7 , :ts; a( t N /, •� 8 g Z xNu g f 44 811 / @ i \ •~ \ �•to x • --_ xd 1 -I L". 1'3'. tI. J. ELI 3 c� m L-. � mII: C�� f..H tT'ifeN � _'i• •ifl�'T. ^ V�// �' •w m rr• r.�24�`X a 7_ F o�tNnZ �J L'^ t'- .+� yl � !y � � � t - r c I�!3 •f i.'• - _y a l i a I^ ���L-} Ol 1�_w -ems--_... ,�.�....• rmsa — F (?r. l7{ f'x1 t .t1r.I;f. }� I •'T I e�s � \`� � � I' •)': a�� a--� Isla Y _ II— ' cy j�• .. n c I u 1 J ! r A �Y ;fi,I of H, H re � �� }.•tI i1S s- 2q I(/ aaa yy ; TM<i—I i7,77 7, _1_ 1 all ZOE H t I� I'' _:1L-- a k-�l -.4 w �- eC ,w� --L-= � r{S> ilk}S PLL L •Lr� J�� � � I I� I � � U s ; a �f^l u<a iaas• r ! t- � its h 0,,, ,,aY= still At p. 3 Pt'M ji � �'t.! �'�; 'IP 'i�: �•- cu -I�AN=-t«.:F%c'•-a9131b' F.ai� ss lz EA ' _ it f / � . _ �r _ a ,S $ E 2 •y' � T a � s ' F . [;ia I; �� �� �� ;,, 'i �a ���� -- �v � a, .f I' ,� ' � u '�`•. ll . . . a � � r _ _ � �r� �•e ' z -o it `� t�� .�+�r i~ .�,Y� ,,,' �..�. a .. �� j �� _a�� _ , �, -q y .���ib � .�L � �F�21 a•Le�r�s� •�al � Y r31 _ 1 i y Old v m Li T 7 u gg��ff'I S4 11F, 1 S S T11. ccCT - • �o-L mot i}�.-.�; ay. AOL Ti ba Arse A • OVq� � Pl G O AP7 a F'r -�a a �j PK SAC (. 7� X4 } g n F I rip. �tltt?at'S' �i Q 1 �. Li Iq f` V i it c 1�. • � C F==R ' t i li i A ! LLL LLL.L UL•L LLLLjI LJLLL.i i i LJL.LI n (! = ; EJLL F LL7CLL7 �E I TE IL l� ArUk wa of Y �a m Ed :El j a � 3 k ll f. r I (( � i � a --, -` I L9 ! .e , I ! I TV. r I Fpj I OLL I LLL LLL m LLL: LI l riC 3 LLL" s i ' L. :I z `7 of e i 1Ask - i I j I 1 D-a� 6 L t r J t _ p-aa FT t \ 8 ! 43- i iI e: I k% f II E —_ - _ zm� i f , i : wa ��7 i' F J� l r t t L4 r �r I D-c-9.s i r:i_ trP- Ir t _ •1 .i Vli- �. i ♦ .f� i. Y tee' is Fit i r � r 1 lY i � E .B I' F El -_Ti � p_a9 = �} D-3o 4 s a I l AOL �_ 31 LL__ Li L rll`s s I'i s t; ii t1l� .�D IT 1 i #• __ � c C G Y f j U 1 rL-1 t i 1 / i ES I EEtt I „1 + ii �l�fst, ff'i t ifl!{t �•_.-ss 6�4• I i C i max. 171 T I� C " �a7 LV:L I O� i L •L. i (� Lu�._ •1 i I 1 L"LL �; � it o• VL.tG '�s� cl r�' ..t� � t ----'r •� tt f •7;. F it 1 f - All. EEE3 �i h I I E3 . N ,1I Ma • • 1 ' /' S f.1 W ~�7y �1 •S�'s Nnvn .�. To- ;Hl V K • � � i,I �I , lz ) eta i 9 i {1I t 41 { 1 jo .1-. anN3AY N3Avt2 c a p.F 21 W N s a C f l 14 ci jz 1,4 OF Z m�r��= � - • ... of *+ �, r `�Z�z .�• sr�#3f•j I �- )` ��'� t..} .�9B � .IY •�� i is • 1 �1.. jjj�� 9 wl• � �.} r � . - i c , I —CFO,• 1.'' !r$ Q' �II / O $� � f �� ra�� o2_ r®^ •O� O Z' Y cr, r s Ai -'^- '. ; _ 1 07a.1- 0 1= �- P` CgtdP � et `.o gage azfi 7 ` RESOLUTION NO. 84-45 Aft `` A RESOLUTION OF '.HE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, CONDITIONALLY APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP .NO. 12650, THE DEER CREEK COMPANY, LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF HAVEN AVENUE, SOUTH OF HILLSIDE FLOOD CHANNEL AND NORTH OF HILLSIDE ROAD - APN 201-121-16. WHEREAS, Tentative Tract Map No. 12650, hereinafter "Map" submitted by The Deer Creek Company, applicant, for the purpose of subdividing the real property situated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino, State of California, described as a custom lot subdivision of 147.16 acres into 225 lots, regularly came before the Planning Commission for public hearing and action on May 23, 1984; and WHEREAS, the City Planner has recommended approval of the Map subject to all conditions set forth in the EngineerZ"ng and Planning Division's reports; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has read and considered the Engineering and Planning Division's reports and has considered other evidence presented at the public hearing. AL NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the tity of Rancho Cucamonga does resolve as follows SECTION 1: The Planning Commission makes the following findings in regard to Tentative Tract No. 12650 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 subdiv aion is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage and avoidable injury to humans and wildlife or their habi*.at; (e) The tentative tract is not likely to cause serious public health problems;; (f) The des,;n of the tentative tract will not conflict r with any easement aE;quired by the public at large, now o' record, for access through or use of the property ;vithin the proposed subdivision. �_ Resolution No. 84-45� Page 2 C g) That this project will not crPa-e adverse impacts on the environment and a Negative Declaration is issued. SECTION 2: Tentative Tract Map No. 12650, f which is y a cop o attached hereto, is hereby approved subject to all of the cop in conditions and the attached Standard Conditions: PLANNING DIVISION 1. Prior to issuance of building permits precise designs, architecture and plot plans shall be submitted for deign review and approval by the Planning Commission in order to assure architectural compatib4lity with the existing Deer Creek homes (i.e.y exterior and roofing materials, and design theme). 2. The developer shall be responsible to install and maintain the perimeter landscape parkway on Haven Avenue prior to annexation into the City's landscape maintenance district. AOL 3. Each property owner within the existing Deer Creek ' Development .;hall be notified r,hen this project is scheduled for design review before the Planning Commission., 4:--- la-future yes-i � rv,r;-Tsfrarrprovi rh?a ,i,rm„mr------ -sere- :- 5. The applicant shall remove one (1) lot in each of the northern four (4) tiers of lots in order to expand the remaining lot widths to provide a random number of lots with a minim,.,a lot width of 140 feet. ENGINEERING DIVISION 1. Proposed storm drain shall be extended to the intersection of "B" and "M" streets, to intercept all flows north of "B" street east of "H" street. Design of other proposed and existing storm drains shall conform to City standards. 2. Additional cross gutters shall be provided at Valinda & "B" streets. 3. Flood protection walls shall bce provided along the frontage of lots 56, 57, 33, 34, 43, 44, 114 and 115 to the satisfaction of the Cit, Engineer, Resolution No. 84-45 !Page 3 S C 4. Hillside .Drive Master Planned Storm Drain shall be extended to Deer Creek Channel from existing terminus at appropriate time as determined by the City Engineer. Easements, if nece. ,,ary, shall be obtained by developer. Construction costs will be credited to storm drain fees. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 23RD DAY OF MAY, 1984. PLANNING/COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA :Denni s L. Sto t; Chairman ATTEST ick Gogiez, Deputy Secretary I, Rick Gomez, Deputy Secretary of the Planning Corm. ;ion 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 t; City of Ranc;io Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 23rd day of May, 1984, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER, REMPEL, MCNIEL, STOUT NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT:.. COMMISSIONERS: NONE * Section 2, Planning Division Condition #4, of Planning Commission Resolution 84-45 was modified by the Rancho Cucamcnga City Council in a duly advertised public hearing on July 18, 1984 to read as follows: 4. All future residential units shall be 2500 square-feet except that no more than twenty (20) percent of the homes shall be permitted to have a square footage of less than 2500 square feet, but in no case shall the square footage be below 2356 square feet. f J�, QI � T E9 ' 0.6 N`•—i• 6EiC '.E 7.� -,� Ste. Y 72 4- O� _' r V up 4 p� c OOy u ' •C 02 c0 '�� • Q L g_ y G c � O p .n �� t� 9 A� �._L ec q,E _ «V 06 E •pr U�q N-- - 09 S•u- Yocot �L. �� —� 29 Lq.. Y.p. p c q O d::. c ap Y nnp c a OYu N 9 L L t p O•E ^O A y �+ � n N c N.y z L.+ v E o o pe n NE noc m c v A p — It T Y a^'•O u q e. c 9 C CO MVyO. �Ca E • C �.-.O �•'Tf�.p V1�t.=: to e Oa Ea E $e c. Sr:E C d.-p.c•� 9 O— C A A U V y A — c..d. l•�f O d0�� E: _ EE L—V A6V 3'. A;� p rOQ c y0� p L 14 1 e tn�• N� � � ��N VEE. E:.N.• Y Q yC • u • -Tp 'n. may. V q Yn .`. c COo Y vC JL O O t N O E g 0 c C • • LL <q W O � e �.� N O Y— N O E C EE u 11 'U �N ¢ E N o E 6 u � n 0 2— �E c« >L c � L 6 6 �.iL N Y e �E•E C d C L S 47u S Ny O EV9 duN. N 24 QF'. VA2 G I...A Gr.2 Nb N.0 Y42 s_ L U C Y TO yy d V * =N u q Z a u O E N y Gi do Cq =.c E ��CEd, m. qy ... �•�." d«�Y ' v N G C O C cam^ cN mt.. d.c. E L` GCnN d • y T TC E «a � d �aC C4 . �N 3NWd 4q+�06 4Y Y.OA 6t S r CC N6. • Q) Oi .p-I .n q.� ^ Y O C O Y OO w=. c GLn pOC O. 0 V.Y O. ^" E ^q �• ddu dc� Ou.«� ha gG. N •yp m9 •L q -7 c ` a,a n vd dL a a to do ago. a c u •-a ma an L us ^ N O Y.d 9UL 9 ' .0 A�.• � _ DLO � d.W OC Z E9 L y=rca L L Y nt^ 00 S - t� q O q p« E4 _9C O GO e ac q.`�`o n'o Lz- dgnm E da oq �y la q a :5.21 dOt O Ol n Er N u u V � v G d=69.n F 6u�r 6.l> 69 �ON Gq 4Mam �L GN d c . ' v �l i I • I : I � � �_Vb oqu Ed ` uE 2¢ q ac q 00« Cad a0a N z N C O O ` • qy . j C C SO�m 9pu TM. Eo.O- q SIf q0 N c NR 1'AYw.V yC4 O q d O g tl A u c O u u. ...0 Ld.� Vrp N.s du �.N q.• u•tl�a Y E O C? .O C n p a cT^•N.T.L p y.^ G wri NaNc�. �"•. tl..dv` 2.—u� .a 01 .='>� sc3 �u;v .n Y Nn d3L.p �uG d r.9 U SEW C.'OdL uO'^ q q..n U EAa N. T µt. • a �N 4 n L cO C.+ T tl t a�CG upi.tl N OC 'G P Y.a` c ` �.� rtl �o C q c Tr E L Tm a G u.Z W C d c v1 Op. U rCrOC1 qq0 O. GE LLOc C .1 dK n Nr >pc u� un 1O N ZZ o C n +Y� V UYa C 9 CNy' uq O 2 Su. q.0•.0 > q0 E UP.Ou 'AC b^ du NUW Ni MyTi Y.iiin u •Si•00.n C.p.•� AYE U y� Y.LEG a.� b� N no euP OT. q rtl. •Ti a caa �p Y 9Q eTD� r -•L tl:.rua - aO b O q O 2 q L 3 t t r t u V w 2.r 9 O ES 9 N Ez a Cq2 T Ftl 9N 6. L AEW . co n r E _ N �—a o Nu • E y N .j y q a i c p — c p ,p,• N.n• . o « C n E v 2.9 O. A LuE #cam - to c..O.q_ ^2 emu'=^ i•� � d0— �� r Sc07 CQ WW' cy ON C O:. -• L O C yrr 2 Tu 6 _c t2 E> LC O.Cq L qE PO 0 q Lq O t UC C {C 7 9 ^ O Ou Om q7 �r O cL dV n. 03 c.F F U LN O,r 51 .r-.+o 1 2� O'C L.0 - C'C9 C ww0 Nuw Op. L. E S. N c u o Nva T dU� YN, • • O a Edo CL L C TF.QJ C. O pya C� TT 9Y L C ccp.. O a T ��' SC TP• a' C^ � E t N P r O` dtl w4= w t. pna G� Uc Z a q r p N 0 V 1.M O 6 Y .OJ v 9 4 0 g 0 Y- L L O V O u u 6 E p n C q •.N C F.t NO Qom. u Pyr Neq t-.+sQ.�o6 6E�6 o. J\_D. —c vdr yl o c W L t 9G 2 h _ pa nW:e 1 so. a.•,y u aF Z '� a c L•� �3 t b n_ vti 41 V _ G� n •NUN _ aj �C C.N } wo d p n 9 m S d F B. - a j�. �. �t a ^•n ti r �fi n q�d ��C E?t 'a eN y6 a CNOt �w3i L.LAG W ed o e c aoycc a = w_ p ti �qU d �i do6GV N Ov ma 93 V EE 0 �O .•. L Y N �� C4•V Fy A Lq N Lu. c c - C• TN d. �t nl �I �Nf sl �• N S qC u O\ C �l C O O L +•. .•.a' T O d p} T aEb y G i VL.Ey Lb Ow q OC 09 WO � Y60 d � O. buOM. FLN Q p. �Y� ¢ O M4. Or Ljd ♦L.,. �O` u G Lu`� dey�= IA 660 CY »U� WW W.ES aLrW�V 1r••� FC 0..F' F I1. � � U �Cp v.. 11 L 1j1j k of _C t i 90 n roW � d ro V p lei N L n dS� ��p CI A ro n ^ Ec n 3O na' a L gip. 4 O 2 aE V.cp Lo E.di n6 2:a—y,y E� E n a cn� .^.. _ y s � a6•C E Iz un Oy Ero oo E 2 V Oa p c t,a qa0 c m n G 2 ria.n.ro u_ m _ qon d nq �� yv of u d^ al ad E yZ CO N E. F 1 Ln 1 �-� LO u pro0 Luyu "d^ — E T'u ins oc t v E OC•e d q V 2<y O 6 d q OI S ro�o y 6 0 d d ao 'o C ao Eon d _ —d Q u C d�c d •O: 'e q L d p c� d u W ar L E.e r p,N a u C�pC�.11 L L. au NN �' y dqd 6a L.yd dN�F. O c EE o p aGo OQE dGo cE. L.a C L L E S C V O 6p A G6Of E Cu .tea — u . E ro •'� ro V Ca rn0 N. q E.••L lLmd 6 O api u0 PN ql > '�A \\9 o d ro > o0 • ( `,( \ . Y � o 71 O d go y o So i. a nY-a Sol = V o aac— C9�N S N CI G. C.C.1..1 G Ct d E n O E: dT qp L� dp u n t S.o E to o a $ n` ad is u yei avt �aC np p•a `o 'o oa - �a on w .0 Np EL p EQ 2 d L q L Ln, P Snd Ly Vu r � u _w LY S6 HQ 4`N G Vy p �I�. ^:� tiI •I. NI �I vI �•� 1 ^I .. C < r = N p V K�' a � d t1G�n 000 p O o i i O� V aCyNL W. =��C Att l L E O`^ Q y U W N p L als U 0 2 L T 3 G �s C O u dTE� ad .+ > p EE d n nd O C L O.L 2 U — Ca — V G C � V - C� NS a' �Eu iU Cy d U� � Q 2 C Fc=nU. E CL E Gu Co nv ETa t NC L r EZC a` F a I u p 0 0 0�= Ask z 4Jtj d u� aou i up m u aq, `qFa od P U1- T EE•+n LY - ,� V �u nq a wdiG L M p 2 o -Ul q a4p Y U C CO C C� may.L N d ^ ^ > L Ydp an• ^. ^W 9 E V y V C y LY .ta Q C d Q.0 U G. _ - E 'a NJ ua c' .. d� on - _ �.0 �- w O W N Y N. - O '� N C L.d q y •p.• wa �- Uy .° d LV • d� E l. Lc ERE a � r � Design Review Committee City of Rancho Cucamonga 9340 Baseline, Suite "B" Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 SUBJECT: Design Review for Tracc 12650-1 Dear Sirs: The Deer Creek Company has presented the architectural and site plan drawings to the Deer Creek Homeowners Association Board and other interested persons. After review of the designs, we find them highly compatible with the existing Deer Creek community. The designs presented to u!s indicated the use of the same roof tile and roof pitch, as well as substantial building setbacks to maintain the estate feel of the proje,_*t. We feel these are important design guide- lines which must be adhared to. The trails shown within.the tract and along Haven are the same as the existing development. The Board feels it is essential to retain this consistency in order to presein,e the character of the community i:a would strongly object to any changes in fencing styles or landscape design. As elected representatives of the Deer Creek community, the undersigned Board members give unanimous support for the designs proposed by the Deer Creek Company. This support is based on the continuation of the same roof tile, roof pitches, architectural design, building setbacks,. and trail design. '. Sincerely, THE DEER CREEK HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION BOARD Z. Mel Ch-mbers,/President Done Card (& Wayne Giro Barbara Balakrishnan Harold Kneller 4-enrita �e�aa"aoM c' CITY OF RANCHO CUCA.M4NA a ! r9- O .)royor Jon D.hlikels Y A! F $ it CounrtlmemOm 9' CbarlesJ.Buquet1I Jeffrey King 1977 Richardllf.Aahl Pamela J.Weight January 13, 1986 Dear Deer Creek Homeowner* As a continuation in the development of the Deer Creek Master Planned Community, The Deer Creek Company has submitted plans to the City to build single family homes on Lots 20-26 and 38-61 of Tract 12ES0-1. Tract 12650-1 is'a residential subdivision for single family homes on 61 1 lots located on the'east side of Haven Avenue, nort' of Hillside. Al plans and files related to this project are available for public review and are located in the Planning Division at City Hall, 9320 Base Line Road. Office hours are from 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM, Monday through Friday. The Planning Commission will be reviewing these development plans and considering them for approval at its regularly scheduled meeting on Wednesday evening, January 22, 1986. These meetings are open to the , public and we 12lCome your presence. Meetings are held at Lion's Park, 9161 Base Lire Road, (just west of Hellman) and begin promptly at 7:00 PM. If you have any questions or comments please direct all inquiries to myself. I will be happy to assist you. We look forward to working with you as we strive towards the development of a City we can all be oroud of. Sincerely, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT P SING DIVI Bruce Coo ' Associate Planner „ BC:das AOL —S3 9320 BASELTNE ROAD.SUITE C• POST OFFICE BOX 807 •RANCIIO CUCAMONGA.CALIFORNIA 91730 • (714)989.1°,51 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF T-c RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING DESIGN REVILW FOR TRACT 12650-1, LOTS 20-26 AND 38 61, '�ICATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF HAVEN AVENUE, NORTH OF HILLSIDE ROAD IN THE VERY,LOW RESIDFNTIAL DISTRICT WHEREAS, on the 12th day of December, 1985, a complete application was filed by The Deer Creek Company for review of the above-described project; and WHEREAS, on the 22nd day of January, 1996, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission held a meeting to consider the above-described project. fol 1 ows: NOW, THEREFORE„, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission resolved as SECTION 1: That the following can be met: 1. That the proposed project is consistent with the objectives of the General Plan: and 2. That the proposed 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 it the applicable provisions of the Development Code; and 4. That the proposed use, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. SECTION 2: That Design Review for Lots 20-26 and 38-61 of Tract 12650-1 is approved subject to all conditions and standard conditions contained within Resolution 84-45 and the following conditions: 1. Elements provided on the front elevations, i.e. window surrounds, soldier course, etc., shall be continued throughout the side and rear elevations to the satisfactio►i of the City Planner. 2. Drive approaches are to be standard two-car width in public parkway and shall flare-out to three-car !idth only when on private property. ` D-s PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION Page 2 3. Equestrian trails shall be fully developed by the developer consistent to established trail standards for the existing trails within thi Deer Creek Community. Final details shall be included in the landscape and irrigation plans to be submitted for the review and approval of the 'Planning Division. 4. Where equestrian trails cross over driveways, driveway surfaces shall be designed with a non-skid texture to the satisfaction of the Trails Committee. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 22ND Dnr OF JANUARY, 1986. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Dennis L. Stout, Chairman ATTEST: Brad Buller, Deputy Secretary left I, Bred Buller, Deputy Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 22nd day of January, 1986, by the following vote-to ,wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ; a CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA c�CA STAFF REPORT 1 M r -.._ o 0 E}-F Z U 'DATE: January 22, 1986* 1977 TO: Chairman artd Mh-mbers of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Bruce Cook, Associate Planner SUBJECT: DESIGN REVIEW FOR ;,f.NTATIVE TRACT 11932 C.T.K., NC esign Review of building ToorPrints an elevations—for`- an approved Tentative Tract of a residential subdiv slop of 2.55 acres into 10 lots in the Low Residential District (2-4 du/ac) located on the north side of Finch Avenue, and on the west side of Haven ,.,.enue - APN 202-191-15. I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action Requested: Approval of precise plot plan, conceptual grading pan, building footprints and elevations for an approved Tentative Tract. B. Surrounding Land Use and Z,ning: North - Vacant;Foothill Freeway corridor, and Medium Residential (8-14 du/ac) South - Sing' _ Family Residential; Low Residential (2-4 du/ac) East - Vacant; Low Residential (2-4 du/ac) West Single Family Residential; Low Residential (2.1 du/ac) C. General Plan Designations: Project Site - Low Residential (Z-4 du/ac) North - Foothill Freeway Corridor and Medium Residential (4-14 ilu/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 site is presently undeveloped and contains native—ifi-F-55 vegetation and i number of Eucalyptus trees along the Haven Aveni� > frontage. The proposed Foothill �. Freeway corridor forms the northern boundary of the project. ITEM E PLANNING COMISSION STAFF REPORT January 22, 1386 DR for Tentative Tract 11932 - C.T.K., Inc. Page 2 Alk Highland Avenue is located just north of that. The land to the south and west has been preciously subdivided and developed into single family houses. The balance of the surrounding area is currently vacant. The site slopes and drains to the south and west at approximately a three percent grade. II. ANALYSIS• I A. General: Access to the subdivision is off of Finch Avenue, —no—rIF--of 19th Street, via Mesada Street and 9andola Street.- Two building footprints ere snowa, each provided with three alternative builGing elevations. Architecture is of a contemporary design that is similar to and compatible win existing surrounding single family development. Existing Blue Gum Eucalyptus (approximately six) are present, along the. Haven Avenue frontage. These trees s are located very close .o the tract boundary line and woulr need to be removed to accommodate grading of the lots and construction of the block wall along Haven Avenue necessary for sound attenuation and flood protection. B. Design Review -Ommittee: The Design Review Committee has AML reviewed t e project an has recommended approval subject to the following: Site Plan: 1. Prov six foot high masonary wall along the north -.A easterly tract perimeters adjacent to Highiu ind Haven Avenues, respectively. The footings for the walls should be oversi.:ad �do accoiimodate a future nine foot wall that may be necessary for noise mitigation when the Foothill Freeway is developed. 2. The existing Flue Gum Eucalyptus trees along the Haven Avenue frontage should be removed. 3. The design of the Paven Avenue wall and parkway landscaping Should be submitted for the reivew and approval of the Design Review Committee prior to Issuance of permits. 4. Sideyards adjacent to the garage side of the unit should maintain, a minimum unobstructed dimension of ten feet; The unit on Lot 1 should be J reoriented so that garage side is adjacent to . Route 30 right-of-way. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT January 22, 1986 DR for Tentative Tract 11932 - C.T.K.,, Inc. Page 3 5. The developer should 1;rovide a six foot high decorative wall along the sideyard of Lot 2 icent to Finch Avenue, The design of the wall old be compatible with the architecure of the dwelling. The wail should be set back a minimum distance to achieve adequate site ":stance for vehicles backing out of the driveway an lot 3_ This setback area should be landscaped and irrigated by the developer. 6. Retaining walls exposer- to public view are to be decorative. Architecture• 1.. Upgrade the overall quality of architecture by breaking up the larger building masses into smaller components. Incorporate variety in roof lines. Articulate building planes by use of bay windows, pop-outs, prominent chimneys, indents, etc. 2. Provide upgraded treatment for side elevations that will face the street. ' 3. Avoid use of dutch gable roof with Spanish style architecture (elevation 1550-C). Extend gable to I" roof line. �l 4. Bathroom windows to be elongated and narrowed to reduce their visibility from streetscape. Provide window with same trim treatment as living area window (plant-ons). 5. Eliminate curvilinear plant-ons from Model 1550-A. 6. Chimneys to be stucco. brick or stone, but not wood or masonry siding. 7. All roofing material is to be tile. The applicant has submitted revised plans that incorporate man of these comments. Those items not indicated in the revised plans are included into the Conditions of Approval Staff recommends that revised elevations be required pursuant to the DRC comments as listed in the Conditions of Approval. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT January 22, 1986 DR for Tentative Tract 11932 - C.T.K., Inc. Page 4 C. Grading Committee: The Grading Committee has reviewed the Project an recor►mended approval subject to the following conditions: 1. Flood protection will be required on north and east property lines. Height of flood wall will be established- through submittal of acceptable off-site hydrology study per requirements and conditions of original approval. 2. Certification by the civil engineer of record as required in City Ordinance No. 240 will be required prior to issuance of any permits. 3. Submit a fn; p;1 grading plan incorporating the above. D. Noise Attenuation: Due to the proximity of the site to both Ti-vcn Avznue and e corridor for the future Foothill Freeway, :ire acoustical study has been completed. Mitigation involves construction of a minimum nine foot high block wall along both Ask the northerly and easterly tract perimeters. ThE Design Review Committee did not feel that it was practical at this time to construct a nine foot high wall to mitigate noise that does not currently exist. Rather, they gave direction to construct a six foot high block wall with an oversized footing designed to structurally sucport a nine foot high wall. This way the wall could be easily increased in heignt if it became necessary to do so at some future date. Staff has reviewed the recommended direction of the DRC and believes this approval may require further discussion by the full Cortmission. There are several issues regarding the proposed wall that were not raised during the DRC's review. When the wall is constructed and the individual lots are sold the subject wall will be privately owned by 9 parties. The assumption is the freeway will be constructed but the actual date is unknown. When the freeway is constructed the likelihood of consistent and unanimous compliance of all property owners to construct the required noise mitigation is questionable. A 9' high continuous block wall is the required mitigation measure. If one or more property owners do not comply with the construction of the 9 foot wall when the freeway is constructed the noise will not be adequatlely mitigated. Consistent and unanimous compliance is necessary. One possible solution may be to require the developer to pay an up-front cash deposit to cover the casts of any future improvements that may become necessary. However, there are p►AMWING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT January 22, 1986 OR for Tentative Tract 11932 - C.T.K., Inc. Page 5 Ah drawbacks to requiring cash deposits. Since the money collected now is to pay for improvements as much as 15 years into the future, a factor correcting for inflation must be adjusted into the total to be deposited by - A-veloper. The up-front costs to the developer would be muct. ,g —ing a cash deposit system and it is quite likely that the deer.-, .,ar, given the choice, would prefer to build all improvements now instead of depositing money for their future construction. The issue of noise attenuation measures for projects adjacent to the future freeway raises a number of issues that the Commission may wish to consider. Cal Tran's present policy is that once a. freeway's route is established, it becomes the responsibility of the developer and local jurisdiction to provide noise mitigation for projects intended for development adjacent to the freeway's established right-of-way, not Cal Trans. Since the freeway is designed with a bel%,w grade configuration, at least fairly reliable noise generation data can be projected and fairly effective noise mitigation meast.pres can be predicted, it may rake sense for the City to require the incorporation of mitigation measures at this time. To delay Ak consideration and implementation of noise mitigation measures -instead of requiring them with project development could lead to a situation in which the City way become fiscally responsible for providing whatever corrective actions became necessary. Therefore, after consideration of alternatives, Staff's opinion is that the most viable zipprn 0 would be to v; require full implementat on of proposed noise mitigation measures as recommended by an acceptable acoustical study to be provided by the developer at the initial stage of project development. If the Commission concurs with the Staff assessment then 't would be appropriate to revise. Condition #1 of the Resolution of Approval as follows: 1. Provide a 9 foot high masonry wall along the northerly and easterly tract perimeters as ,4. recommended in the acoustical study prepared for this project to provide effective sound attenuation. III. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: This project is consistent with the Development o e an the General Plan. The project will not be detrimental to adjacent properties or cause significant environmental impacts. In addition, the proposed use and site plan, together with the recommended Condtions of Approval,•are in compliance with the applicable provisions of the Development Code and City Standards, ,3Aft PLANNING COMMISSION STAF"r REPORT January. 22, 1986 DR for Tentative Tract 11932 • C.T.iC., Inc. Page 6 IV, hECGMMENOAT?ON: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission consider all-material and input regarding this project. If the Commission concludes with the Facts for Findings and Conditions of Approval, adoption of the attached Resolution would be in order. Respectfully sub Pitted, Brad Buller City Planner BB:BC:das Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Location Map Exhibit "B"-- Tentative Tract Map Exhibit "E" Detailed Site Plan Exhibit "D" - Conceptual Grading Plan Exhibit "E" Floor Plan - Model 1550 Exhibit "F" - Elevations Model 1550 Exhibit "G" Floor Plan - Model 1650 Exhibit "H" -Elevations Model 1650 Noise Study Tract-Resolution of Approval No. 81-30 )i Design Review Resolution with Conditions II" f 4, r i Ya�aNr 'i AND KMAND AVVEMNAIE Ilo. i I J r--fJ Re-„— v i� �IN6 '•RIENUE G, Lj u � ---i 1 19..__ _�.__ STREET CITY OF � RANCHO T 'T ITEM:_ t�� Ca CLCANIOI GA TITLE- PLANNING DIVISION r 1 XI IIGIT- _SCALE: MGHLANG. AVENUE , -- � ..��•'�� _�- - ���-. _- ��-- � -- -.:��- ' ill y•• - - I r"AEENI -p PR Wo W ,A l �` J it " -__•wr:R Y _�•� 7�'i � s i O m �5 ( 1 v III ( �. I r ��$✓ fit. — aM i NURTH CITY orRANCH^_ q CLTCANIIoiNGA LE PLANNING DIVISI0,Na' --�—SCALE- _ a e L a o m t `-ELT' it Q . e ua ga g Fv S �e au....�.".�"..a»r r. z£sl I•roN Laval _ !mar ws'a �i wa•+r +•,•••,•• ,,•• •••�• •• '00 ONIU33N ION3 IVOVNV.'f ••w t.u. HH' It°= i'34r7i�ldits:7�i4r fly i iEd+Es Ids ��id ._ : s �t. ,� � !Tf �, I I r 1 i�•%t ii ,is�=�t i€-=ljid . 7 A a�J dd• k1.0 1 d277 jt E 3 '" se.aid . '''j fill. - �..— tF d ,� 7+,ldf �" a 7 _ I r " +Iri�3l7+di,f��i 3S•�L$i��'< ; .a y q ��I•iJ>j � 9'dC. ti'e ;�a�'�E3iEPa�ii�iaE� +3}ii;{ � 3 �1�—s>m.°�_'=•- 11 Li �+I7kJdi,ldiiJe$li �lelli 3 '{ 1 . _ 3��) C-ti ' fir•' �II Gtk I a ; en mu/ fis �iI ' r, ` '\� -- � :may � � p o :•� o Y . � if ' # ,�`_ I I��' ►3 �'• � � ;' U' ..of 0 msrr q, c II oil �. Ia oo Vj El 0 �� !:I ----1- :� .., a LEE 6 flu •y it 3 3_ � 1 ILu1 •�' 'n �� 7 ` i n yQN� i DID I .H It a , i • V y � TEI JO4 s � Fi fil lo, Iv -�- -i s LU .I t t In V-3 I 1 O ,� ;— ;� � �• ,ram , All WPA All Saw I � i� � �';• `p --mot J • 1 jIts •I�. --- - ..—. ..� A y I •< ICI 9 '• y � v U _ �• rs --- 'I� ••s ED 99 rmrr- FFHI Z�3 i I y IL9 i I x jF 1 l_ i L C 7 II .lf€I hl •a � � =z , u ui �a.. i —r sa 3 la + a Tl Ir ME 3 a 3 ii — Ss Nil1 I , 1 'F ElaZ LM ! t F � ,•� •L � cacc�oa � 1 J 99 13. . 0_ }I.r,.E -ai: lit ' ! i I . 'El `t pf Rc LS at � H41 85/[i:07. CONSULTING ACOUSTICAL and ENERGY ENGIUERS December 16, 1985 A C 0 U S T I C A L A N A L Y SI S T R A C T 1 1 9 C I T Y G F R A N C H O C U C A M Q N G A I� Prepared by: Prepared for: Gordo ricken MR. CARL T. KOBBINS, JR. President C. T. K. INC. 3333 So. Brea Canyon Rd., #220 Diamond Bar, California, 91765 1621 East Seventeenth Street,Suite a ,Santa Ana,California 92701 a Phone(714)835-0249 11 11°I "� OGORDON BAICKEN & ASSOCIATE CONSULTI.NG ACOUSTICAL and ENERGY ENGINEERS S U M M R Y O F R E P O R ' The analysis has been completed to determine the exterior and interior noise exposure and the -necessary mitigation-measures for the proposed TRACT 11923 development in the City of Rancho Cucamonga. A detailed list of recommendations and requirements is listed in the following summary. Details are discussed in the body of the report. A. NOISE CONTROL BY'BARRIER jESIGN Various trials were carried but to examine the results I from various barrier heights. These are reported below. BARRIER HEIGHT MAXIMUM NOISE LEVEL ON LOT ROUTE 30 HAVEN(1) LOTS 1_8 LOT 9 LOT 10 g� 81/7, 69 69 65 10' 81/7' 66 • 66 65 12' gt/7, 65 66 65 131 81/71 64 65 65 (1) Refers to Lot 9/Lot 10 heights. Wall heights along Route 30 in excess of nine feet (9t) yield levels in excess of City Standards by less than two (2) CNEL units. Three (3) units are considered significant. 1621 East Seventeenth Street,Suite e Santa Ana,Califomia92701 • Phone(714)835-0249 r B. NOISE.CONTROL BARRIER CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS' The reqW,red noise control barriers may be constructed using one of the following alternative materials: (1) Masonry block (2) Stscco over frame wall (3) 1/4" glass or 1/2" LEXAN (4) Any combination of these materials Each completed noise control barrier must present a solid face from top-to-bottom. cutouts and openings are not ;permitted except for drain holes. C. INTERIOR NOISE CONTROL The buildings would be expected to be constructed, As a minimum; in accordance with the outline of Table 8. This is adequate for all Route 30 wall heights in excess of nine feet AIL (91). For an'eight foot (81) wall, the Plan 1550 Kitchen/Dinette would need 3/16" or Duai Glass. ` D. VENTILATION When operable wirdows or doors are open in the buildings, it is expected that the 45 CNEL intrusion limit will be exceeded. A means of mechanical ventilation should bedconsidered .to insure satisfactory sound control and ventilation. � r RESOLUTION No. 81-130 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, CONDITIONALL Y APPR OVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP N0. 11932 WHEREAS, Tentative Tract Map No. 11932, hereinafter"Map"submitted by E.J.L., applicant, for the purpose of subdividing the real property situated in the City of Rancha Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino, State of California, des;.ribed as APN 202-191-15, located on the north side of Finch Avenue, between Bandola Street and Haven Avenue into 10 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 subject to all conditions set forth in the Engineering and Planning Divisions reports; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has read and considered the Engineering and Planning Divisions reports and has considered other evidence presented at the public hearing. NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does resolve as follows: SECTION 1: The Planning Commission makes the follo:. g findings in regard to Tentative Tract No, 11932 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 Bevel- 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. Ak L ��z ResoluLon No. 81-130 Page 2 - (9) That this project-wil•1 not create adverse impacts on the environment and a Negative Declaration is issued. SECTION 2: Tentative Tract Map No. 11932, a copy of which . attached hereto, is hereby approved subject to all of the following conditions and the attached Standard Conditions: ENGINEERING DIVISION 1. The existing bridge over the storm channel along Haven Avenue as shown on the tentative map shall be removed and replaced with a concrete lined channel to the satisfaction of the San Bernardino County Flood Contr. ' District. 2. The existing right-of-way at the northwest corner of the cul-de-sac at Bandole Street shall be vacated to the adjacent property owner. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 28TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 1981. PLANNING CO MISSION OF THE C' Y OF RANCHO CUC_'C. .SA BY: J fry King Cha man EST: tary of the Planning Commission 1 JACK LAM, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, z. 1 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, Dahl, Sceranka, King NOES: COMMISSIONERS None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Tolstoy a RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING_COMMISSION APPROVING DESIGN REVIEW FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 11931 LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF HAVEN AVENUE, SOUTH OF HIGHLAND AVENUE IN THE LOW o'cSIDENTIAL DISTRICT WHEREAS, on the 20th day of November, 1985, a complete application was filed by C.T.K.; Inc. for review of the above-described project and WHEREAS, on she 22nd day of January, 1986, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission held a meeting to consider the above-described project. follows: NOW, 'THEREFORE, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Cormission resolved as SECTION 1: That the following can be met: 1. That the proposed project is consistent with the objectives of the General Plan; and 2. That the proposed use is in accord with the objective of the Development Code and the purposes of the district in which the site is located; and 3. That the proposed use is in compliance with.each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code; and l 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 Tentative Tract 11932 is approved subject aTT s at ndard conditions and conditions contained within Resolution 81- 130 and the following conditlrlt�- Design Review• 1. Provide a 6 foot ,high masonry will along the northerly and easterly tract perimeters adjacent to Highland and Haven Avenues respectively. The footings for the wall shall be oversized to accommodate a future 9 foot wall that may be.,- necessary for noise mitigation when the Foothill Freeway is developed. ,,4 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION January 22, 1986 OR for Tentative Tract 11932 C.T.K., Inc. Page 2 2.. The existing Blue Gum Eucalyptus trees along the Haven Avenue frontage shall be removed. A tree, removal permit per established City procedures shall be obtained by the applicant prior to the removal of any trees. 3. The design of the 'Haven Avenue wall and parkway landscaping shall be submitted for the review and approval of the Design Review Committee prior to issuance of building permits. 4. Sideyards ;adjacent to the garage side of the unit shall maintain a winimum unobstructed dimension of 10 feet. S. The developer shall provide a 6 foot high decorative wall along the sideyard of Lot 2 adjacent . to Finch Avenue. The design of the wall shall be compatible with the architecture of the dwelling. The wain shall be set back a minimum distance to achieve adequate sight distance for vehicles backing out of the driveway on Lot 3. This setback area shall be landscaped and irrigated by the developer. 6. 'Retaining walls exposed to public view are to be decorative. 7. Upgrade the overall quality of architecture by breaking up larger building masses into smaller components. Incorporate variety in roof lines. Articulate building planes by use of bay windows, POP-outs, prominent chimneys, indents, etc. Final plans shall be submitted for the review and approval of the Design Review Committee prig, to the issuance of building permits. B. Provide upgraded treatment including such treatments as window surrounds, gable trim, continuation of veneer siding, etc., for side elevations that will face a street. 9. Avoid use of dutch gable roof with Spanish_ style architecture (elevation 1550-C). Extend gable to roof line. 10. Chimneys to be stucco, brick or stone, but not wood or masonite siding. 11. All roofing material is to be tile. