HomeMy WebLinkAbout1986/10/22 - Agenda Packet tZ�0 2, .� p
"n V
CITY OF
v RANCHQ�t:UCANIQNGA
MATIVT1\'G CqVI,\'1�IISI
ON
AGENDU
A.
1977 WEDNESDAYP l4 ,O 1 .x, 7:00 p.m,
LIONS PARS COMMUNITY CENTEU
9161 SASE LINE
RANCHO GIICAMORfGA,CiI.LIlmORIdu
L Pledge of Allegiance
r IL Roll Gall
` Commissioner Barker Commissioner Tolstoy_
Commissioner Chitiea Commissioner Stout
Commissioner McNiel
IIL ,Announcements
I,
W. Consent Calendar
The following Consent C q;ertidar items are expected to be routine
and non-controversicl .1,1Dgy v,41 be`acted on by the Commission at
one time without d(sc114r1T#Au if anyone has concern over any item,
it should be removed fol,disacussion.
A. ENVIRONMENTAL I ASSESSMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT
REVIEW 86-24 - AJA/SCHEU - The development of two
multi-tenant industrial buildings totaling 44,050 square feet -
on 3.44 acres of land in the Industrial Park District-Subarea
6, located at the northeast corner of Center Street and
Enterprise Street-APN 210-331-12,13,14,19, 20, 21•
B. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 842J9 -ISIIII -Submittal of a
Resolution of Approval or ddetion of a Condition. of
Approval requiring modified cul-de-sacs.
V. Public Hearings
The following' items are public hearings in which concerned`
individuals may voice their opinion of the related project. Please
wait to be recognized by the Chairman and address the Commission
by stating your name and,�address. All such opinions shall be
limited to 5 mirmtes per individual for each project.
C. ENVI�ENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT SWAZ GTE='A proposal to locate a 665 square foot
unmamied rolnote switching station north' of Highland and
east of Milliken within the Caryn Planned Community-APN
225 Y41-29 (Continued from October 8,1986 meeting.)
e
u
r
o
1',D� TIME EXTENSION FOR EKr'1HONi`lEWVAL ASSESSMENT
AND CONDITIONAL USE'PERMIT 0 29/,-FIRST SPANISH
ASSK BLY OF GUI) CHURCH-The qa n
Lament of a 24,475
i square foot .church facility and a :request to operate a
preschool on 4.29 acres of land in the Low Residential
Dhitrit t (2-4 du/ac), located on the south side of Arrow
High4idy between Calaveras and Sierra Madre Avenues-APN,
207-342-12.
E. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 9972-
q{ MESSENGER INVESTMENT COMPANY - A subdivision o
ll 21.9 acres' of land into 3 parcels in the General Industrial
Designation(Subarea 2),located approximately 563 feet east
of Vineyard Avenue between Arrow6oute`and 9th Street
AP 209-012-16.
F. Sifd APPROVAL 97-66 -MODIFICATION,- PA'i`TON -The
request to modify an existing shoppit� center by adding
trellis along the front elevation,'located'at the:northeast
corner of Archibald Avenue,and 19th Street.
i
VL. Wew Business
f:
= �Ya PREOMINARY REVIEW 86-63 - PITASSI-DALMAU
ARCHITECTS - A consistency determination between the
Foothill Corridor Interim.Policies and the proposedexpansion
of the existing Music Plus store at 9172 Foothill Boulevard-
APR 208-632-48.
VII. Director's Rbearts
H. APPEAL OF MINOR DEVELOPMENT 86-20 - STEER-IN
STEIN
Vffi. Commission Business
IS. Public Comments
This is the time and place for the general pu:ilie to address the
Commission. Items to be discussed here are those which.do not
already appear on this agenda.
X. Adjournment
The Planning Commission has adopted Administrative Regulations
that set: an 11 p.m. adjournment time. If items go beyond that
time, they i nali be heard only with the consent of the Commission.
77
'YUNITY MAP
t'.
Lj !.
° SPHERE OF INFLUENCE i
__,!IIL LSIDJ
8A Atd p ; suml I1T
I" acass_za� O TILL At EW/AY'
eesave 9 `h ease ea �'- y.•'',_'; t161----CiN ;yty.. Y = __
RIA
e e
t w a3 0A8 El LINdl
E !�'K* +tN+ertr�� xrxt
e xe r
��
rE CHU CH
fa
FOO HILL ° Ct t
° w�
ARR W
8th � q i
O
� Tth
Sth .i �
t� < w
a
n w Ath t= W c
a
> w
CC T e
SAN B RNARDINO FREEW Y
CITY OF
RANCHO CUCA1V ONGA
,1
rr
— CITY URANCH6 CUCAMONGA �r10�"^�o,�
- STAFF
REPORT
�
U
DATE: October 22, 1986 1977
` TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commiss,.n
FROM: Brad P11ler, City Planner
BY: Chris estman, Assistant Planner
SUBJECT: ENVIRo��MENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW= 86-24 AJA/SCHE!j -,,The developme of two mu enan 7n us r a
u ngf�totaling 44,050 square feet on 3.44 acres of
land^in the Industrial Park District (Subaru 6), located
at the northeast corner of Center Street and Enterprise
Street - APN 210-�:31-12, 13, 14, 19, 20, 21.
I. PROJECT Al'� SITE DESCRIPTION:
A. Action Requested: Issuance of-a Negatiye Oeclaration.
Ask B. Surresundina Land Use and Zonin :
North - Yacanr, industriOT 1101 ding, Industrial Park District
(Subarea 6),.
South - Vacant', Office Building, Industrial Park District,
{Subarea 6).
East Industrial Building, Industrial Park District,
(Subarea 6).
West - Vacant; Industrial Park District, (Subarea 6)
C. General Plan_Designations:
Project tell_ ndus r a avk
North - ,Industrial Park 1
South - Industrial Park
East -` Industrial Park
West - Industrial Park
0. Site Characteristics: The project r-te is vacant and withcut
any su s an a vege ation. To the south and across the street
Is an existing two-story office building. There is a one-story
light manufacturing building directly east of the site. All
street 4nprovements Have been completed along Trademark Street,
Center 614reet, and Enterprise St.tet with the exception, of
driveways and sidewalks:
i
i
I
i
ITEM A
i
' "` .., a't^'�s�,�s _ e"racar,trrm�pr;. .,.�.-;.._ •ss RF'� ,'^�S'P',P�
! PLANNING CQFtt sSIUN STAB REPtIFtT
DR 85-Cw »M a/Scheu
October 22, 1985 , F
Page 2
YI. ANALYSIS:
A. General. The applicant is requesting Environmental Assessont
Tor a canstructlon of two industrial buildings totaling 4,050
square feet. Upon approval ofa Negative Declaration, the City
Planner will .grant ft'nal approval of the; project based on
conditions recommended by the Design and Technical Review
Committees,
The prOJeCt consists Of two separate buildings intended for
multi-tenant use. The applicant, boviever, has designed them to
such a way that there is the possibilit~:,of expanding to a more
Intensive office use. in order:,,to aic'awodate.that possible,
use expansion, the applicant i:as priivided approximately 25
"extra" parking ;paces in the design.
S. Design Review ,Committee: The protect has gone before the
es gn Review oabi nd approval has bean recoamen4ed based
upon the followinggedFfons.
1. Additional pedestrian amenities are to be provided to
the office entrance plazas in the form of integrated
planter areas and/or free-standing pl-anters.
2. Pedestrian access should be prioided from trademark
Street and Enterprise Street and connect directly to
the employee/pedestrian plazas located on the north
side of Building A and the south side of,8itiloirg B.
3. `i'exturized pedestrian connections and texturized
pavement at project entrances- should be provided.
Texturized materials could be of exposed aggregate,
colon salt finish concrete, brick paver, or a
combination of ahem,
4. Three parking spaces with east/west orientation
located at the northeast corner of the site should be
reoriented to a northwest orientation in order to '
eliminate possible c1rculation conflicts.
S. In order to create vertical relief to the building
elevation and to screen future roof equipment from
the second floor inhabitants of a neighboring
building, the developer should add an angular roof
screening element th!tt is integrated into ':fie.design
of the building .and is similar to the existing
southerly building.
-
PLANNING COWISSION STAFF REPORT r
DR 86-24 - Ale/Schmid
Cctober 22, 2986,
i Page 3
5.- The man doors along the service access corridor
should be painted with accent colors.
7 Special landscaping . treatment --o include accent
trees, specimen siae'trees, annuals, etc. should be
provided at the site ,,intersections of Qenter and
Enterprise dnd'TrademarK and Center.
8.; To mitigate'views into the service corridoC�, dense
landscape treatment such as an incredsed` tiiumber of
trees. and .shrubs should be provi( .i along the,north `
and south side perimeters. 4
C. Environmental _Assessment:, Part I of the Initial Study
as beencomp_R y e applicant, Staff has Meted
Part iI of the Environmental Checklist and -*ound no
significant environmental impacts.
III. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: The proposed use is `consistent with the
enera an an ndustriai Specific 'Plan. - The proposed use,
building design and site plans_; together with the recommended
Conditions of AppNpval are iri compliance with the Industrial
Specific Plan and,.:ati other applicable provisions of the City
Standards. ='
f-
IV. REC"ENDATIQN: 1��� Staff recommends that the Planning Commission
issue a ego vei,eclaration for DR 86-24,
Re ctfuliy s itt
Brad Buller
City Planner
BB:CW•ns
Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Location Map
Exhibit "B" - Site Plan
Exhibit "C" - Elevations
Exhibit "D" - Grading Plan
Exhibit "E" - Landscape Plan
� < de ` t
subarea Stt
ON
wL y
,� r tax ./'�1►oi' n, _ :P
'Y
rA
P s r r6
r6F.
d
® ® ® moo ®
*+fir
C
NORTH:
CITY or-
RANCHO CL'CANION'GA TITLE:-b2lyvinto
PLANNING DIVISION EXHIBIT T'• SC�LC
A-4
r
7E7
Comm
TASULAMO
— `
ACM to
tit `MALCIM0AREA:
d� o VAPM A:10,1Q0 OP.
�a sk 28:f60®.F.
a A yr:te��e +a• MAL 40.090$7.
+. _^��• ` RECtMED: -110KA"arxs!PW
,{ �� � etmnea }• ►ivauR ��arn�ul
% ACYOM 61 ETA"
i � � } o L � wcsrs[aorstmr»
-
1
j - bT11FET• ""'� 1PLpfT1'MAP
CITE' OF ITEM
RANCHO CUCANTONTGA TITLES
PLANNING DIVISION EXHIBIT: SCALE-
F
E r�
- r-eaawawo m.: arsvv�wra ..
i +
_ •°
oft
FM-
J
CITE' Or, ITEM I- A _
RANCHO CUCA1,10.NGA TITLE:
PLANNING DIVISION E. f-ilBIT---jcL- -SCALE:
-b
AMA
sln"a a.F
lARIlKk11K cuWmsat:
W. 3,440 Cx
._ .�. ��4 �� •• �,r� Via.
