Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1987/06/24 - Agenda Packet ,� N,:,, -°� �; �'r b � �m „�+a s^*' 1 � G'� CITY OF K RANCHO CL'CA v1()NGA ' ± V ; WEDNESDAY .TUNE 24, 1987 r 4 7:00 p.m. LIONS PARK MMMUNITY CENTER $161 BASE IMER RANCHO CUCAMONGA,CALIFORNIA L Pledge of Allegiance IL Roll Call Commissioner Blakesley, Commissioner Emerick ' Commissioner Chitiea Commissioner McNiel i Commissioner Tolstoy IIL Ar►noune ments IV. Appreval of Minutes ' April 22,1987 V. Consent Calendar The following Consent Calendar items are expected to be routine and non-controversial. They wTI be acted,on by the Commission at one titres without discussion. if anyone has concern over any item,it should be removed for discussion A. RESOLUTION OF DENIAL FOR TIME EXT13NSION AND. MODIFICATION OF CONDITIONS PARCEL MAP 5786- CROWELL BROTHERS-A moil icatiop to add a condition or utility undergrounding and a request for an extension of time for the project located at the joutheast corner of Base Line Road and Carnelian Street =APN 207-031-28. (Continued from June 10, 1987). B. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 86-35 -C PY OF RANCHO CUCAFdONGA-The development o €corporation yard and vehicle maintenance facility master Plan on 5.69 acres of lad in the General Industrial District (Subarea 2), of the Industrial Specific Plan located on the south Side of 3kh Street between Hallman Avenue and Vineyard Avenue -APN 209-013-27, 24. I C. ENVIRONMENTM.r ASSESSMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 07-I9 LENN0 ARZ-AITECTS 7i,The " development of a warehouse industrial building of 30,02.2 square feet on 1.635 acres of land within the General Industrial District (Subarea 5), locate?., 4tr the northeast corner of Turner A':+enue and Sharon Circle-APN 209-261- € 15. .. VL Pvblie Hearings I. The following items are public hearings in which concerned ` individuals may voice the", opinion of the reidted project. Please wait to be recogni' �by,the Chairman and address the Commission by,stating,;F � Yiame and address. Ali such opinions shall be limited?_J 5 minutes per individual for eFtch r project. D. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND COLATIONAL USE PERMIT 87-04-DON'LEY-BENNETT ARCHITECTS - The development of a neighborhood commercial shopping center consisting of five structures totaling 30,770 square feet 3.8 acres of Iand, within the Neighborhood Commercial District(NC)located at the southwest corner { of Haven and Lemon-APN 201-262-48. J E. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 87-20 - INLAND AREA FELLO'NSIZY To allow a church within an existing pre-school facility, "For Kids Only" on 1.18 acres of land it`;the Low Density Residential lAstrict(2-4 dwciiing units i,er acre)located on the south side of Base Line Road,east of Turner Avenue- APN 1077-061-09. F. MODIFICATION TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 85-14 AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 86-10 MULLER - The request to modify the approved 18.42 acre Master Plan by eliminating Buildings C and D and replacing with parking spaces, in the General Industrial District, (Subarea'3), , located at the northwest corner of 9th Street and Archibald Avenue-APN 209-921-16, 17,05. G. ENTERTAINMENT PEERMIT 87-01 - HARRY CIS The review of proposed "disc jockey" doing vocals and playing records nightly in conjunction with a resjgaurantlnight club, located at 10877 Foothill Boulevard.. i !T I H. ENVI1l:044a8NTAL AS_MMEAT .AND CONDITIOWzL EiSE,PERi IT 87-21 ,NGEWOOD BAPTIST CUU1tC1I A 1Fegliest x0 esYabiisYc a tr,00�Ti squ a foot church�nsttun an ,. existing 1.1,816 square foot mule 4,gnant industrial facility t, in the General Industrial Land-,Use District, (Subarea 3), 19- ted at 9507 Arrow YUghr►ay,.Building 7,Suite H�-APY 1. ENVIR NMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND -DEVELOPAI"T REVIEW 87-11 eSi�VTPIOMO COI1S�'R13GTI4s1 - _;Tl;e development o 10 multi-family unitsori 1aa3 acres of land within the Medium Rstddential District(8-14 dwelling units per acre)located on the north side of 19th StrOet,350 feet east of Hellman Avenue-AP_I 201-474-07. In addition,the applicant has filed a Tree Removal Permit. J. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 13441-WILLIAM LYOFC)CIPANY-A residential tract subdiW-Ron o 18.32 acres b land into 11.5,single family lots in the Low-Medium Dei'isity Residential Listret (ti-8 dwellix',g iuuts per acre) within the Victoria Planned Community, located at the northeast corn(T of Victoria Parts Lane and Kenyon Way-APN 227-011-07. K. FOOTHILL BOULEVARD SPECIFIC PLAN L. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR TAE FOOTHILL BOULEVARD SPECIFIC PLAN-To review and consider'a recommendation for,certi ication of the Draft Environmental Impact Report �`or the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plaa project. The Specific Plan consists of detailed land use regulations and standards for the development along "Footh!U Boulevard .between trove Avenue and Haven Avenue, between the I-15 Freeway and East Avenue. VII. New Business M. MINOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 86-22 SOLOMON Appeal of st s decision denying a reg7 t to-ak,rw a skateboard ramp in the rear ;yard area of a single�samily residence located at 10007 Manzanita Drive - APN 201- 981-11. + .#++,' N. 30MROi`Ts12E.NTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPhIENT s st KY'-VI W 87-ZI ALBANDlM CROUP A proposal to construct two warehOUO2 buildings totaling 118,500 square feet on 6.25,ae;,es in the General Industrial Districti Subarea 5,locked jouth of 6th Street adjacent to an A.T. ;,r &S.F.rail spur west of lxcas Ranch Road-APN>210-0?1- `A �, 51 t VUL Gomn1i30%A Busies M Public Comme Thk is the time and place for the general,public to address the Commission. .penis to be.01scussed here,are,thoss which do not already appear or,this ege3;a X. Adjournment jl ry The Planning Commission has r, hdoptsd Administrative Regulations that set an 11 p.m.adja rrnmen time.'tf items go beyond that time, they shall be hears only wxtii ti)r Fonsent of the Commission. i j I I 1 i i i �M VICINITY MAC SPHERE OF 1111FLUINCE � 1 t _jfIL L8IJDdj SYI , 8 AH I as�ps � R,d .«.. ..? iL...^ 81Iw t ` mere n� as h ® �asrs ae� O YHIL FRR KW�AYY I L 'NC .3.._a --_. YICF 141A ua ca A8 LIW1 + +w Ire CH*CH t � F001 HILL v ®e w AR YA ul ii �� • Alt O • _ e O C a ath • ea _yY -- m adc4Eh +. a� a SAN i9 RHAROIN FREEW Y CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA — CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA c�CAMo f... STAFF REPORT V. e" DATE: June 24, 1987; o� z T0: Chdirman and Members of the Planning Commission 1977 FROM: Bai^rye R. Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer BY: Barbara Krall, Assistant Civil Engineer SU6JECT: RESOLUTION. OF DENIAL FOR TIME EXTENSION AND MODIFICNTION OF PARCELCONDITIONS MAP 57GRUWELL BROTHERS - A mo i cats on'to add A condition for utility un erground ng and a request for an extension of time for ;he project located at the southeast corner of Base Line Road and Carnelian Street - APN 207-031-28 BACKGROUIVO: On June 18, 1987, the Planning Commission considered a request from the applicant, Crowell Brothers, for an extension of time for Parcel Map 5786 subject to adding.,a condition requiring the payment of utility undergrounding in-lieu fees. The Commission decided that the time extension .should be denied because the applicant's letter of June 9, 1987 indicated that.he would not conilnt to the addition of a utility undergrounding requirement and that he had n'at completed some requirements of a previous approval. Staff contacted the applicant to confirm that he has not changed his position regarding the utility issue. He would not provide a definite answer, therefore staff has provided both an approval and a denial resolution for consideration. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Commission approve the denial resolution if the applicant does ndt definitely consent to the addition of the utility requirement. If he does consent to the adC tion of the utility requirement, the approval resolution is recommended. Respectfully submitted, Barrye V Hanson Senior Civil Engineer BRH:BK:dlw Attachments: Resolution of Approval Resolution of Deniel Applicants Letter Reference Staff Report ITEM A CROWELL BROTHERS 521 N. Mountain Ave. Upland, CA 91786 (714) 991-1041 June 9, 1987 Barrye Hanson M Senior civil Enc nser City of Rancho Eucamonga Dear Barry* I am writing this latter to stTt* my absolute non-acceptance to the fee in lieu as a contribution' to the future undergroundi of existing overhead! utilities. This fee will m 1 am trying to develop totally unmarketable. Theme h is site th just n tray that tr s site can absorb an additional —oast of $127,000 plus. it certainly has not appreciated by this amount -in the last year, nor since it was developed. The parcel split that 'is proposed has always been a_part_of. the overall projert_ for the Exchange. It io not an after thought;nor is it a n* _in your city. It has always been a p art o g overall lconcept, ed original plot plan. This entire, buildinq.habeen difficult r Iiie torent up and has caused the delay in wanting to start any new additions to •completd-thjk:*rig pj For the City of Rancho Cucamonga to treat this map and process as though it is brr anew to the city, and as though this cost were being spread out over the total site,, is difficult for me to understand. It is -even more difficult for me to feel as though the city is treating me fairly. You always knew this was planned, and as such, I should be expected to develop the site under the conditions of approval that were originally agreed to by all parties. It can't possibly be the intent of the city to make the fees placed on developments so high as to completely prohibit development. But that is exactly what this additional $127,0 will do. ri �x i I am noWr asking the; City, ,ot Rancho Cucamonga to grant my niy i Year tinge extension, without ang� i964ifieationm to the ao'lditiolis a of appr:oral. si�aereLj�, CROWELL )BROdm Har C. Cxows�i. Partner HCq/lb Enclosure a } i --- CITY OF P-ASCHO CuCAMONCIA can�Q. STAFF REPORT DATE: June 10, 1987 3 Chairman and Members of the Planning;Cmrtission 1977 FROM: Barrye Hanson, Sensor Civil bngineee BY: Barbara Krall, Assistant Civil Engineer SUBJECT: Time extension and Modification of Conditions Parcel Ma rove rot ers - mo 3 cation to add a con i ion or u a y tin ergrounding and a request for an extension of rif" for the project located at the southeast corner of Baseline Road and Carnelian Street (APN 207-031- 28) BACKGROUND- Tentative Parcel Map 5786 as shown on Exhibit:"C" was initia17 4;approved j by the Planning Commrission on dune 13, 1984, for an initial two year period until June 13, 1986;' The first, .�k_a Possible three one-year',-=me 11 extensions was grantd on May 28, 1986 e} ding he approval period until June 13, 1987. The applicant is now requesting the second of the passible three one-year extensions. The letter of request (Exhibit ',A") is attached for your ref eren re. ANALYSIS: i is current policy of the Planning Commission to Yrodify the original e conditions of approval to include a condition for the usdergrounding of existing overhead utility lines. This condition is included under Section 3 of the attached Resolution. The Planning Commission, however, cannot conditiolially approve a time extension far a Tentative Parcel Map. Therefore, the Planning Commission may either deny the extension based an inconsistencies with current City Policy, approve the extension with only those conditions that were required with the original approval or approve the extension with the modification with the consent of the Developer. Planning Cowission Staff' Report Parcel Map 578E June 10, 1987 Page 2 RBCOMMENE 4ON it is r^ecomendea that the plan}inJ Commission adapt, t'�_; attached resolution with madtfications approving a one-yeat time extension for Parcel Pap 5786 with the 1:nnsenV of the Developer. The 'ieWexpiration Mate would be dune 13, 19aS, Respectfully submitted, SarrYe t'"�. Nanson Senfor Civil Engineer 9RH:8K:jh Attachments: Developer's Letter (Exhibit "A") Vicinity Map (Exhibi..t -&-)} Tentative Map (Exhibit Resolution and / Recommended Cbnditions of Approval �J 1 l CROWELL BROTHERS, INc . $21 N. Mountain Avenue Suite E Upland# CA 91796 ti p p; May 6, :1987 City of Rancho CUCamongs. 9220 Baseline Roadp Suite C Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Attention: Russell Maguire, City Engineer Dear Mr. NAguire: This letter is ae request for an oxttnsi.on of time for Tentative Parcel Map No. 5786. An of this data, we have not been able to develop a use that is economically +nimble. c:urrxtntly ere are negotiating with = the GOnstruction of an office-t �dividual fora sale and �• bUxIdineJ. This is still in a very pr�,l3�inary state, so it is too early to make any firm rep_ resentations in reference to this site. Enclosed you will find our checks for $62. With the check and this lthe extension.in hand; we hope the grant you have everything you will mead to tact me. if you need anything further, plOasa con- Sincerely, CFWELL BROTHHr.RS, INC. "aviA Cooper Director of Project Planning DAC/ih Enclosures • °na F �;c�n�. ern 5't8r VF.I.a(w�F'�'S �cTsnc R l m. n fl0 smog as �` ~ 6 r% e a y� i• LIN Y" Site 9� O S 001 ILL �R w a M CITY OF RA14CHO C"UCA1VIt NGA Trna. �►��N L'T��F MAP Aft l - ::-: � .. ,��a•.YunY.owl�i�tltr.gwW=� TENTATNE $r■/�► •off t lip III( F...., {. XffiHaA 1I4 1 �� �I 1$Utv W`�.�q'L OfrYtAl.t m t ;IMC .AYCfi0t6 Q M1C4 t OF egCU.4"7L{W aArL.�:"iLC�EG!Lt1 �• nN1+4.an; x'" .,,. _ LtiFZS r s�r tF ps;CdNlt ff Yp Lp *r✓ vIo a .. ALratAPfCL - .iv�Cn ryrsa��,,,'xr�aiaaassn�tec.e.n✓a �' •� air et�Mratv:.Ir+.tY►..7Y�ri't of Mt.�eO tkYNMNf II71Q:, fr- i W SoAft*r Ic 4 w i NOT t Nwr L acvr—(�Y..4+M y tit\..°.m....r�y / ��fi ¢�, �'•..\ ' �fYtYfi� f �•• �'�i � it a < y N E to r DNS!µsr%.s�i i W 04t�yM f1l iH NN1u.y{Iii l.YtuY l{Yt • .i:f1�11 yr a.;�t{tl tl�t l 4.a Illlt+l t\f�. MWIMi thY.tMH't lYlt Yips {tt l,e�..n.u4t{ss»aArw eaMi lll�atn111 t»»rti I y to it 6 �.�.. 1. i RESOLUT?ON NO, 84-50 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSIO`4 OF' THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PARCEL MAP NUMBER 4786 (TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 5786) LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF BASE LINE AND CARNELIAiV STREET WHEREAS, Tentative Parcel Map Number 5786, submitted by Crowell Brothers and consisting o; 2parcels, located at the southeast corner of Base Line and Carnelian Street being a division of Parcel 2 of Parcel Map 4869, as recorded in Parcel Map Book 49, Page, 46 and 47, records of San Bernardino County, State of California: and WHEREAS, 'on May 4, 1984, a .formal application was submitted requesting review of the above-described !_jntative Map; and WHEREAS, on June 13, 1984, the Planning Commission held a duly advertised public hearing for the above-described map. FOLLOWS: NON, THEREFORE,, THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLVED AS SECTION 1: That the following findings have been made: 1. That the map is consistent with the General Plan. c. 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 June 13, 1984. SECTION 3: That Tentative Parcel Map No, ra786 is approved subject to the recomWerided Conditions of Approval pertain in g thereto. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 13TH 9!1Y OF' JUNE, 1984. PA L NN'ING 4.O:NMISSI0n OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY:�s� t Oe`nnis L. tau airman A-TEST: f`, lit mez, eputy ecretary r Resolution no.. ' 1 1 t P49e 2 I, Rick Gomez, Deputy Secveta4 of the Planning Commission of the City � Ri(trnSo Cucamonga, do hereby certify that thezforegoing Resolution was duly an �` rey�larly introduced passel,. and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamong:a., at a regular meeting of Ahe Planning Commission held x on the 13th day of June, 1984, by th6 fottowng vote-to-wit: t AYES: ,,COMMISSIONERS: 4REMPEL, McNIEL,tiBARKER, STOUT Y. NOES: C014MISSIONERS: HONE ABSENT: COMM ISS?,�i�RS: NONE t; i a A s t \.., :¢ CITY 0. RANCHO cucANONGA-- RfCOMENOED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL j LOCATIOr1' Southeast`z-a-)rer of Basq line TENTATIYE'PARGEL NAP ttti. 479'8, �< and Carnelian Sti�4+et % DATE FIL£D: May 4, 1984 v LEGAL OESCt1IPTION:.arc 2 ofarCe1 1�ap tA�SB�a;-OF LOTS: 2 4869, as recorde6' in Parcel Map �9. Pages GROSS ACREARE.- 7.24,9 46 & 47 Records of San o 8erndrdin V t Coun� ty Afi £SSOtt PARCEL Fd3: 207»031�28, State o a .:i nrn�a . ►�rt:�r**,r�r,�xte�xret ��:+rr�x +t�ra«+k+:tom,, ,��rex*�r**ir�r*,a�r�*�\ e.+r ****+a** DEVELOPER WKER £NOIN�Ekj! Si "tii Crowell Brothers same Associated Engineers 521 Y. Mountain Ave. 316 East "E" Street unite ►Jaland, CP 41786 Ontarioo, CA 917fi�4 n Improvement and dedication "equiremcnts in accordame with Title 16 ei, the MniciPatl Code of the City of Rancho Cucamonga include, but may, not be, li',Mited to, the fallowing; Dedications and %r' icular Access 1, Dedications shall be made of all interior street rights-of-way and all necessary easements as shown on the tentative map 2. Deditation shall be made of the foi lowing,rights-0-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 MG%ts of -vehicular ingress and egress snail be dedicated as follows: X 5. Reciprocal access easeinents and maintenance agreemenrs ensuring access to ali parcels and joint m:-tintenance of all common roads, drives or parking areas shall 'be provided by C,C,&R.s and shall.he recorded concurrent with the maPr i t All ,existing easements lying within`fu;ture right-of-way are to< be quitclaimed or delineated on thelmap per City Engineer" requ iremen+:s. Easements for sidewalk for public ute!�hall be dedicated to the City where sid6walks meander tl.,ough private property, r Sur,t 1, Surety siiail be posted and an «eement executed to tCe satisfaati'gn 'Of the City Engineer and City Attorney, ra tar;nts��iflg ciwipletion'`of the pub, improvements prior to J G, r;+cardin'r fqr a -a - and/or prior. to,hurt lbiri�` erma , rssua+�c�e off'r;, i A Ii'enl agr01erientti must be executed pf,io�* to recording of the for Base L ine.,Roa,'d. See eoklition l41 on Page 5. r=s3. Surety ,.hal l be posted ants an> agree Ot executed, guaranteeing c0m0eti3O,16 nr all an-site►, drainage fa�.iiites necessary for dewatt�rii�,g <ttl par,cels'to the 4atisfac,tien r,f the Building and Safety 0iVison prior to recordings 9ior K aind/or pr-ter to issuance of buildi�hg pe,rmitr Street Imoroyenats _FUrsui;n,is ATI ity of Ranch r.ucamcnga Municipal "ode, Title 16, Section 16.36,120, the subdivider may enter, into an agriiament and post security with r the City guaranteeing the required constPuction p^ior to re;;ordation of the map and/or .building permit issuanc-t. 1. Construct full Street improvements includi1g, but not limited I to, curb and getter, AX. pavement, sidewalk, drive approaches, l parkway trees and street lights oln all interior streets, 1 2. A minimum of 26-foot wide pavement within a 40-foot wide dedicated right,-of-way shall be constructed• for -all half- a sRci=on streets. J 3. Construct the foil°.,wing missing improvements: I Priar to recordation for Prior to building permit issuance or ur r e- rive StreFF treet A. Me ian Street Name iGutter Pvmt, Wall; ' Appr. Trees l hts Overlay Island* Other i 1 *includ,;s landscaping and irrigation one meter F Al •� . 4. Prior to Any work being performed in the public riqht-of-way, fees shall be paid and an encroachment permit shall be obtained from the Cit, Engineer's Office, in addition to any other permits required. 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. G. Developer shall coordinate, and where necessary, Ipay for the relocation of any power poles or other existing public utilities as necessary. 7. Existing lines-'of 12KV or Tess fronting the property shall be undergrounded. 8. Install appropriate street name sic%s, 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. 10. kzndseape 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. 1lndersidewalk drains shall be installed to City Standards, Drainage and Fiood Contrai 1. Private drainage easements for cross-lot drainage shall be required and shall be d:1ineated or noticed on the final map, L. Adequate provisions shall be made for acceptance and disposal of surface .drainage entering the property from adjacent areas. - 3. She following storm drain shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer 1 4. Prier to recordation of the map, a hydrologic and drainage study for the project shall be submitted to the City Engineer for review. S. A drainage detention basin per City Standards shall be constructed to detain increased runoff -3- '" i Grading _ X 1. Grading of the subject property shall be in-;accordance with `th Uniform Building Code, City Grading Standards and Accepted grading practices. The final grading plan sfrat, '„be in. fi substantial conformance with f�he approved contptMal, grading plan. X 2. A soils report shall be prepared by a qu''llified engineer licensed by the ,".rate of California to perfo W',such work prior to issuance of building permit. 3. A geological report shallr a prepared b aqualified _ or geo3ogist and sutm itted at erne time application gradinggrading plan:check. 4. The final grading plan shall be subject to review and a; ro ' by the Grading Committee and shall be .completed prior Mtn recordation of the final subdivision map or issuance of bu},lding permit whichever conies first. := X 5. Final grading plans for each parcel are tt: be ;submitted to the Building and Safety Division for approval prior to issuance of y buitfling permit. General RMuirendnts and Approvals Permits from other agencies will be required as follows: CalTrans for San Bernardino aunty,Flood antral;'--'---- X Cucamonga County dater District for sewer and.water San Bernardino County Dust Abatement (required :prior to issuance of a grading permit) Ocher 2. A,copy of the Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (C.C.,M.$) approved by the City Attorney is required prior to recordation of the map. X 3. Provide all utility services to each lot ir;cluding setiaevage, water, electric power, gas and telephone. X 4. Sanitary sewer and water systems sh,01 be designed to CucumonItt County Water District standards. A letter of acceptan.e ;s required. Easements t6 C.C.W.D. are required for sewer and water. 5. This subdivision shall be subject: to corlditiona of Approval from CalTrans/San ;Bernardino County, Flood Control `l stric:t. X 6. Approvals have net been secured from all utilitiOs and r4 ar interested agencies inv Ived. Approval of the fir;al ma}a'!wti - be subject to any requirements that may be received from'4;hem,. .4_ s ■• } a" X 7._ lire fi 1 ing of the 'tentat i y,;a map or approval of came does not \` guarantee "that sewer treatment capacity will btlfavaitatrle at �I the time building permits,•are requested. When �6l6ilding permits are requested, the T446monga County Water District will be l asked to certify the availability of capacity, Permits will not be issued unIess said certification is received in writing. 8. Locai 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 wee control, in accordance with City trail standards, shall °be submitted to and approved by the City Planner prior to recordation for and/or prior to building issuance or g permit 9. Prior to recording, a deposit shall be posted with the City ' covering the estimated cost of apportioning the assessments under Assessiaent District 82-1 among the newly created,parcels. X 10. At the time of final' map submittal, the -following (shall be ` submitted., iTitle 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, The condition 'requiring a lien agreement for future construction oY a median island on Base Line may be waived pending resolution: by the City Council of the median island ry policy. _ X 12, access easements through the drive or parking areas designated by "Not A Part' on the map shall be provided by the C.C.&Rs. X€• 13. Prior to recordist a six foot- g. o masonry wall shall be required along the property line between Parcel 2 and property to the + south. The wall shall be compatable in appearance with the existing office building and residences. The landscaping on the south perimeter of Parcel 2 shall be augmented to Provide a significant increase dcceptable to the City Planner. X 14. Prior to recording, a six foot fence shall be provided from the southesast corner of Parcei 2 a sufficient distance to the north tC, disicourage 'access to residential property to the south. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA LLOYD 8 883, CITY ENGINEER by: , � • -5- RESOLUTION NO. 87-13 l A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, MODIFYING THE CONDITIONS APPROVING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. S786 LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF BASF LINE AND CARNELIAN STREET i WHEREAS, Tent&4ive Parcel Kim No. 5786, submitted by Crowell Brothers and consisting of 2 parcels, located at the southeast corner of Base Line and Carnelian Street being a division of Parcel 2 of Parcel Map 4869, as recorded in Parcel Map Book 49. Pages 46 and 47, ;records of San Bernardino County, State of California; and WHERFdS, an May 4, 1984, a formal application was submitted requesting rev,cw of the above-described Tentative Map; a WHEREAS';; on June 13, 1984, the Planning Commission held a duly advertised public nearing for the above-described' reap and conditionally _ approved the tentative map; WHEREAS, on'October 21, 1986, the applicant requested for Planning Commission review on the proposal to eliminate two conditions of approval for ` this tentative map; h WHEREAS, . ietcember 10, 1986, the Planning Commission held a dull advertised public hearing for tha,above request and continued it to Janua 28, 1987 regular meeting; and WHEREAS, on January 28, 1987 the Planning Commision held a public hearing to consider the modification to the above described map; NOW, THEREFORE, The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission Resolved as foliowse SF.0 ION 1: That the following findings have been made: 1. That the map is consistent with the General Plan. 2. That the improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with the General Plan. 3. That the site is physically suitable 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 advers adwL environmertalii—mpacts and a Negative Declaration has been issued on June 13 1984. )451$47di Ft;d j- t4, Ze tT97 i -l4. j, _.. r= a PM 5786 - M6D'TFSCAT1,.. - CROWELL BROTHERS :�;*anuary 28, 1987 Page 2 ; SECTION 3: that the Modification to Tentative Parcel Map No. 6786 is approved sub ect to the following conditions and the Conditions of Approval ' contained in the attached Resolution 84-50 + ith the standard conditions: 1, All conditions of approval contained in Resolution No. 84.