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION January 22, 1986 OR for Tentative Tract 11932 - C.T.K., Inc. Page 3 Building Divisions 1. Flood protection will be required on north and east property lines. Height of flood wall wil'i be established through submittal of acceptable off-site Hydrology Study per requirements and conditions of original Tract Map ipproval. 2. Certification by the civil engineer o* -ecord as required in City Ordinance #240 will be required prior to the issuance of any grading or building permits. 3. Submit a formal grading plan incorporating above referenced requirements. APPROVED AND ADOPTED 'THIS 22ND DAY OF JANUARY, 1986. PLANNING CG;"MISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Dennis L. Stout, airman ATTEST: Brad Buller, Deputy Secretary _ I, Brad Buller, Deputy Secretary of the Planning 'G-ommission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 22nd day of January, 1986; by the following vote-to-wit: f AYES: COMMISSIONERSt NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: N M u � G m= �' < o t4 Wit' 'Y `v Y _ o t.•o Q � Z.. .'.p E _4� t�� v 1 ^ .. u OY. L `O<'ut � �m G t .Oi� O.9y'• w� .Oiu •� O t • a � C L 6 L.n V 0U d V aid C'Y ou a " a N d on c t•�,',d. nu n aw ME ol `. _ > C O O rL o ev..ni c d E u y is+• ` w fi t.n i vn N _ �•TV n ` sv a��Eo.c' v' Y��v _ < a u Y oL ..F a^.op a•, <_Cc'� E o G.p^ 3a ^ ^ O•C_a O _C u u GC. va •it ^N �p O V� 42 77 n N O 4 < a S`. 'Y 0•c N� 3 <Oeai O. D, o O L,,� w� ^ a p 4 .t'• a�` L =' O `q C C a e y p G e E .y d V u .~.. Y a mI CV Nii 6q rC N Gw W+LS f2 WV ..t•n�mc.O �' _ w La En C� n Y A L Y L go < a m 0 ` 'p U ,=e, G v Zw 9N. L•� � �,C 9 oa '.°u c•S tea, o' o O �O a uv c.a n4 c to �• <i. tn G U O � T w � y m h u v a c v E E • u�Cy a4 O L s.. u N N o v'cv oY wsY uo r o e� vv rqw an �N.p,. NY _T Z. Yq.Y cm = < 4u N U L o vaprpi Mca+ oP nC� .?n ^Sa noo oo EFo iEx 7 ^C W. emu' 4�.` m >� E. ZI HW W «" •`+•m O.••u �'` rO aaZL. _ 7. O _ O CC <4a Gj tlf A N C w p N ^� I '� � � bI '.I � N ^I •r N J _ r C W ' �• N , L w o as n .� 'c q I •'b L o D7 ••o ti •: L N1 �p C� • CN. i Y 4 4R Py. c � c p �•' o � ^ C L, S�a+i es LEIO G.r` !_� 4 ��6 � CC C '> �• L q O. r G 17.v D L 1.L C N J q cq •'L a G P LO. 4O `AU G �=OY $L 4 pa G'q ` vw. `O9 pR O ``.� LML v�i h 4 jT LJG ...L VOL taV.. =L y y n � .. = P•- 4qw a L } »L q.2 .a.a`3^J pw 65c `�E Ca C.. L4,• v ter,— C w y E E b C A G C C p C .^- �`V,Y. O J o P D L O C -� .�J C Ct q L. 'Y V C a P N 0 It S3 p v< F R L CI. 4 0 G I�3.n GG Nun C�l� �q~ UG p 4` �C—irr.0 O y.�U jay �•O�CgiP C w�'�`y OV Cw A• O a2L! Cn0 F�+q '� OY O.n 60 hr•3u +•E 4 D 4.��y 2—NVG zo~ LOG n.0 f ' 04GC1 4pL• .'p. C ,A G 4�.0 � 9'Ca a Y7 Y OYaz rCM �y L EnL —.0.� CL. DS - — eg . Jew u L p.Dr �. V 4 4 G ]I ay. 6 »q4 y1 GO NCO aL Z Hp nL y . N 4 y wO b L> L t `Y Jv p caa�ay3. 69 64 t er C C: C it �.L G � 4u •...y 2 n O D eqa — 2 Lip J a a�V.p ^•6v.D C O C i= CC1 O gy G� • d b q N M 4.C q O. a 0 �G N Y g.a �'T i N i �a''a c+� R�Y n� i fSv A �. p C4 F'z4u O L L4 L L_ L u r 'V y C :` 2: J Oq —p v L a a r D � 4 4 u 2 �^ o o N� o.L�w .D =Q F ntip - 4D q LM, U J'y ArN ; _ y E.'3 mob-. w�'� p Oyu p .0 N4 r.2 4gdt e%i ` 18 T q N > O q N YC1 C=1t ._ p ADM La 'i e r c Y a c• W�v w O.Ci Ga y �w w O .p '•^ Ea . ` �uL Sw=. Ja V` DCwO. a: M oa 4. L.y E..�. p 3 >C�, fi..G.n : � fi� �•� I y N R ' - -� �{ Li 4J 4 V a ` U D• L O j _ Ell O• do C.p. •^ L O.t. �� �_ C �Q)�� � � 4•� � FF Li O• .. C O^ � O q O �[r .. I � ` C G n a ^� •O 1 y�a. S U P a � •C C' v � • 1 T L II '� CL �•C O L` U u E 3 hC� G Lv�I .=i ^V u '�3 i•O N 3 ... 4O V�V O LN . e 4.y q OO O U h 9 9 G O p 6o O d = G7 �� a i pu L••Ep ` sf�. T Z_- o u M. -t =L.� oL•.=H o nat. a�. =Nlie •"d 'e e.- a o u ._ o c I My i c9- c to w uo u Gv, <n 1-u•n cI O o C g o M N.0 V � 1..• d'•L y n _ c O va d ` vr C •n 4�. � 9 4 M 3 d �C •^ n w' W� O �U y. U .� n — Off? nY. d d3 p,C2. _ u ..O !C.•�>C � OQ 3 �.O..d dV6 SM x.g N G N 2 O 9 O C L C C ^ 2 v •^ u — �v C a v - o 9Qa L�y C wQb 4C4 LG •` 2 !ar O ^'.V U.�i ^�a C Lpu � 'c N.V �C U €a O • C J .a:� 4.•n n .e C u� UU�•"• atu � Q�� uClq LLy D• _ o� 9E COi..'•. .uuL �•oEOa E �I �`� q y O N� 9 u y9 Ty v •= AWN 94N O C � � N bO o a Q�•n c c;..o �m c �� i uc. o 4`�' NG�:O9 Cx V.6 d.2M 9uG 9q1 eE. 04 34 G� 9 N O K F •EyEi d.0 • � '� V .a 092 �` C b .mod O W .nin L + OIti L. •N NC C'aC C.V �U O COOYi OVE J �I Ob L �n LEa o�OE c _ � M L �L Oq 3G�..rLL YL H.X.56 L -2= N nL Y T �} I •p ^ ICI l a u r o' •. ' E. . O C 1 Y L O L ` COG C � - . • V .�. c J J 1 TY p u O' i •7a O G 7 � Y � C O rU GL G 4 C'1 u W� 'U Ol1 � avni Fq � uW W y Outi C. O A �� 6 OC + ' Lu � •'u t �.p. d O O N t L a O L q a LV.1 •� •�e .22 0 p •.r fj T � O L a O d O L �� L L u �O � C n •O <�CO Lat r ( ~Cn a E .'aLi I ^� .rU LTo=i d ` ti 0 c U rr ER JiG c C TN. G y C C7. SW`. U O SO C Vn Lei ie1 uc'oo co O uoe E � - � cC.• L n c d .-O.' E O G cL-i 'Si Lo IOG T �� Z. Oo� N O LC S O22 �UGj L Do Ra Go p *y �I NL L OC E G .Gig G. O E ` is. L s�. �I I Ua 2 N `n Cam- n •t a _ .. GLC _ a_E� d a m G e G •E-L .-L T �i.� CIO a c_. c. wu G.0 uN �vm ac�u m v a 4-s- a ai u 2a q ;zz "O u o•°D' y gas so at tug CN.' 2y � _L 79 •`V OG CqL R > � � � ¢q.p+N l^iG CD �..�.1-a a pop=C CITY OF RANCHO CUCANIONGA ccc a ro STAFF REPORT �I e o w IIIz U I> 1977 DATE: January 22, 1986 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Chris Westman, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 85-38 - VICTORY CHAPEL - .Ion-cnns ruc 'ton Conditional Use Permit to ees is a church in an existing building in a multi-tenant industrial park within Subarea 4 (General Industrial)' of the Industrial Specific Plan, located on the northwest corner of .Archibald and 7th (9618 7th treet) - AFN 209-171-47 I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action Requested: Approval of a non-construction Conditional se Permit B. Parcel Size: 1.48 C. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North - Subarea 4, Industrial Park South - Existing Residential East - Subarea 4, Industrial Park West Subarea 4, Industrial Park D. General Plan Designations: Project Site - General Industrial North - General Industrial South - General Industrial East General Industrial West - General Industrial E. Site Characteristics: The proposed use is located within an existing mu tenant industrial center. ITEM F PLANNING 0MMISSION STAFF REPORT January 8, 1986 CUP 85-38 - Victory Chapel Page 2 II. ANALYSIS: A. General: The proposed use is to be located at 9618 7th Street see Exhibit "B") The major issue related- to institutional uses located within industrial areas is compatibility with surrounding tenants in terms of parking availability. The major parking area for this unit is in front along 7th Street. A parking court determined 367 overall parking spaces available within the Inland Center. Based on a 2,402 square foot sanctuary, 69 parkirl spaces are needed to fulfill parking requirements for the proposed church. With;n a two hundred foot radius of the 'proposed church, there are approximately 155 parking spaces available'. Fourteen of chose spaces will be used b San Berna rdino ardino County Public Social Services for fleet parking g at present duringevening g and weekend. hours. The County has plans to expand their staff and fleet in the near future but has not determined whether they will retain at Inland Center or move. In either case, there is ample parking available during non-business hours. B. Technical Review Committee: The Technical Review Committee T-5-55T the app ca ton o e in conformance with the regulations and standards governing Subarea 4. Foothill Fire District determined the project to be workable panding several corrections. Those fire proofing, installation of panic hardware and exit signs as well as approval of all interior alterations and sprinkler alterations by the Fire District. C. Environmental Assessment: The proposed project has been e ermine rode a categorical exemption (California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines, Section 15301, Class 1), in which it will not have a significant effect on the environment which shall, therefore, be exempt from the provisions of CEQA. III. FACTS FOR FMDINGS: The proposed project is consistent with the Industrial _ pecf ac Plan. The proposed use, together with the recommended Conditions 17,° Approval, will not be detrimental -to the public health or materially injurious to properties in the vicinity. IN. CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised as a public hearing in a ai'Ty—Report newspaper, the proppriy posted, and notices were sent to properly owners within 300 feet of the project site. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT January 8, 1986 CUP 85-38 - Victory Chapel Page 3 V. RECOMMENDATION: If the Planning Commission can support the Facts or Findings, then approval of Conditional Use Permit 85-38 hrough adoption of the attached Resolution with Conditions wo.4d. be. appropriate. Res ectfully su /ttie�, Brad Buller City Planner BB:CW:das Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Vicinity Map Exhibit "B" - Site Plan Exhibit "C" Floor Plan Parking Explanation from Applicant Resolution of Approval with Conditions F I. r O AT&SF R.R. ram+ T. 8th subarea3".. .x O 7th x O gobarea 4 P a �C O A r O subarea 1,�.� 14� • O . !r O 4th NORTH CITY OF n ITEM:t O �LTl 1Vl'V1�GA TITLE. glCAi TY A4ArP PLANNING DIVISION EXHIBIT. s.. SCALE: � VIC1NY CM-iirL[_ - RNMC4AO CVGt`.n%0t CGA CA. D.r s z-X cgy92?o.2 ZPXCBs lP6A--le5 TD Nuirfbe e of 6,1'ek7.v6 sH9ce5 a N ism _ _ e z o �_ 9�3d�als 7ll�C �. o`i cr Z Q l aw 7b'.�w =06 h a:asps x41 tntnN/1 p i F b i/tvoJ�'d of b W �j E09 WOW u z m , � 7n�013M n p a 6 3 u b5nownn�J yl r t Z h 6 a 6. au n a i �rsavd52(—+ Saavjc bl.-i- :a - »'vds hl.—► i--s as ti-� ® vas 2E—� ra;vds 11—1 7Tk t I ZX/57-11V6 � AfPRw 96 6D 7 Yve NORTH CITY OF ITEIM: RANCHO CLTCAMOiNGA TITLE: PI.ANNINiG DIVLSION EXHIBIT---}_SCALE= . V i CTOM Y CPAPS4 9618 -1- ST RANCHO CLv-Kmot4GA cA _ scn�c t e/e� 91730 PASTOR ALEX WIGSOA/ 899 Z.SO Z 1 G1 LA P4gYtR i 4 I ebya� Room � Z-5 yle5 �--L r 1 ' 1 I 1 I 1 , CLas S y3� � y i CLASS •1 Li wt NuRs'FRY J y �' � k iF-T•—fir_' qy� � ' 7 'r� 1 i W -- - - - e-14 1 7 t' _ a PLATFoRIA _ a IR.R . a CITY OF ITELM: RANCHO CLTCAMONGA TITLE: )e- Vt PLANNINr, DIvISIaN EXHIBIT: —scALE:�.�� 442 T C� Tf��iFE f'+'� :S�= f'Ar�a��itJG Spf.'�.S �7UST' ♦.1.J �SeFirrAs� Nr1,�-I,6� c�i��i'�vt�r.��::� � cis �ia'�✓�u�� Od«IrW�I// J s111?'I. GGJJG9!/r' $e, /6'C2 5F g4:5S � �• •��/ } �06 10;4) Cel a .t1oU S' COS' 4��iPf��"iGW Gt.•�1lfG� �Jr� C'OstJie%rc�' C.tJ/Ti'� "U,4J�iC,JD.�skJ OC'CCJf=flis✓7"'� G.�/°�(� Ci✓��5 tqJ,61-/G *ne--Me- � e tirc>�- .va e Aii ©7:1-14o<- C=a�Aiv1T' {Jr�". .�.v o�G�r/ae`IC, .1/ �: o2c� .ALE" Gvfr '`/� GG�ce'/'•c� G�4/!?r�G/T,e�' 577, CCAt7— 7-0 �' Uit1CA.sJ:" s4lf'y 0,00.6 aA v 1�s S '1r4 7 5 ---RE�I�1V6 � CITY LF RANCHO CUCAMON" PLANNING DIVISION 'AM NOV 2 71985 PM -i RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 85-38 FOR A CHURCH LOCATED AT 9618 7TH STREET IN THE GENERAL INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT. WHEREAS, on the 6th day of December, 1985, a complete application was filed by Alex Wil"n (Pastor) for review of the above-described project, and WHEREAS, on the"22nd day o' January, 1986, the Rancho Cucamonga Fanning Commission hfkld a public hearing to consider the above-described project. follows: NOW, THEREFORE, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission resolved as, SECTION 1 That the following'findi.►�gs can be met: 1. That the proposed use is in accord with the General Plan, the obj%tives 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 L public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity_ r 3. That the proposed use complies with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code.. SECTIO'. 2. That this project has been determined a categorical P J exemption Fy—L`a iifornia Environmental Quality Act Guidelines, Section 15301 Class 1. ' SECTION 3: That Conditional Use Permit No. 85-38 is approved subject t67FFT3 sowing conditions 1. This approval shall run with the applicant and shall become void upon a change of ownership, or the use ceases. Modification to the church operation or seating area shall require a modification to this Conditional Use Permit. 2. The site shall be ,:�,al< :ed in accordance with the approveu plans on file in the Planning Division, the conditions contained herein, and Industrial Area Specific Plan regulations. Prior to any use c the PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION Janulry 8, 1986 CUP 85-38 - Victory Chapel Page 2 project site or business activity being commenced thereon, all conditions of approval shall . be completed to the satisfaction of the City Planner and Building Official. s. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Industrial Area Specific Plan and all other applicable City Ordinances, in effect at the time of occupancy. 4. Any signs proposed for this Conditional Use Permit shall be designed in conformance with the Coiprehensive Sign Ordinance and shall require review and approval by the Planning Division prior to installation of such signs. 5. If the operation of this church causes adverse effects upon adjacent businesses or operations, the Conditional Use Permit shall be brought before the Planning Commission for their consideration and possible revocation of such use. 6. Public assembly or large group meetings (50+ persons), shall not commence until such time as mil` Uniform Building bode and State Fire Marshall's Regulations have been complied with. Prior to occupancy, plans shall be submitted to the Foothill Fire Protection District and the Building and Safety Division to show compliance. The building shall be. inspected for compliance prior to occupancy. 7. The building miy be used for religious assembly and group meetings only during the weekend and after 6:00 p.m. on weeknights. 8. Preschools or schools are not aitowed by ti.:s permit; however, this shall not preclude nurseries or Sunday School. 9. Maximum occupancy load of 505 persons shall be allowed as per Fire District recommendation. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 22NO DAY OF JANUARY, 1986. PLANNING CC`1MISSION 1F THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Dennis C—Sf6-uT thairman AOL ATTEST: Brad u er, epu y secretary PLANNING COMMISSIOR RESOLUTION January 8, 1986 CUP 85-38 - Victory Chapel Page 3 I, Brad BLIler, Deputy Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 22nd day of January, 1986, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COK%IISSIONERS: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA c�!QMo STAFF REPORT ��9 < t 0 CI O DATE: January 22, 1986 1977 TO: Planning Commission FROM:. Barrye R. Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer BY: Barbara Krall, Assistant Civil Engineer SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 9530 - WALKER - A division of 7.7 acr^s into 2 parcels in the General Industrial District, oubarea 13, located on the north side of 6zh Street, east and west of new Rochester Avenue (APN 229-261-38) I. PROJECT AND SITE. DESCRIPTION: A. Action Requested: Approval of ParcO Map 8. Purpose: To create 2 legal lots which have been physically divided by new Roche_ter Avenue C, Locat.jn: North side of 6th Street, each and west of new Rochester Avenue D. Parcel Size: Parcel 1 - 4.6 acres Parcel 2 - 2.9 acres Total 7.7Eius— E. Existing Zoning: Industrial Specific Plan, Subarea 13 F. Existinq Land Use: Vacant G. Surrounding Land Use: North - Vacant i; South - Vacant East - Vacant L , West - Existing Industrial Building .4. Su-:-ounding General Plan and Development Code Designations North - Industrial Specific Plan, Subarea 13 South - Industrial Specific Plan, Subarea 13 East - Industrial Specific Plan, Subarea 13 West - Industrial Specific Plan, Subarea 11 I. Site Characteristics: The site slopes approximately 2% in a southerly direcT tion and:`contains an abandoned vineyard. ITEM G PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Environmental Assessment and 'Parcel Map 9530 January 22, 1986 Page 2 JI. ANALYSIS: The Purpose of the parcel nap is to create two separate legal parcels of the portions of the prc,erty which where physically seylarated by the dedication and construction of new Rochester Avenue. _ New Rochester Avenue andthe majority of 6th Street have been widened to ultimate along the prcel frontages. The remaining missing improvements (sidewalks, street lights and landscaping) wli be constructed with the development of each parcel, The Industrial Area Specific Plan shows that an interchange .i„ to be constructed from the Route 15 Freeway to oth Street at a future date when warranted b. traffic demand (refer to Exhibit A!, The eastern 88 feet + (0.5 acres) of Parcel 2 is required to construct the interchat,ge (refer to Exhibit B). Two issues related to the aria required for the interchange, are as follows: A. Hjw can it be protected so that it can be easily acquired when needed in she future? B. How shall it be utilized in the interium, perhaps as long as 10 *to 15 years, and what in.provements should be requires!' A. Protection Options: 1. Do nothing to protect the area at this tim. Allow the area to be *Acorporated into a project site plan. The property would be acquired in the future when needed reali?ing th::t there would be increased cost due to development on the -nroperty. The 'acquisition would also be distruptive to the xisting development on the property. 2. Require the property to be offered for dedication at this time in effect, e.tablishing a set back line restricting buildings, { and required site related items such as parking and landscaping from encroaching into the area, therefore, a future acquistion would not effect developed property. If the City should receive funds from an outside agency (CalTrans, etc.) for the acquisition of the property, those funds would be paid to the owner of the property. a PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Environmental Assessment and Parcel Map 9530 January 22, 1986 Page 2 B. Iuterium Use Issues: 1. Should sta,idard street improvements be required along Old Rochester Avenue and the portion of 6th Street fronting the- area, realizing:that they will be removed upon construction of the interchange? 2. Should the existing r:rerhead uti`iity line on the project side along Old Rochester Avenue be undergrounded, an in-lieu fee; paid or 'postpone any action until construction of the `'nterchange? 3. If the area is not allowed to be used for required site development items, should it be landscaped (perhaps allowing nonrequired parking,`? :initially the applicant had objected to the offer of dedication concept (refer to his letters, Exhibits C, D, and E). At a subsequent meeting, he agreed that the concept contained in Option 2 was acceptable. aff recommendsc 1. Protection Option 2s , 2. Improvement of '011 Rochester ,avenue and 6th :et upon development av Parcel 2, 3. The payment of an in-lieu fee for the undergrounding of the exisitin3 overhead utilties upon development of Parcel 2, due to the shirt, frontage and complications involves! with placing the line at its ultimate lo:.,,tion; 4. Require landscaping of t.., zwea upon: development of Parcel 2. III. ENVIp^NMENTAL REVIEW: Also attached for y.-ur ,review and consideration 5—Part I of the Initial Stvly as completed by the applicant. Staff has completed Part II of the ini,ial Study, the environmental checklist, and has conducted a field investigation. Upon completion and review of the Initial Study and field °investigation, Staff found no adverse impacts on the environment as a result of the propozed subdivision. IV. CORRESPONDENCE: Notices of Public hearing have been sent to surr,uunding property owners -yid placed in the Daily Report Newspaper. Potting at the site: has also h• 3leted. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Environmental Assessment and Parcel Map 9530 January 22, 1985 Page 41 V. RECOKwIENWHON: It is recommended that the Planning Commission consider l l input and elements of Tentative Parcel Map 9530. If after such consideration, the Commission can recommend approval, then the adption of the attached Resolution and issuance of a Negative Declaration would be appropriate. Respectfully submitted, BR.1i:BK:de Attachments: Vicinii•g Map Tentat`ve Map Resol i,t Reconmendej Conditions oi' Approval Ini'tai Study Aft L41 f-- to • .I' y�.y�`�.•*,-y,�a FyyS.1�"h+Y+xj,�s, !.vt g ins�bata& r v f�3 ....... site 6th pcgq� subarea tt� �. z r �g�✓ S$ y , M_k a V '_, cc ` 'a , � sub*WA s� �`�` m x a • 1-15 � CITY OF PROJECT PARCEL MAP 9534 RA�S�;HO CUt�!�MON�A TITLE: �� MAP -- .. ENGINEERING DIVISION G EXHIBIT.. 11 A " as�a � • 2 ' I 14 I 0 ' 1 '•� Y% M Id Yj •_ � Y a SfC► 3zr' � •• ��'cy. t Y � yZrA 0 jt9 t I � S 1 W AM :3 \ I ZrZr.41 1 �.. ••�♦ '�• ♦ .♦ . a,•,J( { 1. •1 a� J J . O � . CITY 0F �}- . ._.. PROJECT PARCEL MAP 9530 . .r RANCHO 1 1CAnliC7lGA TITLE: ENGINEERING DIVISION 6 -e EXHIBIT; t1 B 11 ENVIRUNLNTAL REVIEW APPLICATION o }. .� F � Q � a INITIAL STUDY � PA ls» RT I GENERAL For all projects requiring environmental review, this fora must be completed and submitted to the Development Review Committee through the department where the project application is made. Upon receipt of this application, the Planning Div' ' In staff will prepare Part II of the Initial Study and rake recommendat%;=, to Planning Commission. The Planning Commission will make one of three- dete:rminationst (1) The project will have no significant environmental impact and a Negative Declaration will be filed, (2) The project will have a significant environmental impact and as Environmental Impact Report will be»prepared, or (3) An additional information report should be supplied by the applicant giving further information concerning the proposed project. Date Filed: Project Title: AML Applicant's Name, Address, Telephone: i6:,•n4 Name, Address, Telephone of Person To Be Contacted Concerning this Project: _ Location of Project: f Assessor's Parcel No.: r 0 22 3 E ep- List other permits necessary from local, regional, state and federal' agencies and the agency issuing such permits: I- -PROJECT OESCRV rLoN Proposed use or Proposed project: LA �' LM dVI --------------- ----------------- Acreage of project area and square footage ofi existing and proposed buildings, if.any:_ P1kR!F( i�, -•8.4Cq _ P cC-L 2 15 2.9 r � ARE Uo Er,Y►STzt� � p�� ��l�1NC� Describe the environr.�ntai settin of the project, site including information on topography, soil stability, plants (trees), land animals, any cultural„ historica� or scenic aspects, land use of surroundinq properties, and the description of any existing structures and thei ,use (attach necessary sheets): � �� c�RC�E.sCc. LOP Ci pu -^CVE �) GUT-te GU Vto- lkl2ts. N C�' S y l-� >zy L7CtS1`!l --_� y# SlGiitFtc ve C Atr11� , VSE= 1 �TRtAL 4��-rt-t 1✓�LSCIt Rik a Is the project part of a larger project, one s a sLgries of cumulative actions, which although individually small may environmental ir'pact Y as , whole have significant { V1-2 WILL THIS PROJECT: YES NO 1. Creata a substantial change in ground contours? 2. Create a substantial change in existing noise of produce vibration or, glare? 3. Create a substantial change in demand for municipal services (police, fire, water, sewage, etc.)? 4. Create changes in the existing Zoning or General Plan designations? V S. Remove any existing trees? How many? 6. Create the need for use or disposal of potentially hazardous materials such as toxic substances, flammables or explosives? v Explanation of any YES ai,•iers above'(attach additional sheets if necessary):. 7. Estimate the amount of sewage and solid waste materials this project will generate daiiy: tjVia 8. Estimate the number of auto and truck trips generated daily by this Froject• f Zvrl�� 9. Estimate the amount of grading `cutting and filling) required for this project, in cubic yards: tJo 4,;: 10. If the project involves the construction of residential units, colete the form on the next page. mp CERTIFICATION: I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and information-.required s thi fir initial evaluation to the best of my ability; and that th,j facts. hi statements, and information presented are true and correct to the bes t of my knowledge and �• belief. I further understand that additional information may be required to be submitted before an adeou-ite evaluation can be made by the Plr:nning Division. Date: Signature Title -Qaur ... I-3 RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION The following information should be'provided to the City :.f Rancho Cucamonga; Planning "Division in order to aid the school district in assessing their atility to accommodate the proposed residential development. Develo�;ers are required to secure letters From the school district for accommodating the increased number of students prior to ibsuance of bailding permits. Name of Developer and Tentative Tract No.: Specific Location of Project: PHASE-1 PHASE 2 PHASE 3 PHASE 4 TOTAL 1. Number of singly family units: 2. Number of multiple Family units, 3. Date proposed to begin construction: 4. Earliest date of occupancy; rodela and # of Tentative 5. 3edrooms, Pric_a Range 6 -10 f; � II-4 RESO_UTION NO. A RESOLUTIC'N OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE+CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PARCEL MAP NUMBER 9530 (TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 9530) LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF 6TH STREET, EAST AND WEST OF NEW ROCHESTER AVENUE WHEREAS, Tentative Parcel Map Number 9530, submitted by W. Keith ,.,.Ter and consisting of 2 parcels, located on the north side of 6th Street, east and west of new Rochester Avenue, being a division of a portion of Lot 36 of Rochester as per I-lat recorded in Book 9 of Maps, page 20, records of San Bernardino County, State of California; and WHERt AS, on November 25, 1985, a formal application was submitted requesting ruview of the above-described Tentative Map; and WHEREAS, on January 8, 1986, the Planning Commission held a duly advertised public hearing for the above-described map. FOLLOWS: NOW, THEREFORE, THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLVED AS SECTION 1: That the following findings hire been made: 1. That the map is consistent with the General Playa. 2. That the improvement of. the proposed subdivision is consistent with the General Plan. 3, That the site is physically suitable for the proposed development. 4. That the proposed subdivision and improvements %4 l not cause substantial environmental damage, public health problems or have adverse affects on abuttino property. - SECTION 2: That this project will not create significant adverse environmental impacts and a Negative Declaration is issued on January 8, 1986. SECTION 3: That Tentative Parcel Map No. 9530 is approved subject to the .,ecommended Conditions of Approval pertaining thereto. APPROVED AND ADOPTED T&S 8TH DAY OF JANUARY, 1986. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Dennis L. Stout, Chairman ATTEST: Brad Buller, Deputy Secretary I, Brad Buller, Deputy Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing kesolution wIas 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 8th day of January, 1986, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: 1 t CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVA L LOCATION: North side of 6th Street east TENTATIVE PARCEL 1'1P NO: 9530 and west: of new Rochester Avenue DATE FILED: December 5, 1985 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: A division of a portion NUMBER OF LOTS: 2 of 96 of Rochester as per -4.t recorded in GROSS ACREAGE: 7.7 Book 9 of Mats p3g0 20A records of ASSESSOR PARCEL NO: 229-261-28 San Bernardino Count-, State of California �t**�*�*��*****:t�t�x�t�t•:�,t��t�t��t+��*�**��t:r*t�,t��t:t�r*�t�t***�r�r* DEVELOPER OWNER ENGINEER/SURVEYOR W. Keith Walker Same Sanderson &Assoc. Inc. 427 W. Drvde Street 5587 Arrow Rte., Suite H Glendale CA 91202 Rancho Cucamonga CA 91730 . Improvement and dedication requirements in accordance with Title 16 of the Municipal Code of the City of Rancho Cucamonga include, but may iot be limited to, the following: A. Dedications and Vehicular Access 1. Jeications shall be made of all interior street rights-of-way and all necessary easements as shown on the tentative map. 2. Dedication shall be made of the following rights-of-way on the following streets: _- additional feet on additional feet on— additional feet on _ X 3. Corner property line radius will be required per Citv Standards. X 4. All rights of vehicular ingress and egress shall be dedicated as follows: 'r 5. Reciprocal access easements and maintenance agreements ensuring access all or and joint maintenance of. all corrs nn roads, d parking areas shall be provided by O.C.&R.s �. and shall be recorded concurrent with the map. k 'r; X _ 6. All existing easements lying within future right-of-way are to be quitclaimed or delineated on the map per City Engineer's. requirements. X 7. Easements for sidewalk for public use shall be dedicatedto the City where sidawalks meander through reivate property. B. Street Improvement, Pursuant to the City of Ranch Cucamonga Mun4cipal Bode, Title :6, Section 16.36.120, the subdivider may enter into an agreement and post security with the City guaranteeing the required construction prier to recordation of the map and/or building permit issuance. 1. Construct full street improvements including, but not limited to, curb and gutter, A.C. pavement, sidewalk, drive approaches, parkway trees and street lights on all interior street,:- 2. A minimum of '26-foot wide pavement within a 40-foot ,side dedicated right-of-way shall be constructed for all half- section streets. X 3. Construct the -ollowing missing improvements: Prior to building permit issuance for each parcei. Curb & A.C. Side- Driveve Street Street A.C. Median j Street. Name Gutter Pvmt. Walk Agpr. Trees i.ights Overlay [stand* Other 6th Street ** X X Aft New Rochester X X X X fld Rochester X X X X X X *Includes landscaping and -irrigation on meter **Meandering X 4. Prior to any work being performed in the public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and an encroachment permit shall be obtained from the City Engineer's Offices in addition to any other permits required. X S. Street improvement plans shall be prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer and approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of an encroachment permit. 6. Developer shall coordinate, and where necessary, pay for the relocation of any power poles or oth^.r existing public utilities as necessary. 7. Existing lines of 12KV or 'less frunting the property shall be undergrounded. X B. Install appropriate street name signs, traffic control signs;, striping and markings with locations and types approved by the •� City Engineer. -2r- Cx -/"71 X g. Street light locations, as required, a;e to be approved by the Southern—California Edison Company and the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Lights shall be on decorative poles with underground service. X_ 10. La dscape and irri,,�;ation plans shall be submitted to and approved by thz: manning Division prior to the issuance of building permit. X 11. Concentrated drainage flows shall not cross sidew-lks. Undersidewalk drains shall be installed to City Standards. C. surety X I. Surety shall be posted and an agreement executed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and City Attorney, guaranteeing completion of the pubiic improvements prior to building permit issuance for each parcel. X 2. A lien agreement must be executed Prior to recording of the map for the following: one-half the cost of median island landscaping within 6th Street. a. Surety shall be posted and an agreement executed, guaranteeing completion of all on-site drainage facilites necessary far dewatering all parcels to the satisfaction of the Building and Sarety Divison, prior to recording for and/or prior to issuance of building i_,rmit for fl. Drainage and Flood. Control ]. Private drainage easem, ,its F,)r cross-lot drainage shall be required and shall be delineated or noticed on the Final map. X 2. Adequate provisions shall be made for acceptance and disposal of surface drainage entering the property from adjacent areas. 3. The following storm drain shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer Prior to recordation of the map, a hydrologic and drainage study for the prajtic:4 shall be submitted to the City Engineer for r�vic�. Fas A drainage detention basin Vier City Standards shall b2 cnnsta•ucted to detain increased runoff Q 01 _:d o a- _8 F' 1 enda, Packed o Rafe 7 E. Grading x 1. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance wi{, the Uniform Building Code, City Grading Standards and accepted grading practices. The final grading plan shall be in substantial conformance with the approved conceptual grading plan. X 2. A soils report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer licensed by the State of California to perform such work prior to issuance of building permit. 3. A geological report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and submitted at the time of application or grading plan check. -4. The final grading plan shall be subject to review and approval by the Grading Committee and shall be completed prior to recordation of the final subdivision map or issuance of building permit whichever comes first. X 5. Final grading plans for.each parcel are to be submitted to the Building and Safety Division for approval prior to issuance of building permit. F. General Requirements and Approvals X 1. Permit:, from other agencies will be required as follows: CalTrans for San Bernardino County flood Control District`-�� Cucamonga County Water District for sewer and water X San Bernardino County Dust Abatement (required prior to issuance of a grading permit) Other 2. A copy of the Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (C.C.&R.$) approved by the City Attorney is required prior to recordation of the map. X 3. Provide all utility service:, to each lot including sewerage_ waters electric power, gas and telephone prior to. street constructon. X .4. Sanitary sewer and water systems shall be desimed to Cucamonga County Water ,District standards. A letter of acceptance is required. 5. This subdivision shall be subject to conditions of ,approval from CalTre-s/San Bernardino County Flood Control District. X 6. Approvals haae not be^_, secured from 01 utilities aid other interested �`encies involved. Approval of the final map will Am be subject to any requirements that may be received from them. -4- G -/�o X 7. The filing of the tentative map or approval of same does not guarantee that sewer treatment capacity will be available at the time building permits are requested. When building permits are requested, the Cucamonga County Water District will be asked to certify tho availability of apacity. Permits will W" be issued unless Said certification is received in writing._ 8. Local and Master Planned Trails shall be provided in accordance with the Trail Plan. A detailed trail plan indicating widths, maximum slopes, physical conditions, fencing and weed control', in accordance with City trail standards, shall be submitted to and approved- by the City Planner prior to recordation for and/or urior to building issuance or g permit X 9. Prior to recording, a deposit shall be posted with the City covering the estimated cost of apportioning the assessments under Assessment District 82-1 among the newly created parcels. X 10. At the timL' of final map submittal, the following shall, be zubmitted; Title 'Report, traverse calculations (sheets), copies of recorded maps and deeds -.-sed as reference and/or showing original land division, tie notes and bench marks tferenced. X f•. Notice of intent to join the proposed Median Island Landscape District' shall be filed with the City Council prior to recordation of the Final Map. G., Special 'Conditions X 1. An offer of dedication for the future I-15/6th Street Freeway interchange on Parcel 2 shall be provided and shall be shown on the final map. If the City should receive funds from an outside agency (CalTran.3, etc.) for the acquisition- of the trchange, those funds portion of Parcel 2 need?d for the imc ; will be transferred to the owner of said Parcel 2. X _ 2. The relationship of Parcel 1 to Beffalo Avenue shall be clearly shown on the final map. X 3. The area required for the future interchange shall be landscaped upon development of Parcel 2. X_ 4. An in-lieu fee for the cost of undergrounding the existing T overhead utilities on the project side of old Rochester Avenue from the centerline of 6th Street to the north boundary. of Parcel 2 shall be paid to the City upon development of Parcel 2. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA LLOYD B. HUBB";9 CIV ENGINEER by: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA 'CAAio,, STAFF REPORT z u >> 19777 DATE: January 22, 1986 TO: Chairman and Member: of the Planning Cor,-A ssion FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Alan Warren, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84-03 - SAN GABRIEL VALLEY LABOR ASSOCIATION - A request o retain a 720 square oo (12 feetxx 60 feet) trailer for temporary office space on a 15.25 acre site in the "M" District, located on the north side of Arrow Highway, west of the Cucamonga Creek Channel, 8706 Arrow Highway - APN 207-211-01. I. BACKGROUND: On March 14, 1984, the Planning Commission approved e oca on of a 720 square foot trailer at 8706 Arr dighway for use as a temporary office for the San Gabriel Alley Labor Association. At that time, opinions were expressed by members of the Plannirg Commission that the use of the trailer was acceptable by the recognition that the existing use of the property as a seasonal housing facility was limited in the future. A condition of the approval was a two year time limitation on the use of the trailer. Refer to the enclosed Staff Report, Exhibits, and Minutes of the March 14, 1984 meeting and Resolution Mo. 84-24 for further background information. 1I. ANALYSIS: This request was filed pursuant/ to Section 2 (1) of the approving Resolution( No. 84-24) which authorized consideration by the Planning Commission of a time extension to the two year approval period. A survey of the site revealed compliance with the performance criteria of the use permit and Staff does not find any evidence that site conditions or the development potential of the site has substantially changed since 1984. Further, Staff has not received any evidence that the project has caused any adverse effects upon surrounding residential properties. The improvement requirements of the permit have been satisfied with the use of skirting around the base of the trailer. III. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: The proposed use, together with the applicable conditions is not detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to the properties or improvements in the vicinity. In addition the use is in accordance with the objectives of the Development Code, and the purposes of the district in which the site is located as evidenced by the I� ITEM H PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT January 22, 1986 CUP 84-03 - San Gabriel Valley Labor Assoc. Page 2 1p continuation of existing site condition and the faithful performance of use permit provisions. IV. RECO, ENDATION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission consi er all-input and elements of this project. If after such consideration; the Commission can support the Facts for Findings, adoption of the attached Resolution permitting retention of the trailer for an additional two year period would be appropriate. Respectfully submitted, Brad Buller City Planner BC:AW:das Attachments: Staff Report March 14, 1984 Exhibits "A", "B", "C", "D", and "E" of Report of March 14, 1984 Minutes of Planning Cormission Meeting of March 14, 1984' Resolution No."84-24 Resolution of Approval with Condition SAN GABRIEL VALLEY LABOR ASSOCIATION CUCAMONGA,CALIFORNIA 91730 (714)982-4686 • 982-5675 December 30, 1985 rj, r.• City or Rancho- Cucamonga Planning Division 9340 Baseline Rd.- P.O. 'Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 REF.: FILE NO.: CUP-84-03 Dear Sirs: In response to your letter of December 6_, 1985, we hereby request an extension of our permitt for two (2) momyears. As you must be aware, we have been established here for more] than 40 years, in the business of supplying labor .or the agricultural enterpriser of the whole area. Although, as you are also aware, the agriculture business has de- clined here, we are still supplying Labor to the La Verne Co-op Citrus Association of Upland, -a member of Sunkist Growers, which is situate3. in the City of Upland. Also other members are grape growers in the Cucamonga area, and the Corona College Heights Association, which is located in the Riversitte area. We feel that we can perform a valuable service to these members for 2 more years, `we-therefore request an exten- sion of r3ur permitt for an additional 2 y-ears. Sincerely Yours,' uAN G ZEL VALLEY LABOR'ASSN. Xavier M. /iedZa,.�' Manager - t 111 l i 1 r CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, rVCAXro STAFF REPORT c 1 0 0 U DATE: March 1 , 1984 1977 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner .. BY: Curt Johnston, Associate Planner SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84-03 SAN GABRIEL VALLEY LABOR ASSOGIATIOA - A request to locate a 720 sq. ft. Z feet x 60 feet trailer for temporary office space on a 15.25 acre site in the I'M" District, located on the north side of Arrow Highway, west of the Cucamonga Creek Channel, 8706 Arrow Hirghway APN 207-211-01,. I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: 97 ction -eueste pproval of a Conditional Use Permit as provided florin Sections 17.04.070 (Temporary Uses) and 17.04.030 (C.U.P.'s). B. Purpose: To install a 720 sq, ft. trailer for temporary office space for the San Gabriel Valley Labor•Association. C. Location: North side of Arrow Highway,'west of Cucamonga Creek G an�nel,8706 Arrow Highway. D. Parcel Size: 15.25 acres. E. Existing Zoning: Medium Density Residential (8 to 14 du/ac). F. Existin Land Use: San Gabriel Valley Labor Association, which pr�ov des ousing-Tor seasonal farm laborers and their families. G. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning:• North Multiple family dwellings within the 'labor camp exist north of the proposed trailer site, zoned "M". South - Older single family homes exist on the south side 'of Arrow Route, zoned "M"; and General Industrial (Subarea 1) to southeast. East Labor camp multiple units, Cucamon a Creek,Channel, zoned "M", and ''FC" (Flood Control. West - Mobile home park, zoned "LM"; vacant property, zoned k. i PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Aft CUP 84-�03/San Gabriel Valley tabor Association March .4, 1984 Rage Two H. General Plan Designations° Project Site - Medium Residential (4 to 14 du/ac) North - Medium Residential South - Medium Residential, General Industrial to southeast on Arrow Highway. ! East Medium Residential, Flood Control West - Low Medium Residential (4 to 8 du/ac), Medium Residential I.. Site Characteristics: The property is partially developed with mu tip a fami y um is housing seasonal farm workers and their families. The trailer is to be located ner;r-the entrance to the housing area, approximately 600 feet north of Arrow AM Highway. A tree-lined driveway from Arrow Highway isads to a small ,parking lot in front of the proposed trailer location. II. ANALYSIS: A. General: The applicant is requesting approval of a Cup to install an office trailer on a 15.25 acre-s ire. The trailer is proposed to replace an office building which was recently burned down. The manager of the labor camp stated the facility will relocate in the next couple of years, so constructing a permanent building at this time is undesirable. B. Trailer Location• The trailer will -be situated where the previous b0 -ding stood. The location is approximately 200 yards north of Arrow Route and the trailer will not be visible to passing motorists. The plot plan submitted shows .the trailer set back 10 feet from the west property line, adjacent to an existing mobile home park. Two units within the park back up to the proposed office. However, an existing retaining wall and wood fence along the common property line help to buffer the two uses, and the pad elevations of the mobile homes are raised up approximately 4 feet from the office site. In addition, the entrance to the office will be on the east side of the trailer, opposite the mobile home park. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CUP 84-03/San Gabriel Valley Labor Association March 14, 1984 Fage Three C- Expiration Date: Regarding the time limit for approval, the Planning Commission, has in the past approved the use of trailers for two years. By the end of this two year period, the trailer must be remove or an extension granted b the Plannin Commi Y 9 s��on, III. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: 1. The proposed use, together with the applicable conditions, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. In addition, the proposed use is in accordance with, the objectives of the Development Code, and the purposes of the district in which this site is located, IV. RECOMMENDATION• It is reco�snended that the Planning Commission consider al nput and elements of this project. If, after such consideration, the Commission can support the facts for findings, adoption of the attached Resolution permitting the trailer for a two-year period mould be appropriate. Respectfully submitted, Rick Gomez City Planner RG:CJ:ns Attachments: Exhibit "A" Location Map Exhibit "B" - Detailed Site Plan Exhibit "C" - Illustrative Plan Exhibit "D" - Trailer Details Exhibit "E" - Letter from Applicant Resolution of Approval with Conditions A. SITE P PN-Ottaa\-& room + SOLLMAT- 1 ti. ZRMLEP E i I �rSNN GfIm[!: ®. mQc 'Psf¢.UtaUy PARK �-''�• �"i P-CSI W <�,ut10• -•� � zor •4 �M a -MMLEA. �g m eo eQNoeMtNtufn — 'z.�—_ agrtc Y f a'ROOCGT 1 1000 ®O ®e 9 p� o ` � ► .cgs.., i � � S -•— f trti a'Sr F v NURTH Alk CITY OF ITEM: RANCHO CLTCAj�!TO1�TGA TITLE: PLANNING DIVLSIOi? >XHIBIT e° '® SCALE: t 4-17 r � A01314" l► � a 1 1 nz^. C_ � { r �} v am 'Frk'fZ1G Nw l.Br �$..• r, VAC-mr �. L t� F 1 ELt J FORTH CITY or- RANCHO CUCANT 101 A TITLE: ���G� �, � .�► ' h PLANNIi`,G.lXNTlS QN EXHIBIT: •��•� SCALE: 14-� c • C. =l.1135TRAT\\(E S1'C� PLRN N 1 +••-- fr+ r I.._ •--• Scale. ao, '' 4" = chain.link.faKi.�sX�slinj) I stn, 0 = ®i" ls++�eZte'3tow�iin e=;ari�n� cwh ® (:� Y Jd-ih��U4W 6x.-f-04- LMMT �IPWIK.MICA• 1 200.yds. txlwN . m San Gnb�K.l Valley �abo� hsaociYtbn 0to(o �aat R�ca,a kligtiw'ay Rancho. t..a,:�onaa�U�.4.m+a 4n3q aecelma� Manager- )Ca�ti,x Piedca NORTH CITY OF ITENI: RANCHO CLTCAMO\CGA TITLE: PLANNING DIVISION EXHIBIT-- TCAL�E-t--M�- � i s rs� ^sub°. ' '�" a I•^`r. ,.,�••Y,+qJr:.r,.rrrolWrV1 rrinue p+u ararnu r1�' w.vulnannml •wJ an.•.q v.�rfift Yra 9rttfen fdkrs r:IVOC,0011 L1.. , lllfldtYlalUwOpWIWI!y Lunl FYBnwJ•M«Jtl zwIVArY aau BwOm WnWtaO bo:ntf fwnwfaawalrye i w0oopraul wrleanq �..�� $Illlplrn 4unwdll LI COIIOagnfq ® ``.. 019rmcll llummlm w+e, waa on COk)Na1YRWt wain �' � .•� afnara wo«nlrun Il I 16.:I ffdaJ rm0alrf i. I rt. 1!1.1d••Wt',.•I.vry ra•nr rl.1rY j•: I 1!•vYw,.4aw wrllL-i3fW Iirl.•• ,la•nt w.Jur LW • I r.. rRl 4 w • .�•Lrr+«.JI,J,•lu.r Ire fJV JVI+wW WµN • • LL •I•wn. t,•r ota fxf l l$•a Ij•Vlnal lfp,fipf lyp�VlJt, _ Ia.rl.,,tlY 4••AM•IeIf.H•. d'p IOflmiflmt frr r.yw WMEI q4 Y�a�fWiMfY OJOifOfW Onadt DO1f0 aura l)I.., f,,,r Y.elfayso 6•OC L CITY OF ITEM: � .�� RAN-CHO CL ^.NIONGA PLANNING DIVISION EXIiIBIT: °0 f'4 --�,.._SCALES trt"1 a SAN GABRIEL VALLEY LABOR ASSOCIATION CUCA14ONGA, CALIFORNIA 8i730 is 17%41 9SX-4488 0 s�aas�s February 14, 1984 City of Rancho Cucamonga Department of Community Development Dear Sirs: . Enclosed are all the documents you requested in the UNIFORM APB ;ICATION.• The purpose of our request is to replace on temporarely basis our General Office that was burn( down to the ground on November 6, 1983. We plan to remplaae our building with a moble office 121X60' which meet all our needs. This moble office is going to be purchased to an autho- rized agency that meet all the California Codes accor- ding to the law. Enclosed also is a brosure with those moble offices. We appreciate all your help. If you have any questions please feel free to call us. Yours truly, SAN G RI'EL''VALLEY LABOR ASSN. a e c M. d�Man��r Encl. CITY OF 1TFr1( � �' RANCHTO CUC.AMON'GA TrrLE: PLANNING DIVISFAN EXHIBIT: SCALE /"-1J p D. CONDITIONAL USA: PERMIT 84-03 - SAN GABRIEL VALLEY LABOR-ASSOCIATION ,. A request to Locate a 720 sq. ft.. (12 acre site in the I'M" District, located on the north side of Arrow Highway, west of the Cueamunga Creek Channel, 8706 Arrow Highway APO 207-211-01, Associate Planner, Curt Johnston, reviewed the staff report and showed slides of the site to the FlanninC- Commission. Chairman Stout asked if the applicant could build a permanent structure for their operation here. Mr. Johnston replied that this could be Justified as a condominium since it is in a residential area; however, they would have to bring the street improvements in and up to standards and it is unknown whether that would be feasible. Chairman Stout indicated that this would then be Just a replacement in kind and size. Mr. Johnston replied that is correct. Chairman Stout opened the public hearing. Mr. Al Friezen, 1355 Stanford, Upland, the applicant, indicated he is in agreement with the Conditional Use Permit. There being no further comments, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Rempel stated that the Conditional Use Permit and the trailer is much more satisfactory than trying to get a permanent facility. Further, the whole site will have to be demolished in the not too distant future because it is not compatible with the ourrounding area. Commissioner MoNiel thanked the applicant for the uze of the kitchen facilities for some of the pancake breakfasts sponsored by Little League. Chairman Stout stated this Conditional Use Permit should be approved for a two year period and asked that the applicant came into the City offices six months prior to the expiration of the CUP if an extension is required. Mr. Friezen asked if the Conditional Use Permit is issued two years from the .date of this meeting or the placement of the trailer. Mr. Gomez replied it is two years from this date. Motion; Moved by Rempel, seconded by aarkar, carried unanimously, to adopt Resolution No. 84-24, issuing Conditional Use Permit No. 84-03. i Planning Commission Minutes 7 March 14, 1984 RESGLUTION NO. 84-24 1 '- A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSIiTN t APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 84-03 FOR A TEMPORARY OFFICE TRAILER LOCATED AT 8706 ARROW HIGHWAY IN THE "M" DISTRICT WHEREAS, on the: 15th day of February, 1984,, a complete application was filed by San. Gabriel Valley Labor Association for review of the above described project; and WHEREAS, on the 14th day of March, 1984, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission held a public hearing, to consider the above-described project. NOW, THEREFORE, the Rancho Cucamonga PlanningCommission.resolved as follows: SECTION 1: That the following findings can be meta 1. That the ,propose:. use is in accord with the General Plan, and the purposes of the district in which the use is proposed; and 2. That the proposed use, together with the, conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or matericily injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; :and 3. That the proposed use will comply with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code. SECTION 2: That Cond%tional Use. Permit No. 84-03 is approved su 3�to the following conditions: PLANNING DIVISION { (1) The temporary office trailer is approved for a two (2) year period from the date of approval. By the end of this two year.,.period, said trailer shall be removed from the subject property or ai extension granted by the Planning Commission. (2) Skirting shall be provided around ;he base of the trailer and deck prior to occupancy. Design details shall be submitted•to the Planning Division prior to installation. r J 14.-J 3 RESOLUTION NO.84-24 Page Two (3) No roof mounted equipment shall be installed on the trailer. Also, any air conditioners or other outside equipment which may create noise or a visual disturbance to the adjacent residents shall not be placed on the west side of the trailer. (4) This approval shall not waive compliance with other applicable City Codes and Ordinances. (5) Should the installation or use of the subject trailer cause any adverse e1 ?cts upan surrounding residents or properties, this Cohditional Use Permit will be brought back to they Commission for reconsiderations and possible revocation of said permit. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 14th D4Y OF 'ARCH, 1984. PLA"MMISSION TY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY•� ennis� Chairman .�_ , ATTEST: / R•ck G ez, Deputy Sec. ..;--y I, Rik Gomez, Deputy Secretary ne Planning Commission of the City of Ranch Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular m,:eting of the Planning Commission held on the 14th day of March, 1984, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: REMPEL, BARKER, JUAREZ, McNIEL, STOUT NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIi4ERS: NONE 1 I RESOLUTION NO. 84-24-A A RESOLUTI°`+ OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION,. APPROTING THE TIME EXTENSION! FOR WNDITIONAL USE PERMIT' 84-03 WNEREAS, a ro- " t has been filed for a time extension for the above-described projec,, i ^suant`to Section 2 (1) of Resolution No. 84-24 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conditionally approved the above-described Resolution on March 14, 1984, SECTION 1: The Rancho.Cucamonga ?Tanning Commission has made the following —inffings. A. That the granting of said time extension will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity, as evidenced by the continuation of existing site conditions and faithful performance of -,ondi'tional Use Permit 85-24 provisions. TION 2: The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission hereby grants-a ti extension for: Project Applicant Expiration Conditional Use San Gabriel March 14, 1988 Permit 84-03 Valley Labor Association y. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 22HO DAY OF JANUARY, 1986. PLANNING k:OMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA I' BY: Dennis L. Stout, Chairman �s ATTEST: —Bra Buller, Deputy Secretary ��✓ �15,, k PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION January 22, 1986 CUP 84-03 - San Gabriel Valley Labor Assoc. Page 2 qP I, Brad Buller,. Deputy Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamoaga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, arJ adopted by the Plann, ng Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 22nd day of January, 1986, by the fallowing vote-to-wit: AYES: COK41SSIONERS; NOES; COWMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERSc 1 i ' l J { t CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ICA&ro STAFF REPORT '�� ev f �a O O U I> DATE: January 22, 1986 1977 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY John Meyer, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 85-23 - JENSEN VALLEY PLANT GROWERS - A request to install a trailer as a temporary office and 3 storage sheds for a wholesale nursery business or, 21.17 acres of hand 'within the Southern California Edison Utility Corridor located at 12050 Arrow Highway, east of Rochester APN 227-021-47, 53, 50. I. PROJtCT`AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action Requested: Approval or a Conditional Use Permit, site plan elevations, and issuance of a Negative Declaration. B. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: Nort Utility Corridor South - Utility Corridor East - Flood Control and Devore Freeway West - Vacant, Subarea 8. C. General Plan Designations: Project Site - Utility Corridor North Utility Corridor South - Utility Cot,,idor East Flood Control and Devore Freeway West - General Industrial D. Site Characteristics: The project site is relatively flat, with a number :z�' existing non-permitted sheds and trailers. II. ANALYSIS: A. General: The growing and wholesaling of nursery stock is a permitted agricultural use within the Utility Corridor District. However, the installation of a temporary caretaker's quarters does require approval of a Conditional Use Permit. No additional sheds or structures will be permitted. Any storage must be accommodated by the trailer. I ITEM I 1 i PLANNING COMMISSIOM STAFF REPORT CUP 85-23 - Jensen Valley Plant Growers January 22, 1986 Page 2 B. Design/Technical Review Committee: The. Design and Technical Review Committees have recommended approval of one project with she following improvements which the applicant has agreed to dm. 1. Removal of all non-con"orming sheds, trailers, and signs. 2. Ir a trailer is desired, it should be modular in design and upgraded through the use of decking, arbors, and landscaping. 3. Installation of landscaping within a minimum 45 fool: setback along Arrow Highway. 4. Relocate driveway to align with existing driveway across Arrow Highway, In addition, engineering has required construction of full street improvements along Foothill Boulevard', Arrow Highway, and Day Creek Boulevard (see Exhibit "D"). There are existing overhead telephone lines fronting the project along Arrow Highway. The street improvements along Arrow Highway will be constructed by the City with the Day Creek Channel project. Engineering- staff reconanends that the applicant pay an in lieu fee for the undergrounding to be completed with the street improvements.. C. Environmental Assessment: Part I of the Initial Study has been completed y the applicant. However, this project lies within the Flood Zone, A (100-year flood district as detesrminPd by FEMA). To mitigate this, the Engineering Division has required that the trailer pad be elevated by'a diversion wall or dike be constructed upstream. In addition, all materials including the trailer must be secured to prevent floatation and possible damage downstream. Staff has determined that the project, together with the conditions of approval, will 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 Development Code, and the purposes of the district in which the- site is located. B. Together with the Conditions applicable thereto; will 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 General Plan. f` d PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CUP 85-23 - Jensen Valley Plant Growers January 22, laab Page 3 Aft W. CORRESPONDENCE: -This item,has been advertised as a public hearing in The Daily Report newspaper, the property posted, and notices sent to all prc,F�rty owners within 300 feet of the project site. V. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Planning *Commission consider all matarials and elements of this project. If after such, consideration, the Commission can support the Facts for Findings and Conditions of Approval, adoption of the attached Resolution would be appropriated Respectfully submitted Brad Buller' City Planner BB:JM:ns Attachments: Exhibit "A" Location Map Exhibit "B" Proposed Site Plan Exhibit "Cu - Pulliam Masonry Site Pian Exhibit "On Location of Day Creek Boulevard Initial Study, Part II Resolution of Approval with Conditions r 1 `p I W ur �� t )rr� 4iI.K lflKYti ,Ito 10 CI r Y✓�+Il.fi•9I 1 f 1009 Mar ---------- -- -- -- t', DM.0 1GF UL feNKlios dr y 6f.0 MOO ARPOW I.s C O .F104 ! i~ I OLK 1f„ r F 1, I,rYK 102 WTA y.- ® 1or.0 INS _ a an c wL l® u Ill It � I .j ® �� � isnsnluf. ;,ur fa.•af.ro r ' i .ar.e /�1 1 NORTH CITY OF ITEM: RANCHO CUCAl�/IOi�'GA TITLE PUNNING DIVISION EXHIBIT:-& SCALE: L-� a y - y �^ Kt ILI . r 1 u��� 4l LNORTH CITY OF ITEbI: RANCHO CLTCAMON' '-GA TITLE: Sty 1 PLANNIRtG DIVISIV\T EXHIBIT: � _ SCALE: L-.5 'i�LIJ�tJA'� V�� Pc�n1T' LP AU&A tolrW WJ%V- AWN( IZ �.1n�ZI 1�1Vtlifif V/ ""%a}w•.+�uc.taa woo 711 M711ME,PM/ 1 A r. A" MIRY NORTH CITY OF RANCI-IO CLC.AMO..NI GA TITLE: r nJ 1 PLA�'�tNIIVG DIVISIONEXHIBIT. C SCALE: V n� X� 1{ :0 .}:v:itii{}�:i:>ti :•.•}::;{:tiy::ii J -Are •�1,•.',::::,h}ti�:�ti�tiff�•.::����. 4 •�� rh4.... 4':4.+::....:. •::h•J:::••J$4•. i•4{:i_::}:r}:J:•:{4:•JJ:v:�{^}tiny .:.$�;{7J:JJ:}:•:�?. ..>r....v: i'i:v:}::?J:J{:$::;:$::i}J•:J ..4{::i~�~T::.•:.v;.. r •J.1 J•:J v.vv:::iv:•:{i•:�:.}}::f:..v:•::•.: vv:.:+J'•}::•.. + rk::i{:4:... ...::: ••'+::t�':}r:Jv:: rfrf•• t L: '•J.4v. JJ\• •:ti\vJ :h\•J tiiti:<ii:,k::• ' V V NURTH CITY OF ITEM: RANCHO CUTS.AMoli TVA I TITLE: 143CA1 0M e C-DQY elggK W/D, PLANNING DIVISICXN EXHIBIT. SCALE. CITY OF RANCHO CUCA..SONGA PART II - INITIAL STUDY ENVIROMIENTAL CHECKLIST DATE: Z�{ APPLICANT: FILL`:G DATE:_�///�BS� LOG NUMBER. PROJECT: WHC � YLE- /LlU2 ✓ PROJECT LOCATION:__A4,15 I. ENVIROJ'MfENTAL IMPACTS (Explanation of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are, required on attached sheets). YES %1AYBE NO 1. Soils and Geoloev. Will the proposal have significant results in: / a. Unstable ground conditions or in changes in / geologic relationships? b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or f burial of the soil? / c. _Change in topography or ground surface contour intervals? ed. The destruction, covering or modification , gologic ar physical features? of any unique I e• Any Potential Increase in wind or water erasioi of soils, affectir., 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- f slides, ground failure, or'similar hazards? h. An increase in the rate of extraction and/or use of any mineral resource? 2. RAE210ray. Will the proposal have significant results in: Page YES +GYBE No a. Changes in currents, or the course of direction_ Of flowing streams, rivers, or ephemeral stream channels? b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage 4 or the rate and amount of surface wate=atterns, runoff? i 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? $. Change in the quantity of groundnaters. either through direct additions or w,rh- dravals, or through interference wit> an aquifer? Quality? Quantity? ! h. The reduction in the amount of .rarer other- wise available for public- water supplies? i. Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding or seiches? 3. Air uality. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Constant or periodic air emissfons from msbile or indirect sources? Stationary sources' b. Deterioration of ambient air quality and/or Interference vIth the attainment of applicable air quality standards? c. Alteration of local or regional climatic. conditions, affecting air movement, moisture or temperature? 4. Biota Flora. Will the proposal have significant results In: a. Change in the characteristics of species, Including diversity, distribution, or number of any species of plants? Reduction of-the numbers of any unique, rare <Mr endangered species of plants? ?ace 3 YES `LaY3E N0 c. Introduction of new or disruptive species of plants into an area? d. Reduction in the, potential for agricultural p,oduction? Fauna. Will the proposal'have significant results in: a. Change in the characteristics of species, including divers{ty, distribution, or numbers of any species of animals? b. Reduction of the numbers of an•• 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 :rildlife habitat? 5. PODul4tion. 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 is 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? i. Land Use and Plannine Considerations. Will the proposal have significant -results in? a. A substantial alteration of the present cjr planned land use of an area? f b. A conflict with any designations, objectives, 1l" policies, or adorted plans of any governmental l entities? c. Af_ impact upon the qulaity or quantity of / existing consumptive or non-consumptive recreational opportunities? Page YES MMBE NO 8. TranSDortation. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. -Generation of substan??al additional vehicular movement? / b. Effects on'existir? streets, or dema;,d for / new street construction? c. Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand .`or 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 in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, /. bicyclists or pedestrians?' 9. Cultural Resources. Will the proposal have signiricant results in: a. /s disturbance to the integrity of archaeological. / paleontological, and/or historical resources? ' 10. Health Safety, and Nuisance Factors. Will the .proposal have sign s 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 :Aostances in the event of an accident? d. An increase in the number of individuals or species of va:tor or pathenogenir organisms or the exposure of peuple to such / organisms? e. Increase in existing noise levels? � f. Exposure of people to potentially dangerous noise levels? Alk S. The creation of objectionable odors? h. An ".ncrease in light or glare? ' Page 5 YES "aY3E \0 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 the, following: a. Electric power? b. Natural or packaged gas? % c. Communications systems? _� l d. Water supply? e. Wastewater facilities? f. Flood control structures? g. Solid waste facilities? h. Fire protection? i. Police protection? J. Schools? r� h. Parks or other retreat+onal facilities? r I. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads and flood control facilities? rf m. Other governmental services? 13. Enerev and Scarce Resources. Wille the proposal have significant results in: a. Use of substantial or excessive fuel or energy? b. Substantial iicrease in demand upon existing sources of energy? c.. An Increase in the demand for development of new sources of energy? l' d An Increase or perpo.uation of the consumption Of nor.-renewably Corms of energy, when feasible n reewable sources of energy are available? Page 6 YES MAYBr NO e. Substantial depletion of any nonrenewable , scarce natural. resourci!? or 14. Mandatory Findings of e4znificance. 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 ;;ustaining 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? l b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of 'ang-term, environmental goals? (A short-term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of time while long- term impacts will endure well into the future). c. Does the project have impacts which are i individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (Cumulatively considerable Alk means that the incremental effects of an individual project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, and probable future e projects). d. Does .the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? _ II. DISCUSSION OF ENY IAOMMENT—AI. EVALUATION (i.e., of affirmative answers to the above questions plus a discussion of proposed mitigation measures). t Sr r2�' is %\ n�� r C- Z(Nq Nt:�o -,(L0C,1RJQE c-(L 7r24 -rep '36 PLAc� c>11 7-14E_Sl Ak �-J3 Page 7 III DETZRMINATIOY. On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find the proposed project COLLD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a -NEGATIVE DECLARATIOJ will be prepared. find that although the proposed project could have a significant i /I effect on the environment, there will -lot be a significant effect +- in this case beco2se the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARE,). I find the proposed project MY have a significant effect on the envirnment, and an E,IVIRO:MIT I:fPaCT REPORT is required. Data f i' S'ignatu. - Title Aft j i RESOLUTION NO. Am A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNIMG COMMISSION APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 85-23 .FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A WHOLESALE NURSERY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF ARROW HIGHWAY, EAST OF ROCHESTER IN THE UTILITY CORRIDOR D'iSTRICT WHEREAS, on the 11th day of July, 1985, a complete application was filed by Bob Jenson for review of the above-described project; and WHEREAS, on the 22nd day of January, 1986, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider the above-described project. NOW, THEREFORE', the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission resolved as follows: SECTION 1: That the following findings can be met: 1. That the proposed use is in accord with the,General Plan, the objectives of the Development Code, and the purposes of the district in which the site is located. Ash 2. That the proposed use, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be d—rimental to the public health, safety, or welfare,, or materially injurious -to properties. or improvements in the vicinity'. 3. That the proposed use complies with each of the i applicable provisions of the Development Code. SECTION 2: That this project will not create adverse impacts on the environment and that a Negative Declaration is issued on January 22, 1986. SECTION '3: That Conditional Use Permit No. 85-23 is approved subject to the following conditions: DESIGN:REVIEW 1. The removal of all non-conforming storage sheds, trailers and signs within thirty (30) days of this approval. Resolution No. CUP 8543 Valley Plant Growers January 22, 1986 Page 2 2, If a trailer is desired, it shall be of modular design and upgraded with decking, arbors, trellises, and landscaping within six (6) months of installation to the satisfaction of the City Planner: 3. Installation of landscaping within a minimum 45 foot setbarx, as measured from curb face, along-Arrow Highway within ^,fx (6) months of the approval date. Landscape and irrigation plans will be submitted to the Planning Division within sixty (60) days of the approval date. 4. The retail sales of trees will not be allowed. Failure to comply with these Conditions of: Approval will result in revocation of this Conditional Use Permit. ENGINEERING ' 1. A single driveway shall be located to align with the driveway on the south side of Arrow Highway near the weFterly property line. In addition, a paved driveway apron shall be provided to the site. The relocation and paving a>" the apron shall be ' completed to the satisfaction of the City -ngineer within thirty (30) days of Planning Cmmission approval. 2. No parking shall be permitted within the right-of-way of Arrow Highway or within the 45 foot landscaped setback. On site parking shall be provided within thirty (30) days of Planning Commission approval. 3.. The site is 'located in Flood Zone A. Any new structure or trailer to be placed on the site shall be protected from the flooding as approved by the City Engineer. 4. The applicant shall pay an in-lieu fee equivalent to the cost of undergrounding the existing telephone lines; fronting the side along Arrow Highway. 5. The applicant shall pay an in-.lieu cash deposit for the cost of the street improvements fronting and within the project limits. 6. The in-lieu utility undergrounding fee, in-lieu street improvement cash deposit, and all street dedications shall be received by the City within sixty (60) days of the Planning` Commission approval date. Resolution No. CUP 85-23 Valley Plant Growers January 22, 1986 Page 3 APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 22ND DAY OF JANUARY, 1986. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA- ltY Dennis L. Stout, Chairman 3 ATTEST: Brad Buller, Deputy Secretary I, Brad Buller, Deputy Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and_adopted by the Planning Commission. of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 22nd day of January, 199G., by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS': NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: r. a x D t '3 i�� z a o ;^ b � =mod' n p I. VS A NNq y Y y n N x ` � � K NRa n0 n a 3 x ao to NAG _ u 3 f+ 0 IN la� •I�P I D Ti S a N R S O< Y N n a N n.1+ V»O O p 1". pp 6Sp 6t�C O OR Ny b:3R j, y. 5 5in n+b7 �O tp SO- 'ENO Spryff O- ryN 3.A A a _a.3 Rien'AR vnpo (� n b D.�S TC: ELI- n �aS Pb D.�a ROO 9 C b 3 Vp n a 1 P C6 C3 DN A -Dn =a vDo w• .5�: Np n'q+an p4b n v .b,. 'O. P Z. n ern n o oo.. • CO Ro3a.:3 f1yY .j vNO CP=N N•wNpORI�' COS. N io ip -V. 1 n q O. O n 3 b b 7-a O p =n(0 RAC'C O p0 A v S3, = +nN � nN onox '.oONn�.•'� O < O �n p n��. C- pia R�A6V hbbn1>.d.+RNb��b n n 3 y1 Ro �9i . aav bN R� nib N.2.a a +r^R <.D • �1�C6 �~ �OO:N • b L l. on RDsa onR - 'SSN k� AO• bD 1ON a• O6 � �1An n�wO�.R�C.i�O I -fS R a R S N 1-S w SO p p 3 �� y p nt pa .t ry4ry9 pa l"f �.C1 O n.�O p o u r10•C. O. < 3n>>J, G ponr m3 O �Rdu Cl > pr = � pRp d y�3 ROp n j yp•y~ r �= r.•� ��a S y . n N,P n. N1� of 6�<7 �� N� OOL SaoY C M1 n � 9 l•-R p �1S r rN p SN�. On 3 p� =r n� 33 nSan orr nn da • CN.='.. 3 p. 6R.yr y.»�..-- Norp +GA �, nh of C�d Tao rm.� 1 'K Mangy L O V A r ".+S and yHp n N. n rOb OR •. 3S a0 r Q2 �� N6 SN N.� S as Ny < C l..C� •gyp R,Gr O.a a A Na o n A 9 O t E. z< V d ...0 G `�v 06Cv. �q63 SiN vCR N� OW R.p `r.r.� Y+oNCY 03 �N Gd03�-O- 3p 7± ,.d zP�.p' Y y 6 " O V c p 4 d 3 r R p x y n l'C nor 3 S R O p 0 A N pl, R R 3 R pp N o`er n g.a. R1� n2nor = oo M rQ a� n -.n •..x pin . n�'�N 1 p O p R R:61 •t N b 6 Oi Y O '`G p IC b�R �V R 10 n A n.-'.F o_ 999 pR°r;J z � o zc�'. m on m. zapN r.mnNz a Rya m � ooap • �. p Cn �op �3 1 ' .ray Sj�pR1po Orr �.p6 bpSA.j 3� O� Ow;np.•C 3��N a5SR+3 �n 1� n � .N.� rp .+ az» o�,<. >•N. nz. NO Nr ON �. z rp V�pNp�p p 3 I.InO -_ per. Hlp OS'.o.� Orp,w 4. d Sp YiS y Z p= � d ma 3 N'N C n O O ^-�S 6 0 P R dN r2 lopo•c con sA Karu°' S2 ~R o Cla R..0 G 3 p 3. E IPD y 3 R O S r O rnp ��KO a.Sn 6 n p ;o C'f 7y ESN phi =0 p Opp Sl RSO ' W Z CO. �qS +Sb •C•t.'G r3.. 00 G p R ROeOi 7.M N Y San n ar- a p 3 J n �c pr 3 N6 3�r7fl O,p�Ip OrrO.�. dp p Try =.p. P n3 �P �N zt- ,10.E 1n3S NepiA dp nim�i R • .(�.c m.0 p`c» 1p N0� T-1y IN l� � ►� IN (a {� IN {� {.�{� N, a� o� Nay �N i�HTv vx a a vva s N 9 l O r C 199 + a R+n An0 xa � OO.'Z. V � ..�' C n� b O.ar • 1.T-u YG.— 0.N >r n Ip c1r. -a-5 � a ma R. C9 — b < 6 w O IC 3n Ip V 9 �'6 w w a ? o so n o• v ^ 1 ZI'n oo nm prow �°sr' w. - o w ��' sn n vo C1�+ � l r� 00 O N 0.• QC^ A c C r S 3i w u+iiY 0. Sn N 6r^.. n i c < o + > a s n N y a la av a t�i 3�a N , mdNn Cp nt. On< aa pwuoN owe va porn.. Nry o ra na t o'on a•w n N ao• <��.+. p.o n3 Asa ' 2. o N �S pp o Si OVA OS R � p KM tic± ��i � O• a Z. ^W 1 a `O r. x9 =N ? V a a'. G N - vSpG r �� bfs0 N '6. Or nC W�"' CrO V N tl b w r dO�`G l.� V�� lapb 163NN 9 �19 Ip I6G 6ON fl1E� (.V r O�Ip pf V N lJl P tY y 2"6T rl y Ob �O O+a� yYNdn< rrON� SN�i O!I!E Na rt Ca!o 'v S N 3 0 ID n r L f SIDS ns b N 3 w Za M N 54 9 nV N NC R^ nfD.e O aa3ll �3 �' 6R 3 r L♦ 1 O rq O O Qq R R'..w:x' rpl rp A N,d N. • .I b N S S O Y,V A is O �p Y�l tS' O� p O�OOO ^d Jtpy pt 65� OA+ g^orr. 3 S>�0.0 R nR9II �v A. p 1� o,y�. V.. 1p'D P' -oT '^° asnIIm Trra.^ -'n .+ a 1x ' 0.> O •� G � a: nn n>v o N pnp�' a yi"� pr3q m rNC "�O ^ NO 'N.�• �a VO<g3 < ; mG -5..0. al. li 10 Sa O wY'e N`"an11.�1 Sb f ner<i Z3q o3 J.a oo va 2 �Z PNl 3 O C f0 r O- A 6� �.O i T 31n SIG. N 3 n 6 ''f lD.p �O.•C r•C R(p1� 10 J 01 — 30 3•� r ra.Y �� _' '�. n N 1 ma.'o. c� n c Y p ti_. C T.1N C = N—q �� n onr n p S n 0 n 6 _w3 T Y.....a. a R ai rv� p� oN • =�3m ,n..c avN �..aa `00 �.a 3. rt.a d t p! nN n 0 na. N ±N fO.g3 �. 6_0��p ar YS 69.E^. A n 0 q —�. N o Z o n.� 6 N—T R; v �o� p a. a �.G0 6� 6A 0 6O —a �. O N.n+o.,,. Nw- N9 nop a' •1°�N v N�a a av , 41 0 n SJ Y—b a �r yqc ay r P i 1i n NnN ny ' bn.6 .�p, C + a nr O N < b O rc 3 n�.:• O<r p.P A •I. y 1"1 1 rn. s ONE Q�n b O b N I. 6 6 Y 1 �. n. g 'rI t GN N R; _ N a R— n NT N — jy 0 AO a P OP A.nO A vn3 q�0.��0 r 10 A01 S OAS •pi1R On6N n. n BOA `t7 G it ' — I � I Orb ry N3E 51 . lnlP O N ,il a5:l!1.� S.I.- .9 bs bnb.-1 — O m.0 ?ID•f•a; 1G 3 O fi C•• A G•C+ (LNa S Ml N6 l N 7p,1H. a4aN b ne 3 n H. a tD p 0 n=o r p m �clp. p n w t- p d—R 0d p.6�gC q.r C p19N O n�N Gp .0i.1 1.'OS xop<R n a r -'o° a D w.O r r�N `n r �. Ip ne0i 01 3.0 nn O O. P.Cp� RY Oc C�� Y R n0 n_ _n.t ^SOY. 3 b �3dr n p O N n 0 �r I.e•.7 OO A.,06.5 G a 3 =C CPnn . ^ D O9y yC O.c9 g 3 3-�- O 7 N a S' n e :nZ ago p. tD nO R TO^0Rj.0.3„ y I=a 3p:Sp� nCy Nn •N A D 9"�b A ry S pp 1 p1 y N. 0 • O 0 — Q Ow 3d npo ..0 N N M y T NO e.m a Y OCT. O �Z A316 nv _4 . �a �O n O.0 nap •1!— .. L w� tf �SnE F T 33.0 l . F. 0 A nr po b tpn c3 —�3a < OC C n PS.L�.. 3. 3 a Tf (qY.. 3 3 p 1 ,. ///naa. n nn = S^^C O n^� 10�1 9�0 0q? .K pp I I r r ..Y. c+ . %m. A P N Oy nb D OD �9 29�Gl OC G�x 'di O.x RR 3Na0 Ob GaD 6Nd Ot0 da oY w pG N NO m 1 A.o c. 2'm a m� •0 vndi3� �e S RN ♦C.�A� 3 - SS �O 3.d O C ry. O. 3n3 o s d 9 nw O, V O 6 i O' nnu o� S S O O rNp •t 6a 3 � O- [�N 1 A 9 d.— iN 6 - n d A d • voq.c— Via. B owe' �.'o.w �+ rvd amp 9N o oa �n 41 d v. P .3.a �� arc d 1. K n^� N q=n b O �fd331 N y - G� � y n 0 N N.� b �n f A.9 i0 Ay ty O 9 =d a4P D _ �n0 d [:P V Z. ��° tip -.O.•G y. '^6• O �_ qq .din y O • S P d a �.O Rry 3 b ^ A Y b d p fD 0 O a G. n n C 4 o �Jdb= o 6d Cq R 1 6 - • n aZ d 3.5 O l •t a A%7t7 •• b 1 Ln 1 r I I I I t I n A O ate. G On n O D n Pa:'.1 O o N N 9 d (�]�'•j•am�" - S l N ..