Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
1989/08/30 - Agenda Packet
lj�jpjllq GUG'kn i�� s cam— la CU&`AI�K7l�Y'rA Oy _ ANN11% 0 ;.r4nA7Y1�111 AGENAk 1977, , liILOID8 DEVELOPMENT OR6IN�NCE(ETINIri1v�DA N(}RTFl SPECIFIC")'LAN WEDNESDA' 4 A[IGUST 30,1989 5 0U p.m. C� 1 I ONO PARK CGMMAIR B='UNrI<Y CI IPMR. Im BARCM CUCAMONGA,CALIVORiOA c� Comnissioner Blakesley Comnissione.SWiel Qmnissioner Chitiea'• Cmmnissioner 3lslstoy aRyInissioner "klnberger Ib Ihtr ftetio of Participants by the;Chalrman I M Staff Presentation v*es°ntation of the staff report by Cin'y r°rxiay� Assistant Planntir, futlowed by,Commission questions or commer% osort�ues fle�ntation ' PmWntatldn by Jess glarris, Lead Plan D 'fit ncxuo,rapt senor the `1 j Etiwanda forth Con€ar--kium, followed by Commission questions or. k comments. V. k blie C Qmen$s ur Querns VL C aneluftg Comments A. E4na1`.Commentsby`the Commissioners. 1J1 B. Planning Commission Chairman will summarize the significant comments and the direction that,the Planning Commission wishes to pursue. i > VM AdjR inmeatt It is anticipated the meeting will adjourn by 5:00 P.M. t },� "j i S CITY OF RANCHO CUCAIKQNGA ' l DATE: August 50, 1 989 TO: Chairman and Membe;s .of the Planning.Comnission I,-ROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Cindy Norris, Assistant Piann2r; SUBJECT: PLANNING COMMISSION' WORKSHOV HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT,IN THE E' IWANDA NORTH"SP C£ tC'PLAtt I. BACKGROUND' A copy; of the .City's proposed -=:.draft: .'Hillside Development Ordinance was provided to members.of the.ConisortiumIfor review anu evaluation. The proposed Ordinance, represents a formal �mentation of the Grading Compittee's and Planning Commission, policies and standards Witt► e..'egard to Hillside. Developnrynt, . "Exhibit 'B", Staff requested that the members review, comment and " revise the grading and other appropriate secttont'of,the, Specific- Plan accordingly. II. AtIALYSIS: Staff met with representatives of Land/PlanlDesign Group, Landmark Land and the Ctiwanda Heights Development Corporation on-August 18, 190 to,;discuss their comments regarding ` the Hillside Development Drdinad�e' as they relate to Etiwanda North. Rather than specifically addressing-the :p;oposed Ordinance, Land/Plan/Design-presented staff with a letter providing a general overview of the items they Ash to be discussed at the workshop. A copy of the letter is attafihed far year review, Exhibit "A". The following, is a,summary analysis of t"' significant`< ssues expressed = to staff either orally cjr in pritten form at the meeting and staff's response: A Densi't Consortium Comment: The ,onsortium would like to ensure that the base densities available under the County General Plan will be available with the Specific Plan and that standards be designed to. meetl that end. This would include allowing 'up to 204 transfer of development credits on properties within tha plan. Staff Response: 1. Staff feels thit..�-a d'rnsity determination cannot. be achieved with ; ert'''tinty .for ;any subarea ;unless : a detailed review �pcluding grading, circul ati;on, fJ. 4 MEMO TO:, PLANNING COMMISSION RE: HIELSIDE'DEVELOPMENT IN ENSP August 30, 19c39 Page 2 drainage, and-site desigO has, been completed. Review of lot layout pa'terns'wit!:ut. additional -information, will result in possibly unattainable, situations. Addit°ionaTlyst-ihese lot layouts may result in revfew.-, T problems down the road as future developers find that all of the design standards cannot be met, The 'Consortium has proposed, for a majority of the subareas, that conceptual lot layouts be provided with spot elevations and detailed cross sections in order to determine density. They prefer to wait before submitting detailed grading and drainage information until a tentative map is submitted. Once submitted, the tract will be subject to the criteria set in the plan. The result may be that the density cannot be achieved. Out-parcels, in which conceptual, designs have not been submitted; will not receive a guarantee.of density and will be subject to the criteria agreed upon. 2. Clustering of development is e-iuragod in ;order to preserve and minimize disrupt , �; of= unique natural resources or of environmentally sensitive lands. As, a result, density transfers from sensitive land areas'to those areas of" lesser. 'slope .`and impact should be encouraged.;'. Therefore, staff suggests that with regard to the I Hillside Residential District, the slope/density 1 capacity factors provided in Section 17.11.080 should serve as ju-idelines- to limit the extent of Jeveiopment in each slope category, but'shou'id not limit the overall density allowed. As a result,, it .would 'still be possible to achieve up to 2 dwelling units per buildable acre; but the majority of the density would be clustered in the areas of lesser,slope. Any development proposal would also be subject to the required grading standards and Planning Commission review. This is consistent with current provisions of the Hillside Residential District, in which,there are no minimum parcel widths and deptha or setbacks, in order, to encourage clustering In less sensitive areas. B. Hillside Development Regulations:. 1, Consortium Comment: The Consortium indicated that they fell-that the draft Hiilslde Development Ordinance is not appropriate for the Etiwanda North TY, MEMO TO: AANNING CQMmSSIQN RE: HILLSIDE DEVELORi1ENT_IN ENSR LI ' August 30, 1989 Fags 3 1. f study area,,, as it does ne 1prow, le flexibliity to meet all {. of the sits conditions l;santa ij eS, "thin, the: plan. Instead, they feel' that the'tity. should 1i.,,dw the Specffic Flan as a '$ campreheirsive package, including the amenities to be provide"d, " rather- tharrfocusi7q o: specific standards, Staff Response, Based upon review of the proposed grading standards Wit nip, toe ENSP, staff feels'.that. tJl N are -inely general slid provitle limited Constraint. .1n effect, thej-!ould. aliot� corveni"ianal grading In every " case,,,, page 1I186 1, d. line ,6). -r, Additionally, T;t its #, 11 and 111 Which fist 'standards heightsof yard slopes, i ssentially .provides blanket, standards to `pad and terrace or arf- ots with grades up to 12%,"with resulting . rear yrrd slopes ,up 'ta 3$ feet and .side yard slopes up to 16 €east>_I height, with the added prof+isY:a;1 that 15% .of all 10ts in'i_ tract may eXteed�,_-!;e standards. ' These provisions arek,-'ontrary '.to the policies of the General Plan and:Planning`Gor�mission, and ih fact, altE,xnatit y.gradi,rrg tech", `have been reatairedr for the ma or'ity 'F recent deve?:rpmeht Within the City..an slopes of Bib grade O i sweater (TT, 13305Red! z r, Ko TT 11626- 13114 Nordic; 'n3—13316 Freedmaia Home`s, Tt` YW Compass se, IT- 13674 - Lq"r ). G. Additional °Issues,Pelated to Gradinn as f6ilows• Consortiurrt CcMnent; 1. ; Revise the ;criteria for'Hil lsi'de'Areas from slopes that, are,B or greater to a minimum of 1Ct%, gt�6ater. The reasoning behind,this req��esi .is that 4eneral13% natural grade above the Edison cart�idor ;utzI- kor-s retter<- Staff Response'. Based upon past review of proleets within `Norkth "Alta., E Loma, areas, where- has become a significant' , concern have historically occurred:64 natuw slopesrpf Wgrade or greatr»r. As a result, fire Grading Cammitte'e AM Planning Comriisston have supported the definition'of . "hillside" as-jrades of 8% or greater. a, ILI MEMO TO: PLANNING COMMISSION RE: `'HILLSIDE OVELOPMENT 1N, ENSP August'30 19,89, , Page 4". a i Consortium Comment 2. In�. 'clustered resi'entia areas, Where lots are approximately ICi,000 square feet';(a,e..,_;Landmark), allow use of more"'conuenti.oflal=;grading techqques'raher"ttran stepped pads.andjor stemwali foundation's. Staff,Res onse `i Wh,, clustering of residential to areas, .of lesser natural slope ,generally :.results ,y, preservation. of a significant open, -space and envir,,,nrt�entaIly :sensitive land the a.rading ` in .the 'resident,ial _abortions should Still be, COrlSi;tent with the provisions of the`Hillside Development .Orriinance. In keeping witir,..City policy, the amount and, appearance of,g`rading'should;be reduced 'and. sensitivity to the natural lardform maintained: As the residential develop0elOt_ be located in areas :nf lesser Slope, the neces ary mit;jating "techniques will be less restrictive: Consortium Comments. ` S, Take ,up grade. in greenbeltfpaseo areas and reduce grading on interior.lots. Staff Response. Th.ia`technique may be acceptable in. :areas of 'lesser natural slope (less than' 8%) when specific eriaeriafor their useL and treatment, ;(contocsr grading, landscaping, _ and, he_ ght) .are provided: When slopes available to public viely are treated fproPerly they . can provide attractive open space vistas. Additionally then, slopes , on interior;portions should be significantly reduced,, Consortium Comment: 4. Where cut :or fill slopes are created; allow,use of landscaping techniques in-lteu of any contour grading* Staff Response: If heavily landscaped using contour plantfng techniques, a fairly natural, and attractive appearance can be created. An undulating, Ltlopg plane in concert with landscaping, help.s ' to provide an even more natural appearance. In addition, varying the--slope ,plane may also help to provide soil stabilization on a cut or fill slope, z 't >: MEMO TO. PLNt3T1INC COMMISSION M RE: HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT IN ENSP: AugusIt 30, 1989 Page 5 - ` Consortium Comrent.. ,.` 6. Pra:v�de greater flexibility in the Ordinance text by allowing '"1evFe�t_: nr� an i�tdiv�dual basis rather than tsetting speclficnumberimits�' Staff Resp6tlSe.` • ' }r The:gOideTine.spction ai the draft orditiance�is intended to provide< direction and to en�vorage innovative er alternative.- solutions wh"ick achieve :the sate ends as these ouviined in the text- Wit;hin the frame-Wor', of these guidelines, standards have been set t0i give`more speci'f qa-directiop and have been <:a based on Grading Committee ;;:and Flanning Ommlission pol-icies, iaput from various Cfty divisions, and staff s, research and analysis of sta.Wards-and criteria used in other core nit iess r. In several .rases, paPticular°ly in> the gr�iding and drainage sub-sections, limiting 01terfa have been:;set, but individual case renew by the"Manning Commission is alloyed. Cc,,,, ium Comment; ; 6, Allow street gre�(ients of up to 20% .ih hiT?side areas:', Staff Response; !'1 1 Current City pokey,,al lobs`street roadway,graded up s + - 12�. However; the City Engineer has indicated that crl a case-by-case basis, street gradients up.ttr 15 will be permitted subject to the fnilaWingf Approval of Fire Division; No curates allowed where grades exceed 12%; No front-on fats permitted. x, Generally,; unless specifically desfgned, 1,#ghtveig, t vehicles,'are'used, most emergency Vehicles cannot access streets �iith-grades over 16%. Consortium Comps LU 71 Allow slopes in turf areas to exteed`'�.2 Tdkimum grade. <<j J MDIO TO: PLANNING COMMISSION RE: HILLSIDE OEYELOPMENT IN ENSP August Page b Staff Response: The' City's policy with 'regard to City „,maintained parkways,.,trafiis, medians and other;_related,areas Aimits.;- the,t`lopes allowed i turf"=areas' to 5;1.' This is the safest degree'. of cu vatUre,with which ,a seated -.power mower,can negotiate, ,City policy does allow'ocdasional slope;.variations up to,4:1 'in localized areas on 'a easy- b basis.y�case III. WORKSHOP PRESENTATION: Lan d'M.An/Desigti' has indicated that they would file to present detailed"cross-sections and a sliOe, show to illustratQ the,.type of; condition, and. appearance the!j hope to achieve. To further facilitate discussion, staff;has prepared a summary analysis0of the Et.iwanda North Grading S'ect`ion,;'Exhibit �Bp IV. RECOMMENDATION: Staff 'recommends that the Etiwand`a North Grading, section adopt the H.iilside dev ii elokoent Ordinance by reference t total, unless the .Consortium can provide specific evidence. and/or documentation. is9' the satisf'actio �' off:the Nanning Gommis.sion, to Justify proposed`- revisions;,Which may be incorporated into the y, EtiWanda North Specific'Plan, Respectfully submitted, y Brad 861Ter City Planner BB:CN:ko r Attachments,: Exhibit "A".