Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1987/08/12 - Agenda Packet 'a Cr„ .✓., a d°+.i `.�� v-.�i, u i.� a i r:,:."�N r..x w l: ..`8., ,. t .., s N�....�}N � ® � ® Q �� 0'ry OF ^1 Rr ['{Mj�CL�:Cr{�'�rtC�i�\'(Ce��1� UJISSION 3t AGE `J q :3 ► 1J�T WEDIMDAY AIIC3`1 ST 12,1987 7:00 p.m. i; ACTION AGENDA 7-rMRS-PA" '.COMA;CI iB 9161 BASS]tl is R"Cluo CI�AM(DNtxg,CALIFORNIA L Pledge of Alr; 0. Rau Gall Commissioner Blakesley X Commissioner Emeriti:X Commissioner CNffea X Commissioner McNiei Commissioner Tolstoy A HL Announeemea is W, Approval of Ubutes APPROVED 4-0-1`' Jane 24,1987' APPROVED 4-0-1 . V. Consentl r The folloW&LT Consent Calendar jbe►n; are expected to be routine and non-controversial., T,,4y 1;,411 be acted on by the Commission at-one time without �t�3e ion. If anyone has concern over aa.�item,it should be evrioNve for discussion. A. ENVMONMENTAL A&M%MENT AND TRACT 18058 D CN Yt� - W1LEdl4il+t I,YON GOM ANY The design review of building elevations and Plot plans for a previously approved tract map consisting of 202 lots on 28.51 acres of land in the Medium Re?dential (4-14 dwelling units per .aere) within the ViF toria Planned Community, located on the west side of"Pairmont Way, south of Highland Avenue-APN 202-911-M. VL Publle Bea The following items are public hearings in which concerned individuals may voice their opinion of the re,"Ued p ojeet. Please wait to be recogMiaed by the Chairman and addN s the Commission by stating ycur name ,M address. AIt such opinions shall be limited to 5 miiructei per individual for each A project. pp tt a- rTe' W 0. APPROVED 4-0-1 B EIst�R A8SI3.SSMF�NFi` >AND eQb�Pl`1O13AL •PeER�Ls$�-07�A�RF{a3SIA"�-�A�C,,,: k�y��.i�p a'1�8 8 "'e�foot"retail aeczt'e�ui�*ludit�°a foots A vant An 326 acres of land in �e y'1--era] Com`rraacal DistrT4t Iotatei at tFie southwest carFer of Mavci A�* ltue s ,Acro�t.Rdute - �cFiii'209=041-49; 4. 4k` I elsLz°d FTIe� V7� 5, ontinueii from July 8y 19,87) ' r,aC.Q)APPROVED 4-G-I C. EN A+fPr ' L... ASSESSMENT A33'1}" TEl!L'.i'A1TVE i R, M'" 10$64 3"C AldOI E M-YES " A ;1 suu3. TSn of 2:6'acres of Ijiff I(Eo 2'parodls' in the NeigTibcrhaocT Commereial Deyel�opment District Iochted at I` the northeast corner of Arehibald Avenue snit Base Vine _. Road-AFN 202-781-08. k D,; RNTINUED 7O 8/20/87 D. KON-1E OCCUPATION PERMIT n-255 cism s - 3-1-1 Agped b sts d' eT ion tten a Fume 'elvdtion ` Staff to prepare a Resolution Pk4r-R,#at 107-A Sundance,Drive. (Continued frw,..Y JAl B Hof Appro��! for consideration 18117Y,", y ' ; under Consent Calcndtiar. E. ENVIRO:IM>RNTAL ASSESSMENT, AND, CO UAL E. 'APPROVED 4-0-1 PERMrr 87-27 - SIC ODA - A request to allow a bekefy pastry ghop wTtnin an existing industrial complex loest\ht at the southwest corner of Arrow Route and Vitneye`�d Avenu,inn the General Industrial District(Subarea 1)of th Induatri"&Specific,,Plan-APN 207-261-49. F. CONTINUED TO-9126./87 F. ENVIRO>>t1F1ENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL 4-0-1 USEP8Ai4tiT -28 - M I3GSR - The request for s At applicant's request. Master CUP to allow Busirm Support Services, +Cone ence Ssle�'U4 Services, and Food and Beverage Sales %HuiTdings 2, 2 and 8 of an approved industrial business park,In the General Industrial District,Subarea 2, loated on the south side of Arrow,at Bear Gulch Place- ON 209-012-19. G. APPROVED 4-0-1 G. TIME UTENSION FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 12959 L Time Extension with condition YA28D31AN- total residential development a 4,,W le of undergrounding. family family lots snd two duplexes totalft 28 units on 4.78'acres of lend in 'the Low-Medium Residential ,District (4-8 /iwelliV units per acre),located on the south side of Arrow Ronne, between Comet Street and Sierra Madre Drive - API�207222-08. /J / t .i✓ .3 APPROVED 4-0-1 1' H. ENMORMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND VARIANCE 8?-Q9- HAMMER, retest to reduce the required average Wkwd a sq.0aek Prom. 35 feet to I8 feet along Baker Sweet, to r..tice the required average landscape setback from 35 feet to 13 feet along Bowen Street,and to reduce the required side yard setback frorn Z4 feet to 12'feet fol, the:north building in conjunction with the establishment of ;, a day care center and school. in the Low Resid"a�ilial District (24 dwelling units per acre), located at the northwest corner of Bowen Street and Baker Avenue-APY, 207-531-31 and 519, (Related Pm,%at: CUP 87 22) I. : APPROVED 4-0-1 L ZKY-IRONMENTAL_ ASSESSMENT AND CONIDI'6NAL ERMIT 87-22 HAMMER R-A request to establish a day care center and preschool within two existing buildings 1 in the Low Density Residential District(2-4 dwelling units I per acre),located at the southwest cornOw of 9t`,Street and Baker Avenue AEN 207-531-31 and 50. ' (Related Project: VA 87-09) J. APPROVED 4-0-1 J. ENVIRONMENTAL_ AS3'..:rSMEXT AND PARCEL MAP 10902—WILL,IAM LYON C 'SPA A subdivision of 13. 1 acres of Iasi into 2 parce, for school and park facilities I wittdn the Victoria Groves Community *plan located on the northerly side of Fairmont(Yap at the westerly terminus of Victoria park Lane--APN 202-901-+31. YX New ! K. APPRO`.tED 4-0-1 X. REVISION TO THE ViCTORML VINEYARDS,SOUTH AREA Subject to Trails Committee 1D' LOPMENT PLAN- WILLIAM YUN COMPANY - A comments and approval. request to revise the;approved Area Deveiap anment Plan to ae-orient the park site and realign Rochester Avenue for the Victoria Vineyards South Village,a 117.4 acre portion of the 'Victoria Planned Cow,"Nurtity, located one the north side of Base Line Road, between Milliken and Rochester Avenues .APN 227-081-06. 1 L. A;PROVED 4-0-1 L. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT Subject to Design Review RE W 7!6 GTH - A proposal to construct a ,�010 approval. square foot remote swiitchinitstation on approximately one half acre of land u the General Industrial District,Subarea J 80 located OR the west side of Ettwanda I Vanue approximately 'ISO feet inorth of Arrow Highway - A.P14 229-031-18. r, i t Y g Y 4-R ! r APPROVED 4-0-1 M A CU O�AL� � ESS�fE`T��' ��J7 E)1R�ikFiLOPtVIE��'. `8 ��� icddu a ray s.e�uraee "Toe' 311 a aft F 8�j��1�6 '�oee�ed at�.1i'e•'nortji�twteMa �1#rener=of' � Boa�I ..ird;aacl l ��u Avenct�e ASPN°I11?7 -ii2. trf. APPROVED 4-0-1l N,v APPS��� ;�'itFCJt�I3It3AC38 A�PeP�RU�YIa:f �' ` subject to condition of "40ting of trees along west, gip" aranep�ey to ltruetuie ill *. prci±Qrty line subject to floe, eaval' nclusrialegxXse,;Dustrie iStlerrt5}r City Planner's approval. toes ed r 2439�irrow,d gh*ay�Ap 2Z34I31-+03. Staff directed to D. Pmwt3 r"J'A14D;9MEWALK.SALES :prepare 2 Code Amendments Ito clarify for business M ComM -�= _ location and for limited ?r periods of time. X. Puublle Ga:Ntisita This is the timr•wnd place for the ge►ter�T pit 1.0 to address the Commisafon. Ztoms to be diawssed here are i)JsV which do not ' alr*aii r on this agenda. XL Adjowament 9-15 �.If. The Planning Commissfoii has cdopted ;Administrative Regulations that set an 11 pm. adjoumment tiara. If items go . beyoW that time, they M41I be board rely with the consent of the Commission. I I r r _ Sir VICINITY MAP Fr- i"'� , IJ►iECAIi�!�1�1!&1tS�aCt i. r , tib m, 4n Tma RR. iE'dixY saw h aar ,s , trf «aR ..e...... .... 44lCS CIA t i p , sdo f ��+RJ t s e `i Ctt bat s a e lu 4 t b e a W O ~fit!! h7 ,� `+. fth .....sue v sAa ab acaaARca�/ �tl�a+x Y CyITY OF 1 lon i CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting •, June ?4, 1987 Chairman Larry McN3el called the Regular 'Meeting of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at 7:00 p.m. The meeting Was held at Lions Fdrk , Comnunity Center, 9161 Base Line Road, Rancho Cucamonga, Califo�,itta. Chairman McNiel then led i allegiance. n the pledge of ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT.' David Blakesley, Suzanne Chitiea, Bruce Emerick Larry McNiel, Peter Talstoy ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Brad Buller, City Planner; Otto Kroutil --',Deputy P y a City Planner; Dan Coleman„ Senior Planner; Nancy Fong, Associate Planner; Greg Gage, Assistant Planner; Barrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer; Ralph Hanson, Deputy City Attorney; Debra Meier, Assistant Planner; indy Norris, Assistant Planner, Karen Kissack, Planning Commission Secretary ANNOUNr'MENTS K-j Brad Buller, City Planner, a4,jounced that after extensive recruitment Karen Kissack will be replacing Jan Reynolds as Planning Commission Secretary. He also announced the printing of two new handouts of the Design Review Process booklet and the Planning Commission booklet. In addition, Mr. Buller requested the Design Review workshop scheduled July 2, 1987 on fast food standards be moved to July 16th or August 6th. The workshop for Town Center is scheduled for July 2, 1987 and to eliminate two workshops after Design Review, staff recommendation would be August 6, 1987. After discussion, it was decided to hold the fast food workshop on August 20, 1987. Larry McNiel expressed sincere gratitude on behalf of the Planning Commission and commended Jan Reynolds on the excellent job she had done for the them. Planning Commission Minutes -1- June 24, 1987�,.f z r APPROVAL OF MI'UT£S Motion: Moved by Emerick, seconded by Tolstoy, carried, to approve the Minutes of April 22, 1987 as submitted. CON1 NT CALENDAR Dave Cooper, Representative of Crowell Brothers requested Item A be removed from the Consent Calendar for further discussion. 8. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSE.CSM£NT FOR DElEcOPMENT REVIEW 86-35 _ CITY OF e divelopment or a corporaflon'yard and vehicle maMnTeinance fac lity vaster plan on 5.69 acres of land in the General Industrial District (Subarea 2), of the Industrial Specific Plai% located on the south side of 9th Street between Hellman Avenue an4'Vineyard Avenue - APR 209-013-27, 24. C. EN�'�RONMF.NTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 87-19 - LENNON r, The development of a warehouse industrial Dut ing of' 7,,02T"'square feet on 1.635 acres of land within the °General 7"dustriai District (Subarea 5), located at the northeast ;orner of 1urnev Avenue and Sharon Circle - APN 209-261-15. Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Tolstoy, unanimously carried, to adopt Items B. and C of the Consent Calendar. A. RESOLUTION OF -DENIAL FOR TIME EXTENSION AND MODIFICATION OF CONSTTMR5-: PARCEL`i "586= CROWELL BROT RS - mo i ca ion o a i a condition ion for u 1 y un ergroun gng and a request for an extension of time for the project located at the sov��yeast corner of Base Line Road and Carnelian Street APN 207_031-C8. (Continued it from June 10, 1987). Dave Cooper, 521 Borth Mountain Avenue, Upland, CA, representing Crowell Brothers appeared before the Commission stating that Cror:ell Brothers felt there wasn't any way tt,ey could absorb $1;7,000 (+) in undergrounding costs. • If this was to be wie of the conditions, they- would have to let the map expire. Request was made that they find another mechanism to finance the undergrounding since the burden was too great to finance. The only parcel ' ,;ft to be developed and contribute to the un�lergrounding is the parcel-between San Bernardino Avenue to Baseline. Larry McNiel stated the Commission has adopted a somewhat hard line approach to undergrounding since approximately 50 percent is undergrounded and eventually all of the city would be undergrounded. Mr. McNiel indicated we have been working with the Chamber of Commerce to develop a possibl ' assessment district to help offset some of the Planning Commission Minutes -2- June 24, 1987 i exhorbitan,` costs.. The p,obabiIitias of getting an assessment district were thin.' Since there were no other public comments, the public hearing on It.Pm A was closed. T There are t4a resolutions to cpnsider before the Commission: (1) 'fhe Resolution of Denial with respect to the undrgroundng issue from. two weeks ago and (2)z: Approva conditionally that undergrounding be done. Applicant's position to obtain approval conditionally to underground and to have an opporttMity to seek and create ezn alternate method of financing the undergrounding. Barrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer, suggested the Commission could approve the map 'with the applicant accepting the conditions and return with modifications o conditions if he cool-I find another solution or mecF,anism to the undergrounding issue. f Brad Boller, City Planner, indicated the minutes should reflect the intet,t of the Cormmission for this'case. E: Commissioner Chitiea moved adoption of Resolution of Approval in conjunction witki the minutes of discussion. Commissioner Tolstoy .econdO the motion. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS; BLAKES11, CNITIEA, EMERICK, MCNIEL, 111111 NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE I^ ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE * * * * --carried PUBLIC HEARINGS D. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 87-04 - DONLEY - e developmeat of a neighborhood commercia s opp,ng center consisting of five structures totaling 30,770 square' feet on 3.8 acres of land, within the Neighborhood Commercial District (NC) located at the southwest corner of Haven and Lemon - APN 201-262-48. Debra Meier, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. Staff would recommend that the design of this building and the location of the lube bays go back to the Design Review Coud ttee prior to issuance of building perio ts. Subsequently, Staff recommends approval of the site ' plan and building elevations and issuance of a Negative Declaration. Commissioner Tolstoy questioned whether the Haven Avenue access to the project is a shared access.w, th Mobil. The access agreement was done by parcel map. Planning Commission Minutes -3- June 24, 1987 11 't1 Chairman WNW opened *4he public hearing. ` Steve Donnelly, Donnelly-Bennett Architects, 12821 Newport _Avenue, Tustin, CA appeared before the Commission stating that the applicant will comply ' with the conditions of approval. Alisha Olan, living west of the subject property,voiced her concern about safety, privacy, and what Donnelly-Bennett would be doing about the wall between the'project and,,her property. r Steve Kellogg, 6340 Haven Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga, living south of the project ; questioned, if the plan that is to be approved is consistent Gam, with what the apploa•nt had previously presented to him. He.was told that the southerly driveway would be lowered and that here would a 12 F foot wall. 5 Steve Donnelly, applicant, in' response to the revisions made -to the grading plan, stated that they went through end lowered the entire south send of the property two feet at the minimum to allow a six. foot grade differential from top of the wall to the top of the paved surface. They have bfought it within the tolerances of Mr, -Kellogg's concerns. Landscaping issues would be addressed with neighboring homeowners. In response to Commissioner Chitiea's question of the design of the w, wall, the applicant state W.concrete masonry wall with decoiative block would !2 used. Commissioner Tolstoy wanted to make sure that the wail on the south side will be at least six feet and no more from the finishad pavement to the ,$ top of the wall. The westerly wall should be referred back to Design Review. Mounding and shielding should be utilized to mitigate the potential,.sound problem of the lube bays. Commissioner Emerick expressed concern about noise, hours of restriction of operation of the car wash =a„ the compatible use within a residential district. Chairman McNiel reopened the public hearing for Mr. Donelly to respond to the issues raised by the Commission. Mr. Donnelly stated that he and Debra Meier, Assistant Planner, had gore over the noise study done by an accoustical engineer with the following alternatives: (1) Constructing a block hall along the westerly side of the property of a sufficient height to cut down on the noise, {2} Swing the lube function and the detail function to run north and south along the base of the "V. They could conceivable enclose the back side,of the building. The car wash bays would be running east and wC4. Chairman McNiel closed yhe public hearing. Planning Commission Minutes -4- June 24, 1987 �,�r. Brad •Buller, City Planner, provided the Commission with the following lanpagc,as a condition to modify the resolution stating a combination of ' decorative walls and landscaping blending with the existing, residential development and the proposed_center shall be utilized along), the west and south property liras to insure screening of the shoppinj�� center from adjacent residences. The plant material along .the wesk.�, boundary shall include tall growin.T'evergreen tees to pro4 de sucti screening. Plans showing the above} tall be submitted for reliewrmrtid approval by the City Planner prior to`,fssuance of„building permit Motion: Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Emerick, . to approve_ the j*solution as modified. Motion was carried by the following vote: AYES: CC'NMISSIGNERS: BLAKESLEY, CHITIEA, EMERICK, MCNIEL, TOLSTOY NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE * * * --carried E. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITI04AL USE PERMIT 87-20 -'INLAND AREA FELLOWSHIP --To allow a church within an existing pre-s ao ace i �y -For ids Only" on 1.18 acres of land in the Low Degtity Resider al District (2-4 dwelling units per acre) located or� the south -ide of Base Line Road, east of Turner Avenue - iPN 10i1-061- 09. Dan Coleman, Senior Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman McNiel opened the pelblic hearing. Mr. Ray Smith, 3937 San Lorenfo River Road, Ontario, CA agreed with the report and recommendations of the staff. Mr. Fete Potasxi, 7474 Kinlock Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga, stated he had addressed his 'concerns . :ith Howard Field, Assistant Planner, with respect to the access of the property. There is an emergency access- gate at the end of Kinlock that "miraculously" opens and remains open.The gate was intended for emergency purposes only and was to remain closed. Mr. Michael Boyd, 70207 Arlington Place, Rancho Cucamonga, spoke': -`for Inland Fellowship, in regards to the gate and the access on a Sunday. They were not aware it was to remain closed but agreed to not use it and would park only in the parking lot off Base Line. Chairman McNiel closed the public hearing. Commissioner Chitiea expressed concern about the potential pedestrians crossing Base Line Road and if there is not enough parking within the parking lot. She also raise concern with potential parking in the neighborhood to the south. Planning Cofnni4-,ion Minutes -5- June 24, 1987 I Chairman McNiel agreedthe gate off or Mnlock should\ emain c sed and referred this matter to staff. 44 6 e Brad Buller, City Planner, indicated the Commissi.�gn coul,.� add a condition to an addition to the Resolution rohibitin p g parking on the southern portion of the lot,and that the gate is to remain locked. The minutes will reflect Commissioner Chitiea`s concern of parking on thy, opposite of Base Line Road and: if jaywalking is occurring , this coup be grounds for reconsideration or revocation of this Conditional Use Permit. Parking into the southern neighborhood would be a concern.. Concern of the Commission is with the restricted parking, with regards to hearth and safety of the pedestrians and drivers.. Commissioner Toistoy moved adoption of the Resolution with the Condition that parking shall not be permitted on the southern portion of the site and that the gate st:411 remain locked at all times. He supported Commissioner Chitiea's concern with parking on Base Line and agreed if i this does become a problem it should be grounds for revocation.Commissioner Blakesley seconded the motion. Motion was carried by the fpllowing vote: a AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BLAKESLEY, CHITIEA, EMERICK, MCNIEL, TOLSTOY 1 NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE * * * --carried F. MODIFICATION TO 1ONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 85-14 AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 6-I6 - e requestto modify e approve acre MasterPlan 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 Avenug--- APN 209-021-16,17,05. Nancy Fong, Associate Planner, presented the staff report Commissioner Chitiea asked if any more specific designs for pedestrian amenities had been submitted. Public hearing was opened by Chairman McNiei. Cheri Tarkington, 516 North Orange, kiverside, CA agreed to the conditions of the staff report. Since there were no other public cosments, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Chitiea recommended the plaza area on the northeast side of Building A referred to Design Review Committee for approval prior to release of occupancy for tenants in Building 4, Planning Commission Minutes -6 June 24, 1987 Commissioner Chi'�ea moved adoyC on of the resoluti n, as modified, seconded by Ca-7mfiJ oner Emerick. Motion carried by the'-�foliowing vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BLAKESLEY, CHITIEA, EMERICK, MCNIEL, TOLSTOY NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONER$: NONE * * * * --carried C carredCi Chairman t- Niel. suggested advancement of Item M, with the indulgement of the Commission, staff, and audience, because their are many adolescents here for this-'riem. , M. MINOR DEVELOr°:1NT REVIEW 86-22 - SOLOMON Appeal of staff's decision enyIng a request, a ow a s a eboard ramp in the rear _ yard av~a of a single family residence located at 10007 Manzanita Drive APN 201-981-11. Scott Murphy, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. The staff reco:mends that the Planning Commission conduct a public hearing and C' debt' the appeal of Minor Developme* Review 86.22. L Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Marc Solomon, 10007 Manzanita Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga, CA, appeared before the Commission stating he felt that the staff report was biased and unobjective against this issue. He stated he has beer:`-�rying to obtain city approval for two years. He has taken steps to correct the problems addressed such as garbage, more people, traffic, privacy, and noise. Restrictions of the ramp would be made to comply with the neighbor's wishes such as shorter hours, limiting day use on Sunday, etc. Other issues Mr. Solomon .addressed were disregard of neighbors, lower property value, commercial attraction, the ramp being an eyesore and privacy. Full safety equipment is required to ride the ramp in Mr.- Solomon's backyard. None of the neighbors that opposed this issued were present at the meeting, Mr. Solomon feels he has brokcm no laws, he has no ill intentions, and trv�, tTlcomply with his neighbors' concerns. Commissioner Emerick grastioned the contest that was held last summer. About 150 peop a with 40 entries were there. This was done to help raise money to buy materials for the ramp. Money is not charged for usage of the ramp, only donations. Limits are now set for ten people, average about five to seven people. Mr, John Knickolopilus, 6186 Clenlock, Alta Loma, CA expressed his favortism regarding the skateboard ramp, stating that it was well organized', well disciplined,, no abusive language, and riders are required to wear safety gear. He felt Mr.. Solomon was providing a service in educating young citizens in citizenship. Planning Commission Minutes -7- June 24, 1987 if ._'3, �n r_ Ms. Sarah ock, iCQq Manxnmita, Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, owner of trie V property, stating hgr son, Marc Sol-onion, has ce�,tain guidelines to i follow in keeping the skateboard ramp. There is no ,alcoholic beverage F no smoking, no drugs,, or foul language allowed whatsoeVi�. All have to sign a release, if a minor, it has to be notarized a►,i signed by parents. Since there we 0 other public, comments, the public hearing was closed, „) Commissioner Emerit > stated he -:ftd not see any of the %ritttrs of,the letters opposing Ws issue at tht meeting. Concerns :of Mai. EmOrs.k were noise, too many people, and cars. 4iabiliisj� is not a concern, applicant` is 'taking the risk and felt the City is not shariii-) the liability. Commissioner Blakesley expresser( hies primary concern was unsightliness, yet was impressed with it being,=e well-.organised civic activity. Commissioner Chittea was impr+assed with Fir, Solomon's speech and rebuttal an3,' was surprised that the people who had written the letters were not at the mteeti' g. fact that it was unfenced made it an ;;'•, attvactive nuisance, and she was hot sure that the chain across the bottom is adequate solution. Commissioner Tol$toy' 's primary concern was the non-fenced aspect of the :�li l , project. in � tion, he wanted to conaend Mr. Solomon on the \\ tremendous presentation of his case and wanted to support t4is issue. Chairman McNiel found only two problems: (1) Sound/Noise which is being mitigated; (2) Visual cproblem - sitting oast in the twiddle of the yard,After two years in operation, neighbors who oppose the ramp did not express their opinions at the meeting. Commissioner McNiel suggested perhaps conditioning its use and to numbers of people. Referral to �.:taff regarding the unsightliness of the skateboard ramp and landscaping was suggested. �s _ Brad Buller, City Planner, recommended the item be continued for two weeks to prepare a Resolution of, fpprovaI with conditions for the Consent Calendar. Staff would meet with the applicant to develop the conditions of approval.. Commissioner Tolstoy ,noved, seconded by Com missianer Chitiea, to continue the item for two weeks to work with staff. Motion was carried by the following vote: Planning Commrission Minutes -8- ,dune 24, 1987 h _ 43.—� ...., v . .�..y�+'c•+�•�I.�� r•% ak 1/e r ... . 1✓ �.... _.. _. • q�.. ..1F � r 1 i l AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BLAKESLEY, CHITIEA, EMERICK, MCNIEL, TOLSTOY TOES: COMMISSIONE;tS: NONE �. ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:" NONE c * -carried 8:40 p.m. - Pl:arning Commission Recessed 8:50 p.m. - Flanging Commission Reconvened G. ENTERTAINMENT PERMIT 87-01 - HARRY G'8 - The, review of proposed "disc jockey" doing vocals a�pTaying records nightly in conjunction with a restaurant/night club, located at 10877 foothill Boulevard.. r Dan Coleman, Senior Planner, presented the staff report. k Chairman *Niel oponed the pL51i.c hearing. Mr. Mike Miller, District Manager of Harry. C..'s, questioned the uniformed officer condition of the, Resolution. They do have four employees (lounge hosts) dressed in suit and tie for crowd control, would this be acceptable to the Cwnnission. AOL Mr. Coleman stated the ordinance provides for "a duly licensed and uniformed security guard at all times dancing is permitted or allowed". Mr. James Barton, 8409 Utica Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga, CA appeared before the Commission stating he was the owner of the property and further questioned the issue of a security guard. The `restaurant supplies four security-type people and the presence of a security guard would be demeaning to the class of the establishment. He suggested the condition be waived. Mr. Coleman rebutted that neither the staff nor the Ccmission have the authority to waive the condition which is an ordinance requirement established by the City Council. Public hearing was closed by Chairman McNiel. Commissioner Toisto,y suggested the person be dressed appropriately with a badge with name and identification of his purpose. Ralph Hanson, Deputy City Attorney, stated that the licensing refers to the state procedure set forth for security guards, a process whit,) can:. be attained through security companies or individuals. The uniform 1 indicates a visual presence which stands out from the customers, I 1 Planning Commission Minutes -9 June 24, 1987 r Brad Buller, City Planner, further reiterated the Commission can not waive a condition that is required by the ordinance,�ufti may take action V, as a matter of interpretation of the condition of wnat constitutes a uniform. _ Chai.