�6.di Z ib �d No u�N O o O O 1 N.�N O yy1p Y SA nN N ry.� - y 1p0 N±.�np� an a3.nA 3T erg.+ Nd OiN •.0631 +S O� j ^9 Ad Nay GJ• Q. Zp bM 39 ode. o iLeo ol= 3 p' ? A N d d _ 9 g,C H O -wn n� 6 •t K �A T�.GO NS 3C.d � n�tp Nip 3 d - C • n N 3 ' K �.A O N' N2 r O � N N 1 K n O w� pyp e~w0 � l Aa n S •. rr G3��pp g. i M 'tC 60 y m o- �r- a w ^ ip ISp b c � l Y v(�, � K.n a.N C r � LN bn a n an n's c a o n pll '0'I A. C b al V O� O 1 OSp O. �MGn n' of pip ry<ry O T b 9�an0 pb ��n po 1 o+ G 3� O•'A? n i W 1p n �3 G a 3 1> tlG �� �Z7N G06 I�a CNa b Ut za p m ; and 1 +n Qb D �.CI Cfi .c m o ma'm o' .�'° c G •c pop a^ �E_.e ME ;s; �n GN C ZN _ O •C n1 �� 6n` 0 M1 n. ; S p r n a d 6 !9 Cl S G R _ G :�.�. SrN � N y Wb ur rN Na O G � S:N.r~per C A'; 1 p S Sn i l D•, n 5. G6 Ong 1 G i=�ry r w i .ter w '' J A A • n n �? A F A 9RN'�f l q �3... 7G � A�f� G A • N o�CM �-a3 i 13 �c aoa no:A > a1b o a^ tP 10. A.U. R � ry n p c ^^ > p P � �ap D m N V n$ j". n o•N O C R1C AA2L ZZ 'o> � � •. no n ti � �n �'n v.N t anal u.. c. v cQ 1 b A b+ N 1p 0.a 1 tam as 9n c'yL N.Tm eC+O GG •�� ot�s� �,ti • 11- PRO >+n� O >� CJ �' h9 h 119 �V �CK SC O.i •C.3R Y ?n'k.' np � T Or G ytl' ILV CQ A.R �2 Sn �a P� �1 RtN V RSA p0 OL Y C W1 AQ 1L AU �G �. +N M ff 12 w^ > p y 25 Aa M— n CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA C�;CAXIOSTAFF REPORT I� c d � F Z U > DATE: January 22, 1986 1977 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Connission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Alan Warren, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 85-42 COLE SCHAEFER - A request to operate a 24-hour emergency ambulance station with quarters in a tenant space of an existing tuilding at the Rancho Cucamor7a"Business Park, 10722 Arrow Route, Suite 206, in &,. -area 7 of the Industrid7 ',pecific Plan - APN 208-052 "_. I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action Requested: Approval of a Conditional Use Permit and issuance of a Negative Declaration. Alk B. Location: 10722 Arrow Route, Suite C. Size: 1200 square felt within an ultimate development totaling T22,832 square feet of building area. D. Surround•' . ::-nd Use and Zoning_ 'North = 1ndustrial Office, Industrial Specific P1%;n Subarea 7. South - Vacant; Industrial Specific Plan Subarea 9. East Industrial/Office; Industrial Specific Plan Subarea 7. West - Industrial/Office; Industrial Specific Plan Subarea 7. f. General Plan Designations: Project Site - Industrial Park. ,North - Industrial Park. South - Industrial Park, Heavy Industrial. East Commercial. WeFt - Industrial Park. F. Site Characteristics: The tenant space is located within the first phase of the Rancho Cucamonga Business Park. Phase I occupies about 2/3 of the 7.9 acre site with 76,416 square feet of developed building area. 1 �:�.., ITEM J i PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CUP 85-42 - COLE-SCHAEFER AMBULANCE SERVICE January 22, 1986 Page II. ANALYSIS: A. Background and Discussion: The applicant is requesting authorization to operate a 24-hour emergency ambulance station with living quarters in a 1,200 square foot tenant space within the Raitcho Cucamonga Business Park at 10722 Arrow Route. The City staff became aware of the operation of the ambulance facility through Code Enforcement activities in September 1985. The applicant has stated that the fdCility has been in operation over ten (10) montns. In November of 1985, the applicant filed a Use Determination request to have ambulance services considered as a "medical/healthcare serulce" which is a permitte.` use in Subarea 7 of the Industrial Specific Plan. The reque:,t was denied and the use was defined at: a "public safety. service". The application has been filed pursuant to the use provisions of the Industrial Specific Plan (Subarea 7) which requires Conditional Use Permit approval for the establishment of a p,+blic safety services operation. B. Issues: The potential concerns of the proposal deal primarily with the use compatibility issue. The office and vehicle storage activities are similar to other bus ,Qss activities irr, the park and would therefore be compatible. lie applican* has stated that two ambulances would be ,parked in the front o? the unit and the station would be manned by no more than four employees. A survey of the center during normal business hours did not indicate a parking congestion problem, and as a result, staff would foresee no negative parking impact as a result of this operation. Major items of concern with this facility involve the emergency operation of the ambulances with siren noise and high speed travel. The Industrial area would be the preferred district for an ambulance facility due to the high intensity land use generally permitted in Industrial areas. Somrr concern should be realized for potentially noise-serisitive uses within the immediate area of the proposed ambulance station. A Survey of the complex noted several office uses, a church, ana a dance studio. These businesses and others could be adversely 'affected depending upin the frequency of emergency calls responded to by the ambulance service. It is therefore suggested that any approval of the facility be conditioned upon the prohibition of siren use and high speed travel withit, the Business. Park (Tract 11700 - Condominiums). C. Environmental Assessment: Staff his determined that this project should not create significant adverse environmental impacts. If the Planning Commission concurs with these findings, issuance of a Negative Declaration would be i appropriate. i PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CUP 85-42 - COLE-SCHAEFER AMBULANCE SERVICE January 22, 1986_ Page 3 III. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: Staff can recommend that the following findings can; be made for this project: 1. That the proposed use is in accord with thu General Plan, the objectives of the Development Code, and the purposes of the Industrial Specific Plan Subarea in which the site is located as evidence by the Condit�'onal Use Permit provisions for the establishment oY public safety services- 2. That tt. proposed use together with the conditions applicaule thereby, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to the properties or improvements in the vicinity as evidence by the similar natyre of the office and vehicle storage activities of the businesses aid a condition to limit the emergency operations of the ambulances while in the Business Park. 3. That the proposed use complies with each of the applicatle provisions of the Development Code. IV. CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised as a public hearing in The Daily Report newspaper, the property posted and notices sent to all property owners within 300 feet of the project site. V. RECOMMENDAT.ION: It is recommended that the Plannning Commission consider rx, all material input regarding this project. If after such consideration, the Commission can, support the Facts for Finding and Conditions of t Approval, the adoption, of the attached Resolution would be appropriate. Respectfully submitted, Brad Buller City Planner BB:AW:ko Attachments: Letter from Applicant Exhibit "A" - Location Map Exhibit "B" - Site Plan Exhibit "C" door Plan Initial Study, Part II Resolution qP _n 1 COLS d SCHAEFER AMBULANCE SERVICE Op 8 North Geray,Avenue a Pomona.California 91767 a Tat(7f4)622-1273-(2731333-4 7 December 13, 1985 City Of Rancho Cucamonga Attn: Nancy Fong Planning Dept. P. 0. Box 807 •Rancho Cucamonga, Calif. 91730 Dear Nancy Fong: Cole-Schaefer Ambulance currently leases .a building @ 10722 Arrow Rte, Suite_- 206 in the city of'Ranco. Cuca- monga. We intend to use the office as a substation to provide 24 hour per day ambulance service with a maximum of 2 amub;.ances. There would be 4 employees on the AWL premises per day. We are aloted 6 parking spaces in the complex which would be the maximum number of vechcles on the site on any given day. The Ambulanceswould be parked in front of our suite.. The cleaning of the vehicles is to be done in the rear of our office. We are providing supervisiory personell to handle problems that may arise • 24 hours per day. We have been in the complex for approximately 101 months and have had no complaints to date. Sincerely, P. D. MCAlmona Regional Manager PDMCA/img t_r ' .FM TV-7 np F_A...7. r oo na • o ' Vie• e • s - �S7M P aalleiwo • o o• eoeo• oeo - C(RCULATIoR TRAILSMOJTES' t111111111Mi. 130' .O.W. 0000 .Pedestrian � " Crooks Channs!e ./a. Fka 8tatlont . awawso low N.O.W. 0000 aldYa. � :eddgs 88'or loss R.O.W.<t=p R•pN��et' Access Points PAU.SERVICE .....,._ soeele!Strastscapa/ q��r�s.,V� +►+ter .Existing.. �"'*-' LendscepSM �I+. Perkf ..e... Proposed -= lijjjpjty E Line/ 0 Note:Par--al Moa and lot eon.%orstions era shown as SpMxllnst!on only. tThs sites shown may net be currently owned nor to the location$@•speeSUe. The.depiction of a cite In an ktdieatlon of a projected future need Ott MAY be adjusted overtime as the City develops. ti CITYOF i _ ITG4Ituigg BNW�- ' RANCHO CLTCAIVIO-,\TGA TITLE: PLAN-IINU DIVISIOAI EXHIBIT--A-SCALE. ! v a COW i u t Y t R t - M M 4 Y o mt .la0 a u�o 1 tiya•_ _ 13 O�ON S•- CJ a w+o-•es+} m 4 j. y 9. •4 ! PWti•1; `� 7rba o00'rY Pmrrt+i 9 x V tr'Q7'. !'o r t.. •P t•D G �Si3iT .y g t-A1.3 :.: zi uj. li n'i by 3 3 z � > -- -- - •}�•st�t7i� �= PtgL•t-v 3 O V g.: alel IW - S7 c1 -- 3 � ea Qp (� Poori-i u c, v •� oorl'3 OPoort t}b�00041 +'.+_. Hart-ei 46 — s7 t - -- roon•r ® n Co — �1 � _� c^s — o .a y} 9I9'£L ASU �— ;- -y p. 3nN3AV V31in i CITY OF rr>l�r �Mm RAC LHO CLICAMONGA PLANNING DIVISION ExHii3rr- ---SCALE- SUoAR ° I ' Ioo .m... 22 • ARROWS • 0 Oo w�e-oroc o•o f, ✓. .� arm` ' PROT1�cT' gIT� CIRCULATION TRAILS/ROUTES. t� 120'R.O.W. 0000 4adestrlan .. Crooke A Channels ® Flre Statk nt ' 103'.R.O.W. 0000 Sioyclo ^ Bridge 88'or Ins R.O.W.r app R.Olon't v MuttFtl.� RAIL SERVICE Access Points Existing lsntlaeapipeRsp•Geape/ Park, Proposed o Pcrrer tJn✓ - �- t7tII1IY En.men! 0 400 e00' 1600' Note:Parcel Ones am lot contiptratloru are.shorn as approalmatbn.ony.. 1The sites shown may not he csrramy owned nor Is the location site specMr adjushe d t ktloo at a sit*Is an WilcA to Of a'projected future.need that rtuy,as atlJusiaO orer tlm6 as the City develops. i CITY OF AIL RANCHO cLTCA f0Vi\GA ITEt�It k�5- T TITLCt1011J" W1dP PUNNING DIVISICkN EXHII3II': A.__SCALE- Auk Ho f- f/CB/Ofhy QatwdTcrts ,'_ 17,yt6Raom I O pPJC C. �FFfSC� .. 1 >a T P!r /v H ffA/1 oY° I o 7.Z Z NRRo .J Pam E S�l�Tt^ CITY OF rrE c: MYONAc. ►,- Qr,.Qz RANCHO CUCAMONGA, TrrLc= PLANNINU DIVLS10,N E'4HIBrr.-- C SCALE. CITY OF 'RANCHO CUCAMONGA PART 11 - INItIAL STUDY ENVIRON'fE!iTAL CHECKLIST DATE: A.PPLICA"T: COLS_—SC/d A rcGP �1/aR(V VIP ft= FILING DATE:/2-/�--$S _SLOG NUMBER: CUP PROJEr-T_2ECCt_11-7- EW- Q=E //7-m.Q Aot&K� S?A TjpXJ�(, PROJEC4 LOCATION:_J072Z QR2C+h/ �'7- T'1-zb� I. ENNTIRO_ %M-7NTAL IMPACTS (Explanation of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required on attached sheets). YES NAYBE NO 1. Soils and Geology. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Unstable ground conditions or in changes in geologic relationships? _ b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or burial of the soil? c. .Change in topography or ground surface contour intervals? d. The destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? f/ e. Any Potential increase in wind or water ' erosion of soils, affecting zither on or off site conditons? f. Changes in erosion siltation, or deposition? LZ g. Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mud- slides, ground failure, or'simlar hazards? h. An increase in the rate of extraction and/or use of any mineral resource? Aftk 2. HydsoloQv. Will the proposal have significant results in: F,• Page YES uaYBE SO a. Changes in currents, or the course of direction of flowing streams.- rivers, or ephemerai stream channels? b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface water runoff? v C. Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? v d. Change in the amount of surface water, in any body of water? v e. Discharge into surface waters, or any" alteration of surface water quality? v 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? 4- 3. Air Quality. Will the proposal have significant ` results in: a. Constant orperiodic air emissions from mobile or indirect sources? Stationary sources? b. Deterioration of ambient air quality and/or interference with the attainment of applicable air quality standards? c. Alteration of local or regional climatic conditions, affecting air movement, moisture or temperature? 4. Biota Flora. Will the proposal have significant results in; a. Change in '.se characteristics of species, Including diversity, distribution, or number Of any species of plants? b. Reduction aff the numbers ofany unique, rare orendargened species of plant Pa£e j YES \o c. Introduction of new or disruptive species cf plants into an area? r . d. 'eduction in the potential for agricultural production? 4-/ Fauna. Will the proposal`h-ve significant results in: a. Change in the characteristics of species, including diversity, distribution, or numbers of any s,!cies of animals? b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, tare or endangered species of animals? c. Introduction of new or disruptive species of ankwals into an area, or result in a barrier ;o the migration or movement of o-aimals? v� d. Deterioration or removal of existing fish or wildlife habitat? 5. Population. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Will the proposal alter the location, distri- bution, density, diversity, or growth rate of the human population of an area? b. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or crew= 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 use and Plannine Considerations. Will the proposal have significant results in? a. A substantial alteratiu_ if the present or planned laud use of an area? b. A conflict with any designations, objectives, policies, or adopted plans of any governmental / entities? V c. An ii ct upon the qulaity or quantity of exi. g consumptive or non-consumptive V L,- creational op ortunities? Page 4 YES MME NO Ask 8. Transportation. Will the proposal have significant results in. a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular moverz!nt? b. Effects on existing streets, or demand for new street construction? f/ 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 in traffic hazards to motor zrehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? 9. Cultural Resources. Will the proposal have a 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 health hazard or potential health hazard? b. Exposure of peopl•= to potential health hazards? !� c. A risk of explosion or release of hazardous substances in the event of an accident? v` d. An increase in the number of individuals or species of vector or pathenogenic organisms or the exposure of people to such organic-s? v e. 'increase 1, existing noise levels? f. Exposure of people to potentially dangerous noise li els? g. The crt tion of objectionable odorz? _ ✓ h. An increase in light or glared Page 5 yg 11. Aesthetics. Will the proposal have significant results int a. The obstruction or degradation of any scenic vista or view? b., The creation of an offensive i✓ 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? �r d. Water supply? e. Wastewater fatalities? f. Flood control structures? g. Solid waste facilities? h. Fire protection? i. Police protection? J. Scboo?s? k. Parks or other recreational facilities? I. ?Maintenance of public facilities, including roads and flood control facilities? m. Other goverrunental services? 13. Enert'v and Scarce Resources. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Use of substat,tial, or excessive fuel or energy? d b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy? V C. An increase in the demand for development of new sources of energy? v d. An increase or perpetuation of the consumption o£' non-renewable forms of energy, when feasible renewable sources of energy are availat e? Page YES `_NYSE NO e. Substantial deplxtion of any nonrenewable or sca;ce.natural resource? 14. Mandatory Findings of Sie-iificance. a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of fish or Wildlife specie cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant cr animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important e;smples of the ma3�r periods of �,-lifornia history or ;prehistory? , b. Does the project have t2le potential to achieve short—term, to the disar-vantage of long-term,, environmental goals? (11, short-term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of time white long- term impactN will endure well into 0,v future). Does the project have impacts which are s ' individually Limited, but cumulativel•- consid-cable? (Cumulatively conside;.;jle means --at the incremental effects of an Individual project are co-+siderable when viewed' in connection with the eL ects of past projects, and probable future projects). j d. Does the project have environmesl: " effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either d ;ply or .,dirEctly? II. DISCUSSION OF ENCIRO?iMfrAL EVALUATION (i.e., of affirmative ansu Z to the above questions plus a discussi, of proposed Litigation measures). I oe. T gr-USE- OF UEA9z_f "" S/,rA-15 AMY, 0aVA" z. /�if/iU 7)gE i3US/�S GD.y f. ji Pace III. DETMMINATIO`I On the basis of this initial e:Jaluation: AM 10 7--�� I find the- +raposed project COCLO NOT have'a significant effect L� on the environment, and a NEGATICE DECLARATION,will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant I effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect J in this case becaus,- the nitS;at,ion measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION 'WILL BE PREPARED. I find the propvfed project MAY have a signLficant effect on the envirnament, and au ENVIRO` -LYT I.`tPACT REPORT is required, Date Si&,iature u Title '" RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CHCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSIGN APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 85-42 FOR COLE- SCHAEFER AMBULANCE SERVICE LOCATED AT 10722 ARPOW ROUTE, #206 IN THE INDUSTRIAL SPECIFIC PLAN (SUBAREA 7) DISTRIa WHEREAS, on the 3rd day of January, 1986 a complete application was filed by Cole-Schaefer Ambulance Service for review of the above-described project; and WHEREAS, on the 22nd day of January, 1986, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commiss4on held a public hearing to consider the above described pro j r st NOW, THEREFORE, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning :'ommission resolved as follows: SECTION 1: That the following findings can be met: 1. That the proposed use is in accord with the General Plan, the objectives of the Development Code, and the purposes of the district in which than site is located as evident by the Conditional Use Permit provisions for public safety services in the district. 2. That the props(, use, together with the conditions 1 applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the pu��lic health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity as evident by the similar nature of the cffice and vehicle storage activities of the facility. 3. That tFq proposed use compiias wifiiz each of the applicable p cvisions of the Deve1Ln[•.eat Code. f- SECTION 2 That this pro; ict +vill not create advErse impacts on the environment and that a Negative Declaration is issued on January 22, 1986. SEC"iION 3: That Conditional ; .e Permit No. 85-42 is approved � ' subject to the following conditions: 1. That ambulance emergency operation such as high speed travel •...a -,z-en operation shall be prohibited within the cam.,, „� `_._= ess pkr!. (Tract 11700). All vehicle repai,. zhall be conducted within an enclosed .,u. i • 'PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION ' CUP 85-42 >- COLE`SCHAEFER AMBULANCE SERVICE ' January 22, 1986 P«ge 2 C 3: Any vehicle storege within the unit shalt be:in strict conformance with all applicable building and fire code provisions. 4. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all secticns of the :Industrial Area Specific Plan, all other applicable City Ordinances and applicable community plans or specific plans in j effect at th4,.t time of occupancy. 5. If the operation of this ambu�ance facility causes adverse effects upon the surrounding uses, the Conditional Use Permit shall, be 'brought".afore the Plann`ng Commission for their consideration' and possinle termination of such use. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 22ND DAY OF JANUARY, 1986. PLANNiyo CdMMISSION (jF We CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Dunn-; L. Stout, Chairman ATTEST: Brad Buller, 'enuty Secretary + T, Brad Buller, Deput*,a Secretary of the Planning C;,unu3ssion of the City of Ranchi Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City o! Rancho Curamonga at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held of th • 22nd dale of January, 1986, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES; COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: i c . -i,t CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA r CA STAFF REPORT CG�� j C99 JI_ DATE: January 22, 1986 t977 TO: Chairmal and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Bi^ad Buller, City Planner BY: Nancy Fong, Associate Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESM:NT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 85-40 - YlbAII -- A request to operate a two-station beauty salon includIn manicurist servic^ within an existing health center Fstar's Aerobics Fitness/Tanning Center) in the General Industrial District (Subarea 3), located in the Cucamonga Business Park at the southwest,corner of Arrow III Highway and Archibald .wenu, - APN 209-021-39 (Portion). I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: AOL A. Act;., Requested: Approval of Conditional Use Permit. B. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning_ North '- Si.zgle family residences; Low Residential Distric% (2-4 du/ac). South - Industrial; General Industrial District, Subarea 3. East - Industrial; General Industrial District, Subarea 3. West - Industrial;' General indistr4al District, Subarea 3. C. General Plan Desi nations: roject 51te - General 'ndustrial North Low Density Residential South General Industrial East - General Industrial Nest - General Industrial D. Site Charact:ristics: This building is within the Rancho Cucamonga Business Park. All street improvements, parking, and landscaping are .existing. E. Applicable Regulations: The operation of a beauty salon is classified as a "convenience service" which' requires the app-oval of a Conditional Use Permit by the Planning Commission. ITEM K PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CUP 85-40 - Sloan January 22, 1986 Page 2 II. ANALYSIS• A. General: This item resulted from code enforcement action for violation of the CUF 83-23 for Ct&. Aerobics. The proposed business, Star Cutter, is subleasing 200 square feet of space from an existing tenant, Star Aerobics. A beauty salon/convenience service was neither requested or approved as part of CUP 83-23. Star Cutter is a separate business and will have separate entrances with only a doorway connection to Star Aerobics. A letter from the applicant, Star Cutter, describing her business operation, has been included for your review. In reviewing uses of this nature, availability of parking and assurance that the use will not create disturbances or problems for adjacent businesses are two primary considerations. The total required parking spaces for Star Cutter is 6 spaces, at a rage of 3 for each cutting station. Basod on the reduced square footage for Star Aerobics from 4,900 sq. ft. to 4,700 sq. ft. the total required parking spaces noH are 31 spaces (1 space per 150 sq. ft.). Therefore, the total nunber of parking spaces required for both Star Cutter and Stai, Aerobics are 37 spaces.. In reviewing the previous approved CUP for Star Aerobics, 21 parking spaces are allocated for this business at all .times. An additional 35 spaces a,a�oss from the Business Center Drive, as shown in Exhibit I'd", 'are allocated for the evening hours since the majoritj of classes are conducted between 5:00 p.m. and 9:00 p,n� The following tab1R shows the breakdown of the required v:,mber of parking spaces: Business Hours Non-Business Hours 5PACES TFOEff— Rs,q2, Provided Reg. ' Provided Aerobics 31 15 31 - 21 + 35 Cutters 6 6 '7 2T 7T 56 ' (16 spaces under) (25 spaces over) During business hours, the total number of spaces ;aro lued are short 16 spaces. However, Star Aerobics presently has scheduled only one morning class, and Star Cutter°s clientele are usually scheduled at one-hour increments and one custcimer at a time. Therefore, the overlapping of the cse of parking spaces would not create an adverse impact for the 2 businesses or the surrounding uses during business and nun-business hours. A condition of approval, requiring Planning Commission review, nas been included in the attached resolution for Star Cutter, should parking problems occur. This same condition was Aft also included in the resolution of approval for Star Aerobics. t, PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CUP 85--40 Sloan January 22, 1986 Page 3 B. Environmental Assessment: The proposed project has been determ;ned to be a categorica; exemption (California Environoental Quality Act Guidelines, Section 15301, Class I) in whi: h it will not have a significant effect on the environment, which shall therefore be exempt from the provisions of CEQA. III. FACTS' ,R FINDINGS: The proposed project is consistar.t with the II d L:-;ial S—pec fic Plan. The proposed use,. together with the recotmne►ided Conditions of Approval, will not be detrimental to the _ public health or materially injurious to properties in the vicinity°. IV. CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised as a public hearing in The Daily Report newspaper, the property_posted, and notices were sent to property owners within 800 feet of the project site. Letters from the property owner and a nearby business who are in favor of the approval of the Conditional Use Permit have been incl_'ded for your review. V. RE MMEN ION: Staff recommends the Planning :ommission approve and"ti Ni Permit 85-40 through the adoption of the attached Res on with Conditions. espec yitted, Brad u11er ( CX:NF:ns Planner l 8 Attachments: Letter from Applicant Letter from a Property Ownar Letter from a Surrounding Business Exhibit "A" Location Map Exhibit "B" - Site Plan . Exhibit "C" - Floor Plan Resolution of Approval with Conditirns , . City Of Rar.;cho Cucamonga 9320 Baseline Rd Rancho Cucamonga CA 91730 Dear Sirs My name is Onda Sloan, Owner of Star Cutters, My place of business is located at 9507 Arrow, Bldg. 7, Cucamonga Business Park. Rancho Cucamonga Ca. It is a full service hair salon doing hair by a licensed stylist, with one licensed manicurist. It is a small salon with two cutting stations and one shampoo bowl. It has a small waiting area and'a reception desk. It also _ is connected to Star Aerobicise Fitness&. Tanning Center, Which ISub-least from them. It is;a totally different business from theirs. Sincerly, Onda. Sloan Star Cutters i (ed A.H. REITER DEVELOPMENT December 13, 1985 Ms. Nancy Fong CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 11730 Dear Nancy: Enclosed please find a site plan with parking defined for Star Cutters. In talking with Onda Sloan of Star Cutters, she indicated her hours were from 1O:00AM to 6:OOPM, and that.her daily client load is on the average, 8 persons and at most, 9 persons It appears that these hours are workable with Stars Fitness Center because the Fituess Center daytime hours are very light. Parking therefore does not seem to be a problem. fSincerely, A.H., -ITER D V NT CO. Robert 1. Clarke /fj encl. Malting Address:P.O.Box 7250 `Newport Beach,.Alfornia 92658-7254 (714)751-4594 Pullman at Redhiii ,n , ��iilQutl6Et �m'' Inc. January 13, 1986 Ptann.i.ng p.iv.i,6.ion City o6 Rancho Cucamonga P. 0. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 RE: CONOITIONAL USE PERMIT 85-40 SLOAN Th.ia tetteA .7.4 .in Ae6ponae to your notice xegaAding .the above Ae6meneed peam.i.t. We 6eee that .there.i.s no %ea,6on not to gAant .the Condixio,wt Use PeAmit 6or the above.two-station beauty baton. AA a .tenant o6 the same bu6.ineaa park, we 6eee that having a bu6.i.neas o6 thi6 nature within this .same park, oney enchance6 Chia aAea. One o6 the deciding Aeaaona our o66.i,cu cc ,n moved to .the, Cucamonga Bus.ine .6 Po%k was that .is i4 guat to have an o66.tee within a ccmp.iex where you can .take eaAe o6 a.ee 06 yowc bu,6ina6s and oeuonaZ needs. Thi6 buafness pack .id unique .in _ the way that .it does have a great vaA.iety o6 d.b6erent tnade6 within it6l area. A.eao, a6 eo%enta o6 .the zaeon, we are vent' pteaaed. The 6hop .c6 atways neat and ctean, and Onda Sloan afWays ptesent6 a vent' good:image. SdnmereCy, Kath eee�. F&oJI A6 i6tant to the PAe6.ident cc: Onda Sloan 9567 Arrow Route,Suite M:.Rancho Cr amongja,CA 91730•(714)980.7762 L I---------1 o III = 11.IF14117Lrllli�ll��i Jam- .. 1;2 E.,r F� . ' iC j I 1 C•.;.. ;i;. -- - ITH I'I I I l.t__-JI I I I I I I 1 zr- -4.TT •_ t f . I I III s=s�� , '� aUsE n ����I�I�IIIIlI1111�41411{LI rllIITiL Fr it =. e , L Ul I�:1L11.11.1J I Lr 11111 I I I I'I. N q 9 S jr i � •. l�IfII1IIIiIII 10 TI'2 n Jilil i i — �1111111IIIiiillll!11II1lIi11'llLlllllililillL 111l,III liilllliPl G NORTH CITY OF ITEM. RANCI 0 CUCAMONGA ���� PLANNING DIVISION EXHIBIT- SC,rs,LE. --'' f t / Res j POZ7, �• ,�, P �h/i ;� �aotLT; fj •t`j r { •c'+�k� / �? �7ttrJ � ✓1 .7F/ L'!V j .7 C ra Sao ?"a NORTH MY OF 7(� +� ITEM. RANTCHO CL'C& jNi GA TITLES PLANNING DIVISION EXI IBIT:--O—SCAL.E- RESOLUTION NO, A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING 0M"ISSION APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 85-40 FOR A BEAUTY SALON LOCATED AT 9507 ARROW HIGHWAY IN THE GENERAL INDUSTRIAL DISTK CT WHEREAS, ci the 6th day of January, 1986, a complete application was filed by Onda Sloan Star Cutters for review of the above-described project; and WHEREAS, a beauty salon is defined as a convetance service which is conditx maily permitted in Subarea 3; and WHEREAS, on the 22nd day of January, 1986, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider the above-described project. N011, THEREFORE, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission resolved as follows: SECTION 1: That the following findings can be met: 2. That the proposed use is in accord with, the General `} Plan, the objectives the Industrial Specific Plau, 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 ;er improvements in the vicinity. 3. The'c the proposed use complies with each of the applicable provisions of the Industrial Specific Pan. SECTION 2: That this projectt will not create adverse impacts on the environment and pursuant to CEQA, Section 15301, Class I, this project is. categorically exempt from the provisions of CEQA. SECTION 3: That Conditional Use Permit No. 85-40 is approved subject ie the following conditions: 1. That all City Codes and Ordinances stall be complied with at all time. 1 jcV r Resolution No. CUP 85-40 - Sloan January 22, 1986 P 2 2. If operation of this facility should cause any adverse Impact,'l upon business or properties in the immediate vic W'ty, particularly with regards to parking, this permit shill be brought before the Planning Commission for reconsideration, modification or revocation. This CUP shall be monitored to ensure compliance with the Conditions of Approval. 3. This CUP shall be null and void in the evenc of a significant change in its operation. A new or modified CUP shall be required. 4. Expansion of the business operation, such as additional cutting stations or new services, shall require application for modification of this Conditional Use Permit. i,PPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 22ND DAY OF JANUARY, 1986.. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Dennis L. tout, Chairman A11 ESI-_ irad 3uller, Deputy ecretary I, Brad Buller, Deputy Secretaiy 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 Commissio:' held on the 22rl y of January, 1986, by the folloi-%ny vote-to-wit:. AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: rOMMrSSI;jERS: ABSENT. COMMISSIONERS: _ � �.2 86 P! _ e d . a k t o P e 6 . CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA G�CAr.�o STAFF REPORT C O U� DATE: January 22, 1986 1977 TO: Planning Commiss?on FP.DM: Barrye R. Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer BY: Barbara Krall, Assistant Civil Engineer SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 96':2 - BARTON - A division of 13.22 acres of land into 3 parcels in the Industrial Park District, Subarea 7, located on the south side of Foothill Boulevard east of Haven Avenue - APN 208-351-48, 49 & 50 I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action Requested: Approval of Parcel Map B. Purpose: To divide 13.22 acres into 3 parcels for development of MEL office buildings. C. Location: South side of Foothill Boulevard and the e• st side of Haven Avenue. D. Parcel Size: Parcel 1 2.6 acres Parcel 2 - 7.9 acres Parcel 3 - 2.6 acres E. Existing Zoning: Industrial Park, Subarea 7 F. Existing Land Use: Parcel 1 - Existing office building Parcel 2 - Office building under construction Parcel 3 - Vacant G. Surroundinq Land Use: North - Vacant South - Existing Law & Justice Center East Vacant West - Vacant H. Surrounding General Plan and Development Code Designations: North - Terra 1sta. Community Commercial South - Industrial Park, S.�area 7 East Indus'-izl Park, Subarea 7 West - Office/. ofessional ` ITEM 'L PLANNING COMMISSION -STAFF REPORT Environmental AssF;sment and Parcel Map 9612 January 22, 1986 Page 2 Adak I. Site Characteristics. Parcel 1 is the site of an •existing office bolding; Parcel-2 is being developed at t`.iis time. Parcel 3 is vacant. II. ANALYSIS: This parcel map changes the lot configurations for the Barton P�aza of€ice park development locate,, on the southeast corner of Haven Avenue and FoothilF Boulevard. The approved conceptual master plan (Exhibit D) remains the same. Parcel 1 is the site of an existing office building and was Phase I of the development. Phase II, an office building on Parcel 3, is under construction at this time. Parcel 2 is vacant ?.t the present time and will be the site of Phase III of the development. This phase is proposed to include two office buildings and a parking structure to provide reciprocal parking for the. project (see Exhibit B). Prior to development of Phase III, the project will be submitted to the Planning Commission eor approval. Off-site improvements have been constructed with Phases I & II. III. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: Also attached for your review and consideration ;:. Part I of the Initial 'Study as completed by the applicant. Staff has completed Part II of the Initial Study, tha,environmental checklist, and has conducted a .field investigation. Upon =,,uletior and review of the Initial Study and field investigation, Staff found no adverse impacts on the Environment as a result of the proposed subdivision. IV. CORRESPONDENCE: Notices of Public Hearing have been sent to surrounding property owners and placed in she Daily Report Newspaper. Posting at the site has also been completed. V. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission consider aTT input and elements of Tentative Parcel Map 9612. If after such consideration, the Commission can recomme.,d approval, then the adoption of the attached Resolution and issuance of a Negative Declaration would be appropriate. Respectfully submitted, BRH:BK:de Attachments: Vicinity Map Tentative Map Resolutior. Recommended Conditions of Approval Initial Study qP 1 eqc S � FOOTHILL BOULEVARD PWJ 7..J D.0 .3 -• -Mf r: a r..f...iT .i a It t, Pµ 6T/1 Jr:fc t• 2�' 9 7 31 f•f! a y nx. nct Iuc►rf ti,. t IJ`� Ant 1 I '\ TnTE4 !f h.1f..j',•—' QiivE ; �fC�4 --'--.---- �_ M/ F.0 ?e L'. 62 • t S y �` • a it o MKfL c 209 CITY OF PROJECT- PARCEL MAP 3512 � VICINITY MAP RANCHO CUCAMONGA TITLE: --- • to G R G ;I PAS10N "3 EXHIBIT; it p TENT. IVE FOR MOtWRUL.OR COYLERO&FO'Rp=E] PARCEL DCEL MAP IAA 9612 IN THE GTY OF RANGtq COCAMONOA O.J.•lYLT[a�LbO rYQL H11�),LIK rrr..y,OtO • - a[t •au n•[o v cn bus .c cr•Ka a ,, `ni wubn fca[o[[ar ss�K •aoxo wwm ss�sc w uurofx, FRARKV SCARSOROOGR L9.239R OOTOBER,19B0 ORIfM]CEAT6CATE 9UWJMW9 CGTIFICATE Am.ITrt.w r�rs,.yx.e1-_TJ .•r,..wti%.:rwe"'..'/.'J a Arn �«euf ar' r;.w•T%"'��.�+I11. i�����i. m,ram..."rwr'�je���7FJ:""[.'_srs�•7� b.��.rr.1��, .. w/ry aha.l,nlr 'r.A/r�;/.,Jsarsr+[z.•sL /.nb l:Mw a•�•• GTY EROi..TIF.. fMtJ(re/![lsMIN TmI�!/(.TCelvVIJ4'fOw�.d1'/arni�[[ryxn/ww xi.q•[.tM'rsr rb lN.mfwra�ydMrllLLti+e1 Mw/1rl �i Y'iwOi�e 4�.M �N [Ir /ebwq RwaNfw.rlecrfa/lp'- � /D/.Jrtlr/IrJr [e,�•WJ•I•!e[tI)r�f IWTARY[bTOeLE=:FYERT RAWC QCA=MA CRY Oar.CIL=TVIFAT[ [•i/�w[ �F�NvRd�Cmao7/f llwW O'x'�'1. y lr+Tr twnw/ne�f! •.f�f. '^""�N:f[YWfrlpM. �rY. �w/.� ��[.f�[+lcytiNa•"�I"n'mG,il w;�h/N �MJyY✓wl�ir/Jrr/ 0•I•/ �r fl/i.1bb frl/:f ��i to M�raif IC/w[ �>>��rMralJlxf ry • f��Jlr[Irp/'M ff 1y.Jr III {�y�r � ~•wbrYl�Ywl!Y%rflWr�AY•Lrywy/��� I x7+M ryJN✓dliir aW s1/o[.bx /ft1 - ce�.xrr^.41bi aT�w[vo ' -�d7 ii%�E ___v _ _ _.L lbrJ•e1{[JfJf)w�flx�hn,J[ N_u J.___�_.._ .__�_._ �• -�� • a .__-_FOOYN/14 OCULEVAA•Dt. l-mn � �I,�ITJn �•�sw1�.' f.,r..- �- �- T�Jl�� _"I i ,C�`- Ni ✓/:f..A 4[.«/Y�.de prrnq[[(/Y ..n�:"..' _I37. 0.t4. ' I J:/v�•.tb/ a i �.[ =AECFL.3 1.4 R:cL �rrmry CY•Tu7) a4fY=Z i 2 C4.Lri? d'" a t i. sJt ar.. It a z�. ti T11 j_ r ° /RSRCCt] a . 7"L tyy ,. , __.a:^_:c.-li Irrv/•d..,1 L3 v� ... •,T �t r t I R/MY[b MI'I[x//,,,y,ylflRl .J s I•bnM1/f//lr.fry'/[fGMI[prfb sTN Llrf il�f•r I, f11.lMnf/['KWxI.�I[pel avl.i./wrM6�t lH.Wsl sab/n/wMM[7tf CxKfrbft010W X•✓�Hfr[r[l4A.wYA e.e1 NrJ/sYYer L[tfH wx F.q pT Fx T.Y,f9A Im. � (<OO�Mf/Mer Q La rw RM Y%F FaR IT�It•IA sK rrte rr'f r>.nr xmT.rlr,b Tn fT/blr rl . �I/irN rf tL wer.rf.,bYLrI��rr�IV./Aav/•r f%—I� EXHIBIT fF811 j i�� �'r � i. �" � .. 4 - •,.,fib y oy 9 � .! .. gogou K CITY i OF PROJECT: PARCEL MAP 9612 RANCHO .000AMONGA TITLE: SITE PLAN ENGINEERING DIVISION L-S EXHIBIT; C ► ab�1tl�s 1a►.l �i�!•�ff?''��'=�i:V�a i.ii ►�:'-%►!i�u�aal�►"'�' ���,q.�►aL+►L►�� �• �� �i 'gip �i i i 11 ' �.� • a ij aail►as� »saa►v►� 1 iy Q i' i' }� • 3 1"aa�aat tSimms a� a u � YIt"tull`. _... ova i.- _. .. ■ a 1-=:4 ����aa•--'■ ►.