-50 shall apply, except for condition 13 of "General Requirement and Approval" sectiom of the Resolution which are repealed. 2. A six (6) foot masoriry wall shall be required along the property line 6Aween Parcel 2 and 8792 Caluma Ct. Landscaping on the south perimeter of parcel 2 shall be augmented to provide a significant: increase accgptao, the City Manner. Oet'Med' plans of the masonrjil all and iandscapin shall be sr*mitted for City P artier rcvieit and approval -nd the landscaping and 'gall instatled prior to recordation of the map. 31• n fence of igrought iron material' and pilaster shalt b6i inst'Vltd along east property boundary from the end of the eaiterly adj,aeent Drbjeg:t south to the f> end of the project site,. Addi't'i.ohal lands'taping such as t on center shall shrubs e provided allaylea is rated of 5 feet - portion of the s . site to the satisfaction of the City Planrtr, Detailed plans shall be submitted for City Planner's t review and approval and to be completed prioi to ',recordation of the map, ' APPROVED OPTED THIS 28TH„ DAY OF JANUARy, 198i,, PLANN ` ION OF CITY OF RANCHO CUC'ANIOEFGA ATTEST: rT�y`1i�i,'p1�. t i Yt1tEV1ll.Hi7.i1tYt flUt YG� t;ILUN No. Pt 67 a tNGI FECATI� - CROWELL BROTHERS January 28� i98T ' Page 3 n Bt-,ai Amer, 'bePµty Secrettiey of. the Planning �Cor�iss3on of the City of -� Rancho Cucamonga.. do hereby cer�ify-tfta-ti the foregofimg Rexolutiron was du-ly and regularly-irttr6duce , r Gassed, 'and, adopted by thr Planning Gommi$sion of the City of Rancho uucaa�on'8?: at a reguxar aetii,q Of the Planning Gomissfian held on the 28tb, day of"J ivary, 'i987, by the following.vote-to-wit: AYES., CO1 9ISSIOt7 RSA EMERICK, CHITIEA, •BARKER, MCNIEL, TOLSTOY NOES: CLM USSI`ON€RS. NONE ASSENT: C"ISSIONE('` ' NONE y � ICI t I M r,. .., i 's RESOLUTION No. IK A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION, ` APPROVING THE TIME EXTENSION FOR PARCEL MAP 5786 yam, WHEREAS, a request has been filed for *.1me extension .fdr the t above-des, nf; d project, pursuaflt to 'Section 1.501,8.t of Ordinapce 2n=ll, the Subdivision Ordinance; and WHEREt,� the P%nning Commission conditionally approved the above-described tentative Marcel map. SECTIO .1" The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission has made the followinggi A. Tb�t icurrent economic, marketing, and inventory Ca101tiogs make it unrgasonable to build at this titak, 8. That strict PAforctent of the conditions of approval,;__. - kr regarding expirations would not be consistent with the intent of the Development Code. ,. r C. That there has been no significant changes to the - character & the area in which the project is located that would cause the project to become nonconforming r ^r:'inconsi�,tent with current standards. } SECTION 2: ,,;The Rancho '0ci;longa Panning Gommissinra hereby grants a time extension for, Parcel Map Aic_ ant gxpiration 5786 Crowell Brothers June 13, 1988 . SECTION 3. on No. 84-50 is hereby modified to add the following con yon: 1. Existing overhead utilities: a. Parcel 1 - An in-lieu fee as contribution to the future undergrounding of the existing overhead utilities (telecannunication and electrical, excpet foe the 66 K. V. electrical) on the project Side of Carnelian Street, shall be paid to the City prior to building permit issuance. The fee shall be the full amount of the City adopted unit amunt times the length of the parcel frontage. / -if µ b. Parcel 2 - An in-lieu fee as contribution: to the future undergrounding of the existing '-Mverhead utilities (tele+:ommunication and electrical, except for- 66 K:V. electrical) nn the opposite side of Baseline Road and the pr9ject side of 'Carnelian Street shall be, paid prior to recordation of the Parcel,Map. The fee shall be one-half the City adopted amount times the length of the ,parcel frontage on Baseline Road and the full amount of th City',adopted amount times the letioth of the parcel frontage on'Cjrneliar. Street. APPROVED AND ADOP it>'' THIS 24TH DAY OF JUNE''1987 PLANNING COMMISSION OF ThE CITY* RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Larry ; clue , a�rman r ATTEST; Brad u er, ,putt' 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 Commisf� on held on the 24th day of June, 1987, by the following vote-to-wit: r' AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT:'- COMMISSIONERS: r A-zo RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION, DENYING THE TIME EXTENSION FOR PARCEL MAP 5786 WiENEAS, a request has been filed for a timie extension for t1k-) _ above-described project, pursuant to Section 1.501.8 .2 of Ordnance 28t B, the Subdivision Ordinance; and 0iEREAS, the Planning Commission conditionally approved the above-described tentative Parcel Map. WHEREAS, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning commission finds that the tentative parcel map described herein is in conflict with current City policy. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission hereby denies a time extension for Tentative Parcel F Map 5786 ry APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 24TH DAY OF JUNE, 1987. � PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Larry T. McNie , Chairman ATTEST: Brad Buller, putt' ecretary__"—' I, Brad Buller, De'Gty Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, & 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 24th day of June, 1987,,by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: P9 a -- CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA c�' �a STAFF REPORT k z DATE: June 24, 1987 1977 f TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission 1 FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Nancy Fong, Associate Planner SUBJECT: L'NVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEVE!OPMENT REVIEW 86-35 CITY UF RANCHO CUC e -----The aevelopment of a f corporation yard an 've cTe maintenance facility master plan on 5.69 acres of land in the General Industri.ai District (Subarea 2), of the .Industrial Specific Plan located on the ,south side ofrgth Street between Hellman Avenue and Vineyard Avenue - k"A,209-013-27, 24. I. PROJECT ANO SITE .DESCRIPTION: A. Action Requested: Issuance of a gegative Declaration. B. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning;. North=—hxxlssl•:n;- industrial,Zoning,*_ new warehouse building under construction; General Industrial District, Subarea 2 South - Vacant, existing industrial use; General Industrial District, Subarea 2 East - Existing multi-tenant industrial buildings; General Industrial District, Subarea 2 West - Existing industrial buildings; General Industrial - District, Subarea 2 C. General Plan Designations: Project Size - General industrial North General Industrial South - General Industrial East - General Industrial West - General Industrial D. Site Characteristics: The site consists of two parcels. The parcel fronting on 9th street contains a 14,000 square foot concrete tilt up building with an exposed aggregate face, Dth Street is fully improved. The other parcel wilic._is located to the south and fronts on the proposed extensioni.af Lion Street is vacant and void of aay significant vegetation. ITEM 8 ' PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT' OR 86-35 V- CM OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA June 24, 1987 Page 'L E., Parking Calculations: No. of No. of Type of Square Parking Spaces Spaces Use Footage Ratio Rewired Provided Corp. Yard 14;000 NA b 83 Employee 11 Mei tors XI. ANALYSIS• A. —GeneraY: The City' on September 1C, 1986 has acquired and. o cup�pie& the parcel and the existing building fronting on '9th Street for the City's corporation yard. Subsequently the City , began_acquisitions for the parcel to the rout .4 dewel.Rped a Master Plan with r` 5.69 acres, as shown in Exhibit B. The proposed Piaster Plan has successfully completed the Technical and Design Review Committee's review. Upon approval of the Negative i?eclaration, the City Planner will grant final approval of the project based on conditions recommended by the Design Review and Technical Review Committees.. B. Des' n Review Committee. '_ The Design Review Committee (D. Stout,, S. Chitiea,,an7 07Cotetmp) reviewed the proposed Master Plan f0 tially on November 6, 1986 and recommended approval with the following conditions: 1. That the existing building should be upgraded through architectural treatment consistent w O the Design Guidelines of the Industrial Specific Plan at that 2. All ground mounted and roof mounted equipment should be screened. 3. That landscaping should exceed the City`s Standards.. 4. The proposed service drive and door located at the east elevation shoul.i be elimina;:ted end the area landscaped„ S. Outdoor employee patio area with patio furniture should be provided. The Committee (Chitiea, McNiel and Coleman) subsequently has worked with the Lyty consultant to, upgrade the existing building. On June 4, 1987 the Committee reviewed the final design of the elevations and recommended approval. PLANNING C0l;.ittI�S�ON STAFF REPORT OR, 86-35'- ti1TY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA J ne 24, '1987 Page 3 v ` C. Environmental. AssessmEnt• Staff has culn�'-`1 the nvironmeffa �hec`K ist Rid determined that,,, no,.,., scant impact would result from. the development t used project. III.'"FACTS FOR FINDINGS: The proposed use is consisted O t i t 6ral _ 1=Tan an a n�traal `Specific`Plan. '„o building /�r „ gtt and site plan together with recommended condtti!ans of appr/O°,tai:are in -_ comoliance with the '1dustrial- Specific. Plan a ��� all other apgj cahie City Standards. IV. RECOMMENDATION: Staffrecommends that the PIaril�i;.9 Commission €' issue a eg;: ave Declaration for Developis`nt Revaevr'86-35. Resp tful a J , r f t B;•3d Buller #JAsk City Planner BB:NF:sgr r Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Location Map Exhibit "B" -_Master Plan... Exhibit "C" El,evatioa, ' I I } r r° W �• is } ARROWO 44 subarea... a _ 664 o � mat . O � eZ Coro ATSF Olp �y+ s 1\URTH CITY CF ITEM— PLV. NM L'MSM EXHMff1 SCALE- F r cassti_^_ ' I '�.rrss svw r F� IV U CLUAMONGA PLANNM MEM EXHIMT----4L SCAM XllLtl-MRklk= �. i �:. 1 �A � �_.�.. '4.,t� 'I� �' T ..a a � � k � �ti �" � gill ,���, � 1" art (( �: � 17 � �;��� '� ��p!� � �ti � nr �i .-._ r.0...� f ,� �. {�. �: ��l�ir .�,�^: 4. �i`- � �,� °� a.� y... � ,�..,..� �� ,�° � �� :� ::' .�, � ��:, y �� � 1 .�5�' ��: — .,�� .' r :z - EAST Ir QJ Li W CST RANH(3 G GAMOGA CITY D BUIL®8NG HOODOM O. CITY OF . CUCAMQN\'CA r b CITY Or, RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT 1977 DATE. June 24,,1987 10; Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM Brad Muller, City Planner w ^ BY: Debra Meier, Assistant Planner t SUBJECT: EN.VIRO# ENTAL ASSES04ENT FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIDI 87-19 devel oilmen a a war" use n us r3 jai° .`u -ding of 30,022 square feet: on 1.635 acres wf land within the General Industrial District (Subarea 5) located at 'the northeast corner of Turner Avenue and Sharon,Circle APN: 209-261-15. x a I, PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION.: Agrih A. Action Requested; Issuance of a Negative Declaration N "I B. Surrounding Land Use and Zonin , N9rti1. - vacantan Indus A, Specific Plan (SOarea ;S) South - Vacant land; Industrial Specific Plan (Subarea 5) East vacant nand; Industrial Specific Plan (Subavea 5) Nest - Vacant land; Industrial Specific Plan (Subarea 5) C. General Plan Designations: rai ec Sixe Z-Generat Industrial - North - General Industrial South General industrial .East - General Industrial West - General Industrial D. Site Characteristics: The natural ground slopes southerly at an approx ma a gradient, no trees or other significant vegetation remain on the site. Street improvements have been constructed around Sharon Circle, however, the Turner Avenue improvements were delayed due to the open drainage channel and will be provided with development of this project. ITEM C ;77- PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DR 87-19 LENNON ARCHITECTS June 24, 1987 Page ?. 41 E. Parking Calculations: Number of Number of Type Square Parking Spaces Spaces of Use Footage,, Ratio Re fired Provided Office' 1500 1/2raO 6 ,:.. :... Varehouss- 2&822 36 *Stodge facilities are provided for 8 bicycles. Required on- site parkingiw,ay be reduced at a rate of one automobile parking space per 4 bicycle uatkirg. ' �11. ANALYSIS: g'' A. Generals The applicant is requesting Environmental }assessment orf" Me construction of an induEtrirli warehouse building of 30iO2Z square feet. Upon approval of`the Negative Declaration, the City Planner will grant approval of the project based on conditions recommended by the Design and Technical Review Committees. _ 8. �0%4 n Revietra Gom ittee,�e E1 3 evit Chides 4Mcliiel„a Z'fi ea, o emanl reviewed this project on June 4. 19€7. The committee recommended approval 'of the project with the following conditions: 1. The outdoor eating area should be pulled away from the building entries to the extent possible and separated from the entry-by use of landscaping and/or low profile walls. An enlarged detail of the plaza is provided (Exhibit "C") for your review. 2. The landscaping along the north property line should include shrubs growing 6' to 8' in height as, well as trees on 15' to 20' centers for adequate screening of the loading area from Turner Avenue views. 3. At the driveway entrance provide shrub massrmg and annual 1 color to clearly define the entry. I I 4. The graphic design used on the Turner avenue elevations Should be consistent with what is shown on the south elevation, as shown on Exhibit "D". �. PLAWING COMMISS—IRN STAFF REPORT s, r DR 87-19 - LENY��U(�AR' TECTS June 24, 1987' . \...'. Page 3 ,t C. Technic-al ReviEw C ittee: The_Tachnical Review Comlmittee has revj, a pro ea anddet;erin ned that with ecempendled conditl.o'ns of` a'Orovai the project is ,: ,sit'zq t with applicnbYe .Standard's and Ordinances. D. Envixommental .Ass_ sraent: Upon rev etr of part T of the Initial Eu an:Q compq a ono art YI of a Enviromental Checklist, staff :hat `f&nd no signiificant.• impacts related to the development of tfik, industrfat_ Wildin' III. RECOFCNENPAT mtl Staff recomineVids that a Negative Declaration be TsR�PU or evel-Oment Review 87-19. Resp oly su tt d, l' B a 1 .M— £ity P annex BBDM:vc i Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Location Map Exhibit "B" - Site Plan Exhibit "C" -..;Landscape Plan Exhibit "D" - Building Elevations Exhibit "E" Plaza Details f 0 l -%ACANT- r � -V.CANT- WCANT. - J Fg l WCANI- ►DOSED SITE it t llN ltl (� „/1 l 7-T .- NORTH CITY OF RANCHO CL,f ,lIC),NGA TITLE. PLANNING DIVISIOQ'�I ,�t ---- EXI iIBIT= %}SCALE t. ypy� IIY.Kt'BI OCK.— lw LAW c 41 { t_ to 1 S J_ i F L = 1 e T f �FV=CON CUSERi � QY T $ 7d SHARM CIRt LE SITEN I ! V NORTH CITY OF RANCHO C,CA NGA TITLE, .7,f f ig PLX o f DIV SI(AN EXHIB[T- _ SCALE= J; TURF iLOCR►NIT LANt %W Nor NOW %Pftw TUR"m STMt?71tttt'A' i { { 4 AIICNItACTIMAL pR4►M,Ci '1 �i '1 [1CTCLt/AANINO 1 t� C y A11'$VIC►LASH 1 .. }N:TCLC AARRNNL ulfffll II �J K� istCNMll TA Now OUTDOOR WNCX►A7N) �{,�,�L� � 1 ANA�4R tI��F?TRt[R:Sr� SiSJARON...CIf15lLE i'-!'At[AAOt NIUUT ftAMM! ALL iM[[t fACtf I LopALI[R TRt(!ApAwsr aLmLwm 111RnJ[11d(1 uatRw p[CpkAMr^CpRCAtT[VALIi SV6Lt NORTH CITY OF !TEEM: AN 0?- ` RANCHQ CUCAIN'I �4T A TlltE: 'A PLA-MN SING DIVISIQq�1 EXHIBIT.--C _. SOLE- M)RTHELEWT1IXd I EiM Tom"r.a c T ne t F f7 VEST ELEWION •tn�,SulfeRSltD ctr�x+ I=,'wr srcsr twF[4na� f unlnrwtrT s,gE•n.as wnr<s.c6r6 cttas.slw<tE[• 1ww,rY V,♦a5ww11f aw l�iMWfG�711. - a li I i I i I i I NORTH CITY OF RANCHO C UCANIONGA TITLE=�a+t..�f��J°_,!�'r PLANNING DJVI wi :*I EXHIBIT= � - _SGA.LE------. i a. t SE.fTQN A 1 MMN 8 A f ' t '.� ABOA cOr,ca�TE rs ours k sL___ j - J fO\CRM quc�. 9 3W At :1 • I A NORTH CITY OF RAN TITLE:,' PLANNING DINISION EXHIBIT. SCALE-----------_._• CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA CUCA V1 :. STAFF REPORT F 1977 DATE: June 24, 1987 Tfi Chairmat and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Debra Meier, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 87-04 - T08 Hevel opment of a neighbo"ood commercial sopping centar consisting of five structures totaling 30,770 square feet on 3.8 acres of nand, within the Neighborhood Commercial District (NC) located at the southwest cdvner of Haven and Lemon - APN 201-262-48. I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action Requested: Approval of site plan, Duilding'.�elevation.; and issuance a Negative Declaration. B. Surroundin Lan&aso end Zoning: or - The Woodhaven Apartments and single family residences; Low Residential (2-4 duelling units per acre),-and Medium (8-14 dwelling units per acre. South - The Garden Condominiums and vacant land; Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) and office Professional (OP). East - The Lucky/Payless Shopping Center; Neighborhood Commercial (NC). West Single family residences; Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units r:er acre), C. General Man Designations: ProjectSite - e� of r tad Commercial North - Low Residential (",-4 dwelling units per acre) and Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre). South - Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) and Office/Professional East - Neighborhood Commercial West - Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) i D. Sit? Characteristics: The site is vacant except for the Moil Gas Station at the :�rner of Learn and Haven. Some improvements were partfa11'y constructed some time ago, including curbs, landscaping, and parking lot paving. The PLANNING COMISSION STAFF REPORT CUP 87-04 Donley-Bennett Architects Juse 24, 1987 Page 2 Cucamonga.,County Water District is utilizing approximately 10,000 square feet at the southwest corrr of the property for a well site. E. Parking Calculations, Number of Number of Type Square P&Ong Spaces Spaces t of Use Footage Ratio t%! red Provided r` Retail 25,050 1/250 100 100 Restaurant 4,000 1/100 40 401 Self-11ervice Cap" 4sh 3,720 2 5%shall* 23 23 Autz:- ,tive Se,-irice 1,000 3 plus 2/hay— 7 Total 170 170 9 washing stalls ** 2 service bays II. ANALYSIS.• A. General: l�)e shopping center is composed of three buildings Ti-if—effiffeT fdr neighborhood commercial uses as well as a fourth structure which is i tended to house A L4he 'n Tune automotive service facility and a coin-operated self=service..,carwash. The Zucamonga County Water District well site is anticipated to be in use for ten years; the carwai,h is intended to be an interim use of the remainder of the parcel while the well is in operation. Upon temination ,,, Water District use, the applicant expects to more fully utilize thi parcel within the_ Neighborhood Cormercial development. B. Design Review Committee: The Design Review Committee (Chitica, o eman)- rev ewe a-project or May 21, 1987 and recommended approval of the project with the foliowing conditions: Site Plan 1. Provide direct pedestrian circulation linkage from the center to Lemon Avenue and Haven Avenue (see site plan, Exhibit "B"). I r. The ronceptuai design of the central plaza, including all appropriate pedestrian amenities zs well as special landscape and hardscape treatment, shall be presentee in the form of an enlarged detail for review by the Planning Commission prior to approval (set Fxhibit "D"). PLANNING COFMISSIOH STAFF REPORT CUP 87--04 - Donley-Behnett Architects June 24, 1987 Page 3 Ank f, Architecture 1. The rear elevation of Building 1 should be detailed with a str ,a relief arch treatment. Also, provide an iliustrative perspective of the view along Haven Avenue toward the rear of Building 1 for review by Planning Camnissionll(see Exhibit "F"). 2. The rectangular elements on the towers be cut completely through to provide a more defined shadow pattern. 3. Details and/or sections that illustrate treatm�! u 0t7 columns and soffit shall be reviewed by t►. planning Commission (see Exriibit "H"). A. All storefront el;nents, including window frames and mullions, will �e wood. as indicated by the applicant. Landscaping 1. Tree wells should be utilized within the parking lot to aide in achieving the parking lot shading requirements (see Exhibit "C"). 2. Landscaping should be utilized along the west and south property lines to insure screening of the biiopping center- from adjacent r*sidences. The plant material along the hest bound,.ry shbul d iRtlude tall growing evergreen trees to provide such screening. Lube 'n Tuna/Detail Shop Subsequent to Design Review, the applicant modified the project to include lobe bays and a detail shop in the carwash building and , reconfigur-ed the carwash portion of the site. The original site, as reviewed by the Design Review Committee, indicated two carwash buildings running parallel from north to south. The revised plans propose an L-shaped configuration with the lube bays located adjacent to Lemon Avenue and a detail shop ar: the southeast corner of the building. No revised elevations have been submitted to reflect these changes. Staff would recommend that the design of this Wilding ara the location-0- a' 'Tu>e'►�ayS�Qo ac a e es-s gn Review commitee prT"cr"to issuance i C. Technical Review Committee- The Technical Review, f ommittee has ravi e pr5ject inni" ermined that with recotm eroded conditions of approval the project is consistent wig* applicable standards and ordinances. 40 ;ram PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CUP 87-04 - Donley-Bennett Architects June 24, 1967 Page 0. Environmental Asses%;went: Upon review of Part I of the Initial Stuey a`-d comp a ion o ar of the Environmental Checklist, staff has identified a poterstic, noise 'liapact generated by the self-service carwash upon the -'adjacent one_ and two-story Tingle family. residences. The applicant has provided a noise study which identifies acceptable noise levels and minor mitigation measures necessary to insure these levels are maintained in respect to residences along the west project boundary. E. Neighborhood Meeting: On Wednesday evening, dune 3, 1987, a meeting was netd to d1scuss and inform the surroundi,ig neighborhood about the development of the shopping center and the self-service carwash. A large number of the persons in attendance were residents of the Ge,r,;en Condominiums to the south. Commefits generC W were concern o, _rr noise generated'by night deliveries and early morning trash pick-up behind the large retail building. The applicant worked out a compromise with the residents; by lowering Building 2, the wall and the landscaping become a much more effective screen for both view of the budding and noise penetration to residents dir€ttly south of the property line. Anther resident at the west boundary described difficult wall situation where they would need additional privacy an protection from the carwash activity. The applicant agreed to develop a wall design acceptable to residents along the west property line. III. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: This project is consistent with the General Plan and ike eve opmen. Oda. The project will not be detrimental to adjacent properties or cause significant environmental impacts. In addition, the proposed site plan and building design, together with recommended conditions, _are. in compliance with the Development Code and City standards. r IV. CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised'--a a public hearing in. The a } e or£"riewspaper, the property posted, and notices sent to 1T property owners within 300 feet of the project site. i V. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of thr. site plan and building elevations 50—i ssuance of a Negative Declaration. Respec ally sub ' ted, f B e City P nner SB:DM:ns E AD- r u PUNNING COM6iIS01011 S"J1FF REPORT rc CUP 87-�64- Donfe�Bennett Architects June 24, 3987 . Page 5 _ r Attachments; Exhibit "P .- Location Map (i Exhibit ".B" a Site Plan ,. ,Exhibit "C" - Landscape Plan >� 9 Exhibit "D" Plaza Betal �4 Gxhibi ."E" Bull-ding 8i evati;ons .� Exhibii-"P- ' Perspective.of Building 1 °a Exhibit "G" - Grading P?an 2, .,. Exhibit "�H° - Soffit 94tail Resolution with Gonditi:ons of a/peoval' II IN- { l rc+iaszw r--- ij O J u az J(D F;CE CANL7 --- c a (FORTH CITY OF ITEM: -' 'CH ANUCrCt :N:.-10. GA T.ITLE= PLACNNING LI`1CfVE!; c: iiio l•.,_, ��SCIL.E. ,. \�^ r I y `+--' -- � r `^ -�—■. s �s<� �.orNT,n� -ti an><T.lg. '�\. ,l.' � t t �+.._r�P 2 w t�arrc..c• 1 �t ,�ria+aa,.an,,..s�i'.'.�, ,,,~ .'---�._. JOS SwcY`sT.:.. HIM •I _ I Irr,rr...r a.. .mi No..• i la •v.R.. �� Y.R►...rf Mr ywR _ i i I I l i NORTH CITY OF lTE.ti[=.���"_. ' RANCHO CL'CAti°I 1'Gr1 TiTt,E: ' t, ' EaiHt6!'[': , 1 I rN1071"O P661=WNTIAL PlbraRTlYs •�1 » •+MYK CJMe�1►1ClYaMn't Y --------------- Y � F■ � �i _ c'��—DTI —�. } � c Ida Vii mm�..+�.... ' C�FINialaYaINLI. ��p T �.11 lu,!?411Ss fS/T51llCIIJ1tf'LS. i!"laD�iYIT! �� �,--'� •N.�W�daC M0�W as IFRe�•IIa�Y'• RL!•rM.or�,.1wi r...Ja..,w wow Ma >N ntwsn ns fir.wa+tcri�74 Foomm<a •V11v 1►4FNM/+IO�i.lo�ln0,I�aFrR 9 N�wtlP4BY6 V�oK Yri�! (`.+T RPMYs Pcapgw4s 1moM'ehwrL Tlw •POYw®+i 7e WtBi4ibb Pw+W 110Y a.as rs.R.w�sLr! • o •CNN•'f 3dTY,0.6T0 r alwa: `4M1Msf�.]►i�M. .�L�QI�Q�MIINfe '�./�1� +�MM�i a�'��Y.LL�IMIC\06Ari�i �•�••�-.� •TIMbe�a,<ZGaYI\Ni./PJM.a Ni�1i.W4TV!/M� lPCMO pYsf J�M�P.Ii6aM N•../MRN�GMI:G-'�iCFHt y��pb.EY�Mfi�NWO'l'M7a6 M/V7b YN.