-nan McNiel reopened'Ahe public hearing. Mr. . Jim Barton further questioned the interpretation of 'licensed security guarvs. He felt that the City had not reached the point of having an offi;�r protect, us in the restaurant/dance facility-. Commissioner Emerick stated that where alcoholic beverages are 'being served, this particular ordinance is appropriate and supports Council's action. The Commission agreed a uniform did not necessarily mean a police or security guard uniform. Chairman McNiel closed the public heaving. t Commissioner Tolstoy moved adoption of tho resolution with the securi,y guard licensed according to ordinance as interpret.;-J. Commissioners Emerick v,.9nded the motion. Motion carrie. by the following vote: IV AYES. COWISSIONERS. BLAKESLEY, EFSrTIEA, EMERICK, MCNIEL, TOLSTOY I NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ROM. * * --carried H. ENIRONMF.NTAL AND CONDITIONAL USE ::PERMIT 87-Zlt ORANUMM-WTIST - A reques. ,,o e` tabi 1 sh a-5-,9UU—z;,4da7r—e foot church within an existing 11,826 square foot liiti-tenant industrial facility int he General industrial Land Use District, (Subarea 3), located at 9507 Arrow Highway, ;Building 7, Suite H - APH 2O9-021-39. - Cindy Norris, Assistant Planner, presented the staff%report Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Mr. Mark Rushing, 6905 Dakota, Rancho Cucamonga, CA Pastor of Orangewood Baptist Church, appeared before the Commission stating that they have already met with Foothill Fire District and have received preliminary report which requires panic bars and extinguishers. They are getting bids on panic bars and extinguishers at chis time, Beyond that, they are in agreement with the con0ittions and provisions stated in the Resolution. Seeing no further comments,;Zhairman M Niel cicsed the public . raring. Plannipg Commission Minutes -10 June 24, 1987 ;r r'Aaft" 51 conk+ssioner� Chitiea moved .adoption ,of the resolution, Lbanissioner Emerick scxonded the motion. Motion``Was carried by '�hq'fallowipg voter AYES: COfgli$SIONERS: BLAKESLEY, CHITIEA, EMERICK,�MCNIEL, TOLSfay ` NOES: C.*18SIONERSt NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE �y * * * * carried I. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 87-11 - SUMITOMO ~ Tne eve oprT s'-of"Iu multi-fa fly un s o-n acres of .aod within the Medium Residential Distri„t '(�:14 dwelIinr: snits per acre) located on the north side of 19th Street, 350 feet east of Hellman &6qe - APu 201-47 .-07. In addition; the applicant has filed a Tree Rem6ii�,� Permit. ` APpiicant has made a request: continue to a date unsp,-cifred;: .Item removed from the agenda. y J. ENVIROKM ENTAI. ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 13441' - WILLIAM LYON KS resi en iaf :rac su iv sfion o acres u ana - jn 5 sin9ie family lots in the'Lo.�-Medium Density Residential District (4-", `dwelling units per acre) within the Victoria Planned AIM Community, located at the northeast corner of Victoria Park lane and Kenyon Way APR 227-011-07. k 1,, Scott Murphy, Associate P'ianner, presented the staff report. Chairman McNiel �opened the public hear;[ng. Mr. Stephe, '.,:representing the William Lyon Company, appeared before the Commis `tiring they accept the conditions outlined by the staff report. Since there wera ;rr rurt1*0 comments, Chairman McNiel closed the public hearing. Commissioner Tolstey moved adoption of the resolution, Commissioner Chitiea seconded the motion. Motion was carried by:he following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS BLAKESLEY, CHITIEA, EMERICK, MCNIEL, TOLSI'O NOC : COMMISSIONERS: NONE AoSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE * * * * carried' Planning Commission Minutes �11- June 24, 1987 f , Ji r � [ A - ,� K. FOOTHILL. BOULFY SPECIFIC PLl.N any . L. �" WTI -THE FtOTHILL BOP7P:6AD SPECIFIC PLAN ot—re`view and consz er a recommen a ion ert,i ica ono ie Draft Environmental Impact Report for thi Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan project. The`Specific Plan consists of detailed land use regulatiocz and standards for the development along Foothill Boulevard betwr?n Croy t,,Avenua� ajid Haven Avenui' between the 1-15 Freeway and East +venue Otto Krout_il, Deputy City Planner, p.7�sented the staff report. Chain, ;Niel opened the public hearing, Mr. Gard Mitchell, representing the Chamber nO_Commerce, 9330 Base Line Road, Rancho Cucamonga, and served as a meurrer of the hHOC`CoaiitTe-e expressed his only :oncrzsn was with _' the proposed range of permitted uses, ) including the sale- ,,of used, previously owned, or recycled merchandise at ti Iiioraas Brothers Winery site. As chairman of the Economic Development Comittee,.%and member, of the Board 'Jf Direci.rrs of the Chamber of Commerce we support recommendation fox adoption by the Commission to City Council g" f4r. Howard Adler, 2081 business Center Drive, Irvircei CA, new owner of the Thomas Winery, presented comments of the proposed uses 4nd: concerns. They have been working closely with staff and presenters their views and concerns to the Foothill Boulevarc Committee, presenting data prepared by Dr. Alfred. Goldbar. Most of their -suggestions were Alft considered and adopted by the Committee. However, on May 27 1587, additional direction was given by the Planning Commission to the staff and as a result chonyes were made which could hurt the economic viability of the centa-.' The speciality center at the Thomas dineyar q viability depended upon, the ability to attract a mix of varied tenants which included 35-40 percent of the uses fir. Goldbar indicated in 'his report to make the center viable. A major clothing store or boutique would be very helpful in ;Waking the Thomas Winery more viable He questi'ored the exciusion of a furniture store. Mr. Adler further c requested the Commission. give additional thought to the speciality center permitted uses through conditional uses. Mr.. Gil Rodriquez, 1797 Vallejo Way, Upland, CA addressed the issue of a 50 foot greenbelt resulting in down zoning properties. Mr. Ralle quez is the property owner of the southwest corner of Foothill and Vineyard Avenue. Mr. Gary Mitchell pointed out that Rancho Cucamonga has one of the higher average income levels in the county, ,Yet we have the lowest per capita sales. Mr. Mitchell urged the Commission to carefully consider the requests of Thomas Winery since it holds some new economic opportunities. Since there ware no further com�ents, the public-hearing was closed, Planning Commission Minutes _12- June 24, 1987 ^ 7' Chairman Mlckiei stated f9othiII Boulevard Specific Flan is designed to anti nce Faothi Bowft, and by expanding and bea�atifyirrg it, in addition to increasi ng t :p operS va j,ue, Otto Krouwtil,. Deputy City Planner, stated that furniture stores were specifically not included in the, plan,, but conditionally' permitted clothing stores, and not wholesale, warehouse, or discount stores were in the language of the plan. Chairmaq McNiel reopened the public hearing. ; Mr. Jeff Seranxa expressed & concern should theterm "discount" stores )e utea. He believed it would be difficult to determine what is " 'discuune. the determination and interpretation of the Commission of "discount" stores. `rl The public hearing was closed by Chairman McNiel. Brad Buller, City Planner, "indicated that the primary issue for the ; Thomas Brothers-_Winery si'ce is Design and the desire to protect and enhance the hi_to faai.:nature of the site. A secondary mattes- is the control on :the type of uses permitted, The uses permitted are to i. _suppbrt and not W.f. ^st the strong,design goals for the site, Otto Kroutil;Deputy City Planner, indicated tfat additional,inforaation on media 'islands will be placed in the appendix of the document. comro s�ianer Chitiea moved to continue Item K as modified td the July 8, 19s1 meeting for consideration of the adn,ption of the plan. Commissioner E'merick seconded the motion. Motion was carried by the following vote; AYES: COMMISSIONERSt BLAKESLEY, CHITIEA, EMiERICK, WHIEL, TOLSTOY NOES, GOMN15SIPGHERSt NONE `\ ABSENT COMMISSIONERS-. NONE L. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT.,-.OR THE FOOTHILL BOULEVARD SPECIFIC PLAN - a review Roff consi er a recommendation for crertificaiion o-f- e Draft Environmental Impact Report for the Foothill > Boulevard Specific Plan project. The specific Plan consists of detailed land use regulations and standar' for the`�developi*ant along Foothill Boulevard between Grove Avenue and Naven Avenue, between the I-15 Freeway and East- Avenue. Planning Commission Minutes -13- Vane 24, 1987 r 77 Alan Warren, Asoc*ie Planner, presented the staff report on the for the Foothtllr. ahl1evo oifil #''fart. Chairmen McN;iel :opened.'the public hearing; seeing*no comments, the - public hearing wai Ol4+ 4-,. Commissioner 'hulstay ved to Conti nose Item L to the July 8, 1987 meetings motion seconde i by Como.-sf'ner Emeri:ck. Motion was carried by the following vote. t �i Y - AXES: COMMISSTORRS: RLAKESLEY, CHITIEA, EMERICK, MWEL, TOLS7A ;a . . WOES: COMMISSIaER, NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE (� carried 3 NEW BUSINESS ',ry - K► ENVI4tWENtTAL ASSESSMENT AND OEVELOPIOU REVIEW 87tR1 WALB'ANDIAN UOUPo pr�tposa cons ru o Ware oers utngs o a ng ' T!'MO square feet on 6.E5 acres in the+ Geberzl i�tdustrial District, Subarea 5, located sow h of 6th Street -adjacent to an A.T.& S.F. rail spur Nest of Lucas Ranch Road - APN.-20-071-51. Chri: Westman, Assistant Ilanner, presented, the staff report. ' He pointed out that in regards to Recomendation 6. in the-Resolutton, the .. Design Review Committee felt that with extra l andscapi n,g an the west property lire of the adjacent property which is under the same ownearshtp: ' as the project site,: it would be approp►*iate to waive`, the five yard setback, Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing, Mr. Mark Elliott, an employer the Nalbandfan' Group, appeared before the Commission to answer any question3 or address any comments. Since there were no further public comments, the public hearing, was E closed. N .. Commissioner Tolstoy moved, Commissioner Chitiea seconded adoption of the resolution. Mcition was carried by the following vote: Planning Commission Minutes -14- June 24,,,1^87 w„.. Y41, _ 3 AYES^ CO l O E $LAKESLEY, CRITIEA, EMERICK, MCNIEL, TO UST 0Y NOES: COIR:tISDNR ,� ON ABSENT: C4WISSIONERs ONE Yi t Brad Buller, City Planner uhnaunced the cancellatfdm of the" ctoria Lakes tour on ,tune 2v7 L87.. Two other datp-s 4ere :diseussed, 'T/18 and 7/25/81 for reschedulinI of the toors. Mr.Aarla,n:Bienn,,: consatltaot-, would be available tar.the :our. PUBLIC C"IENTS ci There were namublic comments. ADJOURNMENT motion: Moved by±JTolstoy, seconae* by Emerick, unanimously carried, to Wourn. ` 10:30 p.m. Planning Commission Adjourned. F Res're-tfully submitted, # Brad Buller Deputy Secretary it ' Planning Commission 'iinutes -15- June 24, 1987 4 h �--- CITY OF RANCHO CU'CAMONGA c��o STAFF REPORT O z DATE: August 12, 1987 lsrr w,. TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission, FROM; Brad Buller, City planner BY: Scott Murphy, Associate Planner SUBJECT: TRACT �kW58 DESIGN REYIEW - WILLIAM LYON COMPANY The ecTi sign --ev ew of building elevations and plot pans for a previous ', approved tract map"cQVsisting of 202 lots on 98.51 acres-of land in the W Aiu►a Residential (4-14 <* dwelling units er._sre) within-;"the Victoria Planned CasanGnity located on the west sidW� f Fairmont Way, south of, Highland Avenue - APN 202-911-01J' I. PROJECT AND $ITE 1jESCRIPTION. A. Action Requested: Approval of building elevations and plot per• B. Project Density: 7.08 dwelling units per acre J c, C. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North - vacant; oar- um esiOential- (4-8 dwelling units per acre) South - Graves Park and Vacant; School and Park Site, Low- Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) East - Vacant; Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units Per acre) and Nedimr.-Nigh Residential (14-24 dwelling units per- acre) West - Vacant; Deer Creek Flood Control Channel, Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre), and Low Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) 0. Genferai Plan best nations: � a3ece'-Brie - LOW-Ma-01UM Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) North - Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) South - Low,14edium Residential (4-8 6#ell'ng units per acre) East - Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) { and Proposed Elementary Schonl West - Flood Control, Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units f per acre) and Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) .4 ITEM A rn o PL.ANNL: 'i CISSt�� t S;TtAFi: REPOitT TELAG °tC0< .13 u8, ILtm t,Yok-cowAN'l , August Page 2. II. ANALYSIS: ll: t A. hack round: Dn May 27 985. the Planning Comaisston approved' t e rem el'opeept !?lan for_theM Vitto 4a Groves Yi17Faga 'The Area D'eyelrc�pmcenu ptin-:established the futdre Taind use patterns and ei roo a f n system for the Droves Village. ort Nov _', r 3 3, 1985� the Plabning doxiBisssion appio(ed' Tehiativi r'�adt 13022 which established lq ger parcels for future subd v€Si nsi. on May 28; 19%; the P1a hiitg C iss�ion a pxoved Tentati�te Tract 13058 for the Avealopment of 200' single family lots and!-two common loiisr within the Groves Village. B. General: The applicant is proposing a zero lot line product or ,s tract, The architectural program consists of three floor plans, one single story and two 2-story, ranging in size �._ from 970 square feet to 1,335 square fe6L in area. Each floor plan has three elevations. The applicant is also proposing a series of lot line adjustments. with the Desi&",)Review submittal. The-., lot line adjustments are necessaryl;ta accnodate the' unit type being F; proposed by the applicant. Staff has revivwed the adjusted lot lines and feels the request is in compliance with the uriginel apprpval of the tract, the Groves Area Development, and the :. Vig Aa Planned Community. C Design Review Committee: ,;The Design Review Committee (Emerick, BuT erInitiallyviSe6d the proposal on May 7, 1987. The original elevations proposed by the applicant consisted of wood siding with river rock and brick elements. The Committee was primarily concerned, with the lack of architectural variety shown with the proposed buil&ng elevations and how this tack of variety detracted from th,6 vi=0 quality of the street- scene. To enhance the overall quality of the architectural program, the Committee recommended the following revisions: 1. Provide a fourth house plan with at least three differing fr'jnt elevations. 2. Eliminate the use of wood siding and introduce greater use of stucco on the building fronts. A Mediterranean architectural style wool-d be appropriate. 3. Provide window trim around all windows. PLANNING REPORT TRACT NO.. 1466 - WTLLIAM LYON COMPANY 12, 1-gal, Page 3 4. Provide front yard courtyard walls of variable heights between 3 and 5 feet throughhou the tract to help sitfigate the effect of blank,\zera lot line walls`obtiadjacent units. S. Provide block �vall as opposed to wrought iron fencing at the rear property lines of Lots 1 through 6. 5. On Lots 109 and 178, the two-story house setbacks are only five feet from property lines on the trail side of the lot. (Staff, notes that Lots 61, st. 71 and 72 alto have a five:0'40t setback from the trail). At these loca'-ions, an intensified landscaping design wither the trail should be provided to soften and Y�ffer the appearance of the house dues to the clGZ proximity to the.public �> open space (see Exhibit F ). -qn July 16, 1987, the Design Review Cows ttee iTolSttry, � Emerick, Coleman} reviewed the revised Mediteeranean style I' architectural elevations. submitted by the applicant. The elan$ incorporated the use of entry walls of varying heights and, on all elevations, incorporated additional architectural elements at the entry to the unit. As a result. .the Design � Committee recommended approval of the elevations. Review III. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the Design Review of Tract 13058 through adoption of the attached Resolution with conditions. Re fuly submitted, Br er cityanner I. BB:SM:to Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Location Flap Exhibit "B" - Site Plan IJ Exhibit "C" - Landscape Plan Exhibit "D" - Building Elevations Exhibit "E" - Lot Line Adjustments Exhibit "F" Trail Setbacks Resolution of Approval with Conditions �a 9, s . r ; x .77 1 t'AT,SLtWOM MOCK WALL_ j• � a wmw � g�,{y�p� a ; COLC7irl wT l�1ffiw�F�� wr '! El mu IZZI cttr�WCCO FENCE Y f+IOM'alwl�CwfBn]l�E � Y\ , '��! •�'��. P � `�. awipp WeM TRW Mh - r M R G CITY Q T MENt: " ir cooS e �"R"_ .�'' .✓may t � � � :=. MTW CITY C)F Y rrE1i= PLANNNG t { ! A^-"((1 HLL4i'['t__ '• cr r r. - . R :. -� - � �' � • � ?:+'w`". ,j� �;?- �, !>�Y�iii poly! '!tla �' I_ �Eai 7eP • � l s s .ri � � 1. IrY t `x r ,. x ti ..-•'t .,, �-tom;.••"��•�'�M � �, 1�� - �: ' .�s� ` . ;may. _•. ,""" •~"`�; �. .�V Tom• +"-" `yf J•^ f.�~ .e '�� � f t`` � . f'V Y ILI 'r rNM `r s m+ •� `Ir r -.'r} Wh.JO i•+1[ET ttCE . ..t.0"aMxy � -t ~xta•t tiff x+ J ....ter^r • �'+/ .e x'M.'t-w.nr w'.u.+.•..• �♦ �oTc Tw ��� %1Al*GkV4 ca.a W*A CITY OF rr ,1 RANCHO F.r�= - pl-,Im, } -- A f"S fs romc�❑c� - - "'�•.� �f fir.. �,,�,•'�,,,r f,�- DI,AN � MUMATION!III ii C'"ry 01 Q 4 � s i Ll n QUO ©� A s � PLAM ' SL$bATIONt! rRAN r. CITY or, C`+ UCASMOINGA r 4 f7 6t �r 4 Lf 4 �. ►.« RLIRVATIiON4 r. CITY Qr" TT �ry ° fey iCC,�4= - r fit---d I :1 �"aiNlO LOT LsrE •'' "`� +, � ���t� Ei PAOPOSF.D LOT LM • e ~ a-.ir� WT WE 7AMRMi0M A6i5A CITY Or �. QJO * ,t � TTsjrrj\ri •ice �w i. �Y �,, a my ��r r��• •� � f y fli �• �?�i _ [_t LOT U E i PgGIR0.iEp LOT LrJE f QT U E M ATSftM APMA CITY Of a RANCH CUCAjdM( NGA K-A-",NILNG DIVU,)N )q7- R F ' y � r r i. ; y ,. � "' �� .,.:... _. r�r 4' ' ,� �� � t �,G„ �` � � �. .� � c-; i.` '. i.1, � Wit' �. �G`-'/` � _ . ire- - � . *� ,. err';-- �, l' �aM � A 'w \� - �� i' �. • � �� �� -��'. .� < s ._ •y_ ` A.. i i ' ^• J .' - � ... 11 it � � ., ^..�_.,_. �• s �� �. � •��' .r- M's' t £� :` ,. � _ �. T:'.:- a �r �, �► R� ,� .,_ .� '; �� �� � I �. �� . i �"� � .+ � � � � I .■ ■r ■ I�' , � -- �� � � �! I - � � ;, :': r• �.: '' ,,. i�a��r ._ �► :.=. . � �� j� ��• ,_ �. �� �� - � '� f �, -�+�...� �� � � .__ . � :: o �-�= �� .. .: r� ,_ . r _.� ..: � � ,- �- ra, s 1 G RESOLUTION NO. ", A RESOLUTION OF TllE RANCHO C1IGAAONGA`PLANTING 160MI-SS-LON APS�ROYhNG' DESI61"REYIET FOR TRALT 410. 13058 LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OR rAI MONT WAY, SOUTH' OF'HIGH1,49D AVENUE THE hiED UK RES'I�DENTIAI. DISTRICT - ARM: 202-911-01 WnRcAS, on the 1st day of April, 1987, a complete application was filed by-706 William Lyon Company for review of the above-described project; and WHEREAS, on the 12th day of August, 1987, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission held.a meeting to consider the above-described project:. NOW, THEREFORE, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission x�psolved as follows: t•. SECTION 1: That the following can be met.,, 1. That the proposed project is consistent with.-,the- objectives of theiGeneral Plan; and-f, 2. That the proposed use is in accord with the objective of the Development Code and the purposes F, of the district in rhichIthe site is located; and 3. The the proposed use is in compliance with each of athe nd applicable provisions of the Development Code; 4. That tha proposed use, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental/i� the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. SECTION -2: That Design Review for Tract 13058 is approved subject to the following conditions and attached Standard Conditions: 1. Prior to the issuance of building permits, a fourth floor plan with elevations shall be 'raviewed and approved by the Design Review Committee. 2. 2yior to the issuance of building permits, an amended tract map incorporating all lot line Ask adjustments shall be recorded. A-l0 g u a'4 PLA�19l1 � �1 'lOIi.N0. TFT' 1�� E�I�G - k11:I.1kH LYON AugtlSt Page 2 e 3.° lVtndptirt trig; h41-1 be provided around all 4indows. T 1e r 'plans shall to m,*e and ap proved by the iri yerer-prior to the issuance'of bull ding 4.. Decorative °blAck "mall, as opposdd to wrought iron. find q, s�sa`i beer : ire .at a rear oaf 'Lots 1 thra gh 6 r Th1.e :-- ei;�t shall be shOwnw on the find 'Undtbape n �qhis su6Y-q. t.ta revi.ew and'" apP �vel by the iy P hex• prior,to the issuance,` of b ilding permits.. - 5. The I.andscaptag within, the traf! adjacent to Lots 61, 72, R, 109 and i�$ sfsaIl be int€�nstffed to soften an buffer the eilings due to their elpse' proximity toy the pubUc open spate. The, revised plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Ci#y Planner prior to the issuance of buiz...g peviks.. 6. Front yard landscaping is reglfl.red between courtyard walls and street and shall include, at a minimunt, one 16-gallon •size tree, one 5-gallon size tree, r -)needed ground cover, shrubs, and a permanent irrigation syste__* to be installed by the developer prior to occupancy. The requirement shall be in addition to required street tries, 7. All applicable conditions of Tentative Tract 13058 approval, as contained in Resolution 86-67, shall apply. R APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS " TH DAY OF AUGUST,;,1987. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCMONGA Larry e , Chairman ATTEST: Brad Buller, epu y cre ary pr �� '. _ en Paye',3 . I. Brad BuTjzir, �i7epRty Sect^etary a1 the Planning.Coowfts$fon of they Cf�j of Rancho Cuc p�onga, do�$reBy ce-ti tfaat the low oip RSSo;at.on cgs u��;y an d regularly tntraduee as ed� aau adopted b Cl-y of Rancho Cuba y h P�i`ann W9}U let a �1-syul.-I,r ia�e %141' of tf�`e;Plafi01.Qg on the IBth day of 498`L, by, ther fol lowpng, Voto-Ao- i-t: AYES: COM.;,isI NOES _ COWISSIOREt2S: ABSENT: COW-ts-SIONERS: iI r % _ n ,._ ._,�'+ k:9d�.'4trI�• �ve..,.e.._�L$4a+1'�.,_. _z. ... .. .. _ J.adw°�"3lSi�.s.1. � � trt Y r MM CC Y Ot.tlryL� �rNNN4r�tiL 4` `Y 'yyy�tlN Ni AYO i'A� asY .. �$ +tl$gi 8.2 Hs Z r , ell s 15 tl a lit r pox # GG ... yy s is Y .0 NY. .ra JEx 4!1117-2 s. Lk ig �/ . � V � M• �N cN MM Y •r Y g s Y�$r vO S.tl..N. �• xg S$q`IA E IZU a milt '� ■" yIF Y� s^y�. s�"Mi11� [ N �iw �,"S]�. N^ ! $ li �Y^ N�♦C^soy'^ �"'� ;It,'• lt ♦ r .. ■i`.� � ,s```_� a re s._C"sf l% ISG Im �[ N �" p fill— f i u tV s Y $, a ! at Oyu! Yl�p .-w�^ r 'v. itis Y ��� y us -3, p Ny: wN� $ y .3 ry Sy ?i$i I rill MI > fit $ 't» .� Y jr^ fi x it. Ajxr `` ! US O _ ^r "r^ �1 p� Y +fig r= 2gg 3i$ > ¢ 4l jis y�r IY.yyY gw.� ii{.w � b,. Y ^� y �l�A��p�. �l OO��.N.Y�� �pL^.•aV LL•as `r{y� A a y'c r! .�Ft+ o Ny L.e.� iialltY News>a'M a V a� �9 O �F� !■4`Ltc++! V ma's .a. ! � y }}a PIS .5\tT,� ZZ oY+ c« a$ ����0 cc y`y M YreT =� ^O V 4LL c�cF C" ,99p if.-.i-g^ MIS SO�1.'. s a aI IN . Ise ,� \ •It* e= C3£a ^eY��" 7ZYa � S i1• Erb E�yia yyi MYelL - �iw 4R = ....FV\�i1 nCN Y.riL'rNK ii�. tv »O Pf �► N. 14 lam, \q ii w r It _ pQiz g OS `� iHs chi= nunz y+�t ^+ �� x: t" �`qig GIsxI qu" Lam• ! 'ti y�. w.y u ti ' �` 3 �w a s SS r 1 Mr s6 •a UPI aM x Hsi � � $�� '� Ira= �S�- ���= E371 a fixif i ' pis «�� 4 1J Hi Iv uj Ulf rp0 +� � �/tGN .. Y A« "�� �s'J ► :�Z_ .I O7 y 1 s -1 l ..+ �1� �� fill, NN ~ « Nam` IL wig 206 N rs : r� mil 'Irk " "s 2L _ w -� s: mow W aww + � �' fie/ ail ga s a $ ^ «let t.1 .ova _r U- b : I-c I$off 7 g s- _ ^Ian N. aii 1t 1x» 111% ! ! ! I ► I ! ! ' , N�11 o¢yY` � I a L. ri It ,. L �� ss u Y A -. p■■C �N�M ML-j�LiM� >f 41 a Z3 • I f f Y autmj ±yl� �y' ! w= 4�'Q�.. gg!�§ s ililk ta -ism � . O�w �1 y e C� ^ ` Y�Vg. � 1S6 O�yL��� yJT ��0yy:93 YiAV O o�7,Y� al ��� Y aaiY vV' C� Is o.. a N W V ^Oi CEO ®Y 8 tl w.sa �.�S•y }O8�yy yY y If flit SIN�^r� yM" 0j11�w Yu �L Y r, E MCaZ Y� �Si$`Y`, 4 N `. V ` ays �y6Q La„rt st L.� Ffil�CV. v _ �� •� y O Q P VO� �� Y �yjMiAI 02 23 I Vic 31 , a V.i F 1 '� dam. V VR+• yy MAP ii`ywrY M yy g� g `� 6Y O-Zea+ aS S�1i .ewi � ! w � IolI "s �4 !f i4l 3 �i ^Yl � Q ae m�lP'. MAC®_ E iet Ii ,". a $ w g 'HE yr vT f, f in 1 62 l : ryC tip t Y d Of Y� N J.iM s. yyp i �6 Na 9YM Y us sit oL C `QTV Y V il' Or III .1Z9 n ': z_ � $ w Still dim ua �.^ L i. �► .$Y o�3 'E®�u '� ��°r$ lye ggY�r ?� L«tCf3a 9we Is 21 �gl..� u " cS ff .2 �� �� Y � i. V�IL G 4a Mp L Mp N Y •F6 ♦..141 -2 Y A Y Q C 77-7 77,371 ' - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA r �� STAFF REPORT U � ? DATE: August 12, 1987 1977 i TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad. Buller; City Planner BY: Chris Westman, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL, ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 87-07 SARKISSIAN - A proposal evoop a 1Z-89a square foot r re aai I cen t• including a 1,932 square foot restaurant on 126 acres of; land, in the General Commercial District located at the scuthwest corner of Malven Avenue and Arrow ' Route APN 209-041-49, 50, yN I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. 'Action Re uested: Approval of Conditional Use Permit, site p an and elevations, and issuance of a Negative Declaration. B. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning -or-7tTs=Sing ee Family Residential; Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) South - Chino Basin Municipal Water District; Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) Gast - Neighborhood Center; Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) West - Jack-in-the-Box; General Comercial C. General Plan D-rsi nations: rojec e - General Commercial North - Medium Re-Aential South - Low,Restdbntial East - Low Residential West General Commercial 0. Site Characteristics: The` project site is vacant with no' significant vegetation and, is surrounded �v existing development. To the north is residential, to the 'east is the Neighborhood Center, to the south is the`'Chino Basin municipal Water District site and to the west is Jack-in=the-Box. Partial street improvements have been completed on both street frontages. k ITEM B. �+AFIKI F REPORT «r CO RT� H G4E ' EiLf1 87-07 SAWSSIAN C; a page E. Parkina;Calculations Number of Number of Type Square Parking Spaces Spaces of Use 'a a Ratio Required Rrpyi�ded Retail Commercial 9,374 1/250 37 38 Restaurak)t 1,832 1/100 18 i8 Medical 846 1/200 4- 4 Furniture Store 846 1/500 2 2 Total 61 62 I II. ANALYSIS: A. Bac__kg_Nound:_ The project was originally subm-fitted for review it - o�njun`ction wish a variance request for, in the average landscaping. and parking setback requirements. The Cor�issiort, directed the applicant towork with staff on eliminating the Variance through r:,adesignng toe site plan. The site plan has been redesigned to provide required setbacks. The total building area was reduced approximately 600 square feet., the northernmost parking spaces were brought down to a 30 foot minimum distance,cI-Mm the face of the curb, the restaurantLretaii building was moved an additional two feet to a 47 foot d scatr�'Erom the f ze of"the curb on Arrow; Also a landscape/hardscape area at the west side of the restaurant/retail'building is included to provide the average landscaping requ?�rement. k C. Desi -Aeview.Committee, The Design Review Committee (Chitiea, Wcmiei, eman) reviewed the project o» June 4 and June f8, 1987 and forwarded it to the Planning Commission with the following recommendations: 1. A detail of the plaza area should be provided for review by the Design Review Committee prior to the issuance of building permits. 2. Brick veneer, stucco and Ilat concrete roof tile were de#.ermined to be the most appropriate j material combination. A color and material sample, board should be provided for Planning Copnission approval. 3. the plastic screed shown on the arcade columns should be removed, , Arc C01� S F IIf';87-07' gRKISSIAN a� ..a C. iEn�+i ro rental AsO tom. rfi�s and LI of the I0tiAl *t s�g udy aver ti 1ir co R e e nn ono n�f�icant��nn t�aue beef_�ound relanted to t o cohstru ian of, Sher propose.�is u�ldxng,. III. FACTS FOR FINDT1 S The proposed arse is:'consistent with the . p era n ev o r Code. The building des gn.-and sitie °,. tarf, togethep � �'�eco nded conditions of, approva'i, wii'1 not be , ' detrimenti' to At publYc heae7tr, safely ox� raelfare, br ma�terxally in�lir�ous ,propertie a i�mproveme`nt3 inn the ar- a� and' i compliance wi tit the i�eel`opiwerit Code and othern app f i cab Ee ttCi }' standards. 'a N. RECOMMENDATION Staff recownds that Kanning Commission approve on 4 i,Qna'I Use Ferdait 87-07, and issue a Negativer Declaration through 'adoption of the attached Resolution of Approval ' with Conditions.. ff Res full it d., �. Br B City fanner BB:CW:te _ Attachments: Exhibit "A" Location Map Exhibit "B" - Site Plan Exhibit "C" - Elevations Resolution of Approval with Conditions } 1 i. z # Mt1iNi IiHllt�f • ZtNINHUl t1WFICf �_.::�.. Aw- row .44 a k WNmop 1 efen si:Ag tfYR'C { ar�MMG S [ S.• I (MIN4inN , �' t6r�enni•! w'i�o�u we nE w tn.nw i NORTH CITY OF RAN ITE CL'CAI�I�Ny 1- -- LE: .. $k ww 77 AML i lk 4 � C „�,Y 1- f f6fAla/AIRAc"A NI 1 1 -- ,� it twoIM 4. [`MTH CITY OF RANCHO C G �2 n G � 'N" � O TITLE= pLkINID(YL7 N d�L f E,YHTBIT--_,�_SCALE- �.-.._ ,, . - , r n \� �-�ivmm='- ftTr E2 -E�, nnRrp �L�K:Re L aaNT: -._ t}�Nctc.wt�o,N _ Ncrt% tllvAfIC7N (,M.IIN 6UItpINl,.j Y,• jI •wfatll�Fmlwl ale( \. - �MRd1a r}fal� 1bIMIRM�f�MIUr `\.