►- .� • 1i�� i`l, :ice► r� �� ■►"'y�� �1•:►�.0.`S►��...arT.. t.,!;lq.._l.gTliT. '=�■i/?ga01Wr�Tua::C � e u r i � S C ICAM 0 N'L9e.( ` .r- ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW APPLICATION 0d { "L `-`' INITIALS 1.77 TUDY PART I GENERAL For all projects requiring environmental review, this `'arm must be completed and submitted to the Development Review Committee through the department where the project application is Wade. Upon receipt of this application, the Planning Division staff will prepare Part II of the Ii.itial Study and make recommendations to Planning Commission. The Planning Commission will make one of three determinations: (1) The project environmental impact d will have no significant an a Negative Declaration will be filed, (2) The` project will have a significant. environmental impact and an Environmental Impact Report will be prepared, or (3) An additional . information report should be supplied by the applicant giving further information concerning the proposed project. Date Filed: ' Project Tit'e• •-1��a r''1`hV1 Applicant's Name, Address,.� Telephone:-_� c�n-� S �r3Y fin��Gl�cc�..� ��� . �ci4nti/n —,i.•iL���v�,7L-�� Name, Address, Telephone of Person To Be Contacted Concerning this Project: I[�rn,�< Location of Project Assessor's Parcel No. -]43,!r.3 foss 1s�aL7 /hook 2t79,n 3� List other permits.necessnry from local, regional, state and federal agencies and the agency issuing such permits:_rhnE� — L- 7 T_1 PROJEC' DESCRIPTI011 Proposed use orproposed project: b Acreage of project area and square footage of existing and, proposed buildings, if any: X 2 AG Describe the environmental settino of the project site including information on topography, soil stabilit historical or scenic aspects. plants (trees), land animals, any cultural, description of e p , land use of surrounding sheets y exis ing structures and their se properties, and the ):� Icinn� ,3 (attach necessary -VS�f.LLC��t.'l-� TInG�•r — z n. Is the project part of a ear gar actions, which although.individvallp smalj' one of a series of cumulative environmental impact , may as a whole—have significant � 1 lank �-'" I-2 WILL THIS PROJECT: YES NO 1. Create a substantial change in ground contours? _ Z. Create a substantial change in existing noise of produce. . vibration or glare? _ 3. Create a substantial change in demand for municipal services (police, fire, water, sewage, etc.)? 4. Create changes in the existing Zoning or General Plan designations? 5. Remove any existing trees? Now many? 6. Crk,ate the need for use or disposal of potentially hazardous materials such as toxic substances, flammables or explosives? f Explanation of any YES answers above (attach additional sheets if necess y): 7. Estimate the amoant of sewage and solid waste materials inis project will generate•daily; _ �, �Q , 8. Estimate the number of auto and truck trips generated daily by this project: (zg�� 9. Estimate the amount of grading (cutting and filling) required for this 1 project,.in cubic yards: F'1pYlC d; — 10. 7f the project involves the construction of residential units, complete the form on the next page. CERTIFICATIONi I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in ' the attached exhibits present the data and information required for this initial evaluation to the best of my ability, and that the facts, statements, and information presented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. I further understand that additional information may be required to be submitted before an adequate evaluation can be made by the Planning Division. Date: /�'1 � , _ c- f1• Signature ci Title (_— I-3 RESIDEN- AL CONSTRUCTION Tlie following information should be provided to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Division in order to aid the school district in assessing their ability to accommodate the proposed residential development Developers are required to secure letters from the school district for accommodating the increased' number of students prior to issuance .of building permits. Name of Developer and Tentative Tract No.: Specific Location of Project: PHASE I PHASE 2 PHASE 3 PHASE 4 TOTAL 1. Nuz�aer of single family units: 2• Number of multiple family units: 3• Date proposed to begin construction: 4.. Earliest date of occupancy: Model" and # of Tentative S. Bedrooms Price Range -- _ G —/C) I-4 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PARCEL MAP NUMBER 9612 (TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 9612) LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD AND THE EAST SIDE OF HAVEN AVENUE (APN 208-351-48, 49& 50)- WHEREAS, Tentative Parcel °iap Number 9612, submitted by Barton Development and consisting of 3 parcels, located on the south side of Foothill Boulevard and the east side of Haven Avenue, being a division of Parcel Map 7963 as per slap recorded in Book 82, pages 32 and 33 of Parcel Maps in the office of the County, State of California; and WHEREAS, on December 10, 1985, a formal application was submitted requesting review of the above-described Tentative Map; and WHEREAS, on January 22, 1986, the Planning Commission held a duly advertised public hearing for the abdve-described map. FOLLOWS.: NOW, THEREFORE, THE tANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLVED AS SECTION 1: That the 'following findings have been made: 1. That the map is consistent with the General Plan. 2. That the improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with the General Plan. 3. Th; the site is physically suitable for the proposed development. 4. That the proposed subdivision and improvements will not cause substantial environmental damage, public health problems or have adverse affects on abutting property. SECTION 2: That this project will not create significant adverse environmenta impacts and a Negative Declaration is issued on January 22, 1986. SECTION 3: That Tentative Parcel Nap No. 961? is approved subject to the recommen`dee Conditions of Approval pertaining thereto. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 22ND DAY OF JANUARY, 1986. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Dennis L. Stout, Chairman ATTEST: Brad Buller, Deputy Secretary —� J, Brad Buller, Deputy Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 22nd day of January, 1985, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES• COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT:. COMMISSIONERS: G -�2 i CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA � RECOMMENDED "ONDITIONS OF APPROVAL LOCATION: South si.e of Foothill Boulevard TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO: 9612 east of Haven Avenue DATE FILED: December 10, 1985 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: being a subdivision of NUMBER OF LOTS: 3 Parcel Map 7963, as per map recorded in GROSS ACREAGE: 13.22 _ Book 82, paces 32 & 33 in San Bernardino ASSESSOR PARCEL NO: 208-351-48, 49 County, California & 50 DEVELOPER OWNER ENGINEER/SURVEYOR James Barton Same "rank Scarborough 8409 Utica AvenuL i 8409 Utica Avenue Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730. Improvement and dedication requirements in accordance with Title 16 of the Municipal Code of the City of Rancho Cucamonga include, but may not be limited to, the following: A. Dedications and Vehicular Access 1. Dedications shall be made of all interior street rights-of-way and all necessary easements as shown on the tentative map. 2. Dedication shall be made of the following rights-of-way on the following streets: additional feet on additional feet on additional feet on 3. Corner property line radius will be required per City Standards. X 4. All rights of vehicular ingress and egress shall be dedicated as follows: on Haven Avenue and Foothill Boulevard except for openings as per recorded Parcel Map 7963. X 5. Reci-rocal access easements and maintenance agreements ensuring access to all parcels and joint maintenance of al, common roads, drives or parking areas shall be provided by C.C.&R.s and shall be recorded concurrent with the map. 6. All existing easements lying within future right-of-way are to be quitclaimeC or delineated on the map per City Engineer's requirements. a. Easements for sidewalk for public use shall be dedicated to the City where sidewalks meander through private propv,ty. B. Street Improvements Pursuant to the C ty of Ranch Cucamonga Municipal Code, Title 16, Section 16.36.120, the subdivider may enter, into an agreement and post security with the City guaranteeing the required construction prior to recordation of the map and/or building permit issuance. 1. Construct full street improvements including, but not limited to, curb and gutter, A.C. pavement, Sidewalk, drive approaches,. parkway trees and street lights fin all interior streets. 2. A minimum of 25-foot wide pavement within a 40-foot wide dedicated right-of-way shall be constructed for all half- section streets. 3. Construct the following missing improvements: r rior to recordation for _ Prior to building permit issuance for Curb & A.C. Side- Drive Street Street A.C. Median _Street None Gutter Pvmt. Walk Appr. Trees Lights Overlay Island* Other *Includes landscaping and irrigation on meter 4. Prior to any work being performed in the public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and as: encroachment permit shall be obtained from the City Engineer's Office, in addition to any other permits required. 5. Street improvement plans shall be prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer and approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of an encroachment permit. 6. Developer shall coordinate, and where necessary, pay for the relocation of any power poles or other existing public utilities as necessary. 7. Existing lines of 12KV cr less fronting the property shall be undergrounded. 8. Install appropriate street name signs, traffic cant'rol signs, striping and markings with locations and types approved by the City Engineer. -2 9. Street light locations, as required, .are to be approved by the Southern California Edison Company and the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Lights shall be on decorative poles with underground service. 10. Landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Division prior to the issuance of buii•ki.ng permit. 11. Concentrated - drainage flows shall not cross sidewalks. Undersidewalk drains shall be installed to City Standards. C. Surety 1. Surety shall bet posted and an agreement executed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and City Attorney, guaranteeing completion of the public improvements prior to recording fc.- and/or prior to building permit issuance for 2. A lien agreement must be executed prior to recording of the map Jr the following: 3. Surety shall be posted and an agreement executed, guaranteeing completion of all on-site drainage facilites necessary for Ask dewatering all parcels to the satisfaction of the Building and Safety Divison prior to recording for and/or prior to issuance of building permit for D. Drainage and Flood Contrr,> 1. Private drainage easements for cross-lot drainage. shall be required and shall be delineated or noticed on the final map. 2. Adequate provisions shall be made for acceptance and disposal of surface drainage entering the property 'ram adjacent areas. 3. The following storm drain shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer 4. Prior to recordation of the map, a hydrologic a-id drainage study for the project shall be submitted to the C•rty Engineer for r�iview. 5. A drainage detention basin per City Standards shall be constructed to detain increased runoff -3- 9. Street light locations, as required, are to be approved by the Southern California Edison Company and the City of Rancho Cucamonga. lights shall be on decoraliwe poles with underground service. 10. Landscape and irrigation plans shall be *submitted to and approved by the Planning Division prior to the issuance of building permit. 11. Concentrated drainage flows shall not cross sidewalks. Undersidewalk drains shall be installed to City Standards. C. Surety 1. Surety shall be posted and an agreement executed to the satisfaction of the Cit_v Engineer and City Attorney, guaranteeing comp:etion of the public improvements prior to recording for andi.�%r prior to building permit issuance for 2. A lien agreement must be executed prior to recording of the map for the following; 3. Surety shall be posted and an agreement executed, guaranteeing complrtion of all on-site drainage F g acilites necessary for dewatering all parcels to the satisfaction of the Building and Safety Divison prior to recording for anal/or prior to issuance of building permit for D. Drainage and_' lod Control 1. P. , drainage ei:sements for cross-lot -:`.ainage shall be ret,_ and shall be delineated or noticed on the final map. 2. Adaquate provisions shall be made for acceptance and disposal of surface drainage entering the property from adjacent areas. 3. The following storm drain shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer 4. Prior to recordation of the map, a hydrologic and drainage study for the project shall be submitted to the City Engineer for review. 5. A drainage detention basin per City Standards shall be constructed to detain increased runoff �'4 E. 6radina X 1. Gradir,l of the subject property shall' be in accordance with the Uniform 'Building Code, City Grading StandaF%d--, and accepted grading practices. The final grading plan shall be in substantial conformance with the approved conceptual grading plan. _ X 2. A soils report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer ff licensed by the State of California to perform such work prior I. to issuance of building permit. I - 3. A geological report shall be p�-°pared by a qualified engineer or geologist and submitted at the time of,application or grading plan check. 4. The final grading plan shall be subject to review and approval by the Grading Committee and shall be completed prior to recordation of she final subdivision map or issuance of buiilding permit waichRver comes first.` X 5. Final grading plans for each parcel are to be submitted to the Building and Safety Division for approval prior to issuance of building permit. �. GeneralRecuirements and Approvals X 1. Permits from other agenciEs will by required as follows:. CalTrans for San 'Bernardino County Flood Control Ristrict X Cucamonga County Water District for, sewer and water X San 'Bernardino County Dust Abatement (required prior to issuance of a grading permit) Other X 2. A copy of the Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (C.C.&R.$) approved by the City Attorney is required prior to recordation of the map. X 3. Provide all utility services to each lot including sewerage, water, electric power, gas and telephone prior to street constructor_ X 4. Sanitary sewer and water systems shall be designed to Cucamonga County Water District standards. A later of acceptanceis required. 5. This subdivision shall be subject to conditions 'of approval from CalTrars/San Bernardino County Flood Control District. X 6. Approvals have not been secured from all utilities and other interested agenci_s involved. Approval of the final map will be subject to any req!jirements that may be received from them. -4- -i'fo X 7. The filing of the tentative map or approval of same does not guarantee that sewer treatment capacity will be available at - the time building permits are requested. When building permits are requested, the Cucamonga County Water District will be asked to certify the availability of capacity. Permits will not be issued unless said certification is received`=in writing. ' S. Local and Master Planned Trails shall be provided in accordance with the Trail Plan. A detailed trail plan indicating widths, maximum slopes, physical conditions, fencing and weed control, in accordance with City trail standards, shall be submitted to and approved by the City Planner prior to recordation for andlcr prior to building .permit issuance for 9. Prior to recording, a deposit shall be posted with the City covering the estimated cost of apportioning the assessments under AssesF%nent District 82-1 among the newly created parcels. _ X 10. At the time of final map submittal, the following shall be submitted: Title Report, traverse calculations (sheets), �opies'cf recorded maps and demds used as reference and/or showing original land division, tie notes and bench marks referenced. X. 11. Notice of intent to Join the proposed Median Island Landscape Affik District shall be filed with Vie City Council prior to recordation of the Final Map. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA LLOYD B. HUBBS, CITY ENGINEER by: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAIMONGA STAFF REPORT a' f L c'I ° F ^� z �I > DATE; January 22, 1986 1977 TO: Planning Commission F'RUM: Barrye R. Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer BY: Barbara Krall, Assistant Civil Engineer SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 9180 LANDCO FINANCIAL CORPORATION A division of 6.47 acres of land into 3 parcels in the General Industrial!Rail served District, Subarea 2, Located south of Ninth Street and west of Heilman Avenue - APN 209-013-24 I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: iA. Action Requested: Approval of Parcel Map B. Purpose: To divide 6.47 acres into 3 parcels for future industrial development C. Location: 500 feet south of Ninth Street on the west side of fHellman Avenue k D. Parcel Size: Parcel 1 - 1.98 acres Parce7 2 1.90 acres Parcel 3 - 1.90 acres Total 5.78 net acres r` E. Existing Zoning: General Industrial/Rail Served F. Existino. Land Use: Vacant G. Su!-rounding Land Use: North - Existing Industrial ' South Vacant East - Existing Industrial West - Vacant H. Surrounding General Plan and Development Code Designations': North-- General Industrial/Rail Served - Subarea 2 South General Industrial/Rail Served Subarea 2 East - General Industrial Subarea 3 West - Gener%A Industria;AmIk ; Served Subarea 2 ITEM M ' PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Environmental Assessment and Parcel Map 9180 January 22, 1986 Page 2 I. Site Characteristics: The site is vacant and slopes in a southerly direction. II. ANALYSIS: This parcel map divides 6.47 acres into 3 parcels for future industrial development. Lion Street is to be constructed upon recordation of the parcel map. Missing off-site improvements on Hellman Avenue will be completed when Parcel develops. Utility Undergrounding No overhead utilities' exist fronting this project, however, lines do exist on the opposing site of Hellman Avenue. It is recommended that the applicant be required to pay an in-lieu fee equivalent to one-half of the established cost of undergrounding 229 feet of frontage and that all services to the site be provided underground. IIi. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: Also attached for your review and consideration ift is Part I of the Initial Study as completed by the applicant. Staff has completed Part II of the initial Study, the environmental checklist, and has conducted a field investigation. Upon completion and review of the Initial Study and field investigation, Staff found no adverse impacts on the environment as a result of the proposed subdivision. IV. CORRESPONDENCE: Notices of Public Hearing have been sent to surrounding property owners and placed in the Daily Report Newspaper. Posting at the site has also been completed. V. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission consider all input and elements of Tentative Parcel Map 9180. If after such consideration, the Commission can recommend approval, then,the adoption of the attached Resolution and issuance of a Negative Declaration would be appropriate. ►a!,pectfully submitted, ,6JW14 j! a BRH:BK:de l(C Attachments: Vicinity Map Tentative Map Resolution Recommended Conditions of Approval Initial Study AR A Wit ,Jtt f^ry wgp„p.(� u 10 ® R9th. subarea 1 =subarea 3 .,xr. Site O Feron, AT O a CITY O PROJECT: PARCEL MAP 9180 RANCHO CUCAMONGA T ITL.E: VICINITY MAP ENGINEERING DIVISION �''"3 EXHIBIT; r A MARCH 4965 TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP P NO 9180 'WRIT I Or r SNefrs IN THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA •s)OCIATtm TNCIM994s 316 EAST E• 5'. f' A ^IVISICM OF A PORTION IM TMYF LOT T OF A PLAT OF A 2YBOAnSIOp OF QTTAtq•C'ALLV& 91764 P OE 144.CUOCA MAPS.RECORDS EIAPO OF SaERNAROINO Mt OYNT{�.LALIFORNI�O• (7141966-361J • • CASEMTJOS AFFCCT,—TN13 PA4ctLTNAT ARE Nor noTTeDE BENCH MARK-+_ L TO CUCAN%01 vINCA40 CO.Fer RPCCl4lS AD -TA 2.TO CS I H CURT!•ITN 6T. TO 4A4•FApC [YCOS,5.6D GO tEC 't CST OF£C.L L N 4VG, COUNTY OF SDD F:R Drwluwcl.0 FLON/49 ELEv,1120.44r Pie p1u•vspc pu o a of 56o to O VNEFZ S TO V JM INC rOa DRA14wp!PYRFOSlS L M1OCO FIWNG1114 CO4P0R4TI0N PER ♦642.PA06 BT O 4 OF SOP Cp 4 Pu .TOSEPN N GUNNINb CT wL.FOR DDR.NA0C ASw OGNA,CACL IM1110 C.,5UITC 101 PIJRMStf FG[ {6{2 F pC IOI O C F S bD<O IS, 449-5422 UTILITIES eLZGTR�e-�50,cA EDISON CO.' GTIA)qA7-6t" FNONG 0.1 M011 SL..LE I�+100• OENF[pL TlLCPNONC � ;. Q [M.9IW tTK1:904-))ID 7 j SEwE4/WATCR—N«NONOMTY tT»1 157-2A99GOp "TEC01 ' • y EXISTING ZONING - ' VICINN ITY MAP i.S.P. N V CORNER LOT T.. N T-b. ' FO ON R R lFIKf - S[T IH FLKC OP ObAPIAL 'ATt5-Fie[]i� w 11p0 a I+/b zo/w !e m rPR NnfN - IINE Of T I+OSYC[O EAtTt TI-`OO' 9TN SOMA1•LSE I)!A 22' - .__._ 1 `_ IAS)o• IN eoi ?r STI _ • ___rE%ISTING NI 5(•--- •--T*r� ?'--cRcoC _ •;���LLL EXISTING P G uxNtNT w • v GENERAL 'GENERAL KI li an:RNies .. $ INDUSTRIAL 1 1; EXISTING i J. - I! `.I:. i II' 1 GENERAL a a :INDUSTRIAL I ��+ L'e I INDUSTRIAL I I- •w. V'lC0.uT ,. . S. 'R � I I. I M •I M 0 2•IP �� MOTiY pLP 4} � I . rll' � nI STN 1 )IF 1 At N ETD LO jTMRLY I,' /R[YNVfLf M:T I.�fNCt1iT M _ __ 1 _ m fi1r--+,{-- r, __ -- Ia•E�cncRr ms RR Ay _I G .Y—�nq..f-T—w�• d , l��i 1�� _Ee sRu/Euonxs rI.W t / PARCEL%s i "• :�PAd, i It.,w s wsn•T •/ Arun-•Err•;_..ug�.i. ar A N�z-�' PARCEL 3 a 44• L7 CORNER LOT ` ,. @ J ! apt lei•\ •.-�r� 0 «tS NE�.1,0 I /�•vrY� -I��.{.t�•-��71"��Salc�e 1 / Ey uIT['•�ff UKC14rM Hu=crR sr,alEy y7ry a!)Y� ?``��QE• CfO• •.•!- 1L.E!'� C 1ST`10•St:v[i SJ I" LNE LOT7 SE CORNER 1OT7� '•I3 •Ef >M. �W FO N41L ON INE r YV^V iL•_ ..FOR SOUTN UNC ��� I. Z 6Aw_. kSh� L_7 ft.YCED` I U F ; e N Fa rOO.SP nM.— . E lar,ou•io. ee)•c ��'V A'C ANT w t : x S FO PIP,I TAApU/" 1aj sa: .NN PER RIS 3R/(-0 n. IP ITO Q [fI6LRt-TA0 .. R)')1 R'/R.. / �UNR[R`0.Lt• 1 1}R tE• SOUTH UNC SECT. 10 NO REMAIN u0 TICS - Pti NwIL N cTR. R6•ESTAAE S Po-_ OF R R TRICKS FW bW CORM[%.46LTCN FOR m•A CORNCR�< IS F[DM A66Oe Hr101{b.. 6CLT10N q FtR'W OtOtyyGY OM PM,45Ii.. ►np.Gi/G.7 c.6.P R.461/mm f ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW APPLICATION INITIAL STUI)Y PART I 1977 GENERAL For all projects requiring environmental review, this form must be completed and submitted to the Development Review Committee through the department where the project application is made. Upon receipt of this application; the Planning Division staff will prepare Part 11 of the Initial Study and make recommendations to Planning Commission. The Planning Commission will make one of three determinations: (1) The project will have no significant environmental impact and a Negative Declaration will be filed, (2) The project will have a significant environmental impact and an Environmental Impact Report will be prepared, or (3) An additional information report should be by the applicant giving further information concerning the proposed project. Date Filed: Project Title: B.M. #. 918o AML Applicant's Name, Address, Telephone: Landco Corporation 150 So. El Molino Ave, Suite 101 Pasadena CA 91101 Name, Address, Telephone of Person To,Be Contacted Concerning this Project: a Mr. Donald Hornbeck Location of Project: West Side of Hellman Ave, 500+ So. of 9th St., Rancho, Cucamonga Assessor's Parcel No.: 209-013-24 List other permits necessary from local, regional, state and federal agencies and the agency issuing such permits`: , c PROJECT DESCRIPTION Proposed use or proposed project: This 2roject is to divide existinS parcel into 3 arcels Acreage of project area and square footage of existing and proposed buildings, if any;_pr z�c site is 6.47 acres in area. There are no existing huildinZsand non r000sed Describe the envi otraental Sett`ing of the project. site including information on topography, sc,, l stability, plants (trees), land animals, any cultural, historical or sceric aspects, land use of surrounding properties, and the description of arty »xisting structures and their use (attach necessary sheets): Site is vacant except for native grass cover at present time An existin draina a swale crosses Property in a north-south direction. S_orrounding Parcels are licht industrial. There are no historical or cultural aspects involved. Is the project part of a larger project, one of a series of cumulative. -tions, which although individually small, may as a whole have significant ,ironmental impact NO Al 1f r_2 FILL THIS PROJECT: YES NO 1. Create a substantial change in ground contours? x 2. Create a substantial change in existing noise of produce vibration or glare? x 3. Create a substantial change in demand for municipal services (police, fire., water, sewage, etc.)? x 4. Create changes in the existing Zoning or General Plan designations? x 5. Remove any existing trees? How many? _X_ 6. Create the need for use or disposal of potentially hazardous materials such as toxic substances, flammables or explosives? x Explanation of any YES answers above (attach additioe..l sheets if necessary): 7. Estimate the amount of sewage and solid waste materials this project will generate daily:_ NnnP B. Estimate the number of auto and truck trips generated daily by this project: NnnP 9. Estimate the amount of grading (cutting and filling) required for this project, in cubic yards: None 10. If the project involves the construction of residential units, complete the form on the next page. CERTIFICATION: I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and information required for this initial evaluation to the best of my ability, and that the facts, statements, and information presented are 'true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. I further understand that additional information may be required to be submitted before an adequate evaluation can be made by the Planning ' Division. Q k Date: � (�{ � Signature: 9 Title t2 I-3 RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION The following information should be provided to the Cit' of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Division in order to aid the school district in assessinq their ability to accommodate the proposed residential development. Developers are requirec' to secure letters from the school district for accommodating the increasud number of students prior to issuance of building periaits. f Name of Developer and Tentative Tract No.: II Specific Location of Project: PHASE I PHASE 2 PHASE 3 PHASE 4 TOTAL 1. Number of single family units: 2. Number of multiple -family units• 3. Date proposed to begin construction: 4. Earliest date of occupancy: Modelr and r of Tentative 5. Bedrooms Price Ranee I-4 RESOLUTION No. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PARCEL MAP NUMBER 9180 (TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 9180) LOCATED SOUTH OF NINTH STREET, ON THE WEST SIDE OF HELLMAN AVENUE (APN 209-013-24) WHEREAS, Tentative Parcel Map Number 918U, submitted by Landco Financial Corporation and consisting of 3 parcels, located 500 feet south of Ninth Street on the west side of Hellman Avenue, being a division of a portion of Lot 7 of a plat of a subdivision of Lot 10, Cucamonga Vineyard Tract, as per map recorded in Book 20, page 44 of maps, San Bernardina County, California; and WHEREAS, on May 8, 1985, a formal application was submitted requesting review of the above-described Tentative Map; and WHEREAS, on January 22, 19eii, the Planning Commission held a duly adysrtised public hearing for the abov -described map. FOLLOWS: NOW, THEREFORE, THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING C01,24ISSION RESOLVED AS ' SECTION 1: That the fallo„fling findings have been made, 1. That the map is consistent with the General Plan. 2. That the improvernent of the proposed subdivision is consist � i►ith the General Plan. 3. That the site is physically suitable for the proposed development, 4. That the proposed subdivision and improvements will not eduse substantial environmental damage, public ` health problems or have adverse affects on abutting property. SECTION 2: That this project will not create significant adverse environmental impacts and a Negative Declaration is issued on January 22, 1986. SECTION 3: That Tentative Parcel Map No. 9180 is approved subjc'_`'_., the recommended Conditions of Approval pertaining thereto, i r APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 22ND DAY OF JANUARY, 1986. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Dennis L. Stout, Chairman ATTEST, Brad Buller, Deputy Secretary I, Brad Buller, Deputy Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolgtion was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adcpted by the Planning ommission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 22nd day of January, 1986, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS. NC'S: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: CIT'; OF RANCHG CUCAMONGA AOL RECCMMENDFD CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL i LOCATION: 500 feet south of Ninth Street T.NTATTYE ;,IRCEL MAP NO: 9180 west side of Hellman Avenue CATE FILED: May 8, 1985 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: A portion of Lot 7 of a NUMBER OF LOTS: 3 subdivision of Lot 10, Cucamonga-Vineyard GROSS ACREAGE: 6.47 Tract, as per map recorded in Hook 20, page ASSESSOR PARCEL NO: 209-013-24 44 of maps. San Bernardino County, California DEVELOPER OWNER ENGINEER/SURVEYOR Landco Financial Corp. Same -Associated Enaineer 150_S. El Molino, Ste.101 316 East "'E"_Street Pasadena, 'CA 91101 Ontario, CA 91761 Improvement and dedication regLlrements in accordance with Title 16 of the Municipal Code of the City of Rancho Cucamonga include, but may not be limited to, the following: A. Dedications and Vehicular Access 1. Dedications shall be made of all interior street rights-of-way and all necessary easements as shown on the tentative map. R 2. Dedication shall be made of the tollowing rights-of-way on the following streets: 60 feet on. Lien Street additional feet on additional feet on .. 3. Corner property line radius will be required per City Standards. 4. All rights of vehicular 'agress and egress shall be dedicated as follows*ollo s: 5. Reciprocal access easements and maintenance agreements ensuring access to all parcels and joint maintenance of all common .roads, drives or parking areas shall be provided •by C.C.&R.s and shall be recorded concurrent with the map. r , -1- i X 6. All existing easements lying within f requirements. uture right-of-way are to be quitclaimed or delineated on the map per City Engineer's 7 Easements for sidewalk for public use shall be dedicated to the City where sidewalks meander through private property. 8. Street Improvements Pursuant to the City of Ranch Cucamonga Municipal Code, Title 16, Section 16.36.120, the subdivider may enter into an agreement and post security with the City guaranteeing the required construction prior to recordation of the map and/or building permit issuance. 1. Construct full street improvements including, but not limited to, curb and gutter, A.C. pavement, side- alk, drive approaches, parkway trees and street lights on all interior streets. 2'. A minimum of 26-root wide pavement within a 40-foot wide dedicated right--of-way shall be constructed for all hall- section streets. X 3. Construct the F01 115wing missing improvements: Prior to recordation for Lion Street Prior to building permit issuance for Hellman Avenue. Curb & A.C. Side- Grive Street Street A.C. Median Street Name Gutter Pvmt. Walk Appr. Trees Lights Overlay Island* Other Hellman Avenue X X Lion Street X X X X X X *Includes landscaping and irrigation on meter i X 4. Prijsr to any work being performed in the public right-of-way, `,:es shall be paid and an encroachment permit shall be obtained from the City Engineer's Office, in addition to any other permits required. X 5, Street improvement plans shall be prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer and approved by the City Engineer prior to 1 issuance of an encroachment permit. •6. Developer shall coordinate, and where necessary, pay for the relocation of any power poles or other existing public utilities as necessary. 7. Existing lines of 12KY or less fronting the property shall be undergrounded. r, X 8. Install appropriate street name signs, traffic control signs, striping and markings with locatijns and types approved by the ,City Engineer. _2_ Alk X 9. Street light.locations, as required, are to be approved by the Southern California Edison Company and the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Lights shall be on decorative poles with underground service. X 10. Landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Division prior to the issuance of building permit. X 11. Concentrated drainage flows shall ,not cress sidewalks. Undersidewalk drains shall be installed to City Standards. C. Surety X 1. Surety shall he posted and an agreement executed tc the satisfaction of the City Engineer and City Attorney, guaranteeing completion of the public improvements prior to recording for Lions Street and prior to building permit issuance for Hellman Av iue. 2. A lien agreement ;,,. ue executed prior to recording of the map for the following: I. 3. Surety shall be posted and an agreement executed, guaranteeing completion of all on-site drainage facilites necessary for dewatering all parcels o the satisfaction of the Building and Safety Divison prior to recording ;`or and/or prior to issuance of building permit ror D. Drainage and Flood Control 1. Private drainage easements for cross-lot drainage shall be required and shall be delineated or noticed on the final map. XX 2. Adequate, provisions shall be made for acceptance and disposal' of surface drainage entering the property from adjacent areas, 3. The followir storm drain shall be installed to the satisfaction or the City Engineer 4. Prior to recordation of the map, a hydrologic and drainage study for the project shall be submitted to the City Engineer for review. 5. A drainage detention basin per City Standards shall be constructed to detain increased runoff -3- E. Grading X 1. Grading:of the subject property shall be in accordance with the Jniform Building Code, City Grading Standards and accepted grading practices. The final grading plan shall 5e in substantial conformance with th e ap proved plan. AA ved conceptual grading X 2. A soils report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer licensed_ by the State of California to perform such work prior to.issuance of building permit. 3. A geological report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and submitted at the time of application or grading plan check. 4. The final grading plan shall be subject to review and approval by the Grading Committee and shall be completed prior to recordation of the final subdivision map or issuance of building permit whichever comes first. X 5. Final grading plans for each parcel are to be submitted to the Building and Safety Division for approval prior to issuance of building permit. General Requirements and Approvals X i. Permits from other agencies will be required as follows:. CalTrans for San Bernardino County Flood Control District X Cucamonga County Water District for.sewer and water X San Bernardino County Dust Abatement (required prior t, Issuance of a grading permit) Other 2. A copy of the Covenants, Conditions aiad RPstrictions .(C.C,&A.$) approved by the City Attorney is required prior to recordation of the nap. X 3. Provide all utility services to each lot including sewerage, water, electric poker, gas and telephone prior to street constructon. X ,4. Sanitary sewer and water systems shall be designed to Cucamonga County Water 'District standards. A letter of acceptance is required. 5. This subdivision shall be subject to conditions of approval from CalTrans/San Bernardino bounty F1-3d Control District. X 6. Approvals have not been secured from all utilities and other interested agencies involved. Approval of the final map will be subject to any requirements that may be received from them._ -4- X 7. The filing of the tentative map or approval of same does not guarantee that sewer treatment capacity will be available at the time building permits are requested. . When building permits are requested, the Cucamonga County Water District will be asked to zertify the availability of capacity. Permits will not be. issued unless said certification is received in writing. 