- Excerpt ot!the Grading Section from the Et wa`nda North Specific Plan (<NSP) Exhibit 910 Staffs Summary Analysis of the Proposed Grading Section from the ENSP Exhibit "C" - Revised Draft Hillside Development Ordinance Exhibit "0" - Letter from Jess Harris ;I fk. i r A ROAD OPEN SPACE Blrtt.MW AT BACK'(JF OPEN SPACE SE7 HIGHER SET GRADE OF ROADS$O,THAT LONG VIEWS' 7HAN OPfiN SPMC WO ADJACENT OPEN SPACES ARE CREATED G. GRADING 710 existing topagraphy within the Spedlfic Plan Ora generally drains in a Southeasterly direction.Natural gr2-4es reduce gradually,from mountainous 40%grades at the northern most areas,to 4%within the seutberly portions ofthe.planningarea. IGenerally,.grades above the northtrly'Southehx California Edisoii corgi 3or ate 10%or greater.aod grades youth of the corridor are less than 10%. This corridorprovides,it logical divislon between Hillside'and'Non-Hillside'areas. The following identifies recommended grading standards for both the'Sillside Areas'and 'Non-Hillside Arwe. In order to enhance thecharacttr and design of theEtiwanda North, Specific Plan,a variety of grading solutions are identified below. Best salutionS offer disual diversity within the overall plan and are responsive to the existing terrain: r '' 1. Iiitlside yeas Gre&terthan l0°ir+Pl:odes: s) Attention should be concentrated,on significant visual and envirpnmental elements,, including but not limited to significant vegetation andmildlife habitat,ravines,steep slopes,and,important histori€al or cultural man-made features. Such elements collectively express hillside character. Therefore,it is desirable topreserve or restore these elements within hillside areas. b} Ile preservation of primary ridgelines in their natural state,protecting them from development and r 0iit dining a backdrop for development is recommended. ` Proposed structures should not project above the ridge silhouette as visible from f` designated view points. The ridge's natural contours and vegetation should remain intact with development maintaining an undisturbed rmnirnum setback of 200 feet in width from the centerline of the ridgeline to the undisturbed setback line, ttt es l' c) The preservation of secondary rsdgelines should also is encoufted. Permitted re- contouring of.a ridgeIine s19uld result in a rounded;appearanee so as to'resembla natural terrain,prot=*.ding aekarop for developuYeats Development of se condary' ridgelines will be permittedwhere the tiaWW'Vsofile oan be retained with no abmpt :,lunges in'giade asd where development sniff attendant iarpmvesneats are least"ie fmm other developments texisting&future)and roads lreloev., d) Grading o f the site should be done in,such a vmy that the fural result blends into the " hillside. This can be accompodated bar nay c oinbination of the,following: varying slope helgiits,varying.gradients, rounding tha.slgpe tops and bottoms,or*46r slopes cannot be rounded,aiso vegetation to alleviate the sharp angulsx;appearance. In custom lot areas,grading only for streets'and designing homes to step with the existing terrain is desirable, Conventional grading may also occur on a bylcasa basis. In this conditions sIopc landscaping should be aces➢to crente.,the appearance of aar undulating ground•plane. ,hatueowners association may be required 4o msintain paivatt slopes. A variation on eon'ventio l gtadins that pmvlclss. zoar draining lots is an 91teraativeFthat may reduce slope heights. {See•;Exhibit 34 sections�e-'�) - ry..� e)• To reducealope helots Within yards and create xpleasiag and attractive citiviion erik Incorporate grade,transitions within paseos,along the edges:of rise nelg: orhoodj'. Md(orvrrthin public rights of-way along streets. $ydoing so slope heights between lots are rainimiaed,and additi©nal 1ands4pc enrichmentandIF" connections occur within the neighborbood. Exhibit 34,Ssction`13,identifies b"sv`.this approach can reduce slope heights cotrp�red to conventional grading. Exhibits 4G anti 41 located in map poppets at the end of tin.!bxt also identify this gr lrng appraacli.` �a 1) When space is limited setbacks may lie Iinimized,'street widths reduced and,pad x stes'and building sites maybe clustered to roduce grading g) Align st=b to con6r in to existing topogmphy. b) Off-strut parking tnay br r)ravided in.off-street bays vvlien parallel pars iog cannot be --e�:=±*:to�tedmu+�'tar±�t-c:lwa� tnsr�.ac�gidciv�in,singles"a?nily�evel:Kpm gts==- -- , -.= shouldbe encouraged if,gradirigis.reduced bitheicuse- ilia f } M1 2 _,Non Hillside Areas Lis Than 109ot Grades: (! Tla:s grading concepts can be divided into three generailappraaches as described below: :04fier solutions beyond thoie described that meet the intent;of creating a visi lly attractive y:-ighborhood ehaiacte;",am encouraged. a) Gra�,`n�gith'eogventional'fully gadded fats acid terracing is acceptable. Refer to. 'Exhibit 34 Sections$which identities Ods concept..Tables I`and M identifyprojected slope heights. A variation•of Us is to proWfe rear draining lots which in Yuen may reduce slope heights(see table lI,andExhifi t34,section B) b) To reduce slope heights withinyaxds and create a pleasing and attractive environment, incorporate gradeiaasitions within paseos,along the edges of the neighborhood, and/or Within pubic rig hts=of-way along streets. By doingso slope heights between lots are minimiied apd additional landscape enrichment and paseo cotu}ections occur within the neighborhood. Exhibit ,Section B,'identifies how this approach can reduce slope heights compara to conventional grading. Exhibits 40 and 41 located in rr i pocketsat the end of the text also ide�jtify this gradingf,�proach. c) 'W Wea certain areas of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan speci f is neighborh©ads have been conditioned irl previous approvals by the City to incorporate,stepped pads lots.Iiiis sciiution provides another grading approach that adds to theAiversity of �eJ overall specific plan and assists in reducing slope heights,iit;tear yards,(see l�xhibit 34,Section Q. � %I I f./ i � w I� a , 11 813 �t TABLE I Approximate Height of Rear Yard Slopes (Al1,Lats FrontDcallf SITE:GR/'DE* $0'DEEt LOT 19Q DEEP M 120'DEEP T.OT 2.3% 5to7' 6toT 6to101 4.5% 8to12' 10to15' 11toai' 6-7% 13to 17' 16to21' 18to24' 8-9VO 18 to,43' 22 to 28' 25 to 31' 10-12% 24 to 30' 29 to 35' 32 to 38' TABI:E II Approximate Height of RearYard Slopes (Includes Use ofltear Draining Lot$) SITE GRADE* 80'DEEP LOT 10"D P OT 120'DEEP LOT 2-3% '3to5' 3to6' 2to6' 4-5% 6 to 10' 7 to IT 7 to IT 6 •7% I1 to 15' 13'to 18` 14'to 20' 8-9% 16 to:21' 19 to 25' 21 to 27' 10-12% 22 to 28'i 26 to 32' 28 to 34' TABLEIII klpproximateHeight of Side Yard.Slopes** ! STREET-GRADE 5f WIDE LOB 9 Vi+II}E LOT 2-3% 2to3' 2to3' 4to5' 4 5% 3 to 4' 4 to S' 6 to 70 6-7% 4 to 5' 6 to'7' 8'to 9' C 8-9% 5to6' 7to8' 10 to 11' C 10-11% 6to'7' 8to9' 12to13' ! . 12-'13%; 7to8' 10to11' 13to14' ' 14-15% 8to9' 12to13" 15to16' *'Site Grade refers.the percentage of drop between streets running parallel to the grade. I' **Side slope heights may be larger at end iijt conditions oenther minor areas of the site f where rear slopes wrap around into side yard slopes.Also,slopes for lots Along the inside of curved streets tend to require higher slopes due to the increa ed frontage lengths.Slopes heights above are desired standards but may be exceeded in some cases,such.as those ` [' identified above.No greater than 15%of all lots within a tract shall exceed the above I standards. r Note; These tables do not reflect conditions where slopes are combined and concGentrated wcthin paseos or edges of sites,.Slope;heights within lots in such cases may be fWrther.. ; reduced, s l i4 t 3. GENERAL, In addition to the general concepts,outlined previously,the following standards,24pply within theEtiwanda North Specific PIan, 1) Slope h�-tghts shall 16 ibased on criteria established in the conceptual gradingsections in the Specific Plan and in z able I above.. 2) The nnaxitxt� L streetigtade`sball be 15%for unloaded,lr. trior street sections,except in specific area$where:maximums will be permitted up to 20%subject to a case by case raview. -111iiere existing topography exceeds 10%�the masimunt streV,,,gm- shall be 15%,;04re lots frrsnta street, 3) Allowable maximum street grade into the ends of a cul4e-sac shall be 4%froth the radius point to middle of curb, 4) The current edition oftha UBC,1,iili establish building setbacf,I from tops and toes of slopes. S) U$C terrace and.downdra n standards apply. Benching details,to be determined by the Soil Engineer. 6) The maximum grade break is to be 2% at.BCR's and ECR's f'ti,cross streets in eXcess of 5%. This will allow far shorter letigths of warpage at steeper ntefsections. 7) Site distances,for botizontal and vertical curves shall be based on Caltrans stopping ; distance craeria. 8) A vertical scale of lr-08'is pemitted for profiles on street impravement plan,. This; will reduce the nutnbet of profile brer+hs required and presents a clearer reprv;entation in steeper terrains:: 9) In hillside areas,a nireet r"ius of 2S0'shall-be permitted. 10) Amaximum 4,retaining wale is permitted within side or rear yard slopes.Por a Yypical soTutior.in rear yards,refer to section Exhibit 34,Section B 11) Along edges of the neighborhood aremadjacent to public street rights ofwayrutility corridors or where public paseos are created slope heights may occur up,to 25',as tong as the gradient is 3:t or less if publicly maintained, or 2s1,maximum if , maintained by a home wamem w3od"on. Slope belghts up WY arc also permitted in rear yarns that are adjacent to project edges In order,to reduce slopes within the project boundaries. . l x f ' " 7 t J'SrAtF P"w i �,ti 1, L �. .3tt1Ra5 . t 1 ,. 11 s T � srlRJff&r fL T`Y'P1CAL YA RD. DRA i NAGE LT BEAR RAININ _.aT.1 I N.T S . I EXHIBIT 3413, TYPICAL REAR DRAINING LOT. t, E�I�'�A'1 UA•N{�RTH f� °' tit sr �C kf)a T A SUMARY REVIEW COMMENTS REGARDING THE MWANOA NORTH'' SPECIFIC PLAN' GRAOING SECTION 1) Include a, general purpose and intent section. 2) Section 1,a.'- Could function well,as a general guideline or intent statement with appropriate modification. 3) Section 1,b. This is an acceptable guideline hhich encourages preservation of primary ;.ridgel; nes. However;, the term "primary ridgeline" should be defined, and the ward should be changed to shall. 4) Section 1,c. This is an acceptable guideline to encourage preservation of secondary ridgelines. However, as stated above,` the ' term "secondary ridgeline" should be defined.,--' 5) Section '1,d. This paragraph discusses too many concepts, each, should be discussed separately. a) The first portion, regarding contour grading and landscaping could be an acceptable guideline. Specific criteria and graphics should be provided to illustrate methods of contour grading and landfarm planting. However, it should be kept in mind that the City's policy is to reduce grading to the extend necessary. b) The concept proposed in line five (5) should be further expanded. Instead of saying, "in custom lot areas' define specific slope categories (i.e., 5-10, 10-15%, 1,5-20%...) and examples of types of grading permitted in each. c) The exception proposed in line: six (6) sbou d be qualified by outlining under what circumstances a .mare conventional type grading technique will be allowed, and specific methods to mitigate its appearance. d) A Nome Owners Association will probably be unable to maintain slopes contained within private yards and areas. Areas most likely to be maintained by an association would include common slope and landscape areas as well; as, easement areas for drainage purposes. e) Cross lot drainage may be utilized in a manner as outlined in the draft Hillside: Development Ordinance. Reference should'be.-includ-ed in the text accordingly. 6) Section 1,e. The method 1proposed for taking up grade within public easements/paseos is Acceptable in areas of limited natural slope. However, extensive contour grading and landscape techniques should be utilized to minimize t-6e appearance of the grading. Therefore, criteria shall_ be set to specify exactly those circumstances when this' method may be used, and the specific techniques to be used. mitigate the resulting appearance. �xnjx�� M SUMMARY REVIEW CMIMEKS Page 2 7); Section l,f. As a very general guideline this statement is acceptable. However, specific;:criteria outl,inirig the situations when this provisian viii1 be acceptable and the permissible .standards is necessary: 8) Section 1,g,. - Works as a general guideline. Provide graphic illustration. 