Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
1987/09/09 - Agenda Packet
07.01-02 o 9-9-87 PC Agenda µ i CM OF RANCHO , CUCANM _ 1N�G. A PLA,,NL WG ��OTNW lI ICt4 A - EDNESD':1Y SEPTEMBER 9r 1967 7:00 p.m. LIONS PARK COMM•UNITT CENTER 9161 BASE 7JM RANCHO CUCA*ONV.A;CAL]PORNJA 1, Pledge of Alliegiancet R. Roll Call 1� Commissioner Btakesiey, Commissioner Emerick _ Commissioner Chitiea _ Commissioner McKlel Commissioner Tolstoy _ IIIL Annotezeements Iii. Appnwal of ]lutes July 8, 1987 Y. 'Pablia Hearings The following items wv )uWic hearft:gs in which concerned individuals "any voice their opi;zion of #io related project. Please wait to be recognized by the Chmrman Mind address the Commission by stating your name and address. All such opinions shall, be limited to 5 minutes per individual for each project. _ A. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDP_'AONAL USE PERMIT 87 -28 - MESSENGER f; The request for a Master CUP to allow Business Support SeMZ4 Convenience Sales and Service, and Food and Beverage Sales is 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 at Bear, Gulch Place - APN 209-012-19. (Continued from August 26, 1987) B. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 87 -31 - NEIGHBORHOOD CHURCH - A request to establish a 3,700 )sqtiare. fbot church in an existing business park, loeatod at the southwes . corner of Artow Highway and Archibald Avendi) in the General Industrial Distriek, SU-barea 3 - A. N 209- 021 -40. ti -77 C. �iNVMOXMENTAL -ASSESSMENT AND MODIFICATION To CONDIZONAL USE Y - ----- MEDICAL 99M 1 8 iKZ4-- A ; ,equeat to modify an TRA � ORTATIOW OEM existing CUP by allowing to park in two existing employee designated parf¢ing statics lit an existing commercial c ter in the General Commercial District located on the nort4 �'X"de of Foothill, Boulevard, east of Red Hill Country Club Drive - APN 207-10117. D. VARIANCE,87-12 - BAM-S-ADAIR. - A request to eliminate the required five (5) foot I building setback in conjunction with the proposal to construct two multi-tenant industrial buildings in the General Industrial District, Subarea 3, located at the northwest corner of Helms and Feron - APS 209-031-57. Related file.- DR 81-31L E.,-_"CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 9745 - WILLIE & PIE PIZZA PARLOUR - A request or the esLagh'shment of an arcade within an existing restaemnt located in the Neighborhood Commercial District at 6.321 Hwin Avenue, Suite 1- APN 201-271-69. F. E NMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 13727 - JANSSENS - A residential subdivision of 12 single family lots on 3.53 acres of land in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling knits per acre), located at the southwest corner of Carnelian Street and Highland Avenue - APN 201-214-11. G. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND-VICTORIA C OmLuNrry PLAN AMENDMENT 87-02 - WILLIAM LYON COMPANY - A rec;1est: to chang(- ,; the land use and zoning designation'' from M um (4-14 dwelling units per acre) and Medium-High ;x.4-24 dwelling units per acre) Residential to Low-medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) for a 24.67 acre parcel within the Victoria Planned Community, located at the northwest corner of Victoria Park lane and Milliken Avenue - APN 202-211,43 and 14. Y_ ENYIRONMENZ 0& ASSESSMENT AND DE7(ELOPMENT REVIEW 87-11 - SUMIT -The development r. ton (10) apartment units on 1.03 acres of land in the Medium Residential District (8-14 dwelling units per acre), located on the north side of 19th Street, east of Heilman Avenue - APN 201-474-07. Associated with this development is Tree Removal Permit 87-33. I. &MROMMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 13369 A custom lot subdivision of 3.79 acres into six 6 par(RI-s-9-the Very Low Density Residential District (less than 2 d' "elling units per acre), located on the east side of Sapphire Street, south of Hillside Road - APN 1461- 601 -9,10 and 11. C. �iNVMOXMENTAL -ASSESSMENT AND MODIFICATION To CONDIZONAL USE Y - ----- MEDICAL 99M 1 8 iKZ4-- A ; ,equeat to modify an TRA � ORTATIOW OEM existing CUP by allowing to park in two existing employee designated parf¢ing statics lit an existing commercial c ter in the General Commercial District located on the nort4 �'X"de of Foothill, Boulevard, east of Red Hill Country Club Drive - APN 207-10117. D. VARIANCE,87-12 - BAM-S-ADAIR. - A request to eliminate the required five (5) foot I building setback in conjunction with the proposal to construct two multi-tenant industrial buildings in the General Industrial District, Subarea 3, located at the northwest corner of Helms and Feron - APS 209-031-57. Related file.- DR 81-31L E.,-_"CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 9745 - WILLIE & PIE PIZZA PARLOUR - A request or the esLagh'shment of an arcade within an existing restaemnt located in the Neighborhood Commercial District at 6.321 Hwin Avenue, Suite 1- APN 201-271-69. F. E NMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 13727 - JANSSENS - A residential subdivision of 12 single family lots on 3.53 acres of land in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling knits per acre), located at the southwest corner of Carnelian Street and Highland Avenue - APN 201-214-11. G. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND-VICTORIA C OmLuNrry PLAN AMENDMENT 87-02 - WILLIAM LYON COMPANY - A rec;1est: to chang(- ,; the land use and zoning designation'' from M um (4-14 dwelling units per acre) and Medium-High ;x.4-24 dwelling units per acre) Residential to Low-medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) for a 24.67 acre parcel within the Victoria Planned Community, located at the northwest corner of Victoria Park lane and Milliken Avenue - APN 202-211,43 and 14. Y_ ENYIRONMENZ 0& ASSESSMENT AND DE7(ELOPMENT REVIEW 87-11 - SUMIT -The development r. ton (10) apartment units on 1.03 acres of land in the Medium Residential District (8-14 dwelling units per acre), located on the north side of 19th Street, east of Heilman Avenue - APN 201-474-07. Associated with this development is Tree Removal Permit 87-33. I. &MROMMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 13369 A custom lot subdivision of 3.79 acres into six 6 par(RI-s-9-the Very Low Density Residential District (less than 2 d' "elling units per acre), located on the east side of Sapphire Street, south of Hillside Road - APN 1461- 601 -9,10 and 11. kr j Jw *3i31FICATIQN TO TEN'PAZ'lyE TIIdCT 12659 SECS - 4. 'AN�A,tiEIGfE *r - A request to delete ooltditions of s ' r�,7ai rF:rtt, ring , iiallon of isleechers and an,annourtcers star ''Within r the eytitestrien lot of a residential subdivision of 135 single family and three common lots on 67.87 r° acres of land in the Very, Low idd%181 District (1-2 dwe units per acre) within the j °tiwaa�ila Spbcific Plant, located at the soutFtylest corner of Bdwanda Avenue and 24th Street - AFN 226 -011 �A,- K, EATVtb;ONR le1TAL + SFaS.SI ENtT` N13`± 3'ENTAT VE i? CEL 31.1 areas of Iand into 1 parcels in " t3anera2 Tne3ustriat District, Subarea 8,lted at the southeast corner a£ Rochester Avenue and Arrow Route - APN 229 - 223 =18y 23 26. 1fie18ted Fn�ea 1)R 87 26. VL -Ibw BaNimw L ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Alin DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 8726 - 3. BEii1FIAN1' I3 EL41'MENT CO. -* A development of 13 �`' , indastric�t braiic� tataiir� 570425 square fast on 2.4 e�cres Of land in that,`` jal Industrial Uiie,triet lsuharaa �l lacated on tre �� southeast corrnf oP Arrow Route anll Rochester Avenue - A�'33' ' 229 I?1 I9, 23 -26. Tn addatian, the applicant is requesting Tree `87 Removal Permit -58. Related Fite:: Tentative Parcel M$o M. TENTATIVE TRACT 12659 D=S GN REVIEW - SECURITY RANAG —Iffi T - Da gn R&iew- of buildzng elevations :slut .p. plans for a previously approved tract map consisting ofA35 single family Iots and 3 common lots on 67.67 acres of. + c iti the Very Low Density Residential District (1 -2 dwelling units per acre) within the Etiwande Specife Plan, located at the southwest corner of Etiwanda A"nue and 24th Street - APN 225 - 011 -35, I"% APPEAL OF TREE REMOVA.T., PERMIT 87-43 - Appeal of staff's decision denying the removal of eleven 'cl1) Eucalyptus tt6es located in the rear yard of 9538 Gala Avenfte - APN 202 - 111 -69. O. ENVIFtbNSsIiNTAL ASSESSMENT ANi 1?EYELOPMENT REVIEW 87 -30 - JUAN ADAIR - A proposal to construct two Multi tenant industrial buildings totaling 30,602 square feet on 1.8 acres of land in the General Industrial .District, Subarea 3, located at the northwest corner of Helms avenue and Peron Loulevard ^- j APN 208 -031 -57. 11 � 1 l' I RAP ♦lle iJii':4hoV A'OporU RM Q�ADRJA$40A IFO!2THML FIRE DISxRICT Q. ` MMA t?fiti'2Y 8'1-88 WOaK PROGRAM 13. 4pblie Commesttsc fits .?I the U Me and place for the general public to address the Commission.• Items to be discussed here are t►ics�a�vhiah do not n , already appear an this agenda. X. Agjbumme6t) t• ` The Planning Commission has .adopted Administratiwa Regulations that set an 11 pan. adjou►nment time. If items go bsyond' that time, they shalt be heard only with the a , tsent of the Commission. r �e M. 7 7 VICINITY MAP, 1 WIT OF RANCHO CUCAMONG. r DATE: 71 FROM: BY: SUBJECT. CITY OF RVICHO CUCAMONGA S' AFiq' REP'ORT Septemper 9, 1967 Chairman and Members of'the Planning Commission Brad Buller, City Planner Nan:ty Fong, ;associate Planner ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CORDIT 0NAL USE PERMIT $7-28 - - The request-WC-3 as e —r-Can ffl nat use erm 5-allow Business Support Services, Convenience Saks 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 Bean Gulch Plaze - APR 209- 012 -19. I. BACKGROUND: The Planning Commission, at the August 12 and August W-I9- 87rregular meeting- continued this items at the request of the applicant. Attached for, your review is the August 26, 1987 staff report. II. RECOMMENi.ATION• Staff recommends that the Planning Commission take ac ion on,i, s item at tonight's meeting and not grant any further continuances. ZjBrai�e ful ly ly submitted, ner - BB:NF:te Attachments: August 26, 1987 Staff Report ITEM A �I CITY EO3'fk'/�jRANCHO CUCp°1►3'.[M� ONGrs F DATE: August; 26, 1987 U To. Chairrnn and Members of the Planning Commission 197 FROM: Grad Buller, City Planner BY: Nancy R:119, Associate Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 87 -28 e reques tor a master oT ono se to —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. ABSTRACT: At the request of the applicant, the Planning Commission on u9u`&12, 1987 continued this item to this regular meting. II. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action Requested: Approval of a Master Conditional Use Permit o a ow 'Business Support Services, Convenience Sales and Services, and flood and Beverage o"ales, and issudnce of Negative Declaration. 8. surrounding Land Use and Norffi = -spar n , WEFT- au c ark; Medium Residential District (8-14 dwelling units pee acre) South - Vacant, Existing industrial buildings-, General Industrial District, Subarea 2 East - Vacant, Existing industrial buildings, General Industrial District, Subarea 2 West - Existing industrial buildings; General Industrial District, Subarea 2 I% General Plan Designations: Project site - enera 76ustriai North - Medium Density Residential South - General Industrial East - General Industrial West - General Industrial D. Site Characteristics. The seven multi- tenant buildings are presen v OFF- cons ruction. III. ANALYSIS PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT. CUP 87 -28 - Messenger August 26, 1987 Page , A. General on July 23, l9E�iiv.. the -''Planning CoWssion con, anally approved Bev "i ;eYrt Review 86-13 for the development of the 25 acre Arro� Hi.siness Park t173t consists of 3 phases. Phase I developoi4t 4scludxs 7 multi- tenant and light manufacturing buildings toteing 131,000 square feet and Phase Al developwnt inclu .' L warehouse distribution buildings totaling 223,400 squar4 feet, as shown in Exhibit "C ". Both Phase I and II are under_caill'truction at the present time except for buildiing 13 of Phase 1 %, while Phase 'III is a future project that is subject to sepdilate development review process. The applicant is requesting for a vizstev Condi,Jonal Use Permit to allow the following, uses within buildings 1, 2 and 3 of the Phase I development: Business Support Services, Convenience Sales and Services, Food ald,peverage sales. AccordinC 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 compal0bilitv'to the northerly r4sidents, and allow the leasing of the messantoe spates within buildings 1 and 3 separately from the first `€ oiyr Onufacturing industrial type of tenants. See attached letter frm applicant. B. Wnpatibility of Land Use: The following are definitions of e three land _u_$e__fy_pe_s_'5at the applicant is requesting for in the proposed Arrow Business Park: 1. Business Support Services: Activities typically include, BUT are not limited o: service which support the activity of firms, such as, clerical, employment, protective, or minor processing, including blue print services and multi - copying of pamphlets and small reports for another firm. Activities not including this category are the printing of_ books and services of the personal nature. 2. Convenience Sales and 7rrvices• Activities typically nc u , u are no m .Y�e retail sales from the premises of frequently needed small personal convenience items and professional services which are used frequently. Uses typically include, but are not limited to: drug stores, stores selling toiletries, tobacco, and 14agatines beauty and barber shops, apparel, laundering and dry cleaning agencies. 3, =; and Beverage Sales: Activities include, but are not fiffizea to the retail sales from the premises of food and beverages for off premises consumption. Uses typically include, but are not limited to: mini markets, liquor stores and retail bakeries, catering businesses excluding chain type of grocery store. A'.3 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CUP 67 -28 - Messenger August 26, 1987 Page 3 In reviewing those uses allowed within Business Support Services such as blue 'print shops, clerical and employment agencies, staff believiis that they would provide compatibility to uses within the Industrial Park. The reason is that these type of uses would provide a service to other firms within the Industrial Park. They would fit well in loudting at the messanine within buildings 1 and 3 (see Exhibit "E ", floor plan of the messanine). A review of the ; proposed uses within Convenience Sales and Services and F000- and Beverage Sales indicated that they are more towards the quasi retail type of uses Were storefront exposure would be required. These types of retail uses would prefer to locate in building 2 with store front exposure to Arrow .Route. However, the applicant has set aside only 3,400 square feet in building 2 for these proposed three type of urns, versus a total of 20,300 square feet in the messanine of buildings 1 and 3. Staff is skeptical that these types of uses such as liquor store, beauty and barber shops, retail bakeries, storea that sell toiletries, tobacco and magazines would locate in the Messaiine of build�.ngs 1 and 3. When this project was first submitted for s, f reO'ew in September of 1985, the applicant proposed a multi- tenant project including a "Plaster ;Conditional Use, permit" for service, office and retail types of uses. Statf inforined the applicant that the proposed Master Conditional Use permit and the multi- tenant project was not in ccnformance with the long range plans of subarea 2. ( The purpose of this subarea is to strengthen its manufactuH ng and warehousing cctivities complimented by rail service. The applicant has revised his project _several times in an attempt to compl„► with the Indv:,trial Specific Plan by limiting the number of multi- tenant buildings and providing warehouse discribution buildings where one of the buildings has potential for rail service in Phase II. However, allowing Master Conditional Use Permit at this time is still contrary to the purpose of this subarea 2. C. Availability of Parking, The total gross floor area*for the several - inaustrial bui.dings is 131,455 square fleet,. The Industrial Specific Plan requires parking for multi- tenant use where the office portion is less than 35% of the Teased space at a ratio of 1 parking space per -46'0 square feet of gross floor area. Therefore, the total number of required parking spaces for this project is 329 spaces. The site plan shows a total of 377 parking spaces have been provided, leaving 38 extra spaces (see Exhibit "D "). The following 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: 11 I lu PLANKNtI COMM," TS1ON STAFF REPORT CUP 57 -28 essi tger August 26, 1987 Page 4 I, ! !1 TABLE A A PARKING SUMMARY ( , Number 'a ; B Bldg /Type ( Square P Parking -_,v S Space Spaces Bldg 1: Business Support Service, Conven- ience Sales A Service,, Foot & Beverage Sales 9 9,400 1 1/250 3 37 3 37 Multi - tenant 1 15,915 1 1,400 ' 4 40 4 40 Business Support Service, Conven- ience Sales A j j Service, Food & j Beverage Sales 3 3,400 ? ?/250 - 1 14 1 14 Multi- tenant 1 13,358 1 1,400 3 33 Eating and Drinking Places 2 2,040 1 1/100 : :20 2 20 Bldg 3: Business Support Somice, Conven- ience Sales & Service, Food 3 Beverage Sales 1 10,900 1 1,250 4 44 4 44 Multi- tenant 1 17,431 1 1 /400 4 44 4 44 Bldg 4 Multi- tenant 1 11,976 1 1/400 3 30 3 30 Bldg 5: ltilti- tenant 1 1$,610 1 1/400 3 37 3 36 Bldg 6: Multi- tenant 1 15,630 1 1,400 3 39 3 39 Bldg 7: Multi- tenant 1 16 b 131,455 377 *Based upon proposed r0quest for CUP. A-5 43 377 PLANNING COMIdISSION S4F''P4RL `\ CUP 87-28 - Messenger August 86, 1987 Page 5 A review of the above table indicates that the site complies with the minimum parking , requirements based on the summarization of the proposed use. Exhibit "G" also shows that the parking spaces are adequately distributed around the vicinity of t:,4 seven industrial buildings. Therefore staff determines that the site has adequate parkin±±� spaces for the addition of 'these "quasi" retail type of uses' uch as Business Support Services, Convenience Sales and Services, and food and Beverage Sales. D. Purpose and Intent of Conditional Use Permit: The purpose of "cne uonaitional Use Permit is to create tie x bility necessary to achieve the objectives of the Industrial Specific Plan. Select uses in each district are allowed subject to the granting of a Conditional Use permit because of the unique site development requirements and operating characteristics which mazy require special consideration in order to operate in a manner compatible with surrounding uses. The Conditional Use Permit process is intended to afford an opportunity for broad public review and evaluation of these requirements and Characteristics, to provide adequate mitigation of any po estially adverse impacts, and to insure that all site develoNnent regulations and performance standards are provided in accorda!lce with the Industrial Specific Plan and Development Code. Last April,' the Planning Commission has approved a Master Conditional Use Permit to allow Administrative /Office use, Professional /Design services and Insurance, Financial and Peat Estate services within the Vineyard West Park located at the southwest corner of Vineyard Avenue and ArNw Route in Subaraa 1. In considering this proposed Master Conditional Use Permit, the Planning Commission emphasized that the granting of t<'ais 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 t5te proposed uses. However, these types of proposed uses are considered as quasi retail uses that require store front *Aposure, which would also !wean an expansion of retail uses in the industrial area. The applicant's request seeks to capitalize on nearby multi - family projects by providing commercial uses to support these residences. The intent of the industrial Specific Plan is that these uses were intended to be supportive of ,.he primary industrial uses. The granting of a Master Conditional Use Permit would set a precedent for the entire City. It could also diminish the opportunity for broad public review and Oiluation to ensure potential adverse impacts could be rnitigateLl. A 4, 1 E 11 PLAH►iING C SSI STAFF REPORT CUP 87 -28 - s ger �Ugust 26, 19 7 b E. Environmental Assessment: Staff has completed an Environmental cNecKlift and Pas oeZerm1ned that no significant enviro nmental impact will occur as a result of this proposed project for allowing a Master Conditional Use Permit. Further, a Negative Deeltration has been issued for this project on duly 23, 1,186, IV. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: In order for the Planning Commission to approve s pro ec , facts to support the following findings must be made: I; That the proposed uses - Business Support Services, Convenience Sales and Services, and ,Food and Beverage Sales are in accord with the General Plan, the objectives of the Industrial Specific Plan and the purpose of the subarea in which the site is located. 2. That the proposed uses would not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. 3. That t',�z proposed uses comply with each of the applicable provis4bns of the Industrial S�cific Plan. V. CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised as a public hearing in Me Ually Report newspaper, the property posted ai:4 notices were sent to al property owners within 300 „feet of the project sic. VI. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission deny lNQ`5 i:-iona se Permit 87 -28. However, if the Commission can make the necessary findings, a Resolution of Approval has been provided. Respectful] su ted, City -"-,inner BB :NF:vc Attachments: Letter of Request from Applicant Exhibit "A” - Location Map Exhibit "B° - Approved Detailed Site Plan Exhibit "C" _ Detail Site Plan Showing the number of Parking Spaces Provided Around Each Building Exhibit "D" , Floor Plan for Buildings I and 3 Ncluding Messanine Resolution of Approval MEssENGER !N VESTMENT COMPANY July 23, 1987 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 Company requests the approval of a Limited Master Condition'. T7se Permit for the buildings that front on Arrow R00#)4.- We wish to allow the following conditionally permitted uses in Buildings 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 DA 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. Messenger Investment Company believes that these uses would be more compatible 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 base�a upon the net area (glass line) less electrical /machat. cal rooms and stairwells. The parking requirements live A 16912 -A Von Korman Avenue, Irvine, CA 92714 714i474=1300 R �J been broken down by use. As indicated, there would be sufficient parking for 23,700 square feet of the Proposed conditional =asses -at: l space /250 square feet and 2,040 square feat of °eating and dining establish- ments" at 1 space /loo square feet. We propose to distribute these uses between Buildings 1, 2 and 3 where the additional onsite parkirq is located. The tenant span, #s in Buildings 1, 2 and 3 are as ;small as 400 square feet each. With tha,�o, footage of each use limited, as proposed, Messenger investment Company wishes to obtain a Master Conditional Use Permit to elimirate the need to return to the Planning Commission for a conditional use permit for ea!zh tenant. The planning staff could monitor, the total allowed square footage -,and restrict the project in this manner. I have included the following items with this Letter for this Conditional Use Permit application per your checklist. 1. Uniform Application 2. Part 1 of the initial study 3. (4) 8 1/211 x 11" site plan (parking summary) (4) 8 1/211 x 1" sample. floor plan of mezzanine of Building 1. 4. This letter 5. (5) sets of gummed labels for notification of applicants 6. (3) sets of gummed labels for public ]searing notification - 7. Check in the amount of $398.00 for Conditional Use Permit S. Check in the amount of '$87.00 for Initial Study Thank you for Your assist-.:ca in the application of this Conditional Use Permit. If the application is into fete in my way, please notify me. /ipare , Scot E. Peotter Pro at Manager SEP /cl cc: Dana Sanders, Messenger Investment Company Jeff Gordon, Messenger Investment Company MES °.AVM ONYESTMENTCOMMW Ap'/ PARKING ANALYSIS SUMMARY ,07/22/87 10:24 AM ., Ai .TOTAL BUILDING AREA 1331,455 SF CONVERT TO BUSItNESS SUPPORT SERVI ES. 23,700 SF I REQ91RF_D PARKING (BSS7 1 SPACE /250 SF` 94.8 SPACES .' EAFINS & DRINXINP ESTABLISHMENTS 2 040 SF ' .REQUIRED PARK IN&_(E &DE) i SPACE /100 SF 20.4 SPACES REMAiINING MULTI -USt TENNANT 105,715 SF ' ALLOWABE -E "OFFICE" 35% 37,000 SF 's ,\ MANOFAC , UR ING 65% 56a 7-%!5 SF REQUIRE;.) PARKING (MUT) 1 SPAC5/400 SF 26i -.., SPACES , TOTAL PARKING REQUIRED ?79 SPACES BICYCLE PARKING PROVIDED 28 SPACES= 7 SPACES AUTO PARKING PROVIDED 37� 2 SPACES TOTAL'PARKING PROVIDED 379 SPACES i _r� _ ;1 BUILDING I PARKING ANALYSIS AM TOTAL BUILDING AREA 25,315 sr CONVERT TO BUSINESS SUPPORT SERVICES giwL_sF_ REQUIRED PARKING (BSS) I SPACE/250 SF 37.6 SPACES EATING 4 DRINKING ESTABLISHMENTS 0 SF REQUIRED PARKING (E,%DE) 1 SPACE/100 SF 0.0' SPr-jCES REMAINING MULTI-USE ',ENNANT 15,915 SF ALLOWABLE "OFFICE" 35% 5,370 SF MANUFACTURING 65% 10,345 SF REQUIRED PARKING (MUT) I SPACE/400 SP 39.8 SPACES TOTAL PARKING REQUIRED 77 SPACES BICYCLE PERKING PROVIDEZ 4 SPACES= I SPACES AUTO PARKING PROVIDED -rG SPACES TOTAL PARKING PROVIDED 77 SPACES BUILDING 2 PARKING ANALYSIS 07/22/87 121t24 AM TOTAL BUILDING AREA 18,798 CONVERT TO BUSINESS SUPPORT SERVICES 3,400 SF REQUIRED PARKING (B3S) I SPACE/250 SF 13.6 SPACES EATING & DRINKING ESTABLISHMENTS 2,040 SF REQUIRED PARKING (E&DE) I SPACE/100 SF 20.4 SPACES REMAINING MULTI-USE TENNANT 13,356 SF ALLOWABLE "OFFICE" 35% 4,675 SF MANUFACTURING 65% 8,683 SF REQUIRCD PARKING (MUT) i sDnCE/4ee SF 33.4 SPACES TOTAL —ING REQUIRED 67 SPACES BICYCt '.qKING PROVIDED 4 SPACES= I SPACES AUTO P� PROViDED 66 SPACES TOTAL PRi.% 3 PROVIVaD 67 SPACES BUILDING 3 Pr.AKINO ANALYSIS e7/22/87 1e:24 AM TOTAL BUILDING AREA 28,331 SF CONVERT TO BUSINESS SUPPORT SERVICES lo'goo Sr REQUIRED PARKING (BSS) I SPACE/250 SF 43.6 SPACr.S EATING & DRINKING ESTABLISHMENTS Ql SF REQUIRED PARKING (E&DE) I SPACE/100 SF 0.0 SPACES REMAINING MULTI-USE TENNANT 17,431 SF ALLOWABLE " OFFICE" 35% 6,101 SF MANUFACTURING 65% 11, 330 SF REQUIRED PARKING (MUT) I SPACE/400 SF 43.6 SPACE, TOTAL PARKING REQUIRED 87 SPACE'S BICYCLE OARKING PROVIDEZ 4 SPACES= I SPACES AUTO PARKING PROVIDED a6 SPACES TOTAL PARKING PROVIDED 4 87 SPACES A PUILDiNs 4 PARKIWO ANALN37S 07/22/87 10:24 AM TOTAL BUILDING AREA Y 11,976 SF CONVERT TO BUSINESS SUPPORT SERVICES 0 SF REQUIRED PARKING (BSS) 1 SPACE/250 sr 0.0 SPACES EATING & DRINKING ESTABLISHMENTS 0 SF REQUIRED PARKING (E&DE) i SPACE /100 SF O.0 SPACES REMAINING MUITI-UjE TENNANT 11,976 SF ALLOWABLE "OFFICE" a-i*A 4,192 SF 117 MANUFACTURING 65% 7,784 SF RF-A`.TRED PARKING (MUT) I 'SPAQE140e SF 29.9 SPACES njl-f- PARKING REQUIRED ae SPACES BICYCLE PARKING PROVIDED 4-r-PACES= i SPACES AUTO PARKING PROVIDED 29 SPACES TOTAL PARKING PROVIDED ae SPACES 8UIt.DING 5 rARRING ANALYSIS e7f22/87 10-.24 P-1 TOTAL SUILDING AREA 14,610, SF CONVERT TO BUSINESS SUPPORT SERVICES 0 SF REQUIRED PARKING (RSS) I SPACE/250 ap e). o SPACES EATING & DRINKING ESTABLISHMENTS la SF REQUIRED PARKING (E&DE) I SPACE /1 @0 SF 0.0 SPACES REMAINING MULTI -U8E T5NNPNT 14,610 SF ALLOWABLE "OFFICE" 35% 5,114 SF MANUFACTURING 65v. 9,497 SF REQUIRED PARKING MUT) I SPACE1400 SF 36.5 SPACES TOTAL PARKING REQUIRED 37 SPACES BICYCLE PARKING PROVIDED 4 SPACES- I SPACES AUTO PARKING PROVIDED ZS6 SPACES TOTAL PARKING PROVIDED 37 SPACES BUILDING & PARKING ANALYSIS 07122/S7 10i24 AM TOTAL BUILDING AREA 15, GZrb SF CONVERT TO BUSINESS SUPPORT SERVICES 0 SF REQUIRED PARKING (BSS) I SPACE/250 SF 0.0 SPACES EATING & DRINKING ESTABLISHMENTS 0 SF REQUIRED PARKING (E&DE) I SPACE/100 SF 0.0 SPACES REMAINING MULTI-USE TENNANT 15,610 SF ALLOWABLE "OFFICE" 35% 5,471 SF MANUFACTURING Gs% t0,160 SF REQUIRED PARKING (MUT) I SPACE/400 --;F 39.1 SPACES TOTAL PARKING REQUIRED 29 SPACES BICYCLE PARKING PROVIDED 4 SPACES= i SPACES AUTO PARKING PROVIDED 38 SPACES TOTAL PARKING PROVIDED A 12- 29 SPACES 11 11 }Z1•�5 a �~ P1�5A r SS�y�1 +� SF 0 SF ACES �,za 5A5 g1�'F'Cft SPACE/ 41• SA C� l Eta P Kx�S5 55,A ViSVA r j1� �� S &,76 a SF / ; Jggb G ESQ pF K am¢ j t NS t5 &pE-�NR S , e 5F`V'GS vkso ¢Lx NG nF i S �r SAACE� /xsii+ S� hf AEG 5 R 11AS 1 ter' SMUT ar 5'ACSS- 5�C5 4EQ F'i�En PARt ¢v�4Ep D t�s gIDs AR AAp}�RaRp4`Z 45n sIc`i FARKj�'Ge # n X r "o-co � AOL is =L a _ FIG. IV-2 SUS o A�. ,� rr z sub, A- 14 3 FIG. IV-2 UBBALF;-- suN Is ,ea 3 111-M or A. t 0 1 �T® ITEND CUCAMOINGA -._.g TME. PLANNM DIVISM ExHmrr.. NO is '•s: :- t 4 ES - $sii ( t t -- f a= gg 1 r -I t t t f F t t s0.,. In�no s.sa (x f f t f 0c W z 3 C3?. z m < i ' fig a 77' 1 s a z L`� u R ... .Wrtl4 fC1tS m �m Q,��., ~ Q IFMMYOfAm M= �Q���• �A a�A a iFN� H �a� r wYY41�Yt 1LOq�41w OM�YOi�• pM��Y �VOrMWItl�h wr ►H L1YI� t(!}MIPiYY�'� WW llpj IAi1a� H•M M L t a' t l ' I A CS L F A-lq 0 DATE; TO: FROM: BY: SUBJECT: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA CtC"M STAFF REPORT �� ; x ""96 a O O x F z U 1977 September 9, 1957 Chat. -.man and Members of the Planning Commission Brad Buller, City Planner Chris westman,`'.Assistant Planner CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 57 -31 - NEIGHBORHOOD NURCH - A request to es �� s a 3,700 square root c M"'"n a.; existing busines3;,nark, located at the south�i"it corner of Arrow Highway and Archibald Avenue ;.n the General Industrial District, Subarea 3 - APN 209 - 021 -40. I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action Requested.. Approval of a Conditional Use Permit. B. Surrounding Land Use and zoning: orth Industrial Park, General Industrial South - Industrial Park, General Industrial East - Industrial Park, General Industrial West - Industrial Park, General Industrial G. General Plan Designations: rojec Site - General Industrial North - General Industrial south - General Industrial East - General Industrial - West - General Industrial D. Site Characteristics: The site is a parcel within an existing us ness pa . E. Parkin? Calculations: Number of Number of Type Square Parking Spaces`" Spaces of Use Footage Ratio Required Provided Church Sanctuary 1,200 1/35 34 34+ II. ANALYSIS: This type of use is common for industrial parks and the major concern is parking avaiiabili" .1y. In the industrial park, the amount of parking available will be determined by The surrounding uses and their, hours of operation in reference to the proposed church's hours Y operation. The Neighborhood Church proposes to hold services on Sunday mornings and old Bible study classes on ITEM B PIJAING 0%%3(,)4 STS REPORT 'LOP 87-31 -'li $OhTiOUD CHURCH l� September 9, 19 67,: Page 2 Saturday evenings. Based on information provided by the leasing Agent for the business park, the majority of the surrounding businesses are not _in operation on Saturday or Sunday. Regular business hours are between 8 a.m. and 5 p.m. Monday through Friday. Therefore, inte church use should be restricted.to weekends and weekdays after normal business hours. There should not be any confljlct inn regards, to parking. Other churches have=or still exist in 4;1 CuMmonge Business Park for several years and have nos, presented any compatibility problems. _ III. FAC'!S FOR FINDINGS.- The proposed use is consistent with the 1 General an ana Industrial Specific Plan. The proposed use will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the area. Iv. CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised as a public hearing 1-n-I e a e ort newspaper, the property posted and notices sent to all proper owners within 300 feet of the project. I V. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission issue a Negative Declaration and approve Conditional Use Permit "87 - 32 through adoption of the attached Resolution with Conditions. Res fully bmitted, Br. p _ Gi'ty lanner BB :CK :te Attachments: Letter from Applicant Exhibit "A" - Location Map Exhibit "B" - Site plan Exhibit "C" - FT_�r plan Resolution of Approval with Conditions c orhd HI CH ADDENDUM TO CONDITIONAL UEE PERHI'i.,APPLICATION Proposed Use ,,nd Operation The facility in xention will be used as a meeting facility for religious assembly and religious education purposes. Primary time of meetings will be evenings and weekends. However, a portton of the unit will be designated as °office space and ursed weekdays from S.00am to 5:00px. The Aaximux employee load vould typically never be more than five people at a time. Tats particular facility was chosen due to it's lon=tian$ gross building area and availablilty. 7349 CaxtillaAvenue 0 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 0 (714) 989 -1 552 A -,A I a .,_j 41) Volk .2LRErr) I ROUTE: .L X 7 I - . i .1 NK)RTH CITY OF n7E - RA.'� CLTCANJONYCA Tm- F. 4 L HAP PLANNIN rG DIVNON ExHiw-.-A—scALE. I' F' 9 0 CUCAMONGA BUSINESS PARK CITY CF ■� i !. X i CLUAWMl ,cps 1 PLANNING DWISM m (e NIMTH MAI. . EXHIO T SCALE. - L NOLA NUM fi CITY CF RE I: 6op ieZ�1 RAINUIO CLUAINKINUA TITLE- ?qA4q PLAMING DfViSK)N EXHIBITS SCALE: --Sjj_ RESOLUTION 210. 11 A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO? CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 87 -31 FOR A CHURCH LOCATED IN THE CUCAMONGA BUSINESS PARK IN THE GENERAL INDU_TRIAL DISTRICT - APH: 209- 021 -40 A. Recitals. (i) ;ha Neighborhood Church has filed an application for the issuance of the Conditional Use Parmit No, 87 -31 as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Conditional Use Permit request is referred tows 'the application". (iii On the 9th of September, 1987, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly no0 c," ;public hearing on the application and concluded said hearing or that dad (iii) All legal prerequisites to the d46 tion of this Resolution have occurred. i B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined and resolved by the Planning Commission of the Ci:F. of Rancho Cucamonga 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. 2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to this Commission duriro the above- referenced public hearing on September 9, 1987, including wrattan and oral staff reports, tNgether with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: (a) The -application applies to property located at 9607 Business Center Drive with a street.frvntage. f 100 feet and lot depth of 186 fek +t and is presently improved with an industrial /office building; and (bJ The property to the north of the subject, site is an industrial /office building, the property to the south of that site consist$ of an industrial project, the property to the east is an industrial /office building, and the property to the west is an industrial /office building. (c) The surrounding tenants within the Cucamonga Business Park primarily operate between 8 a.m, and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday; whereas_ the church proposes to operate on weekends and evenings. 3. Based upon the subst? -till, evidence presented to this Comemission during the above- referenced public rieaving and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraph 1 and 2 shove, this Commission �hereby finds and concludes as follows: PJ -� PLANNING COMISSION RESCN:pTION NO. CUP 87 -31 - N£IGHBORiiW CHURCH September 9, 1987 Page 2 n tat That the proposed use is in accord with the Cenerail Plan, the objectives of the Industrial Specific Plan, and the purposes of the subarea In which the site is located. (b) 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. tci That the proposed use complies comply with eacf of the applicable provisi.'ns of the Development Code. 4. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraph 1, 2 and 3 above, this Comission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below and in the attached °Standard Conditions attachett hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. a. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the IndustMal Specific Plan and all other applicable City Ordinances. b. All signs proposed for this Conditionals Use Permit shall be designee in confiormance with the City's Sign Ordinance and the approved Uniform Sign Program for the project and shall require review and approval by the Planning Division prior to installation. c. If the operation of this Conditional Use Permit causes adverse effects to neighboring businesses, the Conditional Use Permit shall be brought before the Planning Commission for their review and posuible; termination of the use. d. the building shall not be occupied until completion of all improvements required by Building and fire Codes to the satisfaction of the Building and Safety Division and Foothill Fire Protection District. Prior to occupancy, Plans shall be submitted to the Foothill Fire Protection District and the Building and Safety Division to show compliance. The building shall be inspected for compliance prior to occupancy. 