8. Local and Master Planned Trails shall be provider] in accordance r with the Trail Flan. A detailed trail plan indicating widths, maximum slopes, physical conditions, fencing and weed control, in ac�:ordance with City trail standards, shall be submitted to and approved by the City Planner prior to recordation for and/•or prior to building permit issuance for y 9. Prior to recording, a, deposit shall be posted with the City covering the estimated cost of apportioning the assessments under Assessment District 82•-1`among the newly created parcels.. X 10. At the time of finj map submittal, the following sha`, be submitted: Title Report, traverse calculations (sheets), copies of recorded maps and deeds used as reference and/or showing original land division, tie notes and bench marks referenced. X IL Notice of intent to join the proposed Median Island Landscape District shall be filed with the City Council prior co recordation of the Finai Map. G. Special Conditions X 1. An offer of dedication to the City for a 65 foot wide drainage easement in line with the existing easement on the property to the north shall be provided over Parcel 2. The easement could be reduced in width upon the installation of a drainage facility within the easement as approved by the City Engineer. X 2. Hellman Avenue is subject to flooding, therefore, flood protection measures will be required for development of Parcel 3. A flood report substantiating those measures will be required and shall be approved bythe City Engineer.. X 3. A minimum 15 foot wide drainage easement along the south boundary of Parcel 2 for drainage from Lion Street shall be provided. X 4. An emergency all weather access from Parcel 3 to lion Street over Parcel 2 shall be provided d upon development of either Parcels 2 or 3. A minimum 20 foot wide easement for this t purpose shall be shown on the final map. t j -5- X 5. Lion Street shall be constructed prior to occupancy of any, buildings on any of the parcels, 'X 6. The applicant shall pay prior to recordation of the final map a fee in—lieu of undergroundi:ng the overhead utilities along Hellman Avenue. Said. fee shall be one-half of the front foot cost of undergrov:+ding for the project frontage on Hellman Avenue: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAmoNGA LLOYD B. HUBBS, CITY ENGINEER by. l 1 j -6— CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA G�CA,yo STAFF REPORT F}- Q Z U �3 > DATE: January 22, 198E 1977 TO: Chairman ,and Vembers of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Lisa Wininger, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 86-01A HAWKINS - A request to amend the Land Use Map of the General P an from Low Density Residential (2-4 du/ac) to ' Low Medium Density Residential (4-8 du/ac) for 13.55 acres of land located on the south side of Feron Boulevard, east of Archibald - APN 209-055-02, 03, 14. I. ABSTRACT: A General Plan Amendment is requested from Low Density Residential to Low Medium Density Residential for a 13.55 acre site located in the North Town neighborhood of Rancho Cucamonga (see Exhibit "A"). The applicant previously requested General Plan Amendments to Medium-High Density Residential and to Medium Density Residential, which were denied by the Planning Commission and City Council after review of the Environmental Impact Report and discussion regarding land use compatibility issues. At this meeting, the Commission will receive public input and consider the General Plan Amendment to Low Medium Density Residential (4-8 du/ac). II. BACKGROUND: The project applicant, John Hawkins, has requested a General Plan Amendment from Low Density Residential (2-4 du/ac) to Low Medium Density Residential (4-8 du/ac). In 1984, the applicant submitted a request for General Plan. Amendment 84-03A from Low to Medium High Density Residential. After preparation of an EIR as required by the Commission, it was determined that the approval of the application would create significant environmental impacts which could not be mitigated. In addition, significant land use compatibility problems were noted. The Amendment was den sd by the Commission, appealed to the Council, and in June 1985, denied by the Council In September, 1985, the applicant submitted an application for General Plan Pp Amendment 85-04D for a change to Medium Density Residential. The application was denied by the City Council in December 1985 on the grounds that the land use change was inconsistent with the policies of the General Plan t relating' to the land use compatibility and transition , of' density. The -applicant has now resubmitted at a lower denisty range. 'r ITEM N PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT General Plan Amendment 85-OIA January 22, 1986 P?ge 2 III. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action Requested: Environmental Assesment per the attached Initial Study and consideration of the General Plan Amendment. B. Location: South side of Feron Boulevard, between Archibald and urn ner. C. Parcel Size: 13.55 acres.- D. Existing Zoning: Low Density Residential. E. Existing Land Use: Vacant. F. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North - Rancho Cucamonga Middle School, designated Low Density Residential (2-4`du/ac). South - AT & SF Railroad right of way and winery, designated Industrial Specific Plan. East - Single family homes, designated Low Density Residential (2-4 du/ac). wo West - Single family homes, designated Low Density Residential ,(2-4 du/aci. G. General Plan Designations: North - Low Density Residential. South - General Industrial (Industrial Specific Plan). East - Low Density Residentialc Best Low Density Residential. N. Site Characteristics: The site lies at the terminus of a drainage channel with a small drainage course traversing the center of the site in'a north-south direction. A large portion of the site lies within the 100 year flood plain and is subject to periodic flooding. Vegetation consists of a row of Eucalyptus trees along Feron,_ scattered trees, shrubs and grasses. Feron Blvd, provides direct access to the site, with Main Street dead-ending into the site on the east and west property boundaries. IV. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The final EIR for General Plan ' Amen meat 8 -0 A discusses potential environmental impacts for h four alternative land uses for the site; Low, Low Medium, `Medium and Mixed Use. The discussion of Low Medium Density stated that this alternative represented no significant impacts. Based on the , k N� PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT General Plan Amendment 86-01A January 22, 1986 Page 3 conclusion of the attached Initial St-I!, and the EIR, staff recommends issuance of a Negative Declaration for General Plan Amendment 86-01A. V. GENERAL PLAN_AMENDMENT ANALYSIS: The major issues to be considered regarding this application are land use compatibility of the proposed density with existing development and consistency with the goals and policies of the General Plan. In thi Low Medium Density range of 4-8 du/ac, development could theory :ically occur with housing types in a single- family, zero lot line, duplex, or low rise townhouse-type pattern. Since the surrounding area is developed with older, 'single family detached homes with densities up to 'approximately 6 units per acre, development in this range could be compatible with existing development. Development at the higher end of the 4-8 unit range could create some incompatibility with surrounding development. However, this concern can be addressed through appropriate design and site planning at the project level to assure compatibility and proper transition. The General Plan states that Low Medium Density is "characterized by residential densities somewhat greater than the Low Density Residential group." It states that Low Medium D•,,Aty would be appropriate within low density areas to encourage greater_housing diversity without- changing the single family character of the surrounding residential neighborhood, Therefore, it appears that development of the site at a Low Medium Density is not inconsistent with the goals of the General Plan, provided that the single family nature of the area is preserved by use of a compatible project type. VI. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: Should the Commission, upon examination of thn General PTan Amendment, determine that the change from Low Density Residential to. Medium Density Residential would promote the land use goals of the General Plan, and that this Amendment would not be materially injurious to the adjacent properties, the fol— owing findings are necessary on approval A. The Amendment does not conflict with the Land Use Policies of the General' Plan, and; B. The Amendment promotes goals of the Land Use Element, and; C. The Amendment would not be materially injurious to the adjacent properties. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT General Plan Amendment 86-OIA January 22, 1986 Page 4 } VII. CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised as a public hearing in The Daily Report and notices were sent to all property owners within 3OD feet of the boundary of the proposed property, in addition to other interested area residents. ' A 4 foot by 8 foot supplemental.notification sigc has also been erected on-site. VIII. RECOMMENDATION:. Should the Commission determine that the required Facts for`Finifings can be met, adoo;ion of the attached Resolution of Approval and issuance of a Negative Declaration would be appropriate. Should the Commission determine that the Facts for Findings cannot be met, a Resolution of Denial is also attached. Respectfully submitted, Brad Buller City Planner BB:LW:ko Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Vicinity Map Initial Study Resolution of Approval Resolution of Denial I. L i c < MEDIUM s,� f (,2$GH0 L SITE ................. W. ........... m , '7 ••r -s-,T R,� F • i �.8. �..... F w ... .� R �R �MIMd r. j .• • /�.•..•,R•�-i-a•L GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATIONS IVORT'H CITY OF IIERI: C 969-0/A RANCHO CUCAM01%A ' TITLE: 06#7141 19W PLANNING DIVISION EXHIBIT: h SCALE- ys CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PART II - INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST DATE.— c3r-l7 APPLIC'\T: K �/� 0� k1 hie FILING DATE:/ Z. .— LOG NUMBER: PROJECT: PROJECT LOCATION:__ I. ENVIROMIENTAL IMPACTS (Explanation of all "yes" and "maybe" answers ar. requi.ed on attached sheets). YES MAYBE NO 1. Soils and Geoloev. 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? y 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 conditorts? 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? J' Alk 2. HYdrolo_ . Will the proposal have significant results in: Page 2 YES ;L4YBE SO Aghk 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? t/ e. Discharge into surface waters, or any alteration of surface water quality? f. Alteration of groundwater characteristics? �L g. Change in the quantity of groundwaters, either through direct additions or with- drawals, or through interference with an aq"ifer? Quality? . Quantity? h. The reduction in the amount: of water other- visa available for public water sup,iies? i. Exposure of people or property to Water related hazards such as flooding or se$ches? 3. Air quality. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Constant or periodic air emissions from mobile or indirect sources? Stationary sources? --ri b. Deterioration of ambient air quality and/or interference with the attai nment nt of applicable cab l PP e air quality standards? c. Alteration of local or regional climatic conditions, affecting air movement, moisture or temperature? 4. Biota Flora. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Change in the characteristics of species, Including diversity, distribution, or number of any species of plants? e • Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of plants? N�� _ jZ C. Introduction of new or disruptive species of YES \talrsE \0 Plants into an area? d. ReO•=ion 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, rar2 or endangered, species of animals? C. Introduction of new or disruptive species of ar_imals into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement ofanimals? J d. Deterioration or removal of existing fish or wildlife habitat? 5. Ponulawion. 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 eisting housing, or create a demand fur additional housing? 6. Socio-Economic Factors. Will the proposal have sigi iJ icanr iesults 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 Planninti Considerations. Will the proposal have significant results in? a. A substantial alteration of the present ex 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 oulaity cr quantity of existing consumptive or non-consumptive lsecreational opportunities?4s� �- Page 4 —YES aUYBE NO 8. Transportation. Will the proposal resul have significant ts inr a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? b. Effects on existing streets, or demand for new street construction? ✓ C. Effects on existing park ng facilities, or demand for new parking? d. Substantial impact upon existing transporta- tion systems? e. Altevations to present patterns of circula- ✓ tisn or movement of g, nple and/or goodF' f. Alterations to or a 'ects on present and potential water-borne, rail, mass transit or air traffic? g. Increases in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? f 9. Cultural P?sout-*_ Will the proposal have significant rest+, in: a. A disturbance to the integrity of archaeological, paleontological, and/or historical resources? f 10. Health, Safety and Nuisance Factors. Will the proposal have significant results in': a. Creation of any health hazard or rotential health hazard? b. Exposure of people to potential health hazards? c. A risk of L-splosion or release of hazardous substances in the event of au accident? s d. An increase in the number of individuals or species of vector or pathenogenc organisms or the exposure of I to such organisms? people � J 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? x Pase 5 YES `Cal__3c. No ll. Aesthetics. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. The obstruction or degradation of any scenic vista or v;ew? b. The creation of ax aesthetically offensive site? c. A conflict with the objective of designated or potential scenic corridors? / 12. Utilities and Public Services. Will the ✓ have a significant need fr,r new systems, proposal r posal alterations to the follovinr.: a. Electric power? b. Natural or packaged gas? c. Communications systems? d. Water supply? _X- e, Wastewater facilities? ✓ f. Flood control structures? S. Solid waste facilities? f h. Fire protection? i. Police protection? j. Schools? k. Patks or other recreational facilities? I. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads and flood control facilities? M. Other governmental services? 13. Eretev and Scarce Resources. Will the proposal lave significant results a. Use of substantial or =xcessive fuel or energy? b. Substaz;tial increase in demand up4,t existing sources of energy? C. An increase in the demand for development of Adk new sources of energy? -✓ d. An increase or perpetuatirZ o the consumption of 7-on-renewable forms of energy, when feasible reizewable sources of energy are available? l N 10 Page 6 YES :UYBE NO Q. Substantial depletion of any nonrenewable or scarce natural resource? .. 14. Mandatory dindin2s of Sieni.ficance. a. Does the projecthave 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 rastrict the range of a rare or endangered plait 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 1;ang- term impacts will endure well into the future). _ c. Does the project Crave impacts which are individually limited, but cumul.Lively considerable? (Cumulatively considerable means that the incremental effects of an individual project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, and probable future projects), «_ d. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? _ II• DISCUSSION OF ?TTAF. EGALUATION f ..e., of affirmative answers to the above questions plus a discussion of proposed mitigation measures). 7b. The- Pni0VUY- pra j e rb repiiezenes a- /a7d a i4 chae a/Jotvinc� 111VICe many arattl6r/y uhl��s aS �5 ;wuliasly pellmlt`ed. hA 51yni fieax.f ,�na' !,�5.� ��ac�s Gvhr�l. �Ar��et .he �ifiydt� N-�1 Page 7 III. DETERMINATIOV On the basis of tnis initial evaluation; EDL,find the'propove1 project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environL.ent, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that A-though the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this cas_ because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A NECATIVE DECLARATION HILL BE PREPARED.- , I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the envirnment, and an ENVIRO`ME'7T VIPACT REPORT is required. Date Signature Title- RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, "CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 86-01A, AMENDING THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (C-4 DU/AC) TO LOW MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (4-8 'DU/AC) FOR 13.5 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED SOUTH OF FERON BOLLEVARD AND EAST OF ARCHIBALD AVENUE. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has held a duly advertised public hearing to consider all comments on the proposed General Plan Amendment No. 86-01A. SECTION 1 The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission hereby makes. the following findings: A. The Amendment "does nut conflict with the Land Use Policies of the General Plan. B. The Amendment'promo*es goals of the Land Use Element. C. The Amendment would not be materially injurious or detrimentai to the adjacent properties. follows: 31:4`710N 2: The General Plan Land Use Map shall be amended as Assessor's Parcel Number.209-U55-02, 03 and 14 shall be changed from :.ow Density Residential (2-4 du/ac) to Low Medium Density Residential (4-8 du/ac). i SECTION 3: A Negative Declaration is hereby recommended for adoption by t—Tie City Council for this General Plan Amendment, based upon the completion and findings of the Initial Study. NOW THEREFORE, BE IY 4ESOLVED, that the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Ccalmission does hereby recommend approval of General Flan Amendme-.. Ao. 86-01A to the City Council. Allk 1 1 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION Page #2 APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS-22ND DAY OF JANUARY, 1986. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY 1)F RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Dennis L. Stout, Chairman ATTEST: Brad Buller, Deputy Secretary I, Brad Buller, Deputy Secretary of the Planning .Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and. adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 22nd day of January, 1986, by the following vote-to-tit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: wi, RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF TFE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING DENIAL OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 86-01A, REQUESTING AN AMENDMENT TO THE LAND USE ELEMENT OFTHE RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN FROM,LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (2-4 BUM), TO LOW MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (4-8 DU/AC), FOR 13.R; ACRES OF LAND LOCATED SOUTH OF FERON BOULEVARD AND EAST OF ARCHIBALD AVENUE. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has held a duly advertised public hearing to consider all comments on the proposed General Plan Amendment No. 86-01A. SECTION 1: The Rancho Cucamonga Planr=ing Commission cannot make the following findings: A. The Amendment does not conflict with the Land Use Policies of the General Plan. B. The Amendment promotes goals of the Land- Use Elcnent. 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 of General Plan Amendment No. 86-01A. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 22ND DAY OF JANUARY, 1986. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY::Dennis L. Stout, Chairman ATTCST: Brad Buller, Deputy ecraory Am N-RS' PLANNING COMMISSION`'RESOLUTION Page 2 Aft I, Brad Buller, Deputy Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 22nd day of January, 1986, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS; ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: j r CITY OF RANCT�O CUCAMONGA CVCAA�o STAFF REPORTno� Cil IZ U > DATE: January 22, 1986 19777 TO: Planning Co= ssion FROM: Barrye R. Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer BY: Barbara Krall, Assistant Civil Engineer SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 9687'- TURNER JOt;ES - A division of 9.23 acre3 into 3 parcels in the General Industrial Area, Subarea 14, located at the northeast corner of Santa. Anita Avenue and 4th Street - APN 229-283-41 & 42 I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPHON: A. Action Requested: Approval of Parcel Map B. Purpose: To divide 9.23 acres into 3 parcels for the development of Industrial buildings on tonight's agenda as Development Review 85-46. C. Location: Northaast corner cf Santa Anita and 4th Street. D. Parcel Size: Parcel 1 - 1.30 acres Parcel 2 - 0.95 acres Parcel 3 6.98 acres E. Existing Zoning: General Industrial F. Existing Land Use: Vacant a G. Surrounding Land Use: North - Vacant South - Vacant City of Ontario East - Vacant .f West Vacant H. Surrounding Gene-al Plan and Development Code Desi nations: North - General Industrial-- Industrial Specific Plan, Subarea 14 South - General Industrial Industrial Specific.Plan,•Subarea 14 East - General Industrial - Industrial Specific Plan, Subarea 14 West - General Industrial - Industrial Specific P1an,.Subarea 14 I. Site Characteristics; The site is vacant and contains abandoned grape vines. ITEM 0 V.-ANNINO COMMISSION STAFF REPORT E.--:eonmental Assessment and Parcel Map 9687 January 22, 1986 Page 2 II. ANALYSTS: The applicant is requesting a division of 9.25 acres of hand into parcel:, for the development of a warehouse distribution building and two light Industrial buildings also on tonight's agenda for approval as D. R. 85.46. Missing off-site improvements will be constructed with the development of Industrial buildtings. OVERHEAD UTILITIES Overhead utilities exist along Santa Anita Avenue frontage and the 4th Street frontage of the project. On the Santa Anita frontage, no services are connected to the overhead utilities and frontage is felt sufficient to underground. The property on the north and property opposing the project on Santa Anita are undeveloped. A reimbursement agreement for one-half the cost of the undergrounding proportionate to the frontage may be requested by the developer. On 4th Street the existing overhead utility poles contain 66 KV with 12`- KV lines on the lower portion of the poles. The frontage is-felt sufficient o underground the 12 KV lines. All III. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: Also attached for your review and consideration Ts- Part I of t e Im ial Study as completed by the applicant. Staff has completed Part II of the Initial Study, the environmental checklist, and has conducted a field investigation. Upon completion and review of the Initial Study and field investigation, Staff found no adverse impacts on the environment as a result of the proposed subdivision. IV. CORRESPONDENCE: Notices of Public Hef•ring have been sent to surrounding property owners and placed in the Daily Report Newspaper. Posting at the site has also been completed. V. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the PlL. ing Commission consider all input 'a elements of Tentative Parcel Map 9687. If after such consideration, the Commission can recommend approval, then the adoption of the attached Resolution and issuance of a Negative Declaration would be appropriate. Respectfully submitted, BRH:BK:de Attachments: Vicinity Map Tentative Map I Resolution IF Recommended Conditions of Approval Initial Study i �i ARROW 'yam.•.�,µ � TMN is if ibFaa 4.-;r. Y °1 scLari.Ya:; � + G y } * wbarea 1S 3 it t } sit .yi GAF. �t= .•.• q ���w'�+w er'�eq'ra'rm�b'ir� eoeoeoe000w0000 oeos . V V CITY OF PROJECT: PARCEL MAP 9687 'RANCHO CUCAMONGA TITLE: �NGINEE f�1UG DIVISIONp_3 EXHIBIT.. EXHIBIT; r, A rr OOE SHEET ONLr PARCEL MAN' NO. 9687 IN THE CITY OP Rx"i11CmrA .BEING A SOBOIEISION OF PARCELS 9 W 10 OF PARCEL PAP to.4749 AS RECORDED IN BOON Al.PAGES 23 CA 29,..RECORDS OF SAN BERNAROINI COWRY.STATE OF 011FORHIA.. Y. D(UNIER A,111! llElllA 4 ASSOCIATES I-GINE!•[S t j ij 3 ®KITTY I[dP UAL[ ,kp, VACANT R,a�41.nr PARCEL I i.1D AeTt VACANT I. VACANT AQI[ ALL.uQIS•11F1kA Am'SApO!p PARCEL. 3' 1�II i ,11i16 Z 40 GEMAL. 1' 111 1 PARCEL 2 - KWAOUG M l•1T yxxlp-s[oacm IwAZ[c Orion i L o.E.v E.c- I.A.mum Sas[ W ' si uLlrouu m�1 ia[r n.�Io.A c.[. ��arrula Axrx Ero m m¢i tc•- li a� 'b• a ,. REIIATIQ AON.AU 1.bA' v' III ��-yam`—•{-tr VACANT SANTA ALITA AVENUE 4TV. STAL[T 1p { ENVIROI,(i.ENTAL REVIEW w a -� APPLICATION --: o z 1977 ' INITIAL STUDY )P RT I GENERAL For all projects requiring environmental review, this form must be completed and submitted to the Development Review Committee through the department where the project application is made. Upon receipt Of this application, Planning Division staff will prepare Part r Initial Sdyan the P recommendations to Planning Commission. The Pl nningeCommissiontw Study makemone of three determinations: (1) The project will have no significant environmental impact and a Negative Declaration will be f;1ed, ( j The Project will have H ' Significant environmental impact and an Environmental Impact Report will be prepared, or (3) An additional information report should be supplied by the applicant giving further information concerning the proposed project. Date Filed: Nove mber l 3 1985 Project Title: Day Creek Industrial Park Applicant's Name, Address, Telephone: Martin Jones 1200 Quail St,:Suite 160, Newport Beach, C1 92660 �. (714 651-1967J955-9131 Name, Address, Telephone of Person To Be Contacted Concerning this Project: same as above Location of Project NEC 4th aii Santa Anita Assessor's Parcel No.: 229-283-41 nList other permits necessary from local, regional, stag and federal agencies ad the agency issuing such permits: none known - 1_1 PROOECT DESCRIPTION Proposed use or proposed project: two light manufacturing buildings totalling _41,100 square feet and one 150,000 square fcot distribution building to be developed in one phase on a speculative basis ifrany: ofnporaxistirct aigehuildi square propusega if,700sand a 23�00 square footings, light manufacturins building and a 150,000 se4uare foot distribution building on 9.23 net acres Describe the env,ronmental setting of the project site including information on topography, sold stability, p ants ,trees), land animals, any cultural, historical or scenic aspects, land us: of surrounding properties, and the description of any existing structures and their use (attach necessary sheets): This area is undeveloped, for the most part, except for Pic-N'-Save approximately 300 feet to the east and a sign company approximately 70C feet to thL north on Santa Anita. ( ;le properties on all sides are undeveloped.) The ' ' grap,s vines on the property have been abandoned and the soil is the typical sandy soil An the area. Alf curbs butters and street improvements are in and the soil is staole. Day Creek is approximately 800 feet to to west. The are; is designated for general indu trial use and this project falls within that designation. There are no apparent animal, •pla cultural or service threats by this project I i d Is the project part of a larger project, one of a series of cumulative actions, which although individually small, may as a whole have significant environmental impact this pru+ject stands b itself I-2 ti HILL THIS PROJECi' YES Pao-• 1. Create a substantial change in ground contours? X 2. Create a substantial change in ?xisting noise of produce vibration or glare? x 3. Create a substantial change in demand for municipal services (Police, fire, water, sewage, etc.)? X 4. Create changes in the existing Zoning or General Plan designations? X S. Remove any existing trees? How many?_ X 6. Create the neel for use or disposal of potentially hazardous mate.-:als such as Toxic substances, flammables or explosives? X Explanation of any YES answer- above (attach additional sheets if -necessary): 7. Estimate the amount of sewage and solid waste materials this project will gener,te daily: unknown but minimal is likely 8. Estimate the number of auto and true! trips generated daily by this project:_ 300 9. Estimate the amount of grading (cutting and filling) required for this project, in cubic yards: site will. balance 10. If the project involves the construction of'residen.Mal units, complete the farm on the next page. CERTIFICATION: I 'hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in he attached exhibits present the data and information required for this initial evaluation to the best oi' my ability, and that the facts, statements, and information presented are true arJ correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. I further understand that additional information may be required to be submitted before an adequate evalua,. �n can be mace by the Plannirig Division. Date: it(l3 -r Signatures ) �t� Title " I_3 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PARCEL MAP NUMBER 9687 (TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 9687) LOCATED AT' THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAITA ANITA AND 4TH STREET WHEREAS, Tentative Parcel Map Number 9687, submitted by Turner-Jones and coesisting of 3 parcels, located at the northeast corner of Santa Anita Avenue and 4th Street, being a d'vision of parcels 9 and 10 of Parcel Map 4749 as recorded in Book 47, pagers k8 and 29, records of San Bernardino County, State of California; and WHEREAS, on Oecember 4, 1985, a formal application was submitted. requesting review of the above-described Te>ntati_< Map; and WHEREAS, on January 22, 1986, the Planning Commission held a duly advertised public hearing for the above-described map. FO..LCWS: NON, THEREFORE, THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLVED AS i SECTION 1: Thai the following findings have been made.- f 1. That the map is consistent with the General Pla- 2. That the: improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with the General Plan. 3. That the site is physically suitable for the proposed development. 4. That the propose, sub(ivision end improvements will not cause substant;a', cl,vironmental ftmage, public ±,ealth problems or have advP-x affects on abutting property. SECTION '2: That t.•is project Brill not create significant adverse environmental impacts and a Negative Declaration is isst;ed on January'22, 1986. SECTION 3: That Tentative Parcel "tap No. 9687 is approved subject to the recommended Conditions of Approval pertainirg thereto. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 22NO DAY OF JANUARY, 1986, PLANNING-COMMISSION OF tNE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, BY Dennis L. Stout, viairman ATTEST: Brad Buller, Deputy Secretary 1, :Brad Buller, Deputy Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucaionga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resulutior was duly and { regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the°Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the 0 1aining Cc•mmission held on the 22nd day of January, 1986, by the following vote-to-wit: rn"MISSIONERS: NOES: CCa-NISSIONERS: i ABSEN':: COMMISSIONERS: J t CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS'OF APPROVAL LOCATIOM: northeast corner of Santa Anita TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO: 9687 _ Avenue and Fourth Street DATE FILED: December LEGAL DESCRIPTION: A subdivision of Parcels HUMBER OF LOTS: 3 9 and 10_of Parcel Map 4749 as recorded in GROSS ACREAGE: 9.23 _Book 47, pages 28 and 29 Records of ASSESSOR PARCEL NO:229-283-41 & 42 San Bernardino County DEVELOPER OWNER ENGINEER/SURVEYOR Turner-Jones Lansing & Associates Pfeiler & Associates 1200 Quail St., Suite 166 985 Alpine Drive 1749-B So. Eucild Avenue Newport Beach, CA 92660 Beverly Hills, CA 90210 Ontario, CA_ 91761 Improvement and dedicatior requirements in accordanc_ with Title 16 of the Municipal bode of the City of Rancho Cucamonga include, but may not be limited Aft ts=, the fo► owing. A. Dedications and Vehicular Access 1. Dedications shall be made of all interior street rights-of-hair and all necessary easements as shown on the tentative: map. r 2. Dedication shall be made of the following rights-of-way on the following streets- additional feat on additional feet on auditional feat on 3. Corner property line i-adi,:s will be 'required per City Standards. X 4. Al', rights of vehicular ingress and egress shall be dedicated as follows: on Fourth Street. _ X 5. Reciprocal access easements and maintenance agreements ensuring access. to all parcels and joint maintenance of all common roads, drives.or parking areas shall be provided -by C.C.&R. and shall be recorded concurrent with the map. -1- CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA RECOMM—ENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL LOCATION northeast corner of Santa Anita TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO: 9687 Avenue and Fourth Street DATE FILED December 4, 1985 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: A subdivision of Parcels NUMBER OF LOTS: 3 9 and 10 of Parcel Map 4749 as recorded in GROSS ACREAGE: 9.23 Book 47, pages 28 and 292 Records of ASSESSOR RNRCEL NO:229-283-41_& 42 Say} Bernardino County *t**�*max*mot**x****xar*�x�*max****�x�x��x***ter*��x�•kri t�sx*�x��;t*****��*ter**** DEVELOPER OWNER ENGINEER/SURVEYOR Turner-Jones Lansing & Associates Pfeiler & Associates 1200 Quail St., Suite 166 985 Alpine Drive 1749-6 So.' Eucild Avenue Newport Beach, CA 92660 1 Beverly Hills, CA 90210 Ontario, GA 91761 Improvement and dedication requirements in accordonce with Title 16 of the Municipal Code of the City of Rancho Cucamonga inclUle, but may not be limited t1o, the following: A. Dedications and Vehicular Access. 1. Dedications shall `%. made of all interior street rights-of-way and all necessar,, easements as shown on tht: tentative map. 2. Dedication shall be made of the following rights-of-way on the following streets: additional feet on additional feet on additional feet on 3. Corner property line % adius will be required pet, City Standards, X 4. All rights of vehicular ingress and egrEss shall be dedicated as follows: on Fourth Street. X 5, Reciprocal access easements and maintenance agreements insuring access to all parcels and joint maintenance of all common roads, drives or parking areas shall be provided•-by C'.C.&R.s and shall be recorded concurrent with the map. ..1_ 6. All existing easements lying within future right-of-;•;ay are to be Oitcilimed or delineated on the map per City Engineer's requ•iremeuts. X 7. Easements for sidewalk for public use shall be a'edicated to the City where sidewalks meander thrcugh private property. B. Street Ymprovements Pursuant to the City of Ranch Cucamonga Municipal Code, Title 16, Section 16.36.120, the subdivider may enter into an agreement and post security with the City guaranteeing �Ne required construction prior to recordation of the map and/or building permit issuance. . Construct full street improvements including, but not limited to, curb and gutter, A.C. pavement, sidewalk, drive approaches, parkway trees and street lights on all interior streets. 2. A minimum of 26-foot wide pavement within a 40-foot wide dedicated right-of-way shall be constructed for all half- section streets. 3. Construct the following missing improvements:- Prior to building permit issuance for each parcel contiguous to that parcel. Cure & A.C. Side Drive Street Street A.6. Median Street Name i;;�tter Pvmt. 'Walk A r. Trees Li hts Qv_erlav Island*Other Fourth St. ,tt X X X Santa Anita X X X See C-2 *Includes landsraping and irrigation on meter **Meandering 4, Frior to any work being fees shal be paid and an P encroachment pererformed in them tb shall lic ibetobtained from she City Engineer's Office, in addition to any other Pere; ts required. X 5. Street improvement plans shall be Prepared Civil Engineer and approved by the C yEng neer prior to issuance of an encroachment permit. 6. Developer shall coordinate, anj where necessary, relocation of any )owes poles or other existing fp the utilities as necessary. public 7. Existing lines of 12KV or less fronting the property shall be undergrounded. -2- t X 8. Install appropriate street name signs, traffic control signs, striping and markin_rs with locations and types approved by the City Engineer._ X 9. Street 'light locations, as required, are to be approved by the Southern California Edison Company and the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Lights shall be on decorative poles with r Underground service. X 10. Landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Division prior to the issuance of building permit. 11. Concentrated drainage flows shall not cross sidewalks'. Undersidewalk drains shalt be installed to City Standards. C. SuLetx X I. Surety shall be pos+ed and an agreement executed to the satisfaction of the City Eng-ineer and City Attorney, guaranteeing cempletion of the public improvements prior to building permit issuance for each parcel contiguous to parcel. X 2. A lien agreement mast be executed prior to recording of the map for the followingi� one-half Median Island on Fourth Street. AWA 3. Surety shall be posted and an agreement executed, guaranteeing •completion of all on-site drainage facilites necessaryfo dewat?ring all parcels to the satisfaction of the Buildin and Safety Divison prior to recording for and/or prior to issuance of building permit for b. ►rai;nand Flood Control X 1. Private drainage easements for cross-lot drainage shall be required and shall be delineated or noticed on the final map. 2. Adequate provisions shall be made for acceptance and disposal of surface drainage entering the property from adjacent areas. 3. The following storm drain shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer X 4. Prior to recordation of the map, a hydrologic and drainage study for the prsject shall be submitted to the City Engineer for review. 5. A drainage detention basin per City Standards shall be ccnstructt to detain increased runoff -------------- 2 -3- X 8. Install appropriate street name signs, traffic control signs, striping and markings with locations and types approved by the City-Engineer. —. 9. Street light locations, as required, are to be approved by the Southern California Edison Company and the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Lights shall be on decorative poles with underground service. X 10. Landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Division prior to the issuance of building permit. 11. Concentrated drainage flows shall not cross sidewalks. Undersidewalk drains shall be installed to,City Standards. C. Surety X 1. Surety shall be posted and-an agreement executed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer r-nd City Attorney, guaranteeing completion of the public improvements prior to building permit issuancf. for each parcel contiguouJ to each parcel. X 2. A lien agreement must be executed prior to recording of the map for the following: one-half Median Island on Fuurth Street. 3. Surety shall be 'posted and an agreement executed, guaranteeing completion of all on-s to drainage facilites necessary for dewatering all parcels to the satisfaction of the Building and Safety Divison prior to recording for and/or prior to issuance of building permit for D. Drainage and Flood Control X 1. Private drainage easements for crass--lo+ drainage shall be required and shall be delineated or noticed on the final map. X 2., Adequate provisions shall be made for acceptance and disposal of surface drainage entering the property from adjacent areas. 