9) Section l,h. - Again two separate'concepts Are discussed in the one paragraph. Each is acceptable as a general guideline statement, however, on an individual, case basis.. Some,qualifiers to indicate the appropriate circumstances when each situation may occur, should be provided. 10) Section 2. See discussion in staff report for determination of hillside and non-hillside areas,.,(8% vs 10%). 11) Section 2,a. - This section is,too broad anri should be revised to be more in keeping with City policy as follows: a) Convent.:.;nai grading with fully padded lots is permitted in areas with natural sIo;:n less than 5%. b) Padded, grading techniques are also permltted.on areas. of natural slope ranging from 5 to 8%. However, mi",gating te,:hnigces such as contour grading, limited cut and fill, padding for the structure only and split level ;prototypes m y be requ ired to reduj^e grading. c) In areas with slrpesr between 8 and 15%, techniques to reduce grading are expected to be As stated in No. 5.c, above, proposed exceptions shall be explicitly identified, the reason for the exception outlined, 'snd specific criteria prc.?osed to mitigate the resulting appet[rance. s 12) Section 2,b. - See discussion under No. 6 above. 13) Section 2,c. - Specify those area that ' have "already been; conditioned to use stepped pads. Provide more detailed information regarding this gr-ading approach, (i.e. text 14_scription)- It would also help to specify those conditions when• it would be..most appropriate to use this approach. Or alternatively, provide exceptions when this solution would no-' be required. 14) Tables I, II, and III are incomplete as they do ait "specify a resulting slope grades and in'what situations these slope heights would b.e permitted. In effect,. the tables• infer that-:'conventional. grading; ;4 techniques are allowed on all properties with natural grades up to 12%_ } �. City policy does not allow unretained or otherwise unmitig. wd' slopes that are over 8 feet i^,':aight. Slopes greater than 8 feet.may be considered on an individual basis subject to Planning Commission f SUMMARY REYIEN COMMENTS , 4up 3 01 review. Consideration`. Will -take into account affect on adjacent properties, views, landfnrms, proposed mitigation and other significant considerations not speci"fically discussed and whether the slopes are required in order to accomplish development -inunusual or extreme circumstances. Additionally ,in those circumstances where slopes exceeding 8% are permitted, criteria for their tr^ 4tment should he provided including but not limited to such items as benches provided at reasonable intervals, (W), to allow ease of access for maintenance, tern—,ed retaining walls, and landscaping. 15) Section 3,1.' - See above comments. 16) Section 3,2.. See discussion lo 'tile Staff:report .regarding maximum allowable street, grades ` Ire addition, guidelines or standards should be 'included "zQ encourage the use of'spl'it streets and reduced roadway rridths:"in steeper hillside areas., Other criteria, including treatment of lan4sc4wi and walls (including retainiAg) shculd be`prrovided: 17) Section 3,3. - Subdec''e to Engineering conditions. See;previews TRC comments. 18) Section 3,4. - Define the anachronim UBC. Uniform Building Cody, !!!i generally provides only, minimum standards. When more restrictive; minimum building. or structural setbacks are specified in the hillside criteria they shall take, residence over UBC criteria (i.e., usable rear yard areas) 19) Section 3,5. a. 110t statement is generally acceptable for minimum safety ctand, �Vlever, more restrictive criteria provided in the hillside section wl." prevail. The sentence should be modified to that effect. 20)' Section 3,6. - Define anachronim BCR and, ECR. Subject to Engineering provisions. Per-TRC comments by Engineering Division, "The City requires vertical curves, in lieu of grade breaks, into an intersection". 21) Section 3,7 - As there may. be .unusual-,circuifttances occurring, in hillside G:,"eas there s,°,ould also be a provision for review.and'approval by the City Engineers Also, per TRC comments by the "Eng,,neering Division, "...lots on the inside of curved streets wil Y have_ greater sight distance; problems,, which should not be compounded by higher slopes' near the street".. 22) Section 3,& - Per TRC comments by Engineering Division, "a l" = 8' vertical scale is permitted if a 1" 4' would result in more than one. 1' � section b..eak per sheet". 4^ _ �fr I SUMi ARC REVI D1 COMMENTS Page,A 23) section 3,g., � per TR0 comments by Engineering Div�tt_ion, "a radius of 250 feet'may be permitted on short cul-de-sans ,ire the hillside area, on a :case' by;cases 6;asir",. Subject to Gi:��:Engineer 'and Fire Division, approval. 24)1 Section 3,14. - Criteria:regarding retaining wall;' contained within the Pillside Development Ordinance, Sec i'on 17,11.070,G,8 shall prevail. 23) Section- 1. a The first €our, sentences of this paragraph'.,art,4 acceptable_ r_.guideline"statement. But, as mentioned in co,t�nts above, situations when these $lopes may permitted hn. clearly outs fined and the netessarlr mitigation mkturei outrr,'ned`. The last three sentences .of this paragraph are no. 'acceptable except, as discussed inilnc,1wQr 1a. tiFm ADDITIONAL C014MENTS 1) For ease of reading, the format of the grading section'should be organized in such 'a.-marger .that them iS 1). a purpose 'and, intent section, 2) a guideline section,- and standard section. Further, Wzrmation should be presented by subject category such as site design, landscaping.. grading,, drainage, roadway/driveway, etc.... ') Additional items which should be includpd .in the grading section are as follows: a. A definition, section. b. Determination of slope zone categories and general. provisions to be followed in each. c) Povide additional guidelines 'to illustrate`methods by thi.ch to reduce and/or mitigate grading. impacts such as: - Contour.gradiag Varying slopa angles 1 Treatment of drainage devices Site design .Possible structural modifications (i.e., split level L or stem wall foundations) View protection - Architectural consideAtions in hilly areas, (i.e., rooflines should follow slope, materials struc"W,,�e massing, etc...) l � - SUM14ARY REVIE�I �O��1tREt�TS, �, r 4 1 Streetscape-=appearance and possible treatments ?` Passb1e,roadvtay designs Examples of`landferm planting and a possible islant pallet d, Provide: specific, standards in additioni' w� contained in the.;gradj ng,section tq incldde� 'Si te'desig.n (a..Q., in areas of steep ter rain_ 20 +, allow lesser, setback"Ciriteria"jt etc.. Driveway design Roadway/Streetscape treatment Landscap:i7g cr,;.eria r )type, '; placement; preservation- 1 � abnsiderutions, sizes-,`.streetfront 10dscaping etc�t:l; . Grad#nd�c" If4ria O.e:, retaining -wtll� heights, slop= reatr dtions, etc.' 4 Drainage provisions. Public safety iss ties „ EXN10J1 r 5 5 OR C'lt:icu:=; ;+.ilia F:UgP,ScS ONLY CHAPTER'17.11 HILiSibE DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS Section 17.11.010 Purpose and Intent These r°plati:ons are intended to further impleme;?t and define the goals, and , objectives of the General Pian, to minimize adverse effects of, and to l provide' for the safety and benefit the ,+?lfare, of the citizens, of .Rancbb fCucamonga while allowing for reasonable `development of land, as expressed _ through the following purposes: r A. Provide;specifc guidelines for development in hi1Iside areas ao minimize the adverse impacts of grading and to promote the " goal,s and objectives of the City of Rancho , Cucamonga'"s General Plan Open Space,, " Conazr0ti+on, and Design Elements; .and, a B. Maintcin an environmental equilibrium consistent with exis-eing vegetation, wildlife,. soils, geology, slopes, and, drainage patterns, and to preserve natural topography and scenic character, including swales,, canyons, creeks,- knolls;•rock outcrops, and-ridgelines whenever feasible; and, , C. Preserve apd. intain texisting wildlifi through the.,retention of, significant natural habitat- and, ' D. Encourage seater conserVat;tmn and aquafe"r" recharge; and E. Avoid deve[opment that would result in fire,' flood, slide, erosion, pollution, t.�r other safety hazards; and, F. Limit the "extent of grading alterations and encourage sensitive development in the 'Hillside areas through flexible design "and innovative y:. arrangement of •building sites by utilizing increased lot sizes, clustering,- and setback variations; and, A, ,. v 4,XI-f16/'� G. Avoid residential den$,l' ies !wM ch exceed]),the capacity of the, land'and level of services which cart reasonably be provided and that generate traffic,x,equiring extenstive yrxdins�to provide adequate "street access—And, H. Encourage devel`baments,.jhich;Mse desirable, existing features of land such `as `natural. v'egetatian,;''viewsheds, geologic- and archaeological 4eatures; and " I. Prot_ct .natural area: for ecologic, educational and'., other, scientific study�tpurposes; and r= J. Preserve;and/or introduce plant igaterial to protect slopes from soil erosion and slippage, preserve natural w$tershed, minimize fire: hazard. and to eedeee the v#geal effeei;s, e€ grad�Rq and:eenstrae0ent andv minimize the scarring aile3 deformation"of the naturdI landscape; and, K, timi mpact of slopes on adjacent developed or undeveloped,; Properties,. Section 17.11.020i Review Procedures All projects-,within a hilis,ide area (8 percent siope ''ar greater) shall tie subject`to .Gr,'ading Committee review ,with approval 'by "City" staff, the City Planner or Pispnning CorMaission. r iF A. 'r City Planner Review The City Planner .shall revie►c all site development,Jpplica'tions, and shall impose conditions deemed appropriate when one or more of the following activities are proposed: ;" f I) Natural slopes which awe eight percefit (8%) or grafter but less than fifteen percent (15%) on'all or part of a subject site,r or on less steep Land which may be`affected "tiy`areasof greater slope e.g,, flat parcei between 'on adjacent to steep hillside), I �° FoR ®1..+.v ltSr74.v tY i<.V Ra wi....S.J i/1`6LY 2) For fills or excavations equal to or exceeding 3 feet, but less than 5.feet in vertical depth, at their deepest pointr measures from then natural ground, surface. 3) For excavations or fills, or any combination thereof, equal to or exceediing 100 cubic yardi�,,but less than 1500 cubic yards. B. Planning Commission Review - The Planning iCommiss'ion shall review site development applications and impose conditions deemed appropriate when one or more of the following activities .are propo,led: 1) Natural, slopes equal ,to or greater than 15 percent on all or part of a subject site.,_. a 2) For fills or excavations equal to or exceeding; 5 feet in vertical depth at their deepest point measured `from the natural ground surface. "' 3) For excavations or fills or any combination thereof; equal to or exceeding 1500 cubic yards. 4) Any excavation or fill which will encroach onto`or •alter a natural drainage channel or watercourse. (Should be prohibited unless -alternate drainage is provided.,) 5) ijp� _*her pr4osal referred to the Planning Commission by the Grading Committee or V ty Planner. ' C. Exceptions Projects 'Which are limited . in scope (e.g., +'. additions to existing structures and/or construction of accessory structures less than 250 square feet and on slopes less than 20%) require- only staff level review. and. approval, However, projects which require grading of large flat areas, ich as: tennis courts, riding rings; etc., in hilisideareas shall be reviewed ;by the City Planner. w r' -3- �. +=� ti. �•X I�1 C3 i7'��3 FOR Discu G i'iSc�:4,G3St:a Oi'11.Y D.--If ambiguity arises co Kerning interpretation of the provisions w of this sG, n, it; shall be reviewed ;by the City Planner to determine- f compliance with the provisions contained within this section or #t he may be ' referred it to the Planning ,commission. Section 17.11 430 Application Filing Requirements A. ->Al; Natural features map which shall identify all existing slope r, banks, ridgelines, canyons, natural drainage courses. Federally recognized. 