... - ENTF.tiPW* STREET vowry NM'.
CITY Or, IT EN I:
RANCHO CUCANU EGA TITLE-C r
PLANNING DIVISION EXHIBIT; 0-5CAL.E: 1 IC
A-7
m
" tww.o,.
1.0
owr
CA
NOPY ...
own ,cca.,AMS
..=Ir
avmwmm Tom
V cy"B"nr
® aea�aen Ta�wwri
`orwawr+ C�!.
mole Al.mu cwwti+is awL
W-%T P41Ol1OMN®OR:GN t
,nraoa.ss.rw
CITY Or, ITEM: I
RANCHO CUCAN-10INGA TITLE-
PLANNING DIVISION EXHIBIT:—Z. —SCru_E
,r ..�
r CITY OF RANCHO CUCAII ONGA �t}CA �
STAFF REPORT
Date: October 22, 1986
To: 1,, Chairman andMembers of the Planning Commission isfx
r-oms Barrye R. Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer
. abject. Conditional Use Permit 84-09 - ISHI a- Submittal of a '
eso ution of Approvalor Utletion of a Conditl7on of
Approval Requiring Modified Cul-de-sacs
BACKGROUND:
' On October 18, 1986, the Planning Commission considered a request
from the developer to delete the requirement for the installation
of modified cul-dfrsacs on the two existf� streets terminating at
the east boundary(,Jf the Church property at the northeast corner of
8tiwarda avenue and Victoria Street. After considering, all-,input
on the -issue, the Commission decided to grant the applic4nt's +y
request<
ACTION REQUESTED:
Approvel, of the attached Resolution reflecting staffs
understanding, of the Commission's decision of October 8, 1986."
Respectfully submitted,
Barrye R. Hanson
Senior Civil Enq deer
BRH:pam
Attachments; Resolution of Approval
J,
u
ITEM 8
FF
1
RESOLUTION NO.
t�
A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COV4,ISSION
APPROVING A MODIFICATION TO CONDITIONAL_ USE PERiM NO.
84-09 CLARIFYING STUB STREET IMPROVEMENT REQUIREMENTS AT
w 6829 ETIWANDA AVENUE IN THE VERY LOW WIDENTIAL DISTRICT
` WHEREAS, on the 9th day of September, 1986, & comp iete application
was filed by Church of tatter Day Saints for review of the above-described
modification; and
WHEREAS, on the 8th day of October, 1986, the Rancho Cucamonga
Planning Commission held a public hearing to. consider the above-described :
modification.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission r�solved as
follows:
SECTION 1: That the following findin3s can be met:
1. That the proposed use is ir, accord with the General Plan, the
objectives of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, and the purposes of the
district in which the site is located.
2. Thatithe proposed use, together with the conditions applicable
thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or
welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in
the vicinity.
3. That the proposed use complies with each of the applicable
provisions of the Development Code.
SECTION 2: That this modification to the original project
conditions of approval will not in any way effect the Negative
Declaration issued on August 22, 1984,
SECTION 3: That ENGINEERING Condition No.. 4 of Resolution No. 84-82
be deleted and replaced to read as follows:
4. The two streets abutting the east property line will be completed
with a straight north/south curb and gutter, landscaping between .
the curb and the block wall, a reflector placed on the block
wall, and a "Not a Th--ougr Street" sign placed near Pecan Avenue.
r
APPROVED AND ADOPT' THIS 22NQ DAY OF WTOEER,-1985.
PLANNINS rOWISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONOA
BY.
-
Dennis s tout, Chairman
ATTEST:
Brad Buller, pu Y., ecre ary:
i
I, Brad Buller, deputy Secretoy of the Planning Commission, of'the City of
Rancho Cucamonga, do,ltereby certify,tSha to foregoing Resol'4tion was duly and
regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Plann4,ng Commission of the
City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the,Planning-,Commtssion held
' on the 22nd day of October, 1986, by the following vote-to-wait:
AYES: COW,1SSIONERS:
NOES:: COMI.SS`OHERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS.
9
p
E
f
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA �vcAti�o
STAFF REPORT
J r
o
} a
DATES October 22, 1985
T0: Chairman and'h3emh+rs of the Planning Commission 91z
FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner
BY: Chris Westman, Assistant Planner
SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 8E-17 GENERAL TELEPHONE A
proposal to locate a square oa —unmanned remote
swV::,hing station north of Highland and east of Milliken
- APkt 225-141-29.
I PROJECT AND STaC;DESCRIPTION:
A. Action -Requested: Apprlval of a Conditional Use Fermit and
ssuance of a Negative Dec'laration.
6. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning:
North Caryn Planned Community
South Caryn Planned Community
East: Caryn, Planned Community
West Caryn Planned Communi--tY_.
C. General Plan Designations:
Project cite Low Residential (L), (E-4 du/ac)
North Low Residential "L), .{2-4 du/ac)
South - Low Residential (L), (`2-4 du/ace
Low Residential (L1 (2-4 du/ac,
East 9
I' West - Low Residential (L), (.-4 du/ac)
i
D. Site Characteristics: The site is presently vacant and-
surroun ea Sy7 thF recently annexid Caryn Planned Community.
Directly to the south of the project site is the Cal Trans
right-of-way for the proposed Foothill F�^eeway..
IT- BACKGROUND:
This project was continued from the Uctober 8 Planning
Commission meeting at the request of +.t* applicant for the
purpose of resolving a deed restriction interpretation. . As of
yet, an agreement h'- not been reached by the involved
parties. However, the applicant wishes to proceed with the
request and resolve the deed restriction at a later time. It
should be noted by ':he Commission that revi i of this project
can procP.d as a land use issue and that th6 interpretation of
the deea restriction is a civil matter to be determined by the
parties involved.
ITEM C
PLANNING CO�fISS10N STAFF REPORT
.> October 22, 198£
CUP 86-17 - General Telephone
Page 2
III. ANALYSIS.
A. General: The :Intent of the proposal is to provide telephone
sere for the Caryn Planned Community. General Telephone
will lease the site from the property owner: the�Archdioces, eff
San Bernardino County, The developmnt of'unmanned switching
stations is not uausual for residential areas, however, design
is an ,issue in that it retest be compatible with the surrounding
uses.
B. Design Review Committee: The Design Review Committee has
revs wad prAw� a_r�, recommended approval subject to the
foi+owing°
i. t;)e roof should be changed to a hip rof with
We material (see Exhibit "C').
2. A r^i nirAum of 2 tree wells sh"uul d be provided
along the inside of the southerly block wall
because of its higif v1sibility from the future
freeway (see Exhibit
C. Technical Review Committee: An access agrec:.nent has been,
reached w1th Ine owners of the property to allow General
Telephone -co have` access from Milliken to the proposed ^:I
snitching station siZz via an approximately 390 foot drive
aisle. A letter from- he Archdiocese also states that access
shall be re-routed at,zk later date_.when and if development
curs cn the property. A Cal Trans agreement for access into
iYeewav right-of-way has bevi discussed and shall be
fitted pN.6or to grading permits as required by the
Engineering V)ivision.
0. Envir-Imental Assessment: Parts I and II of the Initial Study
av�i a en comp e,a an3-3taff has concluded that there are no
significant environmental impacts related to the use.
III. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: The proposed use is consistent with the
Genera! Plan and the Development Code. The proposed use together
with the recommended conditions of aoproval will not be detrimenW
to the public health, safety or welfare or materially injurious ,o
properties or improvements in the area.
1
IV. CORRESPONDINCE: This item has been advertised as a public hearing
_Tfie aq iF�e ort nftspaper, the property posted and note,45 sent
to a property within 300' of the project.
PW
m .+. . '
.�^all:
PlANN:IP�C, C^k +i5SI0�AF�REOOi1T
Octcib 22a 1996
CUP`86-17 mineral. Te epitane
Page
M. RECOMENDATION Staff ,recommends that the Planning Comissior►
ss��e u qe tivc ` :-mc3trAtion ,and approme Conditional Use
Permit RR 17 y ought adoption of' tNe atuched Resolution and
fonditigns of Approval:.
R k,;oeLtful iy submitted;
� a Brad B�tJler�':,
City,Planner
BB:CW•dak t
' Attachments: Exhibitr�e Lecatiori!,,Hap, Carlin plinn®d Cam nity.,
Phase 1
Exh'ibi t "g" "=_Sits Plan
Exhfbit "C" - Elevations:
Exh bi t °€).° -•Grading PI an_
Letter from Archd i)cese ,
K Resolution of Approval with Cenditions
a
1
i C-3 -
. � /S, 1• 1. Y �' .��'77 '' .'7,� ' _
�R
�;;� 1 ► '
aa� •� ,+— � 1 7��J fi�
It
RIN I
UL
MIN
I -MAN
st . .'1 J 11
A a ♦ .. r a y', .
i �
J it w� `li�I. ��'f .-,.... It
! 4
o L FM. _
10
jitj low
NORTH
CITE' OF ITEM:
RAI'C O CI,O ivIQ\G,,� TITLE:PLANNING DIVISION DIVISION EXHIBIT- 3 SCALE: NS
J,
Adak
LZ
,I LE i , U --0 ",N)
TT
"TER nN.ft
__ _ _ -� ✓;
�.1 7 —_, _
� .. _''_ urnvrT ecelwncrt
Cr-�Cyn.Tlafk3 arr. Wl.i:d
NORTH
CITY OF ._ ITEM.
RAINCHG C.C�-VMO NG� TITLE:
PLANNING DIVISION EXHIBIT: SCALE; t 36
i J f
At •�
14
e
cl,
{
AMA 'IJ
r _v.,e •�..w.�� Rw � m 1 F . _ I
tt iy
A
} •o• 1 aLe/�M1Co�WIb6&iY 'NMei
J,;>> 1�.tgecse of�nrc�etfxntc�lra
' 3
September 2, 1986
A
Ms. Barbara Krall
City of Rancho Cucamonga
932.0 Baseline Road
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
Al -1
RE: Roman Catholic Bishop of San Bernardino
€' Property at Highland and Mil?,iken - 'parcel *225-141-29
Dear Ms. Kralls "1
At the present time the Roman dyLtholi,c. Bishop is negoti-
ating with GTE for the purpose of giving. GTE an ease
N ment for ingress and egress to the property from
Millik/n avenue. The location of the driveway imi+ld be
at tf_s' most southern and western point of the parcel.
t1' When and it, however, the property is developed GTE will
no longer be allowed to use the above located driveway
Y zind at that time will be given ingress and egress rights
` in another area which is suitable to both the Roman
Catholic Bishop and the City of Rancho Cucamonga.