6 'S I, Brad Buller, Deputy Secretary of the Planning omsaissicn of z Cit of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that tW foregaIng Resolution 4�s .duly and regularly introduc ;d, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commisa)ion of the City if Rancho Cuc *onga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 3th day of leptember, 1987, by the following vote -to -writ. APES. crissrONERS: HOES: Ct�'lISSZONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIOi *S: PLANNING CSv1JIIk f3QN N0. ,= CUP 87-31 - tEl2�0.CH September 9, 197 ANIL Page 3 The building may be used for religious assembly and other urge group (60+ peMbns activities ; only Saturdays and Sundays and after, 6:00 p,m j•, �Js�ebkni�t#s. f. Preschools or schools are not allowed by this Permit, howevtr, this she,',l not pr ,lude nurseries or Sunday School during the hors of religious or group assembly. S. The Deputy Secretary to this Cosmission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution, APPROVED AW ADOPTED THIS 9TH DAY OF SEPTEt48ER, 1987. '1r PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY; tarry T. e , Owl rman ATTEST: ra u er, epu cre ary7 I, Brad Buller, Deputy Secretary of the Planning omsaissicn of z Cit of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that tW foregaIng Resolution 4�s .duly and regularly introduc ;d, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commisa)ion of the City if Rancho Cuc *onga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 3th day of leptember, 1987, by the following vote -to -writ. APES. crissrONERS: HOES: Ct�'lISSZONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIOi *S: CITE' OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA C,_ocAAra STAFF REPORT r R a = F $ Z U > isn DATE, September 9, 1987 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM, Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Chris Westman, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: MOD?IFICATI:ON TO CONDITIONAL. USE PERMIT 85 -29 - MERCY , - request o modify an ex s ng on ona use Permit by allowing ambulances to park in two existing employee designated parking stalls in aq. existing commercial center in the General Commercial District located on thL north side of Foothill Boule- °d, east of Red Hill Country Club Drive - APR 207 -10I -1 I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTIr..: A. Action Requested: Modification of a Conditional'Use Permit. B. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North Kesidential, enera ommercial South - Commercial, General rommercial East - Sycamore Inn, Get%ral Commercial West Commercial, General Commercial C. General Plan Designations: roJec site - 'uRgmercia! North - Commerd41 South - Commercial East - Commercial West - Commercial 0. Site Characteristics: The site is a parcel local-id within an existing come rc a center. On site and off site improvements have been completed. E. Parking Calculations: Number of Number of 'Type Square Parking Spaces Spaces of Use Footage Ratio Re uired Provided Ambulance Substation 370 _ 3 3 ITEM C PLANNING COh9+tISSION STAFF REPORT CUP 85-29 - MERCY REpICAL TRANSPORTATION September 9, 1,987 Page 2 II. ANALYSIS: A. General: ie intent of the mndification' equest is to increase enu et %af ambulances Serving this ,krea by adding one 22 hour shift; to the existing 24 hour shift. The third space would be used by the field supervisor who also drives an ambulance during inspections. As outlined in they attached lette^ the number of parking paces required for .nis use will not increase, but the spaces wil" be redesicmated. Employees will Fontana and drive their ambulance to park he Rancho ucamonga station, therefore, employee parking is not needed on site. Although the number of spices will not change, the character of the use of those spaces will change:' With an increase in 1 *)ulances, the number of trips generated daily by the substation will a'rso increase. However, the increased frequency does not seers to be significant. Information provided by Mercy Medical Transportatfon Services indicate an average of ten tails daily with the existing 24 hour vehicle. An increase between five and ten calls is projected with the added 12 hour vehicle. III. FACTS FOR HIDINGS: The proposed use is consistent with the enera an'an"d° he Development Code. The propozed use will not be detrimental to they public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the area. IV. CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised as a public hearing n e a ity 1e ort newspaper, the property posted and notices sent to all proper y owners within 300 feet of the project. V. RE eMCOMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission' ega ve Declarat M and approve the modification to Conditional Use Permit 85 -29 thro Resolution with conditions. ugh adoption of the attached X tted, BB:CW:te Attachmen ts: Letter from Applicant Exhibit "A" - Location Ma p Exhibit "B" Site Plan Resolution of ,approval with Conditions A I] Pursuant to our conversation or August 13, 1987, I am sending you. -,the requested inFormation regarding the elimina- tion.of employee parking at 8270 Foothill Blvd,., Rancho Cuca- monga. For the past fourteen 1147 months all field employees have been parking at our maintenance facility at 10022 Citrus Avenue, Fontana. At this location the field crew changes take place. All on- coming employees park their personal vehicles at the aforementioned address and pick up their unit before going to their substation. All off -going crews leave their unit at the maintenance facility and drive their personal vehicles home from there. Since this procedure has been in effect, it has eliminated the need for employee parking spaces at the substations. As indicated in correspondence from Clark Jones, General Manager for Percy Ambulance service, on July 23, 1987, "This re- quest for modification is to change the two employee parking spaces into ambulance parking. This request for modification does not in anyway increase the need for additional parking spaces ". The or4ginal C.U.P. 85 -29 allowed for the parking of three vehicles, one of which was to be an ambulance. Our request is for change, not addition. jr a MEjAff ME6tCAt. TRANSPU AVON SERVICES 813. Mang Avenue Fontana. CA 92334 -0356 4 1714! 823.1056 • ('x iil_$WJ 2f-�'.2 J IJ Teletax17141823.676 ` August 14, 1987 AAG- 369 -8': Chris West-man City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Division 9320 Baseline Rd. 1 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 RE: Modification in Conditional Use PeLmit 85 -29 I Dear Mr. Westman: Pursuant to our conversation or August 13, 1987, I am sending you. -,the requested inFormation regarding the elimina- tion.of employee parking at 8270 Foothill Blvd,., Rancho Cuca- monga. For the past fourteen 1147 months all field employees have been parking at our maintenance facility at 10022 Citrus Avenue, Fontana. At this location the field crew changes take place. All on- coming employees park their personal vehicles at the aforementioned address and pick up their unit before going to their substation. All off -going crews leave their unit at the maintenance facility and drive their personal vehicles home from there. Since this procedure has been in effect, it has eliminated the need for employee parking spaces at the substations. As indicated in correspondence from Clark Jones, General Manager for Percy Ambulance service, on July 23, 1987, "This re- quest for modification is to change the two employee parking spaces into ambulance parking. This request for modification does not in anyway increase the need for additional parking spaces ". The or4ginal C.U.P. 85 -29 allowed for the parking of three vehicles, one of which was to be an ambulance. Our request is for change, not addition. ty �.,: k z � h' ML 5 Page 2 August 14, 1987 RE: Modification in Cond. Qse Permit 85 -29 Pf T thank you for your assistance in the application process and 1 hope that this information provides you with additional. clari- fication. If you should require further information please, contact me at 714- 899 -2505, Sincerely, i Angela Gonza es Puxchasi.ng Agent cc: Board of Directors r k PROJECT DZgcum- "a Under the conditionO of the original Conditional fte >Permit 85 -29, the number of'ambul.anaes as $-teed to the mercy substation at 8270 Foothill. Boulevard, Suite K, Rancho Cucamonga was one, in i addition to the assigned parking of the ambulance there wars also the allocation of two spaces to be used by Mercy Ambulance field employees assigne6 to this station. - s' This request for a modification in Conditional Use Pezmit 85-29, " is for a change in the two current Mercy employee parking spaces ! <x: into ambulance parking. This request for modification does not in any way increase the ueedl for additional parsing srxces. w Changes in field operations has eliminated the need for empleP i parking at this station. our central operations facility acatea in Fontana provides parking for field employees It is out of this facility that all crew changes occur. if this request for a change in assigned Parking is approved, w, caill ensure that these parkitig spaces are appropriately painted to identify themselves as ambulance parking. r; is d -'PG'R L "C t '+• y,O 4 51 I; Z 't. * ^ -PO L.S. t l� ..�1 } v 017- r O 1.59AC K _ 2.09 Ac zv J is a IS 14 • < 1 s •f'•'" l 4 f f/ j" P= Lot ♦ SJ� y .. . �`�• •'_• —� _�p_.,t•8f- '•r35hlRdMrJ R7AD - , ZO1a Ojt .L.pe SIB 0 �7 0.. 75 1 76 I @110 @111 V2 to 74 r asu fw. Lo NORTH C1 1T OF rrrz�s1 LE PLANNING DIVISIC7N FAHIBIT. d* SCALE: _ ) E 134 - CKtuA Allc4 4'f ' - Ft+'OT ttiH blue '. pro eased toss i�rvsd �smb�lt��uc a't�kt'nr� she NW H CITY CF 6u V9 IB5 - RAINS CLUAMONUA Tnu: 157M PI.t11NI1VG IVLsIOiN EXHIBIT- - _SCALE- LAI__�___y G` RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OFJHE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING A 14bIFIC-ATION TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 85 -29 FOR MRMISSION TO PARK WULANCES VERSUS ONE AMBULANCE ANC TWO EMPLOYEE VEHICLES LOCATED AT 8270 FOOTHILL BOULEVARD, SUITE N IN THE GENERAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT - APN: 207 - 101 -17 A. Recitals. (i) Mercy Medical Transportation Services, Inc.. has filed an application for the modification to Conditional Use Permit No. 85 -29 as described in -the title of-this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Conditionf Use Permit request is referred to as "the application , (ii) 3n the 9th of September, 1987, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the_ application and concluded said hearing v%n that date. (iii) All legal prerequis- as to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, delkermined and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows; L This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above - referenced public hearing on September 9, 1987, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this. Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: (a) the application_ applies to property located at 8?70 Foothill Boulevard with a street frdntage of approximately 200 ;eet and lot depth of approximately 480 feet and is presently improved with � center; and commercial family residential, The a ppropertyt to the the south of that site is consists single of commercial businesses, the property tc the east is the Sycamore Inn Restaurart, and the property to the west is a vacaint lot. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Cor. ssjdn during the above- referenced public hearing and upon the specific fin6ngs of facts set forth in paragraph 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: r- 0 _T T PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO, CUP 85 -29 - MERCY MEDICO. -, � AN i'ATIOI September 9, 1987 Fage 2 (a) That the p'ioposed use is In accord with the General Plin, the objectivei'of the Development Code, and the purposes of the district In which the site is located. (b) That the proposed use, together with the conditions applicable thereto,,_ will not be detrimental to the public hex^,th, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. (c) That the proposed use c5mplies with esch of the applicable provisions of the Develo;yAent Code. 4. Based upon the findings and conclusions sit forth in paragraph 1, 2 and 3 above, this Commission hereby approes the application subject to each and every condition set forth below and in the attached Standard Conditions attached hereto and incorporated herein -1)y vh;3 reference. (a) Approval of this request shall not wail compliance with all sections of the De,*elopment Code and all other applicable City Ordinances. (b) That the --umber of employee vehicles and ambu'ances on site at any one time shall be limited to a maximum of three, which is the number of parking spaces provided For this business. (c) If the operation of thYs Conditional Use Permit causes adverse effects to the neighboring businesses, the Conditional Use Permit shall be brought before the Planning Commission for their review and pnssibie termination of the use. 5. The Deputy Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 9T:i DAY Or SEPTEMBER, 1987. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Larry T. Kniel, chairman ATTEST:. Brad Iter, epu y cre ary C q r PLANNING G Sj S� it SOLI- Ti N+O. ZUP 85—n-14W TVOW TRMSPO.RTA1'Itl t, Septa S, 'I Page , 1, Brad Buller, OepOVt Secretary of,-�Nhe Plann Y1j COMOSSion of the Gib � s Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that hs foragoing Revolution was duly and regularly introduced, p8sedt and adopted the Alanning Caai5s4ort of the City vf,Rancho Cucamonga, �t a regular mebti g�nf the PIanninS' -chi% , ,i6 � .held on the 5*h da�r,;af September, 1969, bye falic�,s: v'te- tor' AYES: COMISSIMERS 'NOES: COMISSItNlERS: ASSENT: COMMUSIONERS: _, 1 J, El DATE: TD: BY: SUBJECT: �UCAA.rp�, 0 0 U `� > September 9, 1987 1977 Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission Brad Buller, City Planner i Chris West man, Assistant Planner VARIANCE P,7 -12 - JUAN BAIRES -ADAIR - A request to e m na a -thee required rive oo rear uilding setback in (;Ajudction with the 'Oroposai to cpnstruct two multi - tenant industrial buildings in thf','Ceneral Industrial District, Subarea 3, locateU at the' northwest coener of Helms and Feron APR 209- 031 -57. RELY° rED FILE: DR 87 - -30 I. BACKGROUND: The applicant is vtlquesting a variance from the r---quire r---quired rear yard building Setback in conjunction with the construction o•! an industria1:,buiiding. II. ANALYSIS: The Industrial Specific Plan Deve%o-nent Standard 0.4.B s a.es at when a rear lot area abuts a s4de street, the setback shall be a minimum of five (5) feet. Therefore, five foot setback is required from the north property ine (see, Exhibit "B "). The applicant is requesting a zero (0) foot setbacl. III. FACTARSIFOR CONSIDERATION: The purpose and intent of the Variance is o providLi TlExibility from the strict application of development standards when special circumstances pertaining to the property such as size, shape, topography or location, deprive such property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and in the same district inconsisteat wit:? the obl-octives of.• t',e Development Code. In reviewing individual .apses for variancethe following criteria .nus} be considered: A. Special Circumstances 1. Is the property unique with respect to size, shape, topography or-location? 2. Are there exce- tional or extraordinary circumstances applicable to ,th- '',�perty or proposed use that do not apply gel r:y "ta 'other properties In the same zone? ITEM! 0 PLANNING C"ISSIOM STAFF REPORT VARIANCE 87 -12 - JUAN BAIRES -AOAIR September'9, 1987 Page 2 B, Preservation of Property Right (Hardship) 1. Can reasonable use be made of the property without this variance? 2. Without this variance, is the applicant denied privileges denied ownirs of other properties in the sam Zone? S. Is the hardship self - imposed or created by the physical constraints of the site? G. Damage to Others 1. Will the variance be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare? 2. Will the granting of this variance be a special privilege inconsistent, with limitations on ether properties in the same'7one? IV. STAFF .RESPONSE: The property to the west is developed on the proper Y ne with no setback and the property to the north is developed with a one (1) foot setbac' - -Irom the property line. The request is for a zero (0) lot line allowance at the northwest corner of the site. Therefore, the existing development on contiguous properties could constitute extraordinary circumstances that would not be generally applied to all properties in t:ac subarea. Reasonable use could be made of the overall property if the variance were not - granted; however, the five foot setback would n -It have any practical use and could become a maintenance proble -m. r !f the variance were not granted and the building was built with the five foot setback, a six foot space would be created which could be a safety hazard. It might become an area for people to hide, and should that area be fenced off, it would defeat the intent of the Code which is to peovide an open landscaped area between buildings. Also, should the five foot space be required, the height of the adjacent buil -lings would restrict the quality of landscaping that could be provided in that six foot space. 'I E V. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: Before granting a Variance, the Planning omm ss on mus ma a all of the following required findings; AML A. That strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of this Cole, q;7, -, -I PLANNING COMISSTOM STAFF REPORT VARIANCE 042 - JUAN BArRES-ADAIR September 9, 1;9a7 Page 3 B. That there ariF--, exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property involved or' to the intended use of the prope "I., that do not apply generally to other propertfes In the saw zone. C. That strict or literal interoretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would O��prive the applicant of the privileges enj0X^4 by the owners of other propprties in the same zone,.,-� D. That the "'granting of the Var.ianci��will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitation on,the cNber properties classified in the saw, zone. E. That the granting of th^- Variance will n,ot be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare ot, materially Injurious to properties -jr improvements in the vicinity. VI. CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised as a public hearing WIRe—TaTT-y—Report newspaper and all property owners within 300 feet of-Ure—suMe-cYsite have been notified. In addi-tion, public hearing notices have been posted on the subject property. VII. REC"ENDATIM: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission make the required findings an,d approve Vailance 87-12 through adoption of the attached Resolution of Approval with findings. Respectfully ZB'rad B ,Ier" Ci tyV ner BB:CW:te Attachments: �30itted,- Exhibit "A" - Location Map Exhibit 'B" - Site Plan Resolution of fpproval M111 M CITY CF RANCHO C .AM VC'A Tri LE- 7IoN M PLANNM, DIVrX.N EXHIBIT- _ SCAV� : -_tq) j a Jl�w i (r.�{;Mc1HAiL�Ei�i�• - -•ir'ty�i$'• :: '. :Y � rT• '. 1. • [otl ,s�.p•i ,. .re. •.: 3 taMxcai I•sc Po r3 ;, Pac$ � P gr6 rp. • .k rl a �•• a• Per I' 'ts • l.2iA .se Pet 1 '.0 f 2 • is R Per, 2 Por.4 Pot 7 ago RC ` , , jI _ i 272 AC's �n•cs 1 . -0;�-JERSWV `_ ra v 3 , : Flat •; , Pd,. bet i • lli1AC. ®N', 1 i a� t . ,Par.9`/ t sT . ti.Q .i Par. 21 ,• -- 1� � _ .� �` • .�v' ,(, .rrr ara y .ar.. .. .r,•�s Oil .j � `� , } x y Par ll Por,10 }' Par S +� ! ,• �� Poi.3 1'• ` !. � �, ' :.''eAM • 1 , •Par 3 � i �. I.yrr.l4PAC •1 ' ! A 201r1t; ; • u Zf M LQRAC •y. ;3 , ;' t Z AC so ,r., ... < an s �r. }c riree ism. o "x� < - t•1. !Alt xC 1, A � CITY CF RANCHO C .AM VC'A Tri LE- 7IoN M PLANNM, DIVrX.N EXHIBIT- _ SCAV� : -_tq) j a f U), -05TV-0ex—I ' d CrrY CF VA TME, � — 1�.t4s`:?C±f RESOLUTION NO, A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION APPR9,fJNG VARIANCE NO. 87 -12 TO ILIMINATE THE REQUIRED _ FIVE FIOT REAR YARD SETBACK LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER ")F HELMS AND FtiRON IN THE GENERAL INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT':- APN: 204 - 031 -57 f A. Recitais. (i) Junn Baires - Adair /Shook Building Systems has filed an application for the issuance of the Variance No. 87 -12 as described -b tte title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Variance request is referred to as "the application ". (ii) On September 9, 1987, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on Lhe application and concluded said hearing on that date. occurred. (iii) All legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined and resolved by the Planning Commission oi the City of Rancho Cucamonga 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. 2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above - referenced public hearing on September 9, 1887, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: (a) The application applies to property located at -the northwest corner of Helms Avenue and Feron Boulevard with a street frontage of 128 feet and lot depth of 387 feet and is presently improved with a paved parking lot; and (b) The property to the north of the subject site is a multi - tenant industrial building, the property to the south of that site consists of an industrial project, tree property to the east is an existing contractor's yard, and the property to the nest is a multi- tenant industrial building; and (c; ')he property to the north is dejreloped with a one (1) foot setback along the pri' erty line in common with the subject site; and (d) access easement and asphalt driveway exist on the ib property to the north; therefore, any landscaping that would be planted wit hin the rear yard setback would not be contiguous to Helms Avenue. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION Op. VARIANCE "87 -12 - JUAN BWIRES-AD SIR September 9, 1987 Page 2 a 3. Based upon the substantial'evideico presented to this Commission during the above- referenced public hearing and %k0oh the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraph 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: (a); That strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of the Development Code.:. (b) That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstrces or conditions app3icable to the property involved or to the intended use of the property that do not apply generaly `'to other properties in the same district. (c) That strict or literal interpretation and - _ -__- enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same district. (d) That the granting of the Variance will not " constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the snare district. {e} That the granting of the Variance will not be detrimental to the public heath, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or Improvements in the vicinity. 4. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraph 1, 2 and 3 above, this Commission hem '--y approves the application. 5. The Deputy Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 9TH DAY CF SEPTEMBER, 1987. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCMONGA BY: Larry " , e , chairman ATTEST: Bra u� er, epu y sere ary T 1 ` PLADtN7NE C 5` tiN N0, September 4, 19(17 Page 3 xr . r I, Farad Huller, Deputy Secretary of the Planning Copm ission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the fo)^egoing Resolution vas duly and � 1 regularly introducdd, pawed, and adopted b, the Planning CONWIS on ,)f the City of Rancho Ctjcaeonga6 at a regular meeti% of the Planning Cow 'scion held on the 9th day of September, 1907, by the following vote -to -wit: f AYES: Cfi[IiSSItgfER'St ` NOES: COI�MtSSldltERS: ABSENT: COWIS, SIGNERS: c ' t \ J 9 {f "'r CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA. STAFF REPORT o � zE 'u > DATE: September 9�ti1987 H 1 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Cindy Morris, Assis Cant Plr�nner'� SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL, USE PERMIT 87 -35 - WILLIE A PIE PIZZA PARLOUR A mgL?:x for the a x i shment of an arcade wi thi n existing restaurant located in the Neighborhood Commerci �� District at 6321 Haven Avenue, Suite T - APN: 201- 214 -1Aj I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action Requested: Apprmvil of a Non- Constructiop-,Conditional Use " Permit. B. Surrcunding Land Use and Zoning. Worth Ingle family res -e ial; Low Residential (2 -4 dwelling units per acre) South - Commercial center; Neighborhood Commercial strict East - Commercial center; Neighborhood Commercial Distr't West - Haven Avenue /Mobile Station; NPighborhWd Commercral District C. General `lan Designations: .rr ,Ian ec, s1 et Reig oF and Commercial North - Low Residential t2 -4 dwelling units per acre) _ Stsuth - Neighborhood Commercial East Neighborhood Commercial West - Neigiborhood Commercial 0, Site Characteristics: The installation of 5 gam machines within a separa room of .i existing restaurant facility located at the northwest corner of the Haven Village Center. E. Applicable Reyuiaons: The installation of 4 or more amusement e"v��esvi3eo, pinball gamest within a business is defined as an arcade and requires a Conditional Use Permit per Development Code Section 17.10.030. ITEM E PLANNING COMISSTON STAFF REPORT � CUP 87 -35 - Millie S Pie Pizza Parlour - September,9, 1987 ii < ' Page 2 ' II. ANALYSIS: A. General: The applicant intends to operate the arcade as an accesscnj -,,use to the restaurant facility. The game area occupies aytp; PORT P 'L '1 zza Parlour �. ept 94 u. IV. C_ 4 i RMC£.:. TWs item has been advertised as a public hearing ; �n d 'Y epor { newspaper, property posted and noti s sent . alJ proper , owner:- nd existing tenants Wi tin 300 feet of the" pi'A3eet V. �RI1MOWEt 1W Staff ;J- Winds that the Planning Commission approve oval Use 7. t, rant 8i -3rt throd the adoption of the attached Resal- lrtion and Conditions of poproval. Res�lly fitted r City annex A$.CN:vc Attachments: Letter from Applicant _ Exhibit "A" W Location Map Exhibit "0" Site Plan Exhibit "C" Floor Plan Resolution of Approval with Conditions V 1 j � I i x r, .- kf4 F7 d iai� � .�15eEe.E Utz' aeW.Y40 .+», .� g, h follto�a !7" M,# Y Is �M1a .R.•IjKfw..id -' • naJr+..,xlw- W ^- e•"... • �+n'S I] LTS �� �J� rt ,; �3lr' CJtlf1 C.uSTba•r6+�` l.$' — kES ., fie— x� • r4;. +y�en+r ,rwk ...•:+ V,�. `/! � - i. q - looe."Ipa ? — 1p 11.:3C. -7-e) /0 Svti 1113 4' e7 7fto +Y'61ce7, .. ._ �. .. �,..Y.. ri ... � lvclL!! �'�t.S �- i S .n-� c �.'• �,,�r�j ,icy .,. ._ +, f� �'?�LGt�c -, -mac;'. D�C1 Gu.� t�.�- •!n$'S`�' �� Fr✓ E_ 5urilec.-P Parse- L :`74' —' ilk— "_°''•'� _ =-- f ., a n NUM LITy of rr . PLkNRNM DIVEM warn- A— SCALE- APARTMENT COMPLEY M -- OIAI OENELOPMENT 9w UirTZS f L r LUCKY MARKET 1, i ` "21.964 i FUT ! _ 1 1 f � a Uj Lu uJ SERVICE 1• f E is SIGNALIZED - INTPMSECTION SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIP +- HAVEN, CHAFFEY COLUEGE ONE BL-4t ,K NORTH : ! . .1 R tr Cr� i NCRn-i I ITEM: Tflu. SZt / � =JO CUT, t9�, �: +� 1 t Root- ACcss ; Fmr. 4WDWM pal Ja . .lSn ({ls.rr PkITLToR3+1 i l"1 .r t t r WA L -- G�►5K fS W;oo RooN,_. 3U5 %Whom Arl 1 j• 1 O r t • ! �SEf4tin:U ' �'' 71ZaW, mtL - - �r,"�• t .._ (TITY CF . 1 -��ti • � RiC1C. � � r t.'r 1, � jj�'�...°��.!f }1'''� J}r���" r r 1 r � � i= PLANNM DIVISM Exxmrr: scALF,. -_ �S L RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CiamoNaA PLAWNIma COMMISSION APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO„ 87 -35 FOR AN 1,1CADE WITH 'FIVE (5) VIDEO AMUSEMENT DEVICES FOR WILLIE & PIE PXZZA PARLOUR: LOCATED AT 021 HAVEN AVENUF, SUITE I IN ,HE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL (NC) DISTRICT - APN: 201- 214 -11 A. Recitals- (I) Willie & Pie Pizza Parlour has filed an applicatioe for the issuance of the Conditional Use Permit Na. 87-35 as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Conditional Usf. Permit rt -vat is referral to as "the application ". ( it On the 5th of September, 1987, the Planning, Commission of the City at' Rancho Cacamon a conducted a d;:1y notioed public hek :ing on the application aad canciudeo said hearing nn that dare, (iii) All le4a3 prerequisites to tEs adoption of this resolution have occurred. I B. Reso' ,t an. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby round, determined and resolved by the Manning Comission of the City of Rancho Cucamo +? as follows: a 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are trim- j and correct. J 2. Based upon substantial evidence pn.sented to this Commission during the above - referenced public hearing _,i September 9, 1987, including I writtsn and oral staff reports, together- with public testiminy, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: (a) The application applies to property located at 6321 Haven Avenue, Suite 1 with a street frontage of 16n.60 feet and lot depth of 465.10 feet and is presently improved wit:i curb, gutter and sidewalk; and (b) The p operty to the noeth of the subject site is Low Residential f2 -4 dwelving Units per acre), the property to the south of that � site consists of Commercial Neighbor,iood, the property to the east is Conrtercial Neighborhood, and the .property to the ;wESt is Commercia Nei0boehood; and (c) The arcade is located in a 136 square foot rorYn directly visible fron the serving counter; and �T F Flu r KANMM COh , IS3,109 RES(.I.0 fIOg H0. -� r CUP 87 -35 - _Wil ie „& Re Pizza Parlour' September 9, 1981 Page 2 (d) The arcade is only open du -ing the regular business hours of tyre primary '-restaur nt use, which are 11:30 a.m, to 10 :00 -:a.., MondW� through Thursday; 11 :30 a.m. to 11 :00 p.m., Friday and Satur_lay; and 1).: ?4 a.m. to 9:00 p.m.., Sunday. v _� 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to thfi Commission during tk%; above - referenced public hearing and upon tNe specific findings of facts set North in paragraph 1 anti. 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: 1 (a) That ;the proposed use is in accord with the General Plan, the objectives of the Development Code, and the Iurposes of the district in why the site is 7*ceted. (b) 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. (c) llh�t the proposed use complies with each of they • applicable provisions of the Development Code. 4. This Commission hereby finis and certifies that the project has biou'reiviewed and considered in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Ac! of 1970 and has, determined it to tit exempt per Article 19, Section 153301. 5. Based upor,ihe findings end conclusions set forth in paragraph 1, 2 and 3 above, this ;.okwlssion ” lereby approves the application sabject to each and every condiV..an set forth below and in the attached Standard Cordstions attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference: A. Piannfin1 I. The arcade and aRusement:,,devices therein shall be i?mited to the same hours of operation as the restuurant. ii, The amusement devices shall be placed in a manner that does not obstruct or crowd entries, exits or aisles. iii. Supervision of the arcaegt shall be provided at all times. iv. A bicycle rack shall be placed adjacent to the restaurant and str`all be located in a manner`_ such that the sidewalk and exists or entries will not be blocked. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. CUP 87-35 - Willie A Pie Pizza Parlour September 9, I�iB rPage 3 1 v...If, the operation of this Conditional Use ;Permit !causei adverse effects to neirAboring businesses or to the primary res our4nt use, the Conditional. Use Permit shall bra brought ' before the Planning Ca;�Assion for, heir review and possible termination of the usi. IIvi. That approval of this request sh�� "il not waive compliance wit�t all sections of th;{ Development Co0i, aW all other applicable C°n�y Ordinances i.i i *feet at the time of'occupancy�l`` - J, vii. That any modification, relocaiiomr�,,`increase in the number* of amusement denies, expansion or t *her change in operation will require a vision to this Conditional Use Permit. 6. the Deputy Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APMOYED AND ADOPTED THIS 9TH DAY OF SEPTEMBiR, 1987; PLANNING COMKISSION OF THE CITY OF RUCK CUCAMONGA BY: I avey T. McNiel, chairman ATTEST: !' r --Rrald Buller, Deputy ecr -airy L, Brad Buller, Deputy Secretary of the Planning Comm of the `c:ity cif ission Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing' `-Aution was duly and regularly introduced, pa%sed, and adopted by the Plann..(g Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at r, regular m =eting of the Planning Commission held on the 9th day or September, 1987, by the following vote -Ito- Tait: AYES. COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: p .d - ---- -- CITY OP RANCHO CUCAMONGA � STAFF REP ORT DATE September 9, 148 7 \ 1977 TO., Chairotto and Members of the PIihning CojWssion FROM: Brad Buller, City Oanr+�_,r BY Scott Murphy, Associate Planner SUBJECT: Ekuvwzi;AL AsmSSh>RNT Ah,!�- ENIATTVc TRACT 13727 - rest an a su vis an o singlu-71mily JANSSENS To s on 3 .S3 acres of land in the Low Residential District t2- -4 dwelling units per acr -}, located at the southwest - corner of Carnelian Street and Highland Avenue - APR, 201- 214 -11. F + Staff is in receipt of a letter from the applicant requesting that this item he continued far, two weeks. Therefori staff racomw'Ws that the 1 public hearing be cmtipued to September 23, 1987. RS' *dl Wutly "itteds f 8B: SM:te t Attachments: F.xnibit "A` Letter from Applicant /i ' a \\ rn z _ '.- _ September 1, 1987 City of Randig Cucauctiga Community Development tepartment Planning Division !J 9320 Basz�,ine Rd Suite G Rancho Cucamonga, C &. 9$ 30 Subject:'Tract 13727 Dear Sirs: Due to thp neaESSity of my AP ighbOr having to revise his gra4 -tng plan for '.pact 12820, as a result of the Degign RZvieW Committee meeti..q concerning Jasper St., "I respectfully request that my ,.,-atinq with tho Planning Commission be continued to the 23rd of September at which time both Tracts mal be approved. Very truly yours, Er?.c Janssens •t r� i s — CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA �vGUro STAFF REPORT �- z DATE September 9, 1987 1977 TO: Chairman and Members of tht'Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Scott Murphy, Associate Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AM VICTORIA COWNITY PLAN �ENT�7 =i3�` - request c ange the land use an zd- omng3e`s-g- ions from Medium (4 -14 ewelling units per acre) ;and Medium -High (14 -24 dwelling unitf�-J per acre) Residential' to Low - Medium Residential (4-4 dwelling units per acre) for a 24.67 acre parcel within the Victoria Planned ConmuniV, located at the northwest corner of Victoria Park lane and Milliken Avenue - APN: 202- 211 -13 and 14, PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action Requested: Approval of a Community Plan Amendme chanae aT-n-d -'use designation from Medium and Medium high Residential to Low- Medium Residential and issuanci:, of a Negative Declaration. B. Project Density: rThe proposed amendment will chance the density range firom 4-14 and 1444 dwelling wits per acre to 4- 8 dwelling units per acre. C. Surrounding Land Use and Zdn M y Nortn - acant;FVTia j Commercial Sovt,t , Single family residential; Medium !lesidentia7 -14 dwelling units per acre) East - Vacant; Medium Residential (4 acre) -..4 dwelling units per West - Vacant, proposed single family residential; Medium Residential (4 -14 dwelling units per acre) i D. General Plan Designations: Project r - Media-High Residential (14 -24 dwelling units ` per acre) and elementary school NortY� � NeigF�harhood Commercial South Park � ��ITEM 6 . . 