�i� •�•P'se6'A6.�M� Y.7s. NIMUM iLIwG7P/O.aWOM• •IJINi SMIaM4 N H+d.Wi C�KLpTQ�IM`G w!r Ii MdN I. . �:W�tla g1�1aMeMY Mti�0`NIZL IPCda.rL'Jp�P L O S p.A. MW •N6MT (KaTM�K G1fdIH1\:.OLY.lViGlia uRNT�9i Rid dMrc.� �_ L ottaeaa►„m•t:rw+a a�..lwrol. NORTH CITY O RANCHO C ,'Cc1 i 1�:1'G PLl-NNI.tG DIVISION PAIII.G1i6 hlt�. Woo IL oo R sL s rLA_A ELC-VATION NORTH CITY OF UCAi RANCHO CNlo T GA ITEM:��'�'l-47� PLANNING DIj'LSCN E.YHIBfI': SCALZ------ -' mi .d. ■ Moir.,i;� , - � Mill!! 1 rr + iTanna� r 6slg J liar r ou ••_.._. cota. �.M+f'�.hM'[1.`r![!Y.' R.sw+w. � 's�'+.a�t ni_ ..,_.. _ ...n`.-ix n ►`^^r.. AV 6Ntt_• OLMV A'.7CiN isfrit k'•Ls? f � ✓ V FORTH CITY OF T IM-vt.- Ly� RA (,HQ CZ. N,1a.,GA TITLE=i PLA;'�INUNG DIVISDIVEXHtBCT:, SCALE:. r h ;yro Ri, y� .16 VAIM pY�R1'►r�. P�'Rf'ri'E @ P�,NLUtN�a PJe._ i NORM I` CITY OF ITF1I �� i '\CHt7 C UCA, N-I0,'\,G 1 TITLE- DI`'iSKi EXHIBIT= SC: CE i f; � wxirraNa rertosri71f.4 rron�tri�es f. S j �•• �� � fJfu6 tbi� �' � �Yu 1 1 ? ' , �uas. �e+a3K�Ga11�►�tF 7416TiM$ �'j�Mt L 4 t 'y��_x� L ;t 'J T�.S9�P.Y.F + 1tA1fY PpR++�arS a t:.---'i �..w i is vs��.'• ns a mnt+er IDS (�� a V � + �. -P�M�N Mi"f���Yfpi J�P9'+PF14f Yam• �rr��wt•..Pr.rr�ruw+w.s — � s�rrar� �'"` r...�:�.3:.ru�.o ' aecr,on,•�,ro+ f f i f k NORTH CITY OF PLANNING DPMK)�N SCALE- j; E eirf'4L,��pp�• 1 3 t Ao'Y il�JRTH CITY OF tTE;�t=�U� I .1�i'CHO CI✓`C 1IOi�'GA TITLE--. Pl.r1NANj,\G Di v'lSI 1 EXHIBCi -H SCALE,---------_ 1\,y RESOLUTION No. A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING CISSION APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 87-64 FOR A NEIGHBORHOOD C"ERG.IAL S40PPING CENTER LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF CEMM AVENUE AND HAVEN AVENUE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD COKhSERCxA1, DISTRICT - APN 201-262-48 WHEREAS, on the 15th da; of Aprit, 1987, a complete appi1ication was filed by Dpnley_gennett Architects for re"iew of the above-described project; and WHEREAS, on. the 24th day of dune 12 ,,: Commission held a public hearing to c Insl der the above-described project. follows: NOW, THEREFORE, the Rancho Cucamonga P'r.n^ing Commission resolved as SECTION is T*,,,the Fallowing findings can be met ` i 1. That the pro psed use is in accord with the General Plan, the ob ;`ectives of the Development the WZAoses df the district in Code, and locatet, �'ch the site is 2. That the propos6j use, togetner.with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detr+mencal to 'te Public ousedtoh, safety, or �M'M 1' or materially v properties or mPPOvementt in the ij vicinity. 3, That the proposed use Complies vrith each of the applicable provisions of the ,"welopment Code. SECTION 2: That this Projacc will rIt create adverse impacts on the envFronmen an t at a Negative Declarhtion is issued 7n ae,;le 24, 1987. SECTION'S: That 'Conditional Use Permit le,�, 87-Oa is approved subject to e o owing conditions: PLANNING ryivisION I. Landscaping shall be utilized along the west and south property lines to insure screenin f g of the shopping center from adjacent residences, Tire plant uterial along the west boundary shall include tail growing evergreen trees to provide z�=h screening. 2. The rectangular elements Cn the towers shalt be open patcomtern. through to pravids a more definer+ shadow pattern. O-°'0jr Resol tcti on No. CUP87-34 - Donley-ilennett Arc.=heels June 24, 1987 Page 2 3. The south elevation of Building and the v.;st elev,�tivn of ,the carwash/service area shall be deea*let with 'a_ stucco relief arch treatment. F 4. The columns supporting the arcades;,shalI include a base detailing to be reviewed prior, toi:tissuance of building permits. ; 5. The design o;_the westerly portion (,ill the site, which., inGWddts tl ',,Carwash, robe bays and ,'ataii shop, shall be reviewed and approved tyl':the Design RWew C ►ittee prior to issuance of building permits. ENGINEERING DIVISION 1. Existing 8v,,rhead Utilities a. Lemon Avenue An in-idea fee as contribution'to the future undergrounding of the , existing overhead utilities itelecoamr:nicat'on and electrical) on the opposite stet of Lemon Avenue shall be paid to the City prior to the issuance of building permits. The fee shall be ogle-half C-e City adopted unit amount times the length from the center of Haven Avenue to the west project bgrndary. b. Haven Avenue - An in-lfeu fee for rpimbursesiunt for the undergrounding 0eing completed for the existing i overhead. 4tilit,des (.telero nication and electr);:al) or the oppo!%,,,, :side of ha"en Avenue shall be paid to the City prior,,a issuance of building permits. The fee shall be onL-half the City-adoptad°,unit amount tires the length,of the project frontaqu. 2. Notice of intention to form and/or 3oin the Lighting and � Landscaping District dealt be filed with the City Council prier to recordatian of the ma; or issuance of building permits, velichaver occurs first. 3. An in-lieu fee for one-half the cost of the construction, including landscaping, of the median island on Haven Avenue shall be paid to the City prior to issuance of building peratits. The fee shall be based on the length of the Haven Avenue f"­stage of the project. I 9 CUP87-04 - Donley-Benrsett Architects June R4,' 1987 Page a APPROVED AND .A03PTEC THIS 24TH W OF vl'44E, 1987., r PLANHING.COMMISSIGN OF THE CITY OF $ANCHO CUCAMONGA -BY: aril . MEMO ATTEST: 1`a m Fr, epu•y pere ary I, Brad B#Ilea deputy Secretary c1 the Planning Commission of the'City of Ranc.0 Cl,�amonga, do hereby certify',hat the foregoing Resolution was duly and ; regulzrly intrAu: d, passed, and ad6pted b,,'the Planning Comissi_on of tha t City ve Ranc;io CuCa=s-,gar at a regular meetl,lg of. the Planning Cyr lssia^:held. on tf� 24th slay of v7une, 1987, bar the folIowin ;�dke-to-wit: AYES: COWISSIONERS: ' COMMISSIONERSR > ._,2NT: COMMISSIONERS,- I i r. b 'c [� saa y,� v='� ;�"; ,r�Yic `qN. na•�pN a� � 1 c�> scrap ey ?� 4 ne S ;79 nE 14a: T AL a. ��►°L��L OOii� C 4 4�3. '�C����g_ ^q� A�'V V� C Y µ - AA C M 'Or u I r tl'8y`t9„ d S�� �,alb t. 11s a� ,.KS $tl `ff"tl'Y'S re"u7r';& og, cnp -, otlA►. p� Y3 1 3M � b6>K Ytl$•Cu1 �� 'd lg_�^®Y ���6 4p�M�y�6 Y w4Y {��QIaL N— �yV+O Opp- O.C`NE VY 1 L N L G V ly V=L C V O O Y M 6 4 ! Y 1.� � �. 1�1.Y 65 \'\� ( "�U•6'ij N L tl D� N 1 a 6K Y IY Eli ONZ Q. Ilk 41 L S 7�I O a V Aap� rAyy `Gp p NG y, = y �•• tlD ti 4 � h•. W ;�vs NiMU .r :y xyV a C wd C�AP.C�N OiC1! CA..P.II CNL C�'H R tnY�;ll}1 3 y.Vu O U Q..Pi 0 R r41,. ��_. y iV LNy_ Y.+ � yb•O.e. P:�VII w �<++ F ,' �P C E �� L`wII Qe0'�II' Vp a pt4 3 - 3 vv N:.� 4... f-a.a.L wLa CUj =e aL C��Y YCOa VC^S$9'1 4� M 'N SVC SY.y� 3� S.i�. o— S�l�•d 4. �q�p..L_ �f:31 uuC.`Od' N,yi C�cp tYtY' A(9Qi1f V�C� qe' YYV SN Cad—C pLL OI Cw'^C�1� yypOuy h� 04�. eN,&�Y.. q��y lr �pon� qY SL Y.f YYW J?. . A �OlC3 C> ���JY N_ � .N y N E C_ `T a da ,9 uy■C seCGGG e�•444== C.ee Sy V w Y Y G 4 S S fJ s �M e g G YL = Y 69 N L3� i'�, 'O=—qa,OrG �, Gi`BL .us cp yV1>V.=� VC._' ICI a')•.SrtY h =a�y � �ue p.Ya w e 3� �g`d �� a.LY� � armor W3 w s M" S o 1°SMS"it a'yLii u.$r z Y.rw y>..ail ^ �v=3,`�. '„c g9LHC�$� E N ' IL w$f g�i Y 'n� R 2.1.12 A r O of IL r,4o« s,d am« d._ ,,Zx N. q9 ���z !6 O. y221 C CG`32 CCO —yypp C .rLE Y wt II�; fig M1 a Ci Y.YZL �.� Od4e CMLYMr'A w 44 qC ry p _O P�ONN �1N Yt6 NW �C 4CCy�CC �! L AG V.cNy L�_��� G>C yq L II..,�S. t'`II 9• (3.L4 N .1e34 Q.yi.W�g3 a�—C YC PII� L`rNu ''� io< ��Lo �'�� cCCr— dCig ca''-�i,L, ��r'4Ogo•• S tea= c L t= V_q 55, _ VO4 '1V..gb tli CS7u Lori 0 rYy CY•r� N iII. i s CNtL� Y V 4 CGtC Ny WL.:L SNle'. o�N■ L� ��. eI r Ny VV L.L.r`NYN N.eNN .e. .eyi rd qaN^y E:�,—>�' g$ve 43`3gq2�9e ��$ vpSGYC ��p�iSSa=qaa.. no a DLO o4CC ` —® wL Yw GiOC .i S4 a Y x Y II � � ♦L y LPC> _< `Q `u r.i: ypd�V l�l�L V�gj il0 yOL 000 < ' _Ne ►C nSi C+Mq NXif s1 rWil?gal ani �o c cc b'� ODOO�^N aNiL,� +�-uc c �mv (['�� %se n' ^v •^�su- as aao3s�pa,, dis�a �a+w�'.Q > �'=� N�.63t wN y t.[df pQ P P1a4'tt 1.�YC`6 Cr i�O ri4��. p_!NS�d4S�14621.dT ppY_40 gd��y�w Q s y gLgpp �C T. Na C` Y q1.A 04.�d CQY Low � C .. ? L LG �44 NCC y'Cq`gq pCN Nba e. J,gs, C� �tMy NYC. x 6Q. Y^C GY N c.4`'w. ,.�4.a M Ob nd C +`z us �¢qqqqpM`'pO�^ .'laL�laa ..¢VL¢.G47 6tt�.0 Mi. �'C My`. V:« Aw rl�^NPAw tT« 0���.•Q.R L' « YN Na 5= mppa�a4-t97, il. .`€'AMC N$ M S eN" 3 a�v .Lnq $a s. «yw Y «L Lwo LQLN p �Lw In KUNo • L.� �o aq�' '#'.". r' �L S�t�w �►�'w lywQ� Am C?a o.. a G NV OIL 1_wtYYE�BQNS ..I-. an w5 =" y yu C r L.Y Q a Sw i Q,. l..fLY Q pp wp Is M8 aL 6 �Q N=Y_Y T�' N ! Y pn F yi7 CC Y��`+�' yO'O��p' I kiz I 'iMQ ti �p W C� Lgw 4��� N����« im sx 4 A aV • Y a 00 Ma <YYt w a.«yy�d ;vDo�27 l•w Y C$ ^ ^N4 4� CO 4 ;" y yY yl yf.7W Z. O S. $ a_r W r L 1 11v S.n Q aQi�^ d'Neg�p g' ova "E C'ir `a ea � �w a m4.eC c vim C Ya V 9Q� SPNO Ky�.sZ s C9 N FY 6� .KL S9 40A�e �p�■cy a=v[�*, X�YV.2rAQ7 ai c 6 Y \, u a' yyayay4C .y�`\ �S.N� +�`L. O tiQ9Q .� Bye... PZpU � �� p 4 Cg � O;QY � Gu Q C[y U L O O eeW C a« o44N a_ lCi ^] �r a': uay ate+..y...°.pp �a8 P cr 4�8 6V0 y YY CCj p C _ 3 p ap.� D«a V`wya 6i^4•4 2 NE4,: aa. V � {J .5 yY�pp yp if pLQ. Z YnQPC 'T4 LQ<� ywgS y sM. � N`.Y yad�Y M �UeO iPi^yy MgcpOa•.9`�Y.♦�. �o6"6^6Ya tlwa 4 CyCvC�,6•n oaN�Y4L��QQaQI yyN�W X�Sny aa�0O 44Q q �JM�x �N+$ �LO 9MLP«yyuT^M�$x�yy'6yy.: `y;1 Y[ Q>�qa ger 711M M9 1 i bqe 1.1 yyl N �G _ CY Jl q C s 9 J Y J _ Ex r «� p vs 23 4i., eY � a$ =I his u4 «WN aN %. $ 91 5-2 45 Z "'� ii �Lj a 5 ei o'Ye s«i'.nS z3-1 � q�C"4�� A� NV ^p O� O+a�it: c M+6�■"p/. ��1 {!f bn �..Y N nC. ►.L.r =Cc ��-O aO�i w �4'��` �C 4. O��C EuP V Opa+=+ �a`p Qq `']+a NW 1H Y L 01 w .�i« L MOy'+♦ C.0�_ 1"Y�1� `.Ci Q11� vL'�' r o '�sgs� 4 V a F.O I F . � Zia L iyo t „q YC� _a�• Q g. CL- 5C L •r.. YC�1 b�Y�.DL 1, h CY y 6 yQb2 N . Y. i- O i`� �, L.N. g 'aG. 3j 5``uy e N� F�N 02.13 L�r �L.Y L■ � � O` �M roIn�s `4Y .rp0€ yu PIZ fi51 ' q. ���N ,f�®VitY ilgl _pap A lamb ^g a $ in €s € ask H ^ss s aTcz ^ .2 P �e = aka_ �" � � �^ -� •: �+ t .. � s_ is fit 4= la L pa M �a • e cii Jig Aw Le G ti Iz RVVV ■p y � L `-n !I all U\ 4 4 d■i LrY. O. �Y C1N 13 YN Y N. W QC ��e �«C S"„ „� ��It lv A gyp 8 �a SS X 15 i+ II. fzf.. nY YAM •r ia9Y ! N JU `'�u`�-e •• ?,cry ypSd Cto` it a fit aoc+ �N R A8= fig b rah jut �g ,S M +i +C all „�-� �y $-caq ;. �y W '7 Y CL CMG � YY O� yaa r OW` �n M r y Y L b 1 ` 1 1 O c 1 p Y ��� xYr Li,•L M � p q w $ Y4 `�..� L C+L h ELM L ism Y p. Y yYY.ii asY`� Y _C • E y W Z� .3$�� ZZ NYL vu<qi p.Lp0.YO ~! ^Y� pL y 2s Gl" + Y °.i a` . �.`ae� tl a bb>,�a u � Y.p iY p L�.•.U 0 yy° <II p a �— COY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ' CANro "STAFF REPORT DATE: June 24, 1987 19:7 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Howard Fields, Assistant Planner SUB&'ECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 87-20 - Mnri----ro—al low a church within an existing pre-school ac lity, "For Kids Only" on 1.18 acres of land in the Low Density Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre) located on the south side of Base Line ftad, east of Turner Avenue APN 1077-061-09` I. PROJECT AND SITE'DESCRIPTION: A. Action Requested: Approval of a church use within an existing aay care presc ool facility. B. Existing Land Use: For Kir 9nly preschool facility. C. Sur^ounding Land Use and Zonils�R Nor - s Ong mobil a oHie park; Low-Medium ResidentiO (4-8 dwelling units per=acre) South - Existing Single Family Residential; Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units it acre) East - Existing Single Family Residential; Low Residential • (2-4 dwell inS;hits per acre) West - Vacant; Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acr(:) D. General Plan Designations: rojec i e - ow Tas1 en ial (2-4 dwelling units per acre) North - Low-Medic RC-is�lential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) South - Low Res-.cIrtiaf 4.k2-4 dwelling units per acre) East - Low Rt-si(ential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) West - Low Residential-(2-4 dwelling units per acre) E. Site Characteristics Existing preschool facility. F. Applicable Regulations: Churches are permitted in the Low Residential js rtc subject to the approval of a Conditional Use Permit per Section 17.08.03 Use Regulations for Residential Districts, of the Development Code. ITEM E PLANNING COKUSSION STAFF REPORT CW $7-20 - INLANL AREA FELLOWSAIP June 24, 1987 ?age 2 G. Parking Calculp'}ion5z �~ �~ Number of Number of F � P` :Square Parking Spaces Spaces 1 of use Footage Ratio Required Providk�d Church (AsscuL°y) 1,480 1/35 42 3 '' 11. ANALYSIS: A. Background: The Planning Commission at its regularly schedulr..L, me-'a ing October 9, 1985, approved Conditional Use Permit 85- E 17, for`f1e for Kids Only Preschool within the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre). Curr6rtly, the enrollment of the preschool is approximately eO students and preschoolers. B, Gererai• Inland Area Fellowship proposes to utilize a 1,480 square Toot multipurpose room within the, main building for Sunday services and a smaller classroom bull-ding for ,Sunday school an a temporary basis for approximta�ely 2 years (see Exhibit "B"). The proposed fellowship services am from a a.m. to 10 p.m. on Sundays, and 7 p.i. to 10 p.m. two nights during tM week. This would not conflict wizt't 'ttie primary preschool use operation. The existing preschool facility is ideally suited for church use by nature of its ,constrac'lon and floor pl,n. Prescho!As _ are constructed to stringent building ,ode standards that me:^t or exceed building code requir+ne,is for a church use., n e multipurpose room as well as the classroom contain adequate exits which have State Fire Marshall listed and approved panic door type latches. The maximum octugancy load for the multipurpose type room is ivW persons. Parking: The primary issue is the availability of sufficient part g. The front park og lot has approximately 32 stalls which iaore than meets tlt present needs of the congregation of j approximately 12 families. However, based on the Church's request to utilie 1,4CO s,,uare feet for assembly purposes, the proposal is shoot 10 required parking stalls. To address this parking deficiency, the Planning Commission may consider the following option. In order to ensure that the existing- parking lot can accommodate the church use, the Commissior. may consider a limitation on the amount of seating for services. For churches with fixed 5e4ting, the Development Code calculates parking at a rate of 1 parking 'space for every PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CUP 87- O - INLAND 9REA FELLOWSHIP bane 1987 Page 3 n four seats. Inland Area Fellowship proposes to use up to 201 portable chairs. If parking were calculated based upon the number of seats, a maximum of-128 seaV, could be provided (128/4 _ 32 parking spaces), Although this, method of calculating narking has never, been used before,-for portable seating, it may be warranted based upon the u'}J*tig nature of the site, The site location is such that pakwoulu not impact surrounding residential neighborhoods, ' ept to the south if parking were allowed on the rear portion of the site which is graded and accesses from Kinlock Avenue. Staff would not recommetid that this area be usao4W, arkfng because of the adverse impact upon the neighborhood..-� If -tire seating is limited it would require periodic monitoti q to ensure compliance IV. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: The pE Ject is cVA!=ff Qfth trio Development: Z ode and the enera Plan. The project will 14;t be detrimental to IV adjacent properties or cause significant advarse envfranmental impacts, due to a six-foot high sound zttenuation wall on all three n sides of the project site buffering the adjacent neighborhood from noise impacts. Also, special lighting standards were used.to avoid adverse spill-over of a cess lighting glare. the proposed use, j together with the recd#mended conditions of ap; ov l are in compliance with the applicable provisions of the Development Code and City regulations and standards. V. CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised ns a public hearing in Ine Daily to rt newspaper, the property posted, and notices were sent o all'"pro;ero owners within 300 of the prateect sita.-` VI. RECOMMENDATIGM: -Stiff recarrzends that the Planning Commission consider a materials and input regarding this proposal. If the Commission concuss Rita the findings and conditions of approval, the adoption of the attached Resolution would be in order. 3:ueil Ree ^'i L.O Brad Buller City Planner BB:HF:te Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Vicinity Map F.:hibit "B" Site Plan Exhibit "C" - Floor Plan Resolution of Approval _ P.O.E36XAt `` William F,�anders % PanGw Cucamonga,CA 91730 P. 0. Box Al 1714)987-1200 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730, - Bill Flanders March Ott, 1987 • Paster Mr. Dan Coleman Assistant Planning Director City of Rancho Cucamonga 9161 Baseline Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 ,. RE: Conditional Use Permit F' Dear Mr. Coleman: I have recently become involved in starting a new church au Rsn.cho Cucamonga and have reached the first $oal of new church, that of 'cindzag a place to meet. It is the intent of this letter to supply you with; information which I hope will be consistent with the requirements,needed f!jr the application for a Conditional Use Permit. I have recently contacted and received approval from For Kids Only, Ltd., for the use of their facility located at 13213 Baseline, This is a nets build- ing which I feel is ideal for our type of temporary use. At this time we are aterested in utiiiziag the main structure and one of the two satellite buildings. The main building would be used for the church service while the smaller buildir,; would be ..aed fo' -nildren and their Sunday School program. Tha large room in the main building occupies approximately 1,480 sgttar2 feet (when allowances for the platform and water heater O oset .are deducr.�Q. Although this room could have an occupant load of about 200; our current church family represears only about 12 gttive families:» As you can see the roo- will allow for some growth to which I look forward. The room contains atia,,..ate exits which have Stata Fire Marshal listed and approved panic-type door latches. Approved exit signs and an approved firs alarm system are also in place. The front parking lot and the graded area behind the buildings provide for more than adequate parking space. The main parking Icry in front has a capacity of 32 vehicles, and in the rear t6,;re is a graded and compacted area which covers approximately 26,000 square feet. This area is owned by For Kids Only, Ltd., and is available for parking. There .hould be no conflicts:or problems with httghbc:fs k\s they only exiS in close proximity on the West and the East sidek�, and these are both separat by setbacks and six-foot block walls. The total-Adjoining (surrounding) land uses are as follows: Affttiated with The 8-General Confere-nrp Dan Col 'arch �`,a.rch 24: 19t�, page 2 North-Moblle Rome �--4 across Base,Nine', South Residential (separated by n 26G' for vaeaj4t lot'), East . - Residential West - Residential' (vacant lot adjoins,at"rear). The church �ervices, 'as currently planned,°will occur between the hours of 9 a.m. and 12 noon each Suridly,`cIn order to plan for growth, slid future programming, I woLid request that the rozdifYottal Use permit al"tnw for a time usage On Suudayir between tk.%hours of 8 a.m. and ID p.m., and on week ' nights between the hours of 7 p.m. and i0 p.m In no ease would the hoxlxs K. requested conflict with �-.he regular or gpe^.iZ hours of the school and any week-night services shall net occur morw than twice weekl-, Wanting to set a r,.)od example, we wilt &ii suYi� to meet or eacceed any require- Y ments detailed by the-Building,alfe, Safety Div;;sion,_ tie Fire District, and ' your department. It is our desire ta,utiliaei thin building for a maximum pe.rio.; of 24 months, .• by which time we hope to have establ£shed a pernw,nant facility. I sincerely appreci- : youv interest and attena.::on in helping us obtain, the Gonditio:jnl Use Permit in an expedient eann„er. Sincerely, ,, William R. .'Manders, r � PaEft= r .. ?lntoinati =j Holquin J For Kids anly, Ltd. I 24 <a E 0 A. oil y to,Tom• r '».4' eso rw.rrs• -1Z. SITE UTILIZATION MAP NORTH CITY OF ITE.tt= RANCHO CI;C--1IoNGATITLE : !,2ffSCALIE. PLA NING DivisicNEEC-IIBIT Ask .. .�_ BRSEl1RE ROAD I .. ......�.._�....I ___ ZIA SITE DATA � Mer f YA•p{� N"1+ b `_• '��'�3 � 1'• �• V4ygViA 4ib VA j 5�� � Ulars!/Y 91ib0� + 4� 1 1 _ � I A T SITE FLAN I NORTH CITY OF RANCHO CUCA,.,N ITEM- G TITLE:.�Vi 7'E PLrlNiNI G DI'%,-`LSIOttN EXHIBIT: �' �1•/2. 6e5 ..Tc�yA a�srEM�y,,r j �� L lV•G PRA J SEe✓fcE•5E2 Rai •• 6b �i I .Z.L t o 4�Va%/I'-xwt�ss _BUILDING 3 i Ti•fRaC'[ �� rJ0.3773.�b.K�rf•. '_. .._. tNORTH1 CITY OF ITEM:_ � �o� PLANNING Divgs tyN � --- E,XHIRIT` SG�LE- x 6.1 nt ..15- a o- STOR. /PROPoStD/ � r KI CrN s'EArINi .Y Avvua ST.K.- n Aa4A� 2eso q a Hv loos! 9. INFANT CARE t Gutsy wasv. gr.yj s n.utott!cf..:� �r Fv�r�j f T r QbreY l Seranwb-- -/. .'� �Tp, "fZe.n•5 r:,..T:zer OFFICE . INFANT e'f .YrwrJr.�r+z�ncdm:rr i. lk 6+f� , C NORTH CITY OF ITEM: RANCHO CLCkNjoO,tiGA TITLE= &00� PLANNI\G DI 'ISI)N EXHIBIT. SCALE: CITY OF RANCHO CUC&%ONGA PART II - INITIAL Sr DY r.` E,YVIRQN:Dn�;T:,L C::ECIv:ISP DATE: i FILING DATE:__ NUMBER: r—zz PROJECT' PROJECT LOCATIc)I: I. EP !RMM- L 1%TACTS (Explanation of all 1Pyes" and "Maybe" answers are required an attached'. Soils and - sheets), YES kYEE MI I. -,, o9v. Will the proposal have sign iricantresults 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 intetvals? 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- tlides, ground failure, or similar hazards? h. An increase in the rate of extraction and/or use of any mineral resource? 2. Hydroicrv- Will the proposal have significant -- results in: a^5_. to- YES a. Changes in currents, or the course of direction of`- lowing streams, rivers, or ephemeral strw m channels? b. Changes In absorption rates drainage " ' g Patterns or the rate and amount of surface water runoff? c• Altera'tions to the course or flo ? w of flood wars s , p d. Change in the amount of surface water in anv body pf water? @• Discharve into surface waters, or any a M alteration of surface crater quality? f. Alteration of groundwater chatacteris23cs? c g. Change in the qusntity of groundwaters, either throug.1 d;rect additions or with— drawals, or through interference with an aquifer? Quality?. Quantity? r ./ h. The reduction in the amount of water other wise available for public water sapplies? i. Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding or seiches? 3. Air Quality. Will the proposal have significant resul—is in: a. Constant or periodic air emissions from mobile or indirect sources? Stationary sources? b. Deterioration of .ambient air quality and/or interference with the attainment of applicable air quality standards? C. Alteration of local or regional climatic conditions, affecting air movement, moisture or temperature? 4. Biota i Flora. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Change in the characterisriCS of species, including diversUY distribution, or number i of any species of I ntAs? b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangp _4d sDeeIt&a ,w.F ..,..� 1 YES _iY3E c. Introduction of new or disruptive species of r plants into an area: ' d. Seduction 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 iaumbers 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 arYa, or result in a barrier to the migration cr movement of animals? y/ f d. Deterioration or removal of existing fish or wildlife habitat? S. Population. Wi31 the proposal have significant results, a. Will .he proposal alter the location, distri— bucion, density, diversity, or growth rate of the human Mo nation 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 lu. a. Change in local or gegional socio-economic chaiacteristics, including ecaaomic 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? ?. Land Use and Plannin¢ 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? - 11-11 c. An impact upon the qulaity or quantity of existing consut>ptiye or non-consumptive recreational opportunities? YES 8, Trans portatinn. Will the pro osal, have significant results in: - F a- Generation OF substantial additional vehicular movel=ent? b. Effects on existing streets, or demand for new street construction? J, c. Effects on existing parking facilities, or r demand for new parking? d. Substantial impact upon existing tranapoxta t:an systems? e. Alterations to present patterns of ci..resila tion or movemant of people and/or goods? f. Alterations to or effects on present and Potential ;eater-borne, rail, mass transit or air traffic? g. Increases in traffic hazards`to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? 9. Cultural fesources. Will the proposal have significant results in; a. A dis"irbance to the integrity of archaeological, Paleontological, andtor nistorical resources? / 10. Health, Safety and Nuisance Factor, Will the proposal have significant rasults in: a. Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard? b. Exposure of pefr,le to potential health hazards? c. A risk of explosion or release of hazardous substances in the event of an accident? d. An increase in the number of individuals or species of vector or pathenogenic organisms or the exposure of people to such organisms? e. Increase in existing noise levels? f. Exposure of people to potentially dangerous noise levels? S. The creation of objectionable odors? r h. An increase in light or glare? ?age YES "kY�- no 11. Aesthetics. Will the propos,. 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 c/ d. Water supply? Vy/ e. Wastewater facilities? —� f. Flood control struesures? g. Solid waste facilities? h. Fire prdtecriott? i. Police protection? �^ J. Schools? k. Parks or other recreaticaal facilities? 1. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads end flood control facilities? M. Other gover vental services? 