- NMH CITY OF RANCHO CUCA'Vjoy,,&44 - PLA:�i:�tt �:. =L -► PLANNING �JI�rLSSM EXC-I161`Y': SCALE:LE: REMUTION NO, 1` A -RESO LiTT4N THE RANCHO C JtMONGA PL4NNI�tfiG COPlMISSIDN APPROY G: EO MIONl4l,. USE p9,RMIT NO. 87-07 FOR A NE�HOOCiF�tlCJD 'C ERCIAL.CERNTM,LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST -QF' ARROK' AdUTt ANR MAI:Y,9N AVENUE IN THE GENERAL. COMMERCIAL. DISTRICT �}APM 24g-041-d , 50, WHEREAS, an the 29th day of April, 1.467,/-a'`complete application was filed by Kri•kkar Der Sarkissiar for review of the(above-described,project; and ' WHEREAS, on .the 12th d��y 4jf Aµgu�t, 987, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission held a�*, pubii,c wring to Consider the above4escribed project. follows: NOW, THEREFORE, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission resolved�as SECTION 1: That the following findings can be met: 1. That the proposed use is in accord with the General Plan, the objectives of the Develo ►nt Code, and the p•70ses, of the iistrict in Which r`,t ,site is located. 2. That, the proposed use, together with the conditions ;s applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, :or welfare, or materially injurio��,s, to properties or improvements in the vicinity. 3. That<the proposed use complies with eac►i of the applicable -- provisions of the Develnpment Code. environmen -an at aThat this egative Declaration ect l o e isissu SECTION 2. issued o on adverse impacts on the August SECTION 3: That Conditional Use Permit No. 87-07 is approved subject to e o owfg conditions: PLAMNIHG: 1. The plastic screeo shown on the avcade columns shall be removed. 2. The plaza areas adjacent to the restaurant building`shali incorporate seating, iaxtured bardscape. special landscaping (specimen size accent trees, shrubs and ground cover) and trash receptacles and be reviewed by the Design Revie* Committee prior' to the issuance of building permits. ' I x p f �tAl � v a RQ IMMS11AN AtigustT �° 9 y r, Page 2 r f Ei NE IN4. ,1 I. _An i n-111Gnu fee as ountributi-ap to the future und_argxa¢ur tin � Of t e1� 119', a+iewhea .-,Utility (tel oom n oatit�o', ` eTectr ) n fire opspsre° side of Arr`as�«Raufe shf1 be. ' paid to d City odor to, the issuance of bui'tding r, permits3 71,4 fees sha L*be one-half the City ad4,pkted jq f �' amoc;nt` t l hg frog the can V, a = lvark fteoue ., _� t� they nest �r'��tjr.boundaryx 2. Notice of Ttotfo fo artrtor` loin the tightfis and . LandseapA ng lli s�ric�i mall be fil ed,wf jh the Ci ty C6,unci 1 prior to Ittuance of buildi;3 perafts. Ji d APPROVED AND ADOPTED T'BIS 12TH DAY 6r AUGUST,' 1997, PLANNING COMlM!?SSIaN 'Of T�tE CITY OF RANCHO UCAMONGA,: J BY: rarWYTTWKel, Chai rwn ATTEST: �,—,Fad 8511er"; Deputy ecre ary y I, Brad Buller, Deputy Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, fit r-=�sreby certify-that the toregoing Resolution was duly and regularly' introduced,.:passed, and adapted by''the"Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cu,-Am6nga; at a regular Meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 12th day of August, 1987, by the following vote-to-wit: 1 AYES: COMMISSI RS: ? NOES: COMMISSIONERS: 'nm U�NT: COMMISSIONERS: r� �� v� e$ryaryip "a `�3.'�yy 1 T4 vo.Cvu V V)f 6 �,� � L Y�•�N NLOyO Y d S� � ^A 4 WN<Y V .Z' _ '�w/n enox a« «�• .Y' a"y�� '�jta«u eRYcp.«.s. w � YQy=' 3N�� Np6S t5 �� �`d = y� E C'.Y_< �Ap=''3 {Y ■N. /l g V R Y w 3 �G V L N V4 N 4$1�Q Yr� LI L V•.Y,� ECY q �` 6 L's YYYI`�■N yNy _.uQ■ 4�yVy .21 t al �.'�-IIL .nY p. GtSSaT�I%aY Y$�..4�,�j G� `f■��N �;� ., c j14+�om` � ■�..� � . 21 r� .Y. COiw sy Vim/ 4 ~yN pY !E-A _ p `. i T� M$"aD.. a,.w YP YIn oV XS > �i i �u •. � � M4i9 LYl CMOO .�. O OS■ o rffis fS�a of C�»foV�y�' ga4Y¢x YVC == L YS 4V yy L h! p a M M 6mef 6�qpi y r Q OOWPP v N 4 Sol 313 "o CYO ' . SIZE' OS O ' 'O.T3 +Oi M:+. uN.Qr •.,a'w�.Q.+ �. -a S. Yi�uwVM p ,t T: y� "y't U Zy i Syi ' p � �TA `* .�I4 3's �'► ',$3i N +1� ^'°�Y N ri ..N.oc Fit— e'��"¢5y4 Yo+'g4 11S'''_a i� TL 'O rCw^� wit^ F.M� TM 1y.� a N A �t}'.oQpy�'4- T,u.$�.�T '��..r.�g`. ate} �.� 'c�i��� +=s�• �� �Y'�'o �c� ygi � 6pq' `�r'iN`�,.a'*,T$,�+# N,y�,.�`.jos,4 T�'� .• 22 T W ♦f• 0 I 34n •�c. T-2gNM�y C n_,.9LyV.Hy833' ' lf�" � �L$�= C �m0 rSa ' ug3s: t Y yA F � 1 � 5$42 .= E !,% � iV S vn 'e1'��cy.'.S �Yy y, �Ys•� i .+ aY..=11wYq• wCY oy! rue3i�'.r O�OY�6�Nawii�g�� Ya cg Tsa". C ' CC 1 T1w..uw� ?I Sr. 'arm +-T T p•!Mr YtOt N Y.Y ,Q �T r.� pL�l1 y3 tleVC MMY` SC■ Y �`■M�?M Y$ Cam= Yyu~•i TL we ^N l'' 4N OM¢ y1y'tYUtl�{ aTa•.SY pp MO L� ...a T. � � �.` �WR_pY • '.Y t+1CtNL •V.•qo Y�: SIM YN T5 LIZ ��i _'� .`�v��.� s� ffrl- M �GyO�LYCO'MY c up � 2. Q r .3p� ��g N`. Y U.t 4V~ i„aCKis Tw. N •.•N � Y C Yw�M P�� �i[�yC1Ci� Y Wv�� 0.V f ySy'�CC �,p kw.1. O-1 `S'S 'CCVQCS p�1yyY 6«: C y L 7 �� O` r 6' i,T�+ 'ibis 6+.l tlp, V C C L� pppp s L y O p{F.r jO1_SC N T2�.CN wyo r '4[a MCT7L TMc.L is rM y CN 712 VdaO a sO w2 t1. ,S j 1`S LCa.` w tl�} OSTNY6 O C 0 Y • yaes Vaw.we OYAV4+ + M YT y efN yca N U N �� CY YY aM � i 4 9 Y 1� •w•�.,C� Now yS0 IIw. � p�L 4 i l+ n t-sNa s .US rn`!� 'c3 # �`a3"4"�' iLN�N �c�s..i oft`C6C��.Lo �.ugl1t`,,ysy3 s=`q'y Y�� 1. yyYN V N �� �`j•q QmiYi6 W +C w6 M.��. y S`y¢��r�E LO q � I+ � L Ji a Y Y L r.•4 N•O Mil Y r� L :':�V{� LLJ NY �eR StlL emu "per uBy•`.^ NNO•+'�� P4"�.�CCN� a, .^-«�'� .. a 0.0 w ♦4100^`N4yOyA.♦t ^ ^aMON NK�I� t.t�VpY • N . -, wY . LM Z c�Myyyq' q� �CN$� a'. {nnM,A ^v0 Y�ccC ay Y� �.Y..#S�i�L4p �C^dM� MC vO. �y�` M� yMV�� Lr�NpBpV A.L `i^�1i NN OY NiG O^y^ ��1 w R yyL YYS .Cy +a 1C Ey `.G $aM^{L,YY $ V• ;Q fib ,O L O O Y Y C L • O p.•rr rs0 6 t!� W G" C ` N ci$., N ` 17' +VY 'ISE �Y tom. ~g - '� C:may x 1r5`L'y"O'M Yy PR� T03$ WY ag! ��ll Vq R. / Ll V• ynt•�'R N t6l 0 ,C 4 �Y IOC Ow.p p' yC-.�y" ^•M iYNN 1r` .OL1: +9�Tp�D . R1 01 y N L i.mix M�" �I E *I M l2 M 6 _►r. • ��4 41 .n` CYYA C■ _CY N� NGOELL�" � C N�.N•N .(qn. +�M ANY lei QlIYI.q �i YI GY i1Y i.�l�Y. < O�.GM 1 cx .arc �c aY . .1°. Qr3s � _� a•.az!j 1!z. y c a-eeN• L+v�ec $ M.rT �. YL wJ�to w.^. `:.gin. r.''i.ip.`�g 1-0 • 6`L V C'� aY�C mer G • ~W vN pN ar Cya$ $t e� Yq1 � .� 6 Z cFi r' +x 1gg'^ y'rYN, ��11 CA 1=yd Y ii. 06 i( P'M+l1 SN�`dZN>4 � �.0 NWVW G<O L E^ Y ^� Y.COH V ■pp }N^L� a w. cc ko- r Eta NY Jtl ^ �t0siC i{V�E yN�g � pia 4�sQY _ xr WCL iE O " V N. OR as M ^14 g i E Z-,j3 j •`'yYpvu ��NCG=Qpp■ Qp 6 Y Y �l cc �l G pV y Y C t p p Y Y ^•�„4 V`■!.i L•s �00 N ^N_C {O`I WyyL Yy» i^ ,CY> D� aYi O, Iptgu`NwNV Y1 yCN>4•i Y r WO.(� nt Ngvyyyy yl^ aN+O. �i ^` 47yyrqt C nY•W • .�(C} Mon CO Mw. VP`.N r Ype~± 6C rw GL�VI rf C ys �l C v tzy• C u•:SEo c4Jt <'v.s 1=CNa.'iJ{$.' 1 77 920 'Yc..'.G�i `4 Q ~� ^yi(M OYNY8QTj �-WO,uF�Y. W Cgp • 9yCq 0,f��`�C •_�,?tL Y N� Nw :•� ui M_ yy� W . 6 L X ��. y ���" :_$a %�xay�a;• »q.. x- y =aate - tlOM' so?grs, s �nyµti gain qw. YM at Y g Y n g 15 Y'. w�. tom. ^z=w ri it.. sr u ri p '� �T. .4 $t �jd~x,, ♦tls� is o�gN�ap ^c CN't 'O� ^ tl�04 N � y G aPNtiO ^rAS Y:1. N .2N.- . r-0 Ctl WC�}�.'�i i'w tpa), I, m _ tiz �OC TL Y ap �+ N W i.cd .fit ,� ga `..� a N�4' «L� OS W uTP�ff 1 Y6 bb 4 4"'V m }. ' ;�N =� Ci A�s( r y wyyyY 9 N,K r'R pN�Q tj L N'�1 p v Y gyp• Icy C1 ��9M � tl LCr �YYYq �yp 'rj �• �f c1"l�' �N 3'yOY.Y J,1 �{y7Ap, y.y 'BN 'tl ��pt yy yy O6'R M L NYrY C M QQq �y� �'S r��goi - •C W�cde {q�..� �Qy�O.y. y"� VY� RNVGC ^ G Y. �. •L7fQ^ IL w � S wyNaw G"i sf V^ 1.�+ M w a+ '^ Q O .. ...•-f t L OB wLw�- �p•p 4• tl�i i V C 4 ~i 'aS Cli�. Y i ' "L� � O. pp �'1 yM� Y pry 7 '��.i ... YaC 61C tlga V0. ��V H Y'N. �.t . ='i 2�r J 6 r C q 0000 47 T H O p�Oyp y�Fpp.6«LC 'an� ur C�tYY L ('i« G ¢. Nl.Y bl. ppf c � p eLiCJ =jyp N X CO, C `9�yy��'u T .. 4M •f0.� LLY. �M \ 9�yy� N � Y � � 9^O� 7A LLM _�p« � i��Np '�Y e Mc w4m a�rd a V3 V Y Vqy N .y Y if�.~'1� aL 4 O O V @ ^ C«G G y O M �1 {g� 4 y■C 1 ZIT _ r� v�{�oY4tlp. it i Yy�M^S Off~. C Lw y �� NI 1•iti l�' tp. tp R { m-iS c.+cY .' �. � c`X� aYEp. b GA.Cp..�l Yy.��� oC to.Y,v pe «� �M. �Ny 4 Y�e :F Lp. :1 RFA�C'r g111665 ^Z p12 Lit jai Y «« u� u sa^4 �.: C^•�i g. 6 p. » Na. .. NN7^S • +fie` " m�� .a $ - woN veiw:VYaI s+ M O ■� ♦ $Y Lt7 p0.p LA. �_Y. {��{ y «Y ^ y Cp0 � w��® 4 r^ ...777 y e1 Pe _ «p 44 3 � /, p tr~ ^N.: yyg� �� yyyy V V e� q~�yl paL � LN A Z* QQQC HHd ^ .VLi a S -a av' MOO.{ N W iw` w' N 4���Y. N � $ •. y V yOV yY 1 O��P pi �t a p+uC. b Ci N Y C• 4 N N a w GN C•0 y3 ly bb s. N CW yO.'iyY �•f N O �p it ~ �SO §aC0CpVAtl 1� yy ��Cy _E `~. I i.�w�+ .Tf ��^ w �� Y•py yYjpi�.i 1 KM ` SE 1� JO i•� O.4f w. w `V C`�V G `l � €ca .0. Q C b0 yyb 9 Ii _ � N W� �bo ■V ^Oa pVY ali l.. '11L�M»�V 'fin�Y wN Ytil be N� V•N V�yb N� Tp;� .a0 �Y '. nay 4� a•`oSy�Ln Ya a«v a� yw ryy &� »i �" �� P �o � =o� �� �iql ..Y�O •�� �t _O q G �j Math Off ! 3(y,�` V W �S's alb � a _ `�l q''r "ry aX Q. a � ValN p O.N -43 C 'moo 'PZ E$• Y411 ,a 1« � i y A4ppi s°a gEEN pa— Nil emu... ` {p a. 0 .s� - ba9• kq:u \L\ n_ Cb� � ^V«b u ��a (•� N� 04 J t ! N «b V 7pY iK �O eV 4w p C A C O Y v C a R 6 e 4 OYO e�q 4 C�L N O C; Tf GiN i�8 L N ya yj �f y 4 pC• � YO t � t YL. 713 S ,� �, �dw qJ Gi as all +�V pyIf ONC II Y. CQ yyY vi .:�6 MO R 01 a�.•'= i R w� � 8�C� US y C [1.py N {Yy�O C L V �4 N � ^YN '4Q�f4i� Cj YY. 6GwSp0. pW~ 7�aq ^.0... OY 'c Lp^ t3 y��w �sy ...;N L TO 1Sc■. .==C p> &Z y V. �C CSRL Cp W R� }pN �n_� OqY~{ yi�(d7 L L-L« :�°%R $py. RFfg�.1 w.dY ?Ew ,$ � ✓ I���yC Ao' � ".pCp SY.�" $OC .E! it A m w CITY OF 1 11 rrCHO CUCAMONGA �c�a vro rDA STAFF' �'' () `TE,// August 12, 1987 �i 157: Chairman and Members of the Pi inning Commission -- F, OM: Barrye R. Hanson, Senior Civil �Engineer. k BY: Joe,Stofa, Jr., Associate,Civir Engineer SUBJECT. , ENVIRONMENTAL-ASSESSMENT AND TINTATIV€ PARCEL MAP 10884 - SYCAMORE INVESTMENTS - A su .v s_on lot acres o an `into ithe,Neighborhood Co merciay`Development District located at the northeast corner of Archibald Avenue and Base Line Road - APN 202 731-08 t I. PROJECT AN9 SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action R ^3ested;. Aporoval of.the proposed Tentative Parcel Map as 5 own on Exhibit "B" �r B. Parcel Sire: Parcel 1 - 0.9 ,Acres i Parcel 2 - 1.7 Acres C. Existing Zoning: Neighborhood Commercial D. Surrounding Land Use: -; North Apartments South = Shopping-enter East - Mobile Haig Park West - Shopping Center E. Surrounding General Plan and Development Cade Designations: North - Medium High (14-24 dulac South - Neighborhood Commercial East - Low Medium (4-8 du/ac) West - Neighborhood Commercial F. Site Charazteristicsz The site is partially developed with the pavement art building pad completer' ITEM\;� :- PLANK"fN Ct�d 2Q StA"PEPoaT , A TENT. PAR�L 1�F 41i.84 AUGUST 12, 110, PAGE 2 II. ANALYSIS: \k', The purpose of this,parcel map i to create 2 saparate parceY��--- 1' t,� ,the remaining parcel 4 f Parcel Map 9079. On June�10, 1987 t6 cormii•ssion o approve d Rw �7 10 a 9000 sure foot building wubm i�ed'(by Soat�hwest Savings. ead-Loan on Dropose6 'Parcel 1 (Exhibit "C"). fifkre are no definite pl•at�s at this iti,-'for Parcel Z. The offsite street improvements, int-ludingl unadergrotind utilities, have 13}viously,been completed with the rcr�ining commercial site (CUP 84- ' III. ENVIRONMENTAL: REVIEW: The applicant completed Fart I of the Initial - u"3y.eta cfondu`cted a fi�'td investigation and e6mpleted,-P4nt 11 of r the Initial Study. No adverse -impacts, upor`'the environm4n}-, are anticipated as a result of this. project. 'Therefore, issuance of Negative Declaration is apprepriatP. IV. �CORRESNNDEN"F. Nbtices=of Public Kearitag have been sent to,surrov.Aing 4.._ peoperty owners and placed in tip Daily Report Newspaper. Posting at a;ie site has also been completed,' i( v RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that till Piathing Commission 4arsrder al JnWt WITetements• of the Tentative",Parcel Map. If ai•t4�r such ff consideritlon, the Cm,Jssion can recommend approval, .then the adi cion of the zttiched Resolu;.(on and issuance of a Negative Declaration would be appropriate. Respectfully bmbmitt:ed, Barrye R. Manson Senior Civil Engineer BRH:JS:jh Attachments: Vicinity Map (Exhibit "A") ` Tentative Map (E.xhibit 118e1) � Site Platii (Exhibit "C.-) Resolution and 3 Recommended Conditions of Approval �`� - ,,,sm 'Z_�_____-� ,r"_l��;k't:s<9.,S.,,AZ.,..'+Y�.F_. _,.._. /L "'. .,. .. s¢'�......•',�.�.� �.,:rs��k CM OF R"CHO CU C"ONGA 71, -Al i J 33.t i' t IT 3rud9' ��;M C�fU�FlhatK IN R . Ps�ttC$L Q�A,lRG-L 'o IZ o °lt�AC tip ab , NOT A ' a Pt ,ec.) ff N MY s .Q44©�Li i '.1 d OF Ho OAMOpIGA ENGWMMG D rAON ,+� 9 r PROPOSLO SITE PLAK it PARCEL % r CITY OF _p WRANYCHO CUCAMONGA -TrrLm--A 0P,WL-J,ri C--S" 1� C� RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE .PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RA' '40 CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, CONDITIONALLY APPROVING TENkATIVE PARCEL MAP NUMBER 10884 WHEREAS, Tentative Parcel Map Number 108$4, submitted by Syc?a%Te Investments LI, applicant, for the purpose of subdividing into 2 parcels, the real property::situated ii. the City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino, State of California, identified as APN(s) 202-731-08, locatid.rat the northeast corner of A.rhibald Avenue and Base Line Road;„and WHEREAS, on August 12, 1987, the Planning Commission held a duly advertised public h.,earing f�3r the above-described map. NOW, THEREFORE, THE RANOdO CUCA14CHGA PLANN'.NG COMMISSION RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS: SECTI.'N 1: Th-,t ;,ne follq� '.ng findings gave beeri-made: 1. That the map is consistent with the General Plan. i 2. That the improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent Ysith the General Plana 3. That the site is physically for the proposed de+.elopment. j4. That the proposed subdivision and improvements wilt not cause substantial environmental ,damage, public. health problems or have adverse affects on abutting property. SECTION 2 That Tentative Parcel "Kap No. ,0884 is hereby approved sub ect to t a attached Standard Conditions. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 12th DAY (F August, 1987. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO, FUM NGA BY: Larry T. M ; Chairman ATTEST: ra u er, 046AY secretary p o � ' as � 'r lr -'" f'� •' y ,.w�. dX t \ s F I, Brad Bullar,� D rT�Jte Pad Ccaniosunn o t City. pf Randho C',tieeaEc' � 5' reul.arly 1 �OF .tl* x� City of "iirn1C�aaiss� uita5 . an the 12th.day oft�i ; 9$ , Y fi�Poar : r, >+YES.. COGMtSOF � WES : ABSENT: p 0 3 d t. _ - smJdSi'YNnY'. x.Yn.,uuau..`.�:_.... f _� •. ��.� j2.5 i�.�e. �a. �� eta �yy)S � 7/♦ � 17 IL - fi M b C .. ,S . Alf T t, : s la A W ? s M 33 ,a a . 22 IL �s $a aa it s g s g a 'P' Y R_. �O M.i� � w • � yyY..� � r M �«� NY z as sit It S a F, °•" =�" E " is _ r' v L «. " ri- K p � V y r Ii cry ^ gEn. r $'8 r A � _ p V® i �9. • .0 �� {i acC�Oo y Y O��• row r P� � w• ��� �j�.�. dq^ N� LeL+ \ Us zz''Y f3 sgk Y CL ^� Iv alitro «YN OI <xY CCT�. N.� c•E� ^ N w,G OtD Lys ! IyLi yiLYr� - 3.4 1-8 YV �C OF Sy 9y `L"pp'�t 02 � � �tl CITY COS RANCID OUiONGA. s E 1977 DATE: August 12, 1987 1 TO: Chairman and Aembers of tie Planning Commission \ F41OM: Brad Buller, City Planner _ ) BY: Greg Gage..JF�sistant Manner " SUBiECT: a OCCUMLON PERK, T 87-8is GISBEROS - Appeal of s a s ec, s un eny,ng a upa u on nit at 10786 Sundance Drive"(Continued frog July 8, 1987 meeting). I. B • � ACKGROUND: On May 4, 1987,`fas, h�rayanne Cisneros sRlbmified an �. aPp for `a FRxw Occupation -Permit to allow>'',,hfldbirth iducation courses; within her home located at Ii1136 Sundance Drive. The application indicates tfib� 6 to 8 couples would attend the six-week course for two hours one night-each week. This item Iry was continued from the July 8th Planning Commission meet*hg at the request of'the applicant. . ti II. .ANALYSIS, (tome Occupation y the Development ation is defined b P pint Code as: ' "Hale Occupation. An access-,�ry _occupational use con uc e y a re 'ft� t of a dwelling ? a-secondary, use ,J. thereof, which is' c` "'.y inc-rdentai ti4' the use of the structure for dwellliq' purposes, and"which does, not change the character thereof, apd for which theve is ao display, no stuck in tract :10 cow"dity sold on the premises, and, no mechinicai eouipment used ex:ept that ^_cessary for houszkeeping purposes," - Applications for Now. Occupation permits are evaluated o;:_.the.basis of 14 specific. criteria, to assure that su,7.h occupations are �c atible with the residential character of the surrounding =-o'yhborhood. These include: "The .use shall not allow customew% or �'ie�;tele to visit 4wellings. However, incidental uses ch as music, lessons, and the sale of produce, may es pe,�ilittas if sic intensity of such instructior�= is apprnvaq by t-I!z-'ity _- I PTA Myer.�� _ persons 4,her thin members cy` the fad.1 who reside An the premises shall''be engaged in sub h activity," . p ..A � L k PLANNINPa, Tas��F� HOP' 87-�5 � 3 x August 12, 1887 t Page ""there .shalt be no change Incthe outwaf appearance of the building or premises, as^ other visrble evidence (of the activity.* Staffs review of the aropo`al rssul'ted in the determination that the use would not conform to the above criteria, fcr the following :reasons: s UP to 15 clients would raoularly visit -the residence simultaneously, results in an, "interiiit-� of use which would be in6Mpntib_4 wWf h the primary residential use of the neighborhood. In aftowfng I neidental uses such 'as music lessons, the intent of the Rom Occupation cliiteria � Is to perm t individualized irstruction, not a group- teaching environment. Also, parking copstraints which , result from a group meeting at a residence, would not '? normally be an issue for indtvidualized music instruction, since,students typically are driven to and from lessons by a fWly Mmber. Up to 15 persons other than family members residing on the premises will be regularly engaged in the Home occupation,. activity. The resultant increase in pedestrian traffic would not , �,i consistent with the F primary use of the site for r-s1tVj-,t"i,tl purposes,' The increas-. 'Jn pedestrian an! vehicular traffic would result in Vi.able evidonce of ''jhe tkcupat3pn. Staff has encot4aged the appliaiAlt to find a more suitable location, such as a public or private school, classroom, auditorium, library or church. For example, a variety 'of instrk;ctional services utilize the Rancho Cucamonga Neighborhood i Center. flees charged for such facilities are approximately"$25.00 por hour for a private group up to 50 persons. III. REC ENDATrON; Based upon the above analysis, staff recommends Ta• a anning Comisrion determine the pr)posed }tome Occupation to be inconsistent with the intent of', the Home Occupation regulations and deny the appeal Of Home Occupation Permit 87.255. i Res fully d�' {� Bra y' City dnner ` � 88:ko t '. /) Attachmgnta: Home Occhtpd'tk(oft Permit 87-8t Application Letter.,of O ,isl. Letter;O Appeal r E!Khibtt :,'A Locating Map / Exhibit p8" - Vicinity Map �% a Cit of, Rancho � ka CU h Ib y� �g �®p yys��y� gat GENERAL INfORMA'TION " LOCATION OF aaOPOSED HOME CCUPATION7,3 r'— tt� NAME OF PROPOSED RPOSED BUSINE55 1�11t ,�L 'iytct' t /V, ti � 2 r�ci fcu.fC/ Z�/ " ® APPLICANTS ADDRESS r : z OWNER ❑ RENTER Property owner`s signature will be required,or a signed statement from the owner approving such use of the dwelling mutst be submitted with this application. Property Owner's Signature: 1w2t BUSINESS DESCRIPTION —� j FULL DE;CRIP ION OF PROPOSED BUSINESS—BE SPECIFIC tt a ✓Uj (:1 . I 17a, xJ J.lhr Eft_L%LIFG11— f �) r it ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION 8E SPECIFIC FULL DESCPIPTIOh OF BUSINESS ACTIVITY OCCURRING IN DWELLING INCLUDING EQUIPMENT AND AMOUNT OF DWELLING USED— 0 LI.! Ask cc I hereby certify that I have read the Home Occupation Permit requirements, fully understand t implications,and can comply with ail of these requirements. CL Q SIGNATURE mj -4 ;�� x a QTY OF AIYC�II45 CUCAh ONGA r�oes�.eo:r�7, c-.�„e,.c �i��t1.n14r sec as June 11, 1987 1 Wrayann. Cisneros 10736 Sundance Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 � SUBJECT: HOME O"CUPVION PERMIT 87-255 Bear Ms. Cisneros )) The City is in receipt of your application of May 4, 1987 for a Hoiba Occupation Permit to hold childhirth courses;At 10736 Sundance Drive. The intent of a heme;ioccupatfon. is to ,alloy a resident to conduct an ., accessory occupational use that-"is contixined entirely within the how, and is incidental to the allowed residential use. Such uses should not ` vary greatly fri the%Ae normally found wttiin a residential area. The eligibility-of a use far,a Hume Occupat� n Pe!mit is determined �. through the evaluation of fourteen specific cr!Yteria, which are listed on the back of the 1.4* Occupation Permit appj$ration. Through staff review it ham=btzn determined that the propose( use does not meet tha` following criteria. % o No persons other than meebers of the family who reside on the premises shall be eng4ed in such activity. Your application indicates that twelve to sixteen persons other than family mwnbers would attend classes ,at the residence. As -noted above, such class meetings wouT4 not; be cimsistent with the Rome_Occupation criteria. a The use shall not allow customers or clientele to visit dwellings. However, Incidental uses such as masic lessons, and the sale of produce may be permitted if the Intensity of such instructions is approved by the Ci ;v Planrsr. It is the City's determination that regular M&',`,4ngs at the residence could adversely impact sun,•;4nding properties by intensify ng vehicular and pedestrian traffic. mkw Dobx&N.&own l;� INS,.,King Dean3y 1«Sasut Chulp J Lr iue[.1I R[0!!t[J Bd �_siMW14[x Wiaissntn: _. ' moo.- Due to'the`Feasons above,,,your appliaatinn for a N ftcupttian Permit has been eenied� This VlepAtion m 4. be app aced xati:his� ten (wQ, days by submitting an' appal. in Mrl�Hng o the "Piarrnir� C,O!aA ssinn Se�refiahy together with a 62:00 e44 f ;u. Sf yop hays afiy qc ttions. Olhse coo not hesitate cantzct e. Plaarnirrg Diuisfgn at 9320 rase. Line R'jd or at (.714) 989_145fl Sincerely, P N YIiG DI 11RTMERT Dan o eman 3 Senior Planner GC:GGete cc: Betty king, Business�.itense I - a Y x 19 sa��=1s1 �r R'840� GAcSMOV99, Caltrarais 91734 sqj?� CTV HOME OCOWATIOR PEMaT_8':-2r-5 I received;a letter or deni€7-�_June' 13, 1.98T for a Ron* Osdupation:i2a= .tt,, U;sIllowing q use of my home for chi 4b rth.preparatiom,olsiases. W eligtbiXt to recei ► a dome Occupation Pe=:Lt; based upon t$e fout't®en Listed Criteria, was rs Nzntd diW to eritaria number five aid two * Tho use, shaa.l not allow oums•tozern or R , clisutsle to vio3,t :well . inoi40i:i a�. ue�R-such as MUSIC less s' and the sale of ptoduaw maybe, permitted it the intensity of such ing")r►actlons is approved by the City P2jR�er. I g1a'pCme to. you that I W 11 be well within the-uoxwa�- limlts"ift average music Inst ractol-w; not only is client number bixt the number of automobiles vieiti3t?,� the prbmesis. l No perCQona other than members of they family� ho a:esids on the permisis shal.l bye engageq� in such activity. AN in\critesi�l number 5, I hope is above tint thd'number of clients and care are well within those of mu►eic fnatrnotors who also teach . at.•honk.-:_ Phase view grutph 1 k". I perso&slly inquired with eleven local mul is iu:et=ctors who teach in their home,, asoekiztg a1 average clientele number per clay. An YOU camum see y the yellowed area my class size would be *ith:Lltl the none of music instructors. Z.hd 'bU2,k me to os r can aamla—: a�a orst a otxx aami�, ese VI 'IV pl a they" O ra r` �f I 02fOaP4 8 i '8 , +y',d Or r. � ` 'der' a�s� .acd to �se�r� ate w�"hin ? _ "d 3Io'•�m5. a,'^�j'^a ,y,:;,� 'ti�dil�"o� �;y�.. i � � � + 5 t �Qn: Yiie mmkY Qi ®i. w ', .. -j may. A9 3/9L7 not° dj 338ad tl"3d:1 to unddz6tabd $d regtxfrg n i sr� then o�id:Qcon a ic�nkt�as ¢ and, show, th , iud3�ed die o htuf � a►ithn tX1d int►n o Qde �e�- ttaA ?X' (I our hums io � Ptt o hoz¢ 1ussb eiad c d�. � roma n ao� c� taYiTy t home s,eyl 1i! curd w � WlAtioa 'A Xr: P � im cn lob z `truci o �► �� Or ,;an Sao-.a'ty jj of ro 2i Lo 3 GYsa t(a s .., gau"i�ca -on +mod , ,., dee3 re to e�ete� ttsd in.:; oo`Almezn .. T. 21oPm you �► �:1 aat fie'. '3uryrg= avo this problax tia' thw wtua bd t 'off wee]. 'and Rancho Gucat¢amgs=c :tizaas. s I s: wrsyann S. Cisneros Registered Rur4e ASPO Certified Childbirth Educator ,E .4J R � 7. ;� k �+ page Graph "A" oA F+ E� Ij �t /` ify99 The numbers to the left o2 the graph indicate tho average nua.r of clients eEater ng the home Ifor music lessons per day. The initials at the top are obveousjy my resources ques ®Red 3.n our local arts.. The Ye�el. low��ed area represents may maximum number of propor iRd— 11ent 3ia one class. Graph "B" ¢i H y .si Iz .s .rsi t la 7 TbIs graph indicated the average number of parked care at a music instructors house per y The mellowed area again repreaents my maxi% m number of propose c enta care per class. t ro, r .a a, 47c r 4J •q,� � Y: k f� ` f .a Q ' 4 ; � O, b a. < i' � 4 .� 7ZV71- Pl- ri would be ,4&weea as with us to have the z k, 2-4 autoaichilee; that axe unable *4o park t.+� the (, street in front -W Cisneros t-.home ; park is front 'r f of our ho,,tse, Wd accuse no more thr u twice a week. P..;. FIou!e number :' n`-4 ilxFtP G"16{y r� 6/0 73 Id 7WO 1�111-�5rlf 75- ,r The climte aoule be, coming for a two-hour childi? rth Preparati�m- climes series. You, Wragsnne Z. Cisneros } lioV-OP ' e T„IA • �Ji 1d S.� a Q .. 3� ` ,��A+l LMD1° . 2r� � a � ei vs s r A g ln�a T1e3 • h y,°.oa x;54w enz� as" 46 a r .Y'IDi =4 3Z•9. p e 4e stow4�s� 4+ a9 OL 10 a W'sda` . B cc t� .� v „ �....: ram- f f 8111pp 1 Nk IN/ V �r { t t ♦ H MY OF E R TITLE: i+tCIN1TY WtAr__ Pt.A,Ni'•IM £[V qON EXHIffi i s-Ill:-._...SC ALE: t.wa 77 n � CIT'��'e.00tF R4�tD;9 CUCAMO•NGA, M DATE `' August 12, 198.7 TO: Chairman anu`Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City: lanner BY: Greg Gage, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: ENYIROWENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CCq.QITLONAL USE PERMIT W-'27 - L - A request o allow a a ery pas ry shop within, r an ex! '3ng industrial complex located at the souZjwest corner of Arrow Route and Vineyar4 Avenue in the, General Industrial District (.Subarea 1) of the Industrial Area Specific Plan - APN: 207-261-49. A I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: _ A.: :;fiction Requested: Approval of a Conditional U$e Pe io a ow roadan evera a sates and ssu n - 9 i ace of a Native Declaration. =r B. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: north - condom n u-ms; •+residential District (8-14 dwelling units per acre) South Industrial; General Industrial District (Subarea I) East - Industrial Building; General Industrial District (Subarea 2) West Cucamonga Creek; General industrial District (Subarea C. 'General Plan Designations: erect Site - ene►;5a ustrial North - Medium Density Residential South - General Industrial East - General Industrial West - General Industrial D. Site Characteristics-, All construction within the multi-tenant. Industrial Pa- 115-d adjacent mini storage facility is completed except for the gag station. Street improvements for Arrow Route, Vineyard Avenue and 9th Street are al;so'completed. ITEM E fir. _. v w P II 'c� � REFWT EFC , CS6 `b^C Sl:.Qkl0ra4 August2 1387 Page 2 E. Parking Calcut=aons. Number of Number off i Square Parking Spaces Maces of Use po a t o R ikFed Frov dqd, 5 Multi-Tenant Buildings 56,89.0 1/400 142 191 ~' II. ANALYSIS. y A. General; The Planning Commission has previously app,roved two car onal use permits for the site. Conditional &re Permit 84-27 was app3'o'ved in SOP , Or, 1984,to allow the des�elopment of the multi-tenant, mini" ►c i� ouse and service station facilities. The service station Site has not yet been vex developed. Conditional Uso Permit 87 10 was approved fin"Aoril, 1987 as-a "master's permit, allowing admirnistrativejoft3;oe, , professional/design, and ffnancdaljins`urancefreal estate .uses, to utilise tenant spaces without filing individual conditi'ooai un permit applications for each use. The applicant is requesting approval , to allow an existing wholesale/retail bakery to continue operating. The use was originally established under the old Industrial Specific Plan ' regulations, which permitted catering businesses in the Industrial Area under the classification of "eating and drinking establishments". Subsdquently, the Planning Commission recommended that such'-businesses be classified under "food and beverage sales", and this change was made durimg t7.e revision process for the Industrial Area S')ecific Plan4 Since the use was established prior to the change in regulations, it 1 was allowed to continue until such time as the business and/or ownership changed. The applicant was then notified that any such change beyond the original approval would require a Conditional Use permit *,D conform to the revised indj Specific Plant (See attached. letter dated September 22, 1988). The owner, of the business has indicated that it is her intent to sell the business, and Is therefore requesting approval of a Conditional ,use permit. { k. .... PLANNING COMISSI,ON STAFF REPORT ENV. ASSESS. & CUP 87-27 S[.M0A August 12, 1987 Page 3 Er ` B. Parking_ Analysis: Since the use does provide limited rIetall 3311es—, Varki6q must be provided at a 1/250 ratio. As shot' ;in tha following table, an adequate amount of paz'''-ing is ava.,fable F on the site to accommodate the use while still maintaining i sufficient parking for other existing and future uses* Number of Number of Type Square Parking Spaces Spaces of Use Footage Ratio Required Provided Leased & Occupied 23,152 1/400 rah 64 (Office Portion) MkO) (1/250) (industrial) (17,652)N (1,400) (Industrial/ 1�= Retai;) (2,000) (i:1/250) ?..ease&end unoc6pied 15,369 46 46 ilndusi, iall (61000) (I,400) (Research) (5,633) (1,350-1- .: (Officell (3,796) (1,2501; Subiiotai 112 110 Unleas,ed Y'* Tenant Im kAre_ went Proposals 3,498 (1/250)* 14 Vnleased With No Tenant Improvement Proposal 13,871 (1/250)* 56' - subtotal 17,369 70 81 Total 182 191 *Assumes "worst case" parking ratio based on office, professional/design, ur financial use. C. Land Use: As previously, ..noted, the facility is currently opera ng within the COMPT%. . The continued operation of the use is not expected to create conflict, or otherose adversely impact the surr-Funding tenants. D. Environmen ai- Assessment: Staff has completed Part 11 of the Environmental Cec s and has determined that no significant environmental impact will occur as a result of this project. �a �- i iAPtN26i GOFi�9ISS1014 STiIFP REPORT Ehil. ASSESS &." J 87; 7 - SLOBOOA ( Page 4 \ II1. FACTS FOR nNOOM 1, That the proposed use is in acce►Manc ,x th jthe Geaerai Plan, objectives of the""Develsp ent Code, an the, pw,rposee of the Industrial SPECIfiF.Plain° subarea in which the s',!te i`s 1"6cated 2. That the proposr d use wi.l l not be detrllmenti� to the public _ health, ety, or welfare, or materially Iniurious to ` Properties or\tmorove�nts in the vicinity.. 