'i - PLANNING"C I41ISSION STAFF REPORT Iri1 VCPA 87 -02 - William Lyon Company - September 9, 1983 , ( Par, 2 lk East' - Medium -High Residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre) and Low - Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) West - Medium -High Residential (1,1,44 dwelling units per acre) and Low - Medici Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) E. Site Characteristics: ,'fie site is currently vacant with an average .l'ope n .; frog! north to south. The site is bounded on the north by Kenyon Way, on the south by Victoria Park Lane, rm the ea „, by Mil” lken .Avenue, and on the west by Fairmont Way. iT. ANALYSIS: A. Backc;,aund: On March 11, 1987, the applicant submitted a tentative tract map on this site for* the development of 306 condominium units at a density of 12.4 dwelling units per acre. The proposal had gone through the design review process and had been scheduled for the June 4, 1987 Planning Conwission meeting until it was withdrawn by the appli based upon an insufficient market demand for the product ty��.. B. General: The applicant is proposing to change the land jise eBgna on from Medium and Medium -Nigh„ Residential to Low - Medium Residential to accommodate the de00 opment of a 120 lot single family subdivision. The proposed subdivision is made up of lots averaging 6,712 square feet in area and a density of 4.86 dwelling,, units per acre. The cprrent lapd use designations ce Medium and Medium -High Residential Districts specify a density range of between 4 -14 and 14-26 dwelling units per acre. The request to modify the density range tnd ►ower tie dwelling units per acre must be reviewed fk•- consistency with the Victoria Community Plan. C. Vari,tion in Unit type: Within the Victoria Planned Community, one 3f-' ee— g' oaT`s' ano purposes is to provide a variety of housing types to serve the needs of the growing community. More specifically, the Victoria Community Plan states that 111 residential land within the Victoria Groves Villag;, will include both attached anO detached residences. The - plan identift,is the type of housing products allowed baser on a specific Density range. For example, the Low - Medium density would permit single family attached and detached units on lets ranging from 3,000 4,00 squire feet in area.` �: ,.;ituettsity would permit single family homes including duplekesr 4- plettes, condominiums, and townhomes. Medium -Hir'; density would permit multi- family homes with common open space. t kv ION t P�„ AN111l1G COS: i am Lyon Company VCPA 87 -02 3.987 September 91 n" p page 3 e ,7t in the Gro'�e5 Village has oroceeded in th T:r datex developee following manner: PRGqUCT TYPE ACt N0 LOT, SIZE Detached - Zero k -- 3��p S.F. Lot ap Li Center 13022 East Single Family petache- A,500 S'F' pi of DetChed - ,enter Singl 13022 Wet e Family - Zero 4,000 S,F' Plot Detached ` 13057 Single Family 13058 3,000 S'F' Lot Line y ed - Center Sing 1 Detach i 5,000 S.F. Center . 13059 reta.Ghed - f,20 S.F. plot Fatuity 13060 d° provide Some fcr the Groves Village and lot sizes to ThP projects apprQVed les, unit sizes, is, however, one tural demand• r of all the projects is variety of art�;tethe market ,mere are no characterdetac s an attached serve a ran ��o�at,.is detached h� . co pon eleme farm >y,rove5 :;� eoy+nhome• that the± are all single thc� al;proved ' 1ro3ects �ithin�ptl4iex, condominium lex, that. higher product, either V Community. plan state enter or near fine Victoria regional the Plan states D, Location: +ies will be near the Also, rovided farther resi�entfal densi • of major arterials. While residential areas`wclni y edges.reyional the intersections or along',? that lower densiI Genter villas• from 'the from the regional the farthest i major South a °f the Grov�eV�ect site is loco asite` is jUSa d noreth th centers In addition, ill FreEV+sY does 1Ailliken Avenue` future 'Foo he location 7 gghland Avenue avid the ,:eels ghat higher residential the Community tq. -xvide 9 Base Line n the criteria in it was anticipated densities. °unity Plan, family detached In the Victoria dWnd for sin Por attached Mult. E. * act n n the short d efl apace the demand diu�a ° 1 and uses units wherefores owth dh 2r dcnstth t the dwelling the L units. firstth unity plan realized future family develoPe. that `' o ,d be futiure, resin ����tnointlrefIeects developed in the parcels light higher deenn development of Victoria to date. The PLANNriA C"ISSON STAFF REPORT VCPA 07-02 - Williom Lyon Company Page SeptemLier 9, 1987 4 4" J trend. The majority of developiAnt ',that has taken plate within the Planned Community has occuriJ within the Low and Low-M-adium density land 1� us : xjations both In the Windrows and in the Groves. �� To da townhW or apar"ants have been approved within Victoria. The development of thl s-: site, however, -would provide some benefit to the Groves Village. It would create a more aesthetically ple&sing streetscene along Milliken Avenue. It would also comlete the residential development within; the Groves, 'Village iLnd provide more continuity throughout. F. Fiexibility of the Plail� - ore of the unique elements of the Victo- a Communi ty "PTa—ri- is the flexibility built into the overall development of 'the Planned Community area. Fftolt ica7, ecorionic, or marketing conditions ray arise that suggest rearrangement of °the land use designations. The Comminity Plan allows the trading of residential densities in ime planting area for densities in another plannihj area. Als-, the densities within a planning area can be decreased wGheUt zk corresponding increase in another planning area. Such is the case with the current proposal. The applicant Is proposing tie latter and would like to decrease the density wl.thin this site in response to the current market demand for sing1l family detached homes. However, the flexibility of the densities within the Planned Community should only be accomplished when it is fou id to be consistent with the' goals and intent of the Community )lan for each Vrilage and tie Planned Community as a who-jr. Victoria was intended to havkl a variety of huasing opportuttittas. This variety can only bi achieved try maintaining a broad' range of residential densities. If the proposed land use change from Medium and Medium-High to Lm-Medium is-tdc;,ted, there eill be no further oppo-tunitios for attacheki: multi- family development within the G,.ies Village. The entire village wi^l be single family Beta• Od unites, G. Compatibility: With tho approval of the area development plan Tor winryirds %rth, Medium density was established on the east side of.-Rilliken Avenue oppo3fte the subject site. This was done to provide some simllar!,'t� In the streetscene on both sides of Vill"i'►en Avenue. 4ith the change in density, the streetscene will be sowwhat altered. This change, !,owevtr, Is lot ,obvious due to the' idith of Milliken Avenue. � - 1 n. A& MW 0 0 PLANNAG C004ISS'ON STAFF M_. T YCPA 87 -O22 - William Lyon Company September 9,,, 1987_1 ` Pie 5 N. Traffic• With the proposed change in density the traffic genera ed from the site will decreasa. In fact, the daily trips anticipated will be a little less than one -half the, nuiaber of trips from a multi- family project. For' oxample, a 120 single family lot subdivision would generate approximately 1,200 trips p €r day. A multi- family project of 3O6 units Me previous p;roposal), on the other hand, would produce rou �.X 42 2,1 trips per day... ' I. Future Developmegt:. With the proposal to lower the density on zn' s `size, scars is coi,cerned that additional requests may follow to reduce the densf ies in other plannin'3 areas. If the Planning A omiiission does feel that the changes are 4propriate for this -site, staff recowbeends that the Planning Commmission . establish whether the change' is due to specific conditions applicable to the site or m)ether the change is precedent setting which would allow changes a other villages. J. Environmentrl Assessment: As a result of the Initial Study and e nvironmen a ec ist, staff has detc-oined that the proposed. change will not have a significant impact on the environment. Therefore,, should there be Commission support for the Amendment, staff recommends that the Planning Commission issue a Negative Declaration. III. FACTS pOR FINDINGS. in order for the Planning Commission to approve Ma an use charge, the Planning Commission must determine' that therm are adequate facts to. support the following findings: 1. That the A+mendm# fit Mr- provide far development of -e comprehensively planned urban community within the distrigt that is supericr to development ot,ierwise allot►able under alternative regulations; and 2. That the Amendment will provide for development within tle district in a manner consistent with the General Plan and with relator! development and growth management policies of the City~, r -' 3. That the Amendieert will provide for the construction, , improvement, or extension of transportation facilities, public utilities, and public services required by the development with the district. IV. CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised as R public hearing; zn a ail a ort newspaper and notices were sent to,all ;property owners wifnin "fee%, of the site. -s G a u PLA'X#TNG'COMISSIOR STAFF: REPORT \\ VCNk W-k - Hil'liam, Lyon Company •, 4_ September 9, 1987 Page 8 'y Y. REMWENDATION: If reomi;kads that the planning Cowi_$sion con sac - a win hearing to rbviow the proposal decent a.ad recs:� vo public,-. `d�p�t. �L , after receiving 1il the in'ut, ,h Commission f lst' re are a p t degWe %cts to ipport t� fit' q$, then , a r ousmr. "on of aipprovai to the City owmil an,nl an iasuahce of a :negative Ued'laratjon would be appropriate. Ife Manning Commission fre s the :re.are not adequete facts to stgpar t ` the findings, recommenda ion of denial to the City Cppwii would be app "�apriate. - Res idly fitted, Sri City anner �)P Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Existing v OB•SM:vc Ig L�1 ^fit Use : Exhibit "a' - Proposed Lard Lite �( Exhibit "V - Area Development Plan for Grove Vilage j € Exhibit D - Original Victoria Lard Use Designations Resolution o� ,:4pprovai Resolution of bAniai M1 e 41 1r;: \ f VVIIJJAI�� LYON dC.—" 6111 8510 AR+:1 ZALD, kM, 8, RANCHO JNGA, CA 91731 - 9eO-223A f August 26, 198.' Mr. Brad Buller Planning Di".tor City of Rancho Cucamonga P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cu4amonga, CA 91730 J (\ PROJECT: Victoria Groves 4' SUBJACT:, Tentative Tract ;3722 Dear Brad: 'I I apprecia a you and Scott weecinR.w th us to discuss.'lthe subject tract. As >I mentioned dur`mg our meeting, we fe. =1 the proposed ,'bract is both compatible -4nd consistent with the intent of the Victoria Community Plan for the toliowing reasons: I. Developmert <,, Victoria Groves to data well represents implementatiG-�, of one of the most important zoncepts of Cite Victoria Community Plan, the apeimum Yie -t Concept. �. Tract 13722 continues cite *v" z ation of thi,.,planning approaeh providing Jwelling units of a't- , and in a quantity addressing all of rhF foxlowing elements of the Optzmunt Yield Concept: a3 . bvision of alt +n.titzs deser brd."ln the Community Plan. Note: Victoria Groves currently provides a completcd. 6 acre neighborhood park, 3.17' acres of Victoria Park Lane which -this tract would complete and 6.57 arses of Community ;rails complete or under construction. b) P; +vi ion of the infras.ructure needed.. Ncte. Coni_'urrent with U• -i-I.opmert of this tract, Milliken Ave. will be extended fro.a _ Victo :ia Park Lane to dighland with full wid.;h street impproveme --ts and Kenyon Way will be ct".nstrut.'led`.with full width : seer improvements from Fairmont to Milliken. c) Completion of this parcel ;.n tf Groves , Nina&,- wi-va its attendant, infrastructure will complete A, 1 res�4ential develops, t thereby signii#cantiy a ILancing the' quality of life for alt ;tictoria Grovej,:residents. Additional impetus :o develd nient of the village commercial 'cater will be another benef=, of tompietion - d otcu,,any of this final residential parcel in Victoria Groves. REAL K,5T,4Ti,1DEVEL0FNi?,NT )701-02 o9-9-87 PG A enda 0 2 r I , F d) Provision of homes that meet "the demsnds of the bbusing� market". This quote from th/ %Victoria Co �}}nity Plan is integral and vital i to the Optimum Yield Concept andkxecution of the Community Plan as a whole. r` Development of Vi��toria Groves to date, and Tract, 13722 has been designed to "provide enough units of hkausing to assure housing needs can be met from local employoment growth at prices locally employed workers can afford ". /1 r. The 5 projects currently act£ve :n Victoria Groves offer a wide range of single 5amily home - ownership opportunities. Available are zero -Soy, %line homes on 3004 squara foot rots from approximately 900 square feet with prices beginning in the $80,000's to conventional large single family homes with up to Approximately 2100 square feet of living area on lots averaging over 8000 square feet in size prices, in the $160,0001s. e) Use of neither the maximum nor minimum number of dwelling units for any given land use or the Groves Village as a whole. The Community Plan showed a yield of 1150 A.U. for Victoria Groves. With the completion of the r-roposee.. Tract 13722, 965 A.U. would be provided. This is well within the 20: var ance factor provided for flexibil,, ,, i-1 the Communfaity,Plan. A comparative description of =I)p iar,d uses and number of dwelling units in Victoria Groves can bet_t illustrate this. I CURRENT APPROVtL ' VICTORIA INCLUDING PROYOSh° r0*1UNIT1 _ TRACT 13722 PLAN L '8£ O.U. 19.5 acres 65 D.U. 22.1 acres LM 498 D.U. 89.97 acres 320 D.U.: 63.9 acres M 381 D.U. 42.88 acres 415 D.U. 45.6 acres MH -0- -0- 3 2 D.U. 23.2 ages PARK 6 acres 10 acres SCHOOL 7 acres TRAILS 3.57 acres 1 acre VICTORIA PARK LANE 3.17 acres 2 acres VICTORIA COMMERCIAL 10 acres 15.3 acres 905 D.U. 185.09 acres 150 D.U. 183.10 acres Note: The difference in areragL,;represents final surveys vec:ms AM preliminary surveys. ' x' a r l 70WILLI�Zi ][YON"�n� � You will see that while the total residential acerage is close {152.35 vU. 151+.8) that the D,U.lAc. varies by approximately 1 D.U. /Ac. I feel very strongly that the Community Plan did not adequately address the considerable impact of the existing topography ar) required grading design on yield. f) Provides the opportunity to complete alilres }- dentiai development in Victoria_ Graves accomodating• °current "1�p�1` ^icatir economic and marketing conditions without detrimentall,j t.�Fecting the ability to aJostruct the toal Victoria Community'% The Victoria Community s'cill offers many opportunities for attached and multi— family housing_ in Victoria 'Vineyards and most appropriately in Victoria Lakes with the proximity of Victoria Lakes Park, Victoria Gardens Regional Center and the adjacent Regional W aced ret4AI and commercial development. The approved Victoria Groves Area Development Plan changed the land use for the proposed tract from MH to M. When the Community Plan was adopted tha flexibility to change one density designation was built —in. Further, the definiton of M was 4 -14 D.U. /Ac. Only recently was the M definition changed to be 8 -14. This is the first time that change ha, , raised a question of consistency with the Cor 'auniry Plan. I am not sure chat a Community Flan Amendment is riq iced based on the,fadopted definitions`utilized. Fir,ally, the proposed Tract 13722 is consistent with all current design cim -eria for Victoria. The design as submitted represents the best of the deg, gn evolution chrougout Vittoria to date. We feel this proposal represents th,a highest ant' best use for this site, consistent with the goals of the Viccorii Community Plan, tle City, and the Victoria Groves neighborhood. We have great pride in this project and feel it will represent a significant addition to Victoria. Thank you for your consideration of our comments. I hope you and you'. ;staff will support Tract 13722, I Please contact me for any additional information we can provide to assist yoLr review of this pcl ,zcc. R ec fully, Steven Ford Project Manager SF: rab cc: Scott Murphy, City of Rancho Cucamonga NOTE: Quotes are from the V ctoria Community Plan as adopted May 20, 1981 - 1 (-r-- f2_ u • $ •� wraa wLOSCw. oaeaw f`�E t..aiio ♦ . .T ' UL 7A8lI ONION ..aNnwr iK PHASE I Loa oemr ,7 � _ w tOw'- Lt7cCY L'MWY MA J T'—j tOwi6:W 0"M1 Lon 6AaWl& If MH oom" i1 -M 1�� w j.�. lOaN.•i.6inlY NC ",,C PR `•.j LQfW�Mgf7 * rt Y �o� Ly 1, W C Y ,, "ASE M ILM11 .. .r 1 LO:f W 0--w oetanv 111"aMrn MrAl ,�_. � a noaate, staff; +rL� reoroom root art •� r — soncwlM Y - ' --- Y ° - yMxm aeuL • y : s ;t . � to r 1 S 7 ir Y • � � - ••• -- -�- iVia4llp - Muwor ti M NORTH CITY C ITEN1L RANCHO C iWU A TITLE= 4WdY�S 499 _ PLANNING DIVISION EXHIBIT: 0 SCALE= (-r-- f2_ El. HKMt-V4D AVINUE \MTH CITY CF R►TNUM CL )CAN KX\UA TITLE: a1VL •-4✓> EXHIBIT =. - SCALE. RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING VICTORIA COWUNITY PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 87 -02, REnUESTING A CHANGE lit THE LAND USE DESIGNATION FRO14 M&JIUM AND MEDIUM -HIGH RESIDENTIAL TO LOW- MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF VICTORIA PARK LANE AND MILLIREN AVENUE - APN: 202 - 211 -13 and 14. A. Recitals. (i) The William Lyon Company has filed an application for the Victoria Community Plan Amendment No. 87 -02 as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in thi's Resolution, the subject Community Plan Amendment request is referred to as "the application ". (1i) On September 9, 1987, the Planning :,omaission of the City of Rancho Cucasonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and conciued said hearing on that date. (iii) All legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, d- termined and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucam0ga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically fi'ds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of +his Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above - referenced public hearing on September 9, 1987, including written and oral staff reports, 'together with public testimony,. this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: (a) The application applies to property located at the northwest corner of Victoria Park Lane and Milliken Avenue with a street Frontage of 1183.21 feet along Milliken Avenue and lot depth of 732 feet and Is presently vacant; and (b) The property to the north is zoned for commercial uses and is currently vacant. The property to the south, east, and west is zoned for residential uses, The property to the east and west is presently vacant. The property to the south is being developed with single family residences. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above - referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraph ; and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. %ZPA 87.02 - William Lyon a i. September 9, 1987 Page 2 `-f (a) That the Amendment will provide for development of a comprehensively planned urban community within the District that is .superior to development otherwise allowable under alternate regulations; and (b) That the Amendment will provide for development within the District in a manner consistent with the General Plan and with related development and growth management po1l'cies of the City; and (c) That the Amendment will provide for the construction, improvement, or extension of transportation facilities, public utilities, and public services required by development with the District. 4. This Commission hereby finCs and certifies that the project has been reviewed and considered in compliance with the California Envirommental Quality Act of 1970 and, further, this Commission hereby recommends issuance or a Negative Declaration. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth fiat paragrap 1, 2 and 3 above, this Commission hereby resolves as follows: (a) That pursuant to Sec4ior 65850 to 65$55 of the California Government Code, that the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga hereby recommends approval on the 9th day of September, 1987, Victoria Comaztnity Plan Amendment No. 87 -02. (b) The Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council approve and adopt Victoria Community Plan Amendment No. 87 -02. (c) That a Certified Copy of this Resolution and related material - hereby adopted by the Planning Commission shall be forwarded to the City Council. 6. The Deputy Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED ALf ADOPTED THIS 9TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 1987. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Larry ie , Chairman ATTEST: Brail Miller, epu y secretary Z`77 PLANNING � iii RJMI LMON NO. f r uCPA 87-,42 - [�IAm Lyon Co. September, 9, IRB7 AOL Page .3 I, Brad Buller, Deputy secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commitsion of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the PlaSming Co ission held on the 4th.day of September, 198:7, by the following rote -to -wit; AYES: COMISSIONERS: Oi N Es: caMMiSSlorERS: l ABSENT: COt+i+tISSIONERS: i a s' J RESOLUTION NO. ". A RESOLUTION OF( jE RANCHO CUCAM NGA PLAiaA. NG !I`aiAISSION DENYING VICTORIA "COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDMENT-440. 87 -02, 6' REQUESTIFiG A CV!ANBE IN THE" LAND USE DESIGNATION FROM MEDIUM AND MEDIUM -HIGH RESiIDENTIAL TO LOW- MEDIUM. RESIDENTIAL LOCk?ED AT THE MORTHWEST CORNER OF VICTORIA PARK LANE AND MILLIKEN AVENUE APR: 202 - 211 -13 and 14. I T k A. Recitals. (I) The William Lyon Company has file i an application for the Victoria Community Plan Amendment No. 87 -02 as described in the title of this Resolution=; -, Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Community Plan Amendment request is referred to as "the application ". (ii) On September 9, 1987, the Planning CoW!sion of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hear tig on the application d concluded said hearing on that date. (iii) All legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW. T"'EFORE, it is hereby found, determined acid resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follo�,rsz 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the farts,_. set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above - referenced public hearing on September 9, 1987, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: - (a) The application applies to prop fvty located at the northwest corner of Victoria Park Lane and Milliken Avenue with a street frontage of 1183.21 feet along Milliken Avenue and lot depth of 732 feet and is presently vacant; and (b) The property to the north is zoned for commercial uses and is currently vacant. The property to the south, east, and west is zoned for residential uses. The property to the east and west is presently vacant. The property to the south is being developed with single family residences. (c) That hie of the elements that makes the Planned Community superior to other development is the variation in rAelential housing types within each village end the Planned Community as a whn:A. The amendment will not provide for the development of attached multi- family .nits as was originally provided for in the Community Plan thereby eliminating variation in the unit type within the Groves Village.. (-s- - t -1 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTIOP, -A. VCPA 87 »02 - William Lyon CS.-- September 9, 1987 Rage 2 � 3. Based upon the s 3stantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced . public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraph I and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: (a) That the Amendment will not provide for developmenr. of a comprehensively planned urban community within the District that is superior to development otherwise allowable under alternate regulations, 4. This Commission hereby finds and certifies that the project has been rmiewed and considered in compliance with the California Environmental Quality 'Act of 1970 and, further, this Commission hereby recommends issuance of a Negative Declaration. S. Based up:+n the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraph 1, 2 and 3 above, this Commission hereby resolves as follows: (a) That: pursuant to Section 65850 to 65855 of the California Government Code, that the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga hereby recommendt� denial on the 9th day of September, 1987, Victoria Community Plan Amendment No. 87 -02. (b) The Planning . fommission hereby recommends that the City Council d4i.y Victoria Community Plan Amn°f It No. 87 -02. (c) That a Certified. Copy of this Resolution and related material hereby adopted by the Planning Commission shall be' forwarded to the City Council, 6, The Deputy Secretary to tlis Commission shall . certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 9TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 1987., PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Larry T. McNiel a rman ATTEST. Brao Buller, Deputy recretary 0 PL AM* Septembtir page 1. Brad Buller, Y, Seeretary of the Planning ComisstopL, of the city of Rancho 0 �certify that tht foregoing ResoldJoaL was duly and r Marl lintroduoa�d, posed., and adOPted by the- Plinning GoWtsfan of the MY Of WOO tuomm"Ola at a regular m6etiAg Of the PladDUS COdmission held 1987. 'by the following vote -tat: on tho 9th day 9-f 0 C AYES!�-' om ;ass Mmmsq- NOES: co�m, SIONERS: A9sw.., Cowsslolms: 17 F 0 0 DATE: TO: "FROM; BY: SUBJECT: CITY OF RANCHO C TJCAMONGA ST "F REPORT �7 t _ C O _.September 9, 1987 1977 Chairman and Members of the Planning ommission Brad Buller, City Planner Scott Murphy, Associate Planner ENYIRONMENT11 ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOP ENT REVIEW 87 -11 - e ve opmen'1"ofl en` M) apCtment units on 1.0 acres of land in the Medium Residential District (8- 14 dwelling units per acre), located on the north side of 19th Strati;., east of Hellman Avenue - APN 201- 474 -07. Associated with this development is Tree Removal Permit 87 -33. I. PROJE AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action Reggue__sted• Approval of site plan, building elevations, Tree Removal Permit, and issuance of a Negative Declaration, B. Project Density: 9.7 dwelling units per acre. C. Surroundin Land Use and Zoning=• or - own owes; a um eMdential (8-14 dwelling units ,er acre) South - Single Family Residences; Low Residential (2 -4 dwelling units per acre) East - Townhomes; Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) Hest - Single Family Residences; Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) D. General Plan Designations: .ro ect" Site = Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) North - Mec+ium Residential (8 -14 dwelling units per acre) South - Low Residential (2 -4 dwelling units per acre) East - Medium Residential (8 -14 dwelling units per acre) West - Medium Residential (8 -14 dwelling units per acre) E. Site Characteristics: The site is currently developed with a single am y res1den ce with deltached garage. The house is in a deteriorating condition and will be demolished. ThEre are several mature trees scattered throughout the site. The average slope of the property is approximately 1 percent from north to south. fTC6t t3 l� PLANNING COWISS10N STAFF REPORT DR 87 -11 - SWITOMO September 9, 1987 1) Page 2 F. Perking Calculations: Number of dumber'of Ten 3- Bedroom Units: RSputred Provided Covered - 1 space /unit 102 20 - Open - 0.7 spade /unit 7 0 Visitors - 1 space /4 units 3 4 Total 20 24 II. ANALYSIS: -. A. General: The applicant is proposing to develop ten 3- bedroom units approximately 1,150 square feet in size. The units dre desjgaed in a townhome style with attached two -car garage and the living area located on the first and second floors. There will be two buildings on the site - One running north -south containing eight units and one running Ust -west containing two units. As part o*' the development of the site, the applicant will be installing a tot lot and a putting green with plans to install a swimming pool at some future date, Design Review Committee: The Design Review Committee a es ay, D; er o g na ly reviewed the proposal on June 4, 1587. At that time, the Committee recommended approval and had forwarded their conditions to the Planning Commission. Prior, to the Commission, however, the appr,cant requested a ,,ontinuance in order to revise the project: The revised plans incorporated a Mv,.ber of changes that necessitated additional Design Review Committee consideration. On August 20, 1987, the Design Review Committee (Slakesley, McNiel, Buller) reviewed the new site plan and elevations, Thr Committee recommended approval of the project subject to the following conditions: 1. Extensive landscaping should be provided_: along the north and west site boundaries, 2. Texturized peying should be provided at the site entry. 3. If security gates are proposed, the details should be reviewed and approved by the Design Review Committee. 4, The four (4) foot wail. along 19th Street should be architecturally compatible with the building design or should be constructed to retain, the berm provided along the property frontage. • �I 0 0 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DR 87 -11 - S614IT0140 September 9, 1981 Page 3 5. Additional architectural detailing (multi - level s; cco, layered window sills, corbels, etc.) should be provided throughout the site including the area between the garage doors. 6. The driveway at the northeast corner of the site should be redesigned to provide ";_andscapin§ between the driveway and the east property line. A similar design should be prcvided for the driveway along the north property line if the reciprocal access agre -a ant with the property to the north is not obtained. 7. A sWde structure should be provided adjacent to the tot lot. 8. A pedestrian gate ,,should be provided for tho trash enclosure. Tree Renovai: In conjurction ,iith the roject, the applicant Fa-s s su m ed a Tree Removal Permit application. The arborist's report identifies ten W) trees that are subject to tae City's Tree Preservation Ordinance, Of the ten (14) trees examined, the arborist recommends ".r, if possible, the four (4) Evergreen Ash running north -south and the Texas Privit located in the parkway be-preserved. The Evergreen Ash, however, are located in line with the proposed buildings and, as they do not relocate well, should be removed and replaced with spec� —p size trees. The Texas feivit is located in an arm where street widening wild occur. The tree may ':.e able to be retained within the new parkway. If, however, this can not be accomplished sWf recommends• that the 'iexas Privit be. relocated on the site. The arborist's report also reveals th *t. California ran Palm is in good condition and is adaptable t,) relocation. Staff recommends that the Palm bs preserved in its present Votation, if possible, or relocated elsewhere on the site. The remaining trees subject to the Tree Preservation Ordinance are considered to be in poor condition and .,not worthy of preservation or relocation - The trees should be removed. As part of the development of the site, trees, including specimen - size trees, will be installed to replace those trees being removed, D. Environmental Assessment: The applicant has completed Pact 1 e of e InifiR u y. Staff has comtil etet,.:. , Part 2 and determined that the site may to exposed to excess noise levels from 19th - reet, An acoustical analysis has been submitted for the project which indicates that, without mitigation, the site will be subject to noise Tevels above 65 CNEL (tile City H -°?3 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF'-REPORT DR 87 -11 - SUMITWO September 9, 1987 -' Page 4 maximum). fie report indicates, howe;ter, that the roise level, can be reduced below 65 CNEL and tlhe`environmental impact car. be mitigated to less than significant through conctructien of a 0e foot high, barrier c:astructed of block ' or combination of materials specified in the acoustical analysis. With the inclusion of the recommendatiGps of the acous ull *1 analysis and otheM conditiahe of approval, staff finds that the project will ,got have anq adverse impacts or, the environment and recommends that a Naqative Declaration 4e issued. III. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: The project is consistent with the general an an bZ�dj x --ode. The project wi11 not be, detrimental to the public hkalth or safety, or cause nuisances or significant adverse enviroi.mental impacts. In addition, t * .proposed use and site plan, together with the recommended condititAis of approval, are in compliance with applicable provisions of the Development Code and City standards. V. CORi. SPONDENGE: This item has been advertised in the Daily Report newspaper as a public hearing, notices have been s -OT-to aft' property owners within 300 feet of the site, and a large notification sign was posted on the site. V. REC"ENDATION: Staff recommends approval of Development Dc'siew 7- i3"Tirou doption of ,the attache` ''Psolution with conditions, roea; of Tree Pemoval Permit 87-33, and issuance of a Negative ",r�tian. Respwt_ @ ly r3 e f City PI nne► J BB:SM :te Attachments- Exhibit "A" - Site Utilization Exhibit "B" - Site Plan Exhibit "C" - Building Elevations D " Exhibit "- Tree Remrval Resolution of Approval with Conditions s'; 0 C� �; \K)RTH CATY CF RA:�UM CLUANIIGINGA TITLE: -- -,S:%; eAZ4 PLANNING DRISION EXHIBIT- SCALE: 4-6 L-A IL T IL CITY OF ITEM: RA.NLXIiO CLUA'NlON(;A TITLE: PLANNING DRqSjON EXHIBIT- SCALE: i� L #'• '71 f ram• i : s- 71" .,.: JM 0 LLI CITY OF ITElI: ��- C.'�'K TITLE:t�.�7di'S PLANNING EXvjSM EXHIBIT. —C _ SCrA,I..E- w w c,.tsv CIT'. Clf RAN-dO CUCANJONGA PLANNING MRSION Ll — Q t �r ' � G EF,�45.y- y- 7� W-4 Q:: NMTH ITE%I. TITLE: ��-�cll�1� iXHIBIT: SCALE= 1, RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO. 87 -11, FOR TEN APARTMENT UNITS ON 1.03 ACRES OF LAND, LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF 19TH STREET, EAST OF HELIMAN AVENUE IN THC MEUIUMi RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT - APN 201- 474 -07 A. Recitals. (i) Sumitomo Construction has filed an application for the approval of Development Review No. 87 -11 asp described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolutic' the subject Development Review request is referred to as "the application": (ii) On the of 9th of September, 1',987, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and PA.cluded said hearing on that date. (iii) All legal pk�erequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined and_,resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga 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.. 2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above - referenced public hearing on September 9, 1987, incl4ding written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: (a) The application applies to property located on the north side of 19th StreAt, east of Hellman Avenue with a street frontage of 150 feet and lot depth of 300 feet and is presently improved with a single family resider,-.-c with t detached garage; and (b) The property to the north, south, east and west are zoned for residential vies. The property to the north and east is developed with tcwnhomes. The property to the south and west is developed with single family residences. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above - referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraph 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: 4-q "r s PLANNING COMISSIOS RESOLUTION NO. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 87 -11 SWITOK) September 9, 1987 \) page 2w (a) That the proposed project is consistent with the objectives of the General Plan; and (b) That the prvpo -fed use i ° -gin accttrej; with the objective of the Development Cods( and the purposes of the district in which the site is located; and (v) That the proposed use is in compliance with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code; and (d) That the proposed use, together with the conditions apr'�cable thereto, will not be detrimental to—the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injjurious, to properties or improvements in the vicinity.' 4. This Commission hereby finds and "certifies that the project has been reviewed and considered in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 and, further, this Commission hereby issues Declaration. a Negative S. Based upon the findings 4'sd conclusions set forth in paragraph 1, 2 and 3 above, this Commission hereby approv:s the application subject to each and every condition set forth below and in the attached Standard Conditions';attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. a. planning Division 1) The following items shall be required and shall be shown on the final landscape plan which is subject to review and approval by the City Planner prior to the issuance of build'ng permits: (a) Extensive landscaping shall be provided on the north and west site boundaries. (b) Tfixturized pavement shall be provided at 'ite t. site entry. ;i (c) Abe driveway at the northeast corner of the site shall be redesigned to provide landscaping between the driveway and the east property line. (d) If the reciprocal access agreement with the property to the north can not be obtained, the, driveway at the northwest corner of the site shall be replaced with landscaping, PLANNING COWISS10M RESOLUTION NO. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 87-11� SUMITOMO September 9, 1987 Page 3 (e) The 43f foot wall along 19th Street shall be architecturally compatible with the building design of shall be 4"Igned to rerain the berm provided along the propirty frontage, 2) If security gates are proposed, the final design shall be reviewed and approved by the Design Review Committee prior to the issuance of building permits. 3) Additional architectural detailing (multi-level stucco, layered window sills, corbels, etc.) shall be provided throughout thd' site including the area between garage doors. revised plans shall be reviewed and approveo"%-by the City Planner prior to , the Issuance of bud I,,�ding permits. 4) A shade structure shall be provided adjacent to the tot lot. The final design shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planner prior to the Issuance of building permits. 6) A pedestrian gate shall be provided for the trash enclosure. The final design shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planner prior to the Issuance of building permits. 6) The one California Fan Palm tree and the one Texas Pr1vIt tree shall be preserved in the current location or relocation elsewhere on the site. The trees shall be incorporated into the final landscape plan which is subject to review and approval by the City Planner prior to the issuance of Ouilding- permits. The four Evergreen Ash trees Oall be replaced as required by the Tree Pres,irvation Ordinance. I I Ir 7) All noise attenuation mitigation measures, as recommended by acoustical analysis, si all be incorporated into construction plans. b. Engineering Division 1) An in-lieu fee as contribution to t�ie� future undergrounding of the existing overhead utilities (telecommunications and electrical) on the project side of 19th Street 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 frontage because the opposite side of the street is developed. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. DEVELOPMENT REVIE11 87-11-- SLHITOMO September 9, 1987 Page 4' 6. The Deputy 'Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED PHIS 9TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 1987. PLANNING COMMISS104 OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Larry r. WNW, Chairman ATTEST: Secretary Brad Butler. W/v 1, Brad Buller, noputy/,Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do heAV,- ertify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly in �Aed, and adopted by tha--Pla,nnihg Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga;` A a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 9th day of September'; 1987, by the fo!.lowing vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS, ABSENT: COHMISSIONEP -S: 0 ,4. F, -1mil 6A 4 1. w Ll uzz s y�� ewe 1 �1 p L d 1 � F N uC s _ai - N =46. M- jig M �MY u` «s pj2 rgM Y +eO tab #= =i M ^� N v N H {11 Y e • r N K C s J O.. La 1 I' J1 E`y 9 Lai t N � ;ar ' • i r t N �I ila a3x� V z �t �rg �Y • � 3r 33..2 Sys =rtzg ilir i_us .N Z; Q gg�^ rtl 0'�O o�NyV. Y yitlrL I �w a N� L� Y :r s a+ 3 r ` g Itit`� ri Y -.Sig op I ��{fads $ °+�T °3 � h �g r Jae -= r I rg r 8v� 'O3 • a33 N �a M _) p 9 � ocac YY; P'i N 0 Y.N. its 4L. L. ;2 . Nr �• 40 'rya b �'O Y "ski 3 1r It O r I C '2 `36 J • vTL a" _g C WW AYII t� ' RV if I M i 4 . =211 .g ill = x J • �y 3 w �N V K$ i r O y r�^ 8� «S s NI Oe Tj 4 .Y�i b 1C MN s K � ts V ? W . Y__ s s L Y ^ eN -3 3 1 yyyy ss VV yyyE 1 Z Y .,,IF! L �I �I «tr e A M Fi L lain Vz3 114 ; Ilix 338 N •N�g y =� L r M N Y Y «g a� �3 eS F` u _o ig V� ON �m 'Z g� �I r Y O. V3 amu L Ala H* 2! a �N3v `a= - 4 • a ag-A u u FI — U�« El IS !lim 3¢Y3 *+ �K a I I 11 } i" f w PRI jai ilklz! 0 i k H ell Jis ac �Ya� d i ma� a�kN.` psi�MyMMNxi.0 !�$'�!N »`t?jas ji zRil-i 1i Uust 23 cN yip 7Rt YO ►�• i'5;' rill � Fm f'� D: N =1� i.``qw Myw y+ ^ =111" G 3S a.S 3y g dif4i mow. K e2 211 11 $ 1 t >ya P2 e^ tlix _ / ■y1 N N M � Z`� Y.� 6` ate. .��,� M ss Y 4 VY.6 ]ST_ Yq`� HUI X21 g -i e gt An if up a � w_ _ 2 ems_ 7 t4 w g ;2 r'; a Y r low u p ^YY� i DIX i� 3_�0ww at ziq 6 $�,aa a- a •« N i V . _ X M � C ~## R u xx> pKK _Cy p a- g w N y yYN ` w pY _ v yi� r „ V pC 16 �3 r� fit K "s Y r p L w 3S� '41 1i iN e r� p pf �` t app ad lilt i C C I s all l ZIA • ` 4 » , flu= _. �22 4f , _: I Q��Y Cy rz L � .wMS^ tl Ty cc �¢ }fixy • � V Y L Hill C I s all l ZIA • ` 4 » , flu= _. �22 4f , _: I Q��Y Cy rz .wMS^ tl Ty cc �¢ }fixy L Hill C N � I M !H «:r3 L_!i _ii_r 1 �Vrc '23.2 N q Y. ~ P s� L t r� N N ry X� �Y If p :a "Y �g Y �g " M M +u Epp yy�y`iv �O§ e� A Y ��.�. w � la�. • S u g�a u Y CC` y N o^ p�. � =y O y1Y P M 9 L 1� t8 a Vow i L YN /+pN Q ice' Wp pptl.i as'+R �gO pL� yp3A N y V tl•0 �p �� jS NIS ~Yi�� O ��� »"- "a Vs :.!;I r-[ $ Y MAI 0 8 SR-1� GNU a 2 b 3 Fall yap $S r TL 2 A x'S 5M. A i a��a ��!" $ r �V1 'S Mai+ E i S , r: j I e$� SQL z lab y� �_ ``� ' ISSN sit! Y O V %. v YY OIY YY ^ 5 ��� 9, "Y ` Pj >" s 4 it t1 D e4 Y WN Lt Yt� 6 0313 Its la Ex I II I f 1 I y 9-17 ,I ayg. yXC y Y � L ,oppt 8' tl33 Y CgCYyiyy .333Y� C„a+, °c a w ty� 2l o 23 xx .` irt6N }�{i Yc np y �• C r µ c y JY�g[y� 6� Oyq� 0ZZ. c Y aY 0 �E+ yI� Y. < ��i 4 'I m � +iiii P Q �j «$ .�, m °o ~► 3 li+i vQr +Lx $ °� is ks TUB! Lk ci IngM� L qC M= w-8 ^� , _-*]v' I � �ZA � �ML = e ' i`oSls °o «r'd t iF s� a' a 43 L'ess vi .OL 4 L 1 u 3 V U V Y gppr1 M O OIO n _ N gig: t�« all o� 1-5 ��yp 3yw y: SE A4 ww ps�.u`y�LL%1 2 Ygo ,`' a,m ai r w, 1 A f.2 a�N'. V �^ TaNya 6L1 YL NN NV� NY i �• f N 10' N ev L t ? NN yy� T M d .'f _/X LAI Em V = gppr1 M O OIO n _ gig: t�« all o� 1-5 i$ A4 ww ps�.u`y�LL%1 2 Ygo ,`' a,m ai r w, 1 A f.2 a�N'. V �^ TaNya 6L1 �My 6WW N�YI �:.n C NM .0 aW �• f N 10' .i.. MA�v Ft 1 LAI Em 0 L] p Z'� 9 R 00 L u -•gip ! F a� d'' Tag J M M R Y g Q a �8 Y O its � o ii011000 Y. o w a yy 0 6�� O� g�yy6 NO 8 `gr s p,' '�- wx i �rwx ww! � � T Y� Y ,� L wwwRiii R Y t r YYa see •� �wwe ��11 �i�� O .201 ■ iY Ss StlL' °w At N�f NLnY �W �Y t P Pak t ad_ _ Jig ®i9 ®R -- x--19 a Z'� 9 R 00 L u -•gip L M M R Y g Q a �8 Y O its ^ N Y o w a yy w4y 8 `gr s p,' '�- wx i Y Milyl 9 L�LYYY � � T Y� Y ,� L wwwRiii R Y r Q -- x--19 ' Ov^ ^ui Sa 00 L u -•gip L M M R Y g Q a �8 Y O o ore ^ N Y o M$ YY a yy q 8 `gr .a p,' '�- wx i �M^ aio I W -;° Fes.' o' � war CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: September 9, 1987 TD: Chairman and Members of the planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Scott Murphy, Associate Planner SUGj CT ENVIROWENTAL ASSESSMENT "fAND TENTATIVE TRACT 15369 - Rr - -A- cus om -of su v son -OT-3 , r'?ir acres of an n o six (6) parcels in the Very Low Residential District (less than 2 dwelling units per acre), located on the east side of Sapphire Street, south of Hillside Road - APR 1061- 691 -9f iO and 11. I. PRW ECTAAND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action Requested; Approval of subdivision design, conceptual grauing Plan, n, and issuance of a Negative Declaration. B. Project Density: 1.58 dwelling units per acre C. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: or - Vacant; very LOW Residential (less than 2 dwelling units per acre) South - Single Family Residential; Very Law Residential (less than 2 dwelling units per acre) East - Floyd Stork Elementary School; Very Low Density Residential (less than 2 dwelling units per acre) West - Single Family Residential; Very Low Residential (less than 2 dwelling units per acre) D. General Plan Designations: Troject site - Fafg Site North - Yery Low Residential (less than 2 dwelling units per acre) South - Very Law Residential (less than 2 dwelling units per acme) East Elementary School West - Very Low Residential (less than 2 dwelling units per acre; E. Site Characteristics: The site is currently vacant with an aver6ge slope-107=0 6 percent from northwest to southeast. ITEM I PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TENTATIVE TRXT 13359 - WALTON September 9, 1987 Page 2 11. ANALYSIS: A. General: The applicant is proposing to develop ;six lots rang ng in size from 20,700 square feet to 25„900 square feet in area. The lots are intended to be sold for custum home„ development. S. Design Review Comittee: The Design Review Committee (Barker, le , FUM—eff-flefffe—w-eT the propositl on November 6, 1986. At that time, the Committee recommended approval of the project subject to the fallowing corsdi *.ions: 1. The driveways (curb cuts) on Lots 3 and 4 should L limited to 12 feet in width. 2. The driveway on Lnt 3 should be 1`;cated an the east side of the g0operty frontage. 3. The driveway on l:ot 4 should be located on the west side of the �,�roperty frontage. C. Technical Review Committee: The Technical Review Committee Fe—viewed we propose on November 4, 1986. The Committee determined that the drainage of the public street would have to be handled within a stoma drai�,pipe, as opposed to an aft- .grade structure as proposed by the applicant, in Order to project the i residences to the south of the ite. As a result, an!asement for the proposed storm drain pipe and any grading necessary for construction of the storm drain pipe was required across from the elef�sntary school site. The applicant has subsequently ohtai*, the necessary easement from the school district. The final,:- resign of the storm drain pipe will:, be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer prior to recordklion of the final map. � D. Trails Adviso;hy Committee: The Trails Advisory Committee rev— �'ewed proposal on ay 20, 1987 and recommended approval subject to the following requirements: 1. Provide a 15 -foot wide community trail with offered dedication along the southern tract boundary. The community trail fencing should be provided along the northern edge of the trail. The Trails Committee stated that the dedication was necessary in order to provide another portion of the Beechwood Community Trail as required by the Master plan of Trails (see Exhibit "0 "). The existing trail south of the tract is twenty (20) feet in width but is, however, an equestrian easement and is not dedicated to the City. PLANNING GaAlSS ON STAFF REPORT TENTATIVE TRACT 13359 a WALTON September 9, 1987 As Page 3 + The lf.:foot wide local trail easement along `;the west tract boundary shp44ld; -�Xte- 'Id up to S ".ri +et 3. The local feeder trail shown along the southwesterly lot line of Lot 2 should be deleted. 4.. lll. offers of dedication and equestrian easements ard' to be shown on the final map and are to be submitted for the review and approval of the Trails Committe4 prior to recordation of the final map. With the incorporation of the recommendations 0 the Trails Committee, the tract ~` ign, as preposed by the applicant, will not be in conrorre e: with the Develaprnent Code. The Development Code requires that the lots within the subdivision average 22,500_, square feet in area. With the 15 feet of dedication for the community trail, the lots will only average 21,?92 square feet in rea. in order to comply with the recommendations of the 'Grails Committee, the tract reap will have to be redesigned. The applicant, however, feels that the dedication is excessive and wishes the Planning Commission to [r review and consider the recommendations of the Trails Committee. D. Environmental Assessment: iwe applicant has completed Part I of--tffe--1ffTfla1 Study. Staff has completed part I? and determined that the pra�osed development will not have any adverse environmental impacts. If the Planning Commission concurs, issuance of a Negative Declaration would be appropriate. III. FACTS FOR FINDINGS. With the recommended conditions of approval, e tract map, as submitte�: will not be in conformance with the standards and objectives of the Development Code. Th(-,lots will average 21,392 square feet in area. The Development Code requires tra,*ts within the Very Low Residential District to provide an average lot size of 22,500 square feet in area. IV. CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised in the Daily Re ort newspaper as a public hearing and notices were sent to a p —ii— roper owners within 300 feet of the project. T -3 y :,r PLANNr% COW, ISSION STAFF REPORT TENTATIVE TRACT 13354- WALTON September 9, 1987 Page .� s V. RECC t+iEiiD ION: Staff recommends that he Planning Commission cons er public testimony on the ;proposed development. if, after rece yang all input, the Planning 'omm ssioa concurs with the recodomen0ions of the advisory committees and the applicant is unwilling' to revise the subdivision map, staff recommends that the Planning Commission deny Tentative Tract 13369 due to inconsistencies with the Development Code through adoption of the attached Resolution. v Respectfully submitted, ra u City * -anner BB :SM:te i' Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Site Utilization Nap r Exhibit "B" - Subdivision Map Exhibit "C" - Conteptual,;Grading Plan Exhibit "D" - master Plan of Trails Resolution of Denial t \ l EXI IN6 I n C. D A 0 ---, � V� LLL --( VACA �t e d o ,T.ttr N, nMi® �,�.. SV9JEQ1 FROI�FR'Sy --- SCHOO " © ip © Q Q © JLO Q Q - IT7� Q O 1 4 �[,v 2Y1LT� STt[CT �'• I+ �._./ NMTH CI T Y F ITEM- DA g O CU KXT G TITLE f ..> PLANNING DItrLSK N EXHIBIT- S V 3 iE i i < ALL2 it CITY OF �t •o� �-� .r.- � ^�w� - }--��� � 4 �J � Ali 1i71t14 i ZJt/M44 � ` RANCHO * Y TITLE, Sz4v, PLANNING Di \'ISK:�\; EXHIBIT: \— SC.aLE; � 1 -Lr�n I mi i F i�j i� �S{ 33Nat tr�� TH � �i� 4f�3 - as � � �., ` _ •t e` +•of SST � _� L w...y +'\ .^�\ t �^'4Z� � ' � CITY OF ITEM- r� PLANNING Dit'IS -iCV1 EXHIBIT- -�_� SCAj E: ."L -7 ALM 4ILLSIDE BANYO crTy of RANCHO CLJCAjMoNGA PLANNING DRISM EXISTING COMMUNITY 0 0 0 0 *PROPOSED COMMUNITY" "$'""" "*REGIONAL MULTI- SYSTEM ul Q z Lu z Trru. za/-44/ EXHURT. SCAL.E:. � ]l r� INORTH RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY,OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DENYING TENTATIVE TRACT NEAP NO. 13359, LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF SAPPHIRE STREET, SOUTH OF HILLSIDE ROAD IN THE VERY LOW RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT !3PN: 1061 - 691 -09, 10 AND 41 A. Recitals. ii (i) Arlan,,Waltoi has filed an application for the approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 13359 as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Tentative Tract Map request is ►._ferred to as "the application. (ii) On the 9th of September, 1987, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said hearing on that date. (iii) All legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it'--is hereby found, determined and resolved by the Plan MN Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga 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 coi,rect. 2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above - referenced public hearing on September 9, 1987, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: (a) The application applies to property located on the east side of Sapphire Street, south of Hillside Roaf, with a street frontage of 40 feet and lot depth of 664.95 feet and is presently vacant; and (b) The property to the north, south, east and west is zoned for residential uses. The property to the north is presently vacant. The property to the south and west is developed with single family residences. The property to the east is developed with an elementary school. (c) The design of the tract, with rite recommended conditions of approval, results in a deficiency in the average lot size within the tract. The Development Code requires that the average lot size be 22,50D square feet in a,ta. As proposed, the lots will average 21,342 square feet ii area. ii?l 71 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. TENTATIVE TRACT 13369 - WALTON September 9, 1987 Page 2 3. Based pon the substantial evidence presented to this'Commission during the above- refsirenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in laragraph I and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: ` (a) That tentative tract is not consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, and specific plans. u, (b) The design or fmprovements of the tentative tract is not consistent with the General Plan, Devpment Code, and specific ,plans. mTS Commission hereby finds and certifies that the'project has been reviewed and considered ;n compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 and, furthe.�, this Commission hereby issues a Negative 1 Declaration. J -5. Based upon the findingsl� and conclusions set forth in paragraph 1, 2 and 3 above, this Commission hereby denies the application. 5. The Deputy f4cretary to this%?Commmission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 9TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 1987. PLANNING COMMISSION AF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Larry T. RENIel, Chairman ATTEST: sraa Buller, Deputy-Secretary I, Brad Buller, Deputy Secretary of the Planning Commission :.f the City of Ranchw Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and reg!1larly introduced, passe3, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, it a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 9th day of September, 1987, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONER" ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Y,, : — /0 -- CITY CF RANCHO CUrAMONGA STAFF REPORT u F 4 z C; Y 1977 DATE: September 3, 1387 7O: Chairmn and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Scott Murphy, Associate Planner SUBJECT: MODIFICATION TO TWATIVE TRACT 12659 - SECURITV KMEREN " - reques'r. W ae` letee conaltions of approval requiring installation of bleachers and an announcer's stand within the equestrian lot, of a residential subdivision of 135 singl;, family lots and three common lots an 67.67 Acres of la�'l in the Very Low Residential District 11 -2 dwelling units per Qcl 9 within the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located at the southKSt corer ai -t.1 --t-da Avenue and 24th Street - APH 226 - 011 -35, I. BACKGROUND: On November 13, 1985, the Planning Commissfk-a approved Tentative T ract 12659 for the development of 135 single family lots and three common lots. One of the common lots was to be developed as an equestrian lot with improvements to include, but not limited to, corrals, tac rooms. walking rings, an arena with bleachers and announcer's stand, trailer and outomobile parking. M ANALYSIS: A. General: The applicant is requesting to delete the conditions of approval requiring the installation of the bleachers and the announcer's stand for the arena.. The applicant feels that the intent of the eouestrl,an lot is to provide a facility for up use of the residents of the tract and some small-r equestrian shows or contests. The -pplicant does not feel that the facility will be of the sav,. scale as Heritage Park and that the requirements for bleachers and an announcer's stand are not appropriate. The applicant is proposing to provide seating to the form of wood benches _around the arena area. in addition, the applicant has expressed concern about the liability problems associated with the bleachers and announcer's stand, B. Trails Committee: The Trails Advisory wo"Wittee reviewed the propos Ton"" ugust 17, I987. At that tine, the Committee stated that the deletion of the bleachers and announcer's stand woule be appropriate. The Committee, however, felt that wood ITEM J i PLANKING COMMISSION STAOF'AEPowr TT 12659 aODIFICAT,�ON - SECURITY MANAGEMENT J September 9, r,IW Rage benches would not provide adeq!!te visibility into the arena due to the height of the fencinv, required around the arena. As _ a result, the Committee felt that seating provided on a low( riser mould be more appropriate. C. UtilfLZ Undergroundinq. During the previous year, the Planning trommi ssion has acii�ely pur,;,sed a policy of requ°irfng the undergrounding of existing utility lines or the payment of an In-lieu fee for the fu�{re undergroundng of the existing utility lines. With approval of the-Tentative- 7eact on November 13, 1985, no condition . -was i uded to adequately address the existing utility lines on t.5il._�roJect side of 24,6 Street and the opposite side of Etiwanda Avenue. 0 a result, staff is now recommending that conditions be included requiring that the existing overhead utility lines on the project side of 24th Street be undergrflnded and that an iry lieu Fee be paid ror the future c.ndergro-,•:ding of the exf:4ing overhead utility lines ni, the opposite; '""' de of Et1wanda Avenue. II. CORRESPONDENCE:' This item has been advertised as a puy, ac hearliv an e a y eport newspaper and notices were sent to &/l property owners w�FtTiin 300 feet of tbs project. III. RECOMMENOA;1UN• _Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve a modification to Tentative Tract 12659 through adoption of the attached Resolution with Conditions. i ".'sp fully submitted, BWl C BB:SM :tr Attachments-. Exhibit "A" - Site Utiliza ik)h Map Exhibit "B" - Tract Map Exhibit "C" - Equestrian Lot detail Original Resolution of Approval ResoluZion of Approval with Conditions it i 4 i L 6L I 4� NMi T H CITY CU IA^[, H() ( �j TITLE PLANNING DINES OK, ,- - EXHIBIT SCALE; fJ -1 I J� NMTH„ CITY CF IT£.t: :�E j�m RANCHO CLJCAMON GA TITLE: - -•�- -M PLANNING DRISKYN EXHIBIT: SOXLE; anENrrr 1 it �� � �- 31wESturt3e3 in w, tti➢ICKNi1N1Y TNYri wmxm am rn mw TACn 0000 - 11HN0E/rr3 .� Z �. ir" 'H. 1r � i • �; 1 ' / - d1RONlt 111111'''"'ttttt� j ' \ \ ♦�1 N Y3RC0E \y\� - ti"T►0[t. N SUMS i �� � -^ .•.i � IN CASTROOM ,w w. ifl CYINR3C0 war iw , iatM OTemoR r of ,� 3101E k i0T0f6 NMTH CITY OF ITFAI: mob RAl.NCI CUCAMONGA TITLE FLkNNI:VG WSON. EXHIBIT: SCALE. r 6� 7�i 41 RESOLUTION NO. 85 -168 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA. CALIFORNIA, "CONDITIONALLY APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 12659 J WHEREAS, Tentative Tract Map No. 12659 hereinafter "MAP" submitted by Mayne Blanton, applicant, for the purpose of subdividing the real property situated in the City. of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino, State of California, described as that 67.67 acres, located on the west side of Etiwanda Asenue, south of 24th Street - APN 225- 011 -35, into 135 numbered and 3 lettered lots, regularly came before the Planning Commission for public hearing and action on November 13, 1985; and WHEREAS, the City Planner has recommended approval of tk Map subject to all cog0ttions set forth in the Engineering and Planning Div ,ion's reports; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has read and considered the Engineering and Planning Division's reports and has considered other evidence presented at the public hearing, NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of 1.R3rc Cucamonga does resolve as follows: a SECTION 1: The Planning Commission makes the following findi"''Is in � regard to ent'�' ative -Tract No. 12659 and the Map thereof: (a) The tentative tract is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, and specf'fic plans; (b) The design` or improvements of the tentative tract is consistent with the General Plan, Vevelopment Code, and specific plans; (.c) The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed; (d) The design of the subdivisicn is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage and avoidable injury to humans and wildlife or their habitat; (e) 'rhe tentative tract is not likely to cause serious public health problems; (f) The design of the tentative tract will, not conflict with any easement acquired by the public at large, now of record, for access througr, or use of the property within the proposed subdivision. (9) That this project will not create adverse impacts on the environment and a Negative Declaration is issued. PLANNING COMMISSION t' (LOTION Page #2 SECTION 2: Tentative Tract Map No. 12659, a copy of which is attached heret— o; is hereby approved subject to 311 of the following conditions and the attached Standard Conditions: Design Review: F: 1. Revisions shall be incorporated ioto the equestri.^.area to tl:e ,> satisfaction of the Trails Advisory Committee 4�,qt A) as,� follows; a. Trailer parking spaces should be designed as pull - through. b. Some of the trailer spaces should be large enough to accommodate 4- horse trailers. c. Gates on the central arena should be provided on the east and west ends, as opposed to the north and d. Bleachers shall be provided for the main arena. e. 'Utilities, pad, etc.;' should be made available to accommodate future installation of an announcer's booth, f. Ramps on manure pits should ue more gradual, and a landing should be provided at the top. g. Manure pits should be located on inside of loop road further away from the houses. h. Horse washing areas require a cement pad, and the spigot is to be located outside of railing. _ 1. Hitching posts should be positioneid adjacent to both ends of all tack rooms. J. Horse watering troughs should be provided. k. Feeders and water basins on individual horse stalls should be positioned on outside of stall fencing. 1. 5-rail high fencing should ba used on horse stalls. m. Metal tack rooms are not very durable; an alternative type of constriction should be used. 2. The equestrian easement on the west side of Lot 125 shall be extended westerly along the south side of Lot 128 to align with the trail .,provided along the east side of Lot 92. The equestrian easement between Lots 105 & 101 shall be extended northeasterly between Lots 106 a 107 to "C" Street, PLANNING COMISSION RESOLUTION PgSe 3 ;i 3. Ten {10) foot - corner ,out off easements *^all be recorded on the final map for local feeder trails per city Standard #1001. A final comprehensive design of the equestrian area including, but not necessarily aimi?o -d to, a standard` design for all tack room construction, a landscaping and irrigation plan, a lighting plan, and details of the restroom/caretaker factiies shall be brought back for review and approval by the Design Review Committee prior to final recordation of the map. 5. Perimeter improvements shall include the construction of calls along 24th Street and Hanley. The wail type should be an open nature such as wrought iron. Design of the perimeter treatment of the tract including, but not necessarily limited to, details of perimeter walls /fences, landscaping, and community trails shalt_ be brought kagk for review atd approval by the Design Review Committee pri!jr to final recor'.;se:;an of the map. 6. Design elevations and building footprints shall be brought b .- through the Design Review process for the review and approval of the Planning Commission prior to final map recordation. All roofing materials shall be concrete tile. Variety to the footprints and elevations shall be achieved consistent with the architectural guidelines of the Etiwanda Specific Plan and numbers shall conform to the requirements of Figure 545 of the Etiwanda Specific flan.. A statement shall be included in the CCBRs for this tract notifying property owners that tha architectural design of }heir dwellings must be consistent with the guidelines of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. 7. Tree planting shall be consistent with the windrow planting policy of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. $. Lots fronting on Etiwanda Avenue shall be developed in accord with the Etiwanda Avenue Overlay Disrict and Special Access Policy as stipulated in the Etiwanda Specific Plan, 9. The,.Etiwanda Avenue /24th Street Intersection shall be designed as a community entry per Figures 5 -10 and 5 -11 of this Etiwanda I, Specific Plan. � 10 The 24th Street parkway shall Ibe developed with an equestrian \ t,, ail and bike path, and the Etiwanda Avenue parkway shall ` "��Ilvelcped with bike path per Figures 5 -27, 5 -32, ar4, -33 of Jiiwanda Specific Plan. 4;^ PLANNING COWISSION 10' TION Pzge 44 Ap 11. A feeder„ trail\system for equestrian use shall be required. Such trails shall be located within easements and shall be designed as a continuous network providing access to each Iota Improvecmt; shall be consistent with the City adopted equestrian trail standards and their construction shall be - accomplished concurrent with° Aot grading and street improvements. ' 12. The findi design of the Community Equestrian Trail in the 24th Street parkway shall be coordinated with the final design of Hanley Avenue to ensure a workable solution that provider for a logical future extension of the Community Trail to achieve a continuous and interconnected system. 13. The indicated it?;irovement details for the open spa�lu lots (Loc§_ A, B and C), shCl be developed concurrent with grading and stree <„ improvements initiated with that particular phase of developrrant per the approved phasing plan. Open space improvements shall be completed prior, to the release for occupancy any dwelling units within that phase.of development. 14. With each phase of the development, grading of the entire phase__ shall be accomplished at the outse *_ as opposed to a lot -by -lot --�' basis to achieve a successful design, in consideration of the ' significant gradient of the project site and the mutual dependency of lots on each other to achieve a workaLie grading scheme. r, is. Prior to final recordation of the map, a final landscape plan shall be submitted for the review and approval of the Trails Advisory Committee. Final landscape plans shall include details of : >andscaping treatments for equestrian easements. - Tentative Tract: 1.. The developer shall make a cash deposit for one -half width street improvements on Hanley Avenue fronting Parcel 73. 2. 24th Strer;t shall be 'constructed per Etiwanda Specific Plan Standard 5.3 -23 and landscaped per Etiwanda Specific Plan Standard 5.3 -15 from Etiwanda Avenue to the projection of Hanley Avenue„ to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 3. Lot "B" shall be designed and constructed as a retention basin to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 4. Developer shall provide) the necessary transitions for street . and drainage along Etiwanda Avenue from the southerly boundary to 23rd Street to the satifact•ion of the City Engineer. r 5. Developer shalt pay the City's Stom Orainare fees prior to 9 recording Tract Map. 4;^ PLANNING• COMMISSION 'OLUTION Page f5 A 6. Street i-,nprovements on Etiwanda Avenue; ;adjacent to subject tract, matt ke comst.ructed with the first phase of develovoek to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 7. Developer shall repair the rock curb al ng Etiwanda Avenue fron subject tract to Highland Avenue for drainage purposes. D /%7aA/ a APPROVcD AND ADOPTED THIS 13TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 1985. t PLANNING COMMISSION Of THE CITY OF ROM CUCAMONGA BY: ans , aut, ' , rrnan ATTEST _ Brad u er, Deputy ecretary'; \, f� r. I. Brad Buller, Deputy Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of ' Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly a regularly introduced, passed, ant! adopted by the Planning Commission of / City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning C'ommissiop he eib the 13th day of November, 1985, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER, CHITIEA, MCNIEL, REMPEL, STOUT ii NOES: COMMISSIO*ERS: NOKE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: WNE L{ �. RESOLUTION NO. - A RESOLUTION OF THE PLAXNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA MODIFYING TENTATIVE ''TRACT MAP NO. 12669, LOCATED AT T�£ SOUTHWEST CORNER OF ETIWAKDA AVEWUE AND 24TH STREET 1 THE VERY LOW RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT - APH: 225- 011 -35 �l A. Recitals. f (i) On Noverber 13 „'� 1965, the Planning Commission adopted its Resolution No. 86 -10, thereby approving, subject to specified conditions, Tentative Tract Map_tnp. 12659, which provides for the development of 135 single family lots an 3 coven lots on 67.67 acres of b and within the Very Low Residential District. (ii) The above - described property is located at tJAe southwest cornier of Etiwanda Avenue and 24th Street and is within the VL (Very Low Residential) District. (iii) On August 6, 1987,,a modification request wAs filed by Security Management fir the deletion ) bf conditions of approval requiring the installation of bleachers and `dn announcer's stand adjacent to the arena within the equestrian lot. (iv) On the 9th of September, 1987, the Planning;. commission of the Cit/ of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed publfir' hemming on the application and concluded said hearing on that date. O:CUrred. (v) Al legal prerequisites to the adoption of`VA s Resolution have B. Resoluti!,' . NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined and resolved by the Planning Coma►iasion of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part v, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above - referenced public hearing on September-19, 1987, including, written and oral staff -'reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: (a) That tentative tract is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, and specific plans; and (b) The design or improvements of the tentative tract is consistent with the General Plan, Development, Code, and specific plans; and a PLANNING MISSION RESOLUTION NO. TT 12859 MODIFICATION - SECURITY MANAGEMENT September 9 1987 Page 2 ,. ` {c} The site is physicall y suitableifoi- the type of � = ,development proposed; and td) The design of the subdivision is not Iikely to cekyse substantial environmental damay4 and aw,,Idable injury to hums and wilaYife or their habitats and (e) The tentative tract is not likely to cause serious public health prob ems; and (f) The design of th4 tentative' -tract will not conflict with any easewTt acquired by the plibl is at large, now of ' ;word, for access through or use of the property within the proposed subdivision. A. This Commission hereby firrA and certifies th&t the project -.has bee x, reviewed and considered in compliance with the California Envirotmntal Quality Act of 1970 and, further,, that a Negative Declaration was issued On:' Naeemkor 13, 1.985. 5. Used the vp& findings and conditions set forth in paragraphs I, 2 and 3 above, this Commission hereby modifies Resolution 85 -I$8 by deleting Gonditi-n No. le under Desl9wReviev and by changing Condition No. Id under Design Rex'ew and adding Condition Nc.=B to read as follows; Design Review Id. 14.1 gate. seating shall be provided around the arena area. The seating shall be of a sufficient height to provide adequate visibility into the arena. The final design and location of the seating shall be reviewed and approved by the Trails Advisory Committee prior to the issuance of building permits.' 8. Utility Undergroundin . a, The existing overnead utilities (telecomemunicati�ns and electrical) on the j project (south) side of 24ti Street shall be j, undergrounded from the first pol-_ on the west I side of the, Irtherly projection of future Hanle4f Avenue -td Ute first pole on the east: � side of Etiwanda Avenue, prior to public improvement acceptance or occupancy, whichever occurs first. Reimbursement of one -half the City adopted cost for undergroundW from future development as it occurs on the opposite (►tarty) side of the street is not feazible, because the property is in the County. PLANNING GOMMISSTON RESOLUTION NO. TT Icog MOOIFTMON - SECURITY MANAGEMEN0, September 9, 1967 Page 3 v al` b. An 1r,Mlieu fee as contribution to the future under rounding of the , existing overhead utili'eies (telecommunications and electricals } on tNi: upposite (east) side of Et1wanda shall -' be paid to the City prior to approval of the Final Map. _The fee shall be one -half the City adopted un( amount tames the length from the south project boundary to the terminus of the lines near the north prodect boundary. ` 6. The Deputy Secretary to this Commission shall certify to th+o . adoption of this Resolution, R APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 9TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 1987. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE_GITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: arty T. McNiel, a anon _ ATTEST: Brad Buller, Deputy Secrielary I,, Brad Buller, Deputy Secretary of the P ?�rpning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do F..aby certify thi�t the foregaiag Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, nassO, and &w ed by the Planning Commission of the i City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 9th day of September, I'O ?, by the following vota -to -%101 AYES: COMMISSIONERS: - - NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: i l� J—/3 K] D CIT% Oi RANCHO CUCAMONGA,. STAFF REPORT s a; DATE: September 9, 1987 isn i I TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Barrye R. Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer BY: Joe Stufa Jr,, Associate Civil Engineer SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP - 10782 - . Bermant M;ve opment a 9 subdivision o 3i:I acres o"f'-land nti c :13 parEgs n t General industrial District, Subarea 8, located at the southeast corner of Rochest�- Avenue and Arrow Route. (APN: 229 - 121 - 19,23,24,25,26) RELATED FILE: DR 87 -26 I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION A. Action Requested: Approval of the proposed Tentative Parcel Was shown xhibft "B" B. Parcel Size: Parcel 1 - 1.8 Acres Parcel 8.- 2.3 Acres Parcel 2 - 1.6 Acres Parcel 9;`- 2.2 Acres Parcel 3 - 2.3 Acres Parcel 10 - 2.5 Acres Parcel 4 - G.6 Acres Parcel 11 - 4.6 Acres Parcel S - 2.1 Acres Parcel 12 - 2.8 Acres Parcel 6 - 1.9 Acres Parcel 13 - 2.3 Acres Parcel 7 - 1.5 Acres C. Existing Zoning: "General Industrial D. 5urrounliinng�Land Use., o1+f�Trt - vacant South - vacant East - State eiighway I -15 Wes. - Industrial E. Surrounding Gener'_l Plan and Development Code Desisnations: 115F5 Gen-eral Itidustrial South - 6eneral Industrial East - State Highway ; -15 West - Mrnimum Impact Heavy Industrial i ITEM K r , TENT. PM 10782 SEPTEMBER 9, 1987 PAGE 2 F. Site Characteristics: i The site is Vacant with the land sloping approximately 2% to the South. I1. ANALYSIS: The pui -rose of the Parcet Nap : s to create 13 separate parcels to potentially be developed by separate owners. DR 8"r,26, also on tonights agenda, provides a tctal design pap�fge including elevations, site plan, w -4dim, and landscaping plans,; 1 The street improvemc4.ts, including the G :, ,ite private street, will be constructed upon recordation of the final map. .II ENVIRONMENTAL REVIW: The applic&it completed Part I of the Initial Study. Staff ton W;cted a field investigation and cwm leted Part II of the Initial Stud,, No adverse impacts upon the environment are anticipated ; a r uit of this e�,� project.... Therefore, issuance of Negative. Declaration is appropriate. `.% IV. t'OtRc:YOND£NCE: NWtes of l'ub {'ic Hearing have been sent to surroLaUng property owners and paced- in the Raily Report Newspaper. Posting at the site has al�f "')ee;l c nspletet. V. RECOMMENDATION• It is recomR d that the Planning Commission consider input and elements --%k the,;;i-6rtative Parcel Map. If after such consideration, t)* 'Cammissioti can recommend a prdval, then the aca.�ption of the attachr--�' Resolution and issuance of a Negative Declaration would :w .apprft, - ate. Respectfully submitted, ' Barr,ye R. Hanson Senior Civil Engi ;,eer B.RH :JS: jh Attachments: Vicinity Map (Exhibit "A"i 9Ivw-q MY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Tnl&- =jtjj'TY-'- MAC Ermpm--.- MY OF RANCHO CUCA1V ON6 ENGU4EMWG DrvimaA- lz /"j: �m m A Mum T N'16T VE. -MAP Exmr RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA ' IFORNIA, CONDITIONALLY PPPROVIUG TENTATIVE' PARCEL Mrs N!IMBER 10782 MIEREAS, Ttative Parcel Map Humb.r 10782;. submitted by Up prmant ` Oeveopment Company, apRli cant. for the ptr, °pose,of subdividii g into 13 parcels, the real property situated irk, the Cit-,- of t.ancho Cucamonga, COmtV- of San 4L Bernardino, State of Cal ifrr -1i a, i denti)- led 3s APN (s ) 2Cb121- 192344- 25 -26, located at'the southeast corner of Roche ter Avenue, and Arrow Route; and WHEREAS, on Septe;cber 9, I9�`, 1�he Planning Commission held a duly advertised .oubl is nearing for the abdti4- des-cri bed "n`ap. '`/W, THEREFokt, THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSI4ON RESOLVED AS FLtLfiWS s s SECTION 1: 'hat the fol?_,winy' findings have been male: = 1. 'That tfie niap „is consistent with_,' ha General Plan. 2. That the improvement,,bf the proLk,sed subdivision is, = consistent with tNe I�eneral Plrn. j 3. That the site is- -- ohysicallyy, suitable "rcr the proposed deveiolnent. 4. That the proposed - subdivision and improvements will not cause substantial environmental damage. public health problems or have advrtse affects of abutting property. SECTION 2: That Tentative Par- , Map .No, 10782 is herebl, approved subject to t attached Standard Conditions xid the foll0�rin!i Special Conditions: ... __ A. Special Conditions: 1, OVERHEAD UTILITIES: a. Rochester -Avenue - The existing overhead utilities (electrical) on the project side of Rochester Avenue -shall be undergrounded tram the ffrst pore on the n6rth side of Arrow Route to the first pole oft_site south of the projects south boundary, prior to public improvement acceptance or occapancl, whichever crcurs first., Reimbursement of ore -half the difference between the undargrounding cost of the utilities (electrical) on t':e project side of the RESOLUTION`hC. Pl: s A A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISST4i OF THE CITY t'F " ✓ RESOLUTION -PAGE P street minus those (telecommulications) on the opposite side of the street from future development as it occurs on the opposite side of the street i.s feasible because the,. property is currently undeveloped. b. Arrow Route , The exista g .overhead;, utilities (Communication and electrical, except for the 66 KV electrical) on the project side of Arrow Route shall be undergrounded from the first pole on the a st side of Rochester Avenue to the first pole off -site east of the project's east boundary, prior to public improvement acceptance or occupancy, whichever accurs first. Reimbursement of ; one -half the difference between the un.,ergrounding cost of the utilities (communications and electri ^al) on the project side of the street minus those (trlecormnunications) on the aiposite side of the street from future development as it occurs on the opposite side of the street is feasible only if a new proposal or time extension is granted. 2, the property is located }iithin a Flood Hazard Zone, therefore, flood protection mesasures shall be provided ar certified by a Reoi tered Civil Engineer and apprc,,Gd by the City Erigf�eer prior to issuance of any bu 'Jing permits, APPROVED AN' A�UPTED THI i 9TH CAY OF SEPTEMBER, 1987. PLANNING COM4ISSION OF THE CITY OF RANQJO CUCAmOND, BY: Larry T. MrNie , Airman ` ATTEST: ra j er, eputy ecre a„ I, Bract Buller, Deputy Secretary of the alanning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that thz foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Cmnission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular,neeting of the Planning Commission held or the 4th day of September, 1987, by the follrwing vote -to -wit: AYES; COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT COMMISSIONERS: AlL 4 !r' a y� G l Y � < N S� R yUyYi Yeti I1 yyrY•�i `� i��up il" 61 `+ ILi L . �•! _ y, M. ' mw ", He Ll Az 21 gs m i a `syy� ° wain vi t7Gsi :..i� ai v e a"R Y � rif Tai rw yea �r TM i V f + _ N VI r N 2 Svc Y �K p Od gYE w pp i$n `iS Ntl L Q� `S �" • C � s4sS l �� C yY s�iV +qqS 9EY e C4 fN RCS RVM CY� +ei�� myi iy'. .+�2 j O R V E +G wG� O .RC N 8w 2]�� +s rY Wy ji 2 .+�2 j wG� LC a 8w 2]�� +s rY Wy ji y c a, �� a•• ) _�> e� ��� 7-i i 1 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMOAGA STAFF REPORT RATE: Sept-mber 9, 1987 1977 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: `grad Buller, City Planner BY: Debra Meier, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: ENVIROINENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVF.OPNENT REVIEW 87 -26 - J. BMW DM r` '= ter` d orment or 1h ust-Fiar rjullaings totaling-57V,425 square feet on 29.4 acres of land in the General Industrial District .(Subarea S) located on the southerst corner of Arrow Route and Rochester Avenue - APH: 229 - 121 -19, 23 -25. in addition, the applica•tion._Is requeatirlg Tree Removal Permit 87 -58. RELATED FILE: Tentative Parcel Nap 10782 I. PPSjECT AND SITE DESCRIPTIGN: A. Action Requested: Approval of site plan, conceptual landscape an nr,n, ;ng pans. and building elevations and issuance of a negatt've declaration. B. Surrounding Land Use and Zonto- 11ar - acutTan n us •r a Specific Plan ( Subarea 8) South - Vacant land; Industrial Specific Plan (SL''barea 8) East - Existing nursery (Industrial Specific Plan Subarea 8} and vacant land on the east side of the freeway (Industrial Specific Farr Subarea 14) Nest - Schlosser- Forge; Industrial Specific Plan (Subarea 9) C. General Plan Designations: Project e - encra n u5trial North - General Industrial South - General Industrial Eest - Utility Corridor and General Industrial West - heavy Industrial D. Site Characterystics The netural ground at this site slopi, sou 'Fly at an appwoximate 2% gradient. There is a row of seven (7) eucalyptus trees along Roi.nester and a continuous row of walnut trees along Arrow! Route, also an olive tree and two (2) , alm trees are elsewhere on the site (see; Exhibit "U"). All trees will be removed at the time toe site.` is developed, --' IT FP L ' PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DR 87-26 - J. 'Berlunt Development Co. September 9, 1987 pu0e 2 � / ^ ` the majority of the trees mutt_,Tnake way for ultimate street � improvements. the site is __ _-.. facility and w/ the 1-25 freeway which is approximately above grade in this area. E. � ~ _ Minimum Required , Parking Building/ Lot No. Use __- 1A/1 27,400' Industrial 58 64 Iu/u 25,875 Industrial 54 <62> 1C/3 53°240 Warehouse/ Distribution ** 56 0/4 54,060 Warehouse/ Distributicii 44 54 ' 1E/5 33"000 Distribution 33 41 ANk IF/6 28^400 Industrial 55 63 I 7 22,800 IndumtpYekl 48 6;3 1H/8 39,375 Industrial 83 (82) 11/9 45,000 Warehouse/ ' Distribution 4� F4 2X/10 50,700 Wmrehnu e/ ' ^ Distribution 42 71 2B/11 92,125 Narehouei/ Dist:`fbuiion 60 121 ZC/12 63~V�D worebouse/ � Distribution 48 86 20,13 ., 37,460 Industrial 78 (72) x--- � --- TOTAL 687 874 1 Notes: ' %. Parking Ratios ' - lnuuutrfal .1/500 ' - - Warehouse/Distribution - s.f. ^ 1/2000 for second 29,000 _f. ' ` 1/4001) for everything oxer . _^_-_ - 2. The figures in Provided" gAk parking spaces provided on�-'the lot assmiated t Lh each W -~''-^=^ The figures � in p=`"ti=^.* .vw'ca^e 11its that contain less park`"y spaces than reqmred that ' v k,- t - PLANNING COWISS14DN STAFF REPORT DR 87-26 - J. Bermant Development Co. September 9, 1987 Page 3 building. In actuality the site is well parked av,d through reciprocal parking and access agreements recorded with the parcel map each bufjdinq X11 have adequate available parking. II. ANALYSIS: A. Gener-il: The projeC)t consists of 13 buildings for total dffel o Int of the 29 acre site. The tuildings are designed J for 4 ie,*binatle ' of Varehouse/Oistribution uses and General Industrial and Manufacturing uses. Several lunch ;)arks are located throughout the site for shared use by all ezployees of the project, 6. De,49n Review Committee: The rommittee (Mcmiel. Buller. Krourl ) nas reiiewed fhe project 'and found that the overall site plan, style of architecture and location of loading zones complies with the Industrial Specific Plan. The Committee has recoownded,pproval of the project with fl?e inclusion of the following corditions.- 1. Trees of a tall growing ability (60'-70') shall be planted along the freeway riqht-of-way. Tree plantings sha.1 be 7 clustered in pockets at various Incations in addition to the row placement shown on the conp,ilptual landscape plan. 2. Increase the amount of landscaping areas and landscape material;, at the trash enclosures betwe,--n buildings la and ZA to h6 screen the loading/work area beyond. 3. Lunch parks should become part of the overall landst-ing/ hardscape treatment and can be incorporated into parkway areas and at building frontages (appropriately screened and separated from the main entry traffic). Lunch parks should be clearly accessible and available for use by all employees on the site, and should be screened and protected from loading/work areas and parking lots. Lunch park details shall be included in final landscape plans for City Planner review a.id approval prior to issuance of building permits. 4. Redesign the area around building 18 for the purpose of eliminating one drive approach' (either .,on Arrow or Rochester) and provide,the building archit tre closer to the streetscape if possible, due to flood protection constraints, PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT R 87 -26 - J. tiarmant Development Co. SepV.,"er 9, 1987 Page The drivLvay onto Arran Route has been eliminated. Des to ,00d retention constraints the building remains in nearly the save position 1W relation to the streetscape. 5. All roof mounted equipment (including air conditioners) should be completely screened and preferably interior mounted. The roof tops must look very clean. Site lines wins respect to any public right -of -way shell be submitted for any proposed roof mounted equipment for review and approval by the City Planner prior to is;,uance of building permits. C. Technical Review Committee: The Committee has reviewed the project anj determined -That with the following special Conditions and recommended Standard Conditions of Approval the project is Consistent with applicable standards, and ordinances. The developer tfill be required to underground existin,) ovenccnd itllitiee, along Rochester Avenue and Arrow Route, Reimbursemeat for tine -half the cost would be feasible for properties on the oppositue sides of each street. D. Environmental, Assessment., Upon review of Part I of the Initial u y and completion of art II of the Environmental Checklist staff has found no significant imps *1's related to the development of the proposed warehouse /indu543,3ai buildings, E. Freeway landscaping In the general vicinity of this project hefree-way is approximately 30 feet above site grade. For that reason screening of this project, particularly roof tops and Loading /work areas, has been a critical concern. One way to provide the' additional screening to accomplish this is is provide landscaping within the freewa;; right -of -way. Staff has discussed the idea with officials at CATra"- and found that planting by others on Cal Trans right- of-way (.'allowed through the encroachment permit process and is to be guided by a Master Planting Plan. The District Landscape Architect,, wfll furnish the faster Planting Plan through the Cif, imere planting by others is proposed. The City Engineer i'ras request the preparation of the Master Planting Plan; however, the plan is not yet complete. The planting must be approved by Cal Trans and maintained by others for a 20 year period. Final details, have no bAen worked out, but it appears, that the City will;,' "i assuming the ?4- year maintenance responsibility throug,(` a Landscape taintenance district. 1 iii? PLANNING C(MMISS ON STAFF REPORT DR 87 -28 - J. Bei•"t Development Co. - Saptembear g, 1987 Page 5 Ili. FACTS FOR . 'RQIM6S kirprodeot is :onsistert with the Industrial � c c Man ann rnL- --Aeneral Plan. The ; project �rl' not be detrimntai to the adjacent Properties or cause sipificant } envirohmentai, impacts. In 4014tion, the propo3ed project together f with recommended condition, -ore in compliance with the Industrial SpeLific P'an and ;.City Standards. 'y IV. RECOMMMATIOX: 5otaff recommends approval of Development Review the adoption of the attached Resolution and Conditioits of Approval anti , j -susnce of a Negative Declaration. Respectfully submitted, � bra u Cit Planner BB:DM:vc Attachments: Exhibit "A° - Site Utilization Map Exhibit "B" - Site Plan Exhibit "CU,- X- Sections Exhibit "V,- Building Elevation lA Exhibit "S" - Building Elevation 18" le", 1J an, 1 2A Exhibit "F" - Building - tievrtion 1C„ 1D Exhibit "G" - Building kievAtion IF jj rxhibit Buis�ing.Elevation 1G Exhibit "I" - Bull ding Ilevation IN Exhibit "J" - Building Elevati�gt_2B Exhibirt_ "K" - Buildings Elevation 2C Exhibit` "L" - 101 ding Elevation ZD Exhaart "M" - Landscape Plan Plant List Ex) bit V - 'Landscape Plan (Lnts.,l -d) E;,rjibit uD" - Landscape Plan (Lots 5 -91, Exhibit "P" - Landscape plan (Lots 10 and 13) Exhibl,t "Q" - Landscape Plan (,.ot. 11 and 121 Exhibit "K" - Conctptu;J Montment Sigriage Exhibit "S" - Concept,41 'Grading Plan Exhibit "T" - Tree Removal Permit Exhibit "U" - fnisting Tree Locations Resolution with Conditions of Approoal -mot - i (!f� fl if a m l ,77 NrIRTH CUY CF rrEM- RANUD _^y Jib,: t MOl1 ARROW W.HWAY pis -Z alp A�iilCRI.Mi �'Y "fxtiDNdi (t3! I. `:•y ,� r� _�_�- . —•;..� — --- �,ii ltnC:" .wo Mtlltliq jA C r mac'- =T�1� �� "� ✓iII' - r _ x .. NQ m CJTY OF MY •ice ; �-._ w ..�- --''.� -` L i I '^ ! i IT i w ww. I r- f c (,W ITEM= �" � Gv► RANCHO CUCAkW 701-02 0 9.9-87 PC Agenda 3 BUL(i1W 1A WEST ELEVATION +eerni fives. v. cocoa +xaaa' --` }y BtdU ma 1A SOUTH ELEVATION SIAID iA EAST ELEVATIM Nom I ]Pi,AP+tltiM DRIIWN EXHIL3iT= �' Ai E: 4 Tom" xia}tpMTaF WV%%IpM! 1 •aCWT(Cipp¢%!f4lf Ua[! '.io IMTeo COMCMlT4 ILIpnT Cp4' dl _ —a 79CTVW QIo¢a Line 1 —TI1 . 10 «Cha19 \1 .apnle¢Ta :�l4�Ta0 ¢CYNT ¢alto +o¢p1YY Wlpl1 �aYptlat(tp ! %10a90 + BUILDING SOUTH ELEVATION apLL up Doom , i14MTao1 )7 �' "I ¢ BUILDING EAST ELENATI -N Em I i i cm (" nim.-PNO? 46p t n WALIHNG 10 SOUTH ELEVATIO4 i emoING 1C : W-r ELEVATION ' rAwTio CONGIiTt'• -m _; n C01A/i ��• tuoM %CV6Cw -• PAWTO ACCM AiviA; COLOM n GLUM ' Al MM4CTYMAL W4M UN" , im MUM ffoozo" b FOW MM L.'7.MTim A4001CMTi— •ie. i 8lIFtA1NG' NORTH Eta_•Ytii ON k BLILOl M 1F WEST r. Lp _ X* C, tiff= MOLL ua DOWS Tz :,c -- Jim 8l1R19 NG IF 9 Tit M.,EVATON i k !SLkDm 1F "sT sIF.VATION V, i�v aria Pca w�.are•��. �y �lGf WL M.10 HGATH ELEVATMM UVAL 000aa UUUING 1G CAST ELEVAMN 'Fr GUNTl M &af EXPOU0 �• •aewtcmw►u" sr au a ? i �*W : H WAL,a i�v aria Pca w�.are•��. �y �lGf WL M.10 HGATH ELEVATMM UVAL 000aa UUUING 1G CAST ELEVAMN NAM= t j } , r i r t BU LDING 1.4 EAST ELEVATION BUILDING 1H SOUTH ELEVATION H.. CYff CF RANCHO CLUAMaNCA PLANNM DRISM EXHmn - r )A %Yl Jtltwit O% -- AILC1117107R %At MO %1111 %10. T- 0A14190 CO %t %6 \Y OA01{ T{MT9R 4442{M0 0'1 IPAR% CR1.tl91 - PA1%T90 ACCY %T 4"IAI .A{ %SYR %R%ItR %TAI. %04t{O%� I 9A%PAAAATYtl 99041590 0A1%TA0 C 0A1%T9i CO0C091Y 1 400010.19 10401 M C tow Ctl1O9 AM0%IiAET%9At ACE1PY100 WLDINO ZG NORTH ELEVATION Ae.ane aee11 a.rA ..tom ��}�.��r R�� 1L q�� SUL M di.+9fGST fLi.VAnW { .. ... DIALDING 24 EAST ELEVATIO -v SWLDING WSOUTH ELEVATIOIH NTH CITY AC 07d i'T"FM l Mac DfvfWN EXHUP SCAU: ----------- IMF" .. WLDINO ZG NORTH ELEVATION Ae.ane aee11 a.rA ..tom ��}�.��r R�� 1L q�� SUL M di.+9fGST fLi.VAnW { .. ... DIALDING 24 EAST ELEVATIO -v SWLDING WSOUTH ELEVATIOIH NTH CITY AC 07d i'T"FM l Mac DfvfWN EXHUP SCAU: ----------- BUILDING ZPNORTH ELEVATION NKWH. CITY CF rrEM: EXHI r-. �J 11'ITfa NM /9iTlail aagtfu0a 4! .. � aueaa•frn a :faaae aawuia. . IQAMRR C CatCalil . R. CYM` .. —XL 1— OR 9;1"Tla CaaCalTa 4 ?ICWR -k faaaa tl"Q `4 WONT COLOR. A"Tgctvd" faOC4 111N1 '- -- -- MCCCMi MOM %4"Al 13LNL)iNG20WEST,ELEVAT" t i- ira1�'ai e�oea -- f a- I BLMLDiNG WSOL ni ELEVATiOfI k -.�'^� Y.�-- • .. :�.�„` .eel —�. _ J9✓ MLD[NCa ZMAST ELEVATION BUILDING ZPNORTH ELEVATION NKWH. CITY CF rrEM: EXHI r-. ED PLANT UST MrANICAL_ L1pUjp"HMR JTTYN.IPLW Aw•6F Fl •+ ID SG. MxKEV -�'r T. " A, tAI�F N us r.... 15f1— b. A. ox .9W Aiafw M-AP LA"W 11 A = Tt'4V 1, r crry CF mm.. RANCHO CUCAVAYsUA nTLE. RANNING DIVWJN EXHW---AL- S--CAU.- 16 At r- - - - - - - - - - - - - If - - - - - - - --- CITY OF nw. OW07- 00,i RANCM CIXAMCNGA Triu. 4AWZr"PAe PLANNM DPO HIMT. SCALE- fu i ARROW br .4AY fi f r5l� NOM JF Crry CF X el- 2'ro RANCHO CUCAMM i - I PLANNNG DPA-gaN rytiTfx"r. 47 u c o 3 T �IOitTH CrrY tOe� --' PUVC OrAAIONCA C- N � F J a — — — — — — — — — — — — — --- R= ' CITY OF ?.Cv RAN UM CUCANYQI e• �.,, Mi mv�waaM MOV8tion CTrY OF RANCID +�.:..�'�, is i a � NORTH .►` 'Free Removal Per DEVELOPM GENERAL INFORMATION OR MORE THAN 5TREE5 OR 5G' LINEAR FEET Ordinance No. 276, pertaining t;; -lie preservatr�'�f trees on private property, requires that no person remove or relocate anu woody plants in excess ;,,,.fifteen (15) feet in height and having a single trunk circumference of fifteen (15) inches or more and ", aultl•trunks having a circumference of thirty (30) Inches or more (measured :aenty -four (24) inches from ground .level), without first obtaining a Tree Removal Permit from the City. T E'`, -'OMF ETEU BY APRILMR`riT: LOCATION OF SUBJECT. SITE: SEC Arrow Ai¢hway and Rochester Avenue NAME., ADDRESS, TELEPHONS OFAPPLICANT. Bermant Devel2ment Company 1625 State St,, Suite 4,, Santa Barbara, CA 91101 (805) 687 - 7000 NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPF4Di�S-1:5 ! ROPERif OWNER (it other then applicant): Sara W REASONS FOR REKIOVAL (attach necessary sheets): To properly plan the entire sit_ for the most efficient and logical development, thel�oEucalyptus &_ 2 Palm trees must be removed. These trees were planted for a now removed residence Gn the site. PROPOSED METHOD OF REMOVAL: Cut thew down and remove them from the site. APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE: I�f/G •L�/-�� ,DATE: r�5_ I I ADDITIONAL RLING REQUIREMENTS This application _;hall include a plot plan indicating loca^lon of all treus to be removed and rptained. Tt,s species, number, and size of the trees to be rer roved shall be so designated. It a tree is diseased, then a written statement from a licensed arborist stating the nature of the disease shall be required. ACTION — Evaluation of thist -,ppiication is based on the criteria on the reverse side. ❑ APPROV8D ❑ DENIED By: - Reasons: Date: Notification of application sh ll be givan to property ownera within a three hundred foot radius ten day prior.to approval. If no appeals are received, there the permit shall J:aeoma effective ten (10) days from th date of action. This approved tree removal permit is valid fc 90 days from the date of final map recordatio or building permit issuance, whlcnever comer first. Should - rpiicart fail to remove the trees within this 9 day period, anew permit shall be required, unleas an extension is requested fourten (14)! , 14ays prior toAh expiration -j the permit. a 411 lei ,�,� , ;� ywc =fit, :� y *� � }� a ig�S _ _ ii ' ASk -L w =�o1 CF RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING CaMISSION APPROVING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO -, 87-25, THE DEVELOP14ENT 1 OF 13 INDUSTRIAL BUILDINGS TOTALING 570,425 SQUARE F,_fc`T ON 29.4 ACRES OF LMD LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF ARROW ROUTE AND;IROCHES7, R AVENUE IN THE ,GENERAL INDUSTRIAL DISTRICJ" - APN: 121 -19, 23-26. A. Recitals. (i) The Servant Development Company has filed an applications for the approval of Development Review No. 87 -26 as described in the title of this 1 Resolution. Hereinaifter in this Resolution, the subject Development Review i request is referred to as "the application ". (ii) On the of 9th of September, 1987, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducteO,) a duly nol:iced public hearing,; on the application and concluded said hearing on that date. /rwAML (M) All l -ngal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined and resolvead by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga 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 anCcorrect. 2. Based upon substantial evVyenee presented to this Commission during the above - referenced public hear,ng on September 9, 1927, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: (a) lea application applies to rroperty located at the s 3 -*t corner of Arrow Route and Rochester Avenue with a street frontage of 91U.i� reet and lot depth of 1575.16 feet and is presently unimproved; and (b) The property to the north of the subject site is vacant land, the property to the south of that site consists of vacant land, thoc: property to the east is an existing nursery and the I -15 freeway, and the property to the west is an existing metal forge facility. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commis�:ion during the above - referenced pul,!Ai , hearing end upon the specific fi.,d.�P of facts set forth in paragraph 1-at.. 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: C.` � tr / —n-7 'r PLANNING C"ISSION RESOLUTION b'O. l% OR 87:26 J. Sermant Development Co i September 9, 1987 ?age 2 Q 40- G (q) ;'fat the "proposed project is consistent = ;iir5 the nbJ,rctives of thsrGeneral Plan; and =(b) ntiA: r4 - the proposed use is in accord with the objective ofAhe Industrial Specific plan and the purposes of the district in which the site is located; and ` (c) That th ,rop6sed use is in compliance with each of the applicable provisions of the industrial Specific F Plan; and (d) That the proposed use, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will be detrimental to the public :health, safety,; or weifyire, or materially injurious to properties or improvai0ts in the vicinity. II 4. This Commission hereby finds and ceri;:fies that the project has +� been revirwed and consiq&6d in compliance with the California Environmental I Quality Act of 1970 and, further, this Commission hereby issues a Negative �! Oeclar ' "on. 5.. Based upon,the findings and conclusions set forth in paraarI.phs 1, 2 and 3 above, this '."omission hereby approves the application subject to each and 'every conditi9p set fnrth below and in the attached Standard Conditions attache&beret, =and incorporated herein by this reference: A. Planning Division i. Trees of a tall growing ability (601-70') shall be planted along the freeway right -of -way. Tree plantings shall be clustered at various locations in addition to the_,vw style placement. ii. thcrease the amount of landscaping .,, areas and landscape materials at the trash enclosures between buildings 13 and 2A to help screen the large loading /work, area beyond. iii, provide a landscape area at the rear of building 26 that provides an aesthetic terminus for the the main entry into,..the project from Arrow Route. iv. Lunch parks shall part of the overall landscape /hWr cape treatment and can be incorporated Into parkwa{ areas and at building frontages (appropriatelj ) screened and separated from the main entry traffic). Lunch parks shall be clearly 1 accessible and available for use by all employees on- site, and shall be screened and protected from loading /work areas and parking lots. it. ., ., FLRNNIN6 COMA &S- sS- t6N4,RE�50LUTI Na." DR 87-26 - d Be S"n°t Uevelgpment-to. Slptcmber 9, 1882 Alk Page 3 ,;• Lunch park details- shall be included in final. A' landscape plans fer- City •Pl.anner rev and approval -Jew prior to issuance of building permits V. All roof mounted ;, equipment (includinag air conditioners) shaill be completely screened and preferably interior mounted.. The roof tops must look very clean. Site lines with respect to any public right -of -way shall fie submitted for any proposed roof mounted equipht for re4iew and approval by the City Planner prior to issuan� of - building permits. The north elevation of 4jlding 16 should b0 ungraded due to the Special Boule�r.[rd status of Arrow Route. vii. Enlar;e the pldnter island:. by 8-10 feet at project entry between buildings M and 1N. 0 The developer shalV provide landscaping within the freeway right -of -way along the boundary of this project. The landscape }plan shall be prepared in conformance with the CalTrans Buster Planting Plan for the I -15 Freeway through the. City of Rancho Cucamonga, plans shall also be reviewed -_*1.d approved by the City Planner, and the City Vgioeer. Landscape ' and irrigation shalI - be` installed prior to release of G occupancy for the final building of the project.. B. Engineering Division I. Overhead Utilities; a) Rochester Avenue - The existing overhead utilities (electrical ) on the project side of Rochester Avenue shall be under grounded from the first ,= pole on the north side of Arrow Route too;. the first pole off -site south of the project's „ south boundary, prior to public improvement acceptance or occupancy, whichever occurs first. Reimbursement of one -hAlf the difference between the undergroundi,ng cost of the utilities (electrical) on the project side of the street minus those �'.,elecommunications) on the opposite side of the street from future development is it occurs on the opposite side of the street is feasible because the property is currently; undeveloped. fl; a PLANNING ComiISSlO9,; R£SOLUTT3 ? ..)lo. DR 87 -26 - J. Betvant DeveTopment Co. September 9, 1987 Page 4. b) Arrow Route The ;.;gist ; ' overhead utilities (communication any' electrica , except for the GGXV electrical) on the project side of Arrow Route shall be undergrounded frae the first pole on the west side of Rochester Avenue to the first p9le off -site east of the project's east bounaiary, prior to public imprVement acceptance or occupancy, whichever occurs first,: Reimbursement of one -half the difference between she undergrounding cost of the utilities (communications and electrical) on the project side of the street minus those (telecommunications) on the opposite side of the street from future development as it occurs on the opposite side of the street is feasible only if a new proposal or ti-ae extension is granted. ii. All pertinent condl7tions of Parcel Map 10782 shall apply. The driveway ..ito Rochester Avenue south of building 2D shall be reviszd to an, "Emergency Access Only" driveway to the satisfaction ='of the City Engineer. 6.The Deputy Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 9TH DAY .OF SEPTEMBER, 1987. PLANNING COtiriISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA r BY: arry T. c err at amen ATTEST: Brad Buller, DepuTy Secretary I, Grad Buller, Deputy Secretary of the Planning Commission of ,'the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and,, :;adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga,, at a re-gu ar meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 9th day of September, 1987;eby the following vote -to -kit AYES: COKMISSIONERSc NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMISSIONERS: L �jlyy.. ■■�1R0�1•�LpLSy 4E 0p7>> �,/�� ��Y iROVR ^y Yy4 yy Nx1 f➢a � R:N ^« �t'O.0 yy``D�Yg3,��p .pr yu} �tti1 ��w S�eT�RY .wvL os. 'auo �• � evCi sygY�'$rr N�apapG p'�� A��v.A C�.•t� 1Y �Y «�.yMy C�C�Q I � NYy $4.�fGty ���Ld Lp� OfQi1 ^a HMV YL.Y. �,� o��pp$aa � ��m..'_..i L!!6NICAV --� �LY -Y -� Mtl ML T ■yam \\ dRil.. MJ� 5 PPPR ppbOc bE «jqp 4NTL ytl MI M �_. Wyy VMu C C 9pr^ iQly �'■�L ' «� y'+� M Igo .y : His O $Y V � a r IN 3 r 1T.21 NV �?. Y� •:y, MgYyµ Y SO Y7Y t ,ra, tY W ��YYVJ��� Oi LK • Y O� YV See!-.- i yeY^ C p M V M 4 � ^ip V cu .I's g Q w ; t 'u cimf CCa • W 3a � asy �.t N `v r =M 1LN Vg�^ ° w' itV�n. j3«j�VCY. rZM 6 Y� ti i'sit 21 G.hN f^ w <1 Y «OCYM V•Y eye Fa. w.cae r�^ v t¢ymul �$n. °a.Yh. v' �YY Q wv 22 a$ w ElN Y MN a� N Y YSY Y ;y ;Fu ` S C 9�na= +�Mi'O L "u'i4w .i u as +c L" 2 M Cp 9Y. �,g 13"'i �g MQ` y ^' Y��. w.rml M"'��4 °+'1`' iQ�11 au.� �.Cn�s ,.. L"z Erg r� ca Erg. L y «,� w« � a$i �' 'u �v w ivy" ��aN`V X-4; 3?2 g Y° i C ki � N r Gs � yy5 zi ia� h1a olf fhb.+ t3 '�• ^aNer �.0 wt. a:�Y� Si wN e N gI �$t$g $�a.�� ►+�cMLLM4 �� ���r'� C ^yo °.Q .5-0 � 19 Aka 2. N ibM�O ^B � C � V ^ t 5P -&= 9 L J yyyC MM� Nw VMY+Y ����M YC'CW� °MC�YJ.�Nq •,,, �a�'s ��'g� $�'Vga �'qqi gaa urtanrAg¢ +S w. °� � �.° '^� »'ti ' :$ »~ o13 Y^$ .$� > ^'uo.E'e N.$ ^�. ��°.1,i egiu» YUO.+°+OOa 11 Cw sa e».NiS r•-sNp s... «3' vre su Z:s3'U. �...iuL o r a •-r. La Y^ G CY L Y 1 1 M 1 J10 421 r`` ay � 43-12 w w = �YY ppy6s ��,�sC s Q�P'dw �� yojj Y�•O ` YL y� YI yaNG +� +Y �«N i L�QKtT y@ s C.y� . N C� WMM 8'� yai >>p�•+°.4nyyy.G qC cw eeu p Lna, M ^f .I3P Ny H wCC} a i s C 7 u i'sit 21 G.hN f^ w <1 Y «OCYM V•Y eye Fa. w.cae r�^ v t¢ymul �$n. °a.Yh. v' �YY Q wv 22 a$ w ElN Y MN a� N Y YSY Y ;y ;Fu ` S C 9�na= +�Mi'O L "u'i4w .i u as +c L" 2 M Cp 9Y. �,g 13"'i �g MQ` y ^' Y��. w.rml M"'��4 °+'1`' iQ�11 au.� �.Cn�s ,.. L"z Erg r� ca Erg. L y «,� w« � a$i �' 'u �v w ivy" ��aN`V X-4; 3?2 g Y° i C ki � N r Gs � yy5 zi ia� h1a olf fhb.+ t3 '�• ^aNer �.0 wt. a:�Y� Si wN e N gI �$t$g $�a.�� ►+�cMLLM4 �� ���r'� C ^yo °.Q .5-0 � 19 Aka 2. N ibM�O ^B � C � V ^ t 5P -&= 9 L J yyyC MM� Nw VMY+Y ����M YC'CW� °MC�YJ.�Nq •,,, �a�'s ��'g� $�'Vga �'qqi gaa urtanrAg¢ +S w. °� � �.° '^� »'ti ' :$ »~ o13 Y^$ .$� > ^'uo.E'e N.$ ^�. ��°.1,i egiu» YUO.+°+OOa 11 Cw sa e».NiS r•-sNp s... «3' vre su Z:s3'U. �...iuL o r a •-r. La Y^ G CY L Y 1 1 M 1 {�•� \�y{j� a oiNf sw o: .$ q1 au ofQQ3 CCd COC af. iY�°1a1 ay� iy°�.. c t L L S1.Q0sii~ppp.,, `.ChA=. OL ro�sM� M y'Y' +S -O• Ys 6 CC. � �{� L ZY pi m� YGQ `� �p r..N A^ ski" m�M Ct6L qCL`',�C � ��.v` S p Z 1qy Y&a s ` A is • Y A ipt q� L� C 4O !� i� g1j[NA ®~ MV W go,a13 .bra asg: v�� > + +1a8M`a`. OS N LE- Y` CM ^$^Q �Ytl.6NGN�UUgff��rr a�ON V,OpL �Ng O VeyO` -0. AAL CjNp giN 4..uy OY 9L� CigQPM �OSI Ml'1 ; ¢..TY•GMZ yS.A ��SL YL `.�W S^' LCiLO O�Si�+t. pipe 31i1'� a1� N�� _ li 's^'"'��dg'- a I.Y�pJ� " �'�,g¢'5r; yT + Q w � N A L i'Gq `. w: L0 M _ ` m CNV `w� W1.yY O YNM' +YNMT OT �. t f N >;'z 4L^. VNaV 34 C�$ e.. „� orq+`G^g �8�orf�,'01 �igffj��N1 IM yNp`4 e«�\4YN.� ^NNYr..Oa ~CO jIg OC 2x' 60�C :. C• 010 ^LLG�{wM _ ww s �\ yy �a iN 1i Yi 7`aCK SG 4.�t 4 ) � N6C� S�a C }� 4Y4rV^ 'q� 11CC Lyy CA S2 jpGf �44n O � L �.• YWLL p s CL 5.13 M$� C am Ns _ NC R L.. uM^ ocvs LE_IAq ±MG otC ^ �y 1� 4� all o y� C`� 4s Cy •• D ' tY Y 1- 3 I` d Y 341 7 M ��� 6 ■i ` �_ �Vpp 0M CNYL 7y. CaiGN `�N�1y, NyYY. ~` \5..�8 «YLM �M4 n'`�4• O /� L �° r..* Y `atep 4 wV S> S 7a CMG T t� 4M ksO.L 3 V .: y!!!': $ ate 45 . C. r , ..2 r. �{��1 r„ a to= >�pp„ N L '�a m {. V,p�x +6 �yY.4 ALt1 Y. S�M y C,G y Y L * ¢ S O �v1 6= V 4r O O G4 m C_ .. u"�+. a ag.' a -r. V �y ��. u':f �r+. r ..�"1.9Yi8 N 0 _ N r N V. M aY Y O i� MME° y c O ! y 8~ N� VCC4p A iNNNY.. pN0�� �u0 �ya[r0y 5,1 CS. .°• ;C = 1p. V C `N�y OLLM ■4p �{4y,�V.V �Cq y� IRC sq- �r S N�Y ,C2 < col 6LV -C'4 y�1'� ° L rsaN <'u sv i TL ej I ._2 � �1.1 cl ac 4d W 4�CN Aiv :YL, Rio BI o« by v � �. �M•. At 4�rlk arm q ^6 i LQ Y _Y a3 X P-N • =YoQ yyy y }NYP N 3 $ A4 'a - a iO.Vy� M Oi�=4 pMV � tiM Y F es y5r3 4 1 � f iYr .,T. pi O r4Y i Ry «�� T`pYYy+yi 6 V y L Y rN. y Y Y�q• y O C �. 3 YM+w p.V C a+�r �. L C M��•} Y .1% C G o • �p4�o 3 R R L Y I, C tttiii ° ' 4O + N �9 u w Y yY • �� ge =u5« �r °$ 31 Sim.y All Al{l y �{ppQQ11� asp€ S. 6 � r • VI. a a ty N S 1 N r 00 L M rJ -N$' °.a G �� yn� S�'• ii OMEN... • C C6�� V Ti y7 5M M y wV• rr u f" 1. ^i 1 M�W ie ^N it sc w M .T. V uy$� oN N a S 4! u a 'ss yo � VVVt i M � s$ $ Eq y L Y C � Y 5 Y... C a- , W V A O wt Eel Y V "llii�- uC 2 A t Y'S • Y a 1 Sig N a S 4! u a 'ss yo i M � C i Q M aid GL C a- , W V A -_- as C aZ V. ■ L F Y V 51�q uC 2 A t L ^__o, r �� L Troy 4��f` O oN ix qLi Vj aa�L k w� i Lo O O v zalk 4. LI •O E QiY2 =6 s G S NOCC 4 ,y_y .p9 ��� YY Ol��yl CM s N• iyt L �YsC OI Ni.Y��� bye` P � A i � r•� At}��� N� C y V■ CYC � Y 0 Y� � a � � w \1 N Y 1i Y Y �Y yL C� L(f �J 4AY �9 3 �.., l'�''�� L Y P p w yY L M Mw py ■M .Y Y Z - jrL L t �r47. 61��+ M"�OI�f:�N� .», �YY �� iY F � YV S 0: • N =~ °,yam �® �g•� '��Cgt��S 'u� w.�6� wS�.ii � � �Q � MC ^C yg yyy »III���s� rp O J• D » YyY C KiLYI L � M IF a iuy » 9 L IL�iL4 �Q4Q 011y1{ �� laliY A EA 102 R Nq C Yr m+y A I y �M s� 3 q! a Y a� C 4 C g.. �r T C W N WA r Y V. 112.31 �iC YM P pO1r !! ppr..,, _W ~ +e-q.W us CY .. t Sri. • 2��� w I IZZS g s r M4 3 �► q �s Na� Cg.O. � M �l k �Ir 2 C -533 4 ss� ra eGw y ® Zt• {q. It i N: Jun € Us 13 ! A v .may. YYY�"Y Maa H; L li _ Eli ffi q 7 r _ E3liiyr 6 s jiqm Vs p C (� 1 ra � y� Me! `� r^ YYw� pO. paM uY oQ�` 2Y. Cs fid � �5! —E k Y w OOIM „% yyOpp » s UT gg3L W�'' 6. CCe yyY SLO ?i� KKJ A.PA •�. �c <1'd�y WA r Y V. 112.31 �iC YM P pO1r !! ppr..,, _W ~ +e-q.W us CY .. t Sri. • 2��� w I IZZS g s r M4 3 �► q �s Na� Cg.O. � M �l k �Ir 2 C -533 4 ss� ra eGw y ® Zt• {q. It i N: Jun € Us 13 ! A v L a SF L as .. pC gx ' ;� r^ Is, 9 2 Y�O Mq�'`. O t ....r Y ��y�—t` «yy�N `'g�..' «,5 wiigg$+ g °yY�' �N•MM� `� .,g S d 1!c all a� s s$ Eat �Ny Ye yi 'M N. NVrM NiY. ` *Q X ■YY� YN CC ��� �p � �44jj~11LyA <it �3 �o L r O r N G «� gx -3 � L p 6 ad $ PI ME ""E E E syc ONC �Qj 4Ma V V T $ aw a� 11 �3 �o L r O r N G «� gx -3 � L p 6 ad $ PI ME ""E E E syc ONC �Qj 4Ma V V T $ �3 �o L r O r N G «� gx -3 � L p 6 ad $ PI ME ""E E E `.� _c 4 w Y 3 cod; AWL r L'lYi9. • I,.tSr i Y4C � �... y f)( � O�± + X10 cl s o u 6-: -µms. N W O YCw L L�R VT 4°.+ G QS C b �,¢p C•' p P a4' `p f "c C' L Lam• �.r �o YYY L Y N L Y �a v3Y"p eo ^ t 1-- is N Y G ± p 'air G Y L 4 G ~ O y G a L Ut3 _ e tC N� � O.:Jy'A y3 • Y �V N �`1 L'4Q Ni Ypw� it bd Vy O �y.� �� '2L 4'� p 4 C q VN M« 4`O 7 V d.. Ypj ��n w a t: M ti c ,! t. MO x� j01st}a Eli X�N ■Y�A C%wt. «Y pq� 40 �M�g.. 'f6 ti� NLp w N L n w A u wy'yyyL.. C"�O • ya N/J r _wa.. j{ °Y �Q" w .�Y y a �.xn4 ice' YU4 0_0 w" .5 4 GTr } W G C f3ii Y �Y ; O ° a {'!1' 4 M 1� L s4 u1 h�NY �� iW a�v. K■ gNV �a <�ay�1 app+N.: 4A+. 