The contents of this letter shall be made a part of any
escrow agreement should in -the future the Roman Catholic
Bishop decide to sell subject property. a
i �i
Sincerely,
Deacon eorp
Schmit
Busine s Manager
a
GMS:eit
f450 evwgZ -Z Stud, clan !&. 4axdlnd, d4fOenia 92409 r7i4l 88q-8957 .`I
�• s
RESOLUTION Nam.
` A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PIANNTi.'G COMMISSION
APPROVING CONO<7-TIONAL USE PERMIT �A0 86--�7 FOR AN
UNMANNED REMOTE '�SWITCHiNG STATION; LOCATED EAST OF
MILLIKEN, NORTH 07 HIGHLAND IN 'THE CARYN PLANNED
COMMUNITY DISTRICT
WHEREAS, on the 1.3th day of Auglust, 1906-, a complete application was
filed by General Telephone for review of the above••described project; and
WHEREAS, on the 22nd day of, October, 1986, the Rancho Cucamonga k.
Planning Commi ssi w,f held a ,--publ'ic h "71a; to consider the above-described
project.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Rancho Cucamonti Planning,Commission resolved as
follows:
SECTION 1: That the following findings can be met:
f 1. That the proposed use is 1n accord with the General
f` Plan, the objectives of the Development Code, and
f the purposes of the district in which the site is
located.
2. That the proposed use, together with the conditions
applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the
public health, safety, or welfare, or materially
injurious to properties or improvements in the
vicinity.
3. That the proposed use complies with each of the
applicable provisions of the Development Code.
SECTION 2: That"this project will not create adverse impacts on-the
environmen an at a Negative Declaration is issued on October 22, 1986.
SECTION 3: That Conditional. Use Permit No. 86-17 is approved
subject to-5-e—T-olTowing conditions:
PLANNING:
1. That approval is hereby granted for a 665 square
foot building and future expansion:
2. That the roof shall be revised to a hip roof and
tile roof material
3. That a minimum of two tree ..wells shall be provided
against the north side of the southerly wall and
planted with. columnar evergreen tress.
770
PLANNIf d COW' IS$ION'RESOLUTION *r
' October 22, 1986
CUP 86-17, Generbl. Telephone
pagc.2
4. That the matter of the deed restriction on this
property prohibiting the proposed rer.ote switching 1
station be resolvdd,,:to the: satisfacti9n of the City
Planner prior to issuance of build¢ng pem ts.
=� ENGINEERING
1, An agro aunt between the-City and the owner of the
property i';r the relocation of the drive approach on
Milliken ague `Upon:. request by the City will be
required prl�r to the issuance of building permits.
2. Prior to r�p�nce of a grading permit approval from
Caltransorf site grading on the future Foothill
Freetvy r3rat-Of-way to the south of the project
must be ob��
APPROVED AND ADOPT D THIS 22ND DAY OF OCTOBER, 1986.
Al
` PLANNING COMMISZ"ION OF THE CITY OF RA.Ht W CUCAMONGA
b Dennis 1. Stout, ClaIrman
ATTEST,
Brad u er, Deputy ,.acre ary
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 Cornnission held
on the 22nd day of October, 1986, by th�1ollowing vote-to-wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS;
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: I
�I
ABSENT; COMMISSIONERS:
s
s �
CC
ago:
i C c p +t N t G
�IW .3
f. i-i��}'�.O S��� DULCH �C y� Oyy~1�Z �O y7 OL EH C`p
pL Oliy �.✓�G.�Ca C1S.0
r
pw9= 4Ye.GA C V.Pc
ppp4YY YV p Y p p Lq L^. yY.� V pC=Y-y
�`Z ► VY�MY `u.N Lg,s-- 'Ilk
-M ,. ice'"mot >p3 Ilk
$YOB 1! srs
p_r
ni5 sw«'3o. `� uYS
": qp` Y f CO N> co"aw ■ 'Y O
" O Sef rp al w
+ ■ .a24yV J o -Cw-N w
3r -zC — aN
N N=2Als
lBUt
CC g >., o $�aM3't>>
A
O 04L Yw NC.r'tu0`� NNoCCC. 6�.Y p O>a_t►p� Y� y
0. `�RYV�I'ZS'191` V; FAX
OS.Y�69 iVCC%�S:S �OOYN fS�"S 4NM. ��. Coy I�JG.ifi Ltf
N
i
1
te
ti
� 'g r �N
Z..
Q.
ijC V Ai y •Q
a 'p
p W $q N
YO fS v G' M ?^VL
6V CY O p ip O V.. P F.p
zp
Lpq 9 t s O_ Vu L Vt 2 r l Q p«
6; : L 6 N L CCp 0 O M
R6
v HE
Y'
' 7 rp 4yp Jp C
c-r� z
�$Ga 91h4 10 i.L•?� . L.r a7Y04V a✓ . O L`!u4
c. EpeAaa Ec�oo�pM`oYc uSCL$sty agY E OI
a0i�✓�_ O qw S u aCC{a.0 TH 7 .--e L^'4 �✓CY +._ati
S$.- „ q`E 8 t IRA
Y
G N.LS r qy OpgAyO✓ ✓ GLgYC ONN ?Op`p$ 6
.■ryyi N C�F G L L O q O•.� p y A YwAY�S. y=Y `M -4 �. �i s
' N d� p 9 ! ✓
oa111=e+ �a�Y... V.w«�a,5a: E'".;: a�: g,. $.4.
par- y >,pY eC t yy 4 Z m �v,NC .�¢+
C S+. -✓Q A Y Y, 3 iV_�Cp 6 i O{O rt Y V N« per`C V y� y:W6 �A K
L ^oc �E " 3�ffiX _w 77a s: =I�VVVOpIii Sz
` Cep yy V$ vO v$NO
c. 1�{s $ C �aaMs.„ V✓.w N ie$� i NLa a
�vVL aO VC�n'f q01ELy. ip 1N.QQ� X.,;
N _w �iyyyNv� �CC
Y GL.,' q✓ O i�✓✓ .= N �. j�NV iyY AY •O.Y •-
A ppL > p, YE CC�i N Y Qp,N V .a 019 eqe a
$O way$'p gNi�1�j g� O-, �w�gQY y� + � . _Z
$ GC A 'ss. aSS'do�.'rix+`.a,8 `'>e=N+—� ✓ % a cF aA
�C�✓ yV wN��V SO
SrO Yppa�YOy�. r. {�■y■�✓ CN �Q aY
Gwu y VVy +V qS LSp`SIVI _y-�pY,�QO�. 'JwBY +.0 `V -gr YC.yy
A.11 a9V1,,`�p>Y ✓yy CY✓ YiY, CA{pq,®IL CY�eY Oab1l.CCLLY eW pC�p ik
Y Y'y J5.
i H n Y K fir.M H Y l3•.G. W r A G Y L 0 4
U
t
N
pp ss t
cA�cc >� $may oyu. —i A 3�u�i�i.N--� ai.—✓�i 0�`4<
Amok
^" a n.p
b'� ♦ G� q✓6 N'C 6 `� p�4L' Y i �
G
L c � � �� s$ �w�a~ aqs c✓ s �ae Cw.
NNVySy
��C� A� -n V� /� �S M� Yr�✓� M-q� C O
NN
-�a U -Y V w. �.�V E � ✓ yy O�C� i M i.
;j,,j qppp, qq CC Y CC Vq r b
�$ O py aCi iCo 1a` OWpCjeNpY € ME S 'Z•wm. r.
._L r0 uv Mu✓ ay.G �i6y`qC Cp`VG `�pa CpA�(q$y.` C.ACC`yy.
NC a qi n�a CZ� »S ,` �s V��O�L V ✓41'r� O��.O w.�y
Na $$o^ ra" ouaL' scs �:eea���m�a Y,�e�o`� L,c
ti a e{ $ Q iar q w ou uci pp3AL
a3—o ns E; `✓S -a. '�L o?. W'9c cE Gq C q G4oc.s
SP.
aY Im— .$N g$E,�''� e
�_+`" �w A✓ wY>Q n��y. Nc c
y...✓��,r7yo ✓a ^-
o a
$aw = s� >niu a✓✓. �. 'tee $�y,b'E. ago^}v ay`N4
Y9 ✓qO V yqyLONh7i
N�tyy t1 F� pap QJC M✓a NU y-Y a..✓.AL yNCC ' OAr y YYw
E✓L9 f qq 68 yOC L✓L.YVy Nq ONC S �CaN pr
Va S L{�V OOM CS✓C �V'O ^v CC aV C8�6pC 9yOQ O CC O y
wq Yam OG O CC� C •S A � £�. NT- Eq
y O■■P p C.�U i s pC tTE N O\ Y L d+ p C W C O f0 o. p V V G
A O�M 9 q L 6 y. ` A O A ?`pp a{�. !p a U dd V..M b O L+�6 H
tq OG6 r'M6 1�t NQ lyvYiL M31 IY J 11 GYr�e.�. HL Y.MC• r w.G 4t
C
,poi= O� � ►C PV\ 4�00 ueutYLwS .t- C Yu o..
.O M! PY .�7 CQ OLYcI� O !y a�-3 Or>vo r !
UL + M CV>Y
br NL4 �N N L1 Sa p.`.aR4v�YC`.L C °gaL
P a�^o 4w �• `o.=wi. �� 4�43emR ooR.vt.$ �u s• w4.��
O aY �.• M LCYCY 4y LL N G CY • { U.yYiY+
•TO" w=O�Y •. w .suN..�< Nv�MA9 Oa Y CYYC �
�. Nei VYCI 3L J �+ �NNYY QV V.4 12 �L NV-►
� � ^�+�L. VVag '¢�'.�! ~�"� aS:i nYY-a�oor.$�'gn:.. „•a �� Mac
,Ya .,.� f.a,.0, •. M^ LN a y,0 g C R N
z a
aN A.
zu
y� �,y` pL1 QN4�N a> «3La C4.:gPn
Is q� F` F:.h
g6 �p<r}�,
�Y/_Y,uy•R M Y m`4^ OYa �tt Lt Lib .!/ +ii•' 1•w8`:2+u9'...
y O4YD1 R• fN Y�4y.,y.. ^wy \YLU.
tl^NL�i m '`+.�QV
�pG«iyuLO�Q.CC.