3. That the prop ed use, together With the �rsiAc,applivable thereto, complies with each of the applicable provis"ians of the, Industrial Specific Plan, ilt, GOitI;ESPOilIIENi,E ':ills item has been advertised as a public t�ear'ing n e aTTY—ileport newspaper, t,e property posted, and=noti&s sent7 tf7,flT_­P-r—oAer-ty owners withik'.30O feet of the property boundary. V. RECOMENOATION: Staff recommends tW: the Planning Com➢nissi.o?n approve .;Pori i e-al Use 0irmit 87-27 through the issuance of",, Negatixc'Declaration and ad000ltion of the attached Resolution. I r. Res ttad, ! Brad 9re City annex._ BB:G6:vc Attachments: utter from Applicant Letter dated September 22, 1986 Exhibit "A" - Location Map Exhibit %" - Site Plan Exhibit "Cu - Detailed Site Plakr Showing Exact,Number o'f Parking Space Z,hibit "D" - Existing Uses in Corresponding Leased Suite = Exhibit "E" Floor Plan ; Resolution of Approval kith Conditions \_ m 1 . "�� nil TA o— Ica t " -- a� , Ao trod /3Z 6 bra roe- oKt T- yA CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA i. . G o 1M rM Z U ; Quda k.Buqm H D.K�cds 19rSepfember 22, 1986 Richna A3 PamtAx i wei& �e`r.: " > Sander and Susan Sloboda Pastry Gallery and Fine Eupier imports 8560 VineyardrAvenue, Suite III " Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 SUBJECT: CATERING K#.i.1E,Sr_LOCATED AT 8560 VINEYARD AVENUE, SUITE In (RELATED, rILE -,CUP 84-27) Dear fir. ar.¢ ;ors. $iobuda: On Julv 1 fc 2, 1986t the Planning Division approved your business license r , catering business located at the above-described address. At that a catering business was classified as an eating establishment 4hich is pemitted within the Vineyard hest Rusiness Park, However, a recent recommendation of the Planning COMision would reclassify Aft catering business as a food and beverage sales use .n the Industrial Area. Vineyard West Business Park is zoned as General Industrial Subarea 1 of the Industrial Specific Plan. + This letter :is to serve as ':+atice that. your catering business was. approved prior to the proposed`-evisions to the Industrial- Specific Plan, therefore, you will be allowed to continue operating,y¢ ,r catering business at this location as long) as YOU own the business. owever, any change of ownership ar change of business beyond that app,-oval, would require a conditional Use Permit to conform to the revised Industrial Specific Plan. Should you have any questiops regarding the above changes in the Code, please do not hesitate to contact one or Nancy Fong at (714) 989-1861. 1 wish you success in ,your catering business;. Sincerely, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 4LANG DI9I UL ER city Planner BB:NF:dak cc: The Barmakian Co. � . U n d C cc Cr. . a d Q ARA.' 0 n d w O p q` AMPp� Q O su rea 2 �r O AT& SF R.R. 0 M CIRCULATION TRAILS/ROUTES 120'R.Q.W. O O O Q Pedestrian amis•o•®r Creeks& Channels 100'R.O.W. ® � 0 Bicycle _ W or less N.O.W. Regional t RAIL SERVICE Multi-Use s�: Park' 4-a-i-f-} Existing Bridge .ob t„q,,ti, Special Streetscape.l -++-i++- Proposed .� Landscaping Access Points 0 40W 800r 1FOQ� I�TH CffY OF ITEM: RAN TrIu. 1 ®GF1't'I�141 �1F413 KANtllliilC; DVS ,; SC'` ALE= ' r upff FL it pp z t � s ti CUT CIF° u w Q u 3' 1nou St m08HV ` all ci I i�,,Si AN ZG a ,.t .6S •..9a�z-$ ,5. 2 � '. + �{ac {. e �� � lit N N N At .SZ,QS.6!N .. ��+ C4. SQv zz ,iZ ,YI ,SBI•,6 r7 dS-SI. r ff 0. ,Qx Rt Yt o.o .4 NJI H 01 f IAL QI ,OBI �. 94 El we Uf a 3 s _ Q LD m a t- In •N,n 6 GyJ - N q Yn-}vt Z J W �, .< •,6,.a ds.Ot .Qx t ,OE ,6x •.6�L a'•9 - N 114 > oa Rio •.6 a1 tl9-Gi _Q-.ff r .. o 0 oL at << lao wK �.. Ot t0 c}�d ��qq Q• pj. > 1 Wa 3 ju to C30 o rj < .n_ 2Yt LlL4 _ �,/ CC , OSI Ot. ,0£ 0 0£ Ot, ,.� •� tg t Lim S Of j y bil 9M .IB tllq ,�. •,6�dG Sf K ,aE ,tZ ,4f •,6 Fl8 "Ro, EI .0E ZE Ir :P+' sA k •r a, rS W ui m J IL co M �1 s ttil n r �°^ '� s Or D3 0 J s 4tf m e ' e� � 4 �` Z ftl LU t fz� O. J 0 121 �� fV+cC'S• � S` to 1" r 'm��$rA Co ✓;If }•�w i gib' — — - 71, / N eq _ touo a cN N e a f ell 1 a fi. n t a T a a ¢ a � e ! 1 t t a t ¢ ¢ �t' t r Q �,, C 1Fo - ' r LJ 0', Toast lb fi DIWay Area idol t� a crry e RANCHO IU"KWA :FLooa PLAm r r f RESOLUTION NO.: .r. A RESOLUTION OFF THE RARCHO CIjCR'ONGA PLANNIDIO GONM'ISSI'O31 APPROVING COi16,ITI0NiAL USE PERMIT NO. 87-27 FOR A BAKERY, WHICH IS 'DEFINED'ASI FOOD AND B@YERAGE SALES. LOCATED AT THE SOUTHVESI' CORNER OF 'ARROW ROUTE AND VINEYARD AVENUE IN THE GENERAL INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT WHEREAS, on ;xO(,,23rd day of July, 1987, a complete application was filed by Susan Sloboda for' review of the above-described projects and WHEREAS, on the \'�=h day ff August, 1987, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission held a\�}blic hearing to consider the above-described project. � NOW, THEREFORE, t e Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission resolved as follows: 1 lj SECTION 1: That 01 owing findings a be met: I. That the proposed use is in accdM with the General Plan, the objectives of the Development Code, and the purposes of the district--in which the site is J r located. 2. That the proposed use, together witti the conditions j applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public hdoto,�'safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to' properties or ir. rovements in the vicinity. ! _ � 3. That the proposed use compl•les 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 August 12, 1987. SECTION 3: That Conditior.—._-' se Permit No. 87-27 is approved subject to—M—F-TUTTowing conditions: Planning Division 1. As defined in the Industrial Specific plan, this Conditional Use Permit is approved for food and beverage sales within. Suites 111, 112 and 113 only, as defined in the Industrial Specific Plan. 2. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Industrial Area Specific Plan, and all other '€ City Ordinances. PLliilk C MSt3t;�TION NO, Augut 1'2,, 8 Pago 2 ei4 & If the 1Qeratidn of the facility causes adwar la .affects J'upon ad3acent f►usipesses <or operations, the Condit �t use Eer`aiit shall" be bro git. ,before the annpi=ng Co�issf # for the cots dbra�si°on,and pos iJale termtriatiort 'cf tF.e. use. 4. the use shall `be o"erated in confomnee with ;the performance A standards for Subtrea 1. APPROVED AND ADOPtFD' THIS, ZTH DAY OF AUGUST, 1887. PLANNING COMNI$SIOff OF THE'CITY of R�j�'CWMONGA BY: Carry T. REPO.. unalm . n t ATTEST: Brad er, ep.";,re ry I, Brad Buller, Deputy Secretary of the planning ConWi sion of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify first 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 Comgission ht�d on the IEth day of August, 1987, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: p} NOES: COWISSIONERS: ' ABSENT: Alr"4ZSSIONERS: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMON+GA STAFF REPORT ` y O `q Z DATE: August 12, 1987 > 1977 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Bj}ad Buller, City Planner BY: Nancy Fong, Associate Planner - SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 87-28 c - The request or a Master Condf-tional use Permit o allow Business Support Services, Convenience Sales and Service, food and Beverage Sales in buildings 1, 2 and 3 of an approved industrial Business Park, in the General Industrial District, Subarea :2, located on the south side of Arrow Highway at Bear Gulch Place - APN: 209-012-19. I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action: Requested: Approval of a Master Conditional Use permit o allow Business Support Services, Convenience Sales and Services, and Food and Beverage Sales, and issuance of Negative Declaration. �y B. surrounding�Land Use and Zoning: Norti -�pa�rtment, ear u c ark; Medium Reside-ntial District (8-14 dwelling units per acre) South - Vacant, Existing industrial buildings; General Industrial District, Subarea 2 East - Vacant, Existing industrial buildings; General Industrial District, Subarea 2 West - Exist1.14 industrial buildings; General Industrial District, Subarea 2 C. General Plan Designations: Project 'i£e='GeneraiTn�ustriaT North - Medium Density {residential South - General Industrial East - General Industrial West - General Industrial D. Site Characteristics The seven multi-tenant buildings are presen y un er cons ruction. II. ANALYSIS: A. General: On July 23, 1986, the Planning Commission conaltiovally approved Development Review 86-13 for the development of the 2b acre Arrow Business Park that;consists of ITEM F ' PLANNING COWSSION STAFF,"RT CUP 87-28 - Messenger August 12, 19g:� Page 2 3 phases. Phase I development includes 7 multi-ten"t and light manufacturing buildings totaling 131,000 square f�*t and Phase II development includes 2 war house distribution buildings totaling 223,400 square feet, as sham in Exhibit "C". Both Phase I and 11 are under construction 3t the present time except for building 13 of Phase 11, while phase III is a future project that is subject to separate development review process. The a plicant is requesting for a Master Conditional Use Permit to &V;ow the following uses.,within buildings 1, 2 and 3 of the Phase i. development: Business Support Services, Conveniaace Sales ant. Services, Food and Beverage Sales. According to the applicant, the purpose of the proposed Master Conditional Use Permit is to upgrade the uses in these buildings along Arrow Route to provide compatibility to the northerly residents, and allow the leasing of the mezzanine spaces within buildings 1 and 3 separately from,#e first floor iiinufacturing industrial type of tenants. See �"tached letter `trots applicant., B. CompatibitIty of Land Use: The following Lre definitions of e three land use types, the applicant is requesting for firi the p{ posed Arrow Business Park: I. Business Support Serwicd"s. Ac�ti'vities typically include, �u are not liviteed co: service which support the activity of fines, such as, clerical, employment, protective, nr/,,minor precessing, including blue print services and ;m(ti»copying of pamphlets and small reports r For another firm. Activities not including this category are the printing of books and services of the personal nature. 2. Convenience Sales and Services: Activities typical-Ty nc u , but are not Wilff-ea-To-Tie retail sales `row the premises of frequently needed small personal convenience items -and professional services which are used fregt(ently. Uses typically include, but are not limited to: drug stores, stores selling toiletries, tobacco, and magazines, beauty and barber shops, apparel, laundering and dry cleaning agencies. 3. Food and Beverage-Sales: Activities include, but are not -' limited o theretail sales from the premises of food and beverages for off premises consumption. Uses typically include, but are not 'limited to: mini markets, liquq, stores aid retail bakeries, catering businesses exclu ins chain type of grocery store. -,_ I PLANNING COW10SION STAFF REPORT CUP 87-28 - Messenger August 12, 1987 Page 3 In reviewfng' those uses allowed within Business Supxport Services such as blue print shops, clerical and tloyment agencies, staff believes that they would prp�+ide,• ,tibili „- to uses. within the Industrial Park. The reason`tt that these type of uses would provide a service to other firms within the Industrial Park. They, would fit well in locating rat the + mezzanine withia buildings I and 3 (see EY:hibit "E"', floor plan of the mezzanine), 'A review of the proposed uses within ! Convenience Sales and Services and Food and Beverage Sales indicated that they are more towards the quasi retail type of uses where storefront exposure wot`d be required. These types of retail uses would prefer to lo.:atE 1n building 2 with store w front exposure to Arrow Route. However, the applicant has, set:•. ` aside only 3400 square feet in building 2 for ;these propos;,. kv three type of uses, :versus a total of 20,390 square feet in ine mezzanine of buildings i and 3. Staff is skeptical that these r types of uses such as liquor store, beauty and barber shops, retail bakeries, stores that sell; toiletries, tobacco and magazines would locate in the mezzanine of buildings I and 3. When this project was first submitted for staff review in September of 1985, the applicant proposed A multi tenant project including a "Master Conditional Use Permit" for service, office and retail types of uses. Staff inforsed the applicant that the proposed Master Conditional use Permit and the multi-tenant project was no, in conformance with the long r, ,ge plans of subarea 2. The purpose of this subarea is to str\insthen its manufacturing and warehousing act-tvities complimented by nail service. The Applicant had revised his projec,.,several dimes in an attempt to comply with the Industr#a, Specific Plan by limiting the numMy, of multi-tAnant buildings and providing warehouse distribution buildings ^here one of the buildings has potential for rail service in Phase II. However, -allowing a Master Conditional Vrse Permit at this time is still contrary, to the purpose of this subarea 2. C. Availability of Pa__rk�iin�g:. The total gross floor area for the seven n s r a bwlongs is 131,455 square feet.. The Industrial Specific Plan requires parking for multi-tenant use where the office portion is less than 35% of the leased space at a ratio of l parking space per 400 square feet of gross floor area. Therefore, the total number of required parking spaces for this project is 3p.9 spaces. The site plan shops a total of 377 parking spaces have befit pr��vided, leaving 38 extra spaces (see Exhibit "D*). The�4611'owing table shows a summary and a break down of the number of parking spaces. required versus provided based on the square footage of the proposed use within the seven industrial buildings: j 1 PLANN114 l t1NM'I55ION STAFF REPORT ,. CUP.57-28 - Messenger August,12, 1987 Page G �i TABLE A- PAR.KIN& SUWARY Number of Number of 81dg/Type Square Parking Spaces Spaces a of Use* Footage Ratio Required* Provided, k, B/dw -2: Business Support - Service, Conven- ienod Sales & Service, Food & " ? Beverag6 Sales �,,400,_ 1/250 37 37 Multi-tenant 15,915 1/400 aw. , 40 Business Support :5 i Service, Conven- ience Sales & `u Service, Food & G Beverage Sates 3,400 11250 14 14 r Multi-tenant 13,350i 1/41,41 33' 33 Eating and ` Drinking Places 2,040 x/1 20 20 Bldg 3: Business Support Service, Conven- ience Sales & Service, Food al I u BeveiraV* Sales 10,800 1/250 44 44 f 1 Multi-tenant" 17,431 11400 44 44 81 dg 4 f _ Multi-tenant 11,976 1/400 30 3U 0109 5: Multi.-otenant 14,610 1/400 37 36 Bldg 6: Multi-tenant 15630 1/400 39 39 Ol dg 7: Multi-tenant. 16,795 1/400 42 43 131,465 cj 377 377 *Based upon proposed re4uest CUP. it KANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CUP 87-28 - Messenger ,August 12, 19877 F, Page..5 A review of 'vhe above table indicates that the site compliii with the minimum parking requirements based on the summarization,of the proposed use. Exhibit "D" also shows that the parking spaces are adequately distributed around the, vicinity of the seven industrial buildings. Therefore staff ;- determines•that the site has adequate parking spaces for the addition of these "quasi" retail type of uses such as._,Busim_. s Support Services, Convenience Sales and Services, and Food and Beverage Sales. O. Put pose and Intent of Condi'Jonal Use,Permit; The purpose of e on TtionaT-Vse ermTt-- s 't5 cr-ea ex bility necessary to -achieve the objectives of the Industrial Specific Plan select uses in each distrizt are allowed subject to the granting of a Conditional Use Permit because of the ur?que site development requirements and operating characteristics which may require special consideration in order to operate in a manner compatible withi bu sounding uses. The Conditional Use Permit pr:,cess is intended to afford an-opportunity for-broad public review and evaluation of these requirements and characteristic's, to provide adequate mitigation of any potentially adverse impacts, and to insure that all site development regulations and performane�e,standards are provided in accordance with the Industrial Spect`fic Plan and Development Code. ; Last April, the 'Planning WlwissioWlhas approved a Master Conditional (Ise Permit to allow Admioistrative/Office use, Professional/Design services and Insurance, Financial and Real Estate services within the Vineyard Viest Business Park located at the southwest corner of Vineyarei Avenue and Arrow Route in Subarea I. In considering this proposed Master Conditional Use Permit, the Planning 'Commission emphasized that the granting of this Master Conditional Use Permit should not be considered as setting a precedent for the entire City. In summary, the site . does have sufficient parking to accommodate the proposed uses. However, these types of proposed logs are considered 4s quasi,-retail uses that require store front exposure, which mould also mean an expansion of retail uses -in the Industrial)r' Area. The applicant's request seeks to capitalize on nearby multi-family prof;^rts by providing commercial uses to support these residences I The intent of the Industrial Specific Plan is that these uses were intended to be supportive of the primary industrial°asses. The granting of a Master Conditional Use Permit would set a E precedent ror the entire City. It could also diminish ;the opportunity for broad pubic roview and evaluation to ensure potential adverse impacts could be mitigated. f; r PIrANI& � ON SlAFli REPORT August S2 i7 Page G E. Enrironmenta, Assessment: Staff has completed an Environmental GARKIVS. an', as erm ned that no significant enviromVntal i Fact still occur as a resWlt, of th'!� proposed, prrie.ct for ai�fng a Mister Conditional Use Parwlt., Further, a 'Negative ft laratioh has been issued for this project on July 23, 1986. 111. FACTS ITOR F21;lONGS: In order for-'the Pl.annfng Cowission to appro-`- s pro ec , fAc°,s support the following findings must be vtade That the proposed uses,-- Busfhess S117;ort Services, Convenience Sales and Services, and .Food ;and B verage Sales are in accor4 with the ,.deneral Plan, the. bbiecVvbs:-,of the Industriji Specific P'ian and the pjrpose of the s,:bar in which. the Site is loca$eU.,� i 2. That the proposed uses wool& not be 4046tal tc the puntic health, safety, or welfare, , or materially injurious to *' properties or improvements in +he vicinity. •� 3. That the proposed uses coWp y wfti each of the sppj cable provisions of the Industrial Specific Plan,; IV. CORRESPONDENCE. This its has been advertised as a public hearing Tn Elie a y e ort newsp�,ie�,, the property posted and notices wore sen:r oi�aTrt'proper y owners within 300 feet of the project site. V. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission deny j on onaTIGse Permit 87-28. However, if the: Commission can make he necessary findings, a Resolution of Approval has been provided. Rest ully submI tted, r CityPannier BB:NF:vc Aytachments: Letter of Request from Applicant Exhibit "A" - Location Map Exhibit 'B* - Approved Detailed Sitt-Plan Exhibit "C" - Detail Site P7-an Showing the Number of Parking Spaces Provided Around Each Building Exhibit "D" - Floor P B_for Buildings I and 3 Including t- Resolution of Approval with, Standard Conditions �i ME33ENG99INVESTMENTCOMISANY ' July 23 1987 f Mr. Dan Coleman Senior Planner City of Rancho Cucamonga 9320-C Baseline`Road P.O. Box 807 Rancho_ Cucamonga, California 91730 RE, Arrow Business Park DR-86-13 Dear Dan: As we discussed, Messenger Investment Cgmpany.request:s the approval of a 'Limited Master Conditional Use Permit for the buildings that front an Arrow Route. We Irish to allow the following conditionally permitted uses in ,luildings 1, 2 and 3 of our seven buildings which total 131,455 square .feet of this multi-use tenant general industrial project (total square footage of project including buildings 8 & 9 is 353,855 square feet, see DR 86-�13) . Conditional Uses Requested: 1. Business .Support Services 2. Convenience sales & Service 3. Food and Beverage Sales This conditional use permit will allow us to upgrade the tenants for the three buildings adjacent to Arrow Route. This would allow the mezzanine spaces in Buildings 1 and 3 to be leased separately from the first floor custom manufacturing/industrial tenants. Messengerrvastment Colapany believes that these uses, ' would be more compati.bie with the residential areas north of Arrow Route and would create less noise and truck traffic. We have enclosed a revised parking summary plan. The building square footage has been calculated ,based upon the net area (glass line) less electrical./mechanical rooms and stairwells. The parking requirements have 16412-A Von Ka'manAvenge,Irvire,CA f_, 714W,4-1300 _. been ,;�^ kern down by use. As indicated, there would be suff$,6iQit parking for 23,700 square feet of the proposed/ conditi.ona-a uses at 1 space/250 square feet and 2,040 sguarP,feet of "eating and dining establish 'ments" at 1 4�:-,�oe/100 squa-e feet. We propose to di:�tribute theaY: uses between Buildings 1, 2, and 3 r ° where the additional onsite parking is located. The tenant epaces in Buildings 1, 2 an3. 3 atle as small a3 400 square feet each. With the square footage of each use limited, ag proposed: Xessenger Investment Company wishes to obtain a Master Conditional Use Permit to eliminate the need to return to the Planning Commission for a conditional use permit for each R tenant. The planning staff could monitor the total allowed square footage and restrict the project i rthis manner. i1 I have included the following items witl,- this letter for this conditional Use Permit application per your r checklist: 1. Uniform Application 2. Part 1 of thf�-,;,nitial study Aft 3. (4) 8 1/2" x -11" site plan (parking summary) (4) 8 1/2" x ill, sample floor plan of mezzanine of Building 1. - 4. This letter S. (5) sets of gummed labels for notification() of k applicants 6. (3) sets of gummed labels for public hearing notificaltion T-. Check �; the amount of $398.00 for Conditional Use Permit 8. Check -ice the amount of $87.00 for initial Study Thank you,.( for your assistance in the application of this Condit c„mil Use Permit. If the application is into lete in y way, please notify me. u 5' ere , ScoE. Peotter Pra ct Manager SEP/cl cc; Dana Sanders, Messenger investment Company Jeff Gordon, Messenger Investment Company MESSEN9 IwvEsrMeNrsoMvawv yy+F PARXINa ANAL'SI �R —07l82l87 i0."S4 AM TOTAL BUTLD" F�f���1 _ = 131,4'S5 'SF T lop CONVERT TOUSTJ� S � „ [ yEVI EaO, ,7r 9 CI REQUIRED PR 2KIN tE{ ? 1 F'IAolE,/E 0 SF 94.�c ACES 57 w EATING & DRINKING' ES,TABL HMEh?T5 , E,p e SF� ti REQUIRED PARKING (EZbE7, -1..SPACF 1,00 SF` %6.4 SPACES REMAINING MULTI-USE' TENNAN7 105,715 SF ALLOWABLE "OFFICE"' 0::3 37,, 00 SF MANUFACTURING 65:4 E617 0r e REQUIRED PARKING (MUT) 1 SORCEl400. 'SF G64. 3. SPACES TOTAL PARKING REQUIREn 3n SPACES BICYCLE PARKING PROVIA�;p SS SPACCS- 7 SPACES - * AUTO PARKING PROVIDE`L} 37e, SPACES TOTAL PARKING PROVIDED 379 SPACES I{ s 1 (tea, � 7, a Bt,ILDING 1 PARKING AF*gLYSIS 07/22/87 10.24 AM TOTAL BUILDING AREA - - 25,315~SF CONVERT TO BUSINESS SUPPORT SERVICES s iQz GF REQUIRED PARKING (p9S) 1'SPACE/250 SF 37.6 SPACES EATING*& DRINKING j/tSTABLISHKENTS ? 0 SF R'JUIRED PARKING /E&DE) 1 SPACE/100 SF {� 0.0 SPACES e " REMAINING MULTI-USE TENNANT 15"315 SF ALLOWABLE "OFFICE" 35% 5,570 SF MANUFACTURING 65% 10,345 SF �. REQUIRED PARKING (MUT) 1 SPACE/400 Sr",, 3S.8 SPACES f� fJ TOTAL PARKING REQUIRED 77 SPACES BICYCLE PARKING PROVIDED 4 SPACES= 1 SPACES AUTO PARKING PROVIDED 76 SPACES ° TOTAL PARKING PROVIDED 77 SPACES -- ----------- - ----------- ---___-_-__--____- - BUILDING+ PARKING ANALYSISY -- ----07/E2/S7^ Oz24^AM- p TOTAL BUILDING AREA - - 18,7SS-SF CONVERT TO BUSINESS SUPPORT SERVICES 3,400 SF REQUIRED PARKING (BSS) i SPR''CE/250 SF 13.6 SPACES t I; EATING &„DRINKING ESTASLISHME-NTS 2,040 SF F REQUIRED PARKING (E&DE) 1 SPACE/100"SF 20.4 SPACES REMAINING MULTI-USE TENNANT 13,358 SF ALLOWABLE "OFFICE" 35% 4,675 SF MANUFACTURING 65% 8,683 SF 2 �- REQUIRED PARKING (MUT) 1 SPACE/400 SF 33.4 SPACES TOTAL PARKING REQUIRED 67 SPACES I BICYCLE PARKING PROVIDED 4 SPACES= i SPACES AUTO PARKING PROVIDED 66 SPACES TOTAL PARKING PROVIDED 67 SPACES BUILDING 3 PARKING ANALYSIS 07/22/87 10:24,AM TOTAL BUILDING AREA - - - 28,331-SF--- ^-- CONVERT TO BUSINESS SUPPORT SERVICES 10,900 SF REQUIRED PARKING (BSS) 1 SPACE/ SO SF 43.6 SPACES EATING & DRINKING ESTABLISHMENTS 0 SF REQUIRED PARKING (E&DE) 1 SPACE/100 SF 0.0 SPACES REMAINING HULTI-USE TENNA14T 17,431 SF - fLLOWAPLE "OFFICE" 35% 6, 101 SF - µ MANUFACTURING 65% 11,330 SF REQUIRED PARKING (MUT) 1 SPACE/400 SF 43.6 SPACES — TOTAL PARKING REQUIRED 87 SPACES BICYCLE PARKING PROVIDED 4 SPACES= 1 SPACES AUTO PARKING PROVIDED 86 SPACES TOTAL PARKING PROVIDED 87 SPACES 77 BUILDING 4-PARKI"66 ANALYSIS -F,7/2-/87-10:24 AM- TOTAL BUILW NG AREA-=-------- -------- „ „g75 SF CONVERT TO BUSINESS SUPPORT SERVICES 'ra'SF REQUIRED PARKING (BSS) 1 SPACE/E50 SF 0.0 SPACES G EATING,&!.DRINKING ESTABLISHMENTS Q SF REQUIR�s'PARKING (E&DE) 1 SPACE/100 SF 0.0 SPACES REMAINING MULTI-USE TENNANT 11,976 SF ALLOWABLE "OFFICE" 35% 4,192 SF MANUFAC Td. ''",3 65% 71784 SF REQUIRED PARKING (MUT) 1 SPACE/400 SF 29.9 SPACES TOTAL PARKING REQUIRED 30 SPACES - BICYCLE PARKING PROVIDED `A SPACES= i SPACES AUTO PARKING PROVIDED 291SPACES TOTAL PARKING PROVIDED 30 SPACES BUILDING 5 PARKING ANALYSISSY 07/22137 10:24 AM TOTAL BUILDING AREA 14,610 SF CONVERT TO BUSINESS SUPPORT SERVICES 0 SF REQUIRED PARKING (BSS) 1 SPACE/250 SF 0.0 SPACES :: " EATING & DRINKING ESTABLISHMENTS 0 SF REQUIRED PARKING (E&DE) 1 SPACE/100 SF 0.0 SPACES REMAINING MULTI-USE TENNANT 14,610 SF ALLOWABLE "OFFICE" 35% 5, 114 SF MANUFACTURING rJ 65% S,497 SF REQUIRED` PARKING (MUT) 1 SPACE/400 SF 36.5 SPACES TOTAL-, PARKING REQUIRED 37 SPACES BICYCLE PARKING PRCVIDED 4 SPACES= i SPfaCES AUTO PARKING PROVIDED 36 SrfACES TOTAL PARKING PROVIDED 37.,SPACES _ BUILDING 6 PARKING ANALYSIS 07/22/67 10:24 AM TOTAL BUILDING AREA -------15,630 SF CONVERT TO BUSINESS SUPPORT SERVICES 0 SF REQUIRED PARKING (BSS) 1 SPACE/250 SF 0.0 SPACES EATING & DRINKING ESTABLISHMENTS 0 SF REQUIRED PARKING (E&DE) 1 SPACE/100 SF 0.0 SPACES REMAINING MULTI-USE TENNANT 15,630 SF ALLOWABLE "OFFICE" 35% 5,471 SF MANUFACTURING 65% 10, 160 SF REQUIRED PARKING (MUT) 1 SPACE/400 SF 39. 1 SPACES TOTAL PARKING REQUIRED 39 SPACES BICYCLE PARKING PROVIDED 4 SPACES= 1 SPACES AUTO PARKING PROVIDED 38 SPACES TOTAL PARKING PROVIDED 39 SPACES " BUILDING 7q/ G $ ! ? � � Q7/2.}2/187 1%.a4 AM �. .'.. TOTAL Ei11IL➢I l a c 16s T9 t SF CONVERT TD H4`SIIvE S DST ST2d1d. .C�1$ REQUIRED PAf4f:ING ,CBSS , . .1-1:SRACEpE5G SF' 0.O""PACES ' EATING & DRZNKJNG y�S,i E±LISMME ITS ' SF f �' REQUIRED ARKINS" c E, i SPACE/10e SF 1303 SPAGE5 t REMAININIG MULTTf—USE" TENNANT i6,795 E$F ALLOWABLE "OFFIC4=" 35% 5,8'7'8 SF MANL4FACTURINti S � iG,.9 7 SF ' t REQUIRED PARKING CMUT) Y S4ACE/4ovjwSF 42.0 SPACES r- OTAL PARKING RE{sH.B1RdD; BICYCLE PARKING P8O4'J�'I'I)ED 4 SPACES= i SP4�CE5 AUTO PARKING- POOVgWeD 41 SPRE3ES TOTRL. PARKING PROvfVED 42 SPRCSS r i i s .14 1 `Z � e .