13. Enerev and Scarce Resources. Will the proposal have significant results in a. Use of substantial or excessive fuel or energy? b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of Energy? C. An inc case in the demand for development of new sources of energy? d. An increase or perpetuation cf the consumption e of non-renewable forms of enerl- when feasible renewable sources of �gy &V ,available? G... P s y x`F� tty.Ytl ;eQ. A e. Substantil depletion of any nonren�haable or scarce na.tu+ral, resource? J 14. Manda v F dines Si lifica,�ce, ��% ----� -- 1. a. DL�ss the project have the Potential to degrace the, quality of. the environment, substantially reduee the habItAt Of fish or wrildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife Population to drop below self`'tus.taining Levels, thzestcp to } eliminate ,a Y► s "a Rlant or,animdl communtt reduce E the number or restrict the range of a rare or'' :- endangerzi plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the Mior periods of / California history or prehistory? b. Does the - . Ptioject have the potential to achieve ; short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, ' a r: environmental oats? -S (A short c,,%.= impact on the t environment is. one which occurs i'' a relatively brief, defirlit:Ive period of time�hile long- term impacts will endure well Wo the future). c• Does the tOject have impacts which r@ individually limited, but cumulatively _ , .,�. considerable? (Cumulatively considerable means that the incremental effects a an individual project are considerable when viewed. in connection with the effects of pa-t projects, and probable future projects), d. Does the project have environmental effects --- which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or infrirectly? II. DISCUSSION nr rNt'I pN►.D<_..' EVALUATION the ( above questions plus a discussion of proposed mitigate ionmeasures)t answers o {I DEgwTMYO+� On the basis of this initial evaliltioac find the proposed project GOL�0- NOT'4ave ap w on the environment, and a iE�ATIVE DEG significant effect 4,- TIOY trill be prepared, I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigat9,on 1neasurea described an an attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREFARED, ❑: I find the proposed project MAY have a significant ef^ect on the _ a.envirnment, and an E:WIRO.TMT DWAGT REPORT is required, w. Date S lSre- n�i Ti ,le il' d i I J' I r RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 87-20 FOR A CHURCH WITHIN AN EXI4TING PRE-SCHOOL LOCATED ON THE SOUTH-SIDE OF BASE LINE ROAD, EAST OF TURNER AVENUE IN THL-1LOW RESIDENTIAL. DISTRICT - AN 1077-061-09. WHEREAS, on the 21st day of May, 1987, a complete application was filed by Bill Flanders for review of the above-described project, and WHEREAS, on the 24th day of June, 1987, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commissi..'C"held a public hearing to consider, the above-described project. NOW, THEREFORE, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission resolved as fal1 ows SECTION 1: That the following findings can be met: I. That the pj',;posed use is in accor ,with the General Plan, the Objectives of the Devel"pment 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 detri.1-0tal to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to iroperti-s or improvements in the vicinity. 3. That the proposed use complies with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code. SECTION 7: That this project will not create adverse impacts on the environmen an at a Negative Declaration is issued on June 24, 1987. SECTI'' 3: That Conditional Use Permit No. 87-20 is approved subject to-ire foiTowing conditions: 1. Approval is limited for a period of twenty-four (24) months, at which time the facility shall revert to its primary use, unless extended by the Planning Commission. If a time extension is necessary, a request may be filed by the applicant 80 days prior to the expiration date. 2. Hours of operation shall be limited from 0:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. on Sundays and 7:00 p.m. to 10:00-p.m. on weeknights. Weeknight meetings shall oot occur more than twice weekly. Further, in no case shall church activities overlap with the primary hours of the "For Kids only" Pre-school in a manner which ° creates a shortage of o,-site parking. y �Pd, PLANNING ) ZSSI.ON RESOLUTION NO. CUP 87 2D'= INL►ND AREA FELLOWSHIP d June-24, 1987 Page 2 3.:"-1 Seating`in the ipain building for church services shall be limitez"-o 128 seats. The number of seats and avail ability"-O parking shall be periodicOly ;•-,nitored to ensure compliance. 4. Any modification, expansion, or other change .n operation, including day care, will requi~t a revision to the Conditional Use Permit., 5. Approval' of this request shall not waive compiiance with all sections of the Industrial Specific Plan, all other applicable City Ordinanc-s and any community or specific plans in effect at the time of occupancy. LT 5. All signage proposed for this Conditional Use Permit shall be designed in conformance with the City's Sign Ordinance and shall require reviet and approval by the Planning Division prior to installation. i. If the operation of this Conditional Use Permit causes adverse effects to neighboring residccnces, the Conditional Use Permit shall be brought before the ,Planning Commission for their review and possible termination of the use. 8. All necessary plans shall be submitted to and approved by the Foothill Fire Department and' Building and Safety Division for their review and approval prior to occupancy. 9. The building shall not be occupied, except for church office 'activity, until completion of all improvements required by Building and Fire Codes, to the satisfaction of the Building and Safety Division and Foothill Fire Protection District. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 24TH DAY OF JUNE, 1987. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Larry T. McNiel, airman ATTEST: ' `gray u 11 er, Deputy Secre"Fry �` `,:^'"-- ... N �.e,--+',r�s " ..`say-0 •-r.�+rrE'fi.,- �...,..�.,'-4-- PLANfstt■6►���.. Li: it N1* ito lls N"k'SOLM. OR No. CUP 87r2Q - INLAND AREA PEl,LOWstup June 24, I987 Page 3 t I, Brad Buller, Deputy Secretary of the Planning Commission of the CityAof Rancho Cucamonga, *Jo hereby certif;,, that thl foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted py the P1anMng Ccmasaission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meettvgi of the .alainj ag Commission held on the 24th day of June, 1987, by the following vote-to-wit. RYES: COktISSIbNER5: NOES; COMMISSrONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS i j — — CITY OF RANCHO CUCAINIONGA �O VLCA.btpn,c, C 5`"AF F REPORT � E 1_Z DATE: June 24, 1987 1977 u TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning`Comn;ission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Nancy Fogg, Associate Planner r SUL-ECT: MODIFICATION TO CONDITIONAL tlSE PERMIT 85-I4 AND MEOW REVIEW L e request o m00; y B6 approve acre s r Plan -:.,y el imina�`,,i ng B�lildings C and D and replacinii Witt) parking spaces, in the General�Industr:,t 'District, (Subarea 3), located at the northwest corner of 9th Street and Archibald Avenue APN 209-021-16, 17, 05. i1 I. PROH T AND SITE DESCRIPTION: c; A. Action Requested: }rovaS:A of a modification. to the oZ—frn ilr o anan l se Permit and the -2evelopment Review by eliminatijig building pad area *for Buildings C and D and replacing with parking spaces. B. Surrounding Land � and Zonin tT rFi n us r a ana Business Park; General Industrial District (Subarea 3) South - Vacant, Industrial; General Industrial District j (Subarea 3) East - School.;residential; LM Residet:tfat District (2 to 4 dwelling 'units per acre), Medium Residential District" (8 to 14 dwelTin units per acre) West Industrial; GeC!_-ral Industrial District (Subarea 3) C. ile;reral Plan. Designations: Project e - enera n ustrial North - General Industrial South -- General Industrial East - Low and. Medium Density Residential West - General Industrial D. Sille Characteristics: The site contains t o existing Instiron mane ac ur ng ware Ouse and industrial butt-ding. Buildings A. E and F have been completed, while permit for Building G R;as been issued. All street improvements have been completed along Archibald Avenue and 9th Street, t, Y ITEM F _ PLANNING COMMISSION STAFFj'EPOR? CUP 85-14 and-DR-86-10 - Muller 4 ,lune 24, 1987 Page 2 F. Parkins Calculations: Humber of Number of . ` Type Square Parking Spaces Spaces , of Use rootage Ratio Required Provi rd A - Mfg 51,250 1/250 51 205 1/500 77 8 - Mfg 30,940 1/25C` 36 36 1/500 44 87 . E - Office 12,620 WED 13 13 Rec Facility 1/150 62' 62 F Office 20,414 1/250 81 K G - Office ' 20,414 1/250 81 81 H - Exist. Bldg 148,000 1/500 302 453 746 1020 II. ANALYSIS• A. Generale- On September 11, 1985, the Planning Commission approveT an 18.42 acre Master Plan for the development of three office buildings totaling 53,226 square feet, and four industrial buildings totcling 159,704 square -.feet, Phase I consisting of Buildings A. E and F was recent,y Com,.leted. On may 28, 1986, the Planning Commission granted Design Review approval fof Phase 11 consisting of Buildings B, C, 0 and G. P, To date only Building G nps received a building permit, On April 22, 1927, the Planning Commission conditionally approved' 1i. Conditional Use Permit 87-13 to allow for i=inancial, Insurance and Real Estate type of land use for Buildings E, F and G.and a recreation facility (Star Fitness Cent"r) to be located at Building E. To address the parking issue, the developer agreed to mtidi fy the approved Master Plan and the Development Review by eliminating the construction of Building C and D to provide additional parking spaces as shown in Exhibit "E". These additional parking spaces would relieve those spaces fronting along 9th Street for Building E. The Planning Commission has placed the above requirement as a condition of approval for CUP 87-13. The dLveloper has submitted this modification for your a review and consideration tonight. B. 0esic; Review Cam;nitt:e:_ The Design Review Committee (Chitea, csle, 'and Coleman)--revliewed the proposed modification to the Master Plan on June 18, 1987, and ret.ommended approval with the 4 followi-na improvements: 1 :{ PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CUP 85-14 and OR 86-10 - Muller June 24, 1987 r PaPe 3 lift 1. Provide convenient �pedes+rian �'connection from this .new parking area to Buildings A, B. and H. 2. Provide sufficient landscaping to shade the large parking area within the Buildings C &D pad area. 3. The parking area should be comp-.zted prior to release of occupancy for the-new tenant in Building H. 4. The change to the parking area and loading area along the west and north elevation of Building H shall be subject is ferther review at the time of tenant improvement plan submittal. C. environmental Assessment: Staff has completed an Environmental Ch ea is an as a erm ned that no significant adverse impact C will occur as a result of this project in eliminating buildings C & ,D and repl;tcing with paminrg spaces. ther, a Negative Decl'arat,oy, has been issued for this. appro-,-- Master Plan on September 11, 1985. IIi. FACTS FOR FINDINGSi In order for the Planning Commission to approve 5 s a i catio►r to the Conditional Use Permit and its Development Review,: facts to support the follpwing findings must be made: 1. That the lropoacd project is in accord with the - objectives of the General Plan, the objectives of the Development Code, and the Industrial Specific Plan and the purposes of the district in which the site is - located;,and 2. That the proposed use, together with the conditions applicable ther,.to, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; and 3. That the proposed use complies with each of the applicable provisions in the Industrial Specific Plan and the Development Code. IV. CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised. as-a Public Hearing item in The wily Report newspaper, the property posted, and notices were sent o all property owners within 300 feet of the project site, r '* PLANNING COF SiS z '\tTAFF REPORT CUP 85 1 and t3i1" b Muller Cime 24, 1387 Pag.e 4 4 V. RECOMMENDMON: Staff recommends the Planning Commission approved " the adiflicat'ion to the Conditional qse Permit 85-14 and. the Development Review 88-10. Resolatiogs .,of Approval for both modifications to CUP and the Developrae-it Review have been attached 'for your review. . /Re full tied, 1, � 1e y lanner 88:NF:ns Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Location Map Exhibit "B" - Site Utilization Ma�)� Exhibi°t,•V' - approved toaster PIT!! / Exhibit "D" - Pha GttatiIed Site Plan Ex",bit "E"' - Pro a `i iled Master Plan $ed7 Aodified aAster Landscape Plan Exhibit NO" - P ` oS.ed Modified Building A" Northerly Plaza Agee Resolutions of Approval for CUP 85-14 Modification and DR 86-1€3 Modification l s 1 tr k t } i i i> K f' .r •�.- a.c �i D � �� .:, 0 �. �� � , m �. y �.�/%l %lI1"/''sir:j �� �.: _� .��_ �, U � . ,. P,; . ,� � y .� -+�—saeewttae pr Wr jm Ila if L __ w..► � - ' � �� � i � � � � � ill 41 -- If om r� W 2 U t lot �, [ I L1 .p [f _to 33 UZI "ter•, ,` ,�� � ��� r 1� "' Q S S I T E P L -A N ' P H A S .e T W tja : NK)R COY C)F '� -/ �. XaU CL'a'.WCU � n Q LL-- i t { d � Q - 1 C F 1 1 1 U �: Lf -IF �: i uj i cc e'l' {'h 71, i RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING N COMh1ISSI0N APPROVING MODIFICATION TO DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO. 86-10 FOR ELIMINATING BUILDINGS C & D K40 REPLACING WITH PARKING SPACES LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF 9TH STREET & ARCHIBALD IN THE GENERAL INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT - APN 209-021-L6, 17, 05. WHEREAS, on the 26th day of May, 1987, a complete apO ication was filed by The Muller Company for review of the above-descHbed project; and WHEREAS, on the 24th day of June, 1987, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning I Commission held a meeting to consider the above-described project. follows: NOW, THEREFORE, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission resolved as SECTION 1: That the following can be met: 1. That the proposed project is consistent with the b objectives of the General Plan; and 2. That the proposed use is in accord with the objective of the Industrial Specific Plan and, the purposes of the district in which the site is 1 located; and 3. That the proposed use is in compliance with each of the applicable provisions of the Industrial Specific Plan; and 4. That the proposed use, together with the conditions i applicable thereto:,`, will not be detrimental to, the republic health, sate'ty, or welfare, or materially ': injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. SECTION 2: That this project will not create adverse impacts on the environmenTla-h--5at a Negative Declaration has been issued on September 11, 1985 for the Master Pl;tn.. SECTION 3: That Modification to Development Review No. 86-10 is' approved s Je6 cT-Fo the following conditions and attached Standard Conditions: PLANNING DIVISION 1. All pertinent Standard Conditions and Special Conditions of Resolution No. 87-57, Resolution go. 86-75, and Resolution No. 85-131 shall apply. t . PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Development Review No. 86-10 - Muller June 24, 1987 Page 2 r 2. Modifications to the Master Plan shall be subject to Planning Commission review and rpproval. s. Convenient pedestrian connection` from the new parking area to Buildings A, 8, and H shall be provided: l€ 4. Sufficient landscaping to shade the new parking area shall be prWided. S. The Pew parking area shall be completed prior to rele"e �r of occupancy for the new tenant in Building H. 6. The design of the parking area and loading area along the r west and north elevatian of Building H shall be subjected to City Planner review and approval at the tim- of tenant improvement plan submittal and prior to issuance of such permits. APPRJVED AND ADOPTED THIS 24TH DAY OF�JJNE 1987. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA 3Y• FLarry T. McNiel, 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 Res lution was duly and: regularly introducers, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 24th day of June, 1987, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: t y i RESOLUTION NO. t- A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING MCdTFICATION TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 0v 14 FOR ELIMINATING BUILDINGS G & D AND REPLACING WTH " PARKING SPACES LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNEF '" jTH t STREET & ARCHIBALD IN THE GENERAL INDUSTRIAL DIST ICT - APN 209-021-16, 17, 05. WHEREAS, on the 26th` day of May, 1987, a'complete application was filed by The Muller Company for review of the above-described project; and WHEREAS, on the 24th'day of June_1987, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission held a public hearing to consi�r :he above-described project. NOW, THEREFORE, the Rancho Cucamonga Plarn ng Commission re;;wi�lved as follows: SECTION 1: That the following findings can be met: 1. That the proposed use is in accord with the Gerwat Plan, the objectives of tntI Industrial Specific Plan, and the purposes of the district in which the site is located. 2. That the iroposed 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. llat the proposed use complies with each of the applicab',2 provisions of the xodustrial Specific Plan. SECTION 2: That this project will not create adve,se impacts on the environmen an at a Negative Declaration has been issued on September 11, 1985 for the Master Plan. SECTION 3: That Modification to Canditionai Use Permit No. 85-14 is approved su5Ja_-cTTo the following conditions: PLANNING DIVISION 1. All pertinent Standard Conditions and Special Conditions of. Resolution No. 87-67, Resoluti%, No,. 85-75, and Resolution No. 85-131 shall apply, i �A �� l �� PLANNING COi�i�SION ,VAFF REPORT Conditional Use''Permf,!' 65•-n - mu11',, June 24, 1987 Page 2 J f it ' 2., Modificatik. Jto the Master tlin shall bespbjcrt to Planning Commission review and approval. 3, Convenient pedestrian connecVt I. the new parking area to Buildings A, B, and. H shall bi 4. Sufficient landscaping to sha 6 lew parking area shall 4e orovided, 5. The new parking area shall ba eoeipleted prior to release of )ccupancy for the, q,0w tenant lXh Buy IWng W. 6. The design of the ,parkin; -&',ea and loading area along the w^st and north elevation of u'tic, g H shall be"subjected to City ' Planner review and approv&l at the time of tenant improvement plan submittal and prior to issuance,af.such permits, z APPRUVED &NO ADOPTED THIS 24TH DAY OF JUNE, 1987. 4 - PLANNING COK41SSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Tarry T. McNii], Chairmap ATTEST: Brad Buller, Deputy Secretary 1, 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 C.ty of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Lommissinn held on the 24th day of June, 1987, by the followi7q vote-to-wit AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: — CITY"OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA r CAA STAFF REPORT t� �1> DATE: June 24, 1967 1977 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Dan Coleman, Senior Manner + SUBJECT: ENTERTAINMENT PERMIT 87-01 - HARRY CIS - The review of ' propose sc Jos ey oing voca s and playing records nightly in conjuncti6i with a restaurant/night club, located at I0877 Foothill Boulevard. i. ABSTRACT: 'xn May of IS86, the City Council adopted an ordinance regar ng regulation of entertainment uses':' The Ordinance requires that establishments Which provide entertainment must obtain an Entertainment Permit from the City. The applicant is requesting ,F review and approval on an Entertainment Permit for a disc jockey.. II. ANALYSIS,., Harry C's restaurant is primarily a fu>I service dinner ausji a t0ring a night club with dancfng and the serving of alcoholft beverages. Entertainment for customers of harry C's is provided by one disc :jockey doing vocals and playing records nightly for the listening r asure and/or dancing of patrons. Entertainment is proposes! to te-provided nightly from 8 p.m. to 2 a.m. seven days a week, according to the applicant, The disc, jockey would be 'eu.:ated in tyre nigrtclub area i h is c� the south 1 side a the building. There is no admis? ni ghtel u':. According to the application, Mr. Michael Miller will be i responsible for the management of the entertainment. In accordance with Section 5.12.040 of the Entertainment Ordinance, the applicart has indicated that neithe- the applicant or any persons responsible for the management or supervision of Harry C's has, within the previous 10 years, been convicted of a crime nor has the applicant I had any permit or license issued in conjunction with the sale of , alcohol provision of entertainment revoked. i Section 5.12.130 of the xnterta;nment Ordinance requires that a duly licensed and uni{4. ed security guard shall be in attendance at all times Where dancing is permitted or allowed if the danco area is in excess of 150 square feet. The might club of Harry C's contains a dance flocs/dance area that is 384 sgilare feet in size (soe Exhibit "D"). a ITEM G, { PLAWW',C C",IS SIGN STAFF REPORT ENTERTAINMENT PtkMIT 87-01 - HARRY C's ,tune 224, 1981 Page E \ 1% :Y .� II. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: Barry Cs restaurant and related entertainment, woula, not create a public.nuisam nor is it lUely to be operated' in art illegal,. improper,,or disorderly manner. To the kstt of `t staff's knowledge, the applicant has not made any false, Wsleading or ' fraudt*1enx statements of material flact fin the required• application, IV. REC fENOATION% Staff recommends that the Planning Cbrumission y approve,an Entertainment permit for tarry C`s through ado�tiznnof the attuhed Resdlution of Approval. Res tfull 91if fitted, Bra 1nr City anner �. BB:DC:to Attachments: ;Application ;Exhibit W Location.Ma . Exhibit OW - Master Pan Exhibit nV , Sits Plan Exhibit 'all - Floor Plan Resolution of Approval I I! I i i i i; �f v v. j - tic c � 1 i • v � Yam' a s z r hii JAL 411 1 'v ` 44 o y C y M x i D p Y :d 1. V •4 V t � ry E9 '•� Pan� x n !l i� {x v.: pi ? ♦� s � n�A ffr:a`- �i ai w a�� t /�� ��,•1l w 1 VIA mit �.7,"C g 5 aj 1 T y- ' l i ^•-0 S 3`it4iiGM f _ CL 1 � '+ate .�- • kill 71. w .o V `• I' e>g n a +Eri Z tfiiE f I 'iF i! W?? �i1 f 7 f 11�• y rral ,�,11 � 't Y RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE;ANCHO CUCWNGA_iF1AMING CI tISSIO��,., APPROVING ENTERTk-13MENT PERMIT NG: 87-01 TO OPERATE AND CONDUCT EUTERTAIN[�tEti, BY A DISC JOCKEY FOR DANCING FOR HARRY C'S RESTAURANT LOCATED Al` "`Y7 F6,pTHILL BOULEVARD A. RECITALS (i) On May 21, 1986; the City Council of the City of Raticho Cucamonga adopted Ordinance No. 290 providing for the reguiiation"of entertainment. On June L. 1987, Harry Chan has filed an application for the issuance of an Entertainment Permit (EP 87-01) described above in the title of this resolution. On the 24th .day of June, 1987, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Coiiission held a public hearing to consider the above-described project. B. RESOLUTION NOW, THEREFORE, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning CoOnission resolved as follows: r 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Baser upon substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced June 24, 1987, hearing, including the 'written staff repot, and tht) r written, signed and verified application of the applicant, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to property 1,oc}ted to the southwest corner of Foothill and 'Spruce on " a lot presently improved with structures and parking areas which constitute Harry Clt Restaurant; b. The surrounding property is undeveloped, vacant nand; c. The proposed entertainment, as 'conditioned hereby, complies with City of Rand* Cucamonga code requirements; ­7 PLANNING C"ISSION RESOLUTION NO. ENTERTAINMENT PERMIT 87-01 - HARRY CIS June 24, 1987 Page 2 3. Based upon substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced June 24, 1987 gearing and upon the specific findings of facts_ set forth in paragraphs 1 a�i 2 above, this CoamiAion hereby finds and concludes as follows: (A? -that the conduct of the establfshment or the granting of the application would.tYat be contrary ` to the public health, safety, morals &r welfare; f and (b) That the ,premises or establishment ari�•not likely to be operated in an_illegal, improper° or d{sorderly manner; and {" (c) That the applicant hail-not had any approval, permit or license issued in conjunction with the sale of alcohol or the pr€s-iblon of-entertainment ` revoked within the preceding five yg'~s; and (d) That granting the application would not c' create a public nuisance; and (e) That the normal operation of the premises wood not interfere with the peace and quiet of any surrounding residential neighborhood; and (f) The applicant has not made any else, misleading or fraudulent statement of meterial fact in the required application. 4. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in Paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to the following conditions: a. This approval is for, a disc jockey doing vocals and playing records for listening pleasure and/or dancing. Expansions of the dance floor area, incr,ase in the scale or intensity, or other Modification of entertainment shall require application for modifical on of this permit. b. All persons conducting a public dance or any entertt.inment where dancing by patrons or' -� customers is permitted, shall have in attendance at the premises; ,for the purpose of supervising the dancing ana,'the conduct of all P.LANu G I�.S�UR RE_SOLU, �2N Wb: 1 6W7 ATN' .FERMY^$7 `oI - HA CS June 24: 87 Page 3 r 4 - patrons and customers, a duly licensed and uniformed- sacurity ,guard„at all <times such dancing is, peni4t�ted or ai'lowed. However, the provi lons af, this cond-kion shall apgl ,only dande floor qr da�ice area in'6cess-af one hundred fifty.—iPare feet is available or designates for dancing by customers- or 4 patrons. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 24TWDAY OF JUNE, 1987. � PLANNING CommissioN OF j;z ttz7 OF RANCHO CUVMGNGA r' I a BY:Larry T. McNiel, CRITRIn 'I ATTEST: aFad Buller. Vepufy7 Seciielary I. Brad Buller, Deputy Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the fofaj6ftg Resolution was duly and regularly ;Otroduced, passed, end adopted ey, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular sting of the Planning Coaenissior held on the 24th day of Jure, 1987, by the foiloing vote-to-wit: AYES: - COMMYSSIONERS, ►`p : Ctlr 6SIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: f , k 5 CITY OF RANCHO WCAMONGA G� 1bf}CAQ STAFF REPORT F � 2 DATE:. June 24, 1987 �` i977 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner k BY: Cindy Norris, Assistant Planner f ,- r SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL: USE PERMIT 8�-21 - reqL14t to es a isn a 6,000 square tootrc; h c u w n an existing 11,826 square ` foot Multi-tenant industrial facility in the General ` Industrial Land Use District,��Subarea Z1), located at 9507 Arrow Highway, Building 7, :�CEe H - APW 209-021-39. I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTI0N. i . , A. Actian:,�Requested: Approval of"a Non-Construction ConditiOO '- Use Permit-issuance of a Negative Declaration. B. Sirrounding Land Use and Zoning: Aortin - Sing-TFamily e$i en ial; Residential_(2-4 dwelling units per acre: South - Multi-Tenant Industrial, Industrial Specific Plan, Subarea 3 East - Multi�T"ant Industrial, Industrial. Specific Plan, p Subarea 3 ' West - Vacz.jt, Industrial Specific Plan, Subarea 3 D. Site Characteristics: The site consists of a single unit wi to an existing mu ti-itenant industrial complex, consisting i of 20 buildings on approximately 20.7 acres, which has aeeri fully improved and landscaped. E. Applicable Regulations: The proposed use is classified as a church rcif facile y w is is a conditionally permitted use in Subarea 3 of the Industrial Specific Plan. F. Parking Calculations: .Number of Number of Type Square Parking Spaces 41,aces of Use Footage Ratio Required Provided Church 5913 Total 1/400 15 20 Sanctuary 2640 1/35 75 80 ti p r. ITEM H li PLANNINf COMMISSION STAFF REPORT E CUP e7-21 - ORANGEWOOD BAPTISM CHURCH June 24, 198f Page 2 r t. 11. ANALYSIS: k A. General: The Orange"od Baptist Church will be occupying 5,915 `s. square feet of Building Seven (7), with a total'_lease space of 11,826 square feet, the applicant intends to use the facility primarily`as an offigt Monday through Friday from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Religious assr;'ably ,and group activities will occur on weeknights after 6:30 p.m. and on Saturday and Sunday. The main issues related to institutional uses within an existing multi-tenant facility are compatibility and parking. B. Com atibilit : The tenants whit€i are immediately adjacent to e proposea facility in Buildings 1 and 7 include custom manufacturing, specialty goods and food sales, and office- related uses with working hours generally f" 8 am to 6 p.m. ` (see Exhibit "C"),,,Therefore, the applicant's proposed weekday activities are ge' `illy consistent with the an-site uses and the religious ass6ubiy and large group activities, which occur after traditional working hours and weekends should not pose a conflict. C. Parkin : T.)e Cucamonga Business Park has a total of 856 par ngspaces available (1/295) with approximately 100 spaces near the proposed ch• ch facility. In additian, the applicant will utilizL, the entire north side of Building 7 allowing theNn primary access to the 20 parking spaces directly adjacent to their unit (see Exhibit "B"). During regular weekday hours, the applicant may utilize a maximum of 15 parking spaces based upon a lease space of 5,913 square-.feet, (1/400), for office related .activities.. For religious assembly and large group activities, 75 spaces will be required, based upon a sanctuary space of 2,640 square feet, (1/35) (see Exhibit "B"). As there are sufficient parting spaces available to meet their demand during the week and as other tenants in the park do not have weekend hours, there should not be any conflict wit1" parking. D. Environmental Assessment: Upon reviewing Part I of the Initial Study and completing Part II of the Environmental Checklist, staff has found no significant environmental impacts a� a result of this proposal. y - _ I I� PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CUP 87-21 - OR1fGEWOoD BAPTIST CHURCH June 24, 1987 Page 3 III. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: 1- That the proposed use is in accordance with the General Plan, the objectives of the Development Code, and the purposes of the Industrial Specific Plan Subarea 3, as evidenced by the Conditional Use Permit provision for rgligious assem�ly. 2.. That the proposed use, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the i public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties gr improvements in the �— - vicinity. k 3. That the proposed use complies with each of the k applicable provisions of the Industrial Specific Plan. 4. That sufficient parking is avail`iole for the proposed i use,j,c- surrounding tenants. IV. CORRESPONDENCEt This item has been advertised as a..public hea�.ng in The Daily eport newspaper, the property postee and notices sent o all proper y owne•s and tenants within 306=feet of the property., V. RECOMMENDATION: Staff reccmmends Lhat that Planning Commission issue a egal:ive Declaration and approve Conditional Use Permit 87- 21 through adoption of the attached Resolution and Conditions of Approval : Res uily 'kted, /If' (� t Bra City lanner BB:CN:te Attachments: Letter from Applicant Exhibit "A" - Location Map Exhibit "B" Site Map Exhibi-ft "C" - Tenant List Exhibit "D" - Floor plan Resolution of Approval with Conditions .,., .-7, rd J . May 26, 1987 i kt To Wham It May Concern. St7MM Conditional �ermit Concerning our,proposed relocation into quifte H of t.,e Cucamonga Business Parkr.located at 9507 Arrow, we intend to utilize the facilities as a church, with public asse&j1y on weekends and/or weekni:ghts,.nutside of normal busine-is operating hours in the park,% Additionally, we will maintain a church office in the sp;--.n dw.ing norrel business hours. It is possible that we will have some daytime Bible studies, ' (1 ernall meetings, or(lafter school children`s activities, not requiring manly cars ltliticipated maximum ,- 20 cars), The largest number of people x'% �xmld reasonably seat in the sanctuary would be 20K At Oia gressn!; L we have two paid workers at the church, the pastor/and a paiEAi ne secretary. we would expect to gassihly add another pastor F full-time, one other part-time, and ii`crease thy+ secretary to € full-time while in this location. Thank you for your consideration. f, Sincerely, Mark A. Rushing, Pastor J I x { 9974Amhibald e Ave-- 2 I Rancho cu=nonp GA 91730 17141980.0330 tee„ •ARROW •• � itt)t!R S_TREES'1- - .. � � Rol Pant 1 P9r 2 t' d,tt 4c W n 3"AC- ^ I Pa:f f1 P•µ.`�'t3S A g%4.0 Per.5 Y M Putt rat At/, : - v = z.it/c r 4c M L t..�= .l ion ZasiC •rY.rC.�e/L 9jsAc toyAc%4 ( Pact a 0 y_ 1----- `,. cAc ZACa M -- NORTH CITY OF RANCHO CUC-"'O'NGA, 1 TITLE: --+�L--.-� PLANNING UIZ'`RQtV EXHI8Cix ; --, _SCALE-----------� �= -V-t, R J& 77�, _= z ICA L_ i �I' ,_.) a re..ir•itlli n•+, �eer.•e,io r.�{i a e e � _� y er` Orel• _er. �..� Ir is •.� � n I>r �� � 'e r CITY OFRAN PLC\\I\C DIVISKYN E,YHPBtT= --j_SCALE. ARL AWACENr'T3tWS WITHIN 300' RADIUS Building 1: 9567 Arrow, Smite G Department c;r`. Youth Authority 8:30 - 5:30 p.m. Suite H Vineyard National Bank 8:30 - 6:00 p.m. Suit- J Bedrosian Civil Engineering 8:30 - 5:00 p.m. Suite K Video EnterpLsses 8:30 - 5:00 p.m. j Suite L La Petite Bakery 8:00 6:00'.rm. Suite H Falcon,Demolition 8:30 5:00 p.m. suite N Accounting Plus 8:30 - 5:30 p.m. suite P Tandy Corp. 8:00 5:00 P.M. a Building'2: 9587 Arrow Suite A Decker International f:30 - 5:00 p.m. Suite C BurzoW Escrow 8:30 5:30 p.m. suite D Physicians Wa lter service 8:00 - 5:M D.M. Suite E Valley Impravemant Program 8:00 - 5:60 p.m. Suite F Shipley's Photorraphics 8:30 - 5:30 p.m. Suite GJ Sanderson and Assoc. Inc. 8:30 - 5:30 p.m. Suite K Tiger Drylac U.S.A. Inc. 8:00 - 5:00 p.m. wilding 6: 9605 Arrow Suite A Melody Mellis 8:30 - 6:30 p.m. Suite B CaTut.er Supply 8:30 - 5:30 p.m. Suite C-E ATF Davidson 8:30 - 5:00 px, Suite F Metwn 8:30 5:00 p.m. Suite G-J Harry jariz Video C;30 - 5.00 p.m. Buildi 7. 9507 Arran + Suite A General darble 8:00 - 5:30 P.M. Suite. H Proposed Church - Orangewood Baptist Church Builder 8: 9513 Business Center Drive Suite A Rancho Pipeline B: A - 6:00 p.m. Suite E Logetronics 8^30 - 5:30 p.m. Suite F Wilbur's Painting ":30 5:30 p.m. Suite H Retrospect 8:30 - 5:00 P.M. Suite J&K Omni 8:30 5:30 n.m. Building 9: 9521 Business Center Drive Suite A New Hope Church rite B LSJ Interiors 8:00 - 5:00 p.m. Suite C&D Brubar Concepts 8:00 - 5:30 p.m. Auildinct 10: 9541 r -:iness Center Drive M•�..T}ti#r sf:,•h rr�,r�� ?�-I� — 9-10 Suite B MSC 8:00 - 5:30 p.m. r Suite c Tandy 8:00 - 5:30 p.m. Building J. 9565 Business Center Drive Suite A R&R "tneeting `` :00 5:30 p.m. Suite B LOS Angele Times } ' Z QO a.m. - 8:00 a.m. Duite C6D M bonstruction, 11,00 - 6 00 P.M. Suite E Martel Business�,Cent�-, Accounting p.m. i i ' - .n1ar.ls+�ur.x44. i 3'-6grs.. r 03. 312 CITY OF ITEM b oo e RANCHO CU Nl �CA TITLE--�fltt!/'.'� �$ PI.�..ti�tirI G DIVISM EXHIRtT= RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 87-21 . FOR ORANGEWOOD BAPTIST CHURCH LOCATED 9507 ARROW HIAWAY, 'r BUILDING 7, SUITE H IN THE GENERAL INDUSTRIAL LAND USE DISTRICT, SUBAREA 3 APN 209-021-39 i' WHEREAS, on the 3rd day of June, 1987, a complete application was filed by Orangewood Baptist review of the above-described project; and: WHEREAS, on Me 24th day of June, 1987, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning. Commission held a public hearing '.o consider the above-described project. follows-, THEREFORE, the Rancho jucamonga Planning-Commission resolved as � i SECTION 1. That the following findings can be met: t k 1. That the proposed use is in accord with the General Plan, the- objectives of the Development Code, and the purposes of the district in which the site is located. ,,. 2. That the proposed use, together with the conditions i F. applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the 11 public hearth, safety, or welfare, or materially z 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 June 24, 1987. SECTION 3: That Conditional Use Permit No. 87-21 is approved subject to-f e7oT'Towing conditions: PLANNING DIVISION 1. Any modification, expansion, or other change in operation, including day care, wz-11 require a revision to the Conditional. Use Permit. 2. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Industrial Specific Plan, all other applicable City Ordinances and any community or specific plans in effect et the time of occupancy. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION N0: CUP 87-21 ORANGEWOOD BAPTIST CHURCH June 24, 1987 Page 2 3. All signage proposed for this Conditional Use Permit" sha,1 be .designed in conformance with the City's Sign Ordinance and shall require review and approval by the Planning Division prior to installation. 4. If the operation of this Conditional. !Ise Permit causes) adverse effects to neighboring businesses, the Conditional Use Permit shall be brought before the Plannii,j Commission for their review and possible termination;of the use. 5. Plans shall be submitted to and approved by the Foothill Fire Department and Building and ,:Safety 'Division for their review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. 6. The building shall not he occupied, except for church office activity, until,; completion of all _ improvements required by Ouildja19 and Fire Codes to the satisfaction of the Building and Safety Division 6 and Foothill Fire protection District. Further, the building may be used for religious assembly and other large group (50t persons), activities on Saturdays and Sundays and after 6:3a` p.m. on weeknights. 7. Preschools and schools are not allowed by thi-s permit; however, this shall not preclude nurseries or Sunday School during the hours of religious or large group assembly. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 24TH DAY OF JUNE, 1987. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA i i BY: Larry T. McNiel, a rman ATTEST: Brad u er, epu y ecre 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 Commission held on the 24th day of June, 1987, by the following vote-to-wit. AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: . 3( TT r m m .� J CP>.`Y OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GucnnrD; x }fr STAFF REPORT ( 7 Q O ,a F Z DA'i E: 'June 24, 1987 i977 T0. Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner - BY. Howard Fields, Assistant Planner_ SUBJECT: EWVVRQW_%AIL A-S,$S-SMEV AW_OEVELQPNENT .iEi►I,EFt` 7-1, e . e 'of r lvv un ° e ron t acres"of'T IT s tlx TV,tie, edi Re�id'eitti�l Di&-trkt '14 i eTi�fing. i�rrits per �aere� located cn the ' north s1'def°Y9th Si reet, 350 feet;east of` ti�;llan' tvenue APH 2BI-4r`7 -07. In addition, the`epplicant has filed a Tree PemoGai Permit. fr: The applicant. Switqw Construction, Incorporated, respectfylly requests a continuance tc an unspecified date an their project proposal in order to,incorporatey or site p.an revisions which will necessitate a second Design Review Committee meting. iResfully s `ties:, lenner BB•HF:te Attachments-, Letter from Applicant ITEM I F s SUMX7gM0 COI AS tFCTION AMIERYCA, Inc. 650 So. Grand'Ave., Suite. 700 Los Angeles, Calif. 90017 (213) 627-5068 June 16, 1987 Mr. Howard Fie'3s, Planner City of Rancho ",acamo;igz Dear, Howard: we respectfully request that our Planning Commission hearing Ie continued; to an unspecified date: " The owner of the project has determined he would like to mitre some major changes which will\,,requira another desi-jrv'review. Thank You. Sincerely, Richar&.Dahl, Consultant Sumitomo Construction America Tnc. i f i E CITY OF RANCHO CUCAZtONTGA �Qr.L y k'1 STAFF` REPORT ` CI si Ir 1977 t. ` "DATE: June 24, 1987 TO: CfwirniAn .and Members of the Planning Commission n) FROM: Brad(Buller, City Planner BY: ;I Scott'Murphy, Associate Planner SUBJECT: ENVIROMT ENTAL: ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 13441 real en laT tracr subdi vti si on o'f. 18.32 acres of an into 115 single family- lots in the - Low-Nedium Density Residential District (4-8 dwelling ' units per acre) within the Victoria Planned Communitit, located at the northeast corner of Victoria Park Lane and Kenyon Way - APN 227-011-07. F I. PR&tCT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: k A. Action Requested: Approval of subdivision map, concep PkI, grading plan, conceptual Landscaping plan, and issuance .,.-a Negative Declaration. B. Project Density: 6.3 4ieliin'g ur �s per acre C Surrounding Land Use and T�,d��ni�n__gg, or - a an FcTtumterisity Residential (4-8 dwelli,PS `units per acre) youth Vacant; Schmi.=sits .= East' , - Vacant; Low-Medium Density Residential (4-8, ,-dwelling jj�guhPts per acre) West - Vacant; Low-Medium Density Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) D. General Plan Designations: 1;rojev ,. e ow- 2 1ikm ensity Residential (4-8 dwelling .nits per acre) North - Low-Medium Density Residential (4-€3 dwelling units per acre) South - Low-Medium Density Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) East Junior High School West Low-Medium Density Residential (4-8 dwelling units J per acre) ITEM J PLANNING COMMISSION STAf'F REPORT TT 13441 - WILLIAM LYOWL OMPANY June 24, 1987 Page 2 i AOL r. E. Site Characteristics The site is currently vacant with an average s ope of roughly 3 to 4 percents from north 'to south; The project is bounded,on the north by Lark Drive (previously called East Entry Road), on the souto by Victoria Park-i-Vie, on the east by the future hi'�th school, and on the Kenyon F, way. 11. BACKGROUND: On December 10, 1986, the Planning omrission approved e area eveTopment plan for the 1 njga�ds t7t rth planning area. The .area development-,plan established t e`'S'and��,,�se designations and specific- read alignments. Subsiquently, thel�PlanniAg- Commission approved Tentat7 Tract 13279 (the "super §J�e tract) dividing the Vineyards North into ten sma;1er planning-Areas and dedicating rights-of'w;y for arterial and collector roads. ' III. ANALYSIS• A. General: The applicant is propos`ng to dkyelop 115 single tam y ots ranging in size from 4,000 square,; feet to 9,768 square feet in area with an average lot size c 6,367 square feet in area. The applicant is only proposing t�subdivide the property, grade the site, and install the inf,,9structure at this ,time. The "padded" lots will then be sold to anotiner developer—,-rhe conceptual product type (Exhibit V') indicates .zero-lot line style homes, which would typically be.,30-35 foot wide houses on 40-45 foot wide lots. The design renew of the product type would be reviewed and approved by they, Planning r.omtlissior at a later date. B. Design Review Committee: The Design Review C&Vittee TMakeess e, u er r-CTewed the proposal and recommended approval-subject to the Following conditions: 1. Front yara landscaping should be required. 2. The six foot high precision block wall proposed along the east property line should be designed to provide some visual rt.-lief (vertical or horizontal element) 3. The fencing proposed at the southwest and northwest :orlers of the tract should be rounded or angled to soften the impact at the street intersections. In addition, the Design Review Committee addressed a number of other issues that should b�"incorporated into the disclosure statement for the design review of this tract. These items•' include the Following: PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF_REPORl'r•.. TT 13441 - WILLIAM LYON COPANY lure 24, 1987 Page 3 x 1. A majority, if not all of the lots 45 feet­,'r greater in width should incorporate units with side-entry garages. 2. cial attention should be paid to the detailing on t,,e front elevation of the units with side-entry a _ garages. 3. If two--story unity are proposed, the second �.'tory portion.should have a greater front yard setback than the ten feet indicated for the first story of side- entry garage units. 4., The front entry of she units should be located to provide a relatively open area between the front door and the adjacent dwelling unit. 5. Variatira should be provided in the location of side _ yard walisffencing to create cou,„ard area-, to tie in with the architectural style of the units, and to mitigate the amount of "blank. wall -(zero lot line side•# exposed-4o public view. 6. The floor plans and plotting of the units should be designed-to cr+ate variation in seteacks.an& open spaces fi�r,both thd'front and-rear yard areas. C. Environmental assessment: Part I of the Initial-Study has been comp ote y e- app Tcant. Stiff ha,-completed Part II,-of the Enr i roamental Che:kli�t_and has fount significant impacts on the environment as ; rikult of the proposal. If the Planning. Commission concurs with these findings, then issuance of a Negative Declaration iRould be appropriate. IV. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: This project consistent with the Victoria Planned Community and the General Plan. The project will not be: detrimental to adjacent properties or cau�j significant environmental impacts. In additioa, the proeised use, together with the recommended conditions of approval, is in compliance with .he applicable provisions of the Victoria Planned Community, the Development ;ode and City standards. V. CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been a0erfl sed in The Daily Report newspaper as a public hearing and noticas were sent to a,1 property owners within 300 feet of the project site. PLANNING COMMISSION. STAPF REP(AT TT 13441 - WILLIAM LY©N COMPANY t' , E June 24, 1987 4 Page 4 NI. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning' Commission approve enta ve`'Tract 13441 through adoption of the ,Attached n Resolution with conditions and issue a Negative Declaration. rg Resp . Ily su fitted, ra e 4 City Pj anner w BB:SM:te t Attachments: Exhibit "Ay --Location Map Exhibit Tract Flap Exhibit "C"' Conceptual Product Type Exhibit "D" - Conceptual Landscaping Plan Exhibit "E" - Conceptual Grading Plan Resolution of Approval with Conditions . :I M� y - , P � ll j) Fig C Y r L lie CITY or. RANCHO CL'GtQMa GA �-� ,r --- -------- - --' - �------ { AWL r �4L - ' r - t1 ^t.. � f ..'�a r,_.1 t 7 '' iF y.`' tt'et • i. .i i a. 11r�•�,� •+0 1�+'�� —_.{� -•lit i it .-.� a i..t. ��.�-� L o RAINCt FICA N IChNGA .tit: f� .� 4 e° r. .r ?p F�• I AOL F� 1 u a 1 �i,}'�✓ {s to it' ' � ---# � .. ` � � '. r.S.,, - s�x 9t [� in xt a,a•a 'n a!, a i �{,•, ql td•at iL late as. ! [ ," t' ryF11 dp !t d? to ► It j^n. � t±Fi7E iti• ?it s:?iiilS- a± . ay :rra ..........a tF'ex: - i ±i!lSltit'ai±IdF±12i .SSlii'f a! +i_; ■ 3i:Ai 7 IF 4iiili l.l!_ .i ! "iiiiF :• �=t!�''F fitFaFt� iq`S:E•i M 9 CITY . o y ur ' • Q. r OttFos ,. NY .,Allm IL K Z e � i•c � ,�+��. � 4 ,� S��'�. it � q�.;�C�,�.,�j} 57� 4 '"t f ; Y 3 t s .�LE s s i .• i� 11t� ii. ..1� ` _ •�j� Ng PIE i v 0LU *�. q� w } • b x LU i CITY OI'RANCHO CIUC�"NIONLGA Tom--- E`CHIBIT. r tw tox3 ` a a i n x w: ;''_ 11 4 f^ a _ t IN e. ^ E •s nyf r L CITY Or, rrENPLANNuNG i. LR115'IC)V �YHta'T•�2 SS+"".1�I�= a tt a a s<• z y #�Wr. - Ash 35 N N N N N K N lIle O K e t AML q w$ Bit 0 w � r � •�'3� - r P se f _ t �r G crry or. TfrLn- PLANNING 1XVMCN EXHIBIT.--LIZ-SCALE- �__ J`•+pr �� ^� ��� � �". ,fir ll$ nl�:. � a�� �� 3 i x /� All al - e�1O }'. . � _ �i. r"i". + ♦. ��." d��';lid �\» '"' t_ -lam`+`#'"`' \ \� a � • �jr a�.' NJ�• r�f Y ram"' ./ ^d, �ai �`�� � E rbRrrax i.v to Y `ISO -t- AeAL CITY Or. RANCHO CUOUNIONGA PLANNING DiNISM EXHIBIT. .e- ;�•"ifs SG�T.E�::;_.,__..,�,.:�:�, _ 1 } P .ri T. w L i ry1 'f 17 WE e Zo IP crry or. G� �'C CUC M `d'Gc��. rre�r��r C3i zrrUf °rAC�'��iitING L�='�'MON ESCF:BR`: T, t a = CC si Y3 }!j 31 Aff e I CITY or. PI- Ex Tf'.: r' I I RESOLUTION NO., j( A RESDLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE--CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, CONDITIONALLY—;APPROVING `„' TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 1a441 j ,. ' WHEREAS., tentative Tract Map No. 13441, hereinafter "Map" submitted by .The William Lyon Company, applicant, for the purpose of subdividing the' real property situated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San J Bernardino, State of California, described as a residential <-act subdivision of 18.32 acres of land into 115 single family lots located at, the northeast corner of Victoria Park Lane and Kenyan Clay IAPN. 927--011-07), regularly came before the Planning Commission for public hearing and actig-i. on June 24, 1987;, and i� WHEREAS, the City Planner has recommiended approval of the Map subject to all conditions set forth in the Engineering and Planning Divisinn`s reports; and WHEREAS, ' the Planning Conmission has read and considered the Engineering ani Pi.ann ng Division's r_rorts and has considered, other, evidence presented at the pOlic hearing. NOW, THERsFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does resolve as follows; SECTION 1, The Planning Commission makes the following findings in regard to Tentative Tract No. 13441 and the Map thereof: (a) The tentative tract tl; consistent with the General Plan, Development 06 , and specific 'plans; 6 (b) The design or improvements of the tentative tract s consistent with the General Plan, Development Czde, and specific plans, (c) The site is prtysically suitable for the type'of development proposed•, (d) The design of the subdivision is not lii:sly to cause substantial ' environmental damage and avoidable j injury to human;;•sand wi l dl'i fe or their habitat; { (e) The terEaaive triNA is not likely to cause serious public he'v;l th problems*, I (f) The design of the tentative tract will not conflict � with any easement acquired by the public at large, I now of record, for access through 'or use of the 1 property within the proposed subdivision. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. TENTATIVE TRACT 13441 - WILLIAM LYON Co. June 24, 1987 Page 2 a (9) That this p eject will not create adverse impacts on the environment aisd a Negative Declaration is Issued. SECTION 2s Tentative Tract Map No. 13441, ,a copy sf which is attache grp o, Is hereby approved subject to all of the following conditions and ttm att: hed Standard Conditions:: Planning Division: 1. Prior to recordation of Tract 13441, the f'nal map for Tract 13279 shall be recorded. 2. All pertinent conditions for Tract 13279, as contained in Resolution 87-44, shall apply.. 3. This map is being approved as a Tract Subdivision only. Any future proposals for tTi"e 7 ev`3 e7opme`nnt-U ' five or more residential u^rits shall require Design Review approval prior to the issuance of building permits for any unit.% 4. The Hilliam Lyon Company shall submit a:disclosure statement for this tract to be reviewed and approved by the City Planner prier to distribution to peripertive developers of this tract. The f disclosure statement shall include the City of Rancho Cucamonga's conditions, requirements, and expectations for development standards and product types for this tract. S. Landscape treatments at the end rf the side-on cul- de-sacs shall be designed to provide an open view into the interior of the cul-de-sac. 6. The fencing/walls required for the tract shall be consistent with the fencing/walls indicated on the j conceptual landscaping ,plan. N'o4°! fencing exposed to put l iz view shall be i:�,eated with stain, paint or water sealant. Fencing in corner side yards and ferzi„g along Kenyon 'tiny, Lark Drive, and Victoria Park Lane shalt be decorative block (except trail fence along YictoH a i>ark Lane which shall be per City standard). PLAWNIN$ COMISSION R_.OLUTION NO. j TENTATIVE TP.AC.T 13441 WILLIAM LYON CO. June 24,,A947 7. Prior_ to occupancy of-more than 5O percent of the uniif within the tract, the pedestrian trails shall be improved With sidewalks:; landscaping, irrigation, and low level lighting. The plans are to be reviewed and approved by the Gray P1ahp�r and the City Engineer prior to the issuance ''of building pl 1'Mits. S. Any retaining walls used are to he d maximum ofur L-` feet high. 9. All retaining walls visible to the general public i.e. on the street side of cornea side ,yards and within the front yard, are to be constructed of a decorative material to the satisfaction of the Cil-Y Planner. r 10. All back of lot gra0 differentials arfl to be a maximum of 12 feet. j 11. The six foot high precision bio&%.wail along the east property line shall introduce elements (vertical or horizontal) on the east side of the wall to provide visual relief as viewed frrm> the future high school site. The design of the Ali k shall be shown on the final landscape plan and is J subject `to review and approval of the City Planner !" prior to the issuance of building permits. 