4 r` blue line streams, rock outcroppings, and existing vegetation-, Also depicted' shall be landslides, and other existing geologic hazards.: B. A conceptual' grading plan, ;which shall include the following items in addition to those required as part of the Submittal Requirement Checklist• 13 A legend with appropriate symbols which should include; but 110t be limited to the foliowinq items: top Pfv�a11� top of curb, high paint, low point, elevation of significant, trees,: spot elevations,,jad and.finished floor elevations and chtnge in direction of drairt,age. 2) A separate map with proposed fill areas colored in green , and cut areas iq red,;with areas where cut" and fi11 exceed depths established in the hillside'`deveiopment guidelines and standards clearly shown. I 3) Contours :shall .be shown for existing and natural lend conditions and proposed work. Existing'contours shall be depicted with 'a dashed line with every,fifth contour darker, and proposed contours shall be depicted as above except With a sol,4a light line. Contours shall be ,shown according to the following schedule.40 Natural :Slope Maximum'intervaV eet. j 2% or Tess to 19.9% 2 6 t® 'gs9 _4. DRAFT. 'rok, DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY, C. A conceptual drainage and flood control facilities map`', t describing planned drainage improvements. 0. A. Slope`-Analysis Map ;fs;r-the purpoae of determining,the_,amount and location of land as, it exists. in it:, natural state falling Into,each slope'' category noted in section (17,060.100, H.2) For the slope map, the applicant shall use a base topo.gra0aicail map of the subject site prepared and signed by a registered civil eng;nee r or licensed. fand surveyor which shall have a. scale of not Less t.an one (1) inch to 100 and a contour inter of not more than two (2) feet provided that t2'i`e contour interval may ,`,e t'e4 +10 five (5) feet when the slope is more than 20%. This base -.�v�syr :cal map;shall include all adjoining properties within 150` feet of the :si.e boundaries. Delineate. slope bands in the` range of zero (0)d up to five (5 .,�percent, five (5) up to tery (10) .Percent. ten ('10 up to fifteen (15)',percent, fifteen 9 (15).up! to 1 twenty (20) percent, twenty (20) up to aH$o age} twee y-five'.(25) percenws tkipty ¢39} twenty-five (25) up to €eritiy F49� thirty (30) percent, and and r�+ r fopty J49} thirty Q30)' percent or greater shall include, or be accompanied by a tabulation of the l nd area in each slope(Ntegory specified in acres. The exact method fore computing the percent 'siop�e and area by :percent slope {4 category should be sufficiently described 'and) presented so that a review, can be readily made. E. A solo is and Sois., report,, repared b ` an approved soils g 9 P P y P f" engineering firm and in sufficient detail to substantiate and support. the design concepts presented in the: application as submitted. Additional �. environmental studies apd investigatigns, such as ,but not limited hydrologic, seismic, 'access/circulation .and biota research' may YSRt be ` required in order to help in the determination of the 40? 1e area of a si;e. F. A statement of conditions for ultimate ownership and wintenance of all parts of the development including streets, structums and open,spaces .!J y jay y f Fo p��CtJ��i:7t'1 F)URPOSES I , Ili the 'event that no grading is proposed, a statement to that effect shalt :he filed with a plan that delineates the boundary of an �• adequately sized building pad, driveway,and septic system for each', parcel proposed, to be prepared on a topographic map as described ire Section 17.11,030 R above: H The jo.i lowiniv items°°w0V "may` be 'regd'ired An;y- If' determined" necessary by the Grading Committee, City Planner or planning Commission to ai'd,. in the analysis of the propbsed\,project, to 'illustrate existing or proposed conditions or both: 1) A topographic mae1); r 2) A line of sigN{t;o/View analy. s; ,o, 3) Any other i1lu.4tr Live techniq!pe determined racP:sary to aid in review of a projedt. It, Section 17.11.0�- Definitions BALANCE - The cuttingand filling of a'sita which does not.. e i e `"ti 9_ _ r qu r „ the export or import of earth'materiai,, BORROW - Earth material acquired from it o.ff-site locution for"the use in grading on a .site. CONTOUR - A line drawn-on a plan which connects alb points of equal elevation. CONTOUR GRADING = A'gradina concept��-,Agined to resul in earth foams which resemble patural; terrain characteristics. Nor3zontal and vertical curve variations are often used for slope ianRs. - Contour grading does iiot-, necessarily minimize the-amount of cut�,and fill occurring. CUT - The mechanical removal of earth material, 1 tYi ,I t , � x r � o � ^ rra�y •... ONLYY i, CUT AND FILL -. The "excavating of earth materfial in and place end y depositing of`it as",fill in an adjacent place:' DAYLIGHT LINE - Thd, line,,between grading and xlaturaT terrain drawn by connecting,the;points where ;proposed contaut^s,meat existing contours. r ELEVATION - Height or distance above sea Idvet, EROSION - ,The process by which IFhe soil and rock components of��ttie earths crust are worn away and r..emoved`\.rom one place to another by na,�ral forces such as wild. aW water. EXPORT - Excess earth mater,al that is removed from,a grading project and deposi',zd t-site: FILL - A deposit of:earth material placed by artificial mexiis. FINISH GRADE - Tho final grade of the site which conforms, to the approved plan. L GRADING - To bring an existing surface to a desagned form by -' excavating, fillf.,g, or smoothing operations." HILLSIDE riefers to a ,parcel of land or'deflnabSa Gportion' thereof ' with average rise or fall 'of eight,,(8S) percent or 'greater. l r _ 'KNOLL-- A small round hill or mound. tl II MASS GRADING The process of padding; and/or, terrzcin!�,an. entire piece of land. r 1 1 n DR.ArT FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY MINIMAL GRADING - A grading concept designed to minimize excavation and filling. AlIows' the movement of earth for ,projects such as individual' building foundations, driveways, local roads and utility excavation. The concept .is associatp�t with roads conforming closely to natural contours and with structures being building on natural terrain. NATURAL SLDPE%- A slope which is' not man made.' A natural slope may retain natural vegetation during 'adjacent grading, operations or it may .+ partially or•como?etel,y removed and replanted. PAD = A level area created by grading to accommodate development. PRORIREMT RIDGE - A ridge,or hill location which is visible north of Wilson/24th street from a major arterial ep secondary ar collector street ®r which forms pairs of the skyline wh eh 4s or, is-seen as a distinct edge against a backdrop of land at least three hundrad'(300) feat horizontally behind It, or is so designated by the City Planner or Planning Commission based upon a review of the site. bantam Dackkr* Geatagkai t�etus pro�nk�erti 1 a disti-t edge agslrtssr�becf�4�a1 `� ��� WVd~is 3'or mars ha4onOy behind it'as vk w d from a MJw arUd* aeaorxlsry ar.ea9tset st»at APftsvW 1 ms�orrertarla� seeottdary as RIDGE= A long, narrow, conspiduous elevation of land; SCAR - A. visible cut in a hillside or .ridge with a slopa, `4n wh4eh vegetaUen WO; be greater than 2$4, 1-1/2: 1 in which:: all topsoil has been removed and vegetation will unable to 01__00eant;y establish its6lf after a significant period of time (5'years). i ED RAFT FoR Dj1 c ssjo$Y pU:RPOSE:S ONLY SLOPE - an incti'ned, ground surface,: the inclination of 'which is expressed as`a ratio of horizontal distance (run) to vertical distance (r''-ise)lj or change in elevation. The percent of any given slope is determined by dividing the rise by the run, multiplied by 100. �n �1150 I ' Vsrucal than" 1 —90 N NwWon(flee} L\` ^-630 _a20 ?� loo -� Nerizontat dstance cetw��---meow },nj sLopr-' X 100 30 •X 100 OR 30%SLOP SLOPE, MAN-MADE - P, manufactured slope consisting wholly or partially of either cut or filled material`.' SLOPE TRANSITION '- The; area -where a slope bank meet$ the natural terrain or a level graded area either vertically or horizontally. �t � EXH 113)7- C 11, u �f4N FZT,.- ,y S etiton 17.11.050 Hillside 0esigotion Slope Zoe Natural Slope Standards � F 1 5 or less This is' not a hillside -toildition. Grading with .conventional i'ul]y padded lots and terracing °is' acceptable. 2 5 to 1,99 Oevelooent with grading As, permitted in this zone bit, eilsti;iq landforLms mdit cretain,, he�;r naturk, character. 04dded buildii;g s-i,�t� are permitted, '6tever, tech►,iques such-,as contour -jrading, combined slopes, cut and fill, and. split level architectural prototypes �u# to a Max4mvst of #S #Aehess d##iepent#a Or ,padding for the structure's only, may be required to reduce grading. _, 3 5 `-to 14.9 This is -a,_" hfllside condition. Special h1lj$1de architectural and design teehnigves are fro ired in this zone. Architectural Prototypes � are expected to conform to, the", natural landform by using techniques s0ch as split 'level fqurdations of ;f greater than 18 inches, stem walls, stacking and clustering. i :; -10- �0.�' UISCUSS(c�iV U13PCSES j N1.Y 4 "I'S to `-29.9 De'velopme t).within,,, this_'=:one is _ limited.•�o no more' thanx;the less visually pramitient Sopessand then only `where it can, be shown that safety, environmental and aestheteR }4 ;, impacts can be Use of largar lath;`variab a se, acis; and variablcr building structural techniques such as stepped, or-pale foundations tars expected.• Structures shall blend 'with the �tatura3 envrcnmer�t through their shape, materials, wand. colors. r Impact of traffic-,and uwa o he .nAjnized by folIuwinq natural ' contours, or. using 9x?d'e see retions. %.��; 30 and-Over 5 39 to 390 ,Reve4:�a t AIM .v'0 ookal�y eaetlr' +e4mil Skss :zeae. " 4slella . r4dgeUaes aid pees ovftrops shO °. Ts press e�, `Vepy Uz4 d deAs4�#es akeA,.i•����r�a�A #�.eA asa#h. ';,,; se I as it4ve 5#ia i dEs gA arui aARGVa'We MRS"e c1.5A+i�`a3�xtlpa may, be pe", ry' — 44 s# can ha. detwas4raW that, �G�t�'v�i•��®eA#+13#s sa��y� gad aE+'� $�ft: ; r i6Walf'g a44 be R#t3ga . Itois' is an -excassive slaps Condition and developeent is prohibited'. 'I ti: crrlTl- -�f , v ;DRAFT a FOR PISGUSSJON AURPO$ES ONLY 49'`and ever Th4Is +s an exeesOve 9'3epe ese(M44n aad Aeve}epment ks rweh,Wted-. j Examples of grading in a ritsps slope categooes� THS Easktt.V)raft 5%to M. `a'�� t��� E• �`� ��`(� � - s �V. T S 4r I t3ft**grade 5%to 8% ���—� 21 tl*�p 21 edopo D gam �)1 Eatetting Wart 6%to 2W ma Y h �a F hx 13- 'r 4 G1Cttlt17 r % ;1" t ' Ft7'R U.i`a'Ci.1ST r PURPOSES ONLY' 1' EaistMg W1146 15NYC f� i Ipstttoted blWft qta"t j sectinn 17.11.060 Guidelines - hese Fillside Development Guidelines. -arts intended-,to..'facii,iiate the `r appropriate dexelopment of significant .hillsides a%, au"tlin6d in.-Section 17.060.00EI. These guidelines are not intended, to be,strict stnndsrdsp but rather, to provide direction to encourage development which is ser ftjve to. the unique characteristics :common to hillside properties. Their purpose :.s _. not to restrict an individual from proposing an innovative 'Orl, alternative method of design in hillside area; inrovatior is, itt ,fact ,.encouraged as ,7 long as the end result is dne which respects the_ hillside and is consistent with the purposes expressed in this section and in the goali and objectives of the General Plan. cn l -13- +5 FOR DiG1er"asl:3i'�`,;PL:�'i�USaa' OiyLX ,r A. Contour grading should" be;used to reduce .the impact of grading on adjacent properties. Hard edges 1e,f by cut and, f5;1T operations`should be given a rounded appearance that clPsely resembles the natural contours of the land, a THIS NOT THS r�. unnaturtm An/arsifRaowp�in gddr aad cwa� 3o st=a t fm tatQ IVae or 21 Owk 31 bAM r 21 bQ* t8 rQ � varbty inbanks took' aHspo :.. se a nA2t�al w � fctc� umutwai x1 bsa!t, ' B. Created slopes,, either cut or fill, adjacent.t"oadwaysy should . be graded in such a way,,tt'at an undulating appearance in the grade�", clane he provided. ` -14- !n -T / � N—Z—Aji�POSES ONLY, THS NOT T S c, yam. InEta b�nit eeeaNa� � ,, ,/ Stra�hc L WOWS monotwq of n Iusp* c C. Where cut ar fill conditions are created; slopea should �be varied rather titan left at a`iconstant angle which P be unstable or creates an unnatuk1, r dgid, ®engini e " appearance, VARX.SLOPES, MY a�f� a 0 -15- DRAFT T �C D. The angle of/rant' graded slope shooid,be igradtjally adjusted to the angle 6f the' natural tIiura7n.' _ Existing Dsvelopmant .t._ RM par ad _ woiopmanz 7Fact tovndary Natural grade propoged slope oxtensjon Existing drainage dovige--" Thin Natural grade Combine slopos to more'Woody awoxknate natural made. { f; 't Propo'aod 04velopmtnt Existing®evelopment 1; ! ?ract.Qoundary PM"sed slope extenson Natural grade ;` '' Not this Euistlog dritmage device Ccmbkssg slopes provide a wid® Q befth for pedestrians and eclueateiar17 Natural grade 77 1 trada,,os•a visual break In*a landform. Variable � t Eximting'rl mfactured s DRAFT Foy L?iPCUSSiop i✓JRPd� S ONLY, 1 ,dseap#ng and natural 'era era ea sPevide a na ePa appeaw.anee ae drainage siPue'tuPes: Win possible, drainage rhannels should be placed: in less visible loeatfdns, and re importantly, sh aal'd receive 'a. naturalizing tr?eateent including native . rack, colored ,concrete "and: landscaping, sotithat the structure appears as° an integral part, of, the environment. 