8 NAY two i� .s.w y i�' N .L.mm$`8» Y+O ,«2
gQ i C L Lv
-`•»S» c»,= �c« s«"o Yaps' se�u��.=`y.$.m�«
I
AMk
C7
�$ ey ` Mua c^ i 4$ro^
4qgA� Yn C` 1vy�
u�i L. 'tY + ttl r n• V4 apsr'i> O » � �Na P'
Y�„L
0.<^ +�aC fill~ YCy A $S 03v_CC e.` �..oE; vYV+DV
Y.Is 8 Silly-i>
p 9C
H�C Ca u^
Ny ^S.L. MC�wL w uH " r
C.CNw r0. 'rw Y =C 6N L� 3Q 01 � C9u .
�y A H C.^ 'O U L iy Q.+ C CL�•O Y y L z 2 v w-E It J Y j
e w Y O N tl Y O if y U^ O w
>EVV VY"'"� 4 Yi 6 CC/ C� iN n.fi aiOK L�aLpV..
Y I 0..O fT}
aC R c Q,'..� u « o � gyyyy gasspg}
IL9Ya. EEppY p'L'o
,G A 6.Z P Z -N C Al.y i
^y9
y V p ba b01 a p� y C y pC �
RY 9 4L.,wa. V PCs M
�yr((�..b RH aY tR.i LiyR • YNY ya�v.. L^■Y�.RV�
^13 YLp as ^L Y`O C.L GTG>.VEV OL.L .�EUL w.00<�NO tww.q > iON aOH IV ta. rO.H'^w. <Cp fd K NY W66✓VI�.V
10 • C . N A r N b U •. N
Li ;�
s
cw� .NaA ,o,Cc�.. C�CaCC q..o�ee or- �o r ua
yV 6� U^Zp '•�LV ppZ C CY w�Aa� Q�L� ' �O.
'nL V � • � 0�_
C~w X�.� y CqCVGN�^G� p ptl
QN y RyYYy C.N «1i�. p.� 4yC�N Ya.. �f2MYA
•L �Ep S "6spca w-$ ! ca�gpo ,.` Ij
wa 'mo
ati�ilzFwCaa BB I/fpy Y��jjp 9. _4
n
ts
w a ^'Sg Y 0s ` �ti'> EN
C-S
��..�� N �: N
�CC, �pyy c w p
Gi pd aY�Y Cy«C�GG`,
+���`� ;n,����]�� 'f.oL..�w- •L1�9:Vp' y.p�^�NY/� n '�y
2✓C-!A
O
xt
a
A
V+CY nq. • ygYp. p� LC c tY
ZIP 1 MI Y n � w L a ua'A`
acRi�c4.y. ;-. Y�� V M� • y � MG ..� Of rq' ' OL ;4•w
Eli � �CC� ���CC■v.
iTc 171
€ c .
Y.a�9 L �`.O Yia wy ay �N
v QroC a 9 ».o Lpne _ gyp`.o
nv AE N» wyL CAL Y»pGNw• ML »`qy »�
Gin W M G io��^
GP 6=O 6p v Olio L �®M �•• �t s L��� YO,.5 va N- ua»n aY J
»=o c u ono` CAS nuwa � ,3 Si ,y�Yt SyMS
bwy AL c.n Y. qwp+� c ti ,uF 6>e an vui� w�•- ..cw sw.<
G ;G q C b y R O C C ^y N E O a +.r
O Y G Mq w.. % MO�YA �.G� pps■� 01S` 01 Y•a LYL Y.
Y b.CCa CCUYO „ .. tyy..rr+�� Lei am (pp(
-
rMA
y
1 Y�O44jjO C-OOCw� Na`o LJ C ^ YOC4..
�' •� w�� y.LppppL PD y+0 j � � Y Labp C
■■^pQC YYL nbbbp y�JCC .�. � N � �+�yY
'J � ag.� �+c.�tS�a. -y�! <� i � y 'd. « Ny 'SN u♦a♦
1 QS YY�..� :�N.. � YW L. •
4•Q�� S�$'�6� aYLOr � � O, Q C Y f. q � M�p�•C.. NL
uw�u, ,ny aauNo.. y a by s� w ♦ `o� E :.w wn
��+e
01��^ iwY qyO•. Y NpV cN tl� $' � Y,v y.S =G
b^.1 M•.�cp�w.{{.11.Y y L �+��i S.:O e• _.-�! ON.. _
0 LE
dh. of YY
w N b N 6+•640.
M
UD
W J
YEa" c^ •� Y w. m u�u rn{{.. Y+� =off =
~Yg.Py NyfV..Lp
m C ^O � Y n& �y � EO• � ./ a�4p�up� Ya qO nn Yayl..�
^IL n•Va ti4CC b Qaq C� Y VP AY�.gr '►601�..
L.i g9 < i YY =w pRRpRLL ® pI •p O�apq �p=♦
aC �ti a W3 C�q Y Q YPNp Cap• N NYw
O.d. N� �w �v.cR +' � �Q �V � C+Np • Y`V� CYu.�p M
0.am +� ,NY^¢ $„'•,�,- �'r's .uQw Ge pb .Qr o„+,up qc!
ac 'aI -. q.�y y Y+ k
.c'&.
Q
Q-a ? Lw�6C;. NQ�L �4QVM
NCoIz `^ Yam. v.N. ,�•.,.. N. ..0+ 4 Y�Oa� `raD^n
"aiw�1 Y .-0.. VY NO��O Y'VspS T�pNpq
gyro C« �� C�•fT 4Y. b'.� ^= Y i•Y YUM py N � Y Y yy p.N
t Lin CRµ� ^q Y6p Q . `p L�]tP N y�las i�p��A p
�`pp. a P CCOwi. ^N G44 O.Y Y.♦ V 41VCN� .[.WgO OO^'.f5.^i
NCE 4-4 b7 ww 4-2 O NY # 90 j.
pp. �rf
WrpVb Wu bpt 56. a9b tiY <M KU <01u tiQ. 6 7. a
C vCY O z� n0
NZZ a' a Z� �■i�s.a § ` Y goc 'y o
1 s... "Y �Y .� LO� iN Y ` a '��� •a a`. 8�'
Ls o s gpen Y x - n
ECp« 4A. an CY ,o`',Ne>N 3 .,. ,�, a ' = -`
da«p" � oS y $F dNs „o .Y "Co ,o �N ig �q
Y A G L pp u V O E pM c • O o w V e h
4 i SpY A u3,,�--,q6 � NO C w y4 Y�L.. p�
nV Cy Lw OC - rG-lF LA 4 L� �Nu LV L•'
l6aSr S C � V;0 CCTf_ Y cc Y9 ^ 6— Yt.
L� Y p Y ti `2 4
Iq- CN ^Y W OI
Cpy Y�Ol YyO .CbXGY pp— �
,ate• •. ,rN Cq,YOrr NLI ` L EY> $V Yyp
f• YY t ` � L �^�y. y
I, �C G6OL Yyy yiL C1p 65 xOti �' *aa GO Q ^Y � S- YS OY
yy■ `Lb y —�"S�yyy. +p6j ppC y. —a YCC $' QL .0.•04
quV R •S•...A Yam. YE OIYOy�c NYy Y.+. =L O V` yp ✓y0A dC _ pq.
iNO c. Qt Oaw NW ¢ 6. ..YEE R' 9` 'L'N yC u � ZppL!�
L L I f
N OYry ��p b.�M 11./ `w M.MW LLLf aO, 9 !♦ a �V ^ �Wu 1pM
IC 01 ti V W
uLi
it
�p 9` ! C 4 •Car a$ a %0
lZ
99 a �w o` oee 9-uw 'Y.-� e
n
OI L C YK p E. �i� rO�ptl
w N.^ yOI J C C
Y Ns L
c$ aq = Q$a o e�
sp Y> .rid •a,•c3! p■ a� ai 0^. �N
p$Q
NM�u
O ¢ �CCs.O•VL 4.axr� ^�
VL. NN 42 W„ O ))v US M OKN yO:tlpY �L
O • ! LL YBYB a
V o;A C 6i N'n X., + n a
_ 9 N. Y1Y ���'jj, V 0i�• yL�•r npY Frpt U.
V.Y.'nL ..e`•aw 4'yu ve SN LLC JV� �, yVC
S o 'g1
y3i NY$ a n as in nw` .�. c aroi
Cgs �I
5
U
O
a
f
MCC
]1 Vu Y Rd^- yam+ _ u +b9ttN qu L y L
IL..AN
L.`
L u aa. AL: L biq n n yp.
b 9 GOO 4 C O u -I 6 q a Y C u
s' 8 Eu. e a e
00lNY
�OIYn enVp ?A .�[b(P q�.. Nn L.( bqq� C6C�Y As- a 4� i
O LU JK Sp
y� C� bC
a 8 > B {1 CC
�1>:, aC Nfi p3 baCY
E LY\ gLLy LL uTLgO YN Q aq cG `jyX, �y U.N
,Q !F^=
`
Dpp9 9YS� �� YDlCO ?4Y YV �Y S4 Y QMd qa V i
` Y�V C�..F■.19.-
� R'-`C bTG 6r OI�A L� .L. D•U LS �'�O.CS pNC Y �4�
r �;" NNy�r� �W 6S «' 6YM�N 1�.i J GCS 41�w. d:J iD1C 27W Hnp D
N m Y wi N �p
o a 4
CITY OF RANCHO CITCAMONGA r Cnn�o�
STAFF REPORT
O O
E Z
DATE:- October 22, i986
TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning CoMission
FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner
BY Howard Fields, Assistant Planner
SUBJECT: TIME EUTENSION FOR CONDITIONAL USE OF PERMIT 83-20 - FIRST
SPAAI`i� : RCW-The develc;pment of a
`i s`gUare moo,' church acility and a request to
operate a prgschool on 4.29 acres of land in the Loot
Residential District (2-4 du/ac), located cn the south
side of Arrow Highway between Calaveres and Sierra Madre
Avenues - APN 207�342-12.
I. BACKGROUND: The applicant is requesting a one-year time extension
or the at orementioned conditional use permit as described above.
The project was reviewed before the Planning Commission on,
,September 12, 1984. and currently expires on September 12, 1986.
II. ANALYSIS: Tile request for time extensiba.is needed in order to
complete financial arrangements on the 'construction `loan, The
project as previously approved with conditions substantially
complies with .all current Standards of the development code. The
applicant has indicated that construction funds should be available
within the next 4 to 6 months,.
III. RECOIMMENDATION: Staff recoainends that the Planning Cormission
gran an ex easion for a one-year period until'October 22, 1.987.
Res fully subm ted,
Brad Bu e
City P anner
BB:HF:vlc
Attachments: letter from Applicant Dated September 11, 1986
Exhibit"A" - Location Map
Exhibit "B" Site Plan
Exhibit "C" - Elevations
Resolution of Approval
ITEM
f
-first.