12.' The fencing proposed at the southwest and northwest corners of the tract shall be rounded or tingled to soften the impact at the street intersections. 'The realignmi:nf of the walls shall be shown on the final landscape plan and is subject to review and approval of the Cit1r planner prior to the issuance of building permits. 13. The 01 lowing items shall be included in the disclosure statement and shall be considered during the design review for this tract- A. A majority, if not ill ov the lots 45 feet or greater in width should incorporate units with side-entry garages. B. Special attention should bc.,paid to the detailing on the front eleVation-!pf tire units with side-entry garages, _J V-- - .. �.; , iSIDW RE�flLI'1TS?�il NQ• ; � TRACT S 13441 - WSLL3�+ LYbN CD. PLANNYNC Cam+ TENTITIVE June 24- 1987:.4 Pa52,4 _ the are _,Proposed, a ; stos'f uni is soul d N e tE jn C, �c na' itorton than a story oral seti�ack si;,orY fof l front Y the first Viater for ,_ `feet lndiu a arage units. side<entr. g 1d be r" units sou. ".. front entry, °f relatively 'Pet` a D. door and the `the rovxde a a�acent located to p�fr�nt betw?Pn the = dwelling unit. in the be provided Variation'- shaa�d wails�fePcing to E. location of side Yard to tie in W1 aAd to create caurt�ard areas achitectral si+Ynt a �"',he ur�i wall (zero 1\, f h1 ank ate.the aa�poses�.Puo'l is view'. mi ti g . lot line sided of the'units l,� and Pl att��+g A;kti on i n �i ' F. The floor Plans to createf9 n�. tb the;'"I sr:ould be ands aP spac_s setbacks yard areas. front and rear _ Division shall apply• En ineerin _�—" of Tract 13273 A11 Pertinent conditions Lighting and/u! Soin- the ijjtention to `e7 filed with of District shall he the map or a^d cjeandscaPin9 , recordati,o3 oh exer occurs whicCity Counca.1 building g i5auance of buildinD permits, f it, L4 pro rats fee for future shf overhead u iiitiA a1+�caet ih273 3. devel003e with T undergrOur:,'+ng ° en ative T Avenue: as conditioned ba prior to recordation. v the City shall raintained b, incorP aadefine The trail:) g a to bdedicated full v�rdth curb 4. d and as a wall or construes' such , � the City-rr separation devbeemainta�ned by I� to the the limit. <0 4 YenYoh wayto ent of Lark Drive j���resolve prherCitY' The alignM shall roved Y S. tract boundary�y'nal �r ;� as ;�P4 past, �., 0 the � rsdW'rda rsn follows: Engi^ear asI) i ._ _ Q 1cA11�itLVE TRACT �'4`41 -aI�'�-LIAht �Yp��,C�. i Jun--+?4, M7 a. It shall be realigned so that ,ice south 1 right-of-way line intersects the., west property Zia , of_t4,e easterly-adja6eot piwoerty 4t a'point ;4Q feet int hofiie north -3 i na, of I,thie south' 20.-,ocri!O)' said a ace'6t r t �P op Y, ��'�tl b. It may be dlign4 as proppsedisibgect to the N"i and thr` daveloper ale-rang cog for ;tl the d catioil for the g^;r0 ffr from the easbely tract. '•hit rrda to hestr i Avenue {a atiini�um p z4O ileei f wift.)an f an a"irgnment approve,¢ bj( the City Cngtneer an¢ thel- execution of,a three, � Party agreement between the 'Nigh School ' District, theC*veloper and the "' APPROVED AND ADOPTED TWS 24TR DAYY--6F JUN9�1947. ' PLANNING CCMIgSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUC.kMONGA ` ~ ' BY _ • ' arr,Y sus Re , Clio ru�an I ATTES f. PBrad Sailer, Deputy Secretary I, Brad Butler, Deputy Secretary of tht. Planning Commission of the City of Rancho. Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly an-. regularly introduced, passed, and adopted tk,,f the Planning Comaission nf-the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commissi;^n held on the 24th day,ri June, 1987, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: .Vo,-.,1SSI ON ERS: NOES': COMISSIONERS: ABSENT: gMMISSIONEttS: E t ry r�w t eGv _Yosu � c.'g10 'a ca -C L op C L p Y , n- L A i_y. G a d & :a o p gg gg p �?gYa�tibrcm N`tlg cpa, ay0`p p4Y n,cq"9'`Coa O ye���� Y4L� YC b CY oqr d�p'� qC4 r�CYpY" p•Y y�GC� p n'9� SEE.- '! O g ■ p .0«i1M V.~PV Gp<4y� �Cy Y �Y Aq >cise aY,Y�a`�. —q2.6! „rd-.—a O`er e+:��V _C e+� Y ,p G a• V N V{5 C CY 4'V�C Y aSarY Cya1y0 Ya. b:-a =Q6 Y;Y s •L w --J1a`Y_.� L p YLy� =21 C f _ $q C 33 c�_o&2 xp��'e �•'N +'.r YD os'rt, 0 3 E « L aaY a ctN a»M ca. } G�a�$rS g 3 ! .a« k V a E. U $ ggpg IL a^ . , 9 p$=.e,Y p e L N YO=� •Oi n e p �y a' N /bi—V Hal G '$:[ � O�yY �rO9�r� ! ��� r ♦ pOA V� ��.-t �GY �I qpM g 4 Y� _ p i N Y�V F --ate Y L ta g O ' .7 Gip � _Y i.� i Y�D r• pp aa YY p;+ � • ��. O Cy O�NY. + iN •.} 6p D.4$ gO sli"T -�ago O � \ e4 A• �. `..LY Y Gi YG1 Y V� VY�r 2 Y� � Y^CIGr 2 Qc N z p ` C Y■ ` _' b C�Y iI Ye Y f L G +s Xi 'p. Y C Y L� P2. Yp � Y PGi,OC X J aN+NSY N. A y .t".0,"a Cp "�+ yN L.Yo fyy'�C�+�i ! t«�aY• pg"CC '"aY wQ ^b� ayY yyQ C _ Q.yw uL 4ryY..W tl T Cy$wq `ice y ,G x •N ;y U N.�Y L � G L M O i¢Y^Q aG0 • P'�a R.A� 'o- � G�,`. p,V '�lyN �Gtl 6 V 2A. „ D1 L.v M ^96 bN NYC VaG`. . Yr Goi �Y3 Y atA G �F `YV L y0y.�. oV^ Riw R6 q4q' ✓.b WG VLa 4V � ��N� +s4 CF r �w U+C L01 NV 4C.Y VLy �..�. VC q.9VnVa b�� LCLKY >C�h•�•Qb� �� �6.�.�i •" 332. �., �•'m.0 a" Y w s Y'Y+� oLg Mom. yyuav Ycyse, �,`� g�~�..wqN aeaStL�;c� 50.�• �� s�='a � a..qA, Y� S M�RRgdx� ✓y3 '$ro_o,..a.� _ «fia a� dt�s�. Q.� 32 c'r. ar a�Nw i$'o= govtoq sL: d Na '•.iY. P+s Sz 134 a. n"' Mill oo aYy � ++y.a �. iw�"u tl35cs3t("y(�•.o2.lyy. razu =y O.m Z4 q—.I 4 Aw�.6 KnL 4' RTwM Ki.R�w0t11� N �`®N ui Y.r i.C.IY Ww�L Oi. �4��3 N`� VA N rC _ r., " ga,c.6" �g era n�.i. -s 't at..�•eeq 'Y¢ �.Y�L >a'o.�i o'E. vo$ ty+a '. g. = orA&r+i ua°y..rs. o«�"Y � •. i� - " °' r Y.Y. a..a`.. �� 6�.. ,c�'}$p�, �•• 5 G as � V ■Y L m O N a L. r� 1� Oh� , Y _�� + N E3$N Y uy; S+ " a`r t$•Y.4i �y° $. ' CsX. 3 i LqyS. Ow 33 e,,N�'•�•.N.SS `- =yyaip U ,: �Zvi 5,4 as w E Vf M i ;Y ;_ qC �G'.r-'t^\ Y? "yppJ9d g 9Y��LL RVI► cu Wq aC `� y.YQ ..V.�pp¢ �. q� qLp` C q¢Cl sG.Y.s r� ri`7.q uw a C Q.yy4 �.�. ��7� V � ;CAd�^q t N P O_�CQ.D4 _ �. +C w g, q C A+ O•r a Q B�N.t + +r } L q O Y a t y C L^B+Pw V e C a V L a Yq .Q GR.TO G A �QD P'V• VOY C� C Temap UVCi.MY YVY L4.L <+o.LB `«Q .:t. O i�ruo K'u'q JLa'�'vns�L C!' Y"a3uo tau G✓.a.y +$ 1z. m a .$. .�.•. . °000.y.= 1Y�wIff 4 O ruct c ehvyy'y .. . � hW L4G o. Y y"•. a^ L10 °,q� C{, •':OTC u a°.�0 65 L 'o.L.. v.• veye°.wL° NeN n. a,u,o�`°p s: v� Y ° �• °cc � L ;j:.. ` wo °N"..c r:>v naN 'C uN�v' vw r C. gCCe O • Z L ® pp Z Y a`. On « VtV }b OO VyLi Y�v r 4J g y.OI 2, vI"./ N N 4 qYq.. Y a• u {N 401f1 $ 4N7 ��' I •fe�°M�. v0 N4 ci st 6� .LY d u IN L. a wGGa tl EC wCO wuy... t C� MO�d •. Ou C C­ C L«V tlAy�S'NL [.. O V O w 4 CNC Y -9. V Q O 6/gW 'Cpp�S Vp9N YRtl ..Cn� y O- M A I" : O 6L�j N rt L M Y C e N`n■ pp� w•�. y I6+�w r°� Lj yn.OG..6Na0 ��nM"QO L` N��u f u��r 'llt�•OYOYbj` dw �i C f.O� ~ p NO C dM Norq p Yy� O M y =14 iu fGx� tl Y N LOI t•. L P 2, CNa tl .�, tL _I �ya� 3yV—_ Yy Y,»M_� m_+C� Y� V�•o qq LAvY TX e �ppu. C .4pp C..yy. � .0 NyyU6 NO �y�'' ONY O s tl yL.tl CLpp` 6M L @Mp� «.yiy i�N r C b COL rcv wity N NOM 6N.� 6N 9W.V 1�M6 6N. .n OI�A�M4pp 50� 6 SV Wr&.w`f►u✓e. Ao3 T rT m$ 3w=a y' Au Y yC` C� Ci� N..�. MA C.� OO 4 NG`� m wQ 3. C�.� ��� H V N o.'N.. L�.wY t� Y C rr �p..9 pu•D $�yt OCY q0 PS.L.v x V ■ wC .� QC iVY� C NS �[« WY.a• >°Vdi SIsa 3 is .'.p u3 LYSpS cQ�S aca$ � C,Y nix 4vA4�2 a` ."• � ". g: w ��' LN. � X. "r. a.tl■°- a Lw N pMN j r� To C Sr• i. LSO 4y =C 98A� UL w� Z. LVtl E tui Y NY a.. `Q. �O Vw+y. Y NN 6t C=yam- =Y: 4 e Y-ypsay 4X_ pV C Cap v? n`�iy� '� �• L uO C t+.°� Y v L �• ,�� PtL. E' y a.�a J O cG BYO U. .N.. V • vN GVC��++ DD O. Y= $V101 ` �` 4 C if9 N?. GYOL 4:C �1�� °. °C<Yr O c t+ t y V O n C 3 Y 6 .. y Y y O • O r■ w } C g M�G`Y C.fl9 CAi G Q wW SIC.L+NO <�.rp i wivN lY w,6 zz zv, �ON5! 4p� SHat ` C,.�y. .N7y uyr C Aq qCC 4 4C� KEN 6V�, �: . `QO+ •�CO�� Ot�V ^� � ';yc 3gi. onQ 3 Y�y ' ✓i S o. V L 1 L C w •Y C V l u q Vl C=q» O. Y _ L aNNY O �.: cgad' qO 4t art;; 4�1y1� 1 40 Gv �6 L CYN ^ •V M aw� VAS O OYYGVN S�M - I U vea u'..a;� at•u•• ed i � wq�c 5'f�''O qr'i+ cr✓.v � 9` r 47 4'a- S.yy:�E .Q U�t C�G qTS'^� pp Ym.G W Y�O. YY4 N CY o YpY NY_ E � Cq Q Cf YOq aOari � VVOj < ✓VL� VVTed � Y V w. A S G GG ss CQpp Yr•+ q. q /� 'F YG Q OO.Y 1L1 4Ce xpp lyQyQ�. %S .� y '� 4ygq•S: V . `Y3 �4 4Y WYW cCO�� 9.'.���o MY>Nub. O oc YCr V)u y�� • A. r u 4M �• M�p �q�.Y Y gY br CC C �� 64.pY pLYQYy S�N�O l a$. � NSi Y.T 6 Om �d�..•� •>+�-. � bs ■```tgyp J,,��;�`• � 1l � 1 A SV• boii•$1L.MQ Az .�1 oW Yi.O�.4 N N L V®. ►mow 66 N1 Y r uq Y 6C C t;: sen. ■�(b q.'4 i�0 IL c�oLp w �i°:ate! emu. . ,� �.��C¢ ✓.e � v oc� CLa' is y `•`�6 As `N.M YO .MSG vXZ Z; l lam P' OCCe CGcQ Y�01q = O L AgY1 YyF �4 �•ViW Yr. li c.e'•== ��� ���. �'""®aaar a � b'b {�$ of �•✓`5 ��~✓" �o S� sue+ —V' i, L �� � •• YC 6 � C.i �Y O O✓v rah i qI �� rO �s c C4✓ rLYC �q'CGC Q'° 21 L P Y G1... < w TY CI =U ^ 9C✓YCT � JL�IR T✓ S14 O. ,1. T4�Ya a, N P yL q. • Vim=y# Lt C ^ �Y "i ��m3 yw4i C` Y_ V UzY. ;=V Yb C� 4 a•i: q G C x C.� C 6�� 0 0 3•�A M r 1 N t `•N 1 C i, cam;` +. • ... f'.. u_ uoe.. YYP uar.=i ✓x P>•gu � as u�$ti .L. aY o.r H fJ ti 30� J4f c A. 2.5 +14 C W1` WEY OYw� m pL Y vat' `1 Y C CItQ L �0M` �Np6Y ay. YC4�'yy� � tl)A. b pa Y ss SEaCa `.tl� N 4 tla. MLE w - v ad o LLB Nsr - Y - '>N E.«+yy4 `N S 2: YY«` Y�` i`pM3 ^.Y Lam g Z t d1 $YV. S —a. s'" a `\ V pea $ 4.. 3. aGy Y"a^u µ1^'r" o 6 C 66 <> a YY . Ya 1NAq 4.11 `. nt "' Ut� � '•C O�i VC —rj ffia IIPgay.�� M tl w t� N Z.ac n pY. P c� b Pa +� PLQy uOA Lau h = u. C— 1= J A H Y R Y`PJ+3 � OF O JYp� rRV yy V y • G a q a V M�y Q• Y Y y.0'� p..1 OY tl� uOt 'NJ tl< u o � a .1`� Mom'; 4-Cs. Ctl.izi 'e tl a^ Y pCy tlY$Y No �LNeu.� R SI-P.P 6Y S Cu �.u0. ! ~MJy` ba.YJ p atl Ep — �� �� Jy L9YY uY �• Mg. a a YL N�.CH .s1Rga6 L` O —1 Y.Y P CYL Q M �■ � 4 i � Dr.L'C`�1 � p p C y 4 CO If C CW— O•yy ...aQ 1p1.�pC� vSpHp G Lt' Pr C a®yA Y� 3 P —C ! 48LQ tlY1 - C T E a P N �O M� „N � a O.Y �• Y N YY.C N� (�L C �L M tl Y Y �ct� =qe 415 p`:g. -ca e r60L Ql N� V tl. `tamer kQ .0 4v rd;rr ~ .5; !at f b ups .Ni'r�^p': `uMy. !� g�..r.u,�i § = ry � $e �',� +4. F ��+Y'O�4 5"O -"y»to ,� c� »�,�'>✓ '�Y, R S ,;,y s V:;—`� s� 6�� f1 V�YG Kf 4yG+1 yMK ✓ N . W `O .1 ►Q Y QC 2C 4q {u�$L A� atl C rQ �� G o y C G C SI u •� � ~ N u r 4 13. 4y.yp y` �[y'N y iY.EN y 4wi N «Y U CW I Yi tlU S y ma if tlow LyL li.b `s 4woNu$ y.O�rM4 NQ tY 0 WY tyli�i+ 6 �O W Cq. YL U! V� P► .a 3• Q <a $ t-3 ...vim .caN3. S �, y� HYy y` N _per O �� _.✓Q.� `_w i Q �a iy art �� A • s� -�" C� q�� F �� � �5 L�po r� 1 -az WR IM ON y�. Ub l+y.qL N K� , 0.yM �Qa a—. Y� N' .�`O ��•, NW 4r�L�� y�r'�', CW ! YNy A9. �� ppw Ord y~'K'�kY, L O ` �� S'bQv yuyu5'!� G Aay WO i� 6 �w 9� �. �� ybq y2, xL ■ ! ;y � .+�Y�!/ \ \\ yw b 9U1•C``V— N j Y a l �y xYe S N n �— x -jig .a�yb o.M arN S 6 .[ gaN $`!fig XX W _W 11 r � V a 7 � I r y0 I.• 4�06 ..a,�„ a rd�� 1 N � � _L Y� . Yor v 'Y' �� • �'E ov v c�� � `� $ 'v Ems. ooa vs as �g y o�g� g,L<� E eye � •' ;'= �;; `„� pYtl gS '+' .y a Ore?I I C _Q}' G y Cd g.� V W L� ^ N�' E oy� J aJYy4 �'M �+.■�N. �Y@ uMic 'Ex" Q�. uw�.Vp{ aV 9 !V �= YYNN `G!!■ ^ � � e"� � Vbb6 Ow G VY. �� C Ny r-N �• tie,Ya eN. <' aL t es-a ' sa J LypY '+�'- Zr.10 �I m a.�ua �etL �Mc .o ti r --- CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT a� . ."\ Epp.", 1977 DATE: June 24, 1987 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Bred Buller, City Planner ' t BY:. Otto groutii, Senior Planner ' Alan Warren, Associate Planner SUBJECT,, FOOTHILL BOULEVARD SPECIFIC PLAN 0I. BACKGROUND: Reviewof the Draft Foothill Boulevard Specific elan ! is con inued from the 14ay 27, 1987 meeting. At that time, the Planning Commission gave final direct*i0i to staff and the consultant to a0etid the Plan for preparation of a document in an adoption-ready format. Since that t:me, staff and the 'consuit�nt have been working towards•this end, bdt,.,unfortunatel'y the scope of the changes and the desire to bring a high quality product to the Commission has extended the time needed to accomplish the work, Therefore, the final draft will not be ready for zonsiderdtion until July 8, but staff would like to take this opportunity to inform the Commission of some of the significant changes which are being incorporated into the Plan: II. DISCUSSION• a Due to the desire t€►Ataxea..A:"reade.r friendly" document, the following changes have been made. 1. An executive summary was added at the very beginning of- the'L document to "hit" the significant points of the plan and to interest the reader in the project, 2. The regw.aed legal and procedural references have been moved from the beginning of part 1 to a revised Part 3, Development Standards and Guidelines. 3. A restructuring of the general and specific subarea regulations was made which resulted in a revised Part 3 and Part 4. This makes the plan far easier to'work With. 4. The document was modified to an 8� x 11 inch format j with foldout maps, This was necessary to make the plan usable on a day to day basis, and to make it consistent with our, other documents. ITEM X PCF,raNLNG'CQNtsaTO 5WF'REPORT FOGTHILL WWOPLAN June 2`4, Page 2 -r> r ~ o The land use. change from Mixed Use back to Modium Residdnijal � for Om northwest corner of Etiwandao4fid Foothill was made and the prop e i� v'riC�rier ' have notified ,yby" mail ofy this modificat?fan. , o Changes"to the 0i d use activities have beep incorporated into each subarek,4; dfft-ted by t$e, PI5.anningyLor ds ton. ., In .addition, staff has noted several pate�tt ah.def cicn ies n 't plan, and shed requ chahges, noted bm�d`k�,r_ The Co*o�TWon requested to con our di'rectim. A. ikd3ust:the"boundaries 0 Subarea.2;wesWlY.A,:the Cucamonga Channel, to ,place the intersection of ;Vfneyar'd and .Foothill under a singl°e sai::iofY sura tea stgo ,„�.T digina'•djaft divided•=the Zhomas-.>Bro! center into t subarea's creaiAing sane confusion and inst�n,s'istences. SAW," 4 1i 31 t f PIANNIN6`­0MISSION STAFF REPORT FOOTHILL:SLM. SPECIFIC PLAN June 24, 1387 Page 3 aY Fine tune the following activity center c►undaries: v 1Y Exf' �tdr the west si0e, of the activity center noq;Ser]y along' to align wi0 We eastern ;nde of I Archibald as.? own below. The existing uses -and shallow Tot depth reinforce this concept. LtxviiM &Ott !ty LLM3 - S^��LL�7L LDS' ♦ ,�+ �«M,,� 'L' ti 2• The Etiwanda activity center should"{,,be designed.,tr0 continue the visual continuity of the°,,activity cent '-h concept along the corridor. The activity oenter, y should be modified to provide sIaiIar visual. treatment on both sides of the str-reet, as shown below: Do9eft a F FI},-��Eapagd � Y} _ -7 Y Y•yYY Y .Re Y •� '� I Y Y r• 2 Y.. Expend` r� a PLANNING COMMISSION STCFF REPQP'e FOOTHILL BLM. SPECIFIC PLAN, June 24, 1987 Page 4 Staff will incorporate the modific�(tions 'listed in Items A and B unless the Commission directs differently. Finally, two other items which staff believes should be considered for addition to the plan are as follows: C. At the northwest corner of Foothill and Ramona, a new shopping center has recently been completed. The draft plan proposes that this sitA be within the Commercial Office (CO) land use designation. We recommend that the plan recognize the function of the recently completed commercial center to allow, for the site to be designated Community Commercial (CC). Staff would like the Planning Commission to confirm direction on this matter. � G� 3 2- I—ia4- 101 _ - -0- -- AI sc .-- - ry - �• sF D. 'n response to concerns of the developers of the Thomas Bros. Winery site regarding the limits of special retail uses within the Specialty Commercial designation, staff has reviewed use proposals by the developers. They have proposed that an expansion of specific uses be considered as mentioned in their letter of June 5, 1987 (see Exhibit "A"). Staff is concerned about adding further special activitie3, to the already substantial use list. As an alternative, we suggest a general provision, to read as follows: i PLANNING (3tk 1IS (0 STUFF FtPIORT v -i ,FOOTHILL Bk . aPECIFIC PrAN June 24,, 1987 ' Page S Specialty Retail This use is typified as small s ops an ou ques which "specialize in limited ` product line3 of unique and novel designs and/or purposes. Specialty Retail is defined as faliowsc a. Any retail business not listed separately in Sections 9.3.2, 9.6.2, 9.7.2 and 9.9.2 which limits its sales to product lines of singular purpose or of unique and special design (i.e. cutlery shops, small household or personal appliances, kitchenware, novelty gifts, etc.). ervice businesses are not specialty retail uses, b. Limited to a business area of 3,000 square feet_ -a totally within an enclosed building. - Staff recommends that the Specialty Retail use be conditienaily permitted in the Specialty Commercial and Community Commercial districts. It is hoped that this proposed amendment will expand the use potential within thi�`-SC district while ens tring the character and reduc;U scale of the speciaity-businesses. Staff would like Pien-Ring Commission direction on thisconcept. f E. Finally, the Engineering Division has, requested expansion " of the Median Island provisions i:_! described in- the Circulation Concept, Section 7,1.1. Refer to Exhibit "B" for the text addition. In addition to the street improvement provisions of the Circulation section, intersection configurations and right-of-Tray design dimensions (Exhibits "C" and "0") are recommended for incorporation into an appendix. III. REC"ER TION: Staff is requesting a confirmation on Items A 0s91 U. It is also recommended that the Planning Ctmmission continue she specific Plan to July 8, 1987, for consideration of the pl,-, adoption. R�.?pe full su itt Brad Buller City Planner BB:QK/AW:te Attachments:. Exhibit "A" - Letter `rum Larry Lazar Exhibit "B" - Median Island Text Exhibit "C" - Intersection Configurations f Exhibit "D" - Right-of-Way Dimensions a _ ' Median Island Addition } A raised~landscaped median has. been a part of the F&,"ili Soulepand ' Master Plan since adoption of the General Plan in 1981. The median .. system is designed to m4,*wtai,6 the htgttest K�i{el e�f service possible on, a street: whose very ca .city is going to be severely teed. The enhancement of irafffe rlaw and safety through the attainment 6f the & lowest possible level of conflict among veP,icles is essential to ., achieving the necessary service level. Ii order to preserve the level of service on Foothill Boulevard, access to commercial propfAties should be via-bie-median Veakfat signalized intersections, with If#'-street, internal circOati)6n' to be provided to serve the prapArtits between interseetionsr It will alSo-be ne essary to accept an increased number of U-turns at the remaid'tng inters 4 5 to reduce the greater friction caused b more fre �+ 9 y t,i6fan o pen,ngs�. Any rmdlan break on a street with such high volOme audit be signalized for safety and when signals are placed less than approximately'700 feet apart, the speed at which progressive traffic movement can be obtained falls below an.:acceptable level. East-west arterials in the City will ' have t : be capable of two-way progressive traffic service for a large part of the day, p For these reasons, no median break has been planned, for example, at lied Hill Country Club Drive, San Diego Avenue, or Kltisman Avenue. Klusman Avenue is only`,'a20 feet from Malachite Avenue, an important future intersection, and is at a questionable distance of 670 feet from Archibald Avenue. The necessary loft-turn lanes for median breaks eliminate median planting and when such breaks are close together," reducing the aesthetic value of the median and its visibility. This creates the possibility of traffic from driveways attempting to make left turns, not realizing a median erists. i i P i ti Exhibit "a" x w tj T �{ N R1614T of WaY Ll14F CuftS LINE .. i i WIDEiN11W ReQUIReD AT � �cs��: ttC�tt�iawaf s�e�f C r'fbvirtd I,+ Sow'- ctwtvtwn Via'-- -5e6 Focr t a�Tsar. Ii iHerc�r�ca�1• fox scFKs�rs RIGHT-OF-WAY AND CURB OFFSETS REQUIRED AT Iit"£RSECTIONS vineyard ve. rc aAve. a11man ye.. .. Dimension Grove7 Ave. East A4e. Etiwanda Ave. Turner Ave. A 44 53 53 44 B 44 44 44 C 32 46 46 32 D 32 35 36 W2' E 470 3a0 390 4.70 E E so60 � * ��_� 50 G 50 so 5a 47* H 60 43 60 I 60 67 67 60 3 470 480 400 47ff K 315 390 Soo _ • G 44 53 53 '- 44 ANIL M 44 44 50 44 1p N 35 46 46 32 0 36 35 36 39 A -- 390 390 470 f Q 68 68 60 & -- 67 67 60 S - 61. 61 _ 47* T -- 0 50 50 U - 480 480 470 V -- 365 440 -- All dimensions in feet. - Existing; subject to eventual widening For fief l men Avenue, T=47* kwtv CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA UCA�tp STAFF REPORT 0 I- $ '1, DATE, June 24; 1963 1s,7 w �= TO: Chainran and Members of the Planning Commission` FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner k BY: Alan Warren, Associate ;Ilanner SUBJECT: ENVIR&iIENTAL IMPACT !REPORT FOR THE FOOTHLLL BOULEVARD ' 'SWCI o rev err an co14�i L-.r a recommen a .on' or certification of the Draft Envi.ropental Impact Report F 'for the Foothill Boulevard Specific ,Olan project. The Specific. Plan consists of detailed land use regulations and standards for the development along Foothill Boulevard i a uetwrien Grove Avenue and Haven Avenue, between the I-15 Freeway and Cast Avenue. E E I. ABSTRAZT: The Planning Commission will hold a ,public hearing to consic r'fihe Draft Environmental Impact Report (EI�g) for the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan, This -eport smparizes the environmental issuer iiLted and analyzed i— W% ;Draft EIR and recommends continuance of the public hearing 'to all;,wt for review of R public comments an the donument, e II. BACKGROUND: The propose; Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan and associa a eneral Plan Amendment require a discretionary action by 1 the City of Rancho Cucamonga, which is the "Lead Agency". Because 1 the City must take a discretionary action to approve or deny the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan, tho California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires that thi dction be reviewed to determine the potential environmental impacts whicit wo�l;d result if 1 the project were carried out. l The preliminary review of the projects potential environmental impacts consisted of an Initial Study and Environmental Determination prepared by the City. Based on the results of the Initial Study, the need for Preparation of an environmental' impact report (EIR) in accordance with CEQA eras indicated, the purpose of this FIR is +o inform the public and decision makers about the nature of the proposed project. Its purpose is also to inform the public abo t tite kinds and extent of impacts which the project and its alternatives arp expected to have on the envt•ranment, provided the project (or alternatives) are tarried out. ITEh L PLANNING C"ISSIQN STAFF REPORT EIR for Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan June 24, 1987 Page 2 The City initiated preparation `)f a preferred Specific Plan prior to preparation of this EnO ronmintal Impact Report. The Foothill, Boulevard Specific Plan contains proposed performance standards and other measures to reduce the level of impacts resulting from project implementation; therefore, it is the purpose of this document to review the level of impacts remaining after implement&tion and suggest addiV^rtal mitigation, if necessary, s I . DISCUSSION: The City of Rancho Cucamonga's envir�m" ntal e erm na ton stated that the following environmental factgfs o affect or be affected Ley the proposed project. The 1`0111 {f'ng are therefore included in the EIc: M AesV#eticse An examination is provided of the pot6ntfai'of the proposed project to affect toe appearance of the study area. potential impacts examined include the introduction of new l develop"nt, the possible removal or alteration of existing visual 1 fratures, and positivw, or_negaitive changes in the appearance of other study area features. date report co, 'es that the Plan will result Jh a significant improvement in the appearance of Foothill Boulevard through the implementation of the development regulations. Air Quality: An examination is provided of the air pollutant emissions which will Pesult from the tioposed project, and their impact on. air quality at. a local-�and�!egional level. Potential impacts examined, which "consist of rew or increased emissions,` include the introduction of more intensive uses than presently exist or would .resulT. frow development a.cording to the City's j General Plan. An examination of construction-related air pollution is also provided. The report concludes that the project will incrementally increase the amount of pollutants generated within #ire project area and at regional electrical generating stations, affecting local and. regional air quality levels. These increased levers are mitigable and the report notes that the levels of emissions will increase even if the Boulevard is developed without the Specific plan. Biotic Resources. A number of mature trees, including several eucalyptus windrows, are located within the study area and could be affected by ,project development, An examination of the proposed project's potential to impact these trees is provided. No rare or endangered plant or animal species are located within the study area. The Plan has the potential to affect biotic resources through the 'removal or damage of existing trees, including several Eucalyptus windrows and portions of existing unused vineyards. Ask tie t PLANNING COFti igiiTA F REPORT ; EIR for Fdothi­ .Roul'evard Specific Plan June 24, 195r%t ,., Page 3 } If the proposed project is not approved, trees and vines would still be pot'entially removed, although the number of trees and vines repisnted Within the study Zrea would likely be reduce!' since landscaping standards for new development and'redevelopmepl would not be upgg ad'ed. Land Uses An examination of proposed specific plan's land use Impacts. ncludirg neighborhodc� compatfsaility and economic impacts resulting from-the', of neW uses within the study area, is provided: The Plan will result in• a substani'al change in the character of f the study area, primarily- consisting' of a change in the character of study .area lanrd uses. As tole result of the estibl4shment of coweecidl arts! of dromdre inteniives uses ad acant to residential �. areas within and a jacent to�''the study area, potential land use incomipatibilitles may result.. However, adhepepce to performsa and other standards contained in the proposed 5tsecific Plan and the m City of Rancho Cucamonga D'evelopmely Code will reduce potential ` impacts to acceptable levers:. Drainage: The introduction .of new develop;sent into .the study area can be expected to increase storm flows. M examination is provided hydrology proposed specific plan`si impact on. local and regional ydr gy provided,,. Existing flows aria tho,e which would occur under existing general plan land use oesignations are compared. Development of the proposed oroje*t will increase storm flows originating.in the study area, and may increase ultimate storm flows compared to those Mich would occur if the proposed project were not approved.?'Construction of planned regional storm drain system ir-provementi will mitigate imp cts to acceptable levels, although/, some sites may require the construction of interims improve✓,ients if constructed ahead of regional improvements. Circulation: An examination of the impacts of the proposed project, as well as its impact in combination with development in other areas, is provided. Impacts examined include increases in traffic an Foothill Boulevard resulting from study area development and increases ir, the number of persons from other areas using Foothill Boulevard as a through route. . Potential 'mitigation measures, including the installation of raised medians azd control over site access, are examined. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT EIR for Foothill Boulevard Specific glad', June 24, 1987 Page $ • The proposed project will increase the number L�f:.,.,ehicle trips ultimately generated within they study. Approximately'!2 percent more trips will be generated witk'AWthe study area at buildout than would occur if the.,.eroposed project were not ap roved. Since more than 80 percent '-off total traffic on FoothWl Boulevard will originate outside Mite stun* area, the level of mitigation available is small. Thus, while, impacts of the proposed project can be reduced, total cumulatiy...e irt,;acts Wl not be mitigable through the proposed project. p Noise: An examination is provided of the proposed p.ojer ;s potential to increase noise levels within the study area.' A primary source of noise which is examined is the introduction of higher levels of traffic than �,resently exist. Noise levels within the study area will increase, primarily as the result of increased traffic on Foothill Boulevard. Since study area traffic will comprise a-small portion of total traffic, the lever of mitigation available through the proposed project is small. Therefore, while impacts of the proposed project can be reduced, cumulative impacts of project traffic and traffic generated offsite will be significant and not mitigable. t Schools: An examination is. provided of the proposed project's impact upon the demand for school facilities generated within the study srea, as the result of botb residential and non-residential development. The proposed project will result in an increase in the number of students generated within the study are,-,, (according ti the School District) as the result of both increased commercial i, and residential development. Staff and the environmental consultant, at the Planning Commission's' request, are investigating the School District's student generation, ratios to determine their applicability to the Specific Plan study. An analysis we be presented to the Planning Commission prior to its final determination. Public Services An examination is provided 'of the proposed project's impact on the demand for police and fire protection. r services, znd for public park facilities. Demand for all public services will increase as development of the study area proceeds. however, mitigation measures are proposed which will reduce demand to acceptable levels. Future traffic congestion on Foothill Boulevard will increase response times for fire and police Y."cles which must use the Boulevard to reach emergency sites, re"sul ti ng in potential safety. r �r � ' ; PLANNING COMISSI6N.STAFF''REPf1RT a. E1R for foothill Qoulevard $pecffic Plan June 24, 1987 h Page 5 Soils/Geology: Development within the study area will be subject Gj to groundshaking along a number of regional faults.. In addition, another fault, the Red Hill Fault, traverses a portion of the study area, although its• location is not knorin 'with {�ertafnty. An,; examination is provided Df imo is related"to, these l°aults, as, well as those related to on-site soil types: �� Development within the study area will be su43ect to individual soils characz�erf!tics, , indluding_ soil ' inttabili;.y and 4 erosiveness. The proposed projeetaw�il°T also increase the number of persons affected by stud}t, area groundshaRi;",,. a`:though the, total number of permanent res'a--s'v Subj�ect� to.,sefsmilc evt ts. wIlI be . . lower than would occur if'the proposed, pr6jeet were no approved. 'Mitigation measures are proposed hicP+°will reduce these impacts to acceptable levels.;. utilities: An examination of the proposed project"s impact on the demand for utilities within the study area. tonsumptian of water a"- generation��fl image will increase as the result of approval of the propotA i:eothili Boulevard Spezific. Plan. Consumption of voter and generatton of sew&§e will be less than that which would occur if the proposed Specific Plan i's,,not approved. r Consumption of electricity and natural gas witf increase as, development of the proposed project proceeds. Ultimate consumption k of energy resources will be higher than that which would occur if the proposed project were not approved, since the proposed Specific .Plan contains a higher proportion of energy-intensive commercial and office uses'than are currently planned iii,the existing general plan for the study area. TIT. CONCLUSIONS The Environmental Impact Report identifies the 0 o ng mpacts which can be Mitigated: 1. ;otic Resources 2. Larw use 3. Drainage 4. public Services 5. Soils Geology 6. Utilities These areas of potential impact and mitigation through the implementation of the Plan's provisions is the prime motivator of the Specific Alan process. 1 PLANNIRG COMMISSION STAFF REPORT EiP for Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan June 24, 1987 Page 6 Those impacts which cannot be mitigated to any great degree i ncl ude: A. Air Quality. The majority of stationary source impacts C MT occureven if the proposed project is not approved and the study area is developed according: to existing land use designations. Mobile source pollutants, will iomprise approximately 85 percent of total air pollutant emissions. However, the E: stw.)y area will generate only a small portion of total vekacle trips within the roothill Boulevard Corridor --- vehigles using Foothill Boulevard as a through route wil'i. generate the majority of vehicle traffic. Therefore,'' while".impacts of the proposed project can be reduced to acceptable levels, cumulative impacts resulting from F _ regional and study area gro will be significant. B. Noise. Noise levels would be marginally reduced if the 6 proposed project is not approved and the study area is developed under existing land use designations. However, the le,,- df reduction would be small, and would not result in reduction of,impacts to acceptable levels. The Planning Commission will need to make a Statement of Overriding Concern in regard to these impacts. It should be noted that the EIR recognizes that these impacts will be evident in the area regardless of the enactment of the Specific Plan, and these impacts could be worse without the Plan. A forty-five (45) day review period began on May 11, 1987 to allow the public and interested agencies an opportunity to comment on tht document. This period is due to end on June 24, 1.987. Staff will take the comments received and any public testimony this evening for inclusion into the Draft Environmental Impact Report. This amended document will then be ready for Planning Commission consideration to recommend certification by the City Council. III. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that after public testimony, the public ear ng a continued to the July 8, 1987 Planning Commission meeting. AalBul full sitl a City Planner BB:AW:ns i ' f i i ��.-----— ---- Clrf OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA �;uc�tia STAFF REPORT oil t977 DATE: June ',A, 1987 TO: Chairman and Members of the planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Scott Murphy, Associate Planner SUBJECT: MINOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 86-22 - SOLOMON - Appeal of s a s aectsion ee,yW9 a reques r o allow a skateboard ramp in the rear yard area of a single family residence located at 10007 Manzan to Drive - APN 201-981-11. 1. BACKGROUND: As a result of Code Enforcement, Mr. Marcus Solomon suffiffi to a .0 nor Development Review application for an existing skateboard ramp. The ramp is located in the southwest corner of than lot, ten (10) feet from the side property line and roughly five (5) feet from the rear property line. The ramp is 16 feet in width, 44 feet in length and stands 1% feet high. 11. ANALYSIS. Due to the unique elements present with this type of s roc ore, staff notified surrounding property owners about the request and allowed them a ten (10) day period in which to comment on the proposal. Four letters in opposition to 0e request were received by the Planning Division. The concerns expressed by the area residents ranged from increased noise and traffic (vehicular and pedestrian) to lack of privacy and posing a safety hazard. Basee. upon staff"s review and input received from surrounding property owners, the Minor Development Review application was denied based upon inconsistencies with the objectives of the Development Code and the detrimental impacts that the skateboard ramp would have on the public health, safety, and welfare (see Exhibit "B"). III. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: The proposed project is inconsistent with the objectives of tfie Development Code and the purposes of the district in which the site is located in that the intensity of use of the skateboard ramp results :n increased traffic, both vehicular and pedestrian, and noise above and beyond that typically associated with a single family residence in the Very Low Density Residential District N acre lots). Also, the intensity of use of the skateboard ramp more closely resembles a commercial recreation facility which is not appropriate within the Very Low Density ITEM M grMgly P " 2r,. .a;�;`^a „�y ."."r "•.`R^,�'g' "....,as�—.:,TMs^� vc�-1-7 � •�.-,� i'•` � ;"e k?y � ' if REPORT 1. y� Page,2 �� , Resideatial , i trl t Thy�roPosad use will ne dot" ntal.,to the,,, 1publS,c �telt(s , Y and 1Jelfare because the exstene of tht: rkataLoard +r ps1x s: 11P lncreosei; nolse; ieuel�s 'ana"d�aent' ad�aC `nit gr pAW-Y owners of, tt r pri g a ` e� na enct, s,p 1 d'6d around.one �a�,,a>~� e tkateb'odnd t#T S}retde fi 1.ndi v1 dualFs {froau p�ayi ng-,on he '►amp; whorl the'oritier�s.11x nab he t`U posing a putentftal safety 'hazard. IV. RECO 'f recommends,,th1at the P nning Coaemissi'o„n deny .` apneao nor~l��er�l•apn�ent.'}E�liw S& 22. �r Rea ullyt,. ler ` City anner :f! - `I BB*SM:to ~ Attachments: Exhibit "A" -Letter of r Appeal o Exhlb pt "B" I�.o ter oa Denial.(May le 1981) Ex#,ibit. ur" ,Letters from Surrounding Property Owners Exhibrt4'46I� - Looat 4n Map Exh-,b1t "E'" - Sitie Phan " Exhibit "F" - Elevation_ Exhibit "G" - 'original !.otter Submitted by Applicant I�I .i .� f " "- ' lay 26, 1387 FTUBJECT. �,r?2NQR WIVELG`*?':-Y_" 86-22 'near sirs, This letter is an attempt to try to explain why I feel t t the denial of my Minor Development Review c6-22 ; atgboard ramp is un3ustified. First of all, I would like to uoint out th<-+ t was in the Planning Revision office on several cccasicns trying to ob- tain a building hermit .for the ramp :prior to ^onstruction approximately two years ago, Because no regulations corn be found g.-irErning th e ,.such a structure, I was eventually told: J; �s° ; build it, but we di alt tell you that I was not given a building ?permit, I w " '`�% Welines to follow ft r :.anstruotion of- r wed to the letter.. This guidelines were AMC' i� Structure mast not., over 30 feet tall. Ask 2. Structure must not occupy more than 3019 of backyard. 3. Structure must be at least five feet'-from the rear and ten feet from the side property lines. 4. Structure must not obstruct neighbor's views. I took these and many other factors into consideration upon ii�iding oa the si" and location of the ratulp. Besvit�_, my repeated visits to the planning Office, it was atproximately one full year before the city was aware that I had built a ihmp. Thip fact came to light only after we held a contest here and someone contacted the city to "inquire,, about the legality, and/or safety of what we were doing. f Incidently. I received dozens of compliments from people here in the community about the contest, and not one tingle i complaint. fFver since then it has become a long, frustrating, and futile effort to make the ramp legal, and to convince the 4 city that I have no ill intentionQ whatsoever and am doing my best to make sure that the neighbor's needs are being Taken care of. During this time, a city building inspector 3 ,'S has been to the ramp, told me that it w," safe and overbuilt, and even asked if his son could ride here sometime. I will admU that at the onset there were oroblems such as crowds of Deonle, garbage, foul Iang;age, etc., none of which I appreciated any more than the neighbors did. 'here problems werr,, dealt with accordingly: riders are to call for nermis M sion to ride before Doming over; a limit was set on the num- ber of riders allowed over at one time; troublemakers and litterbugs ark s told not to come back. �,�then west to all my immed3.ate:�r�}.eighbars and told them thatt) if there was ever anything they'Kere upset about, to lei-ale know and I would tare care Af 1t7. I also told them it-they were planning a backyard bar-b-que; yard party, or something of that nature, to let me4now and there would be no skating on that day. -- The neighbors expressed gratitude that I was attempting to k rectify the situation and 'aptreclatett the conoera. With ` the excep-�tion of one man who refuPed to even steak to me. Since than, have received no''complaint$ from anyone and am therefore quite sugar eed to �find that some people are not havpy with the situation and yet they have not attempted to tell me. Because of the steve I have taken to allievate problems, F: the vehicular and medestrian traffic has been reduced to a mare trickle, There are never more than two or three cars narked in front of my home at a time and perhaps a few neigh- borhood children .`riding up to ask to skate. I 1,ee,no probles there. Any garbage round in the street comes mainly from the j conetrno", wArksrs eating their lunchet'nearby and throwing their trath doom, so it blows all over our propgrties. Child- ren walk:Li%g io and from school, or jt�jt playing in the neigh- borhood contributt:to this rroblem also. On the subject of noise being a problem, less riders means less noise and I was once told by my neighbor closest to the ramp: quote, "'fe can hardly hear it." unquote. I would like � . «< to invite the city out to the r=,mo to take a decilel reading so that we both can accur-:rely know just now laud/quiet the ramp is. A ao#nt•1 would like to make here is that I feel that it is much more annoying to have the neighbors mowing their lavrne early.,,in the morning as opposed to having a few people skate on my ramp in the afternoon. I alFo find my- neighbor's occasional. Tool parties complete"with loud`musi.c t than lasts until late in the: evening troublesome" By fad the is worst are the nearby bulldozers and other`Wopnds of construct G iot, that begin at 6 a.m. I am trying to put the noise levels into versnective here. All riding ends at dusk. We never skat4 at night. The intensity of use on the ramp is no longer what it once was and therefore does not resemble a commercial recreation'" �1 facility. I see the ramp as analogous to a swimming Dool, tennis court, etc., which one is allowed to locate in their, -`• j backyard. In addition there is no fee charged to ride here Vius further disputing the ramp as a commercial entity. J The ramp is secured from unauthorized usage by the use of + a chain covered with FYG Dine which is dpswu aososs the ' ramp and taadlocked into Dlaee. In this condition, the ramp 1 i is unrideable. There are no ladders or stairs to t:e top of [ the rawp thus preventing any children from climbing on it. If in fact someone were to become injured on the ramp'wether unauthorized or with permission to be on it, then that is . ME li-ability 6t, stake; not the city's. It is just as likely that someone: could trim on a rock here and become injured in this ;hard. The kid* and adults who skrte here do so with full nrotectivo gear on. D1his is much safer than riding unprotected in the street with s►11 the traffic and steep hills E,round here. This brings up the question of le ality. It is illegal to ride in the street. Likewise to do so on the sidewalk.Cif we . had sidewalks) It is also illegal;:to ride at a public Dark, a school, or anywhere else. It would aDDear teat soon it will re illegal to ride on one's own backyard. AA 4 obi ' at yt e here t derstand ore than dust and�lvisio one nkiY°d There i me thst the �,lekn&boardsnB.M to1 oome s to quste , pious tot �¢ verbcaage of .a clild than that. I for mYee�f the s bussdi�►2 th$ - me cn fore tend thi ,at lige�tylo• :� e'4ate c° Juller- xlg ha$ araing 1" te it- boardi will not sltateo© Skate that the cit erg, Vert;osl lip . It menthe good.I a OoA:mtl.eairi drivintT f°rOe a' thee: mY clo a waY ms being+ d car: having someone. e og l n eVe.'Y e�T86te Y hO ee bosz tion o and Yet -,i f the w Y s—1 sa th t IC do. o� life eatv ine your abovt.whs t thing in Y aresk• I msi"" at n0th most slavort3m gels in rIO $ egort Me mow take the I gsnd �ivatin6 in '. trying to s +V51situstifln Were vans st certain that aaY. Thane oie who cos eb 11 r it is is are a°ce thing +R Ig the ball car bas s• TAee ai -excee'de �' base- such as gO be no orobleIDsxatebosrding�pOtball .ana ogle. woulf.. do f fes ev „e the ore d that, ver hs`�e too beating nth e's self hagsO ionai snorts ,kinninS ad to i�vroae coordinat_ tradit axis on es one s+,rength'. the *lace e%p ding teach bravery+ Lnll skatebo�r� ch � look ST verties, ova Valitiles d at►y are. ds in this e� tional and deeel djalitl an that the k d oomvete yn able indigi e £act er an being j 0T1. *rood of -the am a good rld e 'Jositipn of way• 'that!s sae be°au_e I note me IT tb eTe in 3 pOgltl`re gorc,e in c t�titions. Tha a who come ram* is a voss esve s to k6reo it. _ com nee thO` phi` e�er it tsk d k,�es� the to influ an is s`l About• gnatan �- ,�sll- dQ ch the t�id®: th e er what thi� ,M Su e, tea l use a13, the court .to de i8 sYane time' I w v1 What it mane are at 11 I Rs� 8,t the to tree a them A- o hsvvl in order raea, the govr nei.spLba ais10°es1 d be In�O Q oNy and s a� � u ghoul in thi_ uet A11 O'�,rce o ns d vie }l Vrk In conclusion. Y atinB rQm th � ; qp other e%l- Fhortl`1 0 leaat tz�ee oin8 UP ased thsq an more that issue. WP have dsGcu i-olsted toge�hex id tight for our right to zzart ci?aate in our eDort. I have ebokew to neo-le about'this and am cer,- to xi that l "dal l r the snrnort of hundreds o2 m r1s, �car- enta, and other iAdiv duals to attai.rY this v,, :l plaase don't ta3m this from us: 4 =:nclose4 is the current issue of "`"ranawor•ld f kateboarding -)"agarine". :lease look,at it with an 4-3en mind %nd try to tinder stand what it'is that we are doing* $Otice how`many ramns are in backyards and al.-ease note the advertisempnt T -, have marked on gage thirteen. the exerDt from an iater- viep I have included along with it. These two examnleg,-�ca-. curetely sum up the way we all feel ' Thank you. Marcus Solomon Resident Skater AA I skat+xs No,They dan.kncraar ..,•ri" 'it getting third in almost every contest.Then GATOR it.They fimighrVe been told& .W I went to Canada for the Canadian Amateur warm eonm®old magazrnas butAo. : ian+r Sketeboarding Championships in Van. hold it in as high"-i 4ard as son, -0 the Couver, and I won halt-pipe,slalom and older skaters. But then again, they're downhill_.,almost tiyerytt,ing,'t was tun Lo,ig before Tbny Hawk,there was Eddie inventing their own radicalness. because it wasmy first real road trip.I w E ,itera.For histime,he was simply more What*4 you were tetking to a newersm"r up with John Tuisl and Jim Goodrich,it AM innovative and Much more dynamic a rider. and made reference to someone liks N. pretty wild, NW He wet a harbinger of what skating wasto Page,do you thluktheWd know who you Thanl turned pro,got a. odeln�.G&S. become,becauss hepulled outthe Elguer- were talking about, but things weren't wwkiry 6t wall forme ial,all the varials,fm.itsxfe handplants,fakie Not unless they read it in a history book, with them,So,aftertwo-and-a-half years of flips,fakie ollies and frontside rcck'n rolls, Just Ohs,"Alva--'-ti't that a company?" skaing for them,pretty loyally and faithfully, Everyone thought it had all been done Whan you io1 jattrfavorite setivitles I had to leave.i had to has•loreI was look- t hen he came along and broke the barriers, Past,haw do Indtest? frig for something better.My goals were adding a new dimension to skating,Not that Probably in the same way or in a simiis- ni k 'than what they co I'd cater to: I he made skating as it known obsolete, way as 1 respond to...juggling.How long h participate a . Odl in promo- he just initiated a new subdivision. ago were people juggling?How much do organization,to be a team kinda Hor;Gild 900 trtnaltien waif riding,and people respect juggling?I ran into Jerry ir•idtodo4emos.lwasn't getting ramp to wall riding affect you when you Lopez at on test trade show and I was blown g g first witnessed fit? away. I paid him homage to the fullest � 9 Qmenf.Theyweren't for m- i was pathless.i was in rove,.My jaw was extent,I'd probably a9 rlF ?0 as much as 1 Headed for my p spend an hour tali'ng ,1 u places achieve thins you lower It my shoelaces.i was Just blown to a figure of the skate past with my ey" P things,y wbporl in Mao, of'83 1 went to way."God damn,ridin'the wailst"Just as wide as thu ocis-en,with a+nllfion ques- u,a.x%I just kind of took a leopardly leap, defying these barriers is a blend of a wild tions,getting stoked onOfthoirresponaas, utdt'ienthingsstartedtatt8ppen.twanted ductiro style and it PhYs�f actrvg its pro- to akata for a company that had other in-1 duatha.h;Sth H,you're looking a,a the t:tresis besides flowing boards to a skater, flit(d de of ih Pict r it crevices.On the �� I wanted to firve some Identity I saw skaters loft side or the picture h a ne a bum with like Stacy Pareltarvaha were usin tilvirown a bottle or a junkie n h a needle a of th' ' tools,and being creative and productive in out picture his arm,and on the ri s side of the skating,i wanted to make the rounds,van- andcu thsre't the wag ani—%ml-tucking turn cu►srrn discover,nrtd het he apart fOfg ft giant,pushing nsbodyu tfucking thrive UhKI gxisf, Having iwf,that would urg��hd.like i o3 his body h'ww wtl, Probably V,'my number one priority.BuI i thusing his bodMakin o other Skateboarding has wouldn't have to be a pro to have fun, thought to Making skateboarding tags slottelwiatdingtha»it is.Muregymnastics, Ws� yy3udefGnitfor►ofaptofVXIonal � �� More contortion.It's a real productive way ' There is no exact definition,th4 otv�,*tingacmewayhsrst�aggressions.in• s :x isn't,allthepncaaresodiverse.Myopinf SOMO O '3ISC . a.'rb l 6 VAn slashing " .