17'�al1 eases, AC or concrete-lirt�jar shalt ce used in addition to a naturalizing'treatwnt. NATURAL I BROW DITCHES t rI THIS Varkwo u= wralft NOT THIS IVPICW dtch With A.Ga ca:7Cn1s&mr ,f F. Where ,pad and terracing grading techniques are' used,;',the pads' configuration ,should be softened WM,` variable, undulating slopes. created to give a more pleasing and natural appearance. -17- FT' THIS _ i lncressa tarfzontai ' distance fo ftaltsn l and sotto pad v R4adwaY varfat"'Stopo hank NCT THIS � reandard subcI cteneg dar padYtsi¢ef Roadway G. Design of building sites should be'sensitive` to the: natural terrain. Structures ang should 'be Tocated fin, such a Way,,as to mi'nim;fze necessary grading and to preservenatural features such as prominent knolls`or below ',the natara; erest of a ridgel'ines, = x mil$ Ltfl3 t7.C-1a, y} e7 :7 THIS Gym r w , Y Q. i �0 THIS 4 f -��:�' 'T , FQR DISCUSSION PURPOSES C�NL1F H. Structures: should be carefully placed so 1 they will not subs'tantiall,� encroach into the views °of ,other dwellings or from public rights-ofmway. 1. Pro3ect4 should incorporate 'clustering, varlable,, setbacks, multiple orientations and other site planning to«hni_ques to preserve open spaces, protect natural features,nd offer views to residerfts.. �-- Gcast parkway, Piaiwl t kfta Mato }, �� Ro»l Cea f0ftw nataxal51"s Pfocr ae!`kraor: Clusters Lf 9stiaaerr 4 Ftomd bslv\s:rW9r+i Y i WhWe U J. The farm, mess and profile of the individual buildings and architectural features should be rl- ;fled to blend with the natural terrain ar,1 preserve the character and prOfiie of the natural slope., Some techniques which;may be considered include: 1} Split pads, stepped ''fnotinp and grade separations` to permit,structure to step up the !iatural slope. ' ((� i� �7 DRAFT QR'P1S'CUSS{ON`PURPOSES ONLY a Stopped,alab toundatlofl � ttatger tp+tsdattott` t Pole foundation 4 ^) Detaching parts of a'dwelling such,as a garage. 3) Low profiles or flat tyoflines oriented, in the same direction j the natural slope. I l F 1 RAFT h1 �) Large root Secttona to pwA#Qt the avera"St per = Hoot"t �:� Ba�itdFrs�esmretapat ~MAX.tq bi entoraed '---MAX. 9nit) Softorkto,of tango \ Averages o vartFcat Surface s Not Chile } <—Not allowed (y Pjgki vw t*l eete►ment kF � S , { ,W" This q:t /i p� ovae""a*-ed v"*al I�A ' Q �h�� .. atruatsns tlEseupt eatural 6W10{Wtt* r 0 y K. The design of the structure .shall gibe consideration to the lot's size and configuration in order to avoid the appearance of overbuilding or crowding. L. In areas of steepen- terrain, homes should not front onto north/south streets, ,but instead, should front onto eastIvinst streets or should be plotted to follow the natural`contours. M. Where possiblea, graded areas, should be designed with manufactured slopes located on; the uphill side of structures, thereby, hiding the slope behind the structure. f ExHIL lT ,' ? b trx r� si"be i"*%' 'aK the ApPOWrtreq a or a t v r y the iitt"t 1, 4 Stf10! t' r THS e � � Strrot f Y' NOT TK3 5 E I N. 4ere road constructifofi .As perpritted in hillside areas„ the f extend of vegetation;arid visual 41druption shoCr4 he miMmtxed by the combined' use o= .r- -ini:ng structures and PegaivOtgregrading, to approximate the natural slope;. ...'v along a $treat front shOOld crate a pleasant appearAnce with -a salte of open spsce and landscaping, Sw to chaiquks which can be u4e4 ialcude the fallowonge I 1. Utilize 140foro planting in order to cr% rz a 'nate?al j, appearances and provide a ser:se of.privacy. 2. Reduce the impact of groding ands resulting re'-paining *11's, by creating . visual Interest with ter' ed walls: landscaping and by varying testis and patpira nf. sidewalks. 4 Xhl Y7> C wt} ill n THIS fnantfr+9 pactmts on Stapp" z %tak*9 was allow seteae► 'ptnndrv§at sevor0 awls �+oatfsotS�Mi�c. ,,:� 0 NOT THS to toe of Auk**watt , Eff"OWI bWk. Lgp�e�eo{inq LaM goceorsto '_Y,_acell,lL fHto-,'�'R�1Qt YC3(+F{ i y 1;e�wV_ta2ea.yeece.to 4o' "ea L F y 99 id art. s.—-4fdere, adjacent to a steep-Hillside, as nisal grading;for the road and right-of-sap, with, a tranSitfon to a natu ,,I1 ands am be utilixtd to promfde an'opsn said mru rural 4. A �Olit proadvay incr€�;es the amunt,of landscapOg'and the median can;-be used to handle drain e. � �x�e c��• c., t�a r���,e C�f ve -25- �t?IC7 SXotches of Attvnn ifve Techniques ;s t Not teas This-, Round off out i3natvrat edge cation sl5pa to conform to the ractural cu!hope - - ^. ntour of the Bill. iraa hillside. Roadway ' Road,& Round off cut slopes Knob remaining Remove,small knobs� from roadoadwayay cut. `e` oft Yoadwa cuts y �o caeform to the natuaal Wade. Roadway \ Vista Roady Gap ts to become estaplished Round off l °)sa grading to �aRe cut stop3s Sala roadway secilons to ors tavel arterlai hlsf6t �. adcoenotlato gradtr`Chang*.Natural grade Roadway �. Ifttural grade- t Roadway I Roadway I u: 140 r , xttJB)T Ire DR.AFT' ,., f-QR biSCUSSION PURPCJSE{� ONLY. 0o Driveways which serve ito than one- parcel are 'enc'aueagesi:as a <� method ©f reducing unn2cessarx grading,.'paving, and:site diiturpaace. 7 I� l i n ,afr 1 Ong Gaya can ee�ao gr bl A ! -27- - ti�13fT C-27 t � 1 f i �=QRlai3?�13id be used to soften ina�Ufactured �antin9' should es or ridgelines, and Natucallandform p men�`. a sheep slop � P_ o:f develop Y' } slop"',. educe IDTact ' provide erosio n control. o � Lanc44®rin planting ep ; T I 111 tersgular visual Piano t1 f Section / CO6ventj()nal Planting i IS "d 2:1 $lope in sros�saction s �. Soctlon �Cttt�t7' C-Z _mow � L FA FT r r a 2�R "lSCL1SSjQN,Pt1RF SIrS ONLY !lolls and f ice's can be used to deFi�ti�, a sense of p, ace-and create an attractive appearanee.: !lo ver,, xalI shn�ald not da�irtate a ie�r and=their 'tght shouldrbe limited adjacent to a street, trail or +�i.thin a s rear• yard. /v"Terracing 64C ext nsive landscaping cart;,reditnV the Liffectis►e bulk. In ad Rion, street front Walls, should incorporate varying design, natural material and open vie4 fencing is 'encouraged. `� W R. Trails are an integral part of a "hillside area and provide;' recreation areas ffoO equostrianA hiking and biking. iey cab also fuoctian as a means to take upgrade or to convey dra'%46a. In hillside are as,' it JS not always necessary to provide full improvements for trails. ,h i :=`vrat •experience ,Mar, be achieved and the amount of grading required can be; adduced by Providing fflialtal 19.0roverents,in apprapriate areas, sucPt as undevelppable .steep slopes. t , ti ,Y4 ;Y ' r � .� "- "aim �•,..,{r ., . , ti Ki i- R DIS.^.U� i.^�L'v P?112yvJLS 'C�tL f SYl Clustering of�,dov'4lopmeni tlyrough TraPisfer of Owei`;ing Unit, ` Allocations Miduld be.'et�cour��ed in environWittallY `sensitive areas :der to reduce the potential far, and and; spread, jerosi,on and :excess :'run ff1 r\ and to preserve existing ,natur Aturgs arid,"open space: Section 17.YY.070 Standards: 7 Within the framework of se design qui"delines the following standards have been prepared to giVe.more peti-fc direction: , A. Site Design rl 1) The;width of a building measured in `.the direction',of the slope shall be minimized in, order tp lrimit the amount"of;cutting and _filling, and to better_®fit" the house to the!natural tarry n., -%Ihere the natural grad of a building site is twi ty (20) 'pereent'oG greater, the buil.didg: 3dth of each floor level shall, not exceed 35 feet. This t,caa:a n, ,v w�PPP .;th®tlatu►sf IM1dPOem. X Wt this Pik cus into a" +11 "gym FOR .il�Gi.iC�NL'l 2) in s�eper" terrain -(ID% slope and greater). fj� nt yard setbacks may be reduced to a'mfgfmum of 2- feet froir'back, of curb or back of sidewalk, whfcho er is more restrictfive, in order to minimize rear yarn grading. S. Driveway, : r 1) orive�ly grades abave I5 percent.may be,permitted up to 'a maximum of 20 percent, pru��tled 'they are aligned wft'h.the natural contours of, the land, if determined h�tessary to,achieve site design and if call safety considerations have been" �1n ;to the sat,istL�ctfon of, the ijding OfficioLT. Proper design considerations shall be employed. Including such items as vertical curves and pack9ng'landi:rlgs j Sn d(ny 'case, parking landin.js shall be utilized on,'all drives over 10 percent grade. 2) ' ;'Drive- shir11 not be permi"�ted which 'exceed twenty (20) f. percent slope exrApt that one length. not at the point of access; of not more than ten (10)`fe/%t may have a slope of twenty-two (2?) percent., �r3) On driveways with .a slope' greater tpap of twenty (20) percent or grSatePy °coarse paving material. or grooves for, traction must be incorporated loto the construction'.. These-'Or�iv yx, &half not exceed I00 €eel ;n length from,' M af approach to structure.. 4). Retaining walls, not to exceed f}ve 4�e} 4 (four) Peet An height shalt? permiiiedfo`r,�soi stabirizat ion'a u-a'driveway: 5) Adjacent 'to driveways, .slopes ria, greater than fifty (50) - percent (or.2.1) will be, permitted. J, 6) Oriveways shall enter public/private streets maigta adequate line-if-sight. .nin9 1 4 (, C1 xlt1�3) T C"31 _, 13 r 4,C;v I 4G�ff �k 71 Driveways sha'd1 nod b2':located within 10 feet of any property line, e4cQPt as aesestaay €ew, 4te assess and ee saw 'd #veways Exceptions may 6e considered base on lot, sizes'.percent slope; and, use as a common (joint), driveway. C. Roadways LL 3) Where retai6ing walls are` used adjacent to roadvrays, they shall tie 7_imited tee'hree (3) `feet Jq height on the'sdts Ae, Rs de ®€ t lfYYeS in order to-r-Iyoid obstruction of motorist's and pedestrian's fief&of view Otherwise terraced ret'tainintj"walls. shall be "Ilized which are; separated bya minimum of three (3j.f�t aid appropriate landscaping. (graphic # I ) _ e .^ C3 TAX stfe" .w sL :77J, t� L 1r"/J xH1BI7 G 33 omt:X f5 I 2) iihere reta9ning structures areyreq'ulred for }illsde.roads ca " efforts shall .`abbe made ,to- integrate•them With the foundation Wa.l s y of the adJacent residence an4onatura7 materials shbuld bg used in cansCrttc an. �,, 'I 1 s E a � lntssgeAtW rotes wb'tar��� with t9ya struot�rat slope ` `=pacMt of exposed" wsntla� 1 aa. /h Exposed totak*v earth ' S#C.td0t4 n �° r 31 Roadways shall conform to the;.natural iandform. erdea to, peatiee the- need Gilt ewtens ge 17aO RO sp}# . reaQways are :enQetswaged:'� Woced road sections,"split sections an¢1 `harking bays.shall be. considered fli the layout of hillside streets to reduce '! 6g. Haifa and tMWft geed Wjnk9 foids a": natural grades. - Avoid resruWx�®coimster _ �� to sleep gr s. r. NO Puking Stab0ze and reforest dishwbed banlu-typk Siofee 21 maxinsusie — i patato s davaik Stepp slopes l�:%il epit section Roadvncy,� �. panik,g>xay ;; _ fI ` a Parking 0 bay Sklosragt .N. T D. Architecturg 1) The building envelope for al T,i structures shall be as fol l ows ?� a. ;' bbtvnhil l 'lot A. maximum of 12 feet in`heig�t`at'the frot:t setback extending4 up and towards therear of the lot at-'a 45 degree -angle to a tsta;maxims h""-ht of 295 feet as measured Prow finist.,%ed grade. wish a ,,'..44sat be#ght x*n4t, ovep s4ep;ng pept4ens t,c 1eped €w%jr� grade: r' BUILDING ENVELOPE FOR DOWNHILL LOT a; flow sotbak i 2V Point of aettcsek ° 'z r 2tY � DownhE#Section` sa®setback ig Street Elevation b. . Jphfi1'l iot A maximum height.of 12 feet at the front >- `- setback extLnding up are toward-the--rear' of the tot at a 45 degree angle to a maximum height of 30-feet as measured from finished grade. BULDM ENVELOPE IFM UPH1.1L LOT �. t vartw Sidi sott�tla •s•r 3d o - i+ ta. setaa�k Street Elevation ;. IT Pdrtt.ot t5uct'�tq�setbeek,. upw Section �xJt13/r C c. ' 'Cross Slope Lots — Similar requirements ,as fbr'nphill and downhill lots except_that -height at front ;hard may a�enss, frontage'. inside the side yard setbacks. - 1, it SkjILDING ENVELOPE FOM CROSS SLtPPE f.C1T �.r To AVERAGE HEIGHT � } 3 r i 210KAY 25, f CROSS SLOM 8ECTICN 1 r I C L, ttt 3/ tos FT' ` F 3t`�i;�•tlSur jtoiq Ur^�.Posr: qNL Y r, y 2`1 Building ma irials and color -schemes shall blend' with the natural landscape. .TreateOl wood or material of a Wood-like appearance, hav3 ng the necessary fare Mtardan•t characteristics, are encouraged for exterigr surfaces. Where1-exterior stucco is used, it should have'a final coat of r integrated color in a muted earth tone. Contrasting color accents should be kept to a minimum, particularly, on the view, side.: Use of other natural materials such as river rock is encouraged. }r 1 3} Avoid large gable.ends on downhill- elettations. The rgof slope sk;IT IOTlox the slop€ of-the natural grade. -:r Not WIS This „r .