Spanish
September 11, 1986
ass*#Ably
295 E.9th Street
Upland,California 917w
w
{71di 981-59911
Planning Commission
City of Upland,
460 forth.Euclid Avenue
Upland, California 91786
i Gentlemen
Pastor.
Rev.dose A.Ramirez Our church is requesting a time extension
res.(714)946%3387 on our approved proSect file number CUP 83-20.
The extension is needed: in order to complete
arrangements on a financial loan necessary in
order to begin building. Enclosed is a check AML
covering the extension fee of $62.00.
T regret any inconvenience to you due to
the delay in filing earlier. This delay was
c,",.aed by the church being without a Pastor
..or over two months and these extension forms
Vare only located within the ,last few days.,
yew truly yours,
N. c;
Rev. Johnny T. Perez
JJP/mr
Enclosure
RECEIVED---
.CrtY OF RANWO^.'.'^.AMONOA
PG.ANWF"Cl;•R'pDl
SEP 1 :13�t; Pia
AM
gt8i9)1011t)11t�;2):3)415)6
'T TM
MY
+ �= •�I��^-''-'-'',:�:� ..�I,II III II�11Mp� p '
aea f•- i
1 rf
•:� -d ��� 4 ,.(�'ram'• iw. _ -r
.1Y
1
`E��
1
♦'AAOX ppyTR..
L_-_J
l 11°1 »a w
N
Nugl t
IoiJq t.. v am
_.�
.t♦ Ili. i
LOC►T"PLAN
WE PLAN
NORTH
CITY OF ITEM: C�E '63-ZQ
RAIINCHQ CL'C-l-via'GA TITLE, S� i-r• PIS®r.1
FLANNINU DIVISIUN EXHIBIT--1 ¢.�SCALE:A., '�Ggl
r/
lu
f , i s
i
uj
+y ZURTHi
it-��
CITE.' CIF` ITEM:
RANCID CUCAMONGA TITLE
PLANNING DIVL9aN EXHIBIT- " � SCALE-14 "�'D —�L
f�
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO.CUC410NGA PLANNING COMMLPSION,
APPROVING THE TIME. EXTENSION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
83-20
WHEREAS, a request has been filed for a time ,; t5nsion for the
above-described project, pursuant to Section.I7.02.100; and`E
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conditionally approved the
above-described Conditional Use Permit 83-20.:
SECTION 1: The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission: has made the
followingfTnaR7,g :
A. That prevailing economic conditions have caused a
distressed market climate for development of the
project. r
B. That current' economic, marketing, and inventory
conditions make it unreasonable to develc, the
project at this tl%e.
C. That strict enforcement of the conditions of approv
regarding expirations would not be consistent witi,
the intent of the D€velopsa::y_--lode.
D. That the grmntng 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.
SECTION 2: The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission hereby grants a
time extens off:
G Project Applicant Ex' iration
CIvmm FIRST-SANSH OCTO�87
ASSSIBLY OF GOD
CHURCH
APPROVED AND ADOP""O THIS 22ND DAY OF OCTOBER, 1986.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
8Y:
Dennis L. Stout, Chairman
ATTEST:
Rraa Buller, Deputy Mcre ary
ova _ a ?�r_' �
�,.
I, Brad Buller, Deputy Secretary of the Planning Commission "of the City 'off
Rancho Cucamonga.,,.do hereby.'.certffy that.the foregoing Re:blution eras duly.anct�
regularly introduced, passed; and. adopted by the Pi, nnit Ce issi.on,.of the
City of Rancho CL1+camonga., Ova regular'meeti.ng of the Planning Cciwi lision held
on the 22nd day of October, 198f,; by the,followiig rate-to-wit:
AYES: CCMMISSIONERS.'
NOES: COMMISSIONER$:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
z
;,
�i
t
q
h'
r
-
J r ,
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ry �ucanr�N
STAFF REPOR�
F �rc Z
U >
DATE: October 22, 1986 1977
I•,a _
TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM:, Barrye R. Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer
r,
BY: Joe Stofa Jr., Associate Civil Engineer
SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 9972 - MESSENGER
T N r, N - su iv sion n . acres an
rInto-3T '' I . "s��n the general industrial designation (Subarea 2)
tocatee�aappro imately 563 feet east of Vineyard Avenue between
Arrov Route an 19th,Street (APN 209-012-16)
I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: ;Z
�. A. Action Requested:, Approval of the proposed Tentac;jvdi Parcel Map, as
s 1T own oil x i S Bu
B. Parcel Size: "1
Parcel' 1 - 8.8 Acres
Parcel 2 6.6 Acres
Parcel 3 - 6.5 Acres
C. Existing Zoning:
General Industrial
D. Surroundin Land Use:
Nort -'esi ent a
South-Industrial
East - Industrial
West - Industrial
E. Surrounding Plan and Development Code Designations:
North - Ke" s-identia
South - General Industrial, Subarea 2 ;
East. General. Industrial, Subarea 2
West - General Industrial, Subarea i
AOL
_ C
ITE14 E
M
TO: 1 C i m ar n n h a a .,t Ms ers of the Planning Commission/!n
g
SUBJECT: Environmental Assessment and Tentative Parcel Map 9972
DATE: October 22, 1986
PAGE 2
. F. Site Characteristics: -
The site is vacant and slopes approximately 2.5 % to the syatineast.'
II. ANALYSIS.
The purpose of this parcel map is to create separate parcels for the
Industrial Master Plan approved by the Planning Commission as Development
Review 86-I3 on Jule 23, 1986, The relationship of the parcel lines to
the approved project s to plan-,,iv shown on 'Exhibit "C".
The public streets adjacent to, the site 'will be improved to clt� 9
standards upon development on a parcel by parcel basis.
III. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: The applicant competed Part I of the Initial
study. to con acted a field investigation and completed Part II of
the Initial Study. ,No adverse impacts upon the environment are x�
anticipated as a result of this project. Therefore, issuance of Negative
Declaration is appropriate.
a IV. CORRESPONDENCE: Notices of Public Hearing have been sent to surrounding
prop,r,y owners and placed in the Daily Report Newspaper. Posting at the
site has also been completed.
V. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that " ;r;Planning'Comnission consider
al inpu�t and elements of the Tentativd Parcel Map. 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,
'i
Respectfully submitted,
id&1teRA I
Barrye R. Hanson
Senior Civil Engineer
SRN:JS:diw
Attachments: Vicinity Map (Exhibit "A")
Tentative Map (Exhibit 11811)
Resolution and r
Recommended Conditions of Approval
,a
�.1
„ a
SUBAREA
}
ems,, f • 4- Feron
CITY
-. .. _• ..,* *.,do-;�.
OF ME PARCEL
MAP-il7.2..--
RANCHOCUCAMONGA
TITLM-V-IQNITY u
ENGINEEmG DrvisioN EXMBrr.-l—
t
.04M ANDUSMIAi,tNo tdA�N�[GY uy® �� W!'/ray[! v.`t
TEht?�trx`t►!E
- PARCEL MAP W . 72 4,AY u,* ;
IN THE CITY k
t RANCHO�:UCAMONGA �a Y.v6�wta✓u.tw rrrv4rat O'R�tel!atu y rse.Q.ar.a:a [tctueo r!kRQOa rw tY rr.+et4 rwlN A.C[f HQ M RetQRQ.e 'JC.1L!ALiMi''t/SAW QL!-'+yYrQ fJVkn tIAfC Qr C 11.0-ORVlA ACAC�T�i'rSR
� .. bLrftaRtR Mn�KR� 5
.lahcw cvsnn:x wRrws ct O'
�(,ItreQn'riuirrtrr -
!yt^).. 1RVINL,C4Lre 4t'It{.V QM ar,.�+RtRer wg"L°?t 1;Q'�`..�t► �1 t,.Q1.trt.11me' ot�lwis eALr
e MY AIT11«i Q.N AU.Ita,s
�• t oaM�Af
I�. ff'�' �..�� V+....rnt•[�..) .`j A. �: fa rev)At
/ �A~ y�u—rrrre r
'S'xs:>�r aaj
A - h �—�'• IIiRCt:4 i ji PAR."i
mlinw
FS,' 61
T`
LCGCMO =s�sri.reAw w'S
�'� 1eiQ11 Lw 4.IF S .7'
-. «'�— A<desa+ets�a.Y►f Crrrrtrrc ut>r,grr.Mt
�� flurc sun[or
awn.rmnr arcr.
y. •'M•BRM.QMOw♦I!lM IMIC' „�, �
rtwiwlYrR.V gtllll.ilRJRQe7 pT_�
iQKMAIM+�IMJiiiYxxt♦ +YiAc' �!
Awril.YMrr�Illellfli[.tri .,-
ArY1rrAM�eR[efYYt _
•1tI
AW r* qB: IIaelMetiY
ecewQceeRrr
ANOW A9UrrP aewrR&vR*W e> wAmmer
� nlxnck
tQrnriawr __ , _.
19 cAl SEL Aws a
Nesownwr ,-.,
ME-SS04GER OEVELOP&WNT •
ARROW 9USINESS PARK
RANCM OXAMON"6AWOMA A �g N#._I
MASTER PI AN --+-r .—.—ARROW-.—...ROUT!--
rorea fwo-eTct■auunr _ ._�� - y _ ^-'-.,
077
fxaf Nfrw msrarw ..fa•Mur .uufn ++
mon lre .AuofwN .flan ul It � � � `� •1
yfYsf t11w1L molra�nlf _ ... f :ra�f l f f�e
1rLwlrrar IW oa.afr � • ca .
. 6MfUlN•f1! lal•1 rN.Na N �• / ���� •.� .
lalli N.Lrr afy Ilff¢flf.fff fJ fL•f
wwfafafa�fr•f n! i 1..
slrrafrr! r,f,N �fi-r' arfn
f•rNllaawm !If w C �. t!� � aL�lf
l.rlrr
»es.r NleEa 1 'r. I
r 1 •r ���y� Mello
4-1
_ anw um
r 11L••aN
V
CITY OF
Fi` :�p,�RC1EiL NtA�► 9�72
RANCHO CUCAMONGA T'ME SIT E PLAN CAL
F
ENGMEERM DIMION
�f
_ f
RESOLUTION NO.