6JI?I six of N V 4 n lu — CITY Ur RANCiiO UUUAMUNGA STAFF REPORT DATE.: 5eptes�er 9L igL�7 TD: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM; Brad Buller,,City Planner BY: Scott Murphy, Associate Planner SUBJECT: TENTATIVE TRACT'i12659 DESIGN REVIEW SECURITY MANAGEMENT - The esiggn rev;ew of ut ing -elevations and plot pans fop a wmviously approved tract map consisting of 135 single ?asaily 'lets and three common lots on 67.67 acres of land in the Very Low Density Residential District (1 -2 dwelling units per acre) within the Etiwanda Specific Plaa, located at the southwest: corner of Etiwanda Avenue and 24th Street - APN 225 - 011 -35, r; I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action Requested: Approval of b0,lding elevations and plot ans. B. Surrounding Land Use and Zonis. : or - vacant; unincorporatid County Area South - Vacant, Very Low Residential (J -2 dwelling units per acre) and Estate Residential (Mess than I dwelling unit per acre) East - Vacant and Single Family Residential; ft y Low _ Residential (I -2 dwelling :units per acre) West - Vacant; Unincorporated County Area C. General Plan Designations: Project Site ery ow esidential (less than 2 dwelling units per acre) North - Low Residential (2 -4 dwelling units per acre) with a Master Plan required South - Very Low Residential (less than 2 dwelling units per acre) East - Very Low Residential (less than 2 dwelling units per acre) West - Open Space D. Site Characteristics: The site is currently Vacant with an average slope of roughly 6 to 7 percent from north to south. The Metropolitan Water District easement is located along the ■ �� _ _ ITEM M I y 3 c PLAN918C COMIS5ION STAFF REPORT U TT 12659 DES16N REVIEii - SECURITY MANAG64EHT Se temb °r 9, 1967 Pa�je 2 north boundary and a portion of - the�wesr boundary, An existing _ windrow of Blue Gum Eucalyptus'boeders a site on the adjacent property to the soith. II. ANALYIIS: A. General: The applicant is proposing to develop the 135 lots W—-Me eve differen* floor plans. I single story units, plans,-., 1, 2 and 4, range in 'size frog 2,122 square feet to 2,993 square feet in 'area. Plans Land 2 will have three elevations, and plan 4 will have two elevations. The. two -story - units; Plans 3 and 5, will :be 2,502 square and 3,380 square feet in area, respectively. Plan 3 will have three elevations and Plan 5 will have two elevations. 9. Design Rd'Mew Co ittee: The Design Review Committee (Emerick, , Buller, Nieman) reviewed the proposal on August: 6, 1987, and - recommended approval subject to the following conditions: 1. The site plan should be revised. to provide a minimum front yard setback of 20 feet 'Ath an overall average ,etback of 30, feet throughout the tract, as required by the Etiwanda Specific flan. 2. Substantial architectural relief has -been provided on 'i many elevations to satisfy''the intent of 360 0gree architecture. The Committee felt the';._require;4tnt :nor window trim should be reviewed by the City Planner, then imposed on -those elevations' that need additorial relief. The Design Review Committee also discussed the possibility,of incorpordting larger, usable porch elements into the various floor'Flans. After much discussion wiy,,t, the applicant, the Committee was undecided on "whether the pores 'elements should be required and reft;red this issue to the Planning Commission for further considerati,n. Ir. addition to the comments and conditions recommended by the Design Review Committee, staff also recommends tF.at corner side yard walls (decorative,block) be provided on all corner lets. C. uti?ity_1ln4er rounding: During the previous year the ?fanning o+rmts9% -_ -,;as ac ive y Pursued a policy of requiring the undergrounding of existing uti,", ty lines or the payment of an in -lieu 'fee " for the future .it,?�rgrounding of the a cisting utility lines. With approval of the Tentati%ie Tract on c " 77777 ,77 M tnI , _ O, PLANNING COWWN Wi SUFP REPORT TT 12659 G£3IGAi`RtVfEW - SECURIV MJAAGEMENT 5,optember 9, 19 Page G r November 13, 1985, no condition was included to at1eguately address the existing utility lines on the'p� jest side �f ;74th Street a�j the opposi ter side of Etiwanda Avenue. Ai,a re'sult, J, staff i5 mow recoaw:ndina that canditicnas be included requiring that the existing overhead utility lines on toe project side of 24th Street be undergrounded and than an in -lieu fee be paid for the fu;oare undergrounding of the existing overhead utility lines can the opposite side of Etiwanda Avenue. ' III I. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning `Commission { con—' suet a'"'"!'( public testisany on whether larger usable porch areas ` should be.,inOoded as part of the building elevations. After' receiving all input„ staff' recommends that thi Planning Commission approve the Design Rdview for Tentative. "Tract 12659 through ' adoption of the attached` Resolution with the inclusion of arty additional cond!tiot of approval_ necessiiry �4 a` Tess the porch ` issue. Resp pW ully s it:ed, r _Br l er -Iv P nner ., BB:SM.• ,e r Attachments: Exhibit: 'W " Site utilization Map Exhibit "-B" - Subdivision Hap Exhibit "G" - Site Plan Exhibit "0" Grading Plan l Exhibit "E" - Building Elevations Resolution of Approval with Conditions 4 I f:. '�RTH CITY OF ITENt A A! ice✓ CL T �i�����iE�, TITLE: PLAINNIPC DRr NON EXHIBIT. SOLE- I fi ii CITY OF A TITi_F- . S 1. PLANNING L?R Sd01'v' EXAMIT. SC ALL; i F I �� ►� n" urn �..��` 11� 1 � RANCHO lit CITY OF ITEM. CLjCkNl • .• . CITY OF tTE�tt RA-H CL PLANNING DRISKIN EXHIBIT: SCALE: a.rrtf 1�r ■ a }DIY r = r r,' ;,,-- ---' -- . . qq'' .� �: w °o: ��� r mx ^.. j I^w rs.- Pea.° f f_, �+� �.� �. w r �� X t ran-s �•:� =4 ��v�.srr.':.t Fa*x'" r ua�w =r�.a R FJ •,R• :. 1� iY ^/.�. � r yiierIJ A�'(R SFr' 3 tY :r . , J!J4,- f .a. �I�' ,'-- �r � t,i � � J o 1 a �+.i.. try! � � �, �� � -.� . �Ac 4 i it I ft k 4 1 S �Si;t j-1K ill �Iiiili: v � tits I � TO ffiY Mi: a . 9 � ' q;r .EFttiih ' y,9 Y Y s ( * 1 a ^i =. ;r fpl�t f. y- - • V-- 4 " -Tii dy tit MITI i 4 RESOLUTION NO. r A RESOLUTION OF THE RM HO CUCAMOW PLANNING Cti+GiISSIOt# ,t APPROVING DESIGN- REVAV FOR TRACT 12659 LOCATM AT - Ilk- THE SOUTNtir'EST CORNER 0 'TIWANDA AVENUE AND 24TH STREET IN THE 'VERY 'LOW RESIOCUTM DISTRICT - APH: 22Y- O11 -3s. i A. Recitals. `;. (I) Security Manag+ nt ha ,,ailed an appl icatio �6v the Design Review of Tract t No. 12559 -as describe, -in the title; of this Resolution. Rev einafter, the Subject ;design Review -.request is referred to as "the application'. (ii) On Septdbberl 9, 1987, , tie. planning Commission of the City of ,w Rancho Cucamonga Meld a meeting to consider the application. - (III) All legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. \, NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby tend, detevsained and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: I. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are trsae and correct. ! 2. Based upon substantial evidence presented ,to this Commission during the above - referenced meeting on September 9, 1987, including written and oral staff repor` s, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. That the proposed project is consistent with the objectives -of the General ?tan; and b. That the proposed design is in accord with the - objective of the Dxvelopment Code and the purposes of the district in which the site is located; and C. That the proposed design is in compliance with each of the applicable provisions of the Developmefit� Code; and d. That the , proposed design, togetr`ier with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be :atrimental to the public health, safety,, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the- Iricinity. tl. J k�' k� NING COd] ISUONI RESOLUTION N0. TT 125559 DESIGN REVIEW - SECURITY MANAGEMENT h� September 9, 1987 � Page 2 Sased-�upon the find "ii `;and conclusions set forth in paragraph 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby approves the;,application subject to each and every condition sex forth below and in the attached Standard Conditions attached hereto and incorporated herein by this rf�,ference.. .F a. planning Division i_; All applicable conditions of Resolution 85-168 shall apply, %�T�ire site plan shall . be revised to provide a .' minimum front yard setback of 20 feet with a tract average front yard setback of 30 feet.,,' ` The revised .plans shall be rewierd and approved by 1:14 City Planner pr,;,,' ,'to the:- issuance of building permits, iii. Window t7im shall be required on ;those elevationlj that need additional relief as - determined by the''City Planner. The plans shall be reviewed prior to the issuance of building permits. iv. Decorative block wails,shall be required on all cornea side yards. - Th9 aesign and location of the wall shall be shown on the final landscape 0 is which is subject to review a,id "approval by—the City Planner, prior to the. Assuance of building permits. b. Engineering-Division i. The existing overhead utilities (telecommunications and electrical) on the project (south) side of 24th Street shall be. undergrounded from the first pole on the west side of the 'lortheriy projection or' future Manley Avenue to the first pole on the east . side, of Ettwanda Avenue, prior to;, public improvement acceptance or occupancy, whichever occurs first. Reimbursement of one -half the City adopted cost for undergrounding from future development as it occurs on,the opposite (north) side of the street is not feasible because the property is in the County. . ii. An in-lieu fee as con,, *3bution to the future , undergrounding of the existing overhea�? utilities (telecommunications and electrical X Cn tthe opposite (east) side of Etiwanda Avenue • PLAlt9I4G CII1� lllTkN�._ r � TT' 12659 DFI6 .,'SEC TY MAHp,S'EYENT .:; September 9, 1991. , Page 3 U shall be pai4 to the city prior it approval of ' the Pisa: Map. The fee she'll be , •or**hal f the ' > �, City ated °itt amount times the toangth from • the Project lloundarry to the terpinu~ of the north projecf koundary, 4.,, T Dapety Secretary to thi , `,CO=ission shall certify` to the' adop, *.ion of this t oliutf*". 'ARPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 9TH DAY;,OF SEPTEN4 ER, 14$7. \ PLAMINO COMfI SION Of THE CITY OF RAr: C0CrNG.A I �A arry T. e , Mal r5an r;. ATTEST: TY„ \ Brad er, Deputy secretary Z. I, Brad Buller, Deputy Secretary of the planning ComIssion of the Cit of Rancho Cup emonga do hereby cerii fy ,thI t the foregoinyq,Resoi ution "S duly pit d r e u1ar1':':i t n roduc d � � e passed, and 9 � y_ F adopted by; the-' Piac�ning Commission of than City o. Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular me,atiil;' of the Planning Comission held on the 9th day of September, 1987, by the following voti -to -wit: AYES: COMISSIONERS: HOES: COMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMISSIOWERS: - 5 DATE: TO: FRONT: BY: SUBJECT;: r — CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT r1 _ September 9, 1987 Chairman and Members of-the Planning Commission _J Brad Buller, City Planner i Tom Grahn, Assistant Planner TREE REMOVAL PERMIT 87 -43 - BENCOMO - Appeal of staff's ec s on denying the remove of a oven (11) eucalyptus trees located in the rear yard of 9538 Gala Avenue - APN: 202 - 111 -0. C I. BACKGROUND: On June 26, 1987, Ronald Bencomo submitted a Tree RRW-a ermit application in accordance pith th�proviVlons of Ordinance #276 (Tree preservation Ordinance) , Thel�equest was for the removal of eleven (l) Eucalyptus 9iaculata iSpotted Gum) trees located in the rear yard of 9538 Gala !venue, south of 19th Street and east of Amethyst Avenue. The proposed removal of the trees was to provide roan for landscaping and structural additions. Staff denied the re-quest as inconsistent with the Tree Preservation Ordinance. II. ANALYSIS: The request p1°tains to eleven (11) Eucalyptus trees That were removed and potted prior to the submittal of a Tree Remo,}ial PEtmit. , an June 12,;1987 Code 'Enforce' �t iiformed the ' apE leant that they were in vial a „axon of City Cab_.by removing the subject urees without a permit” and required that the trees be replanted in their previous location (see Exhibit "F "). Staff has carefully reviewed the Tree Rem"kal Permit application and conducted a field investigation to evalil,,te the condition and location of the trees. Based npon the information presented-) staff denied the Tree Removal Permit as inconsistent with the - xyiteria of Ordinance ¥276 (see F <hibit "B ") fri the following areas. -> 1. The trees we -e required by the City in conjunction with Tract 13066, and Tree Removal Permit 85 -22, to replace the orginal Eucalyptus windrow that was removed for the installation of roadway improvements And storm drain facilities.,in the tract, 2. Overall ,. the trees are generally healtriy zl although 'i severaj; appear to he dead dgle to th it r4ioval and subsegient lack of adequate watering, 0 �77�7 77 777 TREE R900L pERMff 87-43 - BENCW y Septembers 9, U87 Page 2 1 3> The removal of the ii;eyes in not necessary at this time as the trees do -not present any danger existing structures or improvemeMs, on 2he,property i 9 In then-° appeal, the Bencomo`s 'cite future improvements" ire their - back yard as justification for removal. The Tpee Preservation y Ordinance 6es allow for consideration of tree removal which allows economic enjoyment of the property. Staff feels,-that the windrow , could be retained in a wanner than could accommodat Xi proposed =' , ` improvements. ' III. RECOMMENNNTION; Staff recomme.^ft-that the Plannilig ComQission deity the roe vat application basdrn•'.n inconsistencies with thv 'free PreservaAr7 Ordinance (Ordinance #276), and require the replanting of the elevek L-) Eucalyptus trees. Respe ul ly submilfi« 8r r _ 1 City lann BB:TG:te Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Tree Removal pit Application Exhibit "B" - free Preservation Ordinance Removal Criteria - Exhibit "C" - Site Plan Exhibit. "O" - Approved Landscape Plan Exhibit "E" - Photographs -..,Exhibit "P" - L�ettpr of Violation %Exhibit "G" - Letter of Denial Exhibit "H" - letter of Appeal 5 fl �J r 1 City of Cucamonga 'tree Removal Permit DEVELOPMENT 6 -7-4�;? GENERAL INFORMATIM t]r*rli GMTNl4t 5 TREES OR $f1" UM AR REEF OF Ordinance No. 278, pertaining to the preservation of treat -on private property, requirAS that no parson remove oe relocate any woody plants in excess of fifteen t16) feet in height and having .a single trunk circumference of fifteen (15) inches ur more and multi-!rusks having a circumference of thirty (30) Inches or more, (measured twenty-four (24) inches from ground level), without tit °t obtaining a Tree ,emoval Permit from the City. LOCATION OFSUBJECTSITE: NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE k0 -'APF _OANT.:�� "!51S C'.aLa NAME, ADDRESS, TF.LEI' HONfE OF PROPERTYOWNER(if other than applicant); REASONS FOR Rf 'OVAL faitach nebbaeary sheets): — — — --- PROPOSED METHODOF REMOVAL x r c� c tin i r . APPLICANrs 3ftA'it F-' DfE'i'E: r -t This application shaft in;Iude 4t plot plan indicating lacati.)ntf ,i{ treaatra s rt�int�ved and retained. hs species, number, and size of the trees to b&?,"o)p4,sW1 b4 z6 desi9neied It atree Wdiseased, then a written statement fam a licensed arborist stating the nature of the disease sl-all be required. . AW4 s R — Er 91919-4 . on .. .am* . - am.y. a&• �s l ❑ APPROdI'cD EY DENIED By: ��_ Reasonsi 'al'c+sLIY!'Lk.''" Date. Y . —....- 1 �L.rdM�- 4 40 NotifWatlon rof appllca:�%n shell be given to props • �wna s wlthln a three hundred. foot radius ten da p,ior to eppxorai. if no appeals a a received, then the permit shall become effective ten (10) drys fror t date cf action. Mis approved tree removal permit is valid for 90 days from *he date of final map recort,at or budding permit issuance, whichever comes first. Should applicant fail ttr remove the trees within this day period, a new permit shalt be required, ue,ass an extension is requested fourten (14) rays prior to expiration of the permit. 1. Condition of the trees? 2. Proximity :o an exisiinc structure or interference with utilityserv%' -es. 3 . Is thec 'anj conflict with prf-aased improvements? (Streets, buiidi V pads, wails) - - C -- 4. ' Proximityofothertreeslathearea. 5 Effect of trae removal on the aesthetics of the area and the public health, welfare and safety. 6 . rjan the tree be preserved by prurri ,g or relocation? 7'. Do the trees constitute i significant natural resourc_.? 6. are the trees required to be preserved by any ape Ific plan condition of approval or hi -t ric lanc±- mark cesignat_iotrh Uia !r V1 .�h � ¢'' Alt d 0A (fitu f 61 ,_IT �(p 9 . Is an arborist required? 3W ON: VP Wt rig; (Q �a . r�', 471►1.�1 !9 ( Gam. wd �r DATE spealve r—"": c*mmwdtY PLO. cendiUon of ,av,�rc+�aii. or dulafttion as hiatofic tandmari— y, J L � D L i� W W betosiataa! with `lVC Davd applkttbm for a �' S Saarsti p3ndt it 4ABC At" with mkt a ;` for CWT—Ou t ar is. t ti IIftta <3� qtr felt of mow; tb fai +rte 1,,. i;pm raceipt of the 4rlic"ka.. the Cfty Ptarmawr designees tl 4 iave�tW& the site and #Valuate the application on the basis of the r 4i e a as ^ The condo: tion of tt* trGOW i�4th rat to disaese, dui�*r coFW" of sh ce,sm pertta; of the trea4a >, Proximity to an ie�dsti�tg st:tri#LeRs# or ihtarfecence;w�tth utiiiiy sarvtas3 to iitYm a Grid Im to constr iCt \ \� _ i impore ants which, attsaw . aoowmia, xajo�7se"s¢" Ct� fe Aak � �.. aunar df exiasie tasttEu hood;, ft 1 1 VOWd h 9Yaww - ' CS.'a buOt 'required lmpmn ry `,mn the i+ttblit sheet .'�htrof �:ay or witht &fjwd irc)C c .utliity right- of-wayp n. @VhsthB; uc.stot ft trace oattd bsz'presa ved by pruning and pmpw mainte;t.-tees or retogatfoi: raWgT twat removal ' _ f, Wtkstjwr or not s t;{s %ee►istitutE a sii4ict� Wald Val redaat!�.a oQ ti;�e C3� cis -'t.. '� - - - � '. What"'" i " a�tft trees alt . fill { $ 09 LU un�'� f z�:i3Ek if i 3 (j °i :�1 a� f j � ;r• s x E 14 IL IsM IL � -� ..,� •- ---- -t sir �t {� � - I` 1 '�-- i 1► l �` � g s f r -�- rr J „ rL- I 6j ir-- PI k A J I ,r t l'1aI1ra7Y'� t �+ ..4 ,_..ti A(-�, , 1 r, uo f 7i; !% 17' Y17 ,Rat su 1W, Aim -- - �._ Ci Ty OF,, CUCAMONCr1 oc c easar so: aoz. Randio Clam, eM C%4,rP?da 91730. (714) 9119 -065 June 12, 1987 i Ronald and Leticia 8encomo ,< 9538 Gala.;Avenue Rancho r �camonga, CA 9VU Dear Mr. and Mrs. 2encomo:, , Prior to development of your tract, the dill- Willia.3 Company was required to - cacure a Thee Removal Permit from `he City, The parpose rf this permit is two -fold. First, all trees on *ne, -site must be identified and proposed developrent.i -s designed UN save a'. 'lany trees as Is practical. The second aspect of peruit approval is the ability to provide replacement trees for those removed. It it this part of the approved Tree Removal Permit wft,;& affects yea and your proptrtyr. As a result pf development, a number of trees were required to be reooved along the west boundary of the tract. Replacement trees were eequired, a few of which were in your back yard. Tree Removal P&-,it 85 -22 was approved on August 12,' 1985. The conditions of approval requit-ed the planting Qf minimm 5 gallon I( Eucalyptus m&zulata (spotted gum), 8 feet on center, 41ong the wash boundary of Lots 8 through 9 and 20 through 22. The planting of these trees is to re- establi f* the Eucalyptus windrow previously located in that area, Ordinance 4o. 37 pertainlag to the preservatioe, of tries on both public and private land, requires the approval of a Tmr' Rewla1 Pettit ,for any tvea or trees within a Eucalyptus windrow. Since the trees at the rear', of your property are within this designation, an application for a Tree' Removal Permit and Planning Division approval is required. Since you have removed the trees in your rear yard: without an approved Tree Remora, Permit, you are cut,rentiy in violation of City Code. Replacement 6' these trees will be eequired in their previous locations. P on -site inspection will be required to ensure tMt the trees have been replaced and will be maintainetiAln a thriving manner. Your cooperation in atter.(ting to this matter will be appreciated. to order to provide a timely resolution, please contact =ze prior to ,tune 25, 1987 to discuss a replacement- schedule. If vo.+,_erve any questions regarding Uis notice, or the requirementa.�,of the 0lunicipal Codc, please feel free.to contact'me at (714) P49 =1881, Crr'mtwet�Mn Tk lui L 9ro+v : eia L Stagy( Deborah N. Jeffrey King . x Ers JEu9+1 IY j CRT pr, _ Pamela J. Wriest /% a y.....; u ,o-r._,... __ 1 r -W7 p. ,7 i Ron4ld an encomo° L�" 'cia 8 June 12s § 87 ti Page 2 �a Si ncere'ty � � MNING DIVISION C> Ri chard Code i~nfor:4ew:nt Officer RA:sg ° ` ft l _ 7 - _. QCITT OF RANCHO CUCAMONC,.A July 27, 1987c Pat Ofts B= 807, Pascho CucmQ§M C,WaWS 91770. (Its) 9991 Pl)nald Benrow 9538 Gala Avenue Rancho Cucamonga, CA- 91701 SUBJECT: TREE REMOVAL PERMIT 87- (RELATER FIRE: TREE REisu /AL PERM1t 85 -22) pear Mr. Bencomo: The Planning Division 'has recei.ed your application for the removal of eleven (11) Eucalyptus mac0ata (Spotte'l Gum) trees from your rear yard, to allow room for landscaping and structeral additions. The trees it question were required �by the City to be pla,lted in conjunction With Tract 13066 to replace the original Eucalyptus 1 ,jindrow that was removed j for the installation of roadway improvements and, stone drain facilities J in your tract. Removing these trees would" be contradictory apd inconsistent with the policf ^s and intent of tart Tree Preservation Ordinance. Based up-ii these determinations, your Tree Removal Permit regse:st has r been denied. The potted elev..n (1I) Eucalyptus .cula a shall be replanted eight (8) feet on center wad any damged or dead trees shall be replaced. Replanting must take place within a period of thirty (30) days fr;am the date of. this letter, Failure to ;replant the trees would copstitute a violation "of the Tree Preservation Ordinance, punis ^3bla by a fine of -,-jot more than $1;,000 and /or by imprisonment not to exceed 6 months. Viease contact the Planning Division for inspectioct following rep?acem+e,tt planting.. This decision is final unless appealed wJ.thin ten (10) calendar days. Such appeal must be filed with-the Secretary of the Punning Cr*aisstc:r in writing, td mthor with the 1:02.04 appeal fee. If yca should have any further questions, please t Intact 'Bow Cretin A.f this; office at (714, 989 -2861. Sincerely, C IMIT DEVELO K p R TM,C.WT F YWq IY$S Sue Planner 0C:`IO: 1c MOW Dennis L Stout Af 7!(hsr mint Gar 0*^VL. y5 5 sVE ul OF PAR CUCA OKU- r At�#+itlY15TFEATfOF�[ kd 041987" l I ib TO: �,:,lanning "Commissirp FROM: Ron & Leticia Sencomo DATE; August 10, 1987 4_�) RE: Appeal - Tree Removal Permit 87--24,-, Plfx se accept this letter. as notice to appeal the decision reached; by the ;ty's Planning Departmentpregarding V)e Removtil Permit 0 -34 which requests permission to re6.ive 11 Eucalyptus Trees from our rear property. We understand that the, Plannitig,,Commis,,iou has the authority to overrule such decisions, and we would like an opportunity to present the facts as they apply to our individual'situationo We realize that the Planning Department must follow procedure when making these types of decisions, and that they must follow set guidelines. However, the decision- making process is so to and ; -Iryt', we felt that our indiviAl al circumstances were never considered. (As a matter of tact, w�- were given indefinite verbal denial before w; even turned in our application). _ We agree that ordinances must be adopted to preserve the look of the city. Especially in cases where outside developers come into our city wanting to remove trees to make way for their projects. However, we do not fit in;`o this category. We have a unique problem which we feel warrants individual attention. Therefore, in defense of our appeal we would like to point out a few concerns: PERSONAL CONCERN: We have a real concern that as Homeowners we have no input into what we are being told must be i!aintsinec on our property. When we purchased this property six (6) months ago pit is a brand new home), no mention was ever made of trees. As a matter of fact, we moved in before landscaping was complete and when the trees wera planted we were told it was part of the landscaping package and that what we did with what they plauted was "ot;r business." We, by no means, want to come acros- as b 4 h Brag and -nosed about this situation, but it� seems to us that the City is asking us to keep trees that we not only do not want but ones which will cause ,problems in the future. Wa are being asked to maintain the tees and to be the ones who will Aft be responsible for any Cree- related problems. ;> To cover any quest >ons you may have regarding legal obligatiuns, I have attached a copy of our "Deed of Trust" and Declaration of Restrictions" pertaining to this lot, Ran & Leticia Regcome, �% t Appeal -- Tree_ kzmoval. Permit 87 -34 Page 2 - and u will see that no � mention i s sn'z�� e of t�� y� �, "� � the 11 tre�s'� in our rear yard. As knr,,wt tci;most h ,6meownExs, the only responsibility that is l ed Ys the lnaint��ning of the tree Toasted in frtmird. the Although the Planning, Pepartme-,%.t .felt, that t:iis `Air ormation was irrelevint in d'aking theiy decisions we 'feit�at it irys the foundation for ouj1 appeal, a PROP�M 'SIZE C07CERN¢ The concern in this area is simple, a_d it represents our main complaint, This type of tree (ECicalyptus) and ;so many of them do fiat belong ,on pro erty the size of our re.er -yard. As you examine the dimens'lons of the property on the attached development -plan, you will see that an unreasonabl' amount of trees were planted for this area. Although it ?eemed obvious tows that we are going, tc have problems iii the V, ture, we are not experts in this field. Therefore, we hi: ed a horticulurist to give;, us his professional opinion. As you will i4e by the attached lett -7, he confirms'_bur belief tliai :;there ale (-, tu.i many trees for this size j�,a. He also makes a fet: §,ther,:poirts regarding maintenance and >future problems. %e lyelieve, ,,hat _ you can imagine the problems we will be facing whey. the - .trees begin to grow and become a threat not only to our ,block wall but Also to our 'home. It is apparent when looking at the trees that there is a prob?em, so we welcome each commission member to visit our home if they wish to make a visual inspection of this situation. (Mote: We plan to have additional information for the . Commission at the appeal mee.t,ng. We we-t ut?b`?le to compile all of cut- research >x.i time, for i -'i to l,e included with this ratter). �I A few other points that je vie ;$ , jke to make pertain to the "Purpose and Intent" of thej ;ee Ordinance. We would like to begin by quoting the first pq,agraphn - "'lie eucalyr *us, pa''_m, ask, sycamote, pine and other I trees grc, ztjg within the City of R �,neho Cucamonga are a na* ar&L a*_-3. chetic resosiren which 'Felp define the character of the City. Such frees are worthy of protection -in order to preserve the scenic; brrauty, prevent soil erosion, protiide; shade, wind pa ;otaction, screening and counteract air, pollution. I,t is pertinent to the public peace, ha moray and, w;al.fare that such }'ees be protected fron it*xiscriminaf -e cutting or removal,7oe-,pe�!'ally where such trees are associated with',a proposal far development." JUL Rc n & Leticia B"ooT-� Appeals_:,- Tree Removal Permit 87 -34 ,. Page 3 As we read this paragraph, which gives the reasons why these trees are worthy of protection,z we would like to make the fallowing comments. Scen=x Besuty -. Without sounding sarcastic, we would have to sax that we fail to see how trees growing intertwined within a block wall, facing homes and a storm drain weuld add,- SC 1)"_.tty to the, -City. Wc- agree that tKs would %apply I to!!_ trey lined str;,ets and porkways where the trees would indeed "add to the look of the City, Prevent Soi11„Eroszon - Again'. we fail to, see where this would j apply to our situation. Because the trees were planted within private property, the only land being affected is our rear yard. ;Because the trees were planted pit a slope,. our intent (as i;how;t on our development plan) is to._put a retainer /planter that would eliminate any erosion ., problems that might develop becipse of the block wall. Provide Shade - This matter is an understaatement in our -base* In an open area within the City where large trees art: an advantage, we believe this would apply. In our case, we would have far too much shade. The trees woW'I,overpower the rear yard axed not allow any sunlight into our home. Wind Protection - We realize that one of the main concerns of the City is to replace a windrow which once existed on j this :Land„ When we read the definition of "windrow" in Section 14' 108'.030 #F, it defines, a windrow as "a row of trees, 11sua ly a variety of Eucalyptus, planted to provide a windbreak to protect property or agricultural crops,,` Well, if we look back to the past, we remember that there were in fact agricultural crops located on the same land there our home is now Iocated. That row of trees had a definite purpose during that time. The agricultural crop - is gone. We now have 27 two -story homes on the east side of this windrow and a storm drain and homes with many trees to the west. We would question what purpose a windrow would have sandwiched between an area developed with homes and trees. If anything, the wind damage from these trees would be greater than any protection they may give to the homes acid property. Screening /Counteract Air Pollution - We have no knowledge about this issue. We would guess,, however, that the Eucalyptus JVML tree is not the only tree that could serve this purpose. We do int3nd to plant a tree /trees, but not Eucalyptus and certainly not if trees. ti r i Ron $ I-,ticia Bencomo u _ Appeal Tree Removat'Permit 87 -34 ca Page 4 In summary, we would like to remind you that the trees in question are not the -- full -grown Eucalyptus trees that once existed on this'land�LSbut rather a "baby" Eucalyptus that was planted approxitGately six ,�,onths agog ( We would like tC s4iess to the- Corm"Assion that,, we have tried to see the r'easo ling Fehiud the Planni Departmept's decision, but fail to see the purpose for keepingZ�?aese trees. We cannot help but notice tYAt thxbughout the City there~ ar a Eucalyptus trees that are bvlLng z -Rmoved and not being rem mod. And we,, 1 must -;ein mentic..� the -a t- -that the trees now .sit on pro e - that is someone's Lack yard, not an open piece of proper -c��;`' that a developeit is trying to build on. ' We would ask that the Commission consider all arE;as of this matter. Thank you. (Ada;itional information, photographs, etc. will-, be available at tt,e appeal meeting). i Attachments:-- = = _ 1) Tree Removal Aplilicati, Deed. of Trust ( > 3 Declaration of Restrictsons -, 4 Development Plan - 5 Horticulturist's .Letter L „. City of 1 +Cucv1nonga � ^: 9�NEE��r�NEQRMAI'tQN,�': t!1 ' vae Removal Permit XWY4K*14NPQk Ordinance No. 276, pertaining to the preser+ation of treos on private property, requires that no person remove or relocate any woody plants in excess of fifteen (15) feet In height and having a single trunk (�. circumference of fifteen (15) inches or more and muitr- trunks having a circumforence of thirty (30) 0 Z.• 0�. t-'. 2 W 2 l3. i`. LIJ C°l . h! a U LL 0 2 LLi tip r !A iric'has or more (measured twenty-four (24) Inches from ground level), without first obtaining a Tree Removal Permit from the City. LOCATION OFSU13JECTSrfF' S NAME:, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE 07 APPLICANT: ithS4Z .' da ZA=1vCM CI NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE OF PROPERTY OWNER (If other than appli ;'ant): _ �__ cSAti1ti =. A� t��V �• REASONS FOR REMOVALtattach necessary shaeta): �1 PROPC: ED METHOD OF REMOV.,-.; _ •\EaY� c�, ,__ APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE: e�cI -DATE: all, `"'e7 ENTS' "hit applicatlon site Include a plot plan Indicating location of all trees to removed and retained. he species, m--” 4 r, Ad size of the trees to Oe removed shall La so designated.. If a tree is diseat 3d, then a written afty, ;: rent from a licensed artvrist stating the nature of the disease shall be required ®1 lEir;'...3.tfon 3tatt34 oppilcation Ia.ba"d on4hcedtcrt3i oRtrho,iM.ani+� Fr: _ rr,IC• " `KriA1lir.C.vYr, E1 APPROVEU C1 GtNII:D Sy: Reasons :.,, Drte: Natific,atitm or application shall be given to property owners within a three hundred toot radius ten dal prior tot roval. if no appeals are received, 'hen the permit shalt become effective ten (10) day;, from tt date of acts a. This rpproved tree removal permit is valid foe 90 days from the date of final map recorriatic or building permit issuance, whichever corres first. Should applicant fall to remove thr, trees within this! day period, a now permit shad be inquired, unless an extension is requaitted fourten (14) day, prior to tt ezplratlan of the permit. i 0701 -02 0 9 -9 -8'7 PU Agend 4 ceaLci. 1�ti�tU���,t� g ° a AkvL 1 �` T ` �'� OPI�e.. h��.'s\ t �h `��\'� �"t��t. � �U �\U..t)2. o... 'S\►.�.�t"�a:x,c�c,� V1.1 t�t1 Lt-4N G rX- —0. \\��� --t " '�a C1• �c��y cv� C`.�\�S�cl��c air`.. �c1 �'�`r.�. ���1�X� \'M.\� \t � R�G.Y�. Or �1Ch�Z. `��CW.K' C\.'S16r ,a� �.�� ! L•�\ t✓\�� � ( f �'l1j�.. C��@.\.•Z.0 \I�AD. or,.� Cfcc�.S::�c1, � 4�e.i \�.V�.'. �'�" \ZC..E \?�� '� �...� '�►1S �•S }�. �U�.V � . u.:��r.. �.a: o�.c�l,. Cif � � ��:ic��., �. aviC' `N \, '.j%r `°'��r \..a.�E•. 1. \.c." _.. - °r7�j�(,l ;�" �r 7'/•C�!? �!VGG•. ref/ L • i�kV�'i�G' .. .._. _ ._ - ._....rte 3�•i%J� 7z V /S= / f lei AI-A1) 7,seK'.�f+�JeurcK SA ;WAWP'eAO Ga ?% �.Q�eF.fzeTitl7' ,j GUM 7,seK'.�f+�JeurcK SA ;WAWP'eAO Ga ?% �.Q�eF.fzeTitl7' yr :: F ...L aECOitaMWRFpuesJLpaY eFL,Wa%t 9111C /JQY n WAMW&T0.. Bg7(COMO, RONALD 6 LETICIA_ 953d GALA AVENUE 1FANCRO CUVMONGA, CA 91701 - - artrxru,s.tnw - SANE AS ABOVE Escrow No, ,.961044 Title Order N-, 857467 J REORDED IN DFI RIAL RECORDS FEB 20 1987 AT 8 =00AM UN BERRUDINQ ANTY. CAU 87-055663 ^SWEF 0VE TWS UNEFOR NEOOMER'SUSE 00tuthent8fy transfer tax $ .....141. ......90 . 1: Computed on Nitvalus at Prop My Wnveyed, or Computed on lull valueieas lines 4 eneum• brxness remvtung thereon at time at sale. the undersigned........ SpMture W deelaranidt agent dlWmM.ng.' {Cie lNinname .7 Unmdd(porated area City or_ ..... .... FOR A VALUABLE CONSIDERAT.DN, receipr of which is hem- y acknowledged, $ILL- NILLIAHS DEVELOPMENT CORP., a California corporation hereby GRANTIS) to RONALD BZSCOMO AND LETICIA BENCOMO. husband and wife _as joint tenants the following .: -,yri !led real property inthe City of Rancho Cucamonga 1 county or San Bernardino . state of t :diforniti: It! Lot 7 , Tract 11o. 13G66, 4n per zap, raeordee in Back 189 of Mrpa, Pages 98 and 99, in tbn office C; 7ha County 8ecorLer of said County. This conveyance is made and accepted and said propftrty is hereby made subject to those certain covenants, conditions and restrictions contained in thsr # certain Declaration of Restrictions recorded June 5, 1986, as Instrument j Na. 86- 147526, Official, Records of said County all of which by this reference }j star hereby incorporated in and made a part hereof as though fully set �l forth herein. FORM 72.13 MAIL TAX STATEMENTS AS DIRECTED ABOVE HILL- HILLIAMS DEVELOPMENT CO".. a California corporation 1 Dared Octoter 21. 1986 BY� 1, (Corpogtianl Donald H. William s Jr.,,// STATE OFCALIFORNit President. SS COUNTY OF --S— Zatnardino + On DOCember 29,z1986___y4_arinrc _.. - Donsld N m4 the unJerarrted, a. YOUrI FuMw in atW rnr .mJ♦t,nc, r—onaih +t +r.'atrJ if -- ..,_ __ ,. fkmnvnwmafurrnn >,:.twme un the bau.. +t .,t .r.�,:.��. nnt.n.er to r+c •h: (known to meJw(pmwnt to mron rhebarlsot uns &tturr tcnktrv�rroee,._.� ^ „_��__ ._'+e,naa „;,t •n, {. cotpontiotl That easeYl(d thewithtn tnerument, known to meru lv:llepmnnwhonmied the Mnhm initrement on NNW 1,hr otp,•ruq—•hrn.�: nam ed, and 4cia owledeed to me that R,2h cprptfratmo netulcd unhm ieVNm<ni punuaht to n<tn lawt nro rrxd.Nnm of nx+n+ani of Jrtc.:. •n 'P WTNESSmy a ' o111Cblseal. � YiRG t Signature '�1 i hD'A izr - •r?nN1A Name hyped or Frintedt twnrrxsna+ E +IMaf Juh ll 14BT FORM 72.13 MAIL TAX STATEMENTS AS DIRECTED ABOVE 5.1 8 D 071;; CL- 1530 - 134757- M-AR'S POLICT- I.P. -LOAN -1973 California Land Title Association re Standard Coverage Policy Fora 1973 SCHEDULE A GF or Order No.: $51467 Presius; $265.20, Policy No.: CNJP -1501- 138612 Effective Datas February 20, 1987 at sloe AN Amannta $128,990.00 " 1. Name of Znnured RONALD =Como AND LETICIA UNCOMO 2. The estate or interest in the land described msrsin and whica,io covered by this Policy ist A !E8 ^ 3. The estata or interest referred to herein is at Date of Policy vested in RONALD BENCOOP AND LETICIA BENCOM, husband and i fe, as joint tenants g 4. The land referred to iz this Policy is situated in the State of California, County of San Bernardino, and is described as follows: Lot 71 Tract Nov 1:8661 in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, County ofi .San Bernardino, State of California, as per map recorded in Boole 189 of Maps, pages 98 .and 99, in the office of the County Recorder of said County. r.