3. The following storm drain shall he install_d to the satisfaction of the City Engineer X _ 4. Prior to recordation of the map, a hydrologic and drainage study fnr Lae project shall be submitted to the City Engi:leer for review. 5. A, drainage detention basin per City Standards shall be cpnstrdcted to detain increased runoff i,` 0 22— E. Grading X 1. Grading of„the subject property shall be in accordance with the Uniform Building Code, City grading Standards and accepted grading practices. The final nrading plan shall be in substantial conformance with the approved conceptual grading plan. X 2. A soils report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer licensed by the State of California to perform such work prior to issuance of building permit. 3. A !geological report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and submitted .at the time of application or grading plan check. Y, The final grading plan shall be sabject to review and approval by the Grading Committee and shall be completed prior to recordation of the final subdivision map or issuance of building permit whichever comes first. X 5. Final grading plans for each parcel are to be submitted to the Building and Safety Division for approval prior to issuance of building permit. F. General Requirements and Approvals X I. Permits from other agencies will be re4-;red as follows: AIL CalTrans for San Bernardino County Flood Control District X Cucamonga County Water Distr'.(ct for sewer and water X San Bernardino County Dust Aatement (required prior to issuance of a grading permit) Other X 2. A-copy of the Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CoC.&R.$) approved by the City Attorney is required prior to recordation of the map. X Provide all utility services to each lot including sewerage, water, electric porter, gas and telephone prior to . street constructon. X .4. Sanitary sewer and water systems shall be designed to Cucamonga County Water District standards. A letter of acceptance is required. 5. This subdivision shall be subject to conditions of approval from CalTrans/San Bernardino.County Flood Control bistrict. X 6. Approvals have not teen secured from all utilities and other interested agencies involved. Approval of the final map will ' be subject to any;requirements "hat may be received from them. -4- 7. The filing of the tentative map or appruval of same does not guarantee tLat sewer treatment capacity will be available at the time building permits are requested. When building permits are requested, the Cucamonga County Water District will be asked to certify the availability of capacity. Permits will not be issued unless said certification is received in writing. 8. Local and Master Planned Trails shall be provided in accordance zrith the Trail Plan. A detailed trail plan indicating widths, maximum slopes, physical conditions, fencingg and weed control, in accordance with City trail standards, shall be submitted to and approved by the City Planner prior to recordation for and/or prior to buildii,l permit 4ssuance for X 9. Prior to recording, a deposit shall be posted with the City covering the estimated cost of apportioning the assessments under Assessment District 82-1 among the newly created parcels. X 10. At the time of final map submittal, the following shall be submitted: Title Report, traverse calculations` (sheets), copies of recorded maps and deeds used as reference and/or showing original land division, tie notes and bench marks referenced. X 11. Notice of intent to join the broposed Median Island Landscape District shall be filed wit` the City Council prior to recordation of the Final Map. G. Special Conditions X 1. Off-site grading easements and a riggdt :cif entry letter from the property to the north are required prier to the issuance of a. grading permit. X 2. Existing overhead utilities less. than 66 Kv locatt;d on Santa Anita Avenue and Fourth Street along the frontaga of the property shall be undergrounded prior to issuance of occupancy permit. Upon written request, the developer may enter into a reimbursement agreement for half the cost propertionate to the frontage on Santa Anita Avenue. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA LLuYD B. HUBBS, CITY ENGINEER by: ar.� — CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA rLCA:titoM STAFF REPORT 0 �I> DATE: January 22, 1986 19 TO: Planning Comtlission FROM: Barrye R. Hanson, Senior C;vil Eng;neer BY. Joe Stofa Jr., Associate Civil Engineer SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 9670 > R. C. ASSOCIATES II A division of 32.6 acres of land into 2 parcels in the ` eneral Industrial designative (Subarea 1i), located on the north side of 6th Street and west sine of Buffalo Avenue APN 229-261-78 I. PROJECT AND SITE DE-cCRIPTION: I A. Action Requested: Approval of Parcel Map B. Purpose: To divide 32.6 acres into 2 parcels for development of Industrial buildings. C. Location: North side of 6th Street and west side of Buffalo Avenue. D. Parcel Size: Parcel 1 18.8 acres Parcel 2 - 13.8 acres ti E. Exis,ting Zonings General Industrial (Subarea 11) F. Existinq Land Use: Vacant G. Su-rounding Land Use: North General Industrial (Subarea 11) South Vacant (Subarea 11) East - General Industrial (Subarea 11) West - General Industrial (Subarea 11) H. Surrounding General Plan and Development Code Designations: North General Industr`i,?,l South General Industrial East - General Industrial West - 'General I.idustrial ITEM P PLANN�NC, COMMISSION STAFF REUkT Environmental. Assessment and Parcei Map 9670 January 22, 1986 P..Je 2 I. Site Characteristics: The site is vacant with a slope of approximately 2 tote souk th.- II. ANALYSIS:_ The applicant is requesting to divide 32.6 acres into 2 industrial parcels in Subarea. 11 of the Industrial Area Specific Plan. A request for .?pprovj,l of an Industrial building on Parcel 1 is on tonight's agdnda as D.R. 85-49. Parcel 2 will remain vacant :at this time, The installation of off-site improvements shall be completed prior to occupancy for each parcel as it develops. III. ENVIRONMENT/�L REVIEW: Also attached for your review and consideration is Part I o- the Initial Study as completed by the applil:ant. Staff has completed Part II of the Initial Study, the environmental checklist, and has conducted a field investigation. ' Upon completion anj review of the Initial Study and field investigation, Staff found no_ad!.erse impact;: on the environment as a result of the proposed subdivision. IV. CORRESPONDENCE: Notices of Public Hearing have been sent to surroundfim property owners and placed in the Daily Report Ne^!spaper. Posting t . the site has also been completed. V. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the P Lining Commission consider all input aniani elements of Tentative Parcel Map '9670. If after such consideration, the Commission can recommend approval, then ;he adnptica of the attached Resolution and issuance of a Negative Decla-ation would be approiriate. Respectfully submitted, 9RH:JS:de Attachments: Vicinity Map Tentative Map Resolution Recommended Conditions of Approval initial Study C1;CAAgp <% ENVIRDN1,ENTAL REVIEW APPLICATION o - o F Z > INITIAL STUDY-- FART I 1977 GENERAL For all projects requiring environmental review, this form must be completed and submitted to the Development Review Committee through the department where the project application is made. Upon receipt of this application, the Planning Division staff will prepare "art 11 of the Initial Study and make ricommendations to Planning Commission. The Plant .ng Commission. will make one .jt three determinations;: (1) The project will have no significant environmental impact and a Negative Declaration will be filed, (2) The project will have, a significant environmental impact and an Environmental Impact Report will be prepared, or (3) An additional information ref:rt should be supplied by the applicant giving further information concerning >>e proposed project._ Date Filed: November 27, 1985 Project Title: Tentative Par,,el Map 9670 r Applicant's Name, Address, Telephone: Joseph B. Hyde 602 S. Hilda Street: Anaheim, CA 92806 T 1 99 db�— Name, Address, Telephone of Person To Be Contacted Concerning this Project;_Joseph B. Hyde (714) 991-8800 602 S. :� lda St.. Anaheim, CA 92806 Location of Project: N.11. corner of Buffalo Ave. & Sixth St. Assessor's Parce No.: 229-261-78 List other permits necessary from loca", regiona., state and federal aElencies and the agency issuing such permits: N/A 'ROJECT DESCRIPTION Proposed use or proposed project: Subdivide Parcel 3 of Parcel Map 7797 into two parcels, the northerly parcel to be improved with—a 398, x 450' industrial building. Acreage of project area and square footage of existing and proposed buildings, if any: Total Acreage = 32.60 acres There are no existing buildings on site. - One Proposed building = 40i,875 Sq. Ft. (Phases I & Il) Describe the environmental setting of the project site including information on topography,, soil stability, plants (trees), land animals, any cultural, historical or scenic aspects, land use of surrounding properties, and the description of any existing structures and their use (attach necessary sheets): This 32.6 acre parcel of land is V�-esently being used as a grape vineyard. The land slopes at 2%-+ from north to south. Adjacent property to ta-?north and west is improved with industrial buildings. Biffalo Ave_. borders the oarcal on the east (fully improved) and Sixth St borders the Parcel on -ae south (fully improved). There are no trees on the site. Is the project part of a larger project, one of a sc,ies of cumulative act iesr,, which although individue lly small, may as a whole have significant et;vir ,nental impr_U � i1o. P F t I-2 PA 4 PG / ed � Po Pa 0 . C�QA btu ENVIROI'+LENTAL REVIEW APPLICATION o 1977 INITIAL STUDY- PART I 6WRAL For all projects reruir?ng environmental review, this form must be completed and submitted to the Development Review Committee through the department where` the project application is made. ' Upon receipt of this application, the Planning Division staff will prepare Part II of the .Initial Study and make recommendations to Planning Commission. The Planning Commission will make one of three determinations': (1) The project will have no significant environmental impact and a Negative Declaration will be filed, (2) The project will have, a significant environmental impact and an Environmental Impact Report will be prepared, or (3) An additional information report should be supplied by the applicant giving further information concerning the proposed project. Date Filed: November 27, 1985 Project Title: Tentative Parcel Map 9670 Applicant's Name, Address, Telephone: Joseph B. Hyde �_ f ��` 602 S. Hilda Street, Anaheim, CA 32-TC—"rie,. g91-a-'g Name, Address, Telephone of Person To Be Contacted Concerning this Project:_ Joseph B. Hyde- (710 991-2900 602 S. Hilda Stay Anaheim, CA 92806 Location of Project: N.t,. corner �f Buffalo Ave. & Sixth St. Assessor's Parcel No.: 229-261-78 List other permits necessary from local regional, state and federal aencies : g and the agency issuing such permits N/A r •- BILL THIS PROJECT: YES NO I. Creaie_a'substantial change in ground contours? X 2. Create a substantial change in existing noise of produce vibration or glare? X 3. Create.a substantial change in demand for municipal services (police, fire, water, sewage, etc.)? X 4. Cs-eate changes in the existing Zoning or General Plan designations? X S. Remove any existing trees? How many? _ X 6. Create the need for use or disposal of potentially hazardous materials such as toxic substances, flammables or explosives? X Fxplanation of any YES answers above (attach additional sheets if necessary): Drainage will be directed towards Buffalo Avenue on the northerly parcel. y 7. Estimate the amount of sewage and solid waste materials this project will generate daily: 1500 G.P.D. 8. Estimate the number of auto and truck trips generated daily by this project: 95 PER DAY 9. Estimate the amount of grading (cuttin and fil"n re uired for this gg)) qG project, in cubic yards: Cut = 13,0gg 00 C.Y., Fill = 51,000 C.Y. 10. If the project involves the construction of residential units, complete the form on the next page. CERTIFICATION: I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and information required for this initial evaluation to the best of my ability, and that the facts, statements, j., and information presented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. I.further understand that additional information may be required to be submitted before an adequate evaluation can be made by the Planning Division. Date:_ 11/25/85 Signature Title 7 1-3 k RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION The following information should to provided to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Division in order to aid the school district in assessing their ability to accommodate the proposed residential development. Developers are required to secure letters from the school dis'. ict for accommodating the increased number of students prior to issuance of buiiding permits. Name of Developer and Tentative Tract No.: Specific Location of Projects PHASE I PHASE 2 PHASE 3 PHASE 4 TOTAL I. Number of single family units; 2. Number of multiple family units• 3. Date proposed to begin construction: 4. Earliest date of occupancy: Model and i of Tentative S. Bedrooms Price Range I-4 ��� FOOT P I L L W Li Q 4� ARRoW � FIWY. - z Q Q z 8TH ST F- DAYTotl 80FFALO LtJ aSITE /ATK ST. 4 ft`oG _SCAM ONc' title; CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Q Parcel Map 9570 m r ENGINEERING DIVISION u a9n VICINITY MAP page Lai �"/� / •� , , i� { N♦ rt.. r ..zj s Lu MI t- RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PARCEL MAP NUMBER 9670 (TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 9670) LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF 6TH STREET AND WEST SIDE OF BUFFALO AVENUE WHEREAS; Tentative Parcel Map Number 9670, submitted by R.C. Associates II and consisting of 2 parcels, located on the north side of 6th. Street and west side of Buffalo Avenue, being a division of Parcel 3 of Parcel Map 7797, as recorded in book 80 of parcel maps, pages 29 through 32, San Bernardino County, California; and WHEREAS, on November 27, 1985, a formal application was submitted requesting review of the above-described Tentative Map; and WHEREAS, on January 22, 1986, the Planning Commission held a duly advertised public hearing for the above-described map. NOW, THEREFORE, THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: That the following findings have been made: Aft 1. That the map is consistent with the General Plan. 2. That the improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with the General Plan. 3. That the site is physically suitable for the proposed development. 4. That the proposed subdivision and improvements will not cause substantial environmental damage, public health problems or have adverse affects on abutting property. SECTION 2: That this project will not create significant adverse environmental impacts and a Negative Declaration is issued on January'22, 1986. SECTION 3: That Tentative Parcel Map No. 9670 is approved subject to. the recommended Conditions of Approval pertaining thereto. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 22ND DAY OF JANUARY, 1986. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY• f` .A!LDennis L. Stout, Chairman aa �� f ATTE1,T: AWL Brad Buller, Deputy Secretary I, Brad Buller, 'Deputy Secretary of the Planning Commission,of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed,and adopted by the Planning Commission of the, City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 22nd day of January, 1986, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Adak r nn T ' tfl CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ArA RECOMMENDEW CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL LCCATION: north side of 6th Street TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO: 9670 west side of Buffalo Avenue DATE FILED: November 27. 1985 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Parcel 3 of NUMBER OF LOTS: 2 _Parcel Map 7797 GROSS ACREAGE: 32.6 ASSESSOR PARCEL NO: 229-261-78 DEVELnPER OWNER ENGINEER/SURVEYOR Santa Anita Dev. Corp, R. C. Associates II Joseph B. Hyde 363 San Miguel Road 3505 Cadillac Avenue 602 S. Hilda Street Newport Beach, CA 92660 Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Anaheim, CA '92803 Improvement and dedication requirements in accordance with Title 16 of the Municipal Code of the: City,of Rancho Cucamonga include, but may not be limited to, the following: A. Dedications and Vehicular Access 1. Dedications shall be made of all interior street rights-of-way and all necessary easements as shown on the tentative map. 2. Dedication shall be made of the following rights-of-way on the following streets: additional feet on additional feet on additional feet on 3. Corner property line radius will be required per City Standards. ` 4. All rights of vehicular ingress and egress shall be dedicated as follows X 5. Reciprocal access easements and maintenance agreements ensuring access 'to all parcels and joint maintenance of all common kk roads, drives or parking areas shall be provided by C.C.&R.s f" and shall be recorded concurrent with the map. -1- X 6. All existing easements lying within future right-of-way are to be quitclaimed or delineated on, the map per City Engineer's requirements. X 7. Easements for sidewalk for public use shall be dedicated to.the City where sidewalks meander through private property. B. Street Improvements Pursua,.t to the City of Ranch Cucamonga Municipal Code, Title 16, Section 16.36.120, the subdivider may enter into an agreement and post security with the City guaranteeing the required construction prior to building permit issuance. 1. Construct full street improvements- including, but not limited to, curb and gutter, A.C. pavement, sidewalk, drive approaches, parkway trees and street lights on all interior streets. 2. A minimum of 26-foot wide, pavement within a 40-foot wide dedicated right-of-way shall be constructed for all half- section streets. X 3. Construct the following missing improvements. . Prior to building permit issuance for each parcel. Curb & A.C. Side- Drive Street Street A.C. Median Street Name_ Gutter Pvmt. Walk Appr. Trees Lights Overlay Island* Other Buffalo Ave. X X X 6th Street **X X X X *Includes landscaping and irrigation on meter **Meandering Sidewalk X 4. prior to any work being performed in the public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and an encroachment permit shall be obtained from the City Engineer's Office, in addition to any other permits required. X 5. Street improvement plans shall be prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer and approved by the City 'Engineer prior to issuance of an encroachment permit. 6. Developer shall coordinate, and where necessary,, pay for the relocation of any power poles or other existing public utilities as necessary. 7. Existing linas of 12KV or less fronting_the property shall be undergrounded. X 8. Install appropriate street name signs, traffic control signs, striping and markings with locations and types approved by the City Engineer. NIP -2- X 9. Street light locatio ., as required, are to be approved by the Southern California Edison Company and the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Lights shall be on decorative poles with underground service. X 10. Landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Division prior to the issuance of building permit. X 11. Concentrated drainage flows shall not cross sidewalks. Undersidewalk drains shall be installed to Cite Standards. C. Surety X 1. Surety shall be posted and an agreement executed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and City Attorney, guaranteeing completion of the public improvements prior to building permit issuance for each parcel. 2. A lien agreement must'be executed prior to recording of the map for the following: 3. Surety shall be posted and an agreement executed, guaranteeing' completion of all on-site drainage facilite; necessary for dewatering all parcels to the satisfaction of the Building and Safety Divison prior to recording for and/or prior to issuance uance of building permit for D. Drainage and Flood Control X 1. Private drainage easements for cross-lot drainage and slope easements shall be required and shall be delineated or noticed on the final map. X 2. Adequate provisions shall be made for acceptance and disposal of surface drainage entering the property from adjacent areas. 3. The following storm drain shall be installed to the satisfaction of the: City Engineer 4. Prior to recordation of the map, a hydrologic and drainage study for the project shall be submitted to the City Engineer for review. 5. A drainage detention basin per City Standards shall be constructed to detain increased runoff E. Grading Grading of the subj ict property shall be in accordance with the Uniform Building Code, City Grading Standards and accepted- grading practices. The final grading plan shall be in substantial conformance with the approved conceptual grading plan. X 2. A soils report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer licensed by ;he State of California to perform such work prior to issuance of building permit. 3. A geological report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and submitted at the time of application or grading plan check. 4. The final grading plan shall be subject to review and approval by the Grading Committee and shall be completed prior to recordation of the final -subdivision map or issuance of building permit whichever comes first. X 5. Final grading plans for each parcel are to be submitted to the Building and Safety Division for approval prior to issuance of building perrrit. F. General Requirements and Approval X 1. Permits from other agencies will be required as follows: CalTrans for San Bernardino County F ood Control District X Cucamonga C<aunty Water District for sewer and water h-San Eernardino County Dust Abatement (required prior to issuance of a grading permit) Other X 2. A copy of the Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (C.MR.S) approved by the City Attorney is required prior to recordation of the map. x 3. Provide all utility services to each lot including sewerage, water, electric power, gas and telephone prior to street constricton. X 4. Sanitary sewer and water systems shall be designed to Cucamonga County Water_ District standards. Al letter of acceptance is required. 5. This subdivision shall be subject to conditions if approval front CalTrans/San Bernardino County Flood Control District. X 6. Approvals have not been secured from all utilities and other interested agencies invoved. Approval of the final map will \ be subject to any requirements that may be received from them. -4- . X 7. The filing of the tentative map or approval of same does not guarantee that sewer treatments capacity will be available at the time building ,permits are requested. When building permits are requested'„ the Cucamonga County Water -D•istrici will be asked to certify, the availability of capacity. Permits will not be issued unless said certification is received in writing. 8. Local and Master Planned Trails shall be provi:led in accordance with the Trail Plan. A detailed trail plan indicating widths, maximum slopes, physical conditions, fencing and weed control, in accordance with City trail standards, shall be submitted to _Ad approved by the City Planner prior to recordation for - and/or prior to building permit issuancefor X 9. Prior to recording, a deposit shall be posted with the City covering the estimated cost of apportioning the assessments under Assessment District 82-1 among the newly created parcels. X 10. At the time of final map submittal, 'he following shall be submitted: Title Report, traverse calculations (sheets), copies of recorded maps and deeds used as reference and/or showing origi:ial land division, tie notes and bench marks referenced. X 11. Notice of intent to join the pr,)posed Median Island Landscape District shall be filed with the -City Council prior to recordation of the Final Map or issuance of building permits, whichever comes first. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA LLOYD 9. HUBBS, CITY ENGINEER by: . c • a5- CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA C�'CAMoN STAFF REPORT c a Z U > DATE: January 22, 1986 1977 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad, Buller, City Planner BY Nancy Fong, Associate Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 85-49 - ANTA ANITA DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION --A phased development of a viare Ouse distri ution ui ding totaling 403,875 square feet with 255,950 square feet for Phase I on 18.83 acres of land in the General Industrial District (Subarea 11) located on the west side of Buffalo, north of 6th Si;reet - APN 229-261-78. RELATED FILE: PARCEL MAP 9670 I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action Requested: Approval of detailed site plan, elevation, and issuance of Negative Declaration. B. Surrounding Land Use and Zonin North - Existing industrial, use; General Industrial/Rail Served District, Subarea 10 South - Vacant; General Industrial District, Subarea 11 East - Vacant; General Industrial District, Subarea 13 West - Existing industrial use General Industrial District Subarea 11 C. General Plan Desi nations• Project Site - eneral industrial North — General Industrial/Rail-Served South - General Industrial East General Industrial West - General Industrial D. Site Characteristics: The site is vacant and vegetation consists of a grape vineyard which will be removed. However, the developer is preserving Vie portion. of the vineyard within Phase II ,xpansion for erosion control. ITEM Q PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT OR 85-49 - Santa Anita Development Corporation January 22, 1986 Page 2 Aft II. ANALYSIS• A. General: The proposed development before the Commission tonight is a warehouse distribution center for Pier I Imports. The project is on 18.8 acres on a 32.6 acre parcel. Therefore, the applicant, in conjunction with this proposal, has submitted a parcel map. The parcel map is a separate item on the Commission agenda. Future expansion of this project and the development of the remainder of the parcel will require. separate Design/Development review. The proposed project consists of a 255,000 square foot building with a large open space area located in front of the main office area. Pier I Imports is proposing to provide an enclosed outdoor eating area within this open space (see Exhibit °F111). The proposed elevation consists of tilt-up concrete panel with painted accent stripes. The office portion has been architecturally treated with a recessed window area,. deep reveals, and sandblasted concrete panels. B. Design Review Committee: The Committee has reviewed the project and recommended approval with the following conditions, which the developer agreed to, 1. Texturized pedestrian walkways, such as brick pavers, be provided across circulation aisles to connect with open space areas. 2. An 8 foot tilt-up concrete wall be provided along the south side of the east elevation to screen loading activity. 3. Either dense landscaping or an 8' tilt-up concrete wall be provided at the northeast corner of the building to screen ;ail service activities. 4. Additional pedestrian-orien.ted amenities such as attractive landscaping, kiosks, fountains, trash receptacles, and other street furniture be provided within the plaza area, 5. A solid wall/fence around the proposed outdoor eating area should not be higher than 4 feet. 6. Special landscaping trwatment, such as mounding, dense hedgerow, increased number of trees, and specimen size trees be provided along the planter area at the southern property boundary in order to screen the loading dock arta• PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF.REPORT DR 85-49 - Santa Anita Development Corporation January 2?., 1985 Page 3 The developer has revised the site plan and elevations to incorporate the above recommended conditions, as shown in Exhibits "B", I'D", and "E". C. Environmental Assessment: Staff has completed th Environmental CTieck�'st and has determined that there i= n significant impact as a result of this project. If ti -_ Commission concurswith these Findings, issuance of a'Negativ,t Declaration would be.in order. III. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: This project is consistent with the General Plan and Industriat-Area Specific Plan. The project will not cause a significant adverse enviromental impa,.t, and in addition, the proposed use, building site flan, together with the recommended Conditions of Approval,, arf: in compliance with the Industrial Area Specific Plan yid ali other applicable .provisions of the City standards. IV. RECOMMENDATION: :ttaff recommends the Planning Commission issue a Negative Declaration and approve Development Review 35-49 through the adoption of the attached Resolution and Conditions of Approval. Res sctfully s mit Brad Buller City Planner " BB:NFins Attachments: Exhibit "A" Site Utilization Map Exhibit "B Detailed Site Plan Exhibit "C" - Conceptual Grading Plan Exhibit "D" Conceptual Landscape,Plan Exhibit "Ell - Perspective View of Office Exhibit "F" - Elevations Initial Study, Part II Resolution of Approval with Conditions 4 M., Santa Fe Railroad 8th f:3eet Target Stores` ♦�\`—s _------_...—__ — —_ _ —.� / Target Stores SLOG 2D \ ?DI.713 .R sa 204.802 : t =u IrL� / Newport Drive Orymil OtlMYs Target I $ Storks . I BLCG IB L 140:751.sq.R I —_ c o D A c ,q B Hoover Un Liversal DG I 5W IA •� � � 140.751 sq.R . F � Meldisco. ®� ZW.3W sq.tt - •'dy 6th Street LVIJl\l rl CITY OF ITEibY: �� RANTCH) CU� O TGA TITLE- PLANNII`: DPVt `V EXHIBI s�. C7A7.E: pp ■2 ifDOE: i � • G �•_ - IE•nl r^�[1n9v+wK+<fr'/. A .n7 <..�.�Z�I< �- MS 1 _ .. I'.iHw I I I if 7 s ° A i• � u �tr ( , r� �.l. � �I 3nti3A 1lFF r; rc ' t t �• .. i 701V�dn8"•s. 5 Ef I ��Z rPw�• � __ � �aY 1wl It ce I ,r ►I I ti — Fr ca „^wan _� 1 :ri7• ae t t j e•� i i y owl 4.1 pl N !� ✓ i• � i _nL.h E�f :a I. • x -1 Ale y Ik •3 , l u. p .I VI F 1 0 � •�` CJ a a. s . g > ;k I LD LE l« f aru:a aecaa�- - rwaartoan_ 00 s .s_ 7NTAY�L®VATIGt1t • •CwLO 11•'al••O•• ..� ,, /� 1 ana.wa.npo� I`� � Y i t`^ � � .cC tON AT 6NTAY 7 +`�\ y` 1 if • NORTH CITY OF ITEM: RANCHO CUCAMONGA TITLE: PLANNING DIVISION EXHIBIT: scALE: { e ; 4 1HIM 3 v f - fEl CCnn 0 51 o- ► o I WS t _1{dd t am L ' ' f if I i s Crl ,. � !I �( ! li! � l it Ir -si,l; i• r � � I ! t; , ... "" pi �C--w��,-"'�.�`. ,�'!,k�'i k�, 11�—�i�"I•ts s•"'+ti��i'�.,!""'�'�r„•�."�I i� ,i! r 'a � �` ' e NORTH CITY O IMM RANCHO C LTCAMOjNGA TITLE: E PLt�Nl�ii\G DIVISIOiV EXHMrr.- SCALE- q4 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PART II = INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST DATE: 2 APPLICANT:�� � D FILIqtiG DATE: /�-�7 S_'`y LOG NUMBER: BY PROJECT:_ 403. py4- sQ,•�- itfnlCF PROJECT LOCATION: M05 �y[, jjc B(Ftdin jff �fh ST I. ENVIROS`ffiNTAL IMPACTS (Explanation of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required on attached sheets). YES MAYBE NO 1. Soils and Geoloev. Will the proposal have signiricant results in: a. Unstable ground conditions or in changes in - ` geologic _alat.onships? V b. Disruptions, displacements, ccopaction, 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? f 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? VVV t' 2. —sdroloY Will the proposal have sign ificant results in:• 'ase ' YES u4YBE NO a. Changes in currents, or the course of direction C of flowing streams. rivers, or ephemeral streat, channels'. b. Changes in absorptLon rates, drainage patterns, V or the rate and amount of surface water runoff? I/ c. Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? d. Change in the amount of surface water in auy v body of water? e. Discharge into surface waters, or any alteration of surface water quality? V/ f. Alteration of groundwater characteristics? g. Change in the quantity of groundwaters, either through direct additions or with— drawals. or ttraugh interference with an aquifer? Qualxty? Quantity? h. The reduction in the amount of water other— wise available for public water supplies? f I. Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding or seiches? 3. Air_ualit . Will the proposal have significant , renoilts in: a. wnstanb or periodic a;r emissions from mobile J or indirect sources? `J Stationary sources? b. 'Deterioration of ambient air quality and/or interference with the attainment of applicable air quality standards? _✓ c. Alteration of local or regional climatic / conditions, affecting air movement, moisture or temperature? 4. Biota Flora. Will the proposal have significant results- in: a. Change in the characteristics of sp�,,tcies, including diversity, distribution, or number of any species of plants? b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare ar endangered species of plants? Q.>p3 . , _ ?ace 3 YES `iaT3E \0 c. Introduction of new or disruptive species of plants into an area? d. Reduction in the potential for agricultural ~l r production? Fauna. Will the proposal'have significant results i in: a. Change in the characteristics of species, including diversity, distribution, or numbers of any species of animals? IJ b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of animals? c. Introduction of new or disruptive species of ` animals into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? ✓ d. Deterioration or removal of existing fish or wildlife habitat? 5. Population. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Will the proposal alter the location„ distri- bution, density, diversity, or 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 %ocal or regional socio-economic character.'.stics, including economic or commercial diversity, tax rate, and property 'values? b, 1•11 project costs b' equitably distributed among project beneficiaries, i.e., buyers, tax payers or project users? 7. band 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 non-consumptive ` recreational opportunities? 1. a �✓j� Page 4 YES MAYBE No S. Transportation. Will the proposal have significant results in. a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? b. Effects on existing streets, or demand for ✓/ new street construction? c- Effects on existing parking facilities, or 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 in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, f bicyclists or pedestrians? 9. Cultural Resources. Will the I-roposal have Aft significant results in: a. A disturbance to the integrity of archaeological, naleontoloF4,cal, and/or historical resources? V/ 10. Health, Safety and Nuisance Factors. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Creation of any health hazard or potential health / hazard? t/ b. Exposure of people to potential health hazards? 7' c. A risk of explosion or release of hazardous / substances in the event of an accident? V d. An increase in the number of individuals or species of vector or pathenogenic organisms or the exposure of people to such ` organisms? V e. Increase in existing; noise levels? f. Exposure of people to potentially dangerous s noise levels? g. The creation of objectionable odors? h. An :!increase in light or glare? k Page a YSS uaF3= vA 11. Aesthetics. Will the proposal have significant results in a. The obstruction or de;radation of any scenir . vista or view? b. The creation of an aesthetically offensive f site? c. A conflict with the objective of designated or potential scenic corridors? 12. Utilities and Public Sezvi`ess. Will the proposal gliri have a sicant need for new systems, or alterations t,) the following: a. Elect•ic power? / b. Natural or packaged gas? V c. Communications systems AZ d. Water supply? e. Wastewater facilities? f. Flood control structures? ✓� g. Solid waste facilities? h. Fire protection? i. Police protection? J. School:? k. Parks or other recreational facilities? 1. Maintenance of public facilities, including / roads and flood control facilities? ✓/ m. Other governmental services? d 13. Enerev and Scarce Resources. Wi.l the proposal have significant results in: .f a. Use of substantial or excessive fuel or energy? v b. Substantial increase in demae� upon existing sources of energy? `. c. An incrtse in the demand for development of new sources of energy? d. An increase or perpetuation of the consutiption of non-renewable forma of energy, when feasible renewable sources of energy are availaale? `age 6 YES YkY3E AML e. Substantial depletion of any nonrenewable, or C scarce natural rdsource? qW 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 k^low self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range or 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 pericd of time while long- term impacts will endures well into the ,future). c. Does the project have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (Cumulatively considerable means that the incremental effects of an indivlival project areconsiderable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects,and probable future projects). -d. Does the project have environmental effects which will cruse substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? II. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRON"ENTAL EVALUAtION (i.e., of affirmative answers to (, the above questions plus a discussia.. of proposed miti5ation measures), Pace 7 111. DETER.'SINATIO`I On the b,.sis of this initial evaluation: AOL I find. the proposed project COULD NOT have a-'significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a eigniZicant effect on,.the environment, there will.not be a significant: effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE < DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED. I find the proposed project :L4Y ave a signs icant effect on the envirnment, and an ENVIRO. T I:1PA REPORT s requi ed. Date S aEure 4_ TIttle I ' I it L RESOLUTION NO. Ak A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISS-I-0N }, APPROVING DEVELOPMENT 'REVIEW NO. 85-49 FOR A WAREHOUSE DISTRIBUTION BUILDING LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF BUFFALO AVENUE, NORTH OF 6TH STREET IN THE GENERAL INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT WHEREAS, on the 30th day of December, 1985, a complete application was filed by Santa Anita. Development Corporation for review of the above- described project; and WHEREAS, on the 22nd day of January, 1986, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission held a meeting to consider the above-described project. NOW, THEREFORE, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission resolved as follows: SECTION 1: That the following can be met: 1. That the proposed project is consistent with the objectives of the General Plan; and 2. That the proposed use is in accord with the objective of the Industrial Area Specific Plan and the purposes of the district in which the site is located; and 3. That the proposed use is in compliance with each of the applicable provisions of the Industrial Area Specific Plan; and 4. That the proposed use, together with the conditions applicable thereto,' will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. SECTION 2: That this project will not create adverse impacts on the environment aad that a Negative Declaration is issued on January 22, 1986. SECTION 3: That Development Review No. 85-49 is approved subject to the following conditions and attached Standard Conditions: 1. Texturized pedestrian walkways, such as brick pavers., shall be provided across circulation aisles to connect with open space areas. Details shall be included in the landscape and irrigation plans to be submitted for review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. Samples of the texturized materials shall also be submitted for --.-! Planner review and approval prior to issuance of building permit. Resolution No. DR 85-49 - Santa Anita Dev. Corp. January 22, 1986 Page 2 2. An 8 foot tilt-up concrete wall to screen the loading area shall be provided along the south side of the east elevatizn. Dense landscaping to screen ral service activity shall'be provided at the northeast corner of the building. Detailed plans shall be included in the landscape and irrigation plans to be submitted for review and approval prior to issuance of building permit. 3. The solid wall/fence around the proposed outdoor eating area shall not be 'nigher than 4 feet. Detailed plans of the fence and the outdoor eating area shall be submitted for review .and approval prior to issuance of building permit.. 4. Special landscaping treatment, such as mounding, dense hedgerow, increased number of trees, and specimen size trees shall be provided along the planting area at the southern property boundary in order to screen, the loading dock area. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 22ND DAY OF JANUARY, 1986. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA i BY: L,inis L. tout,, G airman ATTES'r Brad Buller, Deputy Secretary I, Brad Buller, Deputy Secretary of the Planning 'Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the.foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the_22nd,day of January, 1986, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Q�a° 12 O C �E O n� •Y'¢O E. 6 a> $$ A oa a= noa do u.,i n. oL oAlk f y o so .,pot: oa Y nt m o n E E.c cs, au and A czn .± sa. e N � i ya V .n c•d a 2^� 'Od rnE� E c ^ r =.a.oi d�EV +i•O �� VA:Y^ EeL. -- � VN L O.p Od A. CS N.-+ yt' > COO• O Ep O d O O A EE L q L N N O >c'da0+ N EE"'a^ 'o vCu OL ^H O Y _ qd NL ep uu a, na r.^: .30 O O N^C'�U N n O O dL dA U dU •E CN�+.a y EN o dEa d�'. rn G L' 2 GcO S2E 6'r uAL92 I.N.LA=O f:00dN 6N'�01 3 M-.tp LCI d m 1 e� ® rxi dy y. Ya p �O • �VM/ EE E L N dM.A'p f O C � O • O"Y v.��p U A. O g6g AE LL p v>A 3 O L d 6 2 Y Q O M A A n O ONO E n O O u d M dam 6 LOf y OY .- O Y N O N s cp nua�A�_ Y y i La La a � N6.= O O. O 00 MO ON�Cw,O : Y V AC E. aY NY dd Na a CC a Y Y J Oar. a O O LA-+.��CaZC JM u A • Ew �•. N F.a2 C ¢- q H.q 6.�sMA.HLM�. ^«dpl 9Na 0• cW!• • • .� �' LN Wy. EONIN yA pp U L.> t E � •d f.�N nUyp � O O QUO t� ULO V E u A.i p� N.= SOTp. LL y.Ap TC. E d C q9 gEaM 0.w • n O yN=q V.O�dN E�� Ly.^ C Logp. 9AN ONLI =0L L I� Od 6uSi TWd L �IiC �y.O }l A.O O UxY Z.;- 6pt�d «q cd U� dd 9 •'.L QJ C:� cu dN N HN�� qO L.d-,N �.OL. N d LyC En •O qNC �C.YN LUEe .q �EOy9'N .....Z I 06IfT Nu dV.U�� E 9r.OC IWW d^ A NpN -CV .Odd NEs .CACA O p^6 e EE OI M • NC O. d ^O A • d U a O . M 1 ^ dd C cN C� C,fLN 9A L0.,.C9 aNU L Na Aoow a«.ov «9geceNc p`.c L:c ,^a C EO 6� d.^ A O A.A Y fp O d L d p NL •^..�• • yC .` .'`'� � m� a^`zps >'.^. ..• z� 1cd,S cdy N01 m «q� H Y S H UY^ u y A d La L^ T� `y T.. dy Fp. .rt. ?a vo L •>q� cdl�C aa.,. V L dd. E9 L �Y L. 6 J 4�s 6�.nvL L od i^ ,.O.V■■ d L" �9 "• AC y U HC Q EM6p aVd•- Ee �Ty�•L O N N 6�SN W«�O. W^•�3 C 6Lqu.00 Vyf60 V n 9Q c C C ^ y L ti+��aA�V .O cta O�NNa L,L A 6S Y np..�z ad.«�•'y a�o',c^'gg 0cw Lr aN«. Lg+.q c c Ed op A= o z3: @ Qe T: Al Qq LAG CY@ u>A d N L ayi S� U d�� end>9-G CN d= A V d.5• nLrdY p. 0 aU d6 LW O'a09Ate. rqr VT02 TyY YjOU {�6 �FaN . vC. �O p�6G S >�on. W.A✓Z9dI Vd,yNI NOLn nSL A9>C'T• y M CCO I OL�C L 1 C a^6 v 'OCO ^9 y.0 Qr^L A C.0601L y,L^C v E>00« v ON L L� L �•0y^L y�0 >dr. _cv^.nryA Nrny:C L x LA dNN >d td.O{L. L C U��p.Oa C Cxt J 6 q M. �v ��d 0. O y L C O. v^T i O �•' E. c 1 C'O N u 69 S,?a N a Vl5i Vc Nd �0.r YO �M y'L D• A^d1tl p Lt«Y - C.. r L U 2 J '= o T�nE ve a c a� is vy c.�o do c C. i vLu 3YL ^.o q4 IS •>, yO dc> bo Or':LA.^eC noL vyo.: VL ^Y L LaOi bCC •-•.y .A.l dL C...O V 60YN i.IOL O�> 6 9 C L 6 o•N O, I�L N C Q•� y N A b 6 U J y C p d A M E u S r d C p M 0 F•YY.N N. F•�.A@Am ti a O fl b n ^ N � O c ND V < Orr b O p b C fl Sfl3b _ A O�OOfl6t -Oir.(O�Y bf.f1r O9 ^O O y p fl S� A B'O.; O:O 16 Tn N T< fly SA b Ofl � ^3 L3 �� a0'Cr N, fld NAi fl L RG fl N=. rp C 4N• �� 000'bfl`p... �^�z.i as F � 06 ^ j.SN 6J � 3A dN 1p0 py t Z9�:Ug S Ni if o vt r �.n Sy C O fl� ^� O 9C N l9_O. a r R. ^nazi o.193 v T a Yoh. •= a:F'fl a ve _Oa N o�fa'i w''n o "� u 6 6j, fp Ask 6 fJ��ld V�.� q� ��flfl 1 1. �.N rOOn 061O0 AN� 1 1 _ r 153_ �. 0.1+ �V V 0.:� KZO-Oj S N ^O A3 9 rp N4 rO n O 9 i O O ^�r �9 �M fl �.N'fiNpm flOr %'..w_� Or r� flN9 tfl�0 O NOf n Z N n n� �b fl itr O. fl N b. 9yb flfl n 9 fl.AT �: fK b.� fl�3, S�flO N ^3..pr ft flfl SN N V n �O 3N6R.- 2SS~�rt OO N O�W3 N r 4.N P S0-21 . O GOOO ^N CA 6S� 9y. ��^� 3 m mflGa No bO f o N ON ry o fl j So or Oft ST V T rrnV Kfl. 70od V a ^O pr NO��� ft nON O:O OP �.G NON ~ A R O 9 p or ^S N W Cam^ • '< fc n„fl.ioflN o.� i.=. fl fl pOp N p Oc p OrQfl b. OrR O1p 9 O A.r .Z6 S 00.lj 4 fl DA rf S�.r f,0.. KT O. yr0 N C O S r "O O A N O fl nn3 6. fl1y eO* Q GfL 9 tfO O, o�flrO 6b rfl N;r fl p fly 00 ^ Or A, x - dl S f0. flifi.?'� O bft N:f.:O fl 1 b fl 1 i ' td,� ra c4a m. dv c..�s ai dja m—LLo4 e E «�6 •O"IpOL O W �. f A U�. LL �•E d o d T� .OAR E u3••r Fy�•r w W.o Vb nEW �ia.' a GN Y.Y. N� U d• v O S O'U D - Y9 �'.d d d EE LL ►pGj O6C Vy EU CG OJ pod d u c OAy C+ 9« L Ad« AN L.UEE. LO W 00= Y Od9. A« .�j.� Anup G Gn L%tlN a W. 6a CFa NS_A r3 �G w - LL « «AMLL « m •O N� CU VT=^EQn q p u � A p L% S. C do zp aL'EcYu c> ✓aatiE acaA.m �.',=:u^sv �m «S I C O W Y u Y w o A H d C D,10 =L y M y M G 0.2 9Q�. Yy^ 4 q=dA o d Y�y yO.6 dV 6 W�L y •C T NO ^.O Nu V YG'dOG N�pCi^ LO p L Y W A L.�L Y. V g q S 6l.L.W N i d y IL «Y 6 q W G C 044 uOLDM NdP SSS N� CC an A O d� 1�WO.A 1�¢6M S.LLLN6 F•^Wq O ►t•tpiWt X Hal 6•G••A dG VI nUa d • i 'LnV y9d p, C t NL OJC Ecc G d �d G W Y a T a A LLj� c tlp �Lp 9p OGa = G ^n U 'uA d o A u .ems `p'cn A d N V C j G •^ L ^ G> tlF« T G O a�G G U NLLx O. C 0• q G ,pQO _y d C A >H C L n 0^ d U S L _ > d O G p • « L 0.�. L CO ar q —p� Lu1 G V � C«Y �Y u • Y n 6 A C•'t @.L • u N p LwC 4 W �6 UPxuU = O.^A Oa L« �a •V..G Y■d0 y U. EN. V a u— C.•. y 9y�d �W Ld .N U F«n� .'.Z.n ... vd E prGi to �� .ELL G. n«Q q WF N !9 N d L d N dN M L d q ^P r d L 0 Ga L a:P 0 N A Y Ld Ydq �. d AVd pi i N d V.n � .14. .p N M �' «^ c O.N p N A ^ C O , « — N G p ^p ':� u T W L G U Ol.pa N O N N L G N 1n N n a.tl N=O O pd OA.O d C V `N< 'ytld d A q OLL C C G AM 4Ea <ILP �O ^ N=0 p^N SNP. a0 Nd Ld^ q Y W GU-- aD u = Y�Cy.WD _N«gg $QL—.� n VLLLL ^rL at0mod. a dx Q4ay w C6 C Nit •'0, NL qNM NNy0 YN ^IG.^ CCCCO6 O ii. LLG C y H n 0•�Y u ^ O C C O C we c LA Y E ,EE,JJO LL a g C y.B L A d L F. L W OR - uY td w� «:L .•. do nM t �;w r �o yHe.L. •.O•.a..s� . N . S O • .l L 6•' G. f A.�N� 4 n N0 C'Y •'• Y W IOL �Y H S 6.d«U 4 I f� f s d N ^y r 0 0 a.NaoaE L yt'- o v p � tp. O O E O c O C L Y o v n v E o e b O y O N L `« I r �c r F E of o A w.`N^'; or v c6 '^NA o►. w w .... `ab s O`�d� E�: os. �aL�m�. m-o . a A A yy E6�0. a=C a d.« v O L « S K o v c L.. u . n Y«a.T 1.5 t C yy • NI HNW:EC^ L Eya=, N«a G 9 . tTa tf N d m Y y y p 6 O N Y F n w NPN Cd ^ d Y Cwd NL ^ t ANLE ^p A� `C O t C v A od a '�H e a q •- L " o OtC=2 S.d A« ~ uA Y.. Ayb'Cb OCOY A Ot Y Ll ~ p' L Cq C aE LC q0 nAe= b y .L.t Ao a _ ca o 4. A @OYO Ctq N 9m d � 00`]u bYm. N tiV. 4.A. 1 '.Kw.6L0 6Y� O D tJ W � I L2Y ca. �q.E N 4C maCY �CNMg CLCt�CL P L aY.W& E CO m b ^ A F vr� L L W P N 01Yp p as C q i^.�oY. Ap C G / C WYq A �^ LCo n. 'um o as w ya Ao buo� vdoa 10 r d�OA mz o 2 L O y 9T tti ! A A� d try iatiq d�L6 ^gd ^a ou yqa u� aq ua c ceid�o "' ea d L«M Y G— A. MV S Cm dj r9 N aN y. A ay aaij Sl c. v `. . u ura LaA E q BYO nA. bo 4`.l mN o by t E NO. C E p 6 Ot L OE ^y « ba pLa'id n Y d .mOY = drn LYc uv uN '�' oaL.y aoq o'.O, au 4 N.Lcr o « N,. .n uN Gaon OCY+q NO O b� .Y A •' N.L.t ay L �m « dA60'1T. at«Oy N C.. NV CY YO. L OI 32. nY OyL C� btu- c.,00. d°• O A N b b o. oym. etv F..o ew �'� w i O c=v b v o a.'�t -+ •^_a m$ cY C.d NO l.pW TC. L bb`Q CU. Ot d Ot« C��rtt N y66L Ot N. AM N dE tVN p6,dEi O. fd 1. M p «6 a1N 1mr Y.L OJ1 C OO.ft v`. N.Zt VIA. N C E N o d q 4« d O. P 0 1 F b WNv 'Wuu =a IR�6E 6.=.t 40. CCtU C�Y • L NN OG � O 00.0 OL •�� G Clf.i V y T L W Y rr « z= n UN� S. �Z O � a d O w`, p l p N O N LL Oly� yV d0-4 S N863N y d t : T.• ys. o..G N i U — y LN�..• �, d o nu to N.c c m. Ny a o N . Z T = c T dopy wp.o L+y.q pC N6aL Y .a.. k O•¢ �W OL ... N U LL s A LIEN ay Lp�. Ny AT n L C nn a no'o. o� vY '•cY ac u. 'Lv�.ca+ �vu cn & g6 ,A,S o AL d�q qCC L� Eyv U M L.�+• L N g y U V L O C' � g a 0 U I O N N tl y a Y yy 5 L C d O• a A L 6 C A O N Y Ol A Y pO •` __Y Ir '^ O gyp d A AO C �n�CYC ,Y• y ydO. L Y•u O j� O. GN da4� Lp C N 60 d o. E` �. C�dO'y Eaj OC.\N y� Vn.Y 00 CC LyGN� L =� d O. � ^ ^�C v1oy �W o� �r• T.n.'c^ g'.s' i .T+q�uus: :o va _rn O'd N�O d A L.y A M Y L Y A^1Y y C YyA O Y�C �C A d^ Z i• �@,z`i C i Ta N V c^ u c qip. c I LO. u=.-� Y A od i —mw cw •" a N6W A� g6NM NOy« N9 64« qU G+ W`i ddl„1 =dQ YaL < � I 'It t • I I a NL. p d s =p= T� G Y a i C C y 11.y Y C =? CE vl v y gllr Ld O� ipLO AC dE Li aAMG Aw C �j�1'� . a^ ate. �� ^O Qd U.•0- CyA• � JW5 �. y 6N0 ly �.0 Nd Ua 00 =A 6 Hyl Y ygS. M 4C C� 9p OI NCB G` N 15 .6 W. Y �• CCC LYa CNgp EUCV— a• � .02 E Y y- 1^ qd tee..'". oA ^ z c4 « in �. o c• c�:L it yB a � • A� dy— N bp 2^O C.L M� lei l=9 U N pL^W L 4 B C L W 3 lJ A K q 4 'Lt.• � U �( V t 0.N!J S 6 O d 41 U CJ .' L aN LLp $ w$e Q., YP NY. p 9W .2 d30 d pV N rL N @ OC ZO.0 vp dN t U N COY. C Oly W Rt wA d U� C_d'S 1. qq NO 6L1 J�V T.dQ. Y 7 CyCyU d a= dL CC pM E, LY = p� uy v«. •y cpp O-N 6-5 N l L :S-4 41 0 0: 1 ' 1 N OY. yq G qu.tu c .L.LO g U y L « L '� o t.� � u�op 4 4 St N`O q Fd z. 2 o Su o u� B Y 5 Y q 8 CLI.y O L ip p N N V a U�G U LILT pp }Iduq Y G Y A. ply dN Y.T G` V N = � � di L y90 O^ Vb dd y,0✓� L G .O cc YEW <a L LLH Oi ip Z^ Y Nn'a�t�' N O u.2 N �o� p C6S NN Cy .at.. Y d w Y p 0. u O ^O Y O M Yg.C V �V Y c C q Y.��< d�. t U O•Y C sJ'1 �iR1 .; rah CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA G9CAM,0A, STAFF REPORT _G�p ,q. a l v -y 0 ' Q 9 DATE: January 22, 1986 1977 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Nancy Fong, Associate Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 85-16 - ONES - The development of a 50,000 square foot warehouse/distribution building and 2 light industrial buildings, totaling 41,100 square feet, on 9.23 acres of land, in the General Industrial District, Subarea 14, located. at the northeast corner of 4th Street and Santa Anita Avenue APN: 229-283-44, 42.. Relate: File: PM 9687 I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action Requested: Approval of detailed site plan, elevation, and issuance of a Negative Declaration. B. furrou,,ding Land Use ,and Zoning: North - Vacant, vineyards; General Industrial District Subarea 14 South City of Ontario East - Vacant; General Industrial District, Subarea 14 West - Vacant, General Industrial District, Subarea 14 C. General Plan Designations: Project Site - General Industrial *North - General Industrial South City of Ontario East General Industrial West General Industrial D. Site Characteristics: The site is vacant and vegetation consists of abandoned vineyards. Street improvements are fully completed except for driveway en., AML ITEM R a PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Development Review 85-46 January 22, 1986 Page 2 11. ANALYSIS: A. General: The proposed development consists of a large warehouse distribution building located at the east side of the site, with two smaller multi-tenant industrial buildings that front on Satita Anita Avenue. An open landscape area is provided at the middle of this site and would serve as a central plaza area. The proposed elevation consists of tilt-up concrete panels with reveals, colored and texturized squares in grayish tone, dark anodized frame and glass, and painted accent stripe. A related .parcel map is also being considered by the Planning Commission at this meeting. B. Design Review Committee: The Committee reviewed the sii;e plan and elevations and has recommended approval with the following conditions which the developer agreed to: 1. Colored and texturized treatment in square shapes added to the west elevation and south elevation of Buildings A, Band C; at;d the southern portion of the east elevation of Building C. The color palette be of grayish tone dith accent color for the building entrance columns. 2. Reciprocal use of plaza area be provided. 3. Special landscape treatment be prov+•';id to the corner of 4th Street and Santa Anita Avenue, as well as the two project entrances on Santa Anita Avenue. The developer has revised the site plan and elevations to incorporate most of the above conditions as shown in Exhibit "C" and "F". In reviewing this site plan, the Committee noted that the proposed driveway access from 4th Street does not conform with City access .policies and should be eliminated. The Committee recommended for full Planning Commission -discussion regarding this issue, which will be further analyzed in the following section. C. Access Issue: The applicant has prepared and submitted a traffic study which concludes that the proposed driveway onto 4th Street would operate at a satisfactory level of service (i.e., without traffic congestion). The Engineering Division has reviewed the traffic study and concluded that even '.though there may not be traffic congestion, experiences with existing driveways on arterials elsewhere in the City-show that such driveways may slow down traffic. The applicant also stated that a 4th Street access would provide a better flow of truck PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Development Review 85-46 January 22, 1986 Page 3 traffic where trucks could enter on Santa Anita Avenue-and exit off 4th, Street. However,_most trucks have to back into the loading dock to unloaj the trailer; therefore, making a right turn to exit off Sa'>ita Anita is as easy. Based on the above conclusions, Engineering staff is recommending that the access policy be adhered to and the 4th Street access be eliminated. D. Utility Undergrounding: Overhead utilities exist along Santa AViit.a "venue frontage and the 4th Street, frontage of the pro; :ct. On the Santa Anita frontage.. since no services are conn3cted to the existing overhead utilities, staff recommends that the utilities be underground. Property to the north and the property ;,cross from the project along Santa Anita Avenue are undeveloped presently; therefore, the developer mayrequest for a reimbursement agreement for 1/2 t'he cost of the urldergrounding proportionate to the frontage. On 4th Street frontage, the existing overhead utility poles contain 66 kv with 12 kv lires on the lower portion of the poles. Engineering Division is recommending unaergrounding the 12 kv lines. E. Environmental Assessment: Staff has completed the Environmental Cliec list anff has determined that there will not be a significant- impact as a result of this project. If the Commission concurs with the findings, issuance of a Negative Declaration would be in order. III. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: This project is consistent with the General Plan and the Industrial Specific Plan. The project will not cause a significant adverse impact and in addition, the proposed use, building design, site plan, together with the recommended conditions of approval, including the elimination of the driveway access on 4th Street are in compliance with the Industrial Specific Plan and all other applicable provisions of the City Standards. I IV. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission issue a —Negative Declaration and approve Development Review 85-46 through the adoption of the attached Resolution and Conditions of Approval. Respectfully submitted, Brad Buller City Planner BB:NF:cy PLANNING COMMZ_;ION STAFF REPORT Development Review'85-46 January 22, 19$6 Page 4 Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Location map p �� Exhibit B Site Utilization Map Cp Exhibit II - Detailed Site Plan: Exhibit "Q" - Conceptual Grading r Exhibit "E" - Conceptual Landscape f Exhibit "F" Elevations Initial Study, P«rt IT [ Resolution of Approval with Conditions r ({. 7/ r♦ .e:.S 4 ttill x• t �suiiacea 9S _ � subarea 15 y } a H ®) W"P!00 � m � ME 4fh o one s000soeoeo®oeoa o® s '' � � �y •� ' � 1 ae^ .. ��� t > � del �� �6,�.• ,.y NORTH CITY O ITE�bi: RANCHO CUCIAMC)NGA TITLE. J PI.ANNING DIVISION EXHIBIT._ SCALE- d TI - !2 a 2 u.t II I ...-n ..•n .— CITY a CYAYOYq .`th; •. CITY Cr Clumic 4 (SAN BERNADINO 1 STREET 1 NORTH UITY OF ITEIM: RANCHO CLTQkMO\TGEi TIC: PLAMI G,DIVIRIO'v ®� Nr EXHIBIT. SCALE. } R-6 - . , t 4,1: ,t� r L•�piaw�ic. ,I!t-���.�I I!t l l l l i l l l I �' fir; �oP..ma.seo • .'6. a—Aft. IL 71 a1' I� LL •J I__!a 4., :,nu I f =07 i �F I '— c No io m o m.t• ! C ' 0 mao 1!vYo•n y U ,JbNtwµ.Ep. 1�• iaana �eoa oe . `_.• �•_� I{{r_�. �'—�, n t 7 � , co4ewwom mama '• '-11 IL. .t I I,�t�r ,. ; �` I ..t„c�..en, ea. � i - �. cogs, A n.tYi•4s'e.. e.: .. �. 'F�• • 11 .c5'dt moi� f 4TH tm%rlm �o —_. _., _ ._ .._. __...._._ Nm...PC V 1•�.Kl W ttROw0.1Y.. I PROJRRT GeBCi21RTICIN _ '�.,•, _ I BUILDING A _ 23�400S.F. PARKING REQUIRED r SITE._.EA ; 0.23 AC. OR .402,D53 SM 'jp t OFFICE •-- -- G012b0.4 TOTAL BULGING AREA tYt.180 S.F. N41SE.b MFG.; COVERAGE . 47.637E 2�,400Ib004 45 BUILDING FULLY SPRINA EKED TYPE OF CONST U-N PROVIDED 4p OCCUPANCY 8-2 ' LANDSCAPE REQUIRED 12%OF NET LOT BUILDING'S 17,7OD:6.F. PARKING REQUIRED; 37_— — OFFICE 1000/280 4 V/NSE.4 MFII 16.700/60o.33 - - PRO•'DEO 37 BUILDING CPAn OFFICEG; 174 REQUIRED : ✓ V ICE OFF WNSE.: 6000/230-32 PROVIDED 162'Ob0/f000�112� NORTH A CITY OF RANCHO cUCAmoiNGA mr, TITLE. ;�#It PL.t1NNII\G DT•% I��T EXEdZBIT--, ' SCALE' = It r + qe'S• �. �h�; a y 'r—�+• Vr• �I" ���ii 4 �`d3f�pj�p�1��€.� 3 ! T �•� F tea'` .'i e � T t ,�! I g�r . yn--i3 ' i E�-i9 - - 3s ' �-9000000000 ui a r a ° u t ?psi s lam_ '•F`Y �ij r ,# µ A qg= e 1 •a�-'.. -.. — 7•_ 1 L �;Tn!/ 1.tll_ �'/i�t{{—�.a}i y'�Gs.'@i_.�I I : .----_t-----=k---_3_2i�g—__=:—c_�..S�IS.L—i'3'2L Si•_'.c___.�'. I it 1; I ! 0 I r � II' I • J Ir : u Agahkwr I m BUILDING A -• BUILDING i uwr wumw ne.. wrm.0 ue.. y I "earn-n. •I �a tr. i BUILDING. '.. Q ri uwr aar.re4.ue. 4 `., F I .�. . 1,. STH DTRBBT NORTH CITY OF ITFAM RANCHO CUCAlMONGA, TITLE: PLANNING DIVISIOjN EXHIBIT- SCALE- is } n <' u i 3 a 'i i 3�� A +r A Q Me a UZI ©' s f Q W »7 L�Ii � CJ as i V 1 i2 r�� a na °■ tf �. Zb ' I LNI at —AE 1 r7,1 a a a 3 � r � � .. • CITY OF.RANCHO CUCadONGA PART II I-4ITIAIL STUDY ENVIRON:IENTAL CHECKLIST DATE: _ L—A XL APPLICANT:— FILING DATE:�-96- LCIG NUMBER: p PROJECT:_CW&1. 412 AM S�.Fj` YeAPGy��CG �-r M 17 �.,o 0o sa•�' PROJECT LOCATION:��nyy,}S-f r I. ENVIROMMITAL IMPACTS (Explanation of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required on attached sheets). YES 11AYBE NO 1. Soils and Geolozv. 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? J c. ,Change in topography or ground surface contour intervals? 1 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? J/ h. An increase %n the rate of extraction and/or / use of any mineral resource? Z. Hydroloey. Will the proposal have significant results in: R-/=7 a Page 2 YES 'MAYBE So a• Changes in currents, cr the course of direction Of flowing streams, rivers, of ephemeral'stream channels. _ b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, '— p- the rate and amount of surface water runoff? e* 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 V alteration of surface water quality? aff f•• Alteration of —'groundwater charat;terazztcs? � g• Change in the quantity of groundwaters, either through direct additions or with- dravals, or through interference with an aquifer? Quality? Quantity? 11. The reduction in the amount of water other- �✓ wise availa;,le for public water supplies? I. Exposure of pe:,ple or property to ­_cer _ relate;. hazards such as flooding or seiches? 3. AirQuality. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Constazit or periodic air emissions from mobile or indirect sources? Stationary sources? b. DeteriolarZon of ambient air quality 4nd/or y^ Interference with the attainment of applicable air quality standards? c. Alteration of local or regional climatic conditions,, affecting air movement, moisture oa temperature? 4. Biota Flora. Will the proposal have significant results a. Change in the characteristics of species, Including diversity, distribution, or number of any Dies of plants? v/ Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare / '- or endangered specie, of plants? n VV yti ?age 3 YLS `L�Y3E .O c. Introduction of new or disruptive species of plants,into an area? , d, Reducti-a in the potential for agricultural production? Fauna Will the proposal'have significant results y in: a. Change in the characteristics of species, including diversity, distribution, or numbers of any species of animals? b. ReQuction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of animals? y 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? J 5. Popur lat _ion. Will the proposal-have significant results in: a. Will the proposal alter the location, distri- bution, density, diversity, or growth rate or the human population of an area? b. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housi#g? y /� 6. Socio-Economic Factors. Will the proposal have Y 1, significant results in: a. Change in local or regional socio-economic characteristics, including economic rr commercial diversity, tax rate, and property values? b. Will project costs be equitably distributed among project beneficiaries, i.e,, buyers, 1� tax payers or project users? ✓ 7. Land Use and B'lannine Considerations. Will the propo;al have cN[ ificant results in? A substantial alteration of the present or planned 7 id use of an area? b. A confl. a 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? � �f, Page 4 YES :ral'3E no 8. Transbortatian. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? b. Effects on existing streets, or demaeid 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 f' air traffic? g. Increases in traffic hazards to motor rehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians?` 9. Cultural Resources. 'Will the proposal have r significant results in: a. A disturbance to the integrity of archaeological, J pzl_eontological, and/or historical resources? 10. Health, Safety, and Nuisance Factors. Will the r 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. ;xplosion or release of hazardous substances in the event of an accident?' d. An increase in the number of individuals or species of Vector a, pathenogenic organisms or the exposure of people to such t organisms? `f/ e. Increase in existing noise levels? d f. Exposure of people to potentially dangerous noise levels? g. The creation of objectionable odors? iJf/ h. An increase in light or glare? �( Page 5 YES MkY,3= NO 1.1. Aesthetics. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. The obstruction or degradation of any scenic vista or view? ✓ b. The creation of an offensive site? c. A conflict with the objective of designated s f or potential scenic corridors? 12. Utilities and PG'1ic Sesvices. WZ11 the proposal have a significant need for new systems, er alterations to the following,: a. E'_ectric power? J b. Natural or packaged gas? C. Communications systems? ✓ d. Water supply? _ J/ e. Wastew.- r facilities? V f. Flood control stvuctures? Y J g. Solid waste facilities? h. Fire protection? J I. Police protection? J. Schools? S k. Parks or other recreational facilities? J I. Maintenance of public facilities, including y/ r^ads and flood control facilities? Jf m. Other governmental services? 13. Fnerey P-.0 Scarce Resources. Will the proposal have significant results in'. J 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 devel:ipment of j new sources of energy? s d. An increase or perpetuation of the consumption of non-renewable forms of energy, when feasible renewable sources of energy are ave"e-ale? Page. 6 YES MAYBE 110 e. Substantial depletion of an;• nonrenewable or scarce natural resource? 14. Mandatory Findin s of Si nifgcalice. a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially _ reduce th.a 'iabitat of fish -)r wildlife sPocies, cause a fish or wildlife population to drip below self Sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a pJiant or animal community, reduce the numher or restrict the range of a rare or endangerari plant or animal or elminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehist,-y? 4 /f b. Does the project have the potential to achieve v+ f short-term, .!;o the disadvantage of long-term, I environmental goals? (A short-terms impact on the envirorimer,t is one which occurs in a relatively ')rizF, definitive Period of time while lung term im}arts *.rill endure Well into the kuture). c. Does the project have impacts which areindividually limitad, bmt cumulatively considerable? (Cumulatively considerable means that tine incremental effects of an individtAl project are considerable when viewed r in connection with the effects of past projects, and probable futuve .rojer.ts). d. Does the proje=;t have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or ndlreci.iy? t/r II. 1SISCL'39ION OF ENCIRQV�LSTAi EVALUATION (i.e. of affirmatite answer-.; the above questions plus a discussion ofto p propi_ed mitigatfe: measures). j Page 7 III.' DETERMINATION. On the basis of this 'initial evaluation: AM I find the P-nnpoaed project, COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATME DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, Chore will not be a signi.fi:ant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described onan attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATIONT WILL BE kREPARrD. I find the proposed project NMY hays a si ificant f ct on the envirnmer,t, and an ENVIRO7T Z ACT k PO T is r qui= d. Date Signa52 ture s Title RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSM APPROVING DE LOPMENT REVIEW NO. 8546 FOR A WAREHOUSE BUILDING AND 2 MULTI-TENANT INDUSTRIAL BUILDINGS LOCATED AT THE NORTH EAST CORNER OF 4TH STREET AND SANTA ANITA AVENUE IN THE GENERA, INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT WHEREAS, on the 10th diy of December, 1985, a complete arjl ication was filed by Martin-Jones for review of the above-described project; and WHEREAS, on the 22nd day o,` January, 1986, the Rancho. Cucamonga Panning Commission held a weeting to consider the above-described project. follows: NOW, THEREFORE,, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission resolvdd as � SECTION 1- That the following can be met 1. That the proposed project is consistent witil the obJectives of the General Plan; and 2, That the proposed use is in siccord with the r, objective of the Industrial Specific Plan and the i purposes of the district in which the site ys located; and 3. That the proposed use in ccsnpliance with each of the eppl:cable provisions of the Industrial Specific Plan; 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 propertie• or improvements in the vicinity. Y SECTION 2: That this project will not create adverse impacts.on the environment and that a Negative Declaration is issued on January 22, 1986. SECTION 3: That Development Review No. 85-4v is approved subject to the following conditions and attached Standard Conditions: j Plannini Division: 1. 0�1 veway access onto 4th Street shall be eliminated. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION Page 2 2. Reciprocal use of plaza area shall be provid I and` -hall be recorded in the CC and R`s of the Parcel Map 9687 prior to issuance of building permits. - 3. Special landscaping treatment such as accent trees, ritensified landscaping, specimen size trees, and mounding shall be provided at the corner of 4th Street and Santa Anita Avenue as well as to two project entrances on Santa Anita Aveltue. 4. Detailed plans of the pedestrian amenities within the plaza area shall he included in the landscape plans to be submitted for review and approval .)rior to issuance of building permits. Engineering Division 1. Existing overhead utilities less than 66 kv located on Santa Anita and 4th Street-along the frontage of the property shall be underground. Upon written request, the developer may enter into a reimbursement agreement for 1/2 the cost proportionate to the frontage on Santa Anita Avenue. 2. Off-site grading easement and a'righ -of-entry letter from the property to the north ;shall be required prior to the issuance of grading permit 3. Notice of Intent to join the prWased 4th Street median island landscape district shall be filed with the City Council prior to issuance of building permits. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 22ND DAY OF JANUARY, 1986. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CU(IMONGEI BY: •Dennis L. Stout, Chairman ATTEST: -- Brad Buller, Deputy Secretary i o . PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION Page '3 I, Brad Buller, Deputy Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the 1,oregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at aregular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 22nd day of January, 1986, by the following vote-to-wit; AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERSt ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: f ----- .T c E 9 Ov O d 6 E r G Od ds 9S u�. qq nc�aN ^ct b2J mb nv �nq po n6E o GC �� b qu O c 60 G. Et. •t�..p �G V.. MCa.^ O�ti 6A dyN e,20 OICL•^� v4 @ E L N Zr A V .:mow C q Oa o W C CCM A .n NxY= cbuL .+o i N o a o a$A y..- rx qo o w+ 11 a+ nvgc. a .LVY zu `Ngg V.S WYL fi�yO }' �.N aa� ^NNb �u^^EO uLVd.O^E OLCq C N �.N ^ A^��N =NC q dqc G d.N� d •l;yM O V d et. � � N.L NE c.N+ sib c.'yY RE Or\"NydG^.CLC U Obl Ob.YAO dYF YV¢E�� pp O A Yy NCC N nL 0 a C1 p. G Np u ♦t O y d _ c q y r E � C� d E y=y q O-0 p 'O w EI d C LL 6 r V A 69 I N L A._ O O p n• N K V.+ 4 N 01..+_ 4 O g 6 r z g L 6f..1 pN��I 4 Tl > 4LL1> OO v LC,v EM ' J 4NO 4q 4.> OUy.AYL q C L 2. p YOad+ Y d i ay 6Y.0� C � N ~9YL. O dA 4 R dp O C,y O ('� ` Y. p d'••C h ark. S N. � � d V N d. y L:n q b� a� i•�n c. N^n E E . . C� Y x O O LO. GO V P �N .0 N C Aft tri nc.^.ti d L Ln N �N E d.> ti u L N L c d r� p 6 e. �V b C.EE d E ••¢ C q .a C y a L.b 0 l-•G. ay•' GE uL NLtJ L. = q3 �.rc a =L a— E t L aA nYrp YadN p.0 a. up 00 upcE ENa E — pQ d q.E lJ d NU _ dN 2p,—,•O n.�lNaa Yr�u Ep Sd Yra 'Y.�6ap+ qn cY 2FN G6N pn Laq��aA Q0.d NOS L •+LjlO�L _ pl G. Y y a L 0.N o g t,• Z yyN syw o>p r•o^d�. 0.2 wq�y' y �S.SY +ay.L 0 C ao�a. Gw dd .- a ` E rd r>'. Yd"•^ x'J: � goy -E a. ten. N A t i ^ yudpl c q a « aaN ^s aaq Y Q quo'y '=yyq Grp 34EME d^ L A q cpiN �! 6ti a4. pE N�Q yro 'd Boa iU.'N ,N.pd y« 0. uT ad -R dY dw� N� O A y ye •�C "NTj p ^d nnCd qCa q^. i• NGp� 3p A O i Y E -31 6a _ p'„W EL N�.0 NWYpN a ^O Zd p q0 Y^ •� a C4. Yp`d ^^.�I Y _>jt0• Wa—O+ NY d qK aaFt s apsace o'N, y rn.. a.o s.•. a o..n V Grg G GE Y E Lq a �S V. qqE , Y O Gug E E N L 6E+..L6 p:u0.iOW A•iivOiM L=2 a=nNU OMN Y•pi^ c ^ G G W^^Z g.0 6LNap+O. Nn p N � H • I I I c) N � � m� r7l I I I WI - U C C • �� r«.pl L as �A q aQ.•«C 4..a .M MYG=N SacA fir. 4:ia a ,'-d •` � nia'e NL a u Or"�a • VO^y i' �'.a^ N >I 0.ND K.�'t ya m~L 0.�SOE OrMON L. •eJ LZ MN r '� C— Y YOgS p SL: r ,' <I e 6 �•d L i 1 L c �g E t y aCL- Y..d. d i o O C V • J N q j ✓`d N c g d d 6 d N Y d g Y�1 u E N N C y C E 6Li O C dre> +gyiC L Mu C Nrt Nrq iN r av AL Y N.c. C C N y d a c=0 Yl y O L a u q>Y u L a d LAY ny. O.. i Y 6 W?' •N 6Ga t�J� L UGOpoE p«Y ^ U y d u'O W Ot N— F•Y G L a —A as L ^LNO L.N NEuy Nc0 OGYcin ^n G o v �. .- pq •no. c dq y1N ay YL CEL qz4 p d.N c up 2 g•O�pM y aMZ q6 S La Y>a Y }dil 4. ,pG cd a� Y _6CrC L=G q� N CYO.a CpY aly H ^ , pa c^ a qNY G `Y aC0 COI a C^ d Wr• C p0. j G aE�.C'p0 Ge LU. q V G a L p OI L C qM qa q� wu OY Nc 6 �a Y d Y+E GdH �6e.o rS. ^S r O dA p�Y uc Ac �!do NEE>� Yq^_y 6a as N N a U E G AGO -J-L y :N ul a. ••C.. cN L iY c i Ly; (•' o ^y ,ue's ' Np.c ,..t.G qp u an'n° ��E L p 6 N20 N� =O L+'c•. •Y p w >1Qd y L. N (( N� q—z `;U p —V O O q�r4 uy qG� cOG b.pGp. A Nqu. pYZ L na L C c �G a .p GE 0.pO«O �r yr 9pgg O16 + Y n� NQ. Old OI dLL L�. U•L+>GCa� pU01 aL�..�OaY om M q ba4.apL VY tpd pAft .LOL0.r. YNp i•- p€€� C Q 0.L�i. 6 F•L O A Q n a N A.D Y J M a G W q a=a OI r t na F•ry NCq f�•+q6 q.6.. a O C O �Y O Ou-N d TA O Ct OlL _ Wd SD WS CO Lw•d�> dN�o C.LIs nr6`I O , R.S.r E 9` L u o d. O O O. w 0•= N u `' a p d O ( n p w p A r L u w n O O. 0 I9 • L a Y L y O^T u- d 9 Z d2.A E .O- wLi qUN ay C N Nd � � r�ueJiL • ^y=L apnN G �� W wOOC^O La^ ^aur0 -9 n oV� •ce .4 e w w tau 9 DN iD It w xl. no A r " O > d �Fm a cc5rR 2 9 t p94.p Y t cO.0 C E9•Ts� o _e CO L t�^1d _°e q y •- N nN Ua .~. dO.n.N NO wz C O1Lp a! N o.�•te �d L pq o c p- y TAu 9c 9 �.Yv O L L S 6.c c C^j C T. \ E d _ y N a%' H A LY raa E. c m ats 9 0 W,1. r u 0 d O L SN^ Q SNO fhb QN Y�^O� TgNpO <O+C•.O :z 4.p w r a s a d 9 Y A N I • 06 Aw N e t �.M w.= . NC E1-0iqL a . C Cw .O `=A Y ..+0Y L4, OL � •dq E Aaa+c 10 .. EON �. nOa Toe a�" ^_ Y QYC. >� ii ^ L a ra qV io aYT O E d YY w` NQ NO C Ow OC Y� G9 dar••O=. O•H ate. >ps V Ly a tQ 'n00 S.CZ dac - d�j• O 9Y S ��u « M C� o� _w G L v 9 � 10 V aQ 9 qaa A n uu aA w^ WC o. d9 I.; C r Of N E L L de u F9qu n�w �' .,LL �t G ^.r so F y Lao} pv L rT a C Lbw dM q. AAL� _ `! rtE rsD Z .-ed > L q 6 O L h w L; d �A �,`S ^� L O a C>L VNLn E E&KL.raDp .. 4..N.O' A:,9•«m S Q9:N !-nw QU <9 1-ONr 4. 6Gn C QN6A E-e C G Z� W 6L tt; Ank dt E �' O La O a 6 C 9.0}� tom. E n • d U �o9.p Ea o0 • F.E a4 p y^ y.� .Z .O p LL G U O y px V dEO �3V dL J c dM1a` a >t Na,G EV VOx YGQA qYLV�O tt N V Z.H.= da "� o = A Eo p Eo �u Fd,o Lo J Y �K q. S n Ed v €A p+ y O q AU dm O L tjLE n C a 9 .. 00 Cd EO A �' 2tOi0a C ONl�w � yU C �N q• N C.S V. N OEM L G Y 6 O•w a L O 0A O G G L.... y CO W O V N Q ^u V O O N O C a`Oa d 0 0 9 N d Y N:F a S O`.'E.g N 3^'.N g N N V U 4 c da `V=T LLi d�a m. V Eoca �ro N}ad .T Ed 6=d O VTIi Y�u>+V A AV6 �•�.Gmi Lp N c LvVN uN M, ^ V �aLV LnL E V9 Oy uNt 6 t 2.2 S LLLvi O. !-. A. .. F••UW fy�.pn1i.N .�A.rO N N S � 4v= .4q aa'_ v AY ro �i.o. s Au O L O r .d NO EOu d�L YO.A yud 0 d.eu . O, Y CA Lv N4 qGu a^Vu -EYC aJ On _ SLSO 0 O V A C OL C V LO.w M OHO\ O3 Ay Y AO Vd Eu ayt O.y `q 4110VIN u. �L+uu • yy 0 A F .�N OSL+ V3 ;% y ` L N LL O O. O a y i V O L Y T6. o 6.yZ% was A m H A "` ooY N aA Oyi o 'Y E�.G Ln.VQ 4y NCO @ < V.y •' aN .ar 6 U .L gg L .t n Q9N O a. O E _ w.AC 0�4 Oq �. N2G ONay N LC pE WL. Yu ^ •=0. Equ^ Ai YL 4.Ox N of C.NO O90a� _. u C AO NE OL ru V y • a�G C �� ^��. E06J ub M`Vw Ed O c 'C S:a� G €'•O. Ned �qG AN NN=� ua a u A • 1L-S ODV\\\\\\OY\\\« b61 VN ' S�0`a mL' JiE+c' ^M1[. tid A�gp r tn«0 �< G4 q UI WY0. WLE6.LLT. o V O 1 V1.-R O UlA L OO C L C �tlN O�O..Cj tEu Y 'd A tl C r CY Y 9 o q c a ru 000 -y {J . uqY O OM vy d w.p �6 L V L L v' OV L rCLJ O pw S o E�, o 0 F i L� w ooiq Bv� dN: o . s i oW oa a... '=o G uoM a7.E LT trdc «�' ayi d �+ E Y' d c 4��.. d, Apa �dL q. Yy R7,rtr d3q O. ClMgydA tl�NY �� A Y� O O6y y6 EMW rFJ .n d ��a2 La aq rn� N� < wo as a �o n. ^ M n 'Lw L CA OC d. M20 pLY2 p d ' LL m a S. C O V U G M.0 `p O > g q C Y q 2 C c m o ^3 u v c 2 W n L o FF c Y C p d cz 9 Y OO�Y�. OF U9 6e 60 pL.6 4YM. m 32 Lr 1 t 9 d Or C e•Y d O O �" ya C C CC C r+ O �C VO V e N q ^ m a C C 6 L L G G G 2� oq I. mo L tlau u um o �e mue�. s dAp.,na �v w� uA L. L « La Q� QYT tl 6 >g dC+ O9Q qw^L C C i M =. C d YG.H: �AGa d�N MM �� nC d CC Cq _ ".5 L' U « OMCq �O q y. L 2 V eV.w Zv: _ C C ew c l H S Q V O C E N O L O.M o o � a M efz *,.Av u,. 4 F o '- E ot-tl uO cam. q E d �9 tlga n0 ^ •LV ,cq. O i LLu p p�CO Lp rgir tlq W L O d� n~ rtlrpi �.a aOgO C Q6 p .O 6GO1 EaO.rOY Y 9+'.0 92. y0 eU O LOI LE, 6 aA^o'w C� a 20 E0 O� 4O J ^A LQ OC>O 9^ C G ^q Y tlrY an d O tl aLL MO CE O Ld 2L d1 N. D >r yC YLro. tl oM otc 'N eu COE .M-6 Tn �...arrr Nd pw Ou LL� q. VI 9v1� 6NA0 Op�'E.^i WN9 WYf> :Na - O� O 00 0 O 9 Ji 4 0J]J]L E_ 6 O�• ... ... fr � � N 2 i - ` � �•. O O� Sr v V. O � G. O O � C L T � C Ed N!• ty >m N QO 7Z VL 6Y C NVu>d = N i '�� A A OO>•EppN Cn Ny79N� n n a 0 b y E n C V O L C L L •� a'^ L 6 N �o YC �. y2 LAN 3 h Ld a C • i 9 Y O ` N ld V L O C L adOC a _ v n vvao n4u o TEi =sda s v d aCLC A>u C� y« L y a. L Y• n EN L 6 d F.L E EE 3 C.aa nd Eaw p.0 nN y -E"z i�. Cm `M unLd �. a AM a y� Tom.; tJan Et «ay C au99C a LN y Ty d u o N t� M T 3 N l tN 0 0 Vy16W�d.p- 6a-9 I I Yo y awe m. s T � fie T.r nc.� vy 'o Y u •i.mi v e %a 'dL nia cN w S ._ d OD pYYN Cr dl Uw ` i �IND Ow Mq �O no �^ .• G V y� E y ^6 E y d d y J y EE a aQ Ly So naao as a vs io� a ay Y. yi V o°p) OI C O NCO v NEc N' Mi a ¢i J« aW L oTZN p� >° �.Y•o Sm Ei t �Za cw. y uu u i' mow` n 6i0 6QL W3 L LImgNK 4L Yr� LI A 4 Y E 4Hti •E.. x v NISI � o Ls _� �j e Y E y y v L •�-d .N. o "om � Nam 1 Hi 60 Oy dL ,eY VH. ^d am �+ I y r y .O I c...c 4 V O •-d J W.d d qjN aM r " E I^ U~ate 43 CaL ^? j�a uM _ W 4.y LUYO O: 1 n l y Y b O w O L ^C a O Y Y r LYN x D Y 11. uWE u� C1 � T'MO O ACN �_� SM1I Ns 1"C L. O Ld AY ga.0a_ M Y W. O r Ya y T d y Y V L Off' d Na'a 4E x a^CO ^ O Oy N ja yN �.� LOL. N'j N d v c 4i u dU as c aI L aJ EO Lu �Nd b.. V L a CO LS� Y aEE r,O. \'O N OY W O d:L y � V L N N Y~ Y O.. C C .L•• m uu.`o uv .2t! via �L A F.� C I. ^y 66N qx Y2J C y2F- ri 1 6M <2 71 N� `\ O p, ` i ��