= w t 1' Y }� ••�{oy� '. C� a k � _ t >r ` f4p��. �: - .�� ` eo✓.tcncu�acw. �� �_ Z .,5:'S.� a �s�ec. n�oc. •+' ` i�I •'^j�•inn I r � �-�! �� D `�11 .Y--�_3�.�_.. �-+. •�. 1�1 � \1••��t � of .� � �� •' 1 q^• �' - _ _ 13 ..�L� �^ •i I wA ttNfT , i CITI OF Mill RANMO CIrAMONGA PLANNING DIVMN EXE-IUmn._..._ _,_SCALE=_._. 1 •a.�lisavgo..v s wwrou••:e..�no. .iaf7 -- �_• zz at zz r+ t me _ if Y _ if 3: E o 1 iu ,i tt ft f t ! t t t i Aba 1 JI atniaAr twtr i r � � a h t J �, �fti� 1f1 0 1•�i Jt II !}if � _.fl�� � 1�� i '. � ,1 ""wits F y *17 p.,..,rw,..wcl .O«ra+.►wa.n «. ram.... ,�.s.. sr............ i NMnj (� CTJL'Y OF nTm, RANUD ANK CUB �E_ j i n tit _ xLl y 7 a x o CL 4 } RESOLUTION NO. r ✓<�a\`�, A RESOLUTION OF THE R1i4CN0 CUCAMONGA PLANNING C"ISSION APPROVLNIG,. C'DNDd1IONAC USE PERMIT NO. 87-28 FOR SQUARE FOOT OF' BUSINESS SUPPORT SERVICES,.�CONVENIENCE SALES AND SERVICES, AND FOOD AND BEVERAGE,SALES, TYPES OF LAND USES ` WITHIN 8UI'LRINGS i, 2 AND 3 LDOTED AT THE SOUTH,SIDE.OF-, ARROW ROUTE, EAST OF VINEYARD AVENUE, IN Tom;: GEl1ERk � INOUSTRIAL DISTRICT APN: 209-012-19 J WHEREAS, on the 4th„day of August, 196, a coaVlete application was filed by Messenger Investment Co. f revierl of the above-described project; and 71, WHEREAS, ore" the 12th da,,,4f August, 1987,, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider, the abo+'­Idescribed project. % ; NOW, THEREFORE, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission resflved as o" fol 1 ows: !I SECTi�-AN 1: r at the follovfng findings �0 'bo met: { 1. That the proposed use is in accord with the General f Plan, the objectives of the Industrial Specific Plan, and the purposes of the district in which the site is loc�� 2, That thfw:proposed use, togeth r with, the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental tu`the, public health, , safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to p �perties vicinity. or improvements in the 3. That the proposed use complies with each of the applicable previsions of the Development. Code and the Industrial Specific Plan. SLCTION 2f That this project will not create adverse i;�pacts on the environmenTIRd Vat a Negative Declaration is issued on August 12, 1987. SECTION 3: That Conditional ;lse Permit No. 87-28 is approved subject t-o-5-e-T-oTTowing conditions: Planning Division I. This Conditional Use Permit is approved f or!" usiness Support Cervices, Convenience Sales and Services, and "Food and Beverage „ales only, as defined in the Industrial Specific Plan. All other uses shall be subject to the land use- regulations for Subarea 2 of the Industrial Specific plan: � 1J 11 PLANNING COW WOf AWOLUTION NO. CLY 8741"8 - ►040hger August,lg, I98is Page 2 ,j J , ` b 2. A maximum of MOD feet of leased gross floor area W_31 be allowed within uilding` I for the three land uses as stated in Condition tr�r 1 a ;Rro enn OVY3,.400 square feed of leased gross floor area will be allowed within building 2 fo.- the three land uses as stated in Conot�^Idn No._- 1; a jmui1.__if 101,900 < square feet of 'teased gross floor area will be allowed within building 3 far the three land uses,�as started in Condition No';1 1; and, a vaximum of 2,040 square 'fret of leased gross floor i�,�ea �will be aor�ed �rtthin 'building 2 for eating and dri'nkinN hype, I of, u 3. A written document, showing the 'tabulation of required and..,, provided parking spaces, and the square footage of leased gross floor area for each use within buildings 1, 2 and 3, shall be sp!Wl teed, along with each proposed tenant iWr-ovemer} plans and/or business license application for City Planner review and approval, prior to iseuance of such tenant improvement-building permits and/or approva� ,of business--license application, '' APPROVED AND ADOPTED,TWIS 12TH DAY OF AlCI� , 1907. PLANNItdG C01"dMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAM9NGA��, r _ BY:--- Larry .j; e , a rman ATTEST: ra u er, epu y cre ary 1, Brad Buller, Deputy Secretary of the Plan vng Commission of ?*he City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing-Resolution irks duly and regularly int,-vjuced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular c ting of the Planning Commission held on the 12th day of August, 1987, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES.: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COfMMISSIONE'k�l ABSENT: C00',. ISSIONERS: -- CITY OF)RANCHO CLTCAMONGA. STAFF REPORT 'N�, rz. r z DATE: August 12, 1987 � ,'077 b TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, Cty Planner 8Y; Scott Murphy, Associate' Planner SUBJECT: TIME EXTENSION FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 12969 - YAZEDJIAN - A To-Ma resilen la eve'so nt of Z4 s ng a am yT—f s and two dupl saes totaling 23 units on 4.78 acres of land in the Low-Medium Residential District (44 dwelling units per arse), located on the south side,,of Arrow Route, between Comet Street and Sierra Ma&e;1?"give 222-08. - APN: 207 I. BACKGROUND: Tentative Tract 12969 was originally approved by the aiin ng ommission on July 10, 1985 for a two year period. The applicant has submitted plans —i begin the recordation process. The plans, however, cannot be 'reviewed, approved, and recorded within the original time limits. Therefore, the applia-"ant is requesting a one year extension of time. II. ANALYSIS: Staff has reviewed the tentative tract map ani finds ah r e proposal is in compliance with the Low-Medium Residential Development Standards and with t.4 General Plan, There is, however, one area of the tentative tract that is not in j compliance with . the direction of the Manning Commission _ undergrounding of existing overhr2d utilities. During the previccus year, the Planning Commission has actively pursued a more aesthetic and desirable working and living environment through the un,fergrounding of existing utility lines. In situations where overhead utilities cannot be undergrounded, the Planning Commission has required that an in-lieu fee be paid for the future under- grounding of the utility lines. With the approval 4 ="Cfie tentative tract, ►-o condition was included to adequately addross the existing overhead utility lines on the project side of Arrow Route. As a result, jtaff is recommending that a condition be added requiring an in-lieu fee be paid as contribution to the fAturing underprounding of the overhead utility lines. This additional condition, however, can only be included with the consen o to ap--pl;cent. I a app cant does no a ree o e cc-n on, e ann n ova ss�on may a prove a me extension wl on y 49 or g na can3it ons in p ace or may eny a me extension due to inC0115151tencies with curren y oicy. _ .�, ITEM G �i REPORT III Co(tR 'TAU item has been advertised in The Dail #Re` or ne stra er gas a �p bl is.hea'rirg; notices were sen - a71'Rropgr owners , th y 3G0'feet, and public hearing notices were po e n r+ tKa sie. IY. RECt lE QATTONs Sfaff rec-,omme.#&-� that' the Planning tommI s:31nn' rece ve r, ;�+agut. "oR ihi't itee4, if tfse app111Y alit .ag es. to tSae acid c condi5 ion, �a prova� of a..-one year ti!W'e `tensio►i;iire�rld be appropriate.. Il °tbe"$ppli°eant does:'dagree to the co7itton., staff reca11 ersha<t the Planning Go�ai:ssion deny th'e time- extension'. ��1 Respe ally su filed ra u er y R anner Be:SM:vc ' Attachments: Letter from Applicant j Exhibit "A" - Location hap Exhibit r - Tract Map Resolution of Approval for Time Extension _,. Resolution of Denial for Time Extension EQ@- 74: _t,''u. a.si.�E_+_. - - RECEIVED-- ANNING DIVISION AM J t � � 6aiiyaG oil Alif6t3 i .:ern+ "5 r� IN TMR CITY OF 11'ANCHO-COCALlONQA CR11lNTY bf 7AR•ERNARDINO. STAT!OF CALlFORNIA. gii- ad 1 { { 1 4{ g 1 s s Ord •ASSORT—� ��--'�---+— 1. �. t 1 S 4OK 1 s --STREET �: -� �� � 1 •ye tt r.�n � 1 .. �p � is E yi �i y4 � R t "v._ tc M3MTN ` STREET .ter fM( 0 T� CITY t — r = / i,� RANCHO T1TS..E t 'i7G.c/ M R ANNIN Ii DIVISI I EXI-if, ff- X.__SCALE; ; �/f h 3ro�7 r y� •na. { � ( PtBv�� � - 3 ' AMRow _ Win. 11@UTE zLi NNORTH PLANNINE EXVb9ON EXHIBIT- S_ SCALE 0 RESOLUTION No;, l A"RESOLUTION'OP,THE RANCHO CUCAWKIA`rLANNI+fG COmmisSIog, APPROVING THE TIMEEXTENSION FOa TE.NTATMy TRACT 12969 - APN: 207-222-08, WHEgEA.S, a request has been filed for a time extension for the above-descried project,,pursuant to Section 17.02.090; and WHEREAS,, the Planning, Commission conditionally approved the above-described Tentative Tract., SECTION 1: The Randio=LCucamonga Planning Commission has made the fallowing v`"-in ngs: A., That prevailing economic condition: lave«caused a distressed market climat.; for deviolopment of,,the project. B. That current economic, marketing, .'and inventory conditions make it unreasonable to develop the project at this time. C. That strict enforcement of the conditions of approvalAIR& c> regarding expirations would not be consistent with { the intent of the Derzlopment Code. i D. That the granting of said time extension will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. SECTION 2s The Rancho 'Cucamonga Planning Coaission hereby grants a 'time extens on su ect to the attached Condition for: Project Applicant Expiration TT 12969 Vazedjian` + July 10, 1988 Condition I. An in-lieu fee as contribution to the future undergrounding of the existing overhead utilities (telecommunications and electrical) on the project side of the street shall be paid to the City prior to approval of the final map. The fee shall be the full City adopted unit amount times the length of the project site. �� ��� Ex `OL�1TOk� NOS. Rage APPROYM r�NDk AbtbPTED JTFin 12TH DAY OF AU6t7ST, 1g6�. ' . . PLANNING CITY OF Wgi-d OUCMt3NGA BY: arrY T. MOTO c: ATTEST: Brad u eF, FA y' secretary . I. Brad Buller, Deputy Secretary of the pi an '`pgl rOOM!gission of the City of Rancho CuUmonga, do h6reby certify that,the-ferago 'ng�Resolu sn was duly and, c. regryTarly introduced, passe, and adopted. by the Planning Cb�3ssion of the « Cit; of Rancho C camange„ a a b"bStilar fitieti'ng of the Plannihg CO*issiprr held on the,l2th':day of kWgua, 1987, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMhiISSIONERS: tA' NOES. COMISSIONERS,, ASSENT: COMMISSIONERS: (IN f o \l t " W 7kfit*,FYI 1& i :< RESOLYTION 40. A RESOLUUIO-9 Oi 1HE .RANCHO CUC AMtt3�CvA`PLAHNIN&`.COMpi,ISSI(9N-, DENYING THE ffkt R f tiON rOR TENTATIVE TRACT 12969 3: :x WHEREAS, a request has been; filld"tor a time extension for the above-described .projecfi, ;pu:sitant to Section �L.01.83(b) of O.rdikhance 28-B, the Subdivision drdi,�ninces, and WHEREAS, the Planitinq 6om�i;sio conditionally approved the above-described tentatly! tfMtat1;41 tract. I ; WHEREAS, Tha A, jcho Ct�camonge Planning Commission f�ind's that, :the k tentative tract descri is herein is in conflict with the 3irections he y City s utility underground°ing policy, Il NOW, THEREFORE BF IT RESOLVED, that the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission hereby denies a time extension for tentative Tract 12969, located on the south side of Arrow Route between Count Street and Sierra Madre Avenue. f .. APPROVED AND ADOPTED 'THIS gTii DAY OF AUGUST, 1987.� PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: r Larry T. el, Chairman = �� ATTEST: ra a 'r. Deputy Sedre ary I, Brad Buller, riaputy Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby cirtify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a rr. uiar meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 12th day of August, 1987, by the followiveg vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: e CITY Olt'RANCFO CUC`W0XGA � o STAFF JkE]E'6RT i ` ^\\ O X Z 1977 DATE: _ August 12, 1987 - F 70: �'`�irm-an and Members of the planning Caiw;ission )_, FROM: Brad Buller, City planner � 4 BY: Scott. Murphy, Associate Nut-py SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL AS SFgSMENT AND iARIANCE 87,09 -NAMER - A;i request ore ace`USE -req•`r4(.average an scope se back% from 35 feet to 13 ifeet alCYry;-Bowen Street, and to reduce ! tlse required side yard setback from 20 feet to 12 feet for the north building in,tonjunction with the establishment., of a day care and school facility in the Low Residential District (7_-4 dwelling units per acre), 'located at the a northwest corner of Bogen Street and Baker Avenue APH 207-531-31 and 50. Related pile: CUP 87-22 I. BACKGROUND: The site has been used in the past as a day ca:=e cenTer""1he #order use was est�nshed and operating prior to incorporation of the City. Therefore, the day care center was classified as a legal non-conforming use until its closure in the middle to latter part of 1986. The applicant is now proposing to re-establish the day care and school use on the site. As part of re-oper_inv of the facility the applicant is proposing to provide ,.; services for 120 children -- the same number previously licensed for tits site. II. ANALYSIS.. A. i.andscaping Setback: In order to comply with the current parking requ- remen s for 120 students, the applicant is proposing to eliminate the circular drive off Baker Street and provide additional parking. This change, however, res0ts in the 4limination of landscaping along ,_Baker Street and a deficient average lanr' cape setback. The Development Code requires an ,average' Air;ape setback of 35 feet -- the 1 applicant is Piloposing 18-fleet. The applicant will also be making use of the ex sting parking area along Bowen Street. The paved area will be lb-striped for 15 parking spaces and a secondary access will be provided. The existing,I parking area is setback 13 feet from tl,,e face o6 curb Y ,The Development code specifies that whenei.)r a non+ ITEM;R ±v PLMININ4 C"'!S5ET STAFF REPORT � ~ VA 8,749 - August 12, 7 Page 2 l%onforming us. has been discontinued for 180 days or more, th¢ arse of the s __cture and the site *.,hereafte "call be ilrr c6hfor�mity witfi i[re regulations of the district in Mich it is �i located. Therefore a 35 foot .average landscape setback is required along Bowen, `treet as well as Baker Street. In both instances, ��-t7he greatest obstacle to fulfilling the 1 average landscape Setback is the location of the existing building. With the building centered on the site, there are a limited number of options avail able•'while stil'1 ad'qu e~y usi�g the site. -Me parking could he located at the rear of sit but several large mature trees would have to be removed and the playground area would have to be located adjacent to the streets. If the 35 foot average landscape setback were provided, this wayld create substandard drive aisle width and eliminate 19 parking spaces. This would significantly reduce the number of students permitted to use the facility. B. Building Setback: The Devetdpmeat Code requires that buildings e setback 20--feet from residentially zoned propeP4. The north building is located 12 feet from the west project boundary. However, because no changes are proposed thgt would increase the non-conformity of this northern building no _ variance is required for it to be reoccupied and remai' in its current location. A III. FACTS FOR FINDMp ,: in order ,approve a variance request, the Development o re uir,s that in�11anning commission make certain findings. The findings include the following, :1.. That a strict.and literal interpreta ,n,and enforc,_ jot of the specified regulation would_,,esult in practicol difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of the Devel*;".n+ Code. 2. That there are exceptional or extraordinary cirt��nstances or conditions applicable to the property involved, or to the intended use of the property that do not apply general), to other properties in the ame district: 3. That strict: or literal interpretation of enforcement' of - the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges.,,,enjoyed by ".he owners of other properties in the same,_ strict. i �(t 4 t y � A. C �7? 4. That granting a variance will not constitute a .grant of special privilege' inconsistent t'h the imitationsi grant of other properties classified in this same district, S. That the granting of a variance will not be detrimorital to the Malt-N safety, or welfare, or , materially Wurious to properties or tmproVtaents in the vicinity, TV. CORRESPONDElICE: This item has boen advertfsad as 3. public ear ng e`m—T.,n The Daily lie ort newspaper, the property_ posted, and not were sen + a' 1 property owners within— ZOO feet of the praject site, V. RECOMEHDAMM- %taff recommends that the_ Planning u�""" nduct a public hearing to consi4er public input's a and elements of this project. If, after suc;h considera pn,,k the Commission can support the required findings, there' adoption of the attached Resolution of�,,,Wroval would b�. appropriate. Resr:��4fu�y sub e j ity Piann 88*SM:vc Attachments: Letter from Applicant Exhibit P - Site utilization Exhibit "'to - Site Aran ResgIkjtiolt of Approval i j tl EDUCAT,10i"-4AL PROD RAMS, INC. 940 ATST DUARTE ROAD _ MONROVIAf CALIFORNIA 91016 (W8)447--2246 d,T de Ile u, c %*Ae G ' ''C� �I t G 66/441f• � lxf!f 75A n l," / �, �C?�t•ft� �Y�e .t�tcf�c!'.c��,i��'7�J'�^ J .�. Gh' '%2�,, . e4, ., rl EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMSANC. 940 WEST DUARTE ROAD MONROVIA,CALIFORNIA 91016 + (818)-147_2246 c� T d6a, z h` � { `oee"' -7 42/Ou ,f �t� S 2t za;t'a,,, { s Q -31 }?2t gilt, S e oo 't�l P ZgPl c a pt z,Ca2 7`•/llel.�t,,,1.>`�a fla 47 6JR-e,4 r,- r� It• ;3 (( � tr O'G RAMS 940 W€STbl1A E I Lyftl2 M.ONROVIA,CALWOR4iA 91016 + (818)'4472246_ c C1.4 Aft Of � e CCj�JJ// �;C�,. �✓ffrlJ.c9��_,7�' �.v-d3 ;i�.�''1ir i!*,r� .af�'C � ,1S � �`tc �'+�' l.!✓.14�i{ "� +a r. oc ef MIr-o-'4 '1 a-, h i NEW ,MT1 j6 7 fAwy Ft XrdESQ NkMTH CITY CF :.ALE: , r " � T s l MIK p ;1 N" i r , i Y 1, ES I f� • I_� �t� 9 LU CITY CF ter: Y� gel IL-Z 'i'Ci"I.F.=S//�/-fit/ PLANNING EM'SON: EXHIBIT-,.. _SCALE-�- g,g s 'I ,l RESOLUTION NO. A R pLU ION flF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION APPR '/ING VARIANCE NO. 87-09 T4 1LLOW1 REDUCING THE AVERJGE LANDSCAPE SETBACK FRONT 35 FEET TO� 18 FEET ALONG BAKER STREET-.AND FROM 35 TO 13 FEET ALOW, BOWEN STREET, LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF BOWEN OOEET AND BAKER VENNUUE,SOIN THE LOW RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT 1! APNH 207-531- A. Recitals. 1 ti) Irving Hamrcer has filed an applica �on for tE-b2 issuance of the Variance, No. 07-09, as desc-ibed in the title of this Resolution. Herein- after in this Resolution, the subject Variance request is referred to as "the appl icati o0. (if) lilt the 12th day of August, 1987, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamowla conducted a duly noticed p!jblic hearing an the application and concluded said hearing on that date. (iii) All legal p+crequisites�to the adciptlan of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THE'EFORE, it is hereby found, determined and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamono'k as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 1 2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced public hearing on August 1?:_y 1987, including written and oral staff reports, together with pubif' '--,testimo„y,- tits Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: (a) The application implies to a I.; acre parcel in the Low Residential Di-trict (2-4e dwelling units per acre), located at the northwest corner of Bowen Street and Baker Avenue. 1 (b) The properties to the north, south and west of the subject site are presently designated for residential uses are currently iieveloped with an el mertary school to the north and with single family dwellings to the south and west. The property to the east of the subject site is'Jesignated for industrial uses and is currently developed with single family dwellings. (c) The application has been submitted to allow the reduction of the average landscape setback to 18 feet along Flakes Street and to 13 feet along Bowen Street contrary to the requirements of Section 17.10 040 or the Rancho Cucamonga Development Coda requiring an.average landscape setback of 36 feet. i r� PLANNING CQid~II SSION RESOLUTION NO. VA 87-09 -_Harmer': August I2, 1987 Page 2 % M The. variance"-a specified in. the applicniripn Qi11 not..- contradict the goals or objectfves of the Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Mr Development Code and will nit .prodcot a detrimental condition to the persr}ns or property in the im�ate vicinity of thvUbject site for the reasons`as 1 follows: �r (i) The 35 foot average landscape setback can be schieved by providing parking at the rear (west) of the site. This would however, result in the re'-Meal ,of several mature trees, 'Considered "heritage trees" by the City, The 35 foot a,+erage landscape setoach can be a6ia,did .by wrong Baker and Bowen Street. This would, however,-result in"a substandard drive aisle providing an unsafe situation to the pr5lic safety in the evel,;b of the need for emergency vehicle access, WA) The prnprrty has unique physical limitation, ("heritage trees", P-Yistina 'structures) that are not typically found undzr similar zoning c?Assificai;ions. (Ei the granting of the rubSect variance will not be detriments~'� the public health, safety or welfare, or utaterfally injurious to proper-_'_A-Aof improv nts in the vicinity. 3 , Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this ConKission durt:ig the above-referenced public hearing and spon the specific findings of fats set forth in par4graph: 1 and above, Sys commission herayy finds and concludes as 17011o".: } (a) Approvil of Variance 87-09 shall be coatingent upon approval of conditional Use Permit 8722. (b) All applicable conditions in the Resoluti^R of approval for Conditional Use Permit 87-22.-�hall apply. APPROVED AND ADOFfED THIS 12TH DAY OF AUGUST, 1987. PLANNING P.OMMISEION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY. Larry T. MENIel, ar rman AWEST. Brad u pr, ep y "- a` ar "_ "r ,r i 1-7 $ PLF' AW`Ts`N kk ' � 0 +- VA lQ�tg�aSt F, I, Brad Buller, . epasiy E!Grel;ry of the Planning i4b.Coofj,. of,tbe City '0f Rancho CucamongAy,ado he'reby:certtfy that the foregoiig Res tiiUln wis drily and riegl r-Orly introduced, paSSed, cnd adapted dry the p1 nxb Cou i°ssi'on': of t,hek City 9f Rancho Cucamcsdga., at areptar meet4ng�f the "Pl;anrring Coprql—iaa 1re1�i on the AM day iol �3gusit; I90,,1y the fciTQW*rg vote-to-wfitis NOES: COMFITSSPBRERSs <: �BSEHT: COWISSIONERS: } I n Cl rEMU CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA y STAFF REPORT w m 0 a- F Z_ 8 U > 1971 •'; DATE: August 12, 1987 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Butler, City Planner BY Scott Murphy,'Associate Planner SUEtGrT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT' AND, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 87�-22 HWER - reques c establish, a ay We center and prescWool within t existing buildings in th,: Low Density Residential Dist ri�Et (2-4 dwelling units per acre), located at the sou`hwest corner of 9th Street and Baker Street - APN: 207-531-31=and 50. V k 1 ' Related File: Variance 87-09 c I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: \. Action Requested: Approval of the Conditional Use Permit t, allow aay -care and preschool :uses and iasuance of a Negatle e i Declaration. B. Surrounding Land Use and Gonin tTor—= Los !ps Elementary haol; Low Density Residential'; (2-4 dwelling units per acre) South Single family residential, ---'ow Density Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) East - Single family residential; Industrial Specific Plan (Subarea 17) West Single family residential; Low Density. Residential { �-4 dwelling units per acre) C. General Plan Designations: Project e - LOW Density pesidential (2-4 dwelling units per- acre)' ;forth ''Elementary school South - Low Density Residential (2-r4 dwelling units per ;acre;; East _- Industrial Park Wiest - Low Density Residential (2-4 dweiiing units per acre) D. Site Charagtiristtca: There are two existing buildings located ante tZTa`t—was previoust'y operated as a preschool. A northern building is z converted single family residence The ! south bui ling:-is a former church. There is a cirralar d ';,-e acressing off Baker Street serving the southern buildin .. ITEM I ;i PLANNING COWrSSION STAFF Ri VRT CUP 8742 - Hammer pagest-,12, 1987 Ask Additional parking is provided along the south project boundary adjacent to Bowen Street, in addition, there is a swing ng pool and st-feral [nature trees located an,the site. E. _Parking Calculations: Number of Number of �l Parking Spaces Spaces r. `Ratio Required Provided l 120' tudents' ` 1/5 chi dren 24 24 J 10 faculty" 1/staff 10 10 ?bx-^1. 34 34 ; II. ANALYSIS A. Background: The .site has been used in the pastas a day care cen er, a use was established and opera*ing prior to incorporation of the City. The day ca center was subsequently closed in the middle to latter part of 1986. The property is delapidated as a result of vandalism, B. General; The applicant is proposing to ro-establish the day ^are and school uses on the site. The apoAcant wilh upgrade the site by painting the buildings and installing new landscapirg. Also, the applicant is proposing to modify the Internal circulation 9f the site by eliminating the circ� iar 1 drive off Baker Street and providing additional parking. The parking along Bowen Street will remain and-.a secondary.acces;j, point Will be provided. With the modifications to the site plan, however, the applicant will W'creating a greater`nonconformity of the site due to the inadeq(4te landscape setback provided along Baker Street and Bowen Street. The Development Code specifies that the average landscape setback along Baker Street and Bowen:Street shall be 35 fget - the applicant is proposing I8 feet and 13, respectively, The variance requests are more fully explained in the accompanying staff report for Variance 87-09. C. De sYgn Review Cowittee; On July 16, 1987, the Committee 3 (Tojstay, rnericl�, C0TWan) reviewed, the .;pronsal and recomm ided approval subvect td`the following condice.' 'ns 1. Provide street trees at RO feet on Canter on all street fr-ontages, �,r � �_:•l ems' � .� ,�: PkA}l_ING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT , CUP 87-22 - flamer August 127, 19l87IN :. Page 3 2. Provide a thorny shrub hedge between the public sidewalk and parking lot and pool to di}courage graffiti and vandalism. 3. Tice, existing wall` on Bowen Street should :be plastered or stuccoed to match the south building. 4. Relocate the driveway on Bowen Street to the,west opposite a 4sidentiar driveway.`.. D. Environmental Assesswant: Staff has completed the Envi roWfi a e'enlfli"s'f"'and found no significant adverse or environmental impacts as a result of this project. If the Planning Commission concurs with these findings, the issuance of a Negati-se Declaratio,q ' would be appropriate if the Conditional Use Permit is approved. 111. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: The propoapd -use is consistent 'with the Ojec ves a ,, a ene�a,,,-Plan. ''The project, however, has been determined to be incoWartent kith the Development Code as r described in the staff report for Variance 87-09. IV. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the planning Commission conffucT a"pufi "c hearing and receive all input ant# testimony on the proposal. If the Planning Commission can make ula' the required findings for Variance 67-09, then approval may be ivanted through,: adoption of the,attached Resolution with Condition. and a Negative peclaratiun mayC,be issued. if the Planning Commission cannot support the variance, then staff should be directed to prepare a Resolution of Atnial for adoption on the next Consent Calendar agenda. Respe oily its , Bra Y City anner BB:SM:vc ff Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Site }Utilization Mays ! Exhibit fB" - Site Plan Exhibit 'V - Elevations I Resolution of Approval with Conditions if ,rili Cmu 'PAO r6v NOKM CITY CrF rrE�,, - ;-- Pt.A.N1IINU I3MIRON EXHIBIT.-et SALE= <. ,I 1+ n., F- I� k�. O 7 �l LU —.._ tll _. Ir �A a CITY CF TE 9• � {/��f^� 1l Llfl _Sf'J 7�'� RANTCM CL '11ONGA- TITLE: _`si�,1�' •t f LAN V INU DIL'ISM LXI"IMT- SCALE a R U , •i N CITY CF ITEM. ,�11 TITLE !,1 'IANN '`dl: L?JV ECHIBIT=G'"� SCALE: - II Y -*ate ��tml/� •�..� l �'` ij , low �loo* o- }p �_•� S..,ni F,. r� ,ros,..s �,�,n; �.� +w�y fi � ...`pry �<b�'. ',�t .,t'ZT.P �.d.. .. .. jr r.,�t n ,';v�. i2ESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUT10,N.OF THE MNCHd CUCAMONGA YLANOING COWISSIOid a APPROVINGC4NDITIONAR:Jt'SE PERMIT NQ� 81-22 FOR IAIiI�dG, NAMER LOCATED AT THE �3UTHNEST R 4F BAKER STREET AND 91H STFI£,ET . THE LOW `.RESIDENTIAL DI'SMCT - A(Bi> 207-531-31 AND' 5D VHEREAS,: on the 7th day. of July, 1987, a complete application was filed by Irving Hamer for ,review of the above-described project;, and �. WHEREAS, on the 12th day of August, 1987, -the Rancho Cucamonga planning Commission held a p_u!