-../. - Root slope app-girt-that Of MOM am!(Ou"It&dkeotbn Avoid 9ue4s mtds 8uMV hugs Wound form batW. on dgwntdA dhtvat$ons. FoKow h6lsidr CWtC4 n tM sbpa with WN&V fcanw,PWWAI q'y roof tastes.to kweass the Intawation of dwoti v'er d atta AnWW foams wl►A sio In opposite d mtka6 0 slops of hM de st"101,46 ss* o!hWsk!A and huYdUe�arnd 'l irsraa�4'sftuccShes buds. _ 1 �6. t w 4 �. DRAFT FOR DISCUSSt;;l,,[ aPUPz OSF- 4) Avoid large roof overhangs and ,cantilevers on •the downhill . faees of MOOngs elevations to.-reduce the massive appearance from belo;+. Terrace Building Using The Slope This Not this Terraced decks do nafi c-VI overhanging decks. hcrease building bulk 1 t make bUlding when seen from he9rhy. spent Moro massive. Effective buck with Bulk lncr ise due or without decks. ti5 to deck overhang.; � r Effective bulk: Bu ding correctly fits �/"`�R�,1 HICII profiia building into tho ground stands out on the miuimiaes effact on hilisids� ""� hillside. ^--�__�^- Avoid decks hanging Use roof decks.low from dotvnhiif side with level decks,side ,long pole;supports. of building docks. 5)- Terrace the buiWi rig to foll'ow .the slope.; Use roofs on lower levels for the deck open spaces of upper ip-*—, Clerks swall be a minimum of six (6) feet in width to provide adegwMi usable area and an to effectively break-up the %ass. This Not ttfl!6 T-ing resumes tit= Canulaw t,.malass btAdN { matsatierltaLAjdjW ,f to Can wNw. auo Eftecetw b* v to esntisva` EttaaBw twit a; d ///5 itor4si bash dui to X Effae!!q lw6t easesrlve tool averhatq a /7 sma1w overm"s rot irAlv#uat Efteotivelitilt OOM er WhdMs heo tmak:yr Maas"ixowto agMnat exesst mW9}s1 311 zi �XH13r7' C-�`l MINE FOIE DISCUS810,,N PURPOSES ONLY 6), Avoid large expanses iof a an ►xall! , Miff or paving areas,, ' create interesting, swell scale ,;otterns` by breaking=up building ftrass, varying building materials and throug),_design'and plac nt of windows and doors. " TH;S WT THS Lai-go roof West brohon up "l t tacado of ors material, cyan It rnoddat&d bV wkMows, seems plan. Natural materisla wwod•:of ar'ndors ---� In small ncr*T*Ats arerte intersstlie small scale ps.:mns and s!add a'• snap at,'aeale Elreak up mass"of struaturd dewwlo to mom--Clo"ly approalmsto tM natcral slope T) `Provide 363 deg>oe-anhiteetu I treatment t all -ides of a structure. Elempts of the.architectur-al treatment used on the f n't facade shall be repeated on all sues of a structure with additional ts�sFAsis on those elevations visible from adjacent,. properties 6w tIMM pulylic rights-of-way. 8) Excavate underground or, utilize below grade roods to reduce effective bu7'h and to provide energy efficient and environmentally desirable `� spaces. y 9) Exterior structural supports and undersides of Mors and decks not enclosed by malls may be nprov-+i only if itt is, proven than na alternative ;type of coostruetfon Ys feasible artd, tFtat firs safety and ` aesthetic considerations have been adequatel•= addressed. t F y� FoR PIsCU3 a'01N FuRr 3: s C?i;L`( 70) Residential, deveTopms°;t , s'All be constructed in such, a manner �R epder to as, to reduce the PNt`e',,•hial,for spread of brushfiwe,l threetgH the €ellewingt'by wonsiderztion and 'wtha4.s of construstion as f0110> : shall be bu4.4t 8#covered with pon-combustible Jaen-weedy materials such as clay or concrete shakev or tile. Open ends of`. P9e€ss sueh as the ree€ss M-S be eappeiI w4th Ron-sembestible: Aeterialsiioreld be stopped in orderto prevent' bird nests tr other combustible .material lodging within the roof and to preclude entry of MOM- spaik arreritors wdl.bo toquff Ncn-comb?sstibla roo'.ksg rrsaterig! Esra6 undtr-flow wesm Gr T!t,=j R Vke size and number of 51-aced " is eR the sYde s the house €asln!� are!r,<�rma} okra-eaa� yiRQ w4Rd and tI" ... ^ -IA; side skal; be meld to .a miRimam ash shall be glazed with extra st'PQhjth glass ih# k sa€ety glass sempereAT and¢ew double pase07r: Mass areas shall not exeeed 69% Of aRY v,, �Re€er to 6rephie 0221 o : b. Exterfor calls 'pall be beilfi of noR-€lam able fire retardant substanees of-UPing at least one keur=s pweteet4es: In:add4ians Ore Petaro':•,._.stmId, .ba surf);ed :with non-cGg0jstiblQ or fire resisttwe waterails. Fa pot_a5 othi�NisF- provided herein, exteri()r walls s011 extend €Remto;.the grti tip;,roof line. `1 ;r G 14t r^cz =T rQR DISCUS ION c. GastOever �Sil oniAs„ patsy rooft, eaker.. and other �( (, similar overhangs shall he Hof no. covibustible construction pow- shall—be protected ,ey ene-pear asGe0do fire-resistant materiel xin_the"unders3r7e ors i constructed =pith heavy tinber members and nominal 2' wad or 1 1/ 1MC.sd Jec"ii ;< 9• 5 � d:'. Pra'stti.c webbing, split or whole,+bambao, reed or straw _ �� liKe material,.;'° corrg9pted plastic rt fiberglass 'reater1als and similar' flammable materials will note permitted for use'on patio covers. es Eaves r `sst be a; sad . s#nee opeR e'aveq wa��L trap, superheated a;r treM an 90�-MriRg� f#re and often exuse'a,,##re to- SUM; ae #}aat'' l f. ti=n. . tosr att.s and phd*rfloor areas rust be designed and locoted to minimize the likelihood of spreading of fire. Yndi,vidual vent` _ :. openings sha3+should not Oxceed,one square foot and shal i be covered�,'tii �¢�a, mesh metal screen that 4s ee�Relt- mhust4b;eh "'ag o`penirsgs 'n9i: exceeding'''I/�3 inch in_aay direction. A A4eD a ents ander the`reaf shall bs, poslt oned on. the enclosed -eaves near the- roof edger rather than in or, near toward the exterior wall. g. ;Chimneys shall be provided with> 3 seeare�y attaek dapproved' spark arresters'eon$ WNS of 12+-gasi90 tde3dcAa1;®r waven wage.., Faesk ssreer, w3tk _¢ #ue�repeA3rsgs: 11) Extdrlot lighting, 56&11 'bu )ocated And shielded �i4 its to not impact the adjacent proparty omers,in ,terns of glare and privacy. E. Fences Y), Fences will be allowed ifinediately adjacdnt ta�-structuret to os°ovide ,, private outdoor area. Thi6e fences shall be an ih'tegral ',part of the building design so as to min nize`. the; visual impact, on gut rounding ,7- 2-14 '1 �, C areas The',use,4f wood railing,:w;rought iron or,other open tyke of fE.�cing �s i encoura r,_d.. _ 6 `y } `Wa?is.-and foncinq rAC, ng public raadw,ays shall 'he o greater �:han five (a)'`ar�et ie vertical he3ght:.frne6 x rr#shed grade. {, i 1 PQ19C9 Al "i i. 3) Walls and.fences steal! lntegrate murials aid rolots used in the siructure's facade: Naturally-octurring.materials, stteh a5 river rack., shall be used whenever nosslblj.' �} Halls aid faftGing misihle, frog 'tha. pubiic right-o' gray shall be designed tQ #ncor.00ra 'v�isuat interest. t: F. CandscapingY i 1) Landsgapiit 56a11 ut3lYte fire -retortant species. . .Nat ive or natural#zed plants.ar -other,'plant e.cies` that blend naturally with ,the landscape are generally fevered. ` �} n pers7anent, irrigation, system shall be installed tan, all planted slope"s. Howeve1, the em basis"shall be LoWa'rd us#ta 4t g plant Fmaterials � ;. that will eventually not need to be irrigated ' hater and energy conservation k^ techniques shall be utilized such as drip irrigation and alluvial rockscape., U• _ `fr °+legetat va'hackdr4p" by repid ntfnn f�it'�, native trees. the vegetation' 1'sha�l screen structures 6 the `extent p is I Je at,,: l maturity and are`sWYe the j PPebrrahcC'of the natOai skyline; a `� Skyline PlIantl11 I T'yp"ical*iN ,Vpa rng tf This C rE n {�� •: t�ltavr�s��a�{�Wq - yOat w4n" k�a o#hwa0 T Not this 3CtAlS (OS~� t3.:, � .,•'RY.X.1#4; il�j-WEE , �i �l�utml�an tdt# '�i, e � 1!'da�to so�q waft d.YaAt eta&tpePal�Gt 9NsefarrY#hrs3 FgrtcY�fan �;°+ � �y (.' r, c �1 0 f ' FOR DfSGE.��Sit:i3 y r- r 4) Landscaping shill be .used -,to. screen viarrs of dawnsl.ope elevations. 'When structure ,neight exceeds 10 Feat frsm finished`:grade on the doanslope side¢ addi ona1"#acdscaping. llIh ; regu"ired and A landscaping and irrigation ;plan shall be 9uhmi't ed ti;w review wi ,�'rea�#red pinnss ttt�.: submittal package. 5j The u ,,or water conservatjon 'information,documen+ #r is e.ncoFlyd9ed. To further this en1; eah Levetapment shall pr, V 'de an information pamphlet, approved by,the Cfi,° Planner to each:prospecCi le~6uyzw. h)` Additloual triies.ma,s be 'required to,`supplees„n't the required street tree- .along majoe arterials, secondary,. or,i;a►llector streets, as., dete: lned'necessary,by the Gi,ty Planner or Planning�a, is's3oeo, in aorderfto' enhance the natural 00acier of the area, anCcrea:e a sere ruspal apoarance. 7j CDeee$an,tbpen areas apd, front.,arsd side.yaf`ds'ad�aCettt to 1, „ streets shall- bl4,;adegaately and lrrigAtdd. A' i6iw4s uf,:3C% of the plan';` materials, 'shall_iiFi'large siT.e: (Mi ow ® hffik�"siae tr �s IO galloa size shrubs) in carder to create,..;''aturo,appearance, 4 47 Large ode Psas og low growing ,grass in .he fron 'and side Yards adJactnt to a street is discouraged. A nary s of 35% of ti'��required €roa 4 A street side yard es be.pZ:aeoted urlth a p air or gt ass; 8) Slopes shall be planted with iss!"t cirXsters,of�trees and shrubs,- softaa aae vat kho.slc+pCQlanme. 9) Nat ve;; eg tmtion Sd,,il1 be retained and supplemOted"thin cantons and along patura9 drainage,cour;is.: 61 F.. FO:R L7�SCUSSiCi�[ }?L�,,�P�S�S C�;�LY DRAFT iy G. -grading �i 1) Grading shall bg phased 'so. that Orgsaa�s revegetation oi- Const►luction Sawr�ili cent�rol„'e sssion tihp ,psslble, only tho ,Q ardz o ►ahia will be, built on,, resur€Z,L�, =or, landscaped should b.;disturbed -lop soil l shall be stockpiled,during:raath,..grad;fng and used.�n cut snd,f�ii.] ,slopes ,4 2) Grading operations, shell Ge planned try ava the rait��j seasons Gcte660_16 to. Aped !S-. Grading permits shall only be issu'Ad•when a clan fo'^ erosion control 'aftd;,silt retention fans bee n'`applr)vet ,x`64� City Planner and Building gffic it'w thaut :t6-''time of year.,, 3l T6 eny:am�e .Vainttmdnce of slopes. rol,30 aesthetics, p►roper#y, finds ;shall 44 located,two ;(2j fen>t.iram; at the 3Ap of slaps. : y To sou:sgo eeaak.tabt of mla ai et akin Centvd e.:+`d asiva31e4 CO pmperty S s<Qw �oatxd:at tirav 4ap of thi► toporautd r`e getatlrsee must bo "11 pra tAy es_,r,,t be 2' iroK;a ioF+of `i9dRIiJ - �t" 1�t6sr. i h R ) 3111 ft_poia&ton. any Aructure sdbject,.� the pro�$siasts of-this. section shall' bi,,-Ioaer to visually P ® rtgni< r dgslin th of dre huadred ands ' f fty,.(No):. et sueed horiuntal y oft a +t6pographfa mp-ar, fifty, (50j feet c ItSP.asurk )tertieally on a cross st9Gtio1,r hic er is more restrfictiwes 4xis piZ thaia.Ufa re"Oem-mot :oha;;J ii affirm-t the 4opai*Pa e► mrjitivta is 6 weed at co be au the tmet v4s€bje etgy4y�rc3si'o a v 9ota 3y a� e+m#Rert "440 NOT ., f'' i CIJL'JIY a, -Lot"padding is united to the boundaries of the structure's ' foundation and usable rear yard area (reside ntial 'onV) of 25 "a Ott r . to and; between the structure and top or top ofk~slope. If it: 'is p"ipsically unfeasible to d?Oign 'a reasonable usable.,yard .area due!to conflict with other' grading standards, then other forte;'of usable op e s aee:-sbojala7 bn cor$i_ere such as: decks 9 patios, balconies, or,other, siMilar forms of bui;t'structures' designed to fit the natural ,topography 1� 6) No-finished slopes greater than' fi fty percent ( D 'or 2:1) My be created except beneath ,the .enclosed envelopa,�st:a structurahere the ` maximum created slope is IU�ited 'to _67 pertg at, oe^ less. 7) Fill shale izt ezGeed,a ?depth of five-(5) feet at and point except ►mhPre the Planning to,psissieh detayinines't�t unusual tdpography; soil conditions, previous grading, Or�isather unusual eficu®stances indicate..that such grading would be reascAioble andece5sar7a� 8) Reia#nicag walls-are liMited to,:. a) Qne upslope (from the structure) P„t`to sxeeed�)four (4) feet in height,, Otherwise, terraced retaining Val s !;hall be 57ti1ized which are separated b;� a ainfAin, of three (3) . feet and, apprvpria,te la�idscaping. z' i �V+ _ 4,mom _.a r 47 IB9Al��aE,M�rsL eel C cR IF,T FQR,DiSCUSS101V PU"RPO-' S iyLY, b)�_ Q e. d(naar slope froec the sirlrcture not to exceed, three ,. `rrt• and one-half (3-1a) feet it",height. c) the lots sloping with the street, and., other configurations not d'iscvssed above, one retaining Beall, got to exceed three at.. one=aaTf (3-1/2)�`fect'in height may, be used in a side yard whPke necessary (also see roadtsay).1: d) Val is 'which are, an integral part of the Structure may exceed eight (8) feet in heil t; however', their visual Jwpact sha11 be mitigated through contour gradingtand landscape techniques. 