1A RESOLUTION OF THE P'%ANNINGCOF>r9ISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
l CUCAMONGAI CALIi'ORNIA, COKPITIONALLY APPROVING TENTATIVE,,
PARCEL MAP NUMBER 92
WHEREAS, Tentative Parce3' Nfep`Number 9972, ,submitted by Messenger
Investment Company, applicant, for the purpose of subdividing into 3 parcels-,
the real property situated in the Ci+y of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San
Bernardino, ::,State of California, identified as APN(s) 209-012-,t6, located
approximately 563,,feet east of Vineyard Avenue Between Arrow Route and 9th
t Strzet; and
c
WHEREAS, on October 1.986"" the Plafnning Commission helt4, a duly
advertised public hearing for the above-described map.
f` NOW, THEREFORE, THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLVED AS
FOLLOWS:
0,
1 SECTION 1: That i0e foi7owing-findings have been made:
I. That the map is consistent wit@'Ehe General Plan.
2. That the improvement of the proposed subdivision iS'
consistent with the General Plan-.
3. Than the site is physically spai-gable,for the proposed
development. ,..T
4. That the proposed subdivision and improvements will !*:jt
cause substantial environmental dahiage,, public health
problems or have adverse affects on abutting;property.
SECTION 2: That Tentative Parcel Map No. 9972 is hereby approved
subject to the attached- Standard Conditions and the following Special
Conditions:
SPECIAL CONDITIONS:
I. OVERHEAD UTILITIES
A. ARROW ROUTE An in-lieu fee as contribution to the future
un erg grounding of the existing overhead utilities (telecommunicati)n
and el,-;ctrical} on the opposite side of Arrow Route shall be paid to
the City priar to the issuance of building permits for Parcel 1. The
fee shall be one-half the adopted unit amount times the length of the
project frontage (767-feet).
RESOLUTION
PAGE 2
4
t B. 9th STREET'- The existing overhead utilities'(telpcDmmunications and
e ectrica on the project side of 2th Street shwl.l be undergounded
° along the entire prc4ect frontage extending from the first. poas east i
a� of the A.T. & S.F. Railroad Spur along the easterly
p g y Drop„r.rty 'fine to
the first"yaole nest.of Vineyard Avenue prior to public_,improvement
f=eptance or ocpupa:rcy for Parcels 2 or 3, whichever ogcuws first.
Reimbursement ,n`( one-half the adopted cost of undergrourding from
future developmN nt as it occurs on the Opos to side of the stree{, is
;. .: feasible from the presently undeveloped,properties.
f 2. Off-site drainage facilities shall be designed and related easements
obtained as necessary to. 'convey flcws., from ithe development to an
acceptance di's'aosal location as approved by the City Engineer prior to
issuance of any permits (foundation, grading, building, etc.) for the
parcels. Construction of the facilities shall be corsaleted prior to the
occupancyfof any of the buildings, The Dev;alop.er shall be eligible for
reimbursement of any cost in excess of the stQndard drainage acreage fee
• _ incurred as necessary to construct any portion of the,facility designated
as a City Master Plan line.
3. An easement for a reciprocal drii;4way to include access and maintenance
k shall be provided along 9th Street at the west property line of Parcel 2
and the common property line between Parcels 2 and 3.
Aft
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS WiD DAY OF OC1705ER, 988.
' PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CU.AMONGA
BY. I
Dennis L. Stout, Chairman
ATTESTS
Brad Buller, Deputy secretary
I, Brad Buller, Deputy Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of
Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify ttiat 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 October, 19:a, by the following vote-to-wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONER&:
I NOESa COMMISSIONERS;
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: �
2
tu
V^ p,, s
•Q L $ � a~M W M YNp Y
o ~« a`rdo tia• aFY �g �. r. wn. � a.
„ at: �~LLy �1 `'•�a 5,'ys'� zc= � .� mp iY
V � ^CN Y'O�a . C�Y. ug!`• �Y oCq'V 4 CC ``
o ` 9b� 5�� Np oG�ra «' p„ � e Iz M L w L L�T III L. �u lTC pG 9 �4 C �V RCN ppA4,� ya Y q
�� 'tJe �� QN « YW�J:YOV tln Mt.Of` YOa 4` C
es
gy ~�C L1�1� �ML.q. NYC Ok i .Gi M4I Nffl.�'� �YB V� .CV
r, x{ X1 .,d K{ X4 X X
�, � N• g.'" B;;; fir.
JI C. Y Y
o !K eY t v L ~i
y yC u
♦N Y iv
fg C. YC GCS.
{Y`.
y y � � .J A :.1M1y�l 4 ♦ �. A � M6L.0. �L Qryy. �.�Q �0 i
aY,i � G ,• CyY Ctl M �. ou O �� SN L� Kql ��
�G W fi. s 6 C 6 C 4 w. 'p �A ♦N 'c y p 4i
N voc aY
ttiv
i
C-
t�
-u.. os� uGy
Qrr OY n�OG O�
y. 5 N Y O G
N Gy Q4 Cpix
V
C O ACE Y C L W pU�,
o G.u� YO L
N
� O �.. I •� �0. w0. y� �YQ. Ma Y YT �G n y �.N� N4yy uY.. LGt �..Y •'G .y 03Y
a _
a6 y� y A` � �� ��L o�8p �'� L •y N
` Qe
Y~=�
ez
g
G4
Lla N ¢u 0= G -2a 4z Qii `O=$ N Lp Y
-5 G98u 91rpW� L qY au J+d
L C
w� gaj ~� �y`.. p'. _Y 6.<Y .YG! y LS'C:QY.. p��� n�• 6U
Q dL i7 HN GAY GG�L U F�� Yp�p)!Y YGYO � G�� O�Y Od
Y
L ^ ^ N 14
� � q
k
CITY OF RANCHO CUCA.MONGA
PART II - INITIAL STUDY
ENYIROMMMNTAL CHECY.LIST;
DATE:- QG lj J3 Ee
" APPLICANT: FS ggg r cr vas
FILING DATE: APP it- /�� t 98 LOG NUMBER:
PROJECT.- 7A..
PROJECT LOCATION: AVE
VIROti'ffiNTAL IMPACTS RA ,Lou7 f}.t1D -/Z sme47.'
I. i
(Explanation of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required on attached
sheets),
YES MAYBE NO
1. Soils and Geology. Will the proposal have
significant resul s in:
` a. Unstable ground conditions or in changes in
geologic relationsiips?
b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or
burial of the soil?
C. Change in topography or ground surface
contour intervals? +t,.
d. The destruction, covering or modification
of any unique geologic or physi4=1 featdres?
e- Any potential increase in wind or water
erosion of soils, affecting either on or off
Site conditons?
f. Changes in erasion siltation, or deposition? r/
g. Exposure of people or property to geologic
hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mud-
Slides, ground failure, orbsimilar hazards?
h. tin increase in the sate of extraction anal/or
use of any mineral resource?
r" HydroloQY„ Will the proposal have significant
results in:
Page 1 ra
YES +AYBE ;0
r a• Changes in currents, or the course of direction
of flowing streams, rivers, or ephemeral stream
channels?
b• Changes in absorption F rates*,t s, drainage patterns,or the' rare and amv,,unt of surface water
runoff?
c. Alterations to the cours"e 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?
t/
f. Alteration of, groundwater characteristics?
r' g. Change In the quantity of groundwaters,
either through direct addition ar with-
drawals, or through interference with;an
aquifer?
Quality?
e Quantity.?
h. The reduetinn in the amount of water other-
wise available for public water supplies? t
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?
1.
b. Deterioration of ambient air quality and/or
Interference with the attainment Of applicable
air quality standards?
_ v
c. Alteration of local or regional climatic
conditions, affecting air wovement, 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? 4.
b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare
or endangered species of plants?
r� a34e 3
YES 'MNYHE �0 r
c. Int'2oduction of new`or disruptive species of
plants into an area?
d. Reduction in;:the potential for agricultural
production?
Fauna. Will the proposal'have significant results
in:
a. Change in the characteristics of species,-
includng diversity, distribution, or numbers
of any species of animals?
b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare
or endanger"ed species of animals?
c. Introduction of new or disruptive species of
animals into an area, or result itf>a barriez
to the migration or movement of animals?
d. Deterioration nr removal -of existing fish or
wildlife habitat?
5. Population. Will the proposal have significant
results in:
AOL a. Will the proposal alter :he location, distri'
' bution, density, diversity, or growth rate of
the human pcpulation of an area? v
b. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or
f creace a demand for additional housing? �.
II 6. Socio-Fconomic Factors. Will the proposal have _
significant results in:
a. Change is local or regional soeio-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 Plarnine Considerations. Will the
proposal have significant results in,.,
a. A substantial alteration of the present or
plarnpd land use of an area'?
b. A conflict with any designations, objectives,
policies, or adopted plans of any govez'mental
entities?-' v
c. An impact upon the qulaity or quantity of
existing consumptive or non-consumptive
recreational opportunities? E—` ✓�
o �
Page 4 q
YES :'AysE' NO
i 8. Transportation, Will the proposal have significant
result.-, 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 .fcr 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 effeENts an presens and s
Potential water-borne, ' il, mass transit or
air traffic?
g, Increases in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, r
bicyclists or pedestrians?
1c --
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 lave 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? ci y
g• The creation. of objectionable odors? �.
h. An increase in light or glare?
.,,
Page, ..
YES `AYBE y0
11. Aesthetics: Will the proposal have significant
results in:
a. The obstruction or degradation of any scenic
vista or view?
b The cveation of an aesthetically offensive
site?
C. A conflict vitiz the objaerivs of designated
or potential scenic.corri�dors?
12. Utilities and Public Sefiices1'. Will the proposal _
have a signifiract2 deed for new systems or
alterations to the following:
a. Electric power?
b. Natural or.packaged gas?
v
c. Communications systems?
d. Slater supply? _
v
e. Wastewater "--'�_`lities?
Ask i
f. Flood control structures?
NW
j
g. Solid waste facilities?
h. Fire protection?
i. Police protection?
J. Schools?
v
Parks or other recreational facilities?' _..
-• Maintenance of public facilities, including i
roe3s and flood control facilities?
m. Other governmental services? _
13. Ener¢y and Scarce es. Will the proposal
have significana results in:
a. Use of substantial or excessive fuel or energy?
b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing
sources of enemy?
C. An Increase in the demand for development of e
new sources of energy?
c/
d. An increase or perpetuation of the consumption
of non-renewable forms of energy, when feasible
renewable sources of energy are available?