-.".ic hearing to consider the above-described y NOW, THEREFORE, the Rancho Cucamonga PlanningCoamission,,resolved as follows: SECTION 1: They the following.,findirgs can be met: 1, That the proposed use is in iccord with the General Plan, the objittives of the Development Code, and the purposes of the district % which the site is Iodated. '2.. That the proposed use, togeV,�r crtth the conditions applicable thereto, Will no, r+: datrimental to the public health, safety, br elfare, or materially a injurious to properties r improvements in :;the vicinity. 3. That the proposed use'eon;�iics with each of the applicablei7rovisions of the pevalopment Code. SFCTION 2: That this project will not create adverse impacts-on the environme-Wand Mat a ftatiVe Declaration is issued on August 12, 1987. SECTION 3: That Conditional Use Permit No. 87-22 is approved subject tO-M--Mtowing conditions: Planning Division I. Detailed landscape and irrigation plan shall be provided for the, site and shall be submitted for review and approval by the City Planner. The plans shall include the following: r a. Street trees shall be planted at 20 feet on center along all street frontages. b. A thorny shrub hedge shalf,..)be provided between the public sidewalk and,>the'parking lot arid_pool. CUP,°i.,,y A2+s, aR�1,GNrj z�• a ,,;:. s� , ,'F J Page Y fi - .w •. 3 _ c, ' The ex� rt :wAll on,O.owen Street �ia71 be plastered or h -tiFre south bgiiding and'prov1ded-with 'a cove cap. 2.. All sfte imprgYe��rits,.: ncludiog landscaping and irrigat on, A: shall br�� cr>e�i��*Ii--parr �to occupancy, 6 3, The driYew a]rJng Bid Street sha?1 be l�(!ate; tto the nest oPposite a residenYfal dri`aWAY to the south, Ir cs E�n� GiYiSion !� , 1. A reciprocs acass and drainage easement shall be provided ' between the two parteis prior to Occupancy of the building. � APPROVED;AND ADOPTEO THIS 12TH aAY OF AU1ll 6T, 1987. ". PLANNINC COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CQCAWJNDA s BY: harry T. c ret`- ?la ratan ' ATTES'�: k epu y ecir ary I, Brad Buller, Deputy Secrenary of the Planning COMissiwn of the City of ncho Cucamonga, Ra do P reby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced,, assed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamong,, at a regular meeting of the Pianni+ng Cission held on the 12Ch day of Augu ts 1987, by the following vote-to-wit- AYES: COMKIS(,_ 7ERS i? NOES: COWISSIONERS: ASSENT: COWISSIONERS: I gLi.,Si�'� 0411.q t Cyy 34 } y yrd z -21 LEV B. M•�$8a a•wr u ,i lot —i. — ��«�yy' Y�� E. ^1� LU Sg isg+N 9y+` � qq, fu�i w fix: Sol TL Rmiz _ _e Is IB�. = « g�-�gf�aiyp "+ aa15r'aa—ya a�"'® _� p. p 999Y O M��ii Y a CC= if u la �� c p �p_v =87:J M�+ S W rYi^Y«e4N cy{«� N Y « > ^wi Y wd4 1 N.l�w Q p p !if fi LR. .� � 0 9 qt➢ r�� aw. {y i sS Y 4 td u Uk I f I 1 r i N,�pS .i 3t Z_$..iy1P atthp •'ly< $��1'Yi Au 3 p4tv it mg v y Xm � L■6Cliw O+$e� dVV Y6NS�Uq' N y V^a�1N V v,_;.JJjij Lii C6~ ii^�yy�. M i • {}A•Y�. wLO y NA G 1.6 d T.: -al� pc ,� w 1 yam,., y 6 yam. ^ 4� SOS �N � lCawr 4i� S � 4Ku g N i •+�i ■ rry. S`y�Yj •*���N°1 Gw 6 !€ s o eT N 'ma u -Zv y E '�iC • jg tQ CITI _�Kat, .. i ppp F uzNn� s a s � al Az! M-���li�� w fz f y" N y Y Aserg-! _C ai yQV{ .y li Y e► s .y ayf w gad.§ �VMf4 F31��ryf. p�~ 7j>•e .Y R� N�Y Ow +� rN�iw ���ELY �P�� �wDa[� AS 13. WE j 431 Jj` VL G o w~_N �w Nfy1� 0.CVp} Nsfl �y9} �.•• �1 Nay y ems* #i •� h a t rz h Ig iwr iat�NY� OCVZMC0p'2 r — 'Nh0 — a; AM C.4Q �a j ryas x 14 "'N a C gro61yl.p 1R+��i/^' - rtgY pMy4 VipyCM -luri "Cli$h. II a y v. 'IV Sit pi .a.M�.+in a yfi.. It Y...�.$ *' tY♦ i1� t.. a vs. �c �r �QY M+Yu .«.3- swi'- +ew �irae rp, »tiu.NM.ss.`d. '�4 G as 5c .WS 'd�u y LQ air 41 'p ,:a yew a, .gK fit w 3 �bb,�r,�et w cir■ f7 Pi sNy ^N Vt'OSN ; Yi.Gy m al Ag-f 96 N'+TL yam dX +aa' i.ga st u.fii� K �"I a ' Kp r„ �p c` «aaaL _ as �' .. y_ s R•r�• V�y a' ie70 3 Y � N » �� '�A S� N�Y3•� L W •II V M» ty! ti i + 63 'i�7C� i.itp iN Ys C *2 p ayyyyy!` E- N y Y 'S yM v .5 M.N. YZ M {a� ui spa��N„ Se a + Tai p. 4— UIrO{G y �' ppp� r L y Y� fw .Yy. OO MM Qa 34V 6 a gg v 3ayA �' gyy +� KyY M gMaYl MM Mp,a K9N N-aN su ncv Mao ..r �io� K'f� +'1�L'aasJCy� w IX IL ac T 11tl ' ter R�$�J_f' ` ye V O > g 6s �Y`rSI Aa a L���V! $c` ■p � t�i ` r p13, ... « ws� NHC 9i{f� IN 1Yp •M •� C OM �. McYeM �'Ei •L Yr� iY` 1� Y pY }Y^Ma Y..Yass rr CL ruff iiii M o O A v .P A r �L g P a 1 y�d®Y®dsC �2. g� Yd i9 Y p .^ tlY 9Y Y. CYi d�� aYy r Nrr! O`er ._. y�i` � '. Y Rdd it Hit � y Rz a all 1 y Bud 3 $.^ 3 5 ppY_ � r � Sub a Et i pip qq Y Y pp g� C t I! log p {�}1 •�y`Cw ss � � N erl Y a .231 Ej .1 O O A V Y:Y VOO i +4 yM ^��1 Atd O A^ r 6d L ^ d �NS•AV V N �•, �� 4y Qa, �` � V Y�y, �6+R. yT�� N�r IJ -I p � a"io i � W' • '° w `gd $off S9ia �g'g' ZM� g •.Y�� N� i Z=f Ws � e � V< 11 F N k 'fi a A.- 41 i M '7i7•e �Y _„�� L9 yww q�C, ;2 �. i•• VS ' ` —mod ao Fig �4. a € g .!jai "aQ ` ®� �8.a sy 6 s s s. s �- L Ham '' ip. vTs NHYCC�, ;� to q :'N • Maio - Vgi O V O Q LW b. wa1 �11 ZM t{ti YbK 6C�{ � N 17 i• tti disk LO t sr r iretali -b1 b3% �- g^ ��� t sr sa � f rL Lill off. psSmv s;� Xy '�� _ _ Mggr _ � • � Aop, r \41 •ypy�/ `..� «5y"1�Y'�p I In i wr.y^�PI p My ® it a Y.Ue sag el. �"J Ulu u a, a q Win-. LIZ 4 Iy oip V-N ^ a��y �•p ,tF O p�O r R �]FO' a—p��•• 'FeV'� 11F .q Y Y�• i f _" MY Iq}}Yg¢1 p pMM 'OCssii �a Yp th . }� yam' ar } �•�� M A.��L. L Et- •�� L ,a ^• : w°�. R I �_4�A s .�_ _ pp e a id s $ a 4 W1Vy WYfd .cil C.N. :.}. s a. o �S �4 A NYl � N! i�F ri Nab. la o .. V YL tli , ��r ~ oi ^�p Nam@! N t� _b N.rL M yf Rt Gi NN $ ij C ;� t4^q i'a `,.ral}tt p• �� '.N yiCR$ ,yyD 4� d!±` 'f� `'bM Y• rpf M,N 63 y k'w a L ei Li ti Q�� A it Q V .A � • xj o1 SIR $« if �- as . .-4t - �_� �•� � _ «'2Z �a e W Lf^ Y tl 4 g � g Atli-;� Ns4�t tl 4AM �C fJ S WM Ni LY � �i R� IaL' �V _ �1V t/W t0� oa It Y pip. s t a�Mz �p Ly0. j—,f Cc �. 7Y ti ME x�y� l ♦_3p yy p � g@ � yyL I.. Y¢1**444gw rya �.L) 1 6L W V : K'4 v i4 NBC tO 4� V WV M Y = h�Y s^ wY �pt OY mayy` L66 a uuy .. ==L O r g� LIJ «6 + ~fix PHI Y.3 m i A a ^. e Z M fo eza Aga Its rs'�t i p _yal a g y ill L. c L !i 3 V«C re cc �y�ty qp Yjig pp33 ... +.5 A t_C C L•a p o NY y„1�' . L- 41� y.;4r a e ^ �y _ p'., LL is Y G i , C � pY6 CV sg a ga Y ih f" P "b'3 p+w. e V "^C. a` �' Ss= g« C vAGM G� A 9 Y 6 ~M Ys MwC 4Mti M CM : twee'.^ a4.`.iw2. eot% wi I ' ^ 'A �1 Ni N�I a 4a" i ----- CITY OF RANCHO CITCAMONGA Gvcanrc STAFF REPORT > 1477 Q4TE: August 12, 19$7 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission° (� FROM: Barrye R. Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer BY: ��� Barbara Krali, Assistant Civil Engineer' SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT A*D TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 10902 - TMiE I'ILLIAM LLYON N '- SuDalvis7oll o a`cres of land } into 2 parce s for school and park facilities within the i Victor,;a Groves Community Plan located on the Northerly side of Fairmont Way at the Westerly Terminus of Victoria Park Lans. CAPN 202-901-31) I. PROJECT AND SITE DESC2IPTI0N: _ Action Requested: Approval of the propovLd Tentative Parcel Map ass own on Exhibit "B" B. Parcel Size: Parcel 1 - 7,10 Acres i Parcel 2 - 6.04 Acres Total 13 cres* C. Existing Zontaa�i Victoria �,nves Community Plan, School and Park Site D. Surrounding Land Use: North - Medium (4-14 du/ac) Development District South -".ow'Medium (4-8,du/ac) Development District East - Low Medium (4-8 da/ac) Development District West - Medium (4-14 du/ac) Development 0istrict E. Surrounding General Plan and Development Code Designations: North - Mediurt (4-14 du/ac) Development District South - Low Medium (4-8 du/ac) Development District East - Low Medium (4-8 du{ac) Development District West - Medium ;(4-14 du/ac) Development District F. Site Characteristics: -1 Parcel 1 is vacant. Victoria Groves Community Park has been constructed on Parcel 2. ITEM J TM PCANNINt.. a 112C,_P O I&PLF REPORT Ss 11 RCETENTTAUG = i' 4. PAGE 2 1 If 1 II.` ANALYSIS: . The purpose of th;s Parcel Map is to divide 13.14 acres of lgo'd into 2 parcels to Create separate parcels for the existing City"Park and the school state located within the Victoria Groves Community. In order to have a clearly`defined boundary for maintenance between the City maintained green,.way area and the school site:, some ur realigned of the green way South boundary line is required, she realignment would requdre a quit claim by the City for that small: portion of land as ghown on Exhibit "C". This places the lot line' ' adjacent to o e sidewalk ailong the. green way and creates an easily identified m&intenance boundary. Fairmont Way, located on the Southerly side of the park, has been constructed. Emerson Street and 'Sherbrooke Place, along the West9ry side of the project"are under construction at this time. III. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW* The applicant completed Part I of the Initial Study. Staff conducted a field investigation acid completed Part IX:. of the Initial Study, No adverse impacts upon the environment are anticipated as a result of this project. Therefore, issuance )of ' Negative Declaration is appropriate. IV. CORRESPONOENCE4. Notices of Public Hearing have been sent to surroun ng property owners and placed in the Daily Report Newspaper. "Posting at the site has also been completed. V. RECOMMENDATIONt It is recommended that the Planning Commission conside-F aTl- nput and elements of the Tentative Parcel Map. If after such consideration, the Commission can recommend-:,t+roval, then the adoption of the attached Resolution and issuance " a Negative Deciaratiou,would be appropriate., Respectfully submitted, Barrye R. Hanson Senior Civil Engineer BRH:BK:,j h Attachments: Vicinity Map (Exhibit "A") Tentative Map (Exhibit "B") Resolution and Recommended Conditions of Approval i( �r'a. _.:... _..;.,.. y.- Lan ..:_ .S4 ?:.: .. _. ;1. ... .rzY ;:.' .ram ±::L:�•h� r T b .t b t fill X. erl rw cr Y�y l•� Y t = p fie'��� ex � �a 'S� •9 E.i.l •ti., p „ , rL rp c ui 57 tT ow lot I' �. . ya �Ifi, " cY 1. ..I • us'.>Zi --• ®'= I `ter 4 / C .X a� - io oca ww s it f� t `k IN fill j44 \It_/' t J, "•'V �ESOLUTION NO. A RESOI.CIIa,} 0F-fHE PLANNING COWrSSIai OF THE CITY OF FMACHO -W,C'MOSKs ' Ck1, ORN1A, CONDITIONALLY APPROVING TEXT AATI-Vt AstdEL MP NOMBER 10902' 'WHEREAS, TeotatIver Parcel Map Number 1.090.2, submitted by The William a� LI+3n Company, appCtcant, for the purpose of subdividing into, 2 parcels., the rr,F , property situated- in they City, of Rand'r COcamona� County of San Bernardino; State of 4alifor �F i4entified et-ION(s) 202-9`0 -31, located on the Northerly side of Eai:,rmont W y at the terdtin=, 0if Victoria.Park Lane, and WHEREAS, on August 12, 1997, the Pl=anal.;g Commission held a duly advertised pubii�hearing for tO,,abcve-described map. 3= NOi7„THEREFORE, THE RANCHO CUCAM—CHGA PLANNING COWISSION RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: That'the following findings,-have been �T � made: L lhat the map is cons6tent with the General Plan`"` 2. That the: improaentti' of the, proposed subdivision is, consistent with tlNt,-_General Galan. 3. That the siteis'',' physically' suitable for the proposed development. k 4. That the proposed a,*ivisioW and improvements will not cause substantial, 'envirorimental damage, public health E problems or have ddver,,e affects on abutting property. SEC A 2: That Tentative Parce't Map No. 1nR'-, is hereby approved subject to t attached Stand4rd Conditions and '-the' .follay>:ing Special Conditions: />I 1. In order to define the limits_��"of maintenance responsibilities between tic school site'and City trail to tine northi.the lot line between the tsar shalt be moved to the south Pdge )f the scat ierly trail wait as shown on the tentative map. A`,lat line adjusti-anent is necessary to accomplish the relocation,-.which hall be, completeted prior to recordation of tlia Parcel Map. City,Cotncil approvr_7 *s required for the transfer of the minor portion of the trail property- to the school site. 2. Erosion Contrui shall be required on all slopes on Parcel No. 1 to the satisfaction of the City Engii,eer and Building Official. /j r' 4 71 • T� APPROVED ANa A-DOPTPP THIS ;2th IiY t1F August, ; 987. -PLANNING'COMKSSJbN OF TWCITY OF RANCHO ttlCk*G4 BY. t^�y T. MdNitl, a man ATTEST- ra Buller, eputy crNta '""'" s t 1- 4' Y 1-4;R x E Y Z y #u .a vq M r = w4, aw a: �K diS aw -N ,w P ;743' fit .. .. �. •4tr A. N4z 1.■ -�.s�iV Ylist d V �► + illit 22 � s � 4. � •y: �w w. is w ��i yam,, 1 Sa`s sa ''gel v "'i 7 s `i ^ C qOC C4�� Vw at.IV. AS i vsi Ig± N$ $$P 91 Eli .CN `VM CC�qy. ts NZ N u u$ �+ A tf Va fag.. fe n rt. BM .J ltlLO! QI',yAy M I yYpp� �s L YY 4 V a Di% C K�ryr C � � �v �.'�. � «o. is c�'$ Q�� a> o� N� E�yy r ��> 'yam cn ! Y� reg6 ��(�Y pfL 1L.� � V�V �N• >y C V �y Lp N C� p`$c 22 g 6y �^ 4.L 8i C 6 y 9 leV�. Y'� `YO pb QT�i N Y• e�0., any 2D.fip� may! y� at • 14 � tiLtiO R�q 0.A� r___7 t 1 1 (.ITV OF RANCHO CUCf1M0'VCA x' STAFF REPORT e r o DATE: August 12, 1987 re17 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission k FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Scott Murphy, Associate Planner SUBJECT: REVISION TO THE VICTbRIA VINEYARDS SOUTH .AREA DEyEGOFFlENT PLAN - . - eques o,rev se approvect Area Development an to re-orient the park site and realign Rochester Avenue for Victoria Vineyards South E Village, a 117.4 acre portion of the victoria Planned Community, located on the north side of Base Lima Road, between Milliken and Rocheste, Avenues - APN 227-081-06. I. BACKGROUND On October 23, 1986, the Planning Commission approved =. Tffe rea Development Plan for the Victoria Vineyards South Village. The Area Plan established the future land use patterns and circulation-system for the village, s I. ANALYSIS: A. Park Site: The applicant is proposing to re-orient the park she n a north-south alignment as opposed to the east-west orientation originally approved. By doing so, the narrow strip of Medium r%fsldentiai Land north of .the park site will be €liminatei$ thereby provfning greater flexibility in site design. The Cummunity Services Division has reviewed the- request and is in agreement with the proposal subject to the following conditions: 1. The park site should be 5 acres net, not gross. 2. The overall park grade is to be kept to a minimum. The usable park space should not be comprised to allow for grade adjustments from surrounding development. B. Rochester Avenue: The original approval for the Vineyards South age indicated Rochester Avenue as a straight s street. Over the course of time, it has been determined that ' the alignment of Rochester Avenue will be d-Igned with a slight curve. The proposed revision to Rochest6e'fvenue simply r reflects the most,_rpcently adopted alignment bringing it into s conformance with .standards and policy. ITEM K 1 11,� " �1"`6n .� y _ y PLAf.NIA CCM ISWOk`,'.TAFF REPORT' REVISION yT,Ll _VELO.PMENT PLAN VItiEYARC? S^ft YILlAig August 12, 4g87 Page 2 . C. Loop Road: 7tie Loa Road (Belvine East West) intersects with use ;one Road at median breaks.. engineering Division policye is titsa°�streyt 'lintersect-at rlgght angles for proper visibility k and e ie of turning moVgOients., Therefore, Engineering rec ,(ds that the Loop Roi(d (Beivino East Kest) be designed' �t with Perpendicular intersections at Base Line Road. U. Traits: The approved Development Plan indicates that trails were going to ::,provided from Milliken Avenue to Belvino test 1 and from' Rochester Avenue to Kenyon Ray. The applicant Indicates that',the trails have been deleted from the Area Plan because the connection to Milliken and Rochester Avenues would ` encourage mid block crossings. It has been the policy of the Commission to direct trail users to cross at controlled r._ intersections. Staff has analyzed the change and is in agreement with the proposal. Staff feels that the deletion of F these largir trail connections does not preclude the use of smaller internal trails within 'future developments. The development areas wittin the Area :Plan are ,sufffxient in size to accommodate internal trail system conners,ons to the overall trail circulation system for the Vineyard: South Village.. I V. iRECOMMENDATION• $taff'( recoamends that the Planning Commission approve ►Tee revision to the Vineyards South Area �velopment Plan through adoption of the attached Resolution. Resp ally fitted, Brad 1 Cit, Planner BLS:M:to Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Revised Arta vbveiopment Plan Exhibit "B'" - Approved Area Development Plan Resolution of Approval i � co fu �nx 3 Oi � r � IL �S x 9co V a s L CIS W W Z �i Z ci:R a o Q m = Nuia ors aD 0 12 N LU f " C � Y - 4 Cl < s= z _ . -== r —cr �^ • O LL tb r e o J 3 F C-4 cm 10 m uj ------------ RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING A REVISION TO THE AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR VICTORIA VINEYARDS SO01 VILLAGE LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF BASE LINE ROAD,: BETWEEN MILLIKEN AND ROCHESTER, SOUTH OF THE SOUTHER PACIFIC RAIL'gOAD IN THE VICTORIA PLANNED COMMUNITY - APR 227-081-06 WHEREAS, on the 4th day of dune, 1987, a complete application was filed by The William Lyon Company for review of the above--described project; and WHEREAS, on the 12th day of August, 1987, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission help# a meeting to consider the above,-described project. follows: NOW. THEREFORE, the Rancho Eucamonga Planning Commission rosolved as SECTION 1: That the following findings can be met: 1. That the proposed use is in accord with the ob3ertives of the Victoria Panned Community Text and the purposes of the district in which the use is proposed. 2. That the proposed use, together vrlth the conditions f applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the C public health, safety, or welfare, or materially. injurious to properties or Improvements in the vicinity. 3. That the proposed use complies with each of the applicable provisions of the Victoria 'planned Community Text and Development Code. 4. That the proposed project is consistent witji the General Plan. SECTION 2: That the revision to the Area Development Plan for Victoria n�Pi eat" South Village is approved subject tt", the following conditions: Planning Division: 1. All applicable conditions of Resolution 86-162 ciall apply. Engineering Division: 1. Belvino East hest (Loop Road) shall be designed ~o intersect at right angles with Base Line Road to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. ^r•-"tenJ t '',k'fw '. < -9-z^" F;"'n^'^-'x77 RhVd5iON TR"A' D Ri.14TI0ti NO',. ��. YICiC�tIA .. RY3t VIt6AGR .August,l ; 198T` Page 2 y Commmunity"Servicgs: 1. The park site shall be five t53 not acres in size. 2. The overall pai^k grade shall be kept to a minimum. The usable 'park space shall not be coWrised to _ allow s -for grade adjgstments from surrounding development: APPROVED `A; A0O'PTE9 TNi'a 12TH DAY OF AUGUST, 19g7. � r PLANNING COMMISSION �THE CITY RANCHO CUCAMONGA i s. BY:Larry T. e } ` ` ATTEST• ra ate\epu y acre ary R I. Brad Buller, Deputy Secretary of the Planning Commission of,,-the City 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 meetthg of the Planning Commission held on the 12th day fi Aupst, 1987, by the following vote-to wit: AYES: CoFi issrONER5: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: � i J r ------ CITY OF RANCHO C'UCAMONGA .. STAFF REPORT DATE: August 12, 1987 1977 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FR t: L'Patd Buller, City Planner BY: Chris Nestman, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: ENYIROMMENT* ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REiiEW 87-I6 GTE - pro [ a cans ruc a square, oo rema e switching l ion on approximately "one hal( cre of land in the Genera,. ;, ustrial District, Subar,�a 8, located on the west side c £tiwanda Avenue approximately 1,200 feet EE north of Arrow Highway - APN 2229-031-18, k I.Y PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: " A. Action Re uected: Approval of site plan �4nd elevations and the issuance or a'Qegative Declaration. B. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: 1romw vacant, subarea 7 ustrial Park) J South - Vacant. Subarea 8 (General Industrial) L' East - Residential, Etiwanda Specific Flan West - Vacant, Subarea 8 (General industrial) { C. General Plan Designations-. 11ro ec Site - beneral Industrial north - Industrial Park :*h General Indui�rial East - Low-Medium/Medium Residential (4-818-14 dwelling units per acre) Wiest - General Industrial D. Site Characteristics; The site has no existing buildings and slopes 'slig►t y to—Se south. There are some existing olive trees and large shrubs. Apartments are under construction across the street to the east. Properties to the north, south and west are vacant without significant vegetation. ITEM L y $ r r s �{ ,a PLA11 C -GO-.STAFF`IMRT J� _ T�QPi�ENr kf' -8 6 - GTE August 19, 1987 Page 2 E. Parking Calculations: Number of Number,of Type Square Parking Spaces Spaces of Use Foo� tags Ratio Required Provided ante Switching I Unit 1,010 _ 2 2 a �e II. ANALYSIS: —" A. ''General The project is in conformance with the Industrial .; ec e'Plan and the provisions of Subarea S. This, type of Iise is consistent with surrounding uses and the zoning designation in which it is located. " The project has been reviewed by the Design and Technical Review Committees. B. Design Review Committee: The Committee fidcNiel, Huller, rou iT revitwwed the prq ect on July 16, I987, and discussed ` the compatibility of the building materials to the new apartments under construction which consist of - Victorian elements such as good siding, tile roof, brick accents, etc. The Committee determined that the materials are appropriate as proposed and forwarded the project with additional recommendations as follows: I, The downspout should be relocated from the center f of the east elevation to the north end of the east elevation. 2. A retaining wall at the south side of the project should provide a vertical score treatment consistent with the perimeter screen wait.. 3. A,4ertical score block wall should be provided A ong the entire length of the west and north property-lines. 4. All accent color striping should be removed. ;` S. Extensive i-andscaping to include specimen size „frees, accent trees, shrubs, undulating moundias and ground cover should be provided to the satisfaction of the City Planner. 4 6. Trees should be provided en the"west side of the easternmost screen wall. k a J ALtilts°G t8 " Pf) T G i}E�VEI.OP t E , T_ r GTE August_�2, IN Page 3 7, Low landscaping should beadjacentl tr the eastern bui-,ding, elevation. . . to . 8. Tine sotbact area along: the lauth property line should be I dsda od;at, such time when the future street south�of tge site is to be installed. C. EnvirOnmeOUT ftesownt-, Paris. I and IT of the Tnitia{l Study axe beea 1,*Mp a an no significant impacts have been found related to he consV--action of the proposed building. III. FACTS FOR F'I,0 , _» TN proposed use is consistent with the e: ra ' ian an n s'trtal Specific plan. The building design and site plam,, togethiW with reeommoded conditions of approval, are in. compliance with the industrial Specific Plan and all other, applicable City standards. IT TV. RECOFMENOATION: Staff recommends,; at the Planning Comissien approve DR B7=I6 ano;:?ssue a Negatf,Ro Declaration throw adoption of the attached Resolution of Apn` va . fh conditions, Respectfulii{ itted, Bra Ile Ct Planner BB:CW:te attachments: Exhibit "A" - Location Map ' Exhibit "B" - Site Plan Exhibit "C" - Vevations Exhibit "D" - Grading Plan Resolution of Approval s; 1 r +'�nnr�tMGUAe mG 39L�3�3« •srRh•iM ttt 1 lark lViinntl IWO •l M l indwttlnl 1Yntnntl LiR• irdp-et Ri WwetlAl tJgltl^lin17Y1YN.•1 r a } W.R-a.niral enmwnnnt tvaiau m r . atnit Iran bet161 Nylh i 4y !ro iaC.41G U.!l-M.!lu X"k—! FArC'1 U.3pietili lLn RvbiNn 1 t lOJCA +el 1ptcliYe Ilan lubtnA A � - Wfy +41r SpieRlli MM 3u►t[ti 0 � pR�JtL7 S7YC S .� is 0 } 1 .'ram y �•r ��''�!' CITY CFrrt=� �7~I vCV r ' W ERISYINS e7Lt TA 5MAIN ` YARP SLAV I. AC.PAVINO' —.4 .,ww.ti.. . <-y WORTY QATA _ 1 --lF` — � ��1 ' 4 Las I t NORTH CITY CF V�z 67--ltlp RANCHO CLUkMi O A. T!'fLE: �- A PLANNING DIALS E;H119T=_ ._ ,i E= Na 4 JAIL —— — —_, —-— I i 1 'rSW atty t1.As76R { 5saws cone. 4y" 1°tRCO:WI®L�6A76$/ VtRS,16At GROOV66 ftm WA�1.1. —\ IoLAS'ttR--_..� .5 •�y� � � � I, �� � iI t f f It �• I � I .� .......... ' i3{.QGK P4hNttR •'� pLRIf+1MttR PbOTllrm yl a l�Or R WE 71t-,Ay..GKOOVM F7%i+C7IR ',, �9Moo'1'N PLAS'P?ER WROUGHT IR04 %PRSONNOL.GA 1\. X x �� WIO t•oUS5 tbR 1•."PUftt ,6=,k. SWINGIN4 GAIT .G tI 7` s cow LOOK W" :NTH CITY Of rrE,�: 7r1f0 ANCHO CUCAMQA i'I'f J.E. PLANNING DPvr SIOI'd EXHIIMT:--"SCALE: L-4D n � I � }%st,00Tx n.asTM 'nuL,-iaAo"a � ` Y 1;=ry c-aw_ t wex Wahl. fS#!ioldld4 6a4'E•Z 1 GI 41"C.NAIII � namaDL AIR INTAKE � �t tR0/bEID sC.B �4, UNIS PLNCE SNR4iiD-'3CrWtLK xwOBLf/` MLYRIMM nAGIRR iq" SRANL60RNSA i.. - '.. 'i J1 NIiN t y/oPM;N.. r ON.M�IE-HfRIC.C9� aut .MfOTI'�M. WALL. (. � A.C.CaWD$Nstllt4 1• i f�uND a r- I PSUIt NORTH ,ELEVATION i'r 1 t+ .?4°wt2:.o:efRR iJ/15afolit8E9 OFFfPLrt .. rR.m,tats aro Ka-�,N.It. 6:%lrAHitON LeaDtMS L+ooMt ,I r (II ,1115,1 a scmg come. 57.o,^.M Ir1A{.6 � ( sneotN KFA6t{li.. I A.A3Y6R--_.... Ioo PIA,WN INTMIOR tNCE Cf WA" }I. " OWN$care 41ra"-- h'-9t SOUTH ELEVATION '=�t o' NORTH CITY O RANCHO CUCAMONGA� TI-r E r � MANNING NNING I['ISL- T EXHIBIT; �eA SCALE. �dr.' � +4� `��>>�•) 'a {T��T � �` ,��, T ��"- • _ ,Fyn � -',.-- Na.. -a' +�, _.� t � a �_ � �� ' �� �f�%'F.Y�``V f�T�Y eccrlon a•e..-....�. LA_-. el CO/FETRUCTi9MKOTEB � I. ' � o--(-A4TaU-r-llre ,1 -.e.i Aa-ITT sT{Nmirn iq..H _ MOTION c• d—iw)*ruc:i•torcrva sL.rrtrr a.: a.c. to.srn�-r�1•.:c r�vmtnr ovn wN,cowetttr.c-llewra use. (�—�or+ara�cT.coNceni sacra.ira+�INc uaL rs.eerut•�• - L•�•WiTTaU-T[Mcrirl lle00N Tir Aa OiTAIL•a• CO3II:wx aI=.. Ali S.T_b. "cNlrw314TM5. — T CMTH CITY OF [•i'E1111= RAMID CUC'AMONGA TrnE= f_2_21 1'*T► _�.�.Z PL A1'gN, 1'VG D('JPSCji>I EXHIBM SALE: RESOLUTION NO. � A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NU: 87-16 LOCATE© EAST OF l% ET1wANDA AND NORTH OF ARROW IN 'THE GENERAL INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT—- APN: Z29-031-18 t rr WHEREAS, on the 14th day of June, 1987, a complete application was filed by Riyano ane, Associates for review of the above-described project; and WHEREA.°,, on the 12th day of August, 1987, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Cr,=1,,4sion held a meeting to consider the above described project.. yu , THEREFORE, the Rancho Cucamon_aa planning Coazission resolved as _a4ows: SECTION 1: That the following can be mzt: a 1. what the proposed project is consistent with the objectives of the General Plan; and,.. 2. That the proposed use is in accord with the objective of the Development Code and the purposes i of the district in which the site is located; and 3. That tmb proposed use is in compliance with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code; and 4. That the proposed use, to§ether with the condipfp ons applicable thereto, will not Ue detrimental tis the public health, safety, or welfare, or maternally ;injurious to properties or improvements in the ,,,Vicinity. SECTN'ON 2- That this project will not create adverse impacts-on the environme? an at a Negative Declaration is issc�`,4 on August 12, 1987. SECTION 3: That Development Review No. 87-16 is approved subject to the foilowin—g co�In i�ions and attached Standard Conditions: Planning 1. The down.pout shall be relocated from the center of the west elevation to the north end of the east elevation. 2. A retaining at the south side of the project shall have a I vertical score treatment consistent with the perimeter screen wall, 3. Vertical score black wall shall be provided along the entire length of the west and north property lines. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. OR 87-16 -.GTE, , August 12, 1987 Page 2 i. 11 4. All accent color striping shall be rer,oved. 1 .. 5. Extensive landscaping to inc11, spcamen size 'tries, accent trees, shrubs, undulating mounding and groundcover shall be provided to satisfaction of the City Planner. 6. ' Trees shall be provided on the west side of the eastern most screen wall. k, 7. Low lands'�iping shall be provided adjacent to the eastern €; building elevation. c 8. Setback area along the south property line shall be landscaped at such time when the future street: south of the site is to be installed-;, �� Engineering. I1. An,offer of dAication as shown on the site plan and surety as approved by the City Attorney to guarantee the future construction of.