�- - of a pro skater would be turning my life f samet>ody's face.you're thmteting yourself the oirsctiw)of promoting akateboarding In.at a wall with sweat dripping in your eyes. a ,.. stead of`Going to school full-time and What do y_%u thins:of tt*full ft ntefd s bacomi sd;,artyr�ofthing?What doesthstysy n9 archeologist or something like to Neu wht�em you think of something like that.I'm promoting a company.But more that? arorrtsr rod son, than promoting a company,I'm promoting itoortrayr3havingbaAs ttrsartraysbravely m0 skating, letting it come to"he forefront, and the rtraysdesire having eta �g��ktp►obablyirttiude: displaying it andshcwcasingit,lettingthe 9 pi'- ",-i it depends Gregg Weaver,Ty Page,because I saw him I L, ., n what foP.rm it's in.It you re skating Infrom skate once and tblowmeaRig Pineappte Is what•yon'ris Oingi of a bunch of first and second generation (Doug Saladlno)for h�style iIt's the spiciest thing in mylife.It's what skaters,they're gonna get stoked.Same of Hasa,Stmogc with his big ga tbacks, makesmewake up fn themomfag.l dream theiongNme,hard-coeguyswiilappeciate Toni "Wally" Inouye, Jiurdson, skating. that stu'rf,i appreciate that sfiift.New sksfsrs 5igurdson did frontside"sirs five-a-J-a hsif What would happen if all of it was taken who have a little knowledge of how feet out at Kona Bowll Roy Jamieson,Jeff from you? important that part of skating was will Tatum...let's talk about legerift there you I'd probably have some suicidal tenden- appreciate it. go.Steve Archer Ferris,nicknamedCarvin' rresl'd feel low,cheap.I'd feel like nothing, Do you think its validity stfll holds true Marvin.There are many others, 1,c,ouldn!t exist...no wry,I'd kill myself. today,or do you think it't kind of lost? Who have been your various sponsors? Lose my spirit,I'd float away and my car- Puck nos Just try it.Anybody out here just At the Cudon Pro Am i got sponsored by Gass would get buried,l can't see existing go cut and try to do a frontside edger. Dogtfavn.That was about 1981.Tony Hawk, without skateboarding in my life.When I'm Anybody.Right now,in a pool,in a ditch, Christian,Mike Smith and me were the only skating with my tire's,having a good ses- a half-pipe or on any vest.Then you can team ri:'ors then.This is when I started look- sion,fully sweatin'and pumpin'out and comment on it. ing at skating as sort of a profession.That's rippin',there's like this little volcano inside Do you think contemporary skaters are where my main interests r ,t was a hope- of me that's driving me and heating me.it's somewhat fgnot nt-,bout skating's past? IP-,s skate m4 'am I travelled to a lot of con- Netter than anything. No.Reese Sin,¢son just,ame aroure a -s,did tie AdPO series for long time, couple years ago,and he's way into that. skating for Indy,Dogtawn and Vans.Then Probably vertical. Backyard pools arioL Not your new competitors,Iaut your new Dogtown went under,soI got sponsored by halfpipos. generation of skaters,the kids who are Guliwing and G&S in'32.Steve Cathay How do va t see skateboarding sa Just cu.ntng ing do you think they know used to flow me stuff.l was loin`pretty good sts Ids today.,enough about the background? in the circuit and had to skate against Bob `t never pro`•esses from here on out, 62 Not your baind•new-board,three-month Serafin and Mike Hirsch a lot, so i was iys still going to�n as fun.rcoor m pay.wr _ :,1 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA rose nesce an WT-R-AD _.OMM P.Califcada.9l770.(7[41 989- May 18, 1987 Marcus P9100on 1CO07 Manzanita Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California 91701 SUBJECT: NINlF s.• R�F4 Dear ter. Soloman: The Planning Division, has completed its review of the alk.te-referenced project. In addV.1on, due to the nature of the request, adjacent property owners were notified of your request and given a ten (10) day period in which to comment. In order to approve the Minor Dev6lopmmnt t Reviri request, certain findings in the affirmative must be substantiated by facts to support those findings. The findings include the following: 1> That O i proposed use is in accord with the objectives of the Developatrit Coda and the purposes of the district in which the site is located; and 2. That the proposed use, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will rot detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, br materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; and 3. That the proposed project is in compliance with each of the applicabt� provisions of the Development Code; and 4. That the proposed project is consistent with the objectives of the General plan. Based on staff's review of the aroposal and coments from adjacent property it abeen otiarhat f support iand2cn of be madeinthe Psitivefothe followints to guen 1. The intensity of use of the skateboard ramp results in increased traffic (vehicular and pedestrian) and noise above and beyond that typically associated with a single family residence in thn - )ry Low Density Residential District N acre lots). Aft 2. The intensity of use of the skateboard ramp more closely resembles a commercial recreation facilit which is not- D�stririate within the very Low Dens ty Residential c . CwuiGreeyr, .E.l.�ll�ij •%� "row Deborah N.Bmvm 1elfrey> Dennle 4 Swart Chadea1.auque H Ferhe[aJ.Wrt�bt L umnM.Wwemm � .wli'ne{{ De��a opaisnt ke'ai e<� ��•�� 6 ,.. 3. ;'The extensive use of the stateboard''-'ramp results In 1nrreased',aot a levels an adjacent properties rhicch will 4" adversely iVact the puwl#c 3ieklth, safety, and welfare, " T* location, site, and. in.�nsfity otf use of tact skitelgcaard ' ramp dppriyes adlectant prcv-4,11 °_" rs. of their privacy, thus tse'in� ,and Welfare., 3. There ts;no t �agn6ing;ar�tand t�We lot or around the Sk�atalor�.d ramp to:,preW;ent i nditVf 4t al s f"ror piving 'an the ras Wvh+as1 the owners as°e not ' e thus posing a potential safdty.:, hoard.. Thepefttre, Minor. 190919MOnt Review 86-22 has h sn denied. The de0al i� of the application shall berme final untess art appeal is ftiet!�, h the Plar.11"g Ct iUi on WOW tan days,Of thft data Of this letter. Apped1 s " must be submittid in writing, together with a $62.00 appeal face with the Secmuey -of the .planning Comiistjoa. If yott` shou'A have any further questions, pleksa: do not hesitate to contact Scott Hurphy of this office at (72e) 989-1861. sincerely, CO iNITY DEYEtOPMUT DEPARTMENT ` PtAI DIVT Bra for 1 y i,anner D�:SMagr AA n i y t - 3 F Re: Minor Development Revteyr fib 2: 10007 M "? arizan to Drive} Dear Sirs: L+ In response to your} ei ter, data-ed,Apr l fi; '19fi7, lir iota is a --list of comments on the. poten, l v JtOt$ that. the use of the skfa�eboard ramp rfai±jtrpatei. We live next do ri to hers at ;the scatewogr-dd ramp ,(ori the kres side) and we are directly a ee e 6 the"um er efer4tis the oaA;c ing,.list: -Lack of pfxvacy ' . Te Rage fchttistViand fn R the p m at`its wi►en are trbing to ret; �'n otr :p%o a d ackyara° -They stare *1a *r pv cur f�€r�oYt;�, -.Our master b droortr faces tir'e ramp (we always.have to keel the'' drapes closed) -Noise and litter rW l -We l ve in a`;qu1et bkT'hhdrhaod (ng° ve �m ye�mal i chd tdren or teen- agers : That'was o�+e`digf%e rralstny we c os'er,to,rtioue `,rota that C� neighbo k-cod. eenaae, kids arriv6,An*jhrei5r nofisy'car-s and, th ow freer and soda cans in 1 the street abd on our" property. ' -She.; skate until dark ' -Dangerous for children -No fence around' the Okateboard ramp to,p�event,chiidron from climbing up to. the top of the ramp and pfay.,4g. on it There is nothing there to prevent=childre6 fro owners are nat there m sKati:ng on the ramp when ' th� ' -Decreases our property value -Unsightly from the street.and from our house -Blocks our view of the valley betow We hope you will review all the above comments and take any necessary steps to remove the skateboard ramp from the property. Please feel free to call if you would like mere-details. Sis:cerely, Sandra Luckau 9993 Manzanita Drive Alta koma, CA 9'80-b552 M.". & Mts Charles E. Hickman' 5927 Dartmouth Ave,.' Rancho.0ucaaongo'. GA 91701 714-980 2250 City of Rancho Cucamonga CT'0• Community 4evatopment Department Planning Division P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 ` a April 14, 1987, ,3`,. •',5 t SUBJECT, MINM DEVFul'.Q*MT AS-M 86-22 (10007 Mkia7RNITA DRIVS) Dear Mr. Scotty w:e p h X " Over the past tero years I have come to feel as if I have a eommerc . rscreat10!U1 attraction; in my 'back yard. The position of thca slvste reap in relations to b°�aq► rear yard takes sway the normal privacy that taxis expects in Vk3ir Oran yard. In oddities to the heck of j%rtvicey there is CNInstmViloise seven days a week. At no time can I opan certain windows S\,my home becausccf the noise from their voices and the rolling of thgl;skstob�ardss. To marice natters worse, 1 xAft sore of the young son use very obscene 11tnguage, On cme occasion viitina, qP Young ladies were forced to 1ee16• our Pool, because, of jeers from the akate- : boards. All of the** couPWAts are Ragnified on days vhsn they appear,to; be having competition. u� I peraanally irculd like �,6 know hors: this potentially dangerous structure can even be considerad f. a Asre3o a fence. h4 t y pmrnt Review withoat belz;; enclosed by type cf act vit that occurs surrounding the skateboard coupled with the flow of people to the neighborhood seep s[ter ieedia Coverers lt has only served to lower W06rty value. This is thSf ter cencern of•myself as we as my immed9ate neighbors. We are all striving to improve our hoass, where as the people at the above residence seer,to have no respect for property value`,`1nd-clearly have no rsgard for their neighbors. These existing conditions have already forced vela good neighbor to leave the neighborhood. It would be beneficial for the neighborhood if this structure was dismantled. Thank you for the opportunity to speak out against the skateboard ramp at the above mentioned location. Sincerely. Charles & Dulce Hickman; o_r_v b L 10C G' oq cP! (3- —TfC— AvvS r f� fY?,09/®A, MR 7-0 .... 14 R EICEI VED- C17Y OF RANCHO rUCAMSONGA i PLANNING DIASION AMAPR 1987 F i April M7 SUHJtM MINOR DEVELOPb4NT REVIEW 8642 (10007 MANZANITA. DRIVE) -yr ;,. Dean Mr. Murphy. The skateboard ramp izt,question is definitely noisy and an eyesore. However, our main concerns are as fplloasi 1. 'there is no Pence around the ramp and therefore it Is a safety hazard, ( 2, If lighting were ever injitalled the ramp could be used in the evening (event 4ter than it Is now used in the summer). ry 3. The ramp is used during school and afternoon hours When parents are at work and no adult supervision is available. Sincerely Kirt & Adina Johnson 989y-3022 Y n �f 1 s3 f�+fll(Y it Ito �I ai • s � r c z 5 • �s ` � w N ._ •as 4h a .a 4 01 SOW PS 3 l• — • . t S ,• q I � � i �l ev r. .T av ., u . . Aw• d. V•Q .T� iSfL7' n r r• t. .{ .7J•X.V � �' 1A� �'4 Ae 2 CITY OI< MEN I. LAMING B£ fMN ' 4 T �3 ' 711 IL Ld 06 CAl ul V i. Y r tl.,fl IL .- u £ c, IL CIC r1 w pit , 4 74 r + vi cl cil -a is i- �! • 1,, tT V 4. vr y j U J to 10 w � o — �; // ea.yc tlr�en Tc�cs-r S<7 .fJ/'�/Y�,,� "t prom d/+cY+/vr 7 Z -4/c7er Ha_S 5�c.,P`+ow5 ll es . y-�r e7/ , � � I; t_+/'C= Q..+^C h o �'7r I^YnB.1-�rc� /a a�i��!'S o!• ,�"c.r �✓S :�Q II, fa¢r� ce�r.no7 C �i Aw `�'t Z, r �'►'� h cl'+' �r O t�.sG.. v 5 6a'v5 S' cz /C*/G Al-S 0. dt- , "44./7� f r G�IZ e.rYli�r'4ehc• / ,., �/ ezns/( �fdSL�/eE J � �''luy,..,tie,r. �7,vx,er� n,v$� fa� •e.,. �h �( t yam. a �, e.►r�3o..z•be., S r iS G 1 ct�.:�f Tr�+�S.�C�'r�etw..t��Cl�m�r-a��.�' sd p�"'&5 gv,�,•..e,..�•s rrgW.,r � s+ � zv.�s c�os.�,•, so �Ot,7•on ci.> �er� �T bVouJ® rro� 1` ` �} � � abaFruG� ghy r1CtgA Cart 1/t�2 k> .GR..ase-.,. WO ei�6� P, S o /C Gk.S -{�cLlr �rdrrt�"T�k.itr �vertC � J✓CJ c -44n,; tt��'' f �' /'� 1 dO,s•7� �vQ:y/ 7 eS ei:h tf\C!' /1•'y, ' �esr'k ,a1 '1`rdn7� C.�� h•5 h /C C S Grn. -oe Lc>i�l 5 -e r,.A�+ // 1 4 f GF-i+'O r� SOYnrph`e ray.f r rsc-mlm-lll k . Cs»y0r+� +g �e�vJ�n't 741vrersa t C r5 e1f5� SA C Tr 5 cLrt cps-t-.-qdY+ haa.V� t �Of'��W,a�Li. r`CCC H•Tisa P'G"L�', 70 /�� / � I ! j�Q�eE+t� -74/.d .s L^ y TF,Aa CITY OP AWIM-0 CUCAMONGA c STAVF REPORT K' 017 DATE: June 24,',1987 <, r TO: Chairatan.4!►�, ;fibers of the Plannfng Commission FROM: Brad Sul 1 ,Gi A afier�� BY: Chris Westmar" Assis ar►t Fanner t` - SUBJECT: E 'IiFR 3I1 Ei �s iEWl AND DEV,ELO�d SE T. REYIEW 87 C propos D i'UttiS rUG ar ouse u cgs: o a',�ig 1I8,5OQ s �feet on S 25 atcrea is t C> the General I,rtdu rial ;i9fisatrid , Sub'area 5; Ft�cat�ed south Of 6A Street ad acentio an A.Y. & &..S F. rail Our west of Lucas Ranch Road APN: 210-O71-51 .i I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION:.: A. ActignLL,>Requestad:` Approvar' of site plan, elevations, and ssuance at aF egattve,Declaration. 8. Surrounding Land tise and Zostin SFr - vacant, u area South Vacant, Subattpa 5 East - industrial, Fbbairea 5 West - Industrial, ;iuba'rea 6`, C. General Plan Qes,_ ;aans: "Project ' enera Tn-dustrial/Rail Served North - General IndustrialAffil Served South - General Industrial/Rail Served V i East - General Industrial/Rail Served I`'I West - General Industrial/Rail Served j D. Site Characteristics: The si;.e is relatively fiat and vacant ] with no sign can vegetatit parcels east and west area developed with warehousing facilities. The properties nor ; ind south are vacant. Street improvements have not been completed. r e ITEM ,A . ... . .,z.... :• '. ,._. .. _ 1 .r..k':vve._SJilkn='3t4.a,. _ PLA!lM1NCucCSrAPF REPORT m "Group June 24, .t87, _ A Page 2 - F,. Parking,Calculat_ tans• c Type". Number of Number of Square Parking Spaces Spaces Of Un F Rated Re _fired Provided Office, 6,U£}0 /250 24 Nlanufacturi¢ng 40 ood0O [-tDO 80 1 00 Narehousi' 40 ng 72,a00 iii0O0 20 20 1/2000" 10 a /3000 8 8 1.42 178 H. ANALYSTS: A. Back round• l7rhe.buildings are intended to be used S3 warehouse s r 'u qs laGciiftfes which are compatible *.,'#th neighboring i uses and ih6� provisitons fur Subarea 5 of, t,.he Industrial Specific Plan., The, project site adjacent to,art existi°ng rail spur has been desirq d to provide rail, service, B. C►esi n Review Gcm�ittee: the Design ReVi;W,CoMmittee (Chitiea, MCNI'e , o, WA Gv ewcd the project on June 4, 1987, and ~_ recommended that the project b forwarded to the Plan►;"tng Commission with the following! recf,nendatfons. - 1. A screen wail should be provided at the project Ien•try incorporating the ziggurat design, which will block views of the loading dock areas. 2. The ziggurat contrast on the north `building faces and interior -faces of buildings A & 8 should inset approximaitly one inctr. " 3. The dock and a4'i other roll up doors should be painted the same primary color as the building. 4. The tan contrasting color should be continued back along the office wings and follow the length of the loading dock face. 5. Special landscaping should be provided along 6th Street incorporating specimen size trees,; undulating mounding, shrubs and ground cover. t i PLANNING COWI 1SSYOH StAA FF REPORT ORtne7 2 1g&at�bandian Group Page 3 4. ( 6. tandsCO''ng, including trees and shrubs, shoo -1- be provided aloag the west r11de of Building 'W. This may provided.' in the existing planter--nn the 'adjoining site provided adequate security to guarantee installation is prdvi-de4, 7. Vines, to be determined brttie City Planner, should,-b�e. plahted the length of the tn, building face of building A and at the northeaSterr� section of building try; sgften the buildings. 8. Should the rail s szr not �e roYi l R p dell to serve building. F, landscaping should be provided subject to City Planner review and approval. 1 9. Textured paving should 4e Provided at the vehicle entry at 6th Street and at the office entry areas, 10. The buildings color palette should be apr= _by_Desi gr; Review prior to the issuance of building V, rmfis. Ir 11. A detail of the ►mpl ogee l unLh area ; hardscape and landscape should be provided for ,Nasigvt ',Review approval prior building permit issuance., C. Environmental Assessment: Part I and II of the Initial Sturdy have been completed an no significant impacts have been found related to the construction of the proposed building, III. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: The proposed use is consistent with the General an and the Industrial Specific Plan. The building, disign and site plan, -together with the recommended Conditions of Approval, are in compliance with the Industrial Specific Plan aad all other applicable City standards. IV. RECOWPENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission appro-vW-0eve-TF-4ment Review 87-21 and issue a ;tegative Declaration - through adoption of the'rttached Resolution. Res!330t7lly su ed, r'a u� .p City Pl ner BB:CW:ns Fl,l VT' PLANNI�l6 fib'" IO S F"R PQRT 3� ` DR 87 3' �a rb�ar rotiP . a.un� I [ Page,4 �. Attachme loca d4Ti Map RFrbiTbiuttt, t� Apeprrroavai a 'jansnw t.esAl F it 1 r. 1 k` "i.. , _ ♦. _ .... ..-�n..,ui. ,t_�._...�1uG7.1'. ..... 'R! f�P .tMIM 7 t r _ 2J Q03 Belk wsw�st // i n i UXrH CITY OF RANCH() CUCANlo TPt'i.t,�. � PLALMNING DIVISION �� • a, Twh�'�'o a ..��r ,.►+)Ayy►►� �'�,.�rt�,�i� 1Mrr or`o'��v,,.�`cc�.rl i7 ��K`it Y•T4I.1 ;rAY, Y!'�ly.r�'�� �}'��j,� ��! � � Y� 1 r a�r•4t��7 I4� •�i 1��7': • a. �av� Jt.•3..�Mr® j Y li-�_ ice, � • ; i i y ,his. ®l�3 = �� ,�Ill7ni®®r® arrn■R _ t� o` AW 'a r s RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION ,OF THE RANOO CUCAMONG�'ALANNING'COFLMISSION 'I �%1 = APPROVING 'DEVELOPMENT REVIEW' NO, 87-21 LOCATED SOUTH OF GTH"MR-EET AND WEST 'OF`-LUCAS RANCH ROAD,-IN THE GENERAL INDUaIRIAL bISTRICT - APN:. ?.10-071-51 WHEREAS,! on,the. 4th day,of, April, 1987, a complete application Was:-' filed by The Naibaddian Group for review of the above-described project; and- WHEREAS, on the 24th day. of June, 1987, the ".caho Cucamonga Planning Commission held a meeting;to consd?r ingjabove-describd project. ' NOW, THEREFORE, the Rancho Cucihwnga"Planning ,miasion resolved as follows: _a SECTION 1:_ That the following can'be met: 1. hat.,th„ proposed project is consistent with the objectives,'of the GeneraV,Plan and 4, 2. That the proposed us `is in :accord with tti'ie objective of the Developm�t Code``ind the purposes of the district in which, t spfte ls located; and 3. That the proposed use is in compliance with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code; r_ and 4. That the proposed use, together with the conditions +" applicable thereto, will Pat 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 environmen an at a Negative Declaration is issued bn June 24, 1987. jSECTION 3: That Development Reviela No. 87-21 is approved subject to r the follow ng con tions and attached Standa�^d Conditions: PLANNING DIVISION 1. A screen wall shall be provided at the project entry incorporating the"iiggurat design, w+ich will block views of the loading dock areas. 2. The;ziggurat contrast on the north building faces,andf' interior faces of buildings A & 8 shall inset A approximately one inch. i ice' Resolution No. Development Review No. 8:7-21 June 24,: 1987 Page 2 3. The dock an& aTjr other roll up doors shall ,be painted the ?-,we primary color as the�bui l di ng. 4. The-,tan contrasti�, h color shall be cdhtinued back.al ong the office wrings ahW��-ialow the lengthl of the loading dock face. II i 5. Special landscaping shall, be provided along 6th Street incorporating spe�im size- trees, ut(dulatirig mounding, ^,x shrubs and ground cover:', 6. LanoscapSng;.,including trees and shrubs., shall be planted along,the west sfde of building A=yin the existing planter on the adjoining site. A cash deposit or other surety acceptable .to•the`,city Planner shall be recorded with the city to the mount of $5,000.00 for landscaping along the west face of.building A prior to the issuance of building -,,permits. 7. Vines to be determined by the City Planner, shall be planted the 'Iength of the west building face of building A and at tfr'e eor-.theastern section of building B. S. Should the rail spur not be provided to serve building B, landscaping shall be provided subject to Ci-ty Planner review and approval. H 9. Textured paving shall be provided at the vehicle entry at 6th Street and at the office entry areas. 10. Thai buildings color palette sha11 _be approved by Design Rkiiriew prior to the issuance of building permits. 11. A detail of the employee lunch areas hardscape and r landscape shall .be provided for Design Review approval prior to buildingpermit issuance.P e. ENGINEERING DIVISION 1. An in-lieu fee as contribution to the future undergrounding of the existing overhead utilities (telecommunication and electrical, except for the 66 KY electrical) on the opposite side of 6th Street shall be paid to the City prior to the issuance of building - permits. The fee shall be one-half the City adopted unit amount times the length from the center of the railroad easement to the west project boundary. ResOl;uteijanc ��k1 Devel* n� wietwa No} s�'7 � A; dune 9,4,,,"°I 7 Page i3s rsla fia, *. 2'a 7h4ded e1,1� bei; 'gans 'biZOOrelaeai7 ;N ra 7�1�ro�a� ,�po a� Pie datetied�; A &; ,..o �,° 1, ststYa�,ia� ahe�C��jtyEn a� ". ahe Mr Noti Hof ►1 €�#���a,r o a ;offbsi 3 h the u54 ' ; + Aa �. x w � ,. �� .� t R� •frfi � �a�rdPeFfiy+oen,to }hla �ves� shal.r Abe isr :pior�'ixo ' APPROVED AND A�?OpTED*`TtkIS 24T 44Y OF`J,UNE, t, € PLAtihING COM►MISSIONV f4i CITY'OF°N1�ldCRO BY, Larry c to , ATTEST: �Orad u _ep Y. ecru q z r y „ I, Brad Buller, Deputy Seoretary of the al �nafln : , Rancho.Cuca of monga, do hereby certify thawti 3 `oregoines i,slUtion was dulo" Of the l and regularly introduced, pa"sled", „c# adop,Cedr� y�e Ai'trra�fngromm3ss&d of the City of Rancho CUcamonaa:, ait a reyudar 9'e ting.�af the�� ann �O 40missiwn _held- on the 24th.,day of June., f987, by the fat'fowirig„wrote=td=wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: )XI, n LO 0� f OpaY C� GC Oy 4 N.i.�° Y• a ai canGyJv i ti won .: td vet , Arc ��''o n Cam N .rc GYoa naC�..'C rv�+ tzft2 1. 4�r2g £.e85t '�'Ly��'5_vq�a�•�D'��'.�^rwYl�pi .'�p`cebp�Nell, ql _y �'9{g. (Kr `.A Y Q Y YN piV O A v ca. i-•r �S4sS- it k '�»M G M a A: O •.�'.q C b. di lac.;r YB� o s X, �e o '$ S •�$ ^�t yFt 2W �sn$ o " '` 'Joe. "'w�r,F 4ii aka .a•.- �+..�'�Yy^^m.r� q;. ZA • O gp 7 �G��i�Vy'O y C`.'J�I,�-�'��Cp,� 44GilYr.d y� e~ n, -6���6r Ir ', BW J;.d G N �ia,Y6B Y '+ Y`e •»Y'. Oa� �. 4 Y C III Yi..+�" a e._.vg+',ao .�s'E-� .,F ac�J'o i•. ��I t M y � `e CC qqqq i lacc S � L..�O t aN 1�`. ♦ •y� �OYYG�V j6 .04iii.CH@O4 M j: Is 4lzaIs GC Y a a 39 s i 01 Y�'yr Y r R • �aaar Gb f1.t Tq A4.1M • yy s ci p C y a C y N O.w d S t.Q? .Ga=N V L ff 0 C CYz t !'. L VV yyy ewC lS:e�+� C4ws a v4U `yCf'�1G Y e aN�.eft �Mom. C at �a �Nxw L�aa u -...� =ac c a c. V.. .rt a a.. •.w eao$ oy $'�F: Lis Va- Q� Gav Z3e S Saa =L 4 ,G_L gk q« i �u Nr QOY q y: q nY. {p i 1 Ss � CD nuL .Yy4 Lj,Q�y_4. VV6 y� Q�VCCM 'y `3ca VP .�oV M+ a C. ,tr o 43g f yG. v: y is$� 'g-^`c=*g I.S. .o$G.h moue. 0;Ayr.-gl{C�a C-1w:3�H� y��` RyJYgQ6 #emu � ygCw+g �� 5. '=au,G �e !:! Ay�� L C,� QaCY y.Y gCY4r r3 uBL� T«yY 4r Eo ar.,.+Haut A.Cu� cn r <!y\\l1g� 4Yw b�v tnY AaW t`Y1wi+ �� pi fyy�ppprpppY.111�4 1�. CRi'^'_ay4� �a�+y�� s� .x�.~bR �. gg yyt�YK� Via, 'S Of• »y/ar+.. T4 ` Tr K�.+4� tCN VY++ y[ ..;r.NNL��Na� ii �f�.N��wvC.ry. yCjwwY..3t 9C JCL Yagi� N4. .oNYa4 CwLn`lf "pp a�o, d d$ .y�y$ +jR+p ywja� GUYy ♦1p�q t' Owq n u LC. at H9 oy �g o'� QQ a9 �as� �a qn^--to w�c3c !ig .V... g` S f* 'cp. � no .L.Y vN � ...i� wN vo4Lt rg,uy n w+•N y= v H. N .3 G {.. "' Obi �4 o, -ff� xpY �+�w �aY � nYVscCy.�4r � VN1u�t�O W g S w C ea�� `a cam' �f ��� b� e+3�gv�►Or � ��=$c.°� ��5`�a efC wL^' 'C a N .w..ygCh sq�.vbg'yr. -Zy w %M�rnCi G Pq$q CwY�u Cy Y L eta Gbw .b. i r U'ti�. aN C C�.�a.VaGCa NCCtStu Z ' �n9 C`PA .?LZu +�•'rwC Y�O q 4a Nyq Q u-.$! L EK pp Q .2 x-a U N u q�Y y. ,t. 0 .. H nd E i �. .0 ab wu4M GN q+N �iT .�i♦r b N$V Ot w Nt.�. Za - w �. 9.2 exam c'd �bv "`. :ggoS o o".go. cL Fa Yav Lacc d L, c e��'v..�t>�$` aa�csy�oR .'Q''gi ��tt �S� i...y .0343E LaQ w= U yy� ppp,,a3� QQ ay43a C Vey Ki6{;,� w6 ti;NC1 Kr N.i1 NY1# �[U .Q.�wtl 4VAM q.C..y Sya��N ZC� >ra I . c Lum 1wj`�1yf a c v Ly w`, L fq N��La+e� CTd �Nd.9 &G C G .0� • L IIU QIN dNy _CV • q ....C H d ple Y O ^O � Y N �c "'.�O$$4 pN. ��L O U C.♦ �d C a o�ofd of E^ :.;3 an qoo»N�Laa� ^a' ti� ras •N.+¢:r PC I Np _NS\ OV Y.LYRpNN aUnp4'"•�'D O�?C. 4L gi'gy.� gJf•f Wpd yN U6w'. �+O yr=YYTNOU<.aN L=. N•}+i NUO�f' L� i i 'UoY a!eo`' i nn8.5 ��•' '�g. N off n$c� =;�w� �.:: ,��uuy ^Nu ad�.w.m i-sgNYv^ n�;,.. n� vrs c.uya• ■j C 6L0 C �p t IL Yy C Cpp�L_O S�� ..� OCUO.On:yY p i T 2 N q Q: Z. oaL au.cd -... au +HI-et =_€ aka sa ;E T C N CpCs c >.�f yy. �a..C .6 C• a uyq.` O d A OY > L 4 � �~ Y ;, = �s O=vim :b u`AgL s d 21 yLA — vN vY r�N y v.+ c.sao o �d.3� c-Zt HE ffd d`y� O�Oq ^— ALUo. Cp O C- • `o L•L n r d W C V L = — L L d..L a�' N�p d o v ^g U O U iUi 9>6y a T.m r L N Q. L N L oppo P = u v v.. cvq a V. nY � yqC � n=_ Odd 6N O� UyY—N NOy uA�f. C Uq..aL` _a�y`o'„.. — gi u �' ~o'V° ^'�' _$ � �-.d.qd >.iC v�'d'�• -Lm dva.� .. <u cvL, s.oN�q a�Tn tLg rdi.c'oa ci s=°- a,y� yy—o` d"'S_ +fi�.re c.re mac» ccrdi _cc m y.W 72 is Yv .bnpbO �N �. �4 G C� t4 VN 9 v it :� .i �eQ o9ti � •6��N «r'I�r`V C� -+q'�Ci6 a wbL.Yt fin/ � �E CLI CO.O 4nqi T w.U' Y�•�. 1• «.^YLN 001ti 1w1+ Y_� wL Y +fit � �" N�V S1.SC• 9���q.� a�� yWy �� JN�'~ �aL�YyC `t e �Yyy C 4'-y>!• h L N: C 4 S p� r w._L w CC� g �Y ti y Lp rvyyR �u �O•w L N�W�a4 P CW� !•0 wi� �V Y ..Y pL W . G! V Y '" al y C wlY �S u% �®.Tit• � II ...�p: � dyi4► Jiryal�Q ` uu= v�» 4y� .Cia{y aq ��. L`u .jV.rrA MCYCM� LO. Y4 � wY �nJq W eLTOCII N M1.L VY ` Yv 4V.. c•4 0 0 :Y zr �• 6 bt'> 8y Yak,, 7rpA q ,r �Y » Ctp Stpt,,y Y.` .YILN r NN �• , M. � Y�N C Z CVVO COY� � cC� ��^q�a TC a.+11 Of 4 ,�. 4 Ye6 Na RY- YV �p cBpY «c.p r� {�Y. i4•-m Eo o. ooLA �{� M�� 4� ��i2^33 y��` L N'•` ` v �.L OCC d wY g�t M•L »4 N «L C o N✓ q Y> C O.� r N Y S O - w w 4- V N de gNV�L RIY � 4 GZe C ��O NQ� 'J.^O YL pNa �y1'CCC wJt Y_ L yn CV� R Y Y C LOy« Aw AV' Y Or=+ AO ^a » 6q Tw 0Cq.»r � yr4.y Y y{ry G`z Ye W VY W Y'4 e�t - BOG O.s C�r i e'va1 _.^NZ v�'y in.� � a s— .�riea- s »a.$•_ •eat nVN— £ �& pis �a'��v pi C �YY� L aW O L Y} .•' � ^ `�yyy■ r Y CiNO y{� �acw»d C C [Y VV as ` �■ v » D :C» ^y L 9 y7�. • YAM' ` LAJ Fog- L!r » � 3 oQC Su. ra `S 423 B �$ �• " gg K4~ »�oJA �C u g5k. v'�.�'p• 8' .".$, ec+^ a. w '� yw ,ajar-'�'�• yV� cal. KOY■YS NY $� � YY3� Y�' �r }ya� �9 �O��pu,M•, �- t-2 iJV .N MPi 6 p _ 1: r .4 W� J r In cm o it- Asa]Lj Ny +.�.. YI•. iL. N ;Yq! cicc r ryY�jAw Qa C y aii 1�0�0 �jj yp� o .H M f�1i QY _ L^O 'Y P-— M C YG sr.. -r iI Is•yyc. C- yY , vyeYv'tsj- 15 a— � 3 Y g Ses d L l`^ ski R u. is ~e µ g' �� r Lg $ 2La Gif^•� lass E.—A JAJ JZ w=C� 9ss`y4 aN a " ^w ix —Zlk5 _��p _� yZ '�$•► pLp. C» .y��(� ~DQ$ l[+3 r 1.�y�_Y NyCY Y� ..'a-� KE G CY•ID WN9 WYY 6 cal Jf.Gx I >a�±eYY '�Yl li••ls3{. K t a y M4 JC y N Y >1 L 65c.a q m ^ $tea 2 _.g��x — CD Z Q. S YN 1.2 Yyy� y�6».` 53j'3�i. cp5S�ipo /(Sw�,g `y�o■` ' NO.�i•+w—� N4 L" w. <L/ L4 W NN' I 1i4 KM � ♦.Ci F.I. DLO t, � 0 °� w♦ a�V M y nNw • • { tL i u a y L -wo 8 stj M ; Eat 1. � 8 -s '�S •gyp! � po-� q�p�M pas�+� �i.• Y'� iw pZ Mte� 6Off. •O p j JOB uL ` w"1O.i .'�i: _" St ail �' �N / C 91 p1 1 �iOi C$. sY tCp. 7s YGr4 C.. pY^ -AV.�re=m ZruQ K V L W 1. U N i K L L y N 0 M ti N YY6 W 4 K G W Y '11jj'��•f,, 1 YY r v a . oa O � � s.p W �n Yam: L L y r• Y L i w 1 `06. iy � ��� � N ♦ � YOY ' sr» _ K$� LE _T �� N yV I h>LY 1V NG1 i L r hA Z� I c^en�� vEo +Q�t OY LC`a .i.,O 30 •+ o aN 20 I