A � �
a 'b
YLS ".NYSE N0
tJ
e. _Substantial depletion of ;any nonrenewable or
scarce natural,.cesource? -`
14. Mandatory Findinzs ofstz3f��once. r —'
,.
a. Does the project have the potential to degrade
the quality, of the environment, substaCtially ,
reduce the habitat of fish 'er wild23fe -species,,-
cause a fish or wildlife population, to drop '"~
below self sustaining levels, three%en to
eliminate a plat t or animal'communi reduce /
,,�Oha cumber or restrict the. range 4f a rare or -
endangered plant or animal Weliminate
important examples of the major periods of /f
California history or prei story?
b.- Does the project Lave;the. potential to achieve
short-term, ta'the disidulantage of long-term, 4
r envitbnmental, goals? (A short-term impact on the
environment is one which occurs in a rolatively
brief, definitive period of time whi14 long-
term impacts will endure well into the future).'
sly
t c. . Does the +I
project have impacts which are 4y
individually limited', but ci:mulatively a
considerable? (Cuaulatively considerable ,,
means that the incremental effects of an
individual project are considerable when viewed
$.n connection VIth tlx��effects of past projects, a��
and probable future projects), C, f !
d. Does the project have environmental effects
which will cause substantial adverse effects
on human beings, either directly or indirectly? _
ZI . D13CUSSIoN Op 'ENVIROtEtSM EVALUATION (i.e., of affirmative answers to
the above questions'plus a discussion of proposed mitigation,measures).
r
Page 7
t, III. DETE.Ttx____ I—YxATrom" - Y`
k 4n the basis of this initial evaluation.
I find the Propd, ra ect CQULD NOT have a significant effect
on,the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION Wil1`be prepared.
I find that4�although the proposed p,%b ect could have a significant
effect on qj a environment, there will not be a significant effect
LJ
' in this cas because the mitigation measures described on c)
attached si•,__-n have been added to tho:project. A NEGATIVE�1'
DECLARATION OTM BE PREPARED.
(--� I find the proposed project 'SAY have a significant effect on the
env rrnment, and An ENVIROMMT Dtp4tT REPORT is requited.
ij
Date
53gnatu -..�
y _ T'it'eVA
n
4
i
— I
a
II
I
I
Cc
CITY OF R;At C 50 CUCAMONGA Q�c- OA,
STAFF REPORT �0
z �
O .-
., Z
U T7
DATE: October 22, 1986 - tsz :
TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Brad Buller, 'City Planner
BY: Chris Westman, Assistant Planner
SUBJECT: SITE APPROVAL 97-66 - MODIFICATION - PATTON - The request
too"l��.y an existing shopping cen er y adding trellis
along the front elevation, located at the northeast corner
of Archibald Avenue and 29th Street.
I. PROJECT AND '31TE DESCRIPTION:
A. Action Requested, Approval of a modificatl',+" to a Slie
pp7�rova1- ---
B. Surrounding and Usa and Zoning_.
forth vacant; w '? '_al District (2-4 du/ac)
South - Existing-H6using;. Low Medium,Residential Dis}rio
(4-8 du/ac)
East - Apartments; Medium High Residential District
(14-24 du/ac)
West - Vacant; Office/Professional- District
C. General Plan Designations:
L Project —Neighborhood Commercial
North Low Density Residential ;'-.4 du/ac)
South - Low Medium Density Residential (4-8 du/ac)
East Medium High Density Residential (14-24 du/ac)
West - Office/Professional
D. Site.. Characteristics: The project is a fully developed {
sop-p ng center at—the northeast corner of 19th Street and l!
Archibald Avenue.
II. ANALYSIS
_-
A. General: The project is a Site Approval which was built before
die .n orporation of the City. The shopping center is in good
condition; however, the developer wishes to upgrade the center
by repainting the buildings, adding trellises, and adding stane
to the existing planters. The proposed upgrading and additions,
would require a modification to a Site Approval,
ITEM F
77.
PLANNING G,QMgISSiQN ST1lFa��EPO T b a
SA 97-u6 - M6QiFIG'�IT�}NATfQM 7
OctoberPage 22,°I9B�
o
B. Design Review C tteax The Design Review Comittee reviewed
and recommenided appxova of,the repaint ng to the exterior of
" the buildings and .thi addition of the trerlises ;i th condition
that Authentic, "River-,Rock" materi41 be used on the planter
areas. The Ce mitts also recommended that any future exterior
architectural modifications including materials and' color
should be Iretrimwed and-1approved by the Planning Commission
prior to c�mncemeht of work. .
III. FP.STS FOR FiINGS:;r The proposed, use and the addition of trellis
is,5consistent wrth the Gereral Plan' and Dnwdlopment Code. Tha
proposed use and the addition:., together with;'the recommended
l conditions of approval, gill _not be detrimen`*,fl to the public
health, safety, or:%xelfa°*e, or materially injul us to properties
or improvemEtnts in the ar*a.
IV. CORRESPONDENCE. This item has been, a,4yertised as a public hearing
Tn TFiq—Fr--My MR2ft newspaper, propoty posted and notices sent to
all proper y �tmers wfithin 309 feel of the project,
V. RECOi�+]E.RDATIQN.\ Staff recommends that the Panning Commission
' approvf fications to Site ApvMooval 97-66 through adoption ,
of the"a'tta,:hed ,esolution and Condif, -,ns,of Approval.
Res fully s ttet:�
f„ Bra Bull r Y
City Planper
9B rCW:sgr
Attachments; Exhibit HP Site Plan
Exhibit "V --11tvatiaiits I
Resolution of Approva with Condi'dons
1
1
,
Akk
�. IT
STATEA 4.ROR.1
BNtlC.lt ONOPO
t�
c
a C-L, +
g q }
NtRETEETli
V � I
NORTH
CITY OF, ITEM.
PL LNNING DIVISION EXH`II1T. SCAL 1r- ` 4
'� al
a
'` ;.�la�7tYi 4A:+N G+7�Jr�c/Ma► ;
C c:
�.�KI�f•t�,�h 11.C�1P.110N -��►4Lif.�aGd' - '
S
NORTH
CITY OF ITEM:__ q7
PLANNING DI;rISION �eH�rrs/lam �Sc���G�J�
m
�= REULUTrON NQ.>
1
R �tUOLU ON OF THE RANCHO_;%UCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION iI
`t APPOMING SITE APPROVAL '97-66 MODIFICATION FOR EMRIOR
CHANGES LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF 19TH STREET &
ARCHI'BA.LD )_'-YENUE IN THE NEIGHBOROOOP COMMERCIAL OISTRiCT
WHEREAS, ari,the 2� day of September, 1SR6, a complete'a�ppl i cati w, was
filed by Nichael B.' Patton fo,v- review of the above-described project;, and
khERRAS, on t?N6 22 day of October, IA6, the Rancho Cucamonga
Planning Commission held a publii hear:)g to consider the abgye-described
project.
NOW, 1HEREFORE, the Rancho; Cucamonga ►1annf-19 Commission resolved as
follows:
SECTION 1: That the folUvAno findings can be met:
1. That try proposed use is in accord with the Czneral
Plan, the objectives of the Developan` t Code, and
the purposes of the :.JistriCt in 'whicI the i to is
located,
2. That the proposed use, together with -the,copditions
appi icaUle, thereto,"will not be-'detriroen ai to the
p0lia health, safety, or w:Mare, on,materially
injurious to properties or imZroviiif�ats in ''the
vicinity.
3. That the proposed, use complies. with each of the
p 7 cable prn�1stans of the De%,- opment Code,
SECTION 2; This project is exempt from environmental evaluation
` based on California Environmental Qu0ity Act. CEQA. Article 19, Section
15301, the minor alteration or maintenance of existing public or private
structures.
f SECTION 3: That,Site Approval No. 97-66 Modification is approved
subject to tt5e fool owing conditions:
1. All future exterior architectural modifications including
mate;1z1 s, color shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning
Con,tission prior to issuance of building permit and/or
comm,Icement of work.
2. Authentic "River Rrck" shall be used as the material om the
t planter areas:
r�� y r
�LANNISIs Gf?iRSISSIQN RE5OL14Tlox NO."
l� SA 5T-66- t�It)3Fi IN - P$TTOW
October' U,_1086 ;
Page 2 1�
APPROVED AND ADOPT�P THIS 22 DAY-OF DCTOEaM,, 1986 c.:
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RUCHO CUCAMONGA
BY:
benni s L. Stou airman
ATTEST;
:M r uTleer, Deputy Secretary
P Y ,a
'0 ,
I, Brad Buller, Deputy S�creia.y ,of. the Pl�''hing Cmidssien of the City. of
Rancho Cucamonga, tits hereby :otify t3 at the foregafng resolution was duly and
regularly introduced, passed;; and -adopted by the "Planning Comaission .of the
City of,Rancho Cucamonga,,at a regular meeting of the Planning Coamiss{� held
an the 22 day of October;ig86, the fellowing vote-co-idt:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS �
NOES: 41-IS5IONERSc
ABSENT: COMISS°IONERS:� %' fI -
Zak
t
",,999
CITY OF RA14CHO CUCAMONGA
STAFF REPORT
o
DATE: October 22, 1936 1' 1977
! TO: Chairman and Mempers of the Manning Commission
t, FROM: Brad,Bulier, City Planner j
BY,: Debra Marier, Assistant Planer
SUBJECT: PRELIMINARY REVIN 86-63 P1T'AS_SI4ALMAU AkCNITECTS - A
consistency, d ermina on w e;- a oothill Corridor
Interim Policies and t'het proposed expansion of the
existing Music Plus store at`9172 Foothill Boulevard
APR: 208-632-48
I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION:
A. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning. .
North Existing Single Family Residential; Low Density
Residential (2-4 du/acI
South - Existing Multi-Family Project; Mediou-High Density
.Residential (14-24 du/ac)
East Vacan* Land-.With Existing Small Office Building;
General Commercial
West - Existing Shopping Center "Rancho Town Center";
General Commerical
i` B. Site Characteristics: The site is oa ,2.6 acres of land
conin ng a usfc—Plus Plaza consisting of 28,515 square
feet of retail uses. The site is fully iniroved and
landscaped.
II. ANALYSIS: The proposal is to add 1,450 square feet to the rear of+
the exxiisEing 3,525 square foot Music Plus store. Pursuant to the
Foothill Corridor Interim Policies, the Planning Commission mus,-.
conduct a preliminary review to determine consistency with the',
interim goals and policies prior to processing a development
application, The intent is to provide direction to the applicant
and staff early in the review process and avoid undue tima delays
and expenditures.
The key issues under consideratsan for preliminary review are land
use, compatibility and architecture.
_J
ITEtt G
13�Aar
} .VCR
Ft
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
Oc.6ber'22, '1986
PR 8 -63
Page 2
AM
A. Land Use. Thr exisiting Music Pius stone is retail sales
o r�ecor3s,a1»li tapes which is appropriate for the General
Commercial RT�� ift and consistent',With Interim Policies.