-1/2 the future east/west street a.,-ong the southerly project boundary shall- be provided prior to building permit issuance, The centerline of future streets shall align with the centerline of the entrance of the approved project on the east side of Etiwanda. Avenue and include the corner property line radius per City Standards. 2. An in-lieu fee as contribution to the future undergrounding of � the existing utm tiey (telecommunications) on the project side of Etiwanda Avenue shall be- paid to the City prior to the issuance of building permits. The.fee shall be :the full City adopted unit amount times'the length of the project site. In addition, an in-lieu fee as contribution to the future undergrounding of the utilities (electrical, except for 66 KV electrical) on t''-opposite side of Etiwanda Avenue shall be paid to the City prior to building ,permit issuance. The fee shall be 1/2 the difference E2tween the in-lieu fee of the utilities (electrical, except for 66 KV) on the opposite side of the s,ireet minus those. (telecommunication) on the project side of the street times the length of the project site. 3. An agreement between the City of Rancho Cucamonga and the property owner to remove the drive approach from Etiwanda Aft Avenue when an alternative access can be obtained from a local street shall be provided and approved by the City Attorney prior to building permit issuance, t j �� n PLANUNG t6*tSS1ON RESOLUTION NO. tw August 124' 087 w Page 3AMk p` APPROVED AP ADOPTED THIS 12TH DAY OF AqGU$T, 1987. F- PLANNING COMM6SION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO d,�CAMONGA BY: Larry r. WNW, airman ATTEST: Brad Buller. Deputy Secretary i I, Brad Buller, Deputy Secretary of the Planning Comaissian 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`uf_Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning CoMission held on the 12th day of August, 1987, by the fallowing vote-to-wit: AYES: CE.WISSIONERS: 4 s. NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSEKT: COMMISSION€RS: p 1 Yf�R�.. :_NA G�i> Nc'[ ^ Y.Nw '3 LY.!• _ S Yy L,Y-X R`' Cp .r� yN pL Q Y �+yyMtRUR`[� i.Sv1 �N:.Mgi atip�. �+ d ~ Y>pya==S �MRCY ��m zyy,W,- NzI•QL''�S C^pT'�'s'.... �au0 YM UgQY4NR C Sa _ t7o#L Y", o� yp S. rQ' • pYIr V Mfig s�CCC� . �St- QZ 9.� aY`, P'sCIr�� q� Y�M•� {• OL CA N'r��y Ej 9P''i ��QAyM yYYP M� 5�� A -w..a^ AL ��sir`}v'.0 fiR"Y'� .N� '► °b �oI a 151, O Rwr Y ip _.jr Ulvill W ,. � !'o • � � Y n�+WULL 4C �iQ Y pQ ,p ■y NMN°Y 46 �+ 0 at FKFF 4 R fr N Y� ^�6 V ki nY {I7II � ML �p %Spf„^�O�j p �� YM �K. t J .i. J way N y> CyiY WY!` LYam Os N�{gpyyY�yyd3Q a..N.J ~NPR LOIN MO 11 �pAy i��y. N C =�L6 q, N �ls trUJJ.C�Y ==i�.M� �. Lp Y. tlCv3 q4 Y CRY» S TIQN QRy,. �C� N yC tL 1py tl yplp,J� CNaIZ Vr NMMtyul' .ppp��. Y.L � Ny � S. 0 pY Zia. �I O+ y-L G.Y Y^.-Is +4�O o�CM Z'`rz u�w $►'N �yIAi'^ +io �6$ yym a�v17a a t» ^$}ym �.Y«p�y5� /' � T '�n L L`G 94.�$QQL•��f[q z-_C6 , dam k. 21`y • qa. «'�6vX � ..�i w.`H` � wu^� i+.d-- r .n ra.I6L�IaI�QYyC raL+t CsC 1Y, {Y+1��Y�6o.iMyy+C��Y33 g»C��AP*w•L. 8y '�g.yO� iA^p^W�/per QYa—gSa a{�r` ��syL� .Na o_. ^gtle6+p`^J� as .aMce ,u Cw a� tl Ti g 10 Sip TTZ1Av1, >y ^Y Y i tl. KOYY NMN i.vI � 1 7 Y `7q Rp > L N4� 6. ` y4 M1iM YN �L�p �vi wN 4Ui Y a C 01 N cc pp Y ` `C• Y 4 A L O GM y i . Y rd� vs M iS C .5� � � —lax, at''L". IME s'� r CID/lW9 'Nqf A^ N9. ^t�NII�� O.op dtLppa^Yyy + ]S> Cr 4' ��_ ^ YYY Cc N I. Oy p. O q. C cc S yr. Yw 4 E �� —5 9w CT L M oYy S>S L ~ ��.i s ' CN � C Ty C B�."g +y aiN M yr wt.. .:S3 u i H` O a Y 4 O p y yC' Mai J w��{� O1— I� i� • L Y�Y�I� pO Y+ �I= Y �N N Wy. iIY C4» L�+R Vyp �GwC S 2. 40 it 'i Wa Ojpo1j�-b�& Kr.Y+O+ -or •O.a pl =$:e «Mq ��.�y`s Ya1 I$�i'. .w $'s.^�o>gUZ ?t SoB Alm JqC'� i i t ^Ya+ �y� MyM es CM: �gCa p «O.nO Q NT1� a+LY Li L�Ik�as � � VSE.. `o� y_ N�u{�■I �L. Yij •� �qpss N 1y�j w`�y@�1�■WW TyC� � � H ^i: � Zo Y�1" u�> NV� I$4Sa IIA� L E C 7jI1 q p>tlgML I� t y+ ^964w p y WfI w.ic ytlyr.yY e�I OLy �, �fy fi�iV>s�1 � �gx ayN'ayN® a C� CL "Ca ^wG NY C ty pj V i HU'l F�3�Ya4a ' I 1 ^ .^•4.Yr �+QG. r ^4� CID �M � y Y#_� y,{�Y+»My _> �?A..a. �..e • OI��� W vY..Z F;4r''CyV iYC tl nA o1 Y .� i„L,..-: rY..4 O� �14Y C Lai LY V 9M Y �GL•V »y � ■.nr ' � tt �Lr a 0 0� N LL C N +y ''4Y 4 yy Vr O iT MO +tJ{fir pL „ 1 �uwa 2 Orn pC. ��1 � V` y 13J Ll+Y 1 tJi O+5 ,3: �. � C `Y I +Yai Np q� >^� O'�•01�Y�� �p t�t•�•/i �a)��IIMgV� ' 09Ap y y .s �• ' t� y So 6pp466+ ==.6 �+'pp� pM O'O+p�NaYr�Lp .`CVYC F�.. sZ.yjN� �C+iLCzt CMM�Y4 yy�,,yY'�M�wN4i'MpOYY �YO'Llii'.r4444440333y6♦^��. lMQ NCQN QYeO�ua-y.i aCySn1p� �y•4� NY YLlNa�yy`L"L�NC,q��L.am~C.+tM�'.rii r pG M LCN �„ YYaQQ.+y4 M sOT . SA�+vrit'�G. r`viyN���4N��YqyCGcp 2 YLE C—ityZAI 0:US — O _ya .a v4♦ QVuygtU�, N 4 V a. NO��N tYfh 6 r.Qp� Y a �^rA}My1 4MWYY �Y q. �« �y`� �qp{�y� �O�i4'{�.•C VCNyCmd^�C �r4�.�` �� iyj������y"y VIw NI'N �.•Mlw.. riN HMO F»C .c M.Vrr O>a1Y1 GP 4 Mimi Ry �'6M L'7 o Yy Nrq rQ 6 Y_6 w� >cYyw VAN r CNG L YY� 7^. „1YYi.Na """' „�cac c »yid � � yp�� a� (•toy ��`��a s :a Li r $ , �0 b Vq s p.c I ANy_.!^`y G ". yJW si MYI � y� V Y M�jg � .i�s tTCry .NLp MN '.L Yyq.�o .�2• '�A yN �L LNN �'MO T� C a^'• �.0{.� '�w R�rr 'LY p»�!t¢9y� aYLiL� MB^ � y y V OJ aloes A y s� ���aC"YY' . J: �iyb titM a� �i� VN M �� �4 V ppL >`> Mr.•YL y q Sly N O. L y•v �:QO4 Q� o V 1.9 4 f'0 LpY� Y CNr� tC!C n~ ^Y�Cc C��• S CSC Sew v � C VW£•` rr � H �N.kbV wC.c� Y�.O 7 A irYa. y tl' N 9 L Np�O bra Y y M sL �'r 1�y+'�y s.Y N"8� _�' $ a=.ys ,Gy y■ \\ �Q 6q.; yp Yp9py ` aFew LL�+^ ` r -V s�V $Cw - .�' �'�'.'�^ L+�wZ''^ 3 4 _ y _ Si LN MM Y�^� NY Nr'OO� r t y _ ^" ' V y 4 1 ^L� 41 ". N1o..C� r�.Y > iY '�JMY GAT wY�YY4�. L J 4M NC CCY M.�. t'ON F+GNG t[.} KiV 1•.O.GM�4 KC C —c WM1�S� 'D re rryr � J SUM Ji L f$8 ``Saa �sJg�� �� ■Ze � ojg "" y �Lw LLA �. M f. yyY p s ^�.0 '2 �UO� Ew Y�i♦y �N� W OL N �I VS�Y gall alql Npy� W Yn LK .A av U y8L ON y� V p O� C Urn �Gp'GpY N Mao v LiY Y _ �� Mgel �,p qN 1t'w 4LA Ua! (12-5N.4lya yQ g�pL.Y-. H�^.� �.�Q V���� •�'r0 W O�Rw MN 4~y �•Y+�q � ma Y pC 4YC X Y� ray/ a ■C_ rs`S+e-• " �C• rSr� _ 3 p _ Y qyw pp N 1`6 u V C v. a G bi u^� Te�y qY Y�k Sir U. a^GB'�+ :V.aNyRe ey�ya +�q N+n •r L5 NqqiF a "I V:.._. �y^� � 4� x r u p yM4 ��� � M 3 N� ��s O G Ya.g Y. N�yx$ CY6xL r\���,'`VL^ iyr « iii H +7 t 39 GC+� N � • •.v Q� C �'..O.Mom" � !L V VO pya �y n g qqiy M yYiCa �L 19.CC p ~Y NSA jCp L rig ..GN 6 M L= «�:. aaa � '.r {{^fi�x' -, exyy€ �.�G"N■N■ i00 G $ q r 4Y6 npi > • 4 N. Y$pV g�. 'xis ,�'S+� n G� yyyyg�+T `r C s • Jt ~1 71:5 My M of Y qyp p re al pyyy ■G� 9 p� � 6 '��eYYY L y4`tl 3% .52 Oa S. Va� � M `may� CN pY ppL�� � �SK�Ea. �� N�_�• p y� n f r ��.Y y,6 . j CCSS• �nnnOtl����i`V $p `a c� 2 fl L C 9 a L M6 O S'• y�7 LN Z E M i o N M O N K 09 �SoX aS MIS `^ �8.w�{�:� Orr pGsaptl a,_ Tja�Z.pg $at& y L{rpl 1 C TE ir {p.v p�pp.` LC N C {L t yb `L M . 4 WY•Y � L r y, yy�� AS y Y..w. Err- P.N.S ' �, �yi ', i,u,rS wyq""1' w V.a ` �.�7 a.-o a.c• AG• i i��VL ni0 Lp � y. � g y �[ INN NM SOW»M M yY:W. V6 k M '. O y u 4 + V1i 8 Y +" V �y��YS pp pp pp MC N p y M 1. &- �,1 Y N S O4 k. $Y 4:._ �giN � Col(�1 al Cam•^,• Yfta¢tl��r � -��� ^'�, �� �" •� � f�;V�. �CP {71 /�qi w Yy T��iii wpup i�n y Y ' GCl I g e-S \e a Sg a E�t� ci « 'all gyp' g- _^N 4 'Sy-a� V �r��yyggii��. A.ip �,r rt1M { NO ZI lij lilt C_ it �.�� Y N�.�a 4. • V ~ �g CN` L:y�~� i ca1-1-4 a$ _ a a '� ♦ T�,' otit 1 Sur �.. O A a iip.•rr � O A ,i •�45 ovs fin.+ Y y� O'fy � i _L for �V a i'mmrr �V Ypp aO� 4� q� o ��t$•. � oIZ Y6lapp o. I • V4t Yyy�/yy�y{M 3 M0py q1 rt C aT wfC�.p / TWIN .: g�r� �� ��LY� �T yy � � L(i.V v�� nr6i cNrq•gA�y� WN� W�f6 to �L� �N � ux+ as Sk" o aISsr"'i td+u 94 "•� a a'., u Ve # aft Y M y W G 4 ac U9 2 w �u «�^a Va 8 a " ' <v$ w t a w�j py O qi its{ � 4CN;V ���!j .» ctl`f.L SN ni'b t n 1 ,.^.iOY 3e� " �]� _�at k a � �V jYYV. N Vp�^ O'. a� V V� uiVR {V.k __.p�y_.3,�:M-tl• Q i? M «q aYt�V 3N 1; Y�� ! _ I� a �' wN0 O pi 1 a M LY CL V NA.r V C A :in:19 4 eis {tl_u �W .V+l V aVi .. O rTli CCa LA��Y qp 01 N ^ L+ 1 g ^fig &g g$; L 9� `' Y� `LMy 3 V. IJ Y■ i.9 NO ? ' }TlwVC 1[L y'�M ^3 i L C �V4- y = iYY M� N i� � w+L LgEw YL NN �Vy NV ` Q'a •i iLC KM �4 A N g It t C VApi� V y py b C p N �.C1 c 's p p E t9.1. H L Will <L ... rA o / .= irag Y Zia F got f LVOUY y� 1Val 11-7 p 6 CC 7L V� A g � .M �Lw •i i4 � M�C ~iw~ �� u V �'" • PP � �t^a a E � :. Y o t w� -Aa� '�j'.. = u a �.Y • �"` tip, _ �! '' st 1-1 Ul e� 0 AS C v ly. y.�.� j�(.6• `IV u J CITY CAF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPOT i r DATE: August 12, T987 1977. �' TO: Chair-man acid Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City P1ani.e BY: ZhrisrWestman, Assittant Planner I SUBJXT: DEVELOPMENT REVIEW a7-29 , '&R PARTNERS - The a 9, square are roo-cs -ruc ure or saran development o w restaurant uses on approximately 0.25 acres of land within the General Commercial District (60 located within the •' Virginia Dare finery business Center at ,the northwest q corner of Foothi-i Boulevard and «aven Avenue - APR 1077- 561-02. I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action Requested: kiijsroval of site plan and elevations. B. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning_ 'Norm- FISM-Fooa an rremas; General Came-rcial South - Office Buildings; General Commercial East - Vacant; Terra Vista Planned Community is West -` phase Y Fond Court; General Commercial C. General ro Plan .Desi Design ations. ec Site <_, ene�T'Cra omnercial North - General Ca-wercial South - General Commercial East - Community Commercial ^, i West - Ceneral Commercial J D. Site Characteristics: The site is currently Vacant with no s gam" n"if can, vegeta-fioh. It is part of a 13 acre Master Plan which ir+ciudes the mixed use of offices, general retail, and restaurants. All ,off-site improvements have been completed and interiorvehicular ciruA tion and parking have also been completed. { i1FM114 1, PLANNING COMISSION STAFF REPORT DtVELOPKENT REVIEW 87-29 - TCWER PiW HERS August 12,-1987 , Page 2 E. Parking,Calculations: Number of Number of Type Parking Spaces Spaces of Use FootLge Ratio a wired Provided Restaurant 5_APO 1r100 59 59 per re^ pprocal [ ,'ki ng agreement a II. ANALYSIS: A. ,-General: The protect is Phase II ff the Food Court restaurant cssaPre ,Aich surrounds a ;(Amn courtyard., This type of use is consistent with the `zoning district• in which it is located. The original concept, as approved in the Master Plan, Has for a 6,000 square foot 'dinnerhouse" restaurant. This c;.iscept was abandoned because the pad was tos sm�,ll to accomdate a dinnerhouse restaurant. � S. Des n Raview Cowltt,`e: The � ittee (McNiel, Buller, Kr�� reviewed an oi%arded the project with the following rec",,endations: 1. The northernmost arched entry sh:n1d be furred out. 2. Vines should be planted at th& rorthwes'ternmost corner and adjacent west facade area,. 3. The building colors and',}`inures should be the same as those used on Phase Ia C. Environmental Assessment: Parts I and 'II of the Initt l Study :ave been --0W'eTeG ano aAegative Dacia-,ation was issued under the Master Plar, for the Virginia titre Busineas Center (File CUP U-07). III. FACTS -QR FINDWGS: The pranosed use is consistent with the General Plan ana DeVelopment Code. T::e building design and s to plan. together with recommended conditions of approval are in compliance with the Development Code and all other applicable City standards .and will not be detrimental'`to the public health, safety or welfare, or ieterially,injurious to properties or improvements in the area. C/i� _ i Ap Y ' fit F°iW' ' RT r C1 ! �G 89 {2 1t dE8 PARTMER$ Ili. 6ECOM"M JWI Staff rec�ands that the Planning Co issian 02ROv� a irp—►ent'Reviw 87 29 through adoptio«-of ,the attached 'Re54Yaiit it`0 i r l' /r rad sul ei f� City Pfi ner. 8& CW:to Attachme►its: Exhi#ifi"Ai - Location Map ExhiMt V - Site Plan l; Exhibit 4V - Elevation Revolution of Approval with Conditi,-'4 ` = i 'i k tile tW ' r ttpp, Sr �+ � .9�• to ��r > M.4 3 �- a , w _ n t r: c Ct z ® _ S `� <Balsa .i >. DON Its AERCFO �! Gty4,� St Q t ELEtdP S�. • \S�p g o, SCKSea I sp`��, + ;, it1 S i ® A ind,® l• C .. an fOY9{ Oqpy tp t T t rowS.i c; �<< ` NtIi pSt is� 9' /�. W MeC HURCH •ff:nf PURCH.T a SPRLJottot� nt _ St ST.PARKAErtl t-kY a o j yr - ® PARK vS1 Ord i Uj N fig a - El rrvtci ! ✓•y"�wlp a f ` a Ettgn St W IMIi GSs >t L Q Dot St. Q \A7� att.,rt � tf rd Sf. I'� R E E o u iux BLVD. t Chn"t. _ -- �t e E 'Ham sh,rey n l aural W St- - P a REGIONAL LAW ` � ca W E &JUSTICE CENTER St. st. 2.z '_ .ea e.c�St AAWONILAZA �tg C ter. rgivic g&nteL- Dr. P;ac r , ar R1J.°dNfSS PARK 2 n LL • Q n r r. C -= C� ♦rarr+u �t�I oto lin Ct rrH {F i CITY OF rrEm r312.A-) RANCHO CL)CANJONGA `;AhtNM DIVOC+1 EXHmrrt---_-P-%___scA . I k '� n 0 0; ,�f°�� a +�•� bass�.d+� L a In QE iay a. t ma a _ -i otr ti a� PAVFf +.f i 'FQl^ ✓' r t ii) ss 1 r f t All } RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING 'UEVELOPMNT REVIEW NO. 87-29 tOCATED AT THE 1• NORTHWEST CORNER OF 1iAYEI AVENUE AND FOOTHILL BOULEVARD IN THE GENERAL wrERC1AL DISTRICT - APH IO77-661-02 / aIEREAS, 8n the 10th day of June, 1987, a complete application was fined by T2"er Partpers for review of the above-described project; and on the 12th day of 1 qust, 1987, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Cowii'tstion held a meeting to consider the above-described project, ,NOW, THEREFORE, the !Rancho Cu�,,amongij ►=fanning Commission resolved as follows: SECTION 1: That the following can be met; 1. That ,the proposed project is con,Istent with the objectives of the General Plan; and ' 2. That : the proposed use is in accord with the objective of the: Development=Cone and, t1a purposes of the district In which the site is 'located; and 3. That the proposed use is in compliance with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code; and 4. That the proposed use, together with the, conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, .safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity, SECTION 2: That this project will not create adverse impacts on the enrironmen�Fiat a Negative Declaration was issued on February 24, 1984, as part of a Master Plan. SECTION 3: That Development Review No, 87-29 is approved subject to the follow g conTitions and attached. Standard Conditions: Planning Division. 1. The northernmost arch entry shall be furred out. 2. Vines shall be planted at•, ;the northwesternmost J l5�`corner and adjacent to the western facsde area. , 1 0 3. ;0e building colors and textures shall be the same as those used on Phase I of the Food Court. �_ :..4 DEEyEIOR 1 , ��2U= TOWER'PARTdERS . Page.,2 'w a Engi nee r'fk "Of y 1. An i -lofeu fee as contribueTdn to the future undera-oun0ag of the existl6ng averhead-utilities on the <copdtfte .side of UVen Avenue si-al1 be: psi�4d. to, the prixor to the issuance of 4xuJi'ding permits. The fee shall be one,-:half tie di�ffzrence be"een• the anderghau,nding cyst of 'the ut1 t i ties (co ec znica'ta'�otas -and elec'J' c except " S5 KY..:. eltric"a1) an t'hq p asi a sire of the; street mints those: recent unaergroupCed (te ecommrs:T.caaienl .o : the Project VsJ,d#-_ tMi 'the: iengtti from Mfi +ey n4 between Parcel 4 and Parcel 2 'to midway between 4 Padt' 2 and Parcel 1. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 12TH DAY OF'ia:GUS', 1987. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Larry ie , Chairman ATTEST: Brad Buller, epu y ecra ary I,'�,.$rsd 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 Comm -sign of the City of Rancho Cucamonga,-at a regular meeting of tke Planning Commission held on the 12th day of August, 1987, by the -Following- AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS; J� y, , z r `-- 377 _ .: a .. s r e _G N s 5 Y N I�`NSQpMgo4i.tN NOTCI L C•.JL c4 i�CY y ■ y q3 A .i �p NON Gi y A ii y.g�'R*� O Q +J�'g YI o ay yFLt4i y.1 9C1 ty�3L. CD ntiavlpgan. 'n3 ,.a `� � � «r.G `s `s u-w�M• '.. /�!/' a Yl�•y���N�T� fttiM «a Yy.� dj NNNN O«t l§•»^gay��.. y,yV i p uN « Yy■yy g i p e1 Myi `� S ff iq�Y$3 Q CC S—�4. EOM gCM ^ �r gYyp G!E .,�..I g ss _ p LT zz RNIH Is -ti qv�tj 5 e 0 L Wm 51 g S o f-a If Qn� G SAI Z. V +"-� pNr.Z. _6M^QQjQpL iC gyGa n _ 1 g�l�l�afga¢1 $ X e fag Yam• «Y p I. XI �y�T, ' .iUYF V ! 3 pip ofp •�F L`. �eyi«iY3'ay!'� �' � M-VR � L L NZ • IN M*�V9 Y •, S �, (r`� a oirRISE ZMA %1� •'L'•tlW• ppY« �tl$Q Mo �p�,«��uy ;'ys�M' � .rs..q.. 'of NJ E Z. .la M i G3� I p 4 Y M q J ' y«�rdRL 4211 -q u.N.-.fjr _-8 �'�{■O��p�qm uti w�L gyp= iJ- IM ��a R $ gu ^ SIC nc3 5Cu' 'r nw �++■` ypaAp y- X�n� iCiMOW^� a3'�..'g a 2 Y�g ,lu.'^8v �p SIT S n :t Ga+w+cL3 Y ��LYYN YY «tl �C\31� VY�> L�• X Ms All A_CM tl N O►i. A�^ V M 4yYG»Mgt ^tl A ^�L"�.. `w'ri+L< ax n3�.�yy"v itw w1dG w 9 + V O YO ai � O a t W S ZZ lu U SIB ..t.�a ,p aw. N o y u Co 1�a'�" F p 4ls�i� Z'r g w ' tl'f 0 w's`� R,.«."-y'B`y�1' °W` W L a y .o paw ►°' ..,. mfbs Zvi f v-Io w-r0�Y.a ar PSI 2. rll FG 1.�3 zM OLai� q� p f.7 Yv v '�Lr.s : v�X$ s��..... .r�I.,u sv. �f {1F y4� x- p Y. `IL&i YNL}SOQtk 3 6 . f� u L GWtt� ~gu Ce iy �R. yq C yam`V ara C 4..IM y fd C Fr pMbA M � L L'� yf.`.•L 4�*M1. YY �Y RV L' �k�H NYCL '��'"Oil 'aL v'�-+! >� ar p10�^N�O+ M4.•'Y�}TN4 AM qu B�M� aN �Y fN.A PAP � p4p ar3C b a 7- as px ,ANC-3.5' tri �tiaZZZZLfff Q� �� 91,. 1 L O Y.�„•N C C O. L 1� �L� i �M eZ-"...'a I« i �x �i a�� .c iG �. �.,x/e,.�.a•�.. gg�ss o s �` ox ter .�3" t... • o. '� �C...if ; cu yea Zi�wT Moes«� 6�' .st r'�� C« .....I�L�'r Nr•N N N K N.r +C x ENO 1-Ni K44 t1f r�d�> M a`!� 'G A.=. i. +G u tk '« Ur- 40 f 1 QOt AL b_C li i ry+ 04.. yyG CA As aT M=Cf sO4 r Oa wL = wxr i �46xi 3 A Y i C «a »vee t� �. pp xL..�i. .off 'P••f� �Q '�� a Y Q0.�UaM. rr M Yrat &.1 != t sit yNtYL� Ns Ci Mc 2 8L� �Z,Z }r Sa !i O s Na R Y ,Q M A X � A o'O '� +�j" L'�t x CY� y✓ pY at YLp R a° Sa6 ol sdY `.'F. r+� u. '.�LMAd� 4.`�I.4 zo Yi �li ixilxML ��17.va YA yyA ro M 'eat Rp�N 7:u �0 C -r aj.. „C�y Z. Z's o. ^ Ql'{yL�'' a V>=0yr .Y+$ �aw■l,:o MC Cy�YO Y Q1 Vv*. C1�';t7� t�5{`L Mfg♦.� � k -4 '�. Aay� Y sL�u LYT. Ltlw• M..y{'/ Ti ya>1f, apmy viQ`M �1a "7'i�p usQr �8w .li 7jrauy.0. Yi r+a�t r"�e c Yml r+�17 �O.a rsi ]Yf�A ..+.w M•*w . �2. u�i4 <4M i ay �4w GYY'+ F ��e a I f ���. Vw'JO� ~COL CMCG C4cC \Y�YYQ� p YL. 4'p1 NI}. -k N 5if CIL Or�Y V Cl li._ • 9O aL+ � ;ti0« �. a^kL� • 0 �"e n� ■ at, C g {N1 M."'_l.. LYYt� Na �^Nn. WYY�� �01�,a.�• q ts Z. ,c f �.X we -4s P_ .,sCf $ Y € �+ uga- uw�`y �a aka 0�.� OVG.O'� P ) i�.� y� `� c�1lO• ��ys�r r. -`\ _rs'o a. Ce. YY t i a4-e a - ''Q� „�� t � _ {C�y Y �V2lp yCL+ C�.p Vsµ �yO ���111.1AC 1� yV� 6L Y .{�yQjl Q±GNp�V L.4� u. _�L� iIf Y r L1 0 iN~�� Y � �Ora Ya_+ n � ��wt� 0.Y.A T V C a4 4x 3 �C{ , p�NbY pC T�p� T''� iiGL� ;S +y{C�3"-kL i p I &T p9pCOOMC » ~�y �L y^�Y ¢ !• Vy �,,V 9CL` •� 4nM '4 u ` � n. "r �R Vi11 NL 9 y N M H M C� M Cyy(C V 4 � LCS Mt J. Nay SEA t <,� �y{�€ �i 1^ w�T V 01 N M 4 #»6 r .�Y �� 4 � ;LGa a S ' `'i Yoe 8 nrte L".; y) lm�� i1'So `~ fiy-ai Y`t{`rpp7 a '_l r! aay {q1 ` a •ri '. N.f 11-Y`,��".p,,��L"�p�' X 4 A L. N r C—o ��Z.'. A n a Sn.; TTJJ y !.0 iS L� O 4 pCC V _. wa a+ L0p 4t O?f��r G!a liV'i pC '!� V K Q� ''• O.N,� y L o Y '� C6�i L_& " N f 4 = i`� N N 6 a~cir 3 :i yea. Q ; v"fsir �� r'�iq o Ant pp p4�j�� C�uyC1�y V•�' �." l��I {ys��`y� OR Off. CT��~a OM+VY Q 6 �jM t,!^ �N"y,S64 ' ' '� g'3x+.'• cc ,'� No ■�a�, .. �p�Yj$H■p.� Ir :C y M Y V 0 •lqM .Ni .awl ti r�i c ._.l. 9M 6M Yw� tL4�Yi1v Y�O ♦� l � � ti��v6 `py r YC. 1�i LJN w T ' rpqyC vN yM ,x Tr_uwL IL ,ii Y dam. w y'Y •I qj �tl 3 tqlAa Y Y� .Nr N 41 O f _4 ~o N• bell 8 Ni. '07r c` �C.L;Y„� • �Nw� yy� Mf «1 i�Yi1 MWy �CL � � ��.S�FT, YCY p� _. 4t S'iF� 8 F yg Off ts Iff y Y N r LLy a Cam. _v iMg4 $.. ¢N YY C` Y. Y~9p rh F VgM01A■ C� 1w ^3 M01 C oA.Mp� 's 17. yCINN iCYt�: L`LaVsyG == • �c C Y L C fill �y yo a.M C.— L NYw�a'� ya &YaTL 1 6 i 3 Yy Y v Qiiip IVis ^Nsa ,g �Sy p W b y�� s v ULi 7 It �oIj i ; i.'«Ys a3� 'maAI0t.�y g4Tyy«Y LC$ y a im. �l q ^Aept 9r'�" NwYjNa � za C Rj N��s•y3 rey3 p �m« 11 y � y i$ CCal y� R1.0 y� � S .: wNI■Yppp,,,L� L G ����� N O=�O � '_ �. yS�p O 'y Q p, Wy wig 42Z + te a ` x (w p¢pOp 14•�+ 71. �wruag ri _ass 'Q `� Mw Y�yCjpye N,,,.. PA e��''!�yyY��$..{��`..�-\ yp� V ~� 'al' T�W LpN� 1YM � M9 Y v i`R aVA w d Eli g6C CV Y. f{yJ. vYaY� S yY, sZ�y/Lnp - IXt hr y fS. wrr�T •• �G > Y �"� Cy�y� _ �Cq Cvµ1 Lid}sq L1f '.e k +i C zi `a` � t �¢ ��r�t •. P ;„'i s� bra. La`.:a ia..: �y�•{:� i�: cifa +s W i s'� !w��� �{{�YY W _�gypp L�''yy� � a 2�r`CCLL" w p4ew d�q w e 3 "'�0. 1,. N iMM .Ca ►w WM L.GK i O <\Oi. @ NV N4W <ES I ! I o as vs F y� 4^ `a 'p Itsy�ss- � Mrr Gs ^w`uA. cam'•+ - 16 y� N spit Y O N.lt NJ� Ni O 7 y LN a— xY L.a P� ays Yw N M O i?yit L� Mf1L ;carta� ; ki C � i 1 Y L �V61 VI G. 4.2 1Y~ ' C tJx::^ id--!pY p �p 4 A O sa L C I ,..K ii O C niii ccM L NYi�fi M.1� � Wy p N R LpN. YQN GC Iva uN VA pGs M 64�w ! 1' : C CG' CL y N S N 2 �E 15N3os '" Y \►�} Op 9 MU p { 'S—EEs �y}: p V L rf � O`pl p NtI aa'3�,� �. l�ccc � pN �( p C II gz .-a ll V mQ r COy 4 Y iV V N>,. 1� m?M� ¢y, sg rp6 {ry j i Y. +�IM ��P H�� Siii VpN N�� li K.IF 6ci t,,� .� ILJtiR .X.19\ti �NC N Q A _ y ul, 4pf QTTY 4F RANCHO CUCAXC)NGA 13CAAf0 STAFF nk EP0iTTT­ J DATE: Aaguft 12. 1987 :3f7 ; TO ;;hafv�an and Members of the Planning Commission FROM- Brad Buller, Cfty Plattner BY: Cindy Norris, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: /lPPEAL;'OF THk CONDITIONS.)OF APPROVAL OF MINOR "EVELOPMENT 9IE' - sae propose a di ono a foot cranNay, t i� •eTeRffzfing structure -is the rleavy Industrial rand Use -Pistriet (Subarea is), 1acatgr� at 1 459 A.*rots highway - APN 229-431-37. I. PROJECT AND SIYE tiESCRIPTiON: A. Action Requested; Appeal of the_':�-%. adltions of Api)roval for nar eve opmen' Review 87-24. t. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning art actin ;-'n us ri a r t,-Plan, Subarea 15 Soutio InaustrialJMAnufacturing Industrial Specific Plan, { Subarea 15 East Jmterin Steel & Wire; Industrial Specific Plan, Subarea 15 West Southern California Edison Co, Industrial Specific; j Plan, Subarea 15 C. ,uenet�? ''can Dr-;gnations, ect�"5T 'y;i� avc ,n us vial Nof.,th HPxvy industrial 'outh - keavy Fndutt-1-4l East - Heavy;,.Industrial West -, iMzavy industrial } t. Site Lharacteristirs: The site contains an existing steel Z:)1t1,rg xacll ril M) oui;docr str7aue of scrap materials s j located on a;riroximately 30.12 .aq`ies of land. The subject :parcey' t locdted south of a 14 acii vacant parcel of land'and is` S:isaer'n California Edisonga+-of-wa1: �. `eaplationst Mfnor building additions are subject `�T`cpme-"' revs-w and approva•r by the My Planner, v ITESi w 4 - PLANNING`-%IklSSION J�FAFP�RE[JRT MDR 87 24 - TAMO y, �� August ,2, 1987 r Page 2 t II. BACKGROUND: On Sme 6, 1987,.T;MCO submitt-,d.a proposal to build a TMlf square foot addition to their existinn,melt,shop faciliy. As''this was a sxruGtural addition -of less,than 50 percent oT the existing floor,_area, the application was "subject to a Minor Development Review. 00 July %' 1987, Mi'or Development Ravi:ew 87- 24 was approved by the Plspning Division based upon' ,ertain findings and su$ ect to .vavers: conditions. The. conditions were imposed in .rrlder to hrizcg the site ini~I conformaree with the standards and regulations`,�f the Industrial' Specific Plan (Exhibit Subsequently, in a letttn datad July 17,, 1987, (Exhibit "D"):, TAWO appealed`; all of the ;^equired corrv.�itions of approval for Minor - Cevelopment,Rzview 8 -24, Their requested waiver, is based on the fol l orri ng reasons: I. Due to the high winds whirr occur in this arena TAMCO feels that it woul d be e'Ctremely difficult to add solid fencing along_their'y)estern property line or to buiT4 a structurarfy sound ,,:,of sr„Ertl AOL 2. As a result -�Iy°t5e ext,-rene �6at getoPrated f,om their smelting :operations, pZ�`;ntirtg building or roof .eg0pment world be difficult and cost prohibitive. 3.. That the access road on the east-3rn side of the existing chain link force does not allow adequate room for landscaping 4. That ife,ds-from the % S freeway will not be entirely blocked as a r��.' 't of the required screening measures. III. ANALYSIS: The Industrial Specific Plan requires that ;111 outdoor . scrap yards shall be screened with solid, view obscuring fencing and dense landscaping. In- addition, whenever possible, all roof equipment shall be completely screened from view. However. based upon fui,ther examination of the site and additioaai insord)ation presented by the applicant, staff feels that the required conditions may be unreasonable for this site. Therefore,;, staff suggests that the following condition may be more appropriatk�: 1. That TAMCO,.shall attempt to obtain permission from the Southern California Vdison Co. (SCE) to landscape `that portion of SCE's isnd which is alljaceiit to Arrow Highway: ibis should serve to screan a major view access from Arrow Highway into the project site. . xe REPO RT MDR 87-- - �. August Y8� �+t ;'` t ti Page 3 Staff has, viewo!A this modifi�#tjon fit€: the applicant, IAMC ?- s Obtained p r�nisr iR4it from SCE and , is` J-nb7 , `change d a .. -,. IV. R&CQt Dk OR: Staff reccxwndt that the Planning "Ccx amen a Corr` Bois of apprOV4 through adopt-irr ,of t�je a�.taChed Resol uti ort:; r ._ 11 Res p ctfully itted,. Brad Br er " City P annex B&CWte J a� Attachments. Exhibit "A" Vocation Ptap Exhibit "S" tan Exhibit "C" - Letter of approval; dtaly 8, 1987 Exhibit "D" - Letter qff/*peal; July.-17, 1987 Exhibit "E" ., P`xceFWfr(m industrial Specific Plan ►*lbit "F" - Rpplicant's Letter of July 28, 1987 +esoluflor of Approval x f I I - .. dNK 1 r } 1 � • ' �..---�.1^^r:. 1 • ` :s� nas,.n a, -. tip 1 o''f � Ja4O5 �rrr� �n� 1 I � � I varx � ►u.t.e 1 t dK yi91, � _! � � V 14�v1xCUA. YM M.M.q RlON,.Mn+ ggS 1�R Q N ww.al.y i• a � ��' 1 livt9 (2136• G NOM CITY CF rrEM: ft.A NM, E»`= �r�Y.e..r�-fa:...y:. tir�y,�"O��i1�9+ .1►�y-.��J �' � 1 � =r I .�.�/ 1� � Y7Ow�A6 ♦ - RMrINb �� FL dr.Jr.eN �•'� ,Ij. l Ali. Ai. 4.J1-Gl SJ J ' _..�ti; tart L �Y ��wG ♦ a: Film _ 6 NOlk7, H' C a j RV4�� cucAmaqut . PIANNM DfvEM L :, aITSt G1F Itra�itCHtY CUCA6df1NGR Oaks BOX a07.R-hu aa.QMP.CaRkrait 91730,(714)9�-� July 8, 1987 Geral d S,. To fora 12459 Arrow Highway P. 0. Box 325 ' Rancho Cucamonga, CA :91732 SUBJEO MINOR 1 E-VI E-OPRIW REY'IK $7w'i4 PR0 3 5 ADDITION ON A 50 FOOT Ct#dlHEfiAT T AY Ell: tID+6 BE+IGDIm- Dear,°1tr. Telford: Tht, DevelOPWht Review procesx for thg- above-described project has been successfully cpepietLd• and approval"has'been granted based upon the following_ findings and 6�nditionst Thank you for your participation and Cooperation"..- during this review process. We sincerely 'pope that```th:Is process.has been r positive experience for all ' involvtd. this,, declAl n, shall be effects vArL Fo1iq.!ing a 10-day appe&4 period beginning with She dale''"of this letter. FINDINGS A. That the proposed project is consistent with the General Plan. B. That the proposed project is ;n accordan�:e with the ob octaves of the industrial Specs°ac Plan, the purpose of the district in which the site is located. C. That the proposed Project, together wife the conditions applicable thereto, will not he detrimntal to the puolic health, safety, or wel Fare or naterially irjurio"3 to Properties or improveserts in the vtyinity. D. That the Proposed project will coldly with each of the applicable provisions`of the Industrial Specific Plan. CONDITIONS This project is approved subject to Of following conditions: I. All outdoer storage Jnd yard areas shall be screened o*'view through a coein.It'tArr of view o4scuring fencing and landscaping (Section IV, a.sge 92). r t ,1 N.&a" cftma d�"m Gerald L Telford; Jssl.y 8, 19,87 Page 2 a. View obscuring fencing snail be added along tine western. boundary of the subject parcel CExhihit A . The fertcfing shall be a rAnt" of eight feet in height and,;shall be constructed with a solid type of material such, as wood, metal or chain with slat - Detailed Oevattons shall be submitted to the Planning-! Division for approval`'prior to the issuance, aq building permits. b. landscaping, `which is primarily ought tol Grant°ih nature shall be added.- along westerly propgrty boundary and shall` consist of fast g►�owing evergreen trees plan �d :25 feet on canter, ihtarspec�sed with fast growingj�;evergreen shrubery. 2. A landscape and irrigation plan shall bs submittA to ,the Planning Division for review and approval, prior to the issuanc�z of building,,^_ per pits. f" 3.' In regard to th-a tw (2) options for the pro "d additionz a. If the ®permanents, or fully Enclosed addition __is.