9) No cut yr fill slopes'shai7 exceed eight (8) feet in height at perimeters of the site or elsewhere withdut the use of waFls, terracing and other mitigating ►eaairres,. such as contour leading, landca�e buffering, and ' then only as approved' ,by the Planning,' CoMission after conclusive demonstration that such .cut or fill heights *ill not adversely~affect ad3aptAt properties, views, iandforms Or' other'' significant: ansideratigeas nit specifically discussed here `and that they are nAsolutely required to accomplish land development under extreme conditions., � 10 No slopes steeper than those eristing may,be created r,.cept as provided in Section 17.11.070.g.6 H. Drainage 1 On-site catch basins cr siltation aasins,:as well as energy absorbing devices, silt be providedi ,to prevent erosion when :grading is andertatec 19 the. hillside areas. ;natural drainage courses shall 6e pr62 tee from grading activity. In, instances where crossing is required a natvral�� crossing and bank pratectioij should he preferred :over ,".steel and concrete Systems.. there bra* ditc6iee orc a°equfired,';thpg shall 6e n0aralised with plant-materials ard native rocks. r r, � l t'r`OR DISCUSS—N pilgoOgES ONLY Z) The use r?f cross -lot drain ge shall be ►ainimized. Yne situations where .thi,& is not possible using conventionul design, optional techniques inclsdin0, but not limited to single loaded' streets atd reduced densities shall be considered. Extensive use of cross lot drainage shall to subject to fanning ,Commission review .and may be considered OR after I , eoneTus4ve de l xtration. that this method will not -.adversely. -affect the ` j y pritgosed Tots or ad4acsat propert4i, and that it absolutely�equired in � ' order to minimize the amount; of grading which .would�jiesult with-4onventional drainage practices: 3) Vhere cross lct drainage is ,utilized, an'a 440tece eas3s- the following shall appTr� ti.:` pro ect interiors One-see-wren eress is&jA+a#aage tmy be pepaOted One lot may drain across Cne other lot if an.easeme0,1 is provided in in either an improved, open Y-s>ale, wk1jch has a naturalized,appeaWante, or ;i within''a closed drainage pf pe ;,4hich is`a ainimum 12 Inches in diametew. In both cases, an integral wali., w4tb an 910 skapeg feettnq, shall be constructed.' °Drainage: shall' be conveyed` to a public street or to either, a minimum 18-foot private drainage easement, which is to be maintained by a homeowners association, or to a public alley or paseo,traii which is to be"a minimum 23 feet in width. ftth wall end drainage device to ii constnseted'with tho-subdivision and not left for"vkkW homeowners to COF*tto, erasmmsnt Wkith as deitenn n6d by ` •�" approprlate hydro6 stems. �I 0i,,,�1711 Concrete tpen chaaxssl with naturalized appearan®al.of l� toderground pi"both with into v .r 44et . , ice,, L 4. • fl,= Project boundaritl - Drainage 'shall be convoyed in an improved open V-sWals gutter,-or :underground pipe in af`;ier 'a. �inift'M 18-f(r4t private drainage-eaSMent, ,WhiCh is to 'b f :' atntained 6y a hoaottr." assneiation,.or fn a pub] c='�`212gt ar paseo tra i W4ich is to be a i�tf t ,2� feet'to Widt .` Tha eateme Wt�tit; sl�ai i be,dgtermined o�' an int3fvidya� 'Fads and sha1R Are dependent an �Opriats ;ijreRe+olagic studies and access` requil"Pe=nts. {itefe tr ' Eioed�r�Gy' �7 �.�atShcai�d jDt6 L �. 1 M Ptoft QC Paveto 61 [B{ida�&pia$padiaYt{ia7t i �,�, P14ae2/a6ay asw„oaRt, l �aS�Tilfl.11�'Witt .`z _W L t'It..1® (ix ? W2¢ao`reQuka4 to 4oiyay'dca"" Wt W2 W3' W3 Width w ,L lb*"4Rtjint Width - r .. y�, R yt. �Vi'Z 6d�i��...� tw.7 %"JC ,�u'JG:.7 ONLY '1,t I. �F AEI prevWeas eenta41.eed ,W+tllln eet n' PT184488,4 6 2 sha}I(;::�pp;y a any W.Is#de development. The. fblldw;ng~ y Pu41ic Safety concerns should be addressedz r: . >. Require adequate water supply„a nd'pressuru`for all proposed deve'f9pment in accorda-Ice with Foothill;:€Ira 04stl40DIvision Standards: 2» A 0r�,tent :fuel mod von- area may be required around development projects:-or' portions thereof' that are a43acent ar e9' 'sed to, hazardous fire'are for the opurpose of fire protection.. 7he- recomponded' width of th i fuel?modification area-sb5ll be�dettrm4net :lay the Ipe r s feat ire -no ease shale it be 'less than aee hundred t1go ;Feet �tw 1dtk' as measured fees fihef;i deve}spolest &4metew exeept f'ep OUSU 5 single'=€ashy restdenees wh4eh (g he riWewed eft aw 4pd€v#dyal bas4s gy"the Fore Gk e#= based on applicable building and fire codes and",;a Fire`tiazsrd analysis. Study, developed by the Fire Division: The width of the fuel modification_area."shall be doteined brsed upon aa, lbe'.natural ungraded slope of the land within the project and is�, the arlwss adjacent to the project- Fuel loading, ` r.) Access -to the project, and access directly to-the fuel edified area; and i dj The on-site availability of water that can be usitd for fire fighting purposes. FOR DIS 3, Ade4uate provisions shall he ,Aade for' the cdnntlna+al maintenance of such areas, and, where feasible, such areas shall 'h� desig;� ed as common open space rather, than private open space. l } rnsion 4. Fuel._apodification areas shall also incarpor%ite soil e wnd sedivent contMl "ores 'to alleviate permanent.scarring crid accelerated 5. the Chief 116y re0fre brush„ vegeta3ir p or debris to be removed and cleared eriEhi: teh feet on each side�of,eyery roael! and acc:?css drfr4, and way enter upon .private property to do s& Tjhis seef pn sh,111 it t apply to single'specf%ens,o: trees* ornamental shrubbery or cultiv:�! jround cover such as green grass ivy, succulents or siRilar pjants used:"a�jxuund � rovers, provided they do not foray a means of reaeaily teaj itting fire. A� ; i used in this section, lrnadoay '..aaaeans that pairtion q4'"a hishway or .private" street improved or ordinaa"iiy used for vehicular travel. 6. If the Chief deterain4 in any.specific nose that difffcult `..: terrain, danger` of erosion or rater unusual a�!'rcumstances. make strict compliance with the c Parance of vege`tation'undegirable or llpracticafi` he may suspend enforcement tl creof and require reAsonable alternative wasures designed to advance the pLrposes of this article `t 1` 7. Tii the event the abatement Is nit pergor/ £ as reguii�e At, Subsection �5 'or this section, the- exa,=tive B6Jj my eruct tltQ;Chief to Sit e notice tag--the'.ovmer of the,property upon: ranch-sai;4 canditi®h f61sts to correct sub orahlbited 'condition ani8, if thikt, owner #'ails to correct 'wch condition, the Exe-utive fsdy ; . "cause the saw to be done ,and isake the expense of such comertioit a Baer In the property gpwo aahich'such condl�Jons y,A exist. 8. Restriclt structures and facilities)" frcui . "ealo ice l . a hazardous areas. FOR 946CUSS;oi PURr--OSES ONLY 9 Require 'spec_a� �"ihstruction fvaiure in the design of szructures arh c ,,ifie� ir4ar€�stigatio�ls confirm.potential geologic hazards, 10. The Eriant Escondido and ypaiOdnijArlingtort soil associatiens are not suitable fbi- on-site,waiAe*#ter disposal,' geyei'opmeYit:not on;.,public sewers within areas generally defined 'ts-.beingeither of` these"es5ocations shill bd persaitted only after site.spe:ific investigations have 'been conducted that demonstrate the"soils are_s0table.and the disposal -3f xastewaater trill not dograde the subsurface water;�gaa1icy 11. the Tu uAga"OetH Soil `assc,ciatioa`away have soil `heari:g tap�uilities that cou: d liawit soap >devplo nt. Str'octures' proposed an this 11 soil type should be :permitted only afitcr>a site specific i0estiggt on has been perforaed that indicate' the soils tan adeq',wteiy support the weight or" the structure. . 2., io�e, ail development within, 9the, allgyist-Pr�dlo 'fir City- adopted 'Special--Study Zone*, a statema6t shall be included on every dee4,,fur each lot aw parcel- %�Ach Worms the praapective Omer of the potential for seismic activity and the potentiai,'ht `r:9.' 5ettio'n 17.11.08.0 Density t ;' slope dphaity which. t+iMrelate intensity of development to " steepness of terrain Will be,used to minimize grading, removal of,legetation _ land iastabil;ty and fire hazards. "-The total allowable residential do-01% ; units shale t calculated based an the. total (bgildatile) land"�rea'rtithin,e3eh .. slope ca* ,:j and capacity factor pursuant to t6d slope category. c « xt` rrrrr r t Y 5 4 ` � A 7777 f 4+4 F'OR DiSC.LJ S.S9ION r a v a` ',jZ �.Jlvl.1 u � A. Calculation bf density,- The maximum number of units that may permitted in a proposed dtwYelopment shall be determined by multiplying that "} area of land in each. "slope category" tier the "capacity factor" shown i« the following tahle, taking, the products of these calculations converted to'square feet, and dividing this figure, by the required."site`area vnit: in square feet prescribed in the underlying_zoning,.district:(except-the S.i11 side-Residential District where there .is no minimum tut"size'.required). r' `In the H-01si:de Residential 'District, the allowable amount of buildable area resulting from th4 Capacity ,Factor, p-'';ulation will constitute the trio} net, adjusted net buildable area. Land Capability Schedule , (*Buildable) Area Capacity Add: 'Ad 'Buildable Buildable Slope Category, in square feet Factor' Area (square feet). Under 10 percent X 1PO _ 10-1449 percent X 0 75 = 15-19.9 percent _X, 0.50 20-24'.9 percent X 0.2g s 'to 2549.9 percent X . 9:26 $.025 Bg peree"t &`eYer lIew s#ta area: I Olga = Divided 4 Permftted by minimum number of lot size units requirement 0- under- lying zoning .: -district ex- cept in Hill- side Residential *Bui'idable arem is a contiguous area:of the lot which is less than 30% in natural ` slope, or in the area determined, through environmental studies and investigation as buildable;. X6,uL C. Exceptions -'1Tae fo71®wt�i�lj and areas meeting any or all of the following criteria shall not be included inr the'Falcuiation of total allowable dwelling units: �` sy 17 All land are';s$. regardless of slope, which will be subject to inundation during a IOO-year"stnri a€ter development (has occurred. All, land which is in a geolagid hazard'lone as defined 'ir► the safety element of the General Plan of the City of:Ranchrr Cucamonga and fir which no feas101a nit;gat-ion-.mea-syres_a_re proposed. 3}, All farad area:which 7 ies within a Feder4i recognized blue line stream, or contains significant riparian or stream bad environs:, Section 17.11.090 TrFan:�fer of Dwelling Mit Alloc#iioy R. Pur se - The purpose of "iransfer of dwelling unit allocations" is to provide a procedure, whereby the potential devs,-10pment of an area which stands to suffer adverse environmental impacts can be credited and then transferred to another, more appropriate area in order to prese ve the character and identity of the former area. 8. Definitions DONOR PARCEL - Pip,:'el from which dgvelopmant credits are transferred. RECEIVER PARCEL ;parcel . its` which develapmerit credits 'are transferred. DEVELOPER CREDIT - A development credit is a ptrteritial entitlement to construct dne dwelling in a designated, cluster area which can only be exercised when the development credit has been transferred put,suarft to the provisions of this section from .a donoo to a receiver parcel and other, requirements:0 law are fulfilled. The allocation of dwelling unite may be transferred from one parcel (donor) to another parcel (receiver) within a ,project siteJ. or, fsoia a project site donor to adjacent properties {receiver}, if. conditions are 5$ t FOR applicable, when the development of- the subject site would. Gau'se. adverse 1 impacts. The development per,dpnar sitelvarcel oali be calculated according to the "Calculation of. Density" table and the r W t transferred. to a predetermined rlece site/p rcel` The 'transfer'of'develop"d. credits .iS:;spb ect to a :tevelop ent Agreement t6Aj and/or any other appropr oteLL legal agreeit4nt, aSr Well as a Specific plan and General Plan Amndaaent .(GpA)j. The application shal`1 y designate both the donor all receivrer parcels. as pace of the ,.