B. Co 'ibility: Al "land use and development proposals
ssn compatible with existing and ultimate uses
surrounding properties.i A landscape buffer exists along ,'
the northerly boundary, of the ,.Nsic . Plus ce,Aer,',
mit1gating poteutial conflicts between Ocbmarcial and
residenta9 uses. The property to the- east,. is vacant,
however.' a proposed master planning of a commercial
j:- center has been determined to be consistent wfth' the
Foothill Policy on April, 1986 by the Planning
Comm 'ssion. ':iiterefore expansion of the Music PTus,,would
not conle:ict or'be incompatible.
= C, Architectur.e: Archtualtmenta txnaion
Music us ber ent " fthe Rverall .
shopping, curter.' The building should .raceive additional
architect;aral features such as continuing the slay the
roof canopy and adding the:6xpi. sed beamwot-k pattern,that
is used on the larger retail building., Exhibit "On shows ARL
that the entire lion Street frontage of building "A" uses
r the -anopy feature. It could be said ,that: there is no
F rear elevation for %usic Plus, as the building is located r'I
at the corner of Foothill Boulevard acid Lion Street.
Therefore, providing the above mentioned additional
architectural features would make the buff' ding ; look
cortplete aril be more compatilbi'e to the overall ,C?pter.
The Design Review Committee reviwled the architecture at
its October lo, 1986 meeting and discussed s;we'possible
&-chitectcral modifications with the applicant. The
suggestions were-to raise the roof line over the entry,
similar to style s.wwn 'an Exhibit O, and extend the clay
the roof canopy to the point.where the building is now
existing. The portion added would oe the stucco'finish
with rough 'sawr wood trim, similar to what is existing,`
but would idccme a much smaller proportion of the overall
building (see Exhibit E).
r.
PLANNING CO MU-Si" STAFF"REPORT
October 22, IrO
PR 86-63
Page;3
Alk
rti
1; I
1t
III. RE5JWE0ATIOi,` It is. rimmiended that_ 'thz Planning. Co-�ission �C
erm ae at the proposed".expansion.,is'166,sisteat with ttv,,I is
and poliicies' of the-Foothill Cord ro and direct the applicant to
proceed with forhsal review appl-ication.
Respectfully sgbmiited,
a;
s Brad Sul l er
City Planner
BB:DNI.vc
Attachreents: ExhibitF" bSite Utilization Plan '
Exhi bit.W - Site Plan ,
E,lhihit "Cm - Proposed Addition
_Exhibit °D" Eleaations - Suitdirg "°R"
I
i
i
i
l
I
1
I
«I
Y_y
a x t � �{� �• � ,, 'pit '�'� �,
i
SITE UTILIZATION PLAN
0 100
SCALE
f
s;
CITY CAI'
RANCHO Cl CA?,l0 GA TITLE. 61-�f;/L7,ct!
t
PLANNING DIVISION', E1fit[3tT: -4 Sgl:ALG
a
.w.Amok..l "'� '"°`M
_ � { .,wsua �-C+n iKf sveaw+ uciC .s.. ,•,. /'r`'"s�#�-,u �..� ,
# Md.`►'e• _ � " - .--" L7Y""'6iu..«:>� .u, "+�'s1'; �+1t+'tv'u .a
47
1
J C4
to! va
� SJt
"� � $ S,� J'. f1'.• t0�'�-�y..-M."tM rI T i �! 1/ `1
�
py,-„+'►1?, �" 5�--�':. its + � 5�.._.7a^'_, ,� .ZR�+ . eii__ � ceq.arq•- �d ^,�. `�� 4
<@ "18C ,i i ' �l2sAiDC- ' 4Ml'I`�Fiw.rWoil
. , , X, was rn
s e al T AA?' i t
N d
low
{ .\[LW fn111 s.�Tu1-CE�
1
N AtP i
CITY OF ITEAb A�
RANCHO CUOkNMONGA TITLE- 0?/r s� �'
• " WIN
1•?�� I N U Ii."1"1�I
8
�' �Tll�i� ��1�111�fll�flililnll#lt�(illillll�l111�}I�lli�-� •, ,
�• i ° l
- r
r
s AS
r •
z r
r
t
i
7.
✓�/�/
NORTH
CITY CAI' T T imm: �"O�
PLANNING pIN'IS11O of EXHIBIT. _S��+�LL: •�'
n
k / nw�n�.wvr
t
K
o n i r. Q.L.L.
L zr D D CC
.K.sue GactW I.a e3oC 9if! 7bS.tASt�'..,G '1M�3 � �®c.
1<,RTH
CITY OF ITEM:
� `•r �,�, ' � ,fir
,t�l�l�1, C�. ''10i\GA TITLE-1-1,iG01.
PUNNING DIVISION E-XIi[I3lT_�'� SCALE
c ,
�-- CITY OF RANCHO WCAIVIONGA s co o
t STAFF REPORT
oti
DATE: October 22, 1986 F -
TO: Chairm6' and Membe`k of the Plan in v 1 ,
- h. n g�commission ,>
FROM Barrl;g R. Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer t'
BY: Joe Stofa, Jr., Associate Civil Engineer``
SUBJECT eal of *nor Leveiomnt Reviet W-20 - Steer n' Stein
' the appea.' o Con itions of Appova requ 'h
Undergrounding of Utilities along Archibald Avenue;-:61 the
building addition to an existing Restaurant in the 'Office.
Professional District locateo. on the west side of Archibald
Avenue approximately 660-feet north of Ai-,ow Rorate. APN
208-801-41 N
I. ABSTRACT: The Developer is reg64§t1ag the deletion��of t,ie� City
P�f nner's condition requiring a 1^`,en agreement for inirlieu fees as
contribution to the future undergroiindzng r of exisiing overhead
utilities on the opposite,sida,,of Archibald'i.uenue fo'r the portion
within the limits of the p'rojLt 1!,
r II. BACKGROUND The project was conditionally approved by the City
Plan on Sevtdnber I6, 1986. The Developers letter requesting
the deletion of the lien agreement requirement is attached as.
Exhibit "A".
The project consists of a ^;:gilding addition an existing
Restaurant as shown or, Exhibit "C (detailed Site Plan). The
Archibald Avenue improvements fronting the project are existing.
Existing overhead utilities (telecomnunic?fion and electrical) art!
located on the �.)osite (east) side of A. chibald Avenue fronting
the site. Einibii "0" contains photos of the utilities.
I. ANALYSIS: It is the intent of the Plannira. Cortmiss.on that all
projects contribute tc the undergrovnding`pf existing overhead
utilities fronting the site either by causing the lines to 'be
undergrounded immediately, ,paying a fee to •offsetp the .cost of
fu ture undergrounding or bi':; a lien ?-eement for future
undergrounding of utilities. staff opted for a lien, agreement, as
precedent was set by the Planning Commission in a similar situation
on Jersey Boulevard. for, Minor ,9evelopmert Review 86-08. '1
ITEM`H
;4
Chairman aid embers of 06.Planning Commission
:ti84ECT. Ap peal,=,of iAingr.Bevel ,\,lent Review 86-20 Steer n' Stein
DATC. Iktober'�22��,sVgBE� �
,^ P^5E 2 ,
Archibald Avenue is one of the most.important streets within the
City, therefore it i5 r.ons'Wered especially important that existing
overhead utilities .along its frontage be under'rounded. The lien
agreementwill, enable the devei'ope� to delay the cost` of
construction or 'irwlieu fees until such time that the City deems it_
feasible to underground the overhead utility lines along tire" G
Archibald frontage
The Developer'*.as stated that he feels the re4uirement for a: lien
r agreement forrtki undergrouniiinq of: :.q:;isting,overhead ritilities
_ is excessive ' irk relation to the 'ciii 'of improvements na is
proposing.
If the developer was to pay the in-lieu fee at this time, the cost t
would be $80 per linEar foot times 220 meet of frontage equals
$17,630. He states thai, the addition wiil ,8ost $12,000.
REC i ATIOP6
*' Staff reef nds that the Planning Comm ssior, up6bld the Conditions;
of Approval for Minor Development Review 86-20 and deny the appeal.
regjest.
Respectfully submitted, Y ;
Barrye R. -Hanson
Senior Civil Engineer•
BH•JSme
Attachments
,4 Description
s•
A Letter of Appeal from the Applicant
R Location Map
Detailed Site Plan
Photo of Utilities
r- '
7Q - 2
l' f} 11 f ! NY
Real Estatq Investments p Construction • Oevelppmentt - -
�'' LIt Na 21543a
September 24, 19,16 1
Planning Commisiiag
City of Rancho Cucamonga
9320 Baseline Road
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
ATTN: Dan Coleman
" l Dear Mr, Coleman:
f` We appreciate tl�e quick response in our development review process for
the addition we'nroposed on the Steer n`'Stein Reetaurant in Rancho
Cucamonga. We feel that the conditions set forth by the Planning and
Building Department are acceptable and would help the aesthetics of our
building. However, we feel that the conditions set forth by the
Engineering Division requesting a Tien agreement for the undergrounding
of the existing overhead utilities is excessive.
We had anticipated spending around $12,000 for the construction and
design of this addition. When toe approached the Engineering Depart nt
to get an approximate evaluation of this lien, their response way----
$18,000. Since this is more than the total, price of the addition, we
feel we must appeal this condition.
incerely, _
J es L. Deason _...RCEtRtyD
CITY OF"Netio CUCAMONGA
.ILD/Imq pLAtVNINo DIVISION
cc: Manuel A. Costa SEP 26 1986 Pitt
President Steer n' Stein AM
�yBsg414(tl{Lill. : i } I
Marco Alvarez y
Architect - A.T.A.
t 83SO Archlbald Ave.,Suite 222 Rancho Cucamonga,Calif. 91730 • (714)989.12SS a (714)980-2639.+
` ! FOIJTk/LG BL IiG
LAI
Q
,JR,fO, i
•4�IDS 5i°
• j ~D ti l
wro
grill STT?EET
!f CINITY IVAP
1V
CJTY of rr :
RANCHO CUCA ONGA. Term- t�t�L����' m A
4�
Tkw
�' -L.r+..• +/'�,.t.�_/t� wt.r►...ram ' taP..��C"rU/ ,1L
CF'rPaac. �
i®i ta'
UJ
Z
/r
i 1 ff
PROPOSED
;; �Ri�b70Ot�! � '• c
m
sell >rrn �
t s
tat � !�� .. '.•
MY OF ME m ba Sln-zt
RANCHO cucAmoNGA Tr. a-_SITE, PtiAto�
IV
ENGIh �,mmG ry a rn H
t�
' 9 w
ELECTRIGAL•ti--+�-.-- i.w•
TELECOMAUNiCATIONS-
R
f
I
CITY OF l: M 0 Alm-W
RANCHO CUCA1VIONGA rA "M ODE -DTs L
' ENGMEMUNG DImioN EXHMIT
I
I