` iA constructed, the entire building and new shall be repainted to provide a consistent color, b. If the "temporary crane,-,-,Ay structure,;3e_constructed_ only the new addition needs to be paftod' r If Proposed Dolor scheme i9 _:dififerent ?r`o� that shown on the � proposed plan:,, it shall 11. submitted to t,`se Planning Division for review prior to the issuance of budding permita, 4. All roof mounted equipment shall he screened wff, a solid et.zloaore which is architecturally Cpmpttible with', ie building desiO. Any roof equipment or s�po.tad Jacrtwvrk which cannot be screened shall be painted to Otch the building. Detailed elevU t°ss of the roof equipment enclosure sa111'be subzitted to 9 the Planning Division for reviec and approval prior to the issuance of building'peWts. Please note that conditions may specify completion of Certain plan$4 or work prior to 'fssuaF.ce of building permits.. E r Geraldi0�'f � Z... Jul pagea� e�ry i C J1 ^ Yye .H Tf you should hove an;y..questfons concernIAO specific ccndttions, p1'ease feel { free to contact Ci;o�' Norris at 714-989-!,,4d. Sincerer, C43i '�3NI�Y"DEYELt?' �1T DEPJ MNENT PLAN DrY ll ue Cf Ly Pl anise; 68:CK:ns s ttta.-hWat. Wiibit "e -07 i { 33, 14,339 AC t3.2 4i, elb.JP f � 1 J � F !f �apiv.3 . ff . f / :2 q Non: ..�.� ....�...e...t�.r+�.wc�..r.r CM OF L� 4�Tl�t iO T Y ; �.�+� ITEAiI• KAtvNM DRMW COVINOiTON CRowc .s ' ATrONNYYS AT 1,..AW e „ TELCPMONC130 aYa L131 WEST &trTH STRffiCT NAI0ICC a C4v. - , f, fA7171t1 3'YIN176a .sAPO'«O A 6.I. k POSY OP'PiCC ffiCX 14tS SANVC1.CPo C - O'JTAPtIO. CA{.IPORII41^91762 GCoRGC w POP+L 11G•1.RT P.00 VG^CISTY. y •I+ry y ROIL' SCIr VCR Jul 1[ 19,f f QW•�O A MOPSON E y , . Arar«Bur s.trcrr ff .+CT'i'S R ANOCR50*c / AVOPCYA PCARI / i E. G E N E Q. RAt1OALLJ PITRC CITY OF RANCHO CU YYYeee V � GCPALO P 1GATL N ADM(NIMAT(ON IrCN".t JA«Cs MCLAN+C.TISC. JUL 1 1V137. ACIkCCC«IkCk1as P MA Planning Commisrion City of Rancho Cucamonga Post Qifi_ce Box 807 Rancho 66carrlonga, CA 1,Ml Re: Appeal From C:iti Planr_er's Decision in Minor Develu went Review 87-24 - Pro osed Aadt��n to a So Craneway to an Existing Sui ing Ap 1.icant anc A�Z�,:�lant:_ Tamctl Dear Planning Commissioners: Tamco hereby .appeals each and every condition imposed by the City Planner it connection with Minor Development review 87-24. Those conditions are container in the ity ?Manner's letter dated July 8, 1987, addrr;3sed to Gerald L. Telford, a copy of which letter is attached her7-to for reference. Tamco bases its appeal on the ground that each and every condition set forth in the attachad lette. is arbi- trary and unreasonable under the circumstances:. (11 The. fenrzing condition.. The fourdations (footings) of the pre;tent fence are not designed to with- stand thy added wind. loading that ;:nuld result from the + addition of sluts.. Winds in the Eti4a'nda area routinely are in the 8' •40 mile per hour range, In addition, the addition of slats o: the replacement, of the'axisting fence with solid material, would not serve to obscure any part of Tamco's operations fr'bm view from the 1-15 freeway .because the freeway is,alevated above Tamco's property. _ j ` (� The landscapAng condition. Because of the elevated freeway, proposed' landscapinq along the westerly proP;�rty line would also not obscure Tamco's operations from. view from the 1--15 freeway. Also, the east side of the fence (on Tamco's property), is paralleled by a narrow access road which separates the fence from the ,lag Pile, leaving no planting area available on that side. �.: 777 , PlanningcCo ii� ion a" l July 17, !9 7 im Page Thin IMF s (3) The painting condit inn When 'Z'y;,cCo1's existing melt snp btai3asng was constructed, the siding was ` specifi-ally selected because of its baked-'on finish and long lasting qualities in�an industrially sensi ive environ- ment. It was not PeAnt, to be �pai,nted. „Timoo lou ts. that y erxt�enAed any contractor whit ld guarantee, for an time period, any product ghat may be applied over the existing sidil 3ccauss of the size of the building, it is estimated ] tt the cast of painting would exceed $300,004,.bO, Also,A,bx- tions ox the ducting on the roof ';annot be painted due ?to the hot gases which are transmitted. The sctees±inq roof-mounted 44uipmeht condition. Much of the roof-mounted equipment carries W.gh-t mperature gases to the bag house and is,naturally air-cooled. That air-cooling process cannot be restricted or curtailedr which a solid or semi-solid screening' ?ou3d do. AddiVonall.y, Tamco has serious wind loading concerns about thin �� g Placed on the root. The ducting extends some l$ 'feet above the roof peak. Because of the high winds erparienced in the area, the placing of solid screening water Al on-`the roof would create a serious safety problem. is TamCo resp+sctfully, requests that the c©nditirsns laertain- ing'try f�-ncing> painting and,screening of roof-mounteu equip- ment ]$�� deleted in hair entirety. Tamco also requests that d the lalacapinq condition be deleted unless Tamco can obtain the approval of Southern California Edison Company to place the landscaping materials on the wrest side of the property Line fence. All notices and correspandehc* concerning this appeal should be sent to the wlderszgngd. Respectfully, Robert E. Dougherty Of COVINGGTON CROWE P ttorneys for Tamco RED:sao Enclos`=e cc: Tamco: - Z r C. All lighting is to be sheldEd!'. a confine light spread within the "site boanijar;As. Particular concern shall 4e far lig3ii ing r^ adjacent-toreatdpnt'fiel _areas: Equipment screening ,_ A.S. The purpose of E ei x r p p Q front Screening; �i ndards� shell be to a11::ow for fire rise of cgutpae while j preserving the arctriW--meal c} i,raote and IAUOIty of thy: surroundt" envir Oment, EqK�q t I$ deezid-- to-, tnclude exterfor, m0chaniieal or Oectriirti egufpnerb -`O as A/C s, raps, ductwork,, ,clane bl`os s, cranes, unit storage tanks, and satelli dish antivm*: . The following .standards shall apply according Land Use category: n._. All roof, wall'and groundm,i`unted equipment + shall be screened from alt., des.within all n land 'Use categories except f\\ inicau Impact_ Heavy'liiw�tritti and Heavy I c�Li Ali 1 b. Wherever pass ible all roof wail u ti ground mou ted equipment)5ball be screened on all suds wtUvin the, Minim, i Impact Heavy 1 Industrial and ��eavy Indust ial cait�ories. c. All screening shall be architectu rally k integrated with the building design and where possiole a r*Of parapet wall sh,01 be used to screen ;\"roof;: or , wall mounted equi qt. M!^re`rt_ nountQd mechanical equipment and/or ductwork pro3ects vertically more than one and one=half .';I- 1/2) feet above the roof, or roof ,parapet-;it shall be screened V an architacturally designed encl)gsure which exhibits a permanent ,natc%�'re� with the building design and is detai'�d consistent with building-. Where roof-mount,A =hanical equipment and/or ductwork p;vjacts one and one-.half it-1/ ) feet or-less above the roof-Or idof park;;'et it shall bi painf!_-d consistent with the �:,-,Olor schm'-bf the building in' all cases.` Storage Area/Screening A.6. T114 purpose of storage area �gulations is to for on-site st" _e which is scraened fro view from the. blir r ht-1`tf-v}`jr pu and from tan used it. ctixaon tP blit view) and is architecturr",�ly cb6atVAe with the surrounding t. environment-_' the following standards she appl l accordi:+tg to Land Use en,tegoYyt 01, .,. <x;:, A". Indust fal „ Para: 'da�"e ,os y ouar storage Shall, bfi p�ratitied �sxce t far f°leet vehiellies cnd ii t trues a<x"edi d6or, Stara , tags ;1 emitted ai a efht notto+�ceed; :,,rom g rit fi fsh tide 'then -ed ptw c view �y. co rett&, arasoc sc, from or a_f rom simi'tar trtor#al°s, h'✓' General ` Int�ttra►t or General # ttYpstfi arlsshl,a lisltta#lrl f•ei"s�,r=ee,4d o stovdc tfi+'p'e+�ij screenedv# �ai�flnttin a�`r?:uaiin se epa-t+aia�.As�'neigdl �i area firobt `pull;:' o.x be c, Mini mtmt Impact,*"Vy Industrial and Heavy Industrial caifegories . All,: materials, Foldaway No Sul*, iecx, �=` ttt and op era`s irng trucks e4.e�. t skall1 6e stored Wfthi11 an "Closed tail,ding �. or a storage area. such star$ge areas within NO' 41' a street frontAgt,th:311: be screengd. d. within 600' of tha Oevore Freeway right-Of, _ way, ,411 oatdOnr s gage shall be scree'rted oat4r.r liar ea�a r.ti�ee+��cywr fa ''puhli.� v�tw fr lepieg OeY,ew, �Freewo Way Consider ' ' 1 '* nsa a xa tit@ .:ive of inat In of black or masonry bevming, dense landscaping, or,. e bull dinq-,%A S; Kit:':#:t all Land Use categor;es except HeAvy Industrial, all storage area screening shall 2,41CAL 110tti . be 'architecturally integrated r.ccraVIOW s6iroundinq buildings by t116` us> tii zz—�. atsrtaRe 4�ece concrete, Rasonrlr Lar ottrr similar materials eot to exceed,a, Might of 8' from highest finish grade. f. Within the i* Y Ind, 'stk'3al category storage area screening they lclude ttjso Mt , or concrete, mod, metal,tr chainirak with wood 9. 13t0rage of materials Qf-*Uipmeni shall nett t 4ceed sgrees-,-4 fight *""thin 100' Of street fronting screens. • ; I :' r"O' :z kit" aimY { NW f� ' ' POST OFFICE BOX M.CrIWANDA,CALII OfiNIA St-at tYty 99-2521 _. July 28,. 198% CITY D 'IANCHG CUC*1h70NDA i PLANNING DIVISION jUL ' AM pu t�_ "d18a911Qliii�,�li21�1415t� Mr. P..,rad Butter City Planner City of Rancho Cucamonga P.0, Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Dear Mr. Buller: Re: Hinor°Deveiopment Review 87-24 Landscaping Along Arrow Highway Enclosed is a copy of our duly 20, 1987 letter to Southerrr California Edison Company requesting their approval of our proposal to plant oleanders on Edison property along the south side of Arrow Highway, j Edison has approved our proposal, a$ i°P;Ucated in their letter of July 24, 1987, a copy of which is enei;Sed. Also enclosed is a copy of Temporary Antr_swPermit, which our president, Dwight Jerlow has executeO, -Cnd which we have returned to Edison. We understand that you 'Will send us foi-mal notification of the August 12th Planning Commission meeting, which a representative of our Company will attend, Very truly yours, W. L. Linnelt Vice President Finance and Administration WU:b , 1 i `11 Enc t r ' il Sowhern Csi/romlu Edison Company , P.O.9C.%766 r } RIALTO.CALIF.JRNIA 92376 . REAL PNOPE&M OEPARTMENT TAMCO �e y_ , Jul 2�1 1987 a P. 0: Box 325 � l .� Etiwanda. CA 91739 Attention: Mr. U. L. L"nalZ 7 Vice Presidlnt Fin ce ,Adi].` istratioji �H 'Gentlemen: SUBJECT: Middle Lugo-Mira Loma 500 kV T/L R/W Landscaping License/TANCO i R/P Va. 06-87-051 We have received your requsst concerning the licensing of subject property for the placement of oleandmr bushes and sprinkler system. The request for the iu)'N^ se agreement bus been approved. in view of the time limitations placed on L 4;proposed project, a "itieVarary Entry permit" is attached fas entry to the property. The license agreement will be processed in its normal manner ;end will be forwarded to TAMCo for execution in about ninety (90) days. please note that our litl'uMse agr{ements contain,A 60-day cancellation clause to ever, afar breach oPtcontrncttar Edi*Qn's r, 4 to utilize our property, however. as a practical rtietker, it would be exf-,tiaely rare to cancel a license except for non-eompliance'll.\,many of our tenants having utilized our property without Interruption for i,1 years or more. Also. TAMCO will be required to secure and keep in force a $300,000 insurance pea Icy, including Souther California Edison as: an additional `: sured. The driveway location will be provided by Edison at a later date, once your plans have been revirawed in further depth. Please execute the attached permit and return the copy marked '"File Copy' in the enclosed envelope. Should you have any questions, please contact.-me at (714) 830-5438. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. j Vary truly yours, ED GOODYEAtt Right of Way Agent 1030p/m r F Enclosures , f 1 RP Fps No,Q6-87-051 TEMPORARY EN Y,r,PERMIT Parmiestaeisgtvanto TAMCQ Ediaon'spropertylocatfd rtd_isnn Niddia -Mira Loma M Ic`v-LR/W adjacent to Arrcw`� Route as shown on the attached asap. PURPOSE:.'.., Installation of oleander bushes and ;gkle�r system. TERM:Cog August 1. 1987 Ending pecatrt>Er I.1987 SUBJECTTO:tko seahpnowswthonCaw&riaEd4mComponyeamlowr: None and all ottaracenaes cn" onh,anrktixn,reatrictiaw,rosixvatbna.righta and eosaments whethsrof Te-a cr rot« INDEMNOCATIONpNSURANCE Pamattes&press,fo,itself,and for iG and their&Win and eltVW#Aa wd any Parson or person+dartdnC under the Permitke.to save harmlras and kx*nrJfy Edison,its staeWxts and fie 1 ` and its and their of 6gso m ata,sotployaas,taunts,licensees aid Pormittaaa from and agaIrw elf claims demands: 1 loss.domage,actions,causes of acne:,expanae snWor bWjy or*%err Worming outer lea orar damage M prCtwrty irtctucGnp the properly of Edison,He smocaaeara and aaeigme,anal its and their otaccrc,agent; trainee. 6cauaea,end Pemdtteet or h*V to or death of peaom nwAng in any nmww,directly or from the maintenance,Ut9,operation.napalm err Wasence of said we.Pam°tt"hsttta agrees to inns its ktAtka which may adsa from its aotivmtiea hsmwxW by the Purchase of a liability kw4srm poky with a Combined Skoe Un*of not lags thanrf210 n0 WARRANTY: n 4:e>gxaay tsxieatood end agreed that Pannit tskea the f ramieao era k,aid that Edison rrakea no representation.emm"mt,wwwty,or promise fhet 6*said ptimim are 8t for any pertieWa use,knci ding the use agraarwnt wag entered into and Perinea take not rolled an ar,y such tWea ntation,coveGnt,warrant+, PEE: Thterewillboafaeof Gratis pay"in advance,for use of saidptentisaa. ASSIGNMENT: TNs permit is trc the sale use and pd%Uge of Pormill"and cannot be Assigned or VW&Ferrod.Any attenat to do astray rends thk Permit Voidable at Edison's discretion. TERMINATION: This permit is revocable i mrradfatey at tha ack option and discretion of Edison and des a agteasto peaceably surtenda the premiess upon wdttenax oral demand by Edison orits authorized re,':wenGPivs. AUTHORiiY. This Pamir k WeLmd -Gdfe.«g Order No.=d the Public Utilities Gom^vsakn of the State o California dated and erysativa Jay 1D,1 ��tad hominby INa nfarenco.Pamittee"114 to Comply with as apocabk fedasi,atata,and jcal kwsl. Nwuons. RESTRICTIONS: 1. Permittae agrees thot only t used on the subject property QW be used so as to m intain a minimum ckaranas of ��{�$ )10at frar;/Kowrtw W oWct icaw cmduetors lomWd on said property. 2. Pemminee&,'mall Pmk*Edison'WA a U*m'ii&doses to as of Edkcn's 14011tke and at no time Is then to be.arry` knterWa ce with the free maven W dEdi tor's*wipmertt and matakls. 3. Pamnittae will ndt perk or retool,nor permit to be parked a refueled,any v0*:;s W mechanized puk4wmt within the assigned area Psrmittee tither agrees not to atom of repdr any motor vahlotea.nor to :.tree Stange a condr4pluctors. rs any motor vcNct"directy undemeafh or whirr tan(10)feat of toot trip fife of any ovwhnd etacti" conductors. 4. Permutes agrees to lock or dose any fans or gates at and of the work day and doming rwrwae of Its property, 5. f they entered upon said termination of this permit aam,it,!a agna to Micro the Promises to a condition as dose so polls—to d proper 6. No build'k s,structures,or scrxmtolgtion of flammsbhe or awbis"matakk or exptcaivse shah parmhttad on`1' said property. SPECIAL CONDFTIONS: I have read and understand and agree to uxwrpy with all tc slifornia IEdis m Comp y of the above conditions. Still TAMCO _L, Willa, Siggnnaaturea*A39 ;,tie Supervisor, Probert r Ranade�len 1Z459 Areriatl, PresidentEtiwarida P..0.Box 410.Long deach,CA MI ' Address 7 41°$7-2521 Otte �_ k �l DENNIS RS �. -. 9 A+!',. Eri i ass ) 1771^ SA ift pill 4� z r � � .� _ ftit i TAMCO (g) R� VM OMM&CX 32S.FMANDA.CA FORMA'60*(7,4)W4521 f A:. duty 20, 1981} �y 4 a Air. E. W. Goodyear Southern California Edizon Company P.0. Boa; 788 Rialto. CA 92378 Dear Mr. Goodyear Be: Landmcaping Along Arrow Highway Please refer to our Ietter to W. Ric Greertwod doted July 7, 14187 regarding Rhrubbery required by the ^,,ity of tanch6 Cucamonga along Tamco's wrist fence. In subsequent meetings with the City Planner, an alternate propdsat has emerged which we think is a better solution to the City's beautification concerns and which would also simplify things for, both Edison and Tamco. The purpose of this letter sir. to aesk Edison's approval of our proposal to plant a row of W eandsrs along Arrow Highway on the north end of the Edison property which It-as ,4,,wnediataly west of the AneronlTamco fence. The planting would dxtend west from the ' existing corner post along the south side of Arrow, and would include the inatailation of a watering system. These plantings would be maintained by Tames and would be kept within Edison's 15' height limitation. A drawing is enclosed showing the detail,of our proposal. We understand that a formal license agreement may be required amid may require a few weeks to process, but we are most anxious to have your preliminary approval of this project prior to a scheduled August 12th meeting of the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission.' Very truly yours, W. L. Linneil Vice President Finance and Administration WLL:b; Encl: I �f cc: K. R.� Gudger, Southern California Edison Company '! Ric Pi`eenwood, Southern California Edison Company D. A. srlaw, Tumcs RESOLUTION NO. x' A RESOLVTIUh OF'THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING MINOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO. 87-24 LOCATED AT 12459: ARROYO HIGHWAf IN THE HEAVY INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT APN: '229-131-33 WHEr'AS, on the loth day of June, 19�1, a complete application was filed by TAMCO for review of the abo,.e-described projects and WHEREAS, the City Planner ,:;granted approval of Minor Development Review 87-24 by letter dated Julj 8, 1987 subject to certain specific conditions stated therein; and WHEREAS, the City Planner's approval of the application Was timely appealed to thi;, Commission on July 17, 1987; and WHEREAS, on the 12th day of August, 1987, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission he'td a meeting to consider the above-described project. NOW, ThER'EFORE, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission resolved as follows: r SECT6N 11: That the following can be met: 1. That the proposed projec} is consistent with the objectives of the General Plan; and 2. That the p�ldposed use is in accord with the objective �a the Industrial Specific Plan and the f purposes ��f the district in which the site is located; and 3. That the proposed use, is in compliance with each of the applicable-rrevtaions of the industrial Specific Plan; and 4. That the propen,ed 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. j SECTION 3: TWa Minor Development Review No. 87-24 is approved subject to e o awing coh`ditions: 1. That TAMCO shall- 2ttain permission, and submit documentation to City of same, from the Southern California Edison Co., (SCE), to landscape that portion of SCE's land which is adjacent to Arrow Highway. This should serve to screen a major view access from Arrow Highway into the project site. PLANNING COMMISS'bt}!t RESOt,OTION Na. t� MDR 87-24 - TAMCO A111ust,-12, 1987 Page 2 2, A detailed landscape and irrigation plan shaf' be submitted far review and approval by the Planning Division prior to the issuance of building permits. 3. be site shalt be developed in accordance with the approved site plans on file in the Planning Division, the conditions contained herein, and Development Code regulations. Prior to any use of I the proect "„ite, or business activity being commence thereon all conditions of approval shall k be completed to the satisfaction of th; City j Planner. j4. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development Cade, and all other applicable City Ordinances, and applicable community plans or specific plans in effect at the time of building permit issuance. r S. Approval shall expire, unless extended by the Planning Commission, if building permits are not issued or approved use has not commenced within twenty-four (241 months from the date of approval. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 1 M DAY OF AUGUST, 1987. PLANNING COMF'?ISSION OF THE CITY OF RA)610 CUCAMONGA BY: Larry T. KNIel, unairmah ATTEST: 'tl-rea u er, Deputy Secretary -- -- _ I, Brad Buller, Deputy Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of 2ancho Cucamonga, do hereby c�.'tify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and rt!gularly introduced, passed,'and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held dR the 12th day of August, 1987, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: C"ISSi9NERS. ABSENT:. COWISSIONERS: CITY(?F RANCHO CUCAMONGA r.,CAMo STAFF REPORT 0 t F Z 1 1977 s DATE: August-12, 1987 TO; Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission ! FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner ! BY: Richard L. Alcorn, Code Enforcement Supervisor SUBJECT: PARKING LOT AND SIDEWALK "GALES 1. BACKGROUND: The Development Code, Section 17.04.070 iC.1 has provisions which allow parking lot or sidewalk sales within Commercially zoned districts. A Temporary Use Permit is required, and the criteria iim►its the duration of such sales to three (3) days within any three (3) month period. Section 17.10.030 G.2 of the Development Code which regulates this use is not specific as to what links a sale to this time period. 1n the past, staff has I approved Temporary Ilse Permits based on individual business locations (storefronts), however, the Code is not specific as to hvi an approval relates to the business entity, storefront, or the commercial property, on which it is located. i Staff has interpreted the 00elopment Code to use individual business locations (storefronts) as the basis of the pemnit application and when meeting time limits, or other criteria. Recent requests for this type of Temporary Use Permit have caused staff to reevaluate the Development Code provisions. Two specific applications have -raised questions as to the intent of the Code. In the first instance, three separate business locations within a shopping center applied for Temporary Use permits. The dates for each sale Were arranged to create t;; °ee consecutive three dart ' periods or what was actually a continvOus nine day parking lot tent sale. Since each permit was requested by a separate business location, the permits were approved on the basis of staffs interpretation of the Development Code. The effect of this interpretation can conceivably create a situation where a Commercial center with 30 shops could obtain permits for parking lot sales continuously, with each business using only the allowable 3 clays within a 90-day period, The second instance was a single business location which sublet separately licensed business operations within the same storefront. The request was made for a parking lot sale based on the individual business entities at that location. Again, multiple businesses, this time at a single location, could �1 ITEM 0 ° PLANNING COWISSIaN STAFF REPORT Parking Lot and Sidewalk Sales August 12, 1987 ` ,page 2 perpetuate permits and parking lot sales in excess of 3, days in a 90-day period; In this case, staff would have denied the p, application due to a previous sale at that location lr.ss than 90 days prior to the request, basing their, .decision on the interpretation that permits were based dn-,bosinewi, locations r (storefronts) rather than licensed business operations. II. PROVISIONS OF THE DEVELOPMENT CODE: Section 17.04.070 C.1 regarding emoorary Uses restricts par ing lot sales tD businesses within commercially designated properties, and defers all specific regulation to Commercial District development criteria. Section 17.IO.030 G.2, which regulates this type of activity, does not specify to whom the permit is granted or on what the time limits are leased. Staff believes that the intent of this section is to provide guidelines for this type of sales activity, but not to promote excessive use. Further review of this matter by the City Attomy cons, 4 that,; no reference is made to business Locations. lime rerquireit * that the sale occurs on commercial property and that the property owner must approve would indicate that the 1 ication of the sale is a o basic consideration. fie criteria used to control the frequency of parking lot sales could be linked to the commmmeircial property. Since businesses can least and sublease space, and obtain licenses infinitely, the linking of the permit; to commercial property would provide a greater degree of assurance that promotional sales activity would not be excessive. This interpretation seems consistent with other provisions of commercial development. If it were determined that we should 1ifik approvals for parking lot sales to commercial property, it would have the Poll. ring effect; (1) A free standing business, on its own lot, would be permitted to have a 3-day sale in each 90-day period. (2) A multi-tenant site located on a single Coemaercial parcel would be permitted a single 3-day sale in each 9D-day period to include all businesses ,n that parcel. Phis intepretation would correspond with the high development standards imposed on new commercial centers by limiting the flea market atmosphere which accompapies outside sales. In addition, this would promote the cooperation of adjacent businesses by involving entire shopping centers in promotional events. 1 s PL $G A REPORT r- Fa Cs6 an " f SdJ eb page $ U 1r 1II. .REGEPIQ [ Ii tie, Planning Coiss°Fon_finds that tf)Vq yrrent f r 1? a nod�s' a fi O def3n t�q wtt t is POR ,reO*i r.ard to Y the intenni�t�he Code istofhka �isiit :�nl finds that J, th sales �aotivit . �y 4 a `1 specific lFo�e trort. t eB s f Xequests d[reotion to aieend 'Section i7. b.03Q-G ;2 aF e De i�o r<i< Cbde 'to refiiect this itntent, Res 11y Brad B�.yl'er r- City Planner PB:RLAnas r' ttachment: Exhibit 'me - Excerpts from the pee lopm 4k Cade with. Suggested Amendment to Section 17 10.030 G-Z-. a s t . EXHIBIT "Aa Section 17.04.070 C,1 of the Development Cade stags. C. Temporary use permit. An application for a Tr army Use Permit v s a be re or the foi1`o�y.ng activities an shaft be subject to conditions establiAhed herein .and any other additional conditions f: as may be prescribed by the City Planner, 1. Parking lot arHt sidewalk sales for businesses located within a commerci*TTy d s"1i gna a proper y, such uses shall be sub&,it to the commercial and sign regulations contained within Chapter 17.10 and Title 14 of the,'ftnicipal Cade, respectively. Section 17.10.030 0..2 of the Development Code states. (Suggested additional language is in bald type). G. Condition of Uses. 2. Parking lot and sidewalk series: Parking lot and sidewalk sales ar a Tlea marrez Type or operation may be permitted in the commercial districts sub3t-et to the approval of a Temporary Use Permit as descrioed in Chapter i7.04.(176 and lowing criteria: (a) The sale may not exceed three (34f— three (3) month period; an anydetermined by fee title wmrsh whether portions thereof are leased in 1� part. _ pa -;• i (b) The prospective merchant ' must obtain written F authorization of property owner. (+a1 The acttvil�y shalt not present a hazard to, 'f pedestrians or encroach on a required building exit- (d) Safe vehicle ingress and egress shall be provided at all times; and (e) Adfquate parlking shall be provided and 'maintained during the course of the activity, and shall consider all activity ins► the same site. L ... ...et4.. .. ...�i .J ...:.ems... .F...- . ,...e.:c. aa,.�.. Y t s a 40,clte0s., alty, and .indloate ttie J.'Oew"Q4t CITY U ` r fi. 7. 8. 9 12. k 1:3. J 14. 15. 16. . 17. rd' 19. r. 20. 22. 24. 25. - { 28. 29. 30. 13 3A?.UVOIEDA tioEur*&planning o CITY OR',AANCHD CUCAMONGA AUGUST 10> 1987 1 S A/SonGe Vista ATTSNTroN SCOTT MURPHY d a Four TO CHAIRMAN AND MEHKRS OF THE PLAMING ChMMTSSION' 4Drmae.CA 99 773 !? i"a92-7308 ' $99-8000 r . 9E6JECfi TIME TENSION FOR TT N13 12969 YAZEDSI '" WE WOULD Llxftz`rb INFORM THE COMMISSION Tt-:W WE WILL -C:OMPLY WITH. THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CONDITION TO��REQUIRc FROM; THE DEVELOPER INLIEU FOR THE FUTURE \1 UNpERC•CRWNDING CF iJTILITY LINES FOR THE � ;-, J'ECT \ PROPERrY., WE UNDERSTAND THIS WILL APPLY, m THE E'R.OWAGE '- OF ARROW HIGHWAY. WE WILL NOT AS OF 1460 BE ATTENI?�l0 r THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING— PLEASE FORWARD T`r,7s IWORMATI'ON TO THE MEMBERS. si 7E VOLBEDAr AR"CAITE'CT FOR YAZEDJIAN 3 a ' r r { I t-4 MESSWWR ll111fO5WENTCCMPANY 7g�t J . 1A _ _ L .. August n, 1987 Ms. Tlancy Fong, Associtity% Planner Planning Department City of Rancho Cucamonga 9320-0 Baseline Road - Rancho Cucamonga, California 917o" RE. Arrow Business Park Request for Master Conditional Use Permit `- 87-28-Messenger Dear Ms.-song: Messenger investment company would like to request a t� continuance on the above referenced request for Master Conditional Use Permit to the next Planning Commission Meeting, Than you for your assistance and cooperation in this matter. siricerely, A na S. Sanders Vice President Southern California Commercial Development DSS/cl t "". 4 2-A Von Vatiran Ave e, Irvgwe 9271 ., p0