�a"'v., OWER'S POLICY-J.P.-LOAN-1973 California Land Title Association Order Wa.s 851467 Standard Coverage Policy Fora 1973 i POLICY i).2 CM -1501- 13,$612 A SCHEDULE B PA31T II -.. A. a° s lien of supplemental taxes, if onyx assessed pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 3.'S (Comoucing with Section 75) of the Revenue { and Taxation Code of the State of California. �j 1. An eases"t for ai tar pipelines and incidental purposox, in favor ,if ' hd. Hellman and Bmma Hellman by instrument recorded in Soak 211, pace 417 of Deeds. 2. An eassa ut for water rights and incidental purposes, in favor of Imaia W. Hellman, at ua., by instrument recorded October 9, 1900 in Look 288, page 128 of Deeds. 3. An easement for water and incidental purposes, in favor of Hermes Water Cwipany, a corporation by instrument recorded Septaaiwar 13, 1910 in Jock 465, page 223 of needs. 4. An ea*tmerm for strict drain and incidental purposes, in favor of the � City of i4mchc Cueawouga, over the We*-' 20 feat of *aid land, as ghowa on the sap of said tract. 3. Covanaoats, conditions and rej�;trictions as set forth in a Declaration of Restrictions recorded Jura 5, 1986 to Instrument No. 86- 147$26, of Official Records of San Bernardino Co�nty, California, which provide, 0wu9 other hiugs, that a violation thereof *hail not defeat or j } render invalid the lien of any mortgage or dead of trust made in good faith and fox value. Said covenants, conditions and restrictions ire incorporated by reference in the dead recorded February 20, 1947 as Instrument No. a 87- 055663 of Official Records of San Bernardino County, California. 6. An eas meat for aerial and/or underground electric or communication structures, and ineV,,ntal purposes, as conveyed to General Telephone i Comp my of Californian a corporation by instrument recorded August 22, 1986 as Instrument Nee. 86- 241676 of Official Records of San Bernardino County, California, affecting the Southerly 3.00 feat of said land. 7. An easement for aerial and/or underground electric or communication s structures, and Incidental purposes, as conveyed to Soutbtj.su California Edison Company, a corporation by instrument recorded September 4, 1986 as Instrument %. 86- 255007 of Official Records of 3 San Bernardino County, Calil*ruic, affecting the Scutherly 3 feet of ' said land. 4 4 � ? N a� Order No.: $S1467 6etaehsd to and aktds a part s €tserart Tula Guaranty C"ag Policy Continuation of S';hadule I - Part 11 S. ♦ Dead of antsfIlto secure an iadehtadnaas as hereinafter eat out, and any other mmunta payabla uLder the mms tharaofs Dateda robruary 11, 1987 Trustor. Unalct Bsncewo' and Latiaia Sencoea, kusbs.Ad SMA vifep, as joint tenants Trustees %A Case Trust Deed '$4V`xica, , a California corporation Umfiaiaryt SW llort aZet Ina., a California corporation Amounts 686,621.00 Recorded: Februm" 20, I987 :s Iostrumvt 4o. 87-055664 of O-Ific al Isc*wds ct San Barnaroino, California Al- TRACT NO. 13066 IR THE CITY OF RAKCHO CU014OROA 1MWrA Wansnapf PAK'3ts L sMN tY/PatA:RLYAP MILAUS sMCIRW♦ y. MOM "fMAN WMYMMNAMNAWWWSAM is3sASYPfYL'WRTa WATM W /:AICVMrW P♦iMY[Yi MYl7 NtfY l% f1AfMNi 1NC MYMr11rALT not W PAML'[N I AIM 7 or rAN'rL MAP MX. 'M. MAIN! M,4m RI•t4•41• "m As smwu 011 A YAP IYOI M w.Mi M. PADS rI W PAM = YAM sILmm DP AAM MrMMM11YNit' WMrf. tR MAIL AW tAY M.a•.0 MIL "m M. M cum CM YMYIQ•rbM W WUlr "Na S.•UOV W rMWr Lwumo3MS at r s r s u• - D WY STARK YtNRLt> YWM AMC TAIWW fA•A. ML !♦A It N .14L SAAR LNr cwMa♦ oxim OtC ww MINVArYL tNtYSIN;r,1sS 7l luls ASO PASS Inumn Ams, 3 M1—m T W Y r LP. AMC TAR. Lr.0 HsM "AWL PfR ,AML'LL CAP IIL'*"R P.C.ILWC. VOL40 YSMMMVMM PWM A WQA AVXA WO V AMC TAY. UC.L t♦tt. rW K.M3 UAVTr M4"I M/N•r! f I 11M1i'AII.� Y YSssC AMC waves rot PAsC6 CAP M0. • NMPAIA. LI it. F P lowARRM MPIIrMi wr'.MIWIPI%TA,`Cx,a.C.CMRL SIP ^..1•pst1�•IMrM LPA1RCRM,W3PM.'R. YSiLLYQlYC3• er1: MlYetis TM TI9, Xf.L. r1A•'AN ■II tfatt9em"UMC PpAAL e3 k•' AAa 3TATE HIGHWAY ROUTS 30 � � � ♦ K IYA'1•e.'It'e A,PS.Nh eM APCN a 1 Y f 'Cow'", _ >etl' NM }` CP7MlARRt .L • rYD'AM• t3MW Ya4 -. AIPr C ~is- 3T�e 3:37• 7APr D w4rw mew • 314' NM' �Le t 1. 71DK IlD � 9t ��3 P I191M'A3' r Y 3 AV Y fit i • Y A f Amer kw sr,9 ,rMx• Aar• �y t '' xrr IMLM ` A AIP I , A $ 21 K -Ai ` fi)\ Ntl'rjl� V C' t O`y 22 R (urtrrArry 23 P C. P. f.ANOE EROIREER3 VDSANO..CRLIiOflRiA d r � CURVE37 A 1 R L f aA'AI'!Y _ >etl' NM NK' • rYD'AM• t3MW Ya4 -. AIPr C ~is- 31Mf► 3:37• 7APr D w4rw mew • 314' NM' 14rA3• 71DK .. f!L' !A!3' P I191M'A3' Saw s3Ar 7A23" 3 rMPAI• Amer kw sr,9 t _.�., a D i n� yr 2 >t A �1 • Maa.aY aatA f, •50' •NAMII.TON AVENUE � �/• PNePPwM rKw /t. pn y ~1r MI /P •Py,, nP .J0.H IL ale •7 r — " 37 F_ -- RECORDING REQUEST_ -D QY; WHEN RECORDED, MTL TO: SATTN. TIYLE CO. DECLARATLON OF RESTRICTIONS ATTN. NMER TRACT N0. 13066 C7[ ri 147526 This Declaration, made lI the undersigned, eff-4ling tots Y` tlr through 2Y, inclusive, Tract No. 43066, situated in the city t of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino, State of California, r, as per map recorded in 3ook_t8g _of(Maps, Pages q9aad Q q in the office of the County Recordar of said County. W WIT.)ESSETH: WHEREAS, Hill - Williams Development Corp., the owner of all said Tract No. 13066, said party hereinafter'oeing refered to as "Declarant ". NOW, THEREFORE, on consideration of the premises and for the use and purpose herein set forth,.the above Declarant does hereby declare that al,a conveyences of Lots and Cartels comprised in the above described real property, shall be mhde and accepted up the following conditions, provisions, rer: ?rictions and c unants which shall apply to and bind the parties Chereto, t -eir heirs, successors and assigns, and /or designed_ !for i1,Ai mutual benefit of the owners or lots above described, conditions, covenants and restrictions being as follows, to wit. it) Land use and building type, No lot shatl be"used excfpr% for resideatitl purposes. No building shall be erected, altered, placed or permitted to remain on any Lot other than one detached single- family dwelling not to exceed two and one -half stories in height and a private garage for not wore than three cars. (2) No noxious or offensive trade, business, industry-or activity shall be'carried on upon any lot within said Tract 13066 and no truck or commercial vehr,cai may be stored or parked on any premises not fully- `_nclosed by a premanent building. There shall not be stored, kept, maintained or permitted to be upon any portion of said Lots, not fully enclosed by permanent building, any broken down Machinery or metal or material designated as "junk ". (3) Any buildings placed, erscted or altered on any lots shall have a desirable quality of work and material, must harmonize in exterior design with existing structures and should be locrL ed in accordance with topography and finish grade elevations. No fence C`_,dall shall be erected, paced or altered on any tot nearer to any street than the minimum set -back line unless similarly approved. p i A/ pppp �. -&2* _ X, ., S6 -14 7525 (k l' The livable floor area of r.he main strutiure, exclusive of one story open porches and garages, sha11 not be less than 1,365 square feet. No building shall be' located on any lot nearer to'the front lot lint or nearer to the side street line Lhan the minimum building set back line shown on the recorded map. In any event, no building shall be located nearer than 5 feet Cv an interior lot line. No dwelling shall be located On any interirr lot nearer than 20 feet to the rear lot line. For the purpose of this convenant, eaves, steps and open porches shall not be considered as a part of a building, provided, however, that this shill not be construed to permit any portion of a building on a Lot to encrouch upon another lot. No dwelling shall be erecte ^.'or placed on any building set -back line, nor shall' any dwelling be erected or placed on any building site having an area of less than 7,200 feet. No Structure of a temporary character, trailer, basement tent, shack, garage, barn on .iy other outbuilding shall be used on any lot at any Lime as a residence, either temporarily or permanently. (5) No fence or hedge height in the front set -back area shall be more than 3 feet on any 'lot in said Tract. (6) No derrick or other structure designed for use in boring, mining of quarrying for water, oil, natural gas or precious minerals, shall ever be erected, maintained or permitted upon any lot in said Tract. (7) These covenants are to run with the land and shall be binding on all of the parties and all persons claiming under them until 35 years, at which time said covenant- p�;,all, insofar as such procedure shall be then lawful, be aucome- "ically extended for successive periods of ran years unless by a vote of the majority of the then recorded owners of the lots an agreement be recorded to change said covenants in whole or in part. (8) If the parties hereto, or any of them or their heirs or assigns, shall ever violate or attempt to violate any of the covenants herein, it shall be lawful fcz any other person or persons owning real property situated in said development or subdivision Co 'prosecute any proceedings at law or in equity against the person or persons violating or attempting to violate any such covenants and either to prevent him or them from so doing or to recover the damages or any other dues for such violation. (9) Invalidation of any one of Lhese covenants by_.judgment or court order shall in no wise affect any of qAe other provisions which shall remain in full force and effect:'` E 86-147526 10) Each grantee is to agree for himself, his heirs, assigns or auccessorn in interest that he will permit free access by owners Ot'Adjacent or adjoining lots to slopes or located on his property which affect said adjacent or adjoining lots, when surd access is essential for the maintenance or permanent stabilization on said 31opec., or a maintenance of the drainage facilities for the pr3tection and use of property other than the lots which the slopes or drainageways are Located. . ch grantee of a lot in said Tract agrees for and his assigns, that he will not in any way interfere frith the established drainagepattmrn aver his lot. for the purposes "Established" hereof, drainage is defined as the drainage which occureJ at the time the overall drainage of the said Tract, including the landscaping of each lot in said Tract, was completed by the undersigned g rantor. (12) Easements for the installation and maintenance of utilities and drainage facilities are reserved as shown on the map of the property recorded in the office of the Cowt�ty Recorder of San Bernardion County. Within these easements no structure, planting or other mate;"' 41 shall be placed or permitted to ever remain which may damage or interfere with the installation and maintenance of utilities, or which may change the direction of flow of drainage channels or devices in the easements or which may-6bstrucc or retard toe, flow Of water through drainage channels or devices in the easements. The easement area of each lot and all improvements in it shall be maintained continuously by the owner of the lot, except for the improvements for which a authority public -or utility company is responsible. (13) Satell-'�.,4 dish antennas: (a) V shes no greater than I meter in diameter may be roof mounted. (b) Dishes greater than I meter in dilfteter shall be ground mounted and screened from public view on all sides w101 a combination of watts, Landscaping or buildings. (14) Reciprocal easements for "solar access", prohibizing the casting of shadows by vegetation, structures, fixtur,,I,is or any other object, except for utility wires and similar objects are hereby granted over and across subject property, subiect to the following stipulations: as- 147A Po person shall allow a tree or shrub to be placed or grown so as to cast a shadow greater t,� 10 percent to the ,.ollector absorption ''`area upon the solar collector surface on the property of another at any one time between the hours of 10 a.m. and 2 p.m., provided that this section shall not apply to specific trees and sh,'ubs which, . at the time of installation oaf a solar collector' during the remainder of that annual solar cycle cast a shadow upon that solar collector, (15) ARCHITECTURAL CONTROL COMMITTEE Section 1. Architectural Approval of Proposed Improvements Except for vcrmal maintenance and repair, no Owner shall (1) build, construct, erect, install, or attach, any lighting fixtures, shades, screens, awnings, patio covers, gazebos, walls, fences, room additions, serials ;rte <<nas or other broadcasting or receiving devices; or (T;l i;,nge o ytherwise alter the exterior of any Rcsidentia' Structure tin the Project, (hereinafter coliectively',,referred to as "proposed improvements ") until all conditions which may be imposed by the city have been satisfied and until the plans and specifications showing the nature, kind, color, shape, dimentions, materials and location of the same shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Architectural Control Committee provided for in Section 3 hereof as to harmony of external design and location 'In relation to surrounding mtructures and topog- raphy. in the event said Committee, or its designated representatives, shall fail to approve or disapprove such design and Location in writing within thirty (30) days after said plans and specifications have been submitted to it, approval by said Committee will not be required. Section 2. Powers. Approval of the plans and specifications for any Proposed improvement may be withheld because. of non- csmpliance with any of the specific covenants, conditions and restrictions contained in this Declaration, or because of the reasonable dissatisfaction of the Committee with any aspect of the proposed improvements which in the reasonable judgment of the Committee will render the proposed improvement inharmazious or out of keeping with the general plan of improvement for the Project or with the improvements erected on Neighboring Lots. The approval of . -;ny such work shall be deemed conditional upon the commencement of Ouch work within ninety (90) days after such approval. Thereafter, work thereon must be prosecuted diligently to completion within a reasonao%,:,,time and in any event before the expiration of any ressonaU.e period as may be specified by the Committee. {u `.fit) 11 8�s- x47526 Sect €on 3. l hershi ;;he Architectural Contrgl om^m�ittee is *pose of gonal H. Williams Jr., Richard V. Crosby and Victor A. Gengler whose address is 5500 Santa Ana Canyon Road, Suite 231, Anaheim Hills, CA 42807. A majority of the eommir.teer may designate a representative to act for it. In thtt event of derath or resignation of aeiy member of the 'comet €ttee, the remaining mgmbers shall have cull authority to designate a sutc,xasor. Neith+erthe members of the committee, nor the designated representatives shall be entitled to any compensation for si�rvices performed pursuant to this covenant. At any Clw e, the then record owners of 41 majority of the Lots shall have the power though a 4july recorded written instrument to change the memt- 4rsh €p of the committee Of to withdraw from the eom4,ttea or restore to €t any Of its powers and duties. Procedure. The cOmmitce's approval oZ disapproval a.s required in these covenants shall be in writing., In the.event the committee, or its designated representative fails to approve or disapprove within 30 days after plans or-specifications have bo*m submitted to it, or in any event, if no suit to enjoin the,,eonstruction has been commenced prior to Che completion thereof, approval will not be required and the related covenants shall be deemed to have been fully complied with. PROt:DED, ALSO, that a breach of any of the foregaing covenants or cundit €ons shall not defeat nor render invalid the lien Of any mortgage of deed of trust made in good faith and f-r value, as to said realty or any part herecsf, but said covenants or conditions shall bet binding upon and effective against any subsequent owner of said property or realty. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, said Peclarant i caused its name to be affixed hereto this /j day of 4t /Z , YS p. �Fj, HILL- UILLIAMS DEVELOPMENT CORP., a California Corporation 1 ! ` BY: ` Donald H. Williams Jr., r Presid,ant �r i , STATE W CAUFOFSdtA Ina S.S. courrrroF ��t -d On tfria the Zlt:h �y M Aotri.l t9_ 86 me, ft isv&,agnsd, a Nohry Pubho in and Of WW Goulxr and State. pe app-w -- -- .. -.il -- Donullt H Will1aiii tp P AY known to trQ -or Pfd fa mtl on ft base of ssds4Ki ry evxWv*. be a» Pt.c.a,+►#rldr�trtt,r�rr11J:< t 1 rttttLltthr (tl�ttt�ttt >ttri[.ttitr;A� . �ttu�>�it�llia�>���Ril! . t t t / t t / t �kAj of the w pore m Wim -zoo td...Vw wittin insmww t oo behalf of the cwpombon Mroin nrtwd.. and admor lodged to ma Me such cmporatlon o nmftd me wWAn lrvaftrtNnt pu,uanttoi� oraread ykwbocMof)& ctae. z gnatufe `�1�. i��" STEWW tT FOR N0fAAi SEA�OR STAMP 86-147526 526 RECORDED IN' OFFICIAL RE-,`0R'.%` Jtltt —5 ?m Z. 0S EAK BERNARD= ! CO., CALIF, — il— is n_ r, sic. No. C27 40388!3 , Landscape C'. 1843 C STREET, i:A VERNE; CAUFORNIA 91750 (714) 506 -3263 company, inc, Mr. & Mrs. Bencomo, 8 -3 -87 As you requested I have given some thought to your situation. tsd have investigated the particular species o=- tb o the bui,,der of your home has put �r. 7 yard. Y have 1Z years direct experience trimming tre vu, 'and, installing and maintaining landscapes. It is 'say opipl on that ,you have two many treez in the available space. Eucalyptus maculate will eventually gtat to 70 feet in California. Your trees are only eight feet apart and Four feet from your back wail. In several years their branches will ir"rfare w .tih each other and their roots K r :1 lessen the integrity of the ° °.',1. It will be costly to ■at thou. Possiblo repair to your wall would also be quite espy /n..'.ve. If'yau want to keep that species. I recommend that you eliminate all but three of the trees, plant the r,1maining three with two in the northwest corner of your property at least ten fates: from the wail and house, and the third halfway between the house ar-z Bali about ten feet north of your R,Y. slab. Another and possibly bette_ soiutia,1 would be to use a different a *10cies. ;.. 2f you want Eucalyptus, try E. torquate or E. uictholii. The torqu'iita has attractive flowers and used capsules, a slow growev, it rar`3y 1 Soso over ,20 foot. The nichtt li-1 has a nice weeping look and a ' i stprcng \Svegr&nce. it gr"�iL 40. facet. .,-. 7� yu -. =. «n._,any ca�ar�a three for tour troas woyld be aore than sufficient in # your ;3ackYord are *. Yg you ;geed any further help plewae let me - _ J SlIncero.Cy, I NTen K. Pape Vice Fr`- ^sident and General Iia*a�ger SCLM Co.. Inc. j 3.3. OrnamOnta.l Hortt4ultura lu IE DATE: Tkl.: FROM: 3Y: SUBJECT: — CITY OF RANCHO CUC"iONGA STAFF REPORT c�^io i r r o a F � Z > September 9, 1987 U :sn €,hairman and Members of the Planning Commission Brad Buller, City Planner Chris Westman, Assistant Planner ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 87 -30 - E uunm vAirsr -4- ALK - A proposal to construct 0 mu 7- ent` ani ni dk r a buildings totaling 30,502 square feet on 1.3 acres of land in the General Industrial District, Suuarer Y. located at the northwest corner'ef Helms Avenue and.`eron Boulevard - APN 209- 031 -57. RL -O FILE: YA 87 -12 I., PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. action Requested: Issuance of a Negative Declaration. B, Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: ar - sous r:a , Subarea 3 (General Industrial) South - Industrial, Subarea 3 (General industrial) East - Contractor's Yard, Subarea 3 (General Industrial) WQSt - Induatr� -,I, Subarea 3 (General Industrial) C. General Plan Desi natiu-ns: ldorth - General Industrials -aw South - General Industrial East - General Industrial West - General Industrial D. Site Characteristics: The site is an existing paved paring o w some mature trees. properties north and west are existing iadustri.' developments. Street improvements have been completed including curb and driveways; however, sidewalks have not been installed. E. Parkin' Calculations: Number of Number of Type Square Parking Spaces Spaces of Use Footage itatio Re uc� fired Provided Multi- tenant Industrial 29,367 1/400 73 73 ;i PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DR 87 -30 - JUAN BAIRES-ADAIR September 9, 1987 Page 2 II, ANALYSIS: A. General: The project has been reviewed by thf.,Uesign and ec nica Review Committees. Upon approval of":the Negative Declaration, the City planner will grant final approval of the project based on conditions recommended by the Design and Technical Review Committees. Because there are existin:fr, mat ire trees on the site, a Tree Removal Permit application w' 11 hive to be submitted and approved prior to City P1,9nner appr val. B. Design Committee: The Committee (NeNiel, Blakesley, _Review r 8u er ) reviewed the project on August 20, 1987 and forwarded It to the Planning Commission with the foliowinn recommendations: I. The lower half of the building should have a change in color and/or texture from the upper halt' and it should be continuoi:s, 360 degrees, on both buildings. 2. d glass Element should be introduced to the east i facade of Building "B ", 3. A second plaza should be provided at the east end of Building "B ". d. Both plaza areas shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planner pril)r to the issuance of buil,diny permits. 5. IntensiVzr landscaping with specimen size trees should be provided along Feron Avenue. 6. A landscape focal point should be provided adjacent to the building in l;ne with the drive at Helms Avenue. 7. The placement and treatment of the trash enclosure was in question. The applicant should work with staff in addressing both technical and aesthetic restraints. 8. If all technical requirements can be satisfied, one of the driveways on Helms shoul,4° be E eliminated. k C. Environmertal Assesr Parts I and Ii of the Initial Study �rave'S e , comp e e cn4 -rsa significant impacts have been found-.-_ related to the construction of the proposed building: ti.. PLANNIlK4,rCpFihtl,QN STAFF REPORT DR BT ! - JUM I% RIES -ADAIR September , 561 " Page 3 \\ l III. FACTS �$ [ Ctae proposed use is consistent with the enera elan 1R eiK, Sgecific Plan. The building design and site p1a[r, Loge with recommended conditions of approval, are in compliance wii��the Industrial Specific Plan and all other applicable Cit tandards. IV. REC"ENDATION'. Should the: Planning Cowtission grant Variance 87 wain q appropriate that the Planning Commission issue a Negative Declarotinn for Development Review 87-30, a a Res fail ubmiwted, City Tanner BB:CW -.te Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Location Map Exhibit "B" Site plan Exhibit "C" - Elevations I 4 i r ;NMTH CITY CF n'EM: ��- RAN U0 CUCAMONGA TrrLEx . &:�&17 �2 PLANNM LXVISriN EXHIBIT. ___A __ -,, ALE. r�r� .j, ovel ac i �F•�•+la«+e.s •srr.. re• sts ae,a•. Pori r Por.5 P_or6 ..r Parj kx ` Pat► 4 i f ,• 269 �•. >3s •.C. j � � s Z E�. a • J6 �Y. • 53 i - ./ .i j Par. , Par .4' pot? L90Et'y`� ; i. j •974.19 )•.`t,u so 7H� s•F, \ ®w 6 RJ2 AG Par. .� Pot Para :,Por2� ,✓ :� =e7' wJJ �..._,_._„ •.,: A UA arts .7r ,y tsr.7s yParx6 yParll Patio >r 4 Q•S J ; P/a'r�.3 ti � :', l.]], ♦ � 7 e n L ♦ > ' L � r .red .t Jw° ?• 2.OIAC�� �ta6AG YJ, £ !'•t. .�_ ,J •` 26 .76 AC ..,aS• •!ca 4x•e +w -.•_', so „y +ca c .n ac arc 4r >ra r2 r ' e ' + �,,;,_, .r ....s.�c.•.. _... .:G4•iy�p�.nr to I_• s . t its i . jr r ;NMTH CITY CF n'EM: ��- RAN U0 CUCAMONGA TrrLEx . &:�&17 �2 PLANNM LXVISriN EXHIBIT. ___A __ -,, ALE. r�r� aiws. w � NOM. CnY CF t . ' i°F LEx rJ-f re Pl.A _ _ 16 1 EYJ4Unt-- Fr a MI. f t.lVmL tCamcw M5 a&" a Mn! Ex"O" m v r�p h.t *r r F` 1 •. xYt3v�• R JrK y t { I j C a CrrY CF MANNM l L — CITY 01;? _RANCHO Cllr AMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: September 9, 1987 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Dan Coleman, Senior Planner SUBJECT: NIGH RISE ORDINANCE - FOOTHILL FIRE DISTRICT 1977 The Foothill Fire i�rotection District has adapted a new high rise ordinance which focd► es on fire safety measures for buildings of a certain height. The';,rdinance apply to all buildings which have floors located more than three stories above Fire District vehicle apparatus access leve11j The Chamber of Commerce Economic Development Committee participate( /' � developing the ordinance. Building and Safety Division and PianninjG,'V'vision staff also commented upon the provisions of the ordinance,, It ,) The ordinance containiy;;provisions that will a''tzct City policies and /or codes. Zoning code pro \tisions could be ,ffected in terms of setbacks, design review, and lociltion of certain, types of landscaping. r Key,_ provisions in the high rise ordinance are the requirement of "roadway access fire lanes and emergency Pelicopter landing facilities on certain buildings. A 45 foot wide fire lane is required on two sidqs of buildings which extends from a point 5 feet from the building to 50r feet horizontally (see Exhibit "C "). No obstructions including trees, are allowed within this area which could Impede fire vehicle access. Emergency helicopter ,14nding facilities are required for buildings in excess of 75 feet in height. The Foothill Fire Protection District `will slake a presentation- of the ordinance to the Commission and be available to answer any questions that you might have. A copy of the full ordinance is attached for your review and information. Re ul�l tted, ad 1 City anner l BB:DC:te Attachments: High rise Ordinance Exhibit "A" Diagram of fire Access Exhibit "B" - Chart of Fire Access Standards Exhibit "C" - Roadway Access Fire Lanes ITEM P FOO LL FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT H76H RISE ORDINANCE �i I 4ABi2i OF CONTENTS TITLE SECT TOI� -PAGE 1. Alarm and Communications 2. Appellate Procedure 6 6 3. Automatic Sprinkler System/Standpipe System 19,, 5 19 4. Building Occupancy 3 5. Compliance Required 4 3 6. Definitions 3 2 7. 8. Elevators < �' Helicop�rLj 2 �\ la 1 21 Emerg di a 'lity .j 15 17 5. Emergency Pre -Fire Plan;!i!ing and Evacuation Requirements 17 18 la. Exits \ re Control Center 9 11 12. .9 Fire Fighting Provisions 14 14 13. Intent 13 12 14. Plan Review and 61date 1 1 15 Publication 18 3-9 16. R a wa Access iFi+e antis 21 16 20 17. Seismic Considerations' 12 1;r- 18. Smoke Control a f? 12! 19. Smoke Detection la <a. Standby and Emergency Power and Lighting 7 11 9 21. Valic,Aty 12 20 _ 20 ;i �i I ORDINANCE NO. 13 AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS or TnE FOOTHILL FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT, COUNTY OF SAX BERNARDINO STATE OF QVITFORNIA, ESTABLISHING RULES AND iiiG6Ej�IONS FOR BUILDINGS IN EXCESS OF TM= STORIES. The Board of Directors of the Foothill Fire Protection District does hereby ordain as f ollcws: SECTION I A. It is the intent of the Ordinance to prescribe regulations consistent with nationally recognized good practice for safeguarding, to a reasonable degree of f ire and life safety, buildiAgs, described as low-rise, mid-rise and high-rise,,in Section 2. B. Other-SourRes Where specific standards or requirements are specified in this Ordinance, or contained within other applicable laws, adopted codes or ordinances, compliance with,, other nationally recognized fire-gatety standards, as approved by the Fire Chief, shall be deemed as prima facie evidence of compliance with this intent. SECTION 2 DEFINITIONS A. !LgA=Ej9�01 Buildincrs Shall 'Mean any building having floors used for human occupancy located more than three stories, but less than SS feet above the lowest level having Fire Distrt7t approved fire vehicle apparatus access. B. !!=-Riseill Buildings onall mea,n any bV�Iiding having floors used for human occupancy locatv4 at least 5s feet, but less than 75 feet above thet lowest level having Fire District approved fire vehicle a.pparatus access. C. "High-Ri:-,&e" ]Luildings Shall mean any building having floors used for human occupancy locaL-id 75 feet or more above the lowest level having Fire District approved fire vehicle apparatus access. D. EXCEPTIONS as defined in Title 24 CAC shall apply to all, low-rise, mid-rise and high-rise buildings. J ��6rdinance No. 13 Section 2 & 3 Page 2 E• Bu�id�na Access Building access shall be defined as in 'Title 24 CA, a4-modified herein. 1. If locked, access openings shall be designec�,.to allow penetration through the use of Fire District'forcible entry tools and equipment unless other approved arrangements have been made with the Fire Chief. F. Bank of Elevator For the purpose of this Ordinance, a "bank of elevators" shall mean a group of elevators or a single elevator controlled by a. common,operating system; that is, all those elevators whimh respond to a single call button constitutes a bank of elevators, There no li on no which be morethan4carsithinacommn hoistway. G. Fire ont o Cen e For the purpose of this Ordinance,, -- :"fire control center" shall mean a central locatl�_'sn within th,� high -rise building designated for Fire District operations and *,—, Loring of such systems an equipment as required by this Ordinance.. H. Fire District For the purpose of this Orf_1ida- n(,e, "fire district" shall mean the Foothill Fire Protection District and all of its officers, personnel,, departments, services and other amenities it may undertake. I. Fire Chief For the purpose of this Ordinance, "Fire Chief" shall mean the _'ire Chief of the Foothill Fire protection District. J. UnifoYri_Builciin r de Whenever the Uniform Building Code (UBC) is referenced, it shall refer to and mean the latest edition thereof adapted by the City council for the City of Rancho Cucamonga or other code enforcemen agency. K. Occupancy, as used herein, shall be construed to be as defined in the UBC. SECTION 3 COMPLIANCE REQUIRED A. how -Rise & Mid Riss Builftr j Every low-rise and mid -rise building hereafter constructed shall cOnform to the requirements of this Ordinanq ? it shall be ,r Ordinance No. 13 Section 3, 4 & 5 Page 3 unlawful and a misdemeanor for any person, firm or oorporatiorc to fail to comply with the requirements of this Ordinance. B•ghRiseBu3lcTns Every nigh -rise building hereafter constructed shall conform to all applicable provisions of the UBC and Tit' Ce",C eaCCe•Y: as modified herein. It shall be unlawful and A misdemeanor for any person, firm or corporation to fail to caaply with the ,requirements of this Ordinance. SECTION 4 BUILDING OCCIOPANCY A. The following items, wren required by this Ordinance., shall be installed in accordance with approved plans and specifications and, when applicable, shall be` _ienronstrated to be in roper operating condition as per approved design to the satisfaction Of this Building Department and Fire District prior to ellccupancy. I. Mechanical equipment 2. Electrical equipment, including elevators 3. Life safety system t° 4. Fire phone system S. Stairway pressurization system r 6. Smoke evacuation: systems -- 7. Fire apparatus access roadways S. Fire hydrant system 9. Other fire protection and extinguishing systems, as outlined in ether applicable Laws, codes or ordinances, as required by the Fire District. B. All a,quipment and facilities required by this Ordinance or other applicable code or regulation shall be maintained in conformance with the codes under which they are installed. The owner or designated agent 'shall be responsible for such maintenance. SECVEON 5 AUTOMATIC SPRIMMER SYSTEM /STANDPIPE SYSTEMS _ A. Fire DepaLtt „a Co nepa4 ns 1. Connections for sprinkler systems, standpipe or combined . standpipe systems shall be located no closer than 15 feet nor more than 5o feet and up to loo feet from an approved hydrant with approval of the Fire Chief. 2. Any Fire District connections shall be located ho closer than 50 feet from the building it supplies or other locat:.dn as approved by the Fire Chief. The Fire Department sprinkler connection. shall inc7.ude two 2 1/2 inch female swivel inlet connections anAlgr ou*'- 4 inch female swivel inlet connection at tine apppro•2a1 of the Fires Chief. All. connections are to be National Standard Threads and shall be clappered. f ordinance No. 13 Section 5 Page 4 = B. Automatic Sprir:kler Systems Every low -rise, .aid -rise and high -rise building shall be Provided with en automatic sprinkler system. 141 Group R, Division X Occupancies and in 1 -hour fire rated ,exit corridors of all toacupancies approved quick response sprinkler., heads (QRs) shall be used,; 2 Every tyre sprinkler system shall conform to the UBC1azd NFPA 13 except as modified herein: a. Every fire sprinkler system shall ba, electrically supervised. Shut off va3-r%z& and water flow devices shall be provided for each floor. In addition to actuating a loca;i al -Nrm on the flooO r upon which the water flow is detected, an alarm ` ,,O 1 ;- •} to an approved' cential station. 1 be transmitted b. The fire sprinkler system. for light hazard occigancies shall be designed en this iasis of a coverage of 168 sq. ft. per head. c. When sprinkler heads a-!A installed for light hazard- occupangies in an area defined as a "small room" by NFPA 131 but not exceeding Soo sq, ft., a coverage of 225 sq. ft. may be(rused for head placement only if AWL approved by the Fia�e Chief. d. Any roam or area of the building where the application at water is consid -ired uhdasireable or,may complicate fire fighting or rescue attemptsr,.additional or alternate fire protection systems may be required. These systems shall., be approved and installed according to Fire District. standards. Such, rcom or area may Include: 1. Electrical vaults, generator and transformer rooms. 2. safe deposit or other vaults of fire-resistive construction, wh(.n used for the ,storage of records, files and other documents, when Stored in + metal cabinets or on metal shelving. 3. Commun_4ation equipment areas as defined in the UBC. 4. Other areas with specific prior approval from the Fire Chief based on a review of jVstifiable fire protection engineering criteria. > t_ i Ordinance go. 13 "ection 5 Page 5 e. The actuation of any sprinkler head shall: 1. Place into oper&tion all mechanical equipment provided to r8str-'et the spread of- .smoke in high-rise taildings and operate the voice alarm system when a voice alarm system is required by this Ordinance. 2. Transmit an alarm ; directly to an approved central station and to the fire control centW if such center is required. In Group B, ''Divi Sion 2 Occupancies, such signal shall be zoned with a minimum of one zone per floor with a maximum of 28,000 sq. ft, Paz zone. Should a single floor exceed 28,40o sq f",?- multiple zones shall be rsquired as appi,oved by the Fire Chief. f. The sprinkler SYStAx shA11 be placed in service prior 4-0 any use or oc—cupancy of the buildiAg. 9. Sprinkler risers may be combined with standpipe risers provided st=;na is sufficient and proven-by ralculatio"IS t0- 4cl-lommodate demands. In addition to the requirements set forth in 5 A. and B. above, the following requirements shall ippiy: 1. A pump test header shall be provided in an-'approved location. C. 2. A minimum on-site Water supply Of 12,000 gallons shall be provided, (1,500 sq. ft. 0 O.IG t'als/sq- ft. + 250 gpm, for standpipes x 30 minutes). TILe SUPPlY shall be automatically available if the principle W;Lter supply fails. 3. Underground tanks shall be protected against corrosion an I d buoyancy. 4. If the Municipal water supply is adequate to meet the requirclents Of XFPA 13, only I standby fire pump is required. If a fire pump is needed to meet the requirements Of NFP& 13, a second or reserve fire pump shall be provided. Such piutp shall have a minimum 750 gpm capacity. D. I. Standpipe systems shall conform to UBC Standard's and the Uniform Fire Code, except as modified bercAn. Hase shall be required in: I- Occupancies exceeding iso feet in height and more than one story. L. Ordinance No. .13 Section 5 a Page 6 z 2. Occupancies four stories or more but less than iso feet in height, except Group R Division 3. 2. All standpipe systems shall: be supplied with a,fo-jr inch ,female swivel Fire District inlet connecticn, plus the r6cfaired number of 2 1/2 inch female swivel` Fire District .,,'inlets, as indicated above. 3. 