-object property. The Qeyelop nt Agree9 nt or„any other appropriats`ageeement, shall be uiid to ensure the appropriate legal. direction 'for c letion of sRCific conditions and Encourages 'Oublic and !priiiate:partnership. A Specific Plana and General .Plan da�nC steal] be osecE to deteranin-Aihe compatibility of the proposed Iand�i0 to 9ilrrmUnding'.land us* desfgnaltions; the apprr'apriatp distribution of land .:uses' withise the pla.�t 6oaan�9ar'ir�s"ara9 allows,, the j designation of the donor parcefi .as open space, exhoustin its developist , I credits. In addition, a Specific #'inn regyires 14rge scale aunster'plannipg and discourages incrematal„ piecemal develoi rat The transfer of .development credits may`be authorized when, the' Planning Commission finds.that 'the receiver parcel has Sufficient area to accommodate development otherwise permitted under city Developm ant' DistriCts, plys the development credits, to be , transferred, and ' that such fetal development meets all of the applicable requirements of the city°s ='naenerai Plan and all provisions of this:sectio. n. C.: Proe� ist4ns Yj when development credits are transferred, all such credits are thereafter depleted with r regard to;the donor parcel. excess development' } credits of that donor parcel which arer.nut initially transferred tole receiver parcel may be subsequently transferred to another receiver 'parce'1 in accordance. with.the provisions of this section. r+ F - rf 2} =ihe number of development credits which may be transferred shall not exceed the number of aWo f%g units determined for ,,t donor parcel 1 through applying established S, pe density standards'and througi* preliminary site review to determinr 'the actual number of units Which could be developeii on the donor parcei .sublject to Pravisians'contained tnithin ;his secs.#on.. 3) 'ApprovaT of developpment credits transfer must 6e based` on findings that this procedure is consistent With the General Plan ,and provides for the long-term maintenance of the property as' opzn space. Ana ysis`,Uf the eventual maintenanco of the open space shall .be based upon the £ity's estimated annual cost for aaintmnance and liability ftwr the land .apd for Pro:Yisians 'thereof, 4) The donor parcel, after deve'lo'ent .credits have, been depleted, shall be kept etsentia2l,y in a natura:f condition. °However, the. it may, pursuant to a Conditironi UsePermit, autharize_,:the #olaWing;uses if it deems they are compatible With. maintaining the natural. condition of 'the property. and are consistent Stith the General Plan. . a, Watershed, s.and/or,tra'M. by. The growing of crops and fruits. C. Low intensity recreation. d.r Other similar uses. e. Accessory;uses necessary to support the uses above. 5� Rand 'fromr Which deyelopr�ent credii have been trans erred shall be recorded as open space'through,the process '4 r;a SPeci fic. Plan and a General Plan Amendment' to ensure that such land remains as open space; in perpetuity. 6ti A Parcel from which development credits have been transferred shall not b(�teasidered as "common or spaces unless such parcel is transferred in fee to the receiver parcel. 'qI IS KPI41,5!,7't,e_57 7). The, maximum number of dwelling units permitted on'a parcel, receiving devetopment:credi#, shail,'not exceed the., sum total determined by; applying';the established slope density standard 6 the Yeceiving parcel and adding the number of idevelopment-credits transferred as out7ifledn. Secti®n EX i�t i- IC -- rJ tl r ' 4 Ij Tared/Plan/Design Group Planning Urban Design ;Lands ape Architecture r r "'t al'1'?.`7ft%,iRG'tt(�:.tt4t:!?Gitr Jyugust 18,1989 AM P&4. '118�91llllllll�t2 j:l�i�l�i b 1US.Eliki Bkatt,Associate Planner CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA 9320 Baseline Road,Unit C Rancho Cucamonga,CA 9 030 RE: Etiwanda North?I-nnitig Commission Workshop Job No.t NES 876 DearMiki: As you requested I am identifyingbelow an overview o£ourpresep ation to the planning. commissir .oa'Augubt 30th. 1) L.pd use density. As you are aware the basis for the Consortium's processing the Etiwandallorth Cdt ' Specific Planwithin the y is that the same total dwelling units that are accepteblelm the County will also be acceptable in City. The Consortium agrees to have reasofabie development standards as currently proposed!in the draft Specific Plena In'><aae fhb' overall standards exceed to our knowledge any oth� planning d brt in Southern. California and we invite comparison to otherplanneommunities, If will be important to receive reafl`trmAion ofthis crucial point kjotal dwellingunits at the workshop.'The Consortium has formed a consensus'opini� that if units within the current draft Specific PlawCan be reduced in the City that th§lbaye no choice other than to process through the County.. Please recall the density�i the"draft Etiwanda North Specific Plan"is equivalent io the existing Etiwanda S��cifrc Plan at approximately 15 dwraa'ngunitss pEr acre and results in a lo /er density than any other location in City.. An additional reduction in density,say by i/3,for example,would only lower density in the plan by 1/2 a dwelling unit per acre. ` 2) "Draft Hillside Development Regulations"prepared by City Staff. The Hillside Regulations aze a good start at addressing variable conditions in hillsides,however,they are mostl:ed to infil[sites'such as inAlta Loma. The Ftiwandallorth plan provides a comprehensitre approach and must not be looked at on a basisof fulfilling"text book"standards that are not specifically relatedto the site. Instead the standards must be looked at;It they reinforce the entire community plan. Three examples ofhow we have achieved these are summarized below;(Refer :also to theattached exhibit A.) a) In the northwest portion of the planning area where Landmark Land is Proposing a f 750 acre golf course oriented residential development(planning area 4),residential uses have been located away from the most scenic northerly part of the site. 230 Newport Conior Drive,Suifo 2001 Newport Goach.California 926601(714)720-f 198 � 1r f Ms.Miki Bratt CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA NES 876 Page 2 8/18/89 <: The golf course has instead been located In this am,.a. (Conventional,golf c6rse' planningin residential,communities would'not have Grkem this approach as maximum lotvalues can)i chieved,byproviding asmuch frontageotta$olf course as powIbl ) As a p: seing its scenicfeatu and'residential uses have esesntialty been "'clusterea"whereslope heights 25"and higher withitt yards may occur. b) On approximately 400 acres In'the northcasterlypart of thesite(planningarea 7),a plan that retains existing grades to the maximum extent possible is proposed. Grading is only proposed far providing road access within the site. The;'homes in this areawouid be"fir into the existing toy of the land with only minor grading for the house pad.itself. Euen in this core of absolute minimum site grading some slopes will occsrru to 50 fee to provide for road'access. In addition;in several area treat gradients must aclueti a 2045. The 20%i grade is currently accepgblc in tl County of San Bernardino,in the much reviewed County gr�eabelt standards for this area,and by the FireDistrrct,lFlowever,cumntarF^proposedcih{standardsvfQuldnot permit this,condition. ' c) Within the approximately 300 acre site in the westerly portion ofthe planning area(planning area 3),rather than tam=the land evenly to aclileve lot pads,a major pasea/greenbalt system is proposed that incorporates a large portion of ' the grading. This reducesWeerial lot slopes,allows graded lots ofreamnable size to allov,t for approximately 25 foot and greater r=yards,and provides both a funciionally and aesthed,cally attractive plan.It creates an improved plan: by taking a long narrow site rind cce,ttng distinct ne ghborhoou areas:deftned by open space elements. Additionally,lot laycpts havcbeen designedtoi;Cease lot size in a northerly d teenton. 3) Other related items As much as w'e are attempting to reach the;spirit of the City s concern for a quality community there are several items that are part of current orproposed city standards " that conflict with this goal. a) The City bw'xte:ntty required il+.hta concrete channel with access roads/walks and chain lint fence be located adjacent to developments elang the south surd east sides of SCE corddots,in audtiom,ta other passi'ole areas. Exhibit B attached,identifies the chanaeicross-section; Che total widthoFthis section wiI[be approximately 40 feet aird ls.ret'tred ins be located within a projects*site. boundaries, This condition significantlyrtdurs a site's buildable area and forces!of sizes to be reduced in size,creates a highTy'sregative visual rnpacf thong many trails and open space canneclions that occur along the cor€idors, and accent:.ates the gradtngproblents within:individual sitesas'the:grading within,the site musthaveltigher slopes since there are shorter distal.=s to take up grrade over the site. i Ms Miki Brats CITY OF RANCHO CUCMMONGA NES 876 Page 3 8/18/89 We do not believe these conditions should occur on interim basis either. Our engineers inform us the width of this channel is not based upon water vt,lumes but instead on the ability ofmaintenancevehicles to drive into the c*-el. The combinedwidth of this channel is actually larger than the width of Day Creek channel and it could be required along six miles of development. b) the City stenos to also recommend minimum cross-lot drainage. In order to reduce slope Heights this condition,should be encouraged as an alternative for all planning areas. c) The proposed grading hillside standards provide a'maximum slope for turf areas in city ir intained areas at .ildlent. Most standards in CitYs are 3:1, To require5:1 effectively eliminates thepotrntial for turfed areas in many Edwanda North parkways. d) The proposed lot layouts within the draft Specific Plan are intended to be the basis o—t'r future tentative maps. These lot layouts have been developed.to compliment the concepts or design and grading descraW above and within the a draft Specific Plan. It is crucial to have these plans ravic ved simultaneously as part of the Spr^ifio Plan approval process as they will become the basis'for future tentative maps. The-Consortium recognizes that when maps are filed all development criteria in the Specific Plan must be met. However,acceptance O.- lot layout patterns at this timl willmentially remove acommon reason for delays in regulatory processing and for reductions in dense*,� 4) Proposed Etiwanda North Specific Plan Standards The approaches described above are the basis for the current draft Etiwanda North Specific Plan grading standards,which are attached,'(See exhibit A) The communit design section of the Specific Plan which defines overall"planning concepts",' however,must be looked at simultaneously as they are complimentary,and f6m6rce one another. In the,-!orkshop August 30,a series of cross-sections and slides will be presented to identify the intended grading approaches anticipated in the development. The intent.will,be tf?demonstrate that numerous high-endand uccessful planned communities hall" ,,icorporated similar standards to those recommended irk the draft Specific Plan. , /,6 would also suS8est a site tour be scheduled with the planning commission to`'sit sites that are developed similar in concept to the proposed Etiwandallon iSpecifiePlan.We look forward to our August 30th meeting. Please feel free to call shouldyou have any questions. Very truly yours, =am Principal Corr 14 cc: Joe?3iIoriwttiwanda North Consortium Larry Henderson EXH1 z3J1 �3 p� { 4, tbe zi V 6 ..• � {. 1�v 'LK e' /k}:r"yet t ^fir t `t Fj\,� l<�MY. z�� �_ '�}7'tSt�t�1I'I,tti�/t •' � 1 �,.� � •• .i'� '� r h �t,.�1•M�.V y1 y .rf` 'F �G +Yl 2 �',.p��uy/ J'(•�1 a �Y� ti�t r LTY }�R�t 3 sw.+ T !1 r � � ,1:�J' •� •. IY ���J � i .r �E'. '�l t�� � .it�sR t -"'T/'J�,,.� I,�+ I d1 •1��+ ��,.i' IljwA50N RYE•ary WNS` s "WtaMA 9L o K"oft ®ANYAN AYENUE' AVEMR s V, _ � �. � TdWAA1D P6GfFEC WIMAW +AV f10LLT6 30 FpEEWAY LEGEND ._ �... Q RESIDENTIAL PLANNING AREA IN COMMERCIAL A-{ PLANNING SUBAREA r'wswisne hls.ttnatiawsea..s OS OPEN SPACE '* R$SIOENVALIDENStTY E5 ELEMENTARY SCHOOL TRANSFER POTENTIAL Crt�y S~t P PARK tiS 51tE53Le tCGN SCHOOt, C X IBI A J4� JUNIOR HIGN$CHOOL ........ S?ECtKttx PLAN BOUNClRY LAND USE PL• N S SPECIAL STUOIE$,AREA 'v yr pNG l,St! Ktii7C" S[�C r3ofto+n c e' V. y' UARtE'S yCCE5S 2QrtF3 J �1 RtGE43 � wptK �t oeaRD l EKJ�1t3)T` L?y�""