1 ombihed Systems In combined systems where sprinkler risers with 2 1/2 inch nose outlets are provided, the risers and supply piping to risers shall be sized to accommodate the equiremantz of NFPA 13; or the sprinkler d6rdind, including hose demands specified in UBC Standarda, whichever is the greater. SECTION 6 A tARX AND COMWNICATIONS ^\ A. Manual Alarms I 1. Manual alarms shall be provided in the following buildings: a. in every Group R-i Occupancy high -rise building; b. in other high -rise occupancy buildings4 =ass required by the Uniform Fire Code, Title 24 CAC, and/or the Fire District C. In any sir�gle floor that exceed 28,000 sq, ft. in area of a mid -rlsa or high -rise building. 2. Manual alarr. pull st?tions shall be located adjacent to exits from corridors, adjacent to doors into enclosed stairways and in every elevator lobby in the above described buy .idings . 3. Alara boxes shall, when actuated, transmit an alarm directly to an approved central station, and, in high -rise' buildings, operate the voice alarm sysf-Im and transmit a signal -to the fire control center. B. Leaky coax Cable Antenna 1. Each low -rise, mid -rise or high -rise building shall be Trovided with a "Leaky Coax Cablei0 antenna system installed n accordance with Fire District standards. C. Fire Department Telephone System 1. Each mid -rise or high -rise building shall be provided with a two -way sound - powered telephone system having the capability_ of providing interpoMunication between all floors and the fire control centez1vr tether approved location. M_ JAWL Ordinance No. 13 Section S Page 7 f A 2. A minimum of six single -ear headsets shall be provided a=nd � shall be stored in the fire control center or other location as approved by the Fire Chief. 3. Jacks for connection of the headsets shall be located as a. At each floor level adjacent to each hose cabinet; b. At the exterior of an adjacent to each stair shaft exit at ground level; C. At the exterior of each stairshaft penthouse or other approved roof- level location; d. In each elevator car. e. In each elevator lobby enclosure; .f. In each mechanical, g'�nerator, air- handling equipment or elevator machinery room; g. outside the fire control center adjacent to the exterior entrance to the center; h. At other locations deemed necessary by the Fire District. 4. Sound•epowered telephone equipment, including communications Panels'> and location of jacks, are subjei'; to Fire District Approval. D. voice Ala2-m_Svstems I. A voice alarm system shall be installed in the following buildings: a. In each high -rise building; b. In any single story of a mid -rise building that exceeds 28,00a square feet in floor area, where, in the opinion of the Fire Chief, inaccessibility, dagree of hazard or complexity of building arrangement makes a voice alarm system necessary. 2. The voice alarm system shall be automatically actuated by the operation of any sprinkler head, water -flow device, or manual alarm station, and shall sound an alert signal to desired areas as determined by the Fire District, followed by recorded voice instructions giving appropriate information and direction to the occupants. 3. Controls for the voice alarm s,rstem shall be located in tt.s fire control center, of other designated location, rnd shall be designed so that ; ;a selective or general voice -alarm may be manually initiated to the following locationsi a. Elevators, elevator lobbies, corridors and stairways; b. In every room exceeding fifty (so) occupancy load,, In each dwelling unit or guest room of a Group R, Division I Occupancy; ordinance No. 13 r Section 6 Page 8 d, Speakers in ?railways Shall be 280 feet apart and meet field audibility tests; elp In rooms and tenant spaces exceeding 1,000 square feet in area; f. on other location(s) as required by the Fire Chief. 4. The voic,, Alarm system shall be supervised so as to cause activation of an audible trouble signal in the fire control center or other designated le-,ation upok interruption or failure of the audio path including amplifiers, speo,ker wiring, switches or electrical contacts or any other- malfunction which might impair the transmission of the voice alarm. 5. The voice alarm shall be designed-to be heard clearly by all occupants within the building or designated portions thereof. Said alarm shall conform to NFP,A pamphlet 72F and is subject to field audibility tests. E. Public Address System 1. A public address sys',!dm shall be installed in the following huildingsa a. In each high -ri5;e building; b. In any-'�ingle story of a mid -rise that exceeds 28,00 square` -feet in floor area, where in the opinion of th 4P Fire Chief, inacoessibility, degree of hazard or complexity of building arrangement makes a public address system necessary. 2. The public address system shall Yee a one -tray 1'ystem providing communication from the fire controlltcenter or other designated location to the following locations: a• 42evators, elevator lobbies, corridors and.stairways; b. Iin every room exceeding fifty (50) occupant load; C. In each dwelling unit or guest room of a Group R, Division 1 Occupancy; d. ,Speakers S.n hallways shall be no more than 200 feet apart:,:and meet field audibility tests; e. In roams and tenant spaces exceeding 1,000 square feet in area, f. or other location(s) as required by the Fire Chief. 3. The public address system shall be designed to be heard clearly by all occupants of the building or designated portions thereof as defined in Titie 24 CAC. F. Alarm and Voice Communication Comzaat��+iij+ The sounding of a fire alarm signal in any given area or flog shall not prohibit voice .larm or public address communication to other areas or floors. P -fa Ordinance No, 23 Section 6 & 7 Wage 9 PY 1 G, Co n�binincr voice A3aa and Public Addre s S ste s The voice alarn and public, address systems,-.Zay be combined In a single system. Combined systems shall ba drr coed to permit voice tr'a� ?mizsiOn -. to override voice or�%fixe` -afar signal, i�ut shall not control alarm signals es%ept as provided.for at the fire control center or other gna4ed locat,o a. H. In__ �lenenrien�s The public address and voice alarm systems shall ; installed so that failure of any Si oa designed and ngle speaker will not reuse a loss of any Other speakers, in the circuit or circuits. I. Auxil a paw: An aPProved back -up battei -y powered sZ�stem shall be supplied for the voice alarm and public address systems. SECTION 7 SMOKE DETECTION A. Smoke Detector Require' _ In every high -rise ,building, at least onn approved smoke detector suitabl follows: e for the intended use shall be,installed as 1. in eve 47. zi' mechanical teleph +equipment, electrical, transformer, one equipment, elevator machine or similar room; Z• In the main air - return and exhaust air plenum; of each air conditioning system in excess of 10,000 cfm and located in a serviceable area downstream of the last du upstream of the outside du--t inlet and Stpply Air (osA) 3. At each connection to a vertical duct or riser sean air rving 2 or more stories from a return -air duct or plenum of conditioning system; 9• Ir,- =Group R, Division 1 Occupancies, an approved smoke detector may be used in each return -air riser carrying not more than 5,000 cfm en openings.. d serving not more than 10 air inlet B. The smoke detectors as required shall, upon act `ation, other lore as to their location in the, fire colItrol center or ether location approved by the Fire Clef. C. R -1 occupancies, dvell,irg units and guest rooms shall be provided with smoke detectors as required ro m$ shall Iy Ordinance No. 13 Section s Page 10 SECTION a SMOKE CONTROL. Mid -rise and higf� -rise buildings shall be "provided with a means for restricting the ppread of ;.,smoke and for i`�he removal of smoke by not Less than one of[the following methods. T A. Panels or ikiindows Panels or openable windows or fixed tempered glass windows in the exterior walls around the perimeter of the building at the rate of 20 sq. ft. of opening pe' So lineal feet of %exterior wall in each story, unless otherwise prohibited, EXCEPTION; In Group R, Division 2 Occupancies only, such windows or panels shall be provided in each habitable room at the,,rate of,2 sq., ft. of venting per quest room, suite, or apartment. All such panels and windows shall be clearly identified in a manner approved by the Fire Chief. B. Single Floor Svste+ns 1. When an air conditioning /air supply system is provided' wit{ the intent of serving each floor separately and such syste' receives its makeup air from a common duct or shaft servin more than one floor or system, each story shall have a means for pressurizing floors not involved vith fire by use of volume control dampers that will close automatically on the fire floor upon the actuation of any sprinkler head or other fire detection device required by rather codes or ordinances on the fire involved floor.. The intent is to isolate oz inhibit the movement of smoke to the non -fire floors. 2. Smoke removal shall be accomplished as in A.1. above or a fan, capable of providing three air changes per hour for the largest floor served, located at the top of each stair shaft. The smoke removal fan shall include a tight shut off back draft damper s, that it does not interfere with the stairwell pressurization system of Section 9.A.3 below. Operation of the smoke removal fans shall be, manually controlled at the fire control center or other approved location. C. Multiple Floor Systems 1. When an air conditioning /air supply system is specifically designed to accommodate multiple floors, it shall incorporate smoke control volume dampers at each floor of the supply and return duct serving that floor. Upon the actuation of any sprinkler head or other fire detection devise required by other applicable codes or ordinances, both dampers on the fire floor shall sutomatically close. 41--12, Ordinance No. 13 Seztion 6, 9 r IQ 4 Page 11 1 The return air dampers on the other flcors served by the same air conditioning system shall partially close to create a positive pressure on the non -fire floor. 2. The air conditioning /air supply syystem shall incorporate "economizers" capable of introducing ion outsia -,air. and mechanically removing the air via a return/exhaust fan. This system shall be utilized for smoke removal, and shall be capable of being controlled from the fire control center or ether approved location. D. Any other system that will produce equivalent results as approved by the Fire Chief. SECTION 9 EXITS A. High -rise buildings shall comply With the provisions of the UBC except as modified herein. I. All stairway doors wh%oh are to bq locked from the stairway ride shall have the carability of being unlocked simultaneously without unlatching upon a signal from the .fire control center or other approved locations. Upon failure of the electrical systen, the locking mechanism shall be retracted to the unlocked position. 2. A telephone or other approved two -way communications system connected town approved emergency service which operates continuously shall'be provided at not less than every fifth floor in each required stairway where other provisions of this;aode permit the doors to be locked. 3.° Smoke -proof enclosures may be omitted, provided all enclosed exit stairways are equipped with s barometric dampered relief opening at the top and the stairway is supplied mechanically at grade level with suffic$.ent air to discharge a minimum Positive pressure of 0.15 -inch water column in the shaft relative to the atmospheric pressure within the story at each floor level, with all doors closed. The maximum allowable pressure shall be 0.35 -inch water column. Actuation of the mechanical equipment shall be in accordance with the UBC. S. StaiMX Identification .Stairway identification in mid -rise and high -rise buildings, stairways shall be identified ag� described in the UFC. SECTION 1Q ELEVATORS In mid -rise and high -rise buildings, elevators, dumbwaiters, escalators and moving walks shall be in compliance the UBC and Title 24 CAC except as modified herein. ;:;I Ordii&'ace No. 13 Secti�'. 10, 11, 12 & 13 Page %2 A. A minimum of two elevators capable of serving every story shall have inside clear dimensions of 61811 x 41311 to accommodate a gurney or stretcher 22 1/2 inches wide and 75 inches r�azy. Such elevator may also be used,to serve Fire District req�lrementS 'EXCEPTION: When a building is served by only one elevator carp only that elevator car need be of the specified size. B. Each elevator car shall be provided with an emergency, "access opening of not less than 32 itches by 32 inches. C. Vertical rolling doors s, \U be pr�ibited at the point of access to a passenger elavistor car. D. The elevator lobby separation required by the UBC sell be required in high -rise building.. SECTION 11 STANDBY POWER,, LIGHT AND EMERGENCY SYSTEMS Every high -rise building snail be prov ae&Vith emergency anS tandby power as required by Title "24 CAC and other applicable codes;_ -, SECTION 12 SEISMIC CONSIDERATIONS A. Mec ranical and E atrical'Eauipmen horar a ,il Every high -rise building shall have the anchorage of the v following mechanical and electrical equipment designed and installed in accordance with the UBC for lateral force based on Cp value of .45, unless data substantiating a lesser value is furnished. 1. Elevator drive and suspension systems; 2. Standby power and lighting facilities; 3. Fire pumps, automat-a fire extinguishing systems and other fire protection egU4pment; •4. Air handling equipment regulated by this Ordinance. B. Verification of such conformance shall be substantiated by a licensed structural engineer, SECTION 13 FIRE FIGHTING PROVISIONS A. Hose Cabinets I. Every high -rise building shall have eaci -t -floor of the building provided with Fire District htkie cabinets. These hose cabinets shall be at each floor landing of the stair shaft and shall be clearly marked. i; P14 Ordinance No. 13 Section 13 Page. 13 2. In any single gar that exceeds 28,000`aquare feet in area of a mid -rise ouilding fire district hose cabinets may be required. These hose cabinets shall be =at each floor landing of the stairway shaft of those floors exceeding 26,000 square faet_in area and shall be clearly marked. 3. All hose cabinets shall be keyed identically to provide accessibility only to the Fire District. The key to the hosR,czbinets shall be provided in the key box in the fire control center or other approved location. The l.;ose, cabinet and all equipment specified in this section shall conform to the Fire District standards. Operation of doors to Fire District hose cabinets shall transmit a signal to an approved central station and to the fire control center, when the, fire control center is required by other sections cf this Ordinance. Contents of the hose cabinet shall be: a. One 2 -1/2 inch gated wye connected to the standpipe; discharges shall be reduced to -i 1/2 �,ich with removable reducers. b. Two hundred feet of 1 -3/4 inch (600 pound t;csty fire hose; one hundred feet preconnected to the gated wye with an approved .nozzle attached, one hun#ed feet rolled. B. Add t onal Hose Cabinets I. On roof levels a hose cabinet shall be provided on buildings having roofs of combustible construction. 2. No hose cabinet is required on the roof if the hose cabinet on the floor below the roof has hose sufficient alm'angth, water pressure is adequate, iitc. to reach all portions of the roof within 30 ft. of the perimeter. 3. P_ hose cabinet'is only required in the elevator 1 bby•of a high -rise building if the elev yr lobby is more than 100 feet distance from, enclosez Jtairway. C. Tools and gtaraae In every mid and high -rise building located or. the even numbered floors, beginning with the sacond floor, a tool closet with minimum clear dimensions of 2 feet deep by 3.5 feet wide by 8 feet high shall be provided. The door to the tool closet shall be a minimum of 310" by Van and shall open into the stairway. These closets shall be located within the stair shaft that leads to the roof. If more than two stair shafts are trovided, tool closets may be required within those additional stair shafts depending upon the building design and size. Each closet shall contain one 110 volt receptacle at a location approved by the Fire District. P-6 Ordinance No. 13 Section 13 & 14 Page 14 Each closet shall contain tools and equipment with approved mounts or method of storage, as approved by the Fire Chief, which shall include but not be limited to the following: I. One Halligan tool; 2. one pinch point crow bar.,1 3. one pick -head axe; 4. one fl -head aY.3; p 5. Three fiie sprinkler "',hut off devices; 6. One four to eight foot telescoping pole with rich to apply' sprinkler shut offs; 7. Twelve approved door stops, S. Six marking pens of a washable nature; 11 9. One hundred feet of 2 -1/2 inch (600 pound test) fix& hose, per Fire District specifications; 10. ',:'wo 100 foot life lines, per `Fire D .Strict specifications; 11. Four battery powered hand lights, per Fire District specifications; 12. One 2 -1 /2 inch and one 1 -3/4 inch hose clamp, per Fire District specifications; 13. Canvas bag with draw string for items Cj 7, 8 and 9 above. SECTION 14 FIRE CONTROL CENTER A. Requirements Every high -rise building shall be provided with an approved fire control canter lccated near or adjacent to the main err %rance to the building, or at any location approved by 4,'he Fires Chief. The fire control center shall be directly accessible from the exterior and interior of the building by Fire District personnel only. The fire control center shall be designed to accommodate the functional controls and the command personnel required to conduct an emergency activity. There shall be a minimum net floor area of one hundred fifty square feet after all required equipment is installed. The net floor area shall accommodate the use of the table and chair listed below. 1t i << r \\ 1 I 11 Ordinance No. 13 action 14 �ge is 5 n_ o The fire control center shall be separated from the remainder of ` the building by not less;' than a one hour occupancy separation. The fire control. Center exterior exit door shall s wing in " directioxi of egress and be.openable from the exterior of the building. The interior door$ shall be gasketed f;yr smoke and draft control. All doors to the fire control center shall be operable only by use of the approved master' keyLWhich shall be made available in a location appr�oved by the Fire Chief. A. "FIRE CONTROL" sign, with a minpimum one inch contrasting color letters, shall be placed on the exterior sico of all doors to the fire Control center. The fire control center shall be provided w4;th an approved source of outside air so as to provide adegaate,air circulation at all times. The fire control center shall be used to house the following equipment which shall receive Fire District approval prior to purchase and installation. I. voice alarm and public address equipment, including the equipment necessary to the function control and override of these systems and their display and status panels; 2. Fire alarm, and fire'detention contrc-' 'equipment, ircludinq equipment necessary to the function '�,f the control unit and" their display ?�4 status panels; Z.. Status indicators and controls for elevators; 4. Air handling system status indicators and control switches; 5. controls for unlocking stairw4y doors ,and status board indicating whether said doors are lonkid or unlocked; 6. Sprinkler valve supervision and water flow deteotor display 1 panels; 7. Alarm, water float, and trouble signals shall be atMunciated by means of an audible signal and visual display, witch indicates building, floor, zone;, or other designated area from which the alarm, water flfaw or trouble signal originated; 8. Standby power status display and controls; 9. A telephone connected to the public telephone:systex adjacent to the Fire District Communications system. This telephone shall be for the exprese uss of the Fire District. Telephones for building occupant use shall be Fire Dis ordinance No. 13 Section 14 Page 16 lQ, Intercom to exterior of fire control center to allow for verbal communications without Opening the door; ll� Supervision indicator for Fire District rooms and cabinets, including fire control center; s,2. Two cO;yies 01 the complete approved or as-built building plans And related operations manuals; 13. Three copies of Fire District pre - plans; 14. Labeled cabinet contain ;ng the minimum six portable voice Powered head sets as required in Section e.C.2; 15. Labeled cabinet containing labeled emergency access and elevator control. keys; 16. -A furniture(- quality table, a minimum of 3 fees. wide and 6 feet �a��, and a sturdy Office - quality chair; 17 Instructions for operating all equipment in room; 18. other fire proteirtion equipment and system as: controls, such a. Water tank level indi.ators; b. Fire puirp controls and' status indicatoost C. Fuel level indicator on auxiliary generators and fire pumps B. Status Tnggaticn Any equipment required to produce an indication of status at the fire control center shall conform to the following: _. I. Graphic Annunciator. The graphic annunciator shall be a live diagram of each building, floor,, zone or other designated area, and shall indicate the location of the activated alarm device. 2. Alpha- Numeric Printcyt. An alpha - numeric printout of 'Ij status indications of switch activations, a1zng with date and time of alarm or activation, shall be provided. This printout shall also be coded to provide the location of activation on tae building floor plans, per floor and location on tho floor. This equipment shall be located on furniture - quality cabinetry constructed to handle this speciali.zed equipment. Ordinance No. 13 Section 14, is & 16 Page 17 BAstriCeted Cantu er The fire control center shall: not be used for the housing of any bi�iler, heating unit-- eratar, combustible storage; or similar ( hazardous ecpiipment�br storage. D. Scaled Drawing Rer^1�rAa An engineer's drawing of fire C-ontrol center at an approved scale, donotinq layout of room, location-.of required equipment, and specifications of required equipment shall be Provided Ca District for final „approval;�ior to installation.` 15 R ENCY HELICOPTER LANDING VACTLITY igh -rise building shall inco,- orate an emergency helicopter facility in an area, approved by the Fin's Chief. FAviathe cility shall be designed and constructed in accordance with icable codes, o;"dinancea, and 4 :�te requirements of the Federal tion Administration and the San Bsr,- 4rdino County Sheriff's nt. roof top shall ba marked with the numerical the building, with the numbers facing the strelit frontage responding to the address. The numbers shall e three feet h' hand one font wide. SECTION 16 ROADWAY ACCESS (FIRS LANES) A. Requirements Fire apparatus access shall be provided or. at "east two sides of all buildings. Access from exterior walls Shall extend from five feet to fifty feet horizontally, with no obstructions vertically. Access areas shall not exceed five percent sloe and she the following compaction requirements: p l -• meet 1. Paving and Improvement. lanes shall be paved to meet the paving standards of the City of Rancho Cucamonga or approved equivalent. Where the Fire Chief deems it permissible, he may allow, the use of natural- t_ > Lf the following condition,. - are met: grass surface { a= A sufficient subsurface shall be provided which will withstand a 70,00o pound combined dead and live load in all weather corditions, 'Without significant gattlement (engineering data shall be provided);.. C _ Ordinance No. 13 �! Section 16 & 17 Page 18 Othgr supporting material, or block may be used if � y mee the same criteria and /or conditions as stated above; C. Grass - covered restricted access shall be marked so tha the supp07.ted driving area is clearly discernible; d. No dip, hump, or other surface irregularity shall: I. Have an angle or approach of 4 -1/2 degrees (10$) or steepe_; 21 Have an angle of departure of 4 -1/2 degrees (1ug}< or more; 3. Impede the movement of fire apparatus having a ) wheelbase of 252 inches, with a minimut ground �.n clearance of 11 inches. �%� B. Obstrurtion _-� Access roadways shall be provider: aria maintained in a passable condition at all times. Any obstruction or impedance 'to 'i reasonable access may be repaired or removed 'torthwitil by an public safety agency ani the expense of repaii+ or removal i- o be borne by the owner of the roadway and, in t22e case of any obstructing vehicle or object, by the owner of oaid vehicle object. Approved "NO PARKING" signs and /or other -apnr6'!7,rjete notice prohibiting obstructions may be required and shall be maintained by the property owner. All firQ Lanes shall be posted according to the Fire District standards: 1. Curbs shall be painted red and/or approved fire lane sign,; installed for the length designated by the Foothill Fire Protection - District. Said signs shall be installed no more than loo feet apart on roads and accessways up to 1/4 mile in length. On roads and accessways in excess of 1/4 mile in length, said signs shall be installed no more than 200 feet apart. 2. As determined by the Fire District, additional accesswaay be required. SECTION 17 EMERGENCY PRE -FIRE PLANNING AND EVACUATION REQUIREMENTS A. P ocedgr& tlanuaT All mid. -rise and high -rise buildings shall supply the Fire District with a completed emergency pro -fire planning and evacuation procedure manual. A copy of the manual, to be f d out by the building owner /occupant, will be made available a'L�"" Fire District headquarters. i j1 Ordinance No. 13 Section 17,. IS & 19 Page 19 The completion and filing of this Zanual shall meet the intent of the provisions of Title 19 CAC. Low -rise buildings may provide the procedure manual to the Fire District at the optiors of the owner / occupant. SECTION is PLAN REVIEW AND UPDA7:.:1 The copies cf the approved or as built plans, including tenant improvements, shall be updated anytime revisions, additions, or deletions to the building are made. The responsibility for these updates will be that of the building owner unless the owner and occupant have otherwise agreed between themselves, in w.!. %Jch, evert the occupant shall. comply. Copies of such plans shall be supplied to the Fire District. SECTION 19 APPELLATE PROCEDURES; A. Alternate Materi -4 or Method The Fire Chief, with notice to the appellant, may approve any alternate x >aterial or method, provided that they, find that the proposed design, use or operation satisfactorilir complies with the intent of these provisions and that the materials, methods Of work performed, or operations to be employed are, for the Purpose intended, at least equivalent or that prescribed by these provisions in quality strength, effectiveness, fine resistance, durability and safety. B. Testiro for Compliance The Fire Chief may require tests as proof of compliance with the intent of these provisions or alternates thereto to be made by an approved agency at the expense of the person or persons requesting approval of alternate methods, materials or operations. Expert opinion If technical .expertise is unavailable within the Fire District to determine the acceptance of new technology,'products, process, facilities, materials and uses attend,.ng design, operation or use of a building or premises subject to the Provisions herein contained, the Fire Chie2 may required the appellant or his authorized representative to provide, without charge to the Foothil? Fire Protection District, a is hn :al opinion and report prepared by a qualified engineer specialist, laboratory or fire safety specialty organization acceptable to tie Fire Chief and the appell�tat, to thoroughly analyze the fire ?afety properties of said design, operations, or use in prescription, approval and adoption of the necessary recommended changes. 4;'-;J4 r _Ordinance No. 13 Section 19, 20 & 21 Page 20 D.`; Variance '`Whenever there are practical difficnities in stri L application ,,?f these provisions, the Fire Chief may modif t Upon application, -,n writing, by the own Y ,� Provisions h ;s authorised representative, provided C�at�theespir developer or intent of the provisions shall be complied with and the public saL�ty secured. Particulars of any such modification or e d vi'ltion from these provisions, when granted or allowed, shall e rb b ndered by a written decision of the Fire Chief and entered f the Fire upon the record o District with a sic -„copy furnished to the appellant. E. Appeals Whenever the Chief disapproves an application or refuses to grant a Permit applied for, or when it is claimed that the provisions of the Code do not apply or that the true intent and meaning of the Code have been misconstrued or wrongly Interpreted, the applicant may appeal the decision of the Chief to the Board of Appeal- within 30 days from the date of the decision appealed. SECTION 20 VALIDITY If anv,sec�tion, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this INI Ordinance is, for any reason, held to be invalid, such holding or holdings shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The Board of Directors hereby declares that it would have passed this Ordinance and each section, Gubsection', sentence, clause and phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid. SECTION 21 PUBLICATION i Prior to the expiration of fifteen corking days from its passage, the Fire Chief shall cause this Ordinance to be published in a newspaper Of general circulation, as required by law. This Ordinance was introduced at the regular meeting of the Board of Directors of the Foothill Fire Protection District, Rancho Cucamonga, California, held on the 17th day of February adopted on the c�a of , 1987 and was fallowing vote, t— o std`# t Y March , 1987, by the AYE - ALEXANDER, EGGLESTON, LATIPOW, LYONS WHEATLEY; NODS - NONE; ABSENT - NONE c, _ Willt-T V4 ex and , President -.1, D nn s Michae , Secare ;,y �. 'It` �' a � � f, �s�x.� .a.'lF. t'; ;i'�r%"' _ Y`�ft� y, '� ���� TRU j 9V $ ;;q�' -r• 90*C"` ?01 89'9" (! d : 1 60 83 4� 1. .. Ip 's 500 75'1" r �- 70-- 60. n s®. � 3p3 52'4" e - i 2CP 39'7' )� 30, : 10° 2a 4" 20`" ry° 10' i t3' 0" s ' I OUTRIGGER 04 04 i i f '.\ 1 t \J, REACH . x 77:Rl tF E l 1 `j �3 -}k f` 0 mw of 13ANCIP CUCAMONGA'"�, STAFF aEPOPT DATE:,; September 9, 1987 U 1977 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: ���, Brad Buller, City Planner BY: 1`;Dar, Coleman, Senior Planner SUBJECT: ANTENNA STUDY /8748 YORK PROGRAM I. BACKGROUND: In June 1987 City Council, in considei,ing an appear ot�nstail a 72 foot antenna in an residential neighborhood, directed the Planning staff to consider reevaluation of city ordinances affecting antennas. The purpose of this repert is to solicit a reconmendatir,n on the draft scope of work and;., the suggested work program schedule for the antenna study, The study will include, but not be limited to: <. 1 _r`of our ex�Tsiting regulations governing: A. Television anterAias B. ,Radio antennds C. Satellite dish antei as 2. A comprehensive survey oil antenna regulations in other communities in comparison to Rancho Cucamonga's. 3. Research technical issues of antenna operation. {' 4. Preparation of recommended ammendments to antenna regulation . � II. AML SM. A. Scope of Work 1. Review of existing antenna regulations including a qualitative assessment of whether the regulations are fair or overly restrictive. 2. Survey of otner/communities: a. Initial phone survey of surrounding, cities regarding their antenna regulations. b. Review of regulations from other ;communities and model ordinance in comparison to Rancho Ldcamonga's. c. Photographic survey of exisitng antenna installations. d. Field survey of Rancho Cucamonga to determine the number and nature of violations. . _ - ITEM PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT ,. Antenna Study /87 -88 Work Program September 9i 1987 Page 2 3. Reseal,ch technical aspects of the various antennas: a. RwH ew of public testimony given during hearings on ap ;heats of Minor Oevelopmtrt Review aoplicatiort for antennas. b. Reserach of technical data to be obtained through literatut-I and personal interviews with antenna "experts: c. Review tf existing antenna regulations by antenna "experts" such as radio operator organizations, 4. Prerare draft amendments to antenna regulations for revie' by Commission and Council. R. Schedule: Staff estimates that the antenna study would take approx mately nine months to complete including Gity Council adoption c! =-any necessary code amendments. Furttw_r, it is anticipated that any amendments to our antenna regulations are potentially as controversial aF the tree preservation ordinance amendment which took r1 ne months to complete. C. Staff Resources: Staff estimates that this study-'would require 200 hours if person weeks) to complete. This type of study would involve pulling together a group of planners to do the research and draft proposed amendments. This group would include the Senior Planner, one Associate Planner, and one or two Assistant Planners. III. CONCLUSION: Staff reclksends that the Planning Commission e e� whether the proposed antenna study should receiva a Priority I, II, Iii, or IV for the 1987 -88 Work Program and comment on the proposed . colc of work and forward a recap, `odaUon to the City Council, - Notwithstanding the controversial nature of an antenna study— it would be staff's recommendation that :his study take a much lesser priority in relation to some at�:.r more Pressing work program items. A list of the 87 -88 Work Prcgram items and their priorities have been attached. Staff further recommends that this study be given i Priority IV. If a prioirity IV is assigned, i' is 'likely that this study would not start until the end of this=< fiscal year ar the bs`aianing of the next fiscal year. qPanner jai d, BB:kk Attachments: Exhibit "A" - 1987 -88 Work Prngram Q —A 0 dz - �r Memo to Mayor S Members of the City CouncYl r Re: 1987 -88 Planning Division Goals - - �'_ July 20, 1987 _ J Page 14 87/88 WORK PROGRAM SUMMARY TASX (PER /WEEK) 1. I DEVELOPMENT PROCESSING REVIEW ......................313 •'.. I PUBLIC INFORMATION SERVICES ........................131 3. I CODE ENFORCEMENT ......... 4. I ...........................131 COMMNITY DEV. BLOCK GRANT .......................... 33 5. I INTER GOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS .........................9 6. I GENERAL PLAN LAND USE AMENDMENT ......................7 7. I ASSOCIATED DISTRICT AMENDMENTS .... ..................2 8. I GEOG%APHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM ............... ....41 9. I FOOTHILL CORRIDOR SPECIFIC PLAN & EIR4. ...19 10. I SPHERE OF INFLUENCE ANNEXATION STRATEGY, :' .....20 11. I GENERAL PLAN ADMINISTRATIVE UPDATE ................... 17 12. I HAVEN AVENUE PARKWAY LANDSCAPE PLAN ..................3 13. I MINIMUM j,-9T SIZE /UNIT SIZE STUDY ......... 6 .......... Is 14. I HILLSIDE GRADItA ....................... 15. I COST ALLOCATIOk STUDY .. ........................,.....2 16. I TREE ORDINANCE UPDATE..... ................ 5 17. II DEVELOPMENT CODE UPDATE... ................ .12 18._ II HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ORDINANCE . .... ..... .8 19. "' 7. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES PROGRAM .............10 20. Ii GENERAL PLAN /COMMUNITY DESIGN ELEMENT UPDATE........ 12 21. II DESIGN CRITERIA GUIDEBOOK ......................:....4 22. 23. II II COUNTY PLANNING .................................. ':..10 DESIGN OF EXCELLENCE AW ARDS....... ...................3 24. II SMARA .................. 25. it ..............................6 MULTIPLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS ...............2 26. II1 SENIOR HOUSING ACTIVITIES ..............................4 27. III ETIWANDA SPECIFIC PLAN UPDATE REPRINT ................8. - 28. III TRAIL ; STUDY ............ 29. III ..............................3 ANNEXATION OF OUT PARCE'S IN VICTORIA ................2 30. IV BILLBOARD CONDEMNATION . ..............................4 31. IV CODE ENFORCEMEVT COMMUNITY WATCH & COMMIUNITY AWAR NESS .... ..............................3 32. IV STREET NAMiiZ rRDINANCE AMENDKENT STREET NAME CHANGES..,.......... 33. IV .... ............ .10 SAN SEVAIKE CREEK SPECIFIC ALAN ......................2 34. IV DAY CfYYON- ETIWANDA HEIGHTS PLHY .....................3 35. IV OFFICE MANUAL. UPDATE ... ..............................1 36. IV ETIWANDA SPECIFIC PLAN SPHERE OF INFLUENCE REVISIONS: 3 37. IV ...... LAND .......................5 38. IV C:MIMUNITY PROFILE UPDATE ................ 39. I`! ANTENNA REGULATION STUDY........ ........... ......3 l0. IV LANDSCAPE /IRRIGATION GUIDELINES ................ ......3 dz - Re S o f council 19 Vision Goals ti a Page 15 41. _ IV ENTERTAINi NT PERMITS, . ..... .....1 42. IV ADULT �IdESS Z0?ti 43. IV TRAILS ED-717 -EE.. ... ...3 44.. IV SIGN ORWIKI=,KNUMEIT.,...... .. �. ,...,,.....1 45. IV ISP EXECUTIVE S~X 46, Ii!A SPECIAL FNtWELiS....... .......... ...................bl TOTAL .... 034 AVAILABLE STAFF....814 120 i