No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1990/02/14 - Agenda Packet GM1? t o �- o Al� F IC � 7SSZt 1977 *r , {; {h RDDIsSDAY FEF3RUA,tY 14,1990 ?00 g,m Id�i 3 g!ASS COMMU1,1 TY CIMM F 1 916Y`iIASE LIim z ANLHOICUCAMONGA;CALIFORMA; ' L Pike bf Allegiance r . � g. Roll Call - Cormi'ssioner �lakesley •.ComnissFoner NeNiel _ Cuiniissioner tizitiea _ c6mnissioner TdIstoy, r Commissioner Rb'nberger —' z >1g Aiu9"ements , IV. Approval of Minutes r Joint 1VVdreting with'Historic f'rRsehation Conmmss on January .4, k, 1990 5 January,240 1990 Y i ' f. The following Consent°Catertdfir.items=are,expectedo b3 routine to non-dontro'v46fizLl. They'wilt be acted on,by;the'Commission.at one time without discussion. If an has concern over any,iterr[, it should be removed for discussion, A. ENYIRONME14TAL ASSESSMENT FOr ic�DEYELOPMENT 'REYIEk1. i' :,SURKE 'COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT 'Ifie degelopment o a multi tenant. business; patio:;totaling 142;330 square Yeet on 9.6 aLres'of letl in tl:e'bidustrial Park.;IJiatri�Cy Subarea 6 of the'Inciustrigl.Specific Plan,:iocated;at the'south�ves corner ®f Trademark Sti+eet and, Center Avenue - i¢ APN-�210-'072�33 :(Continued fcotn Januai ,24;1990) ��' .. B . YACATYQN OF bTICA Ai�NUE TENTATIVE'PARCEL MAC? 11410 n- UTICA-IifAvZN-AS DCIATES A reques* to vacate,a portion tJfica 'ivenue,;approximetely 3 feet wide and`766 feet long,locatd south of Arrorr:Ilaufe to the north"property line of Parcel 1 of i a�reol" 0,1100081AP!N. .�09 144-SZ fn s f. VL : 4' oatou ite f wirrg ms.are public hearings:to which concet ned indiWduats may voice their opW®n of the related.proi'gct.- PYease.wa�?t ato'1ie. . recognized by the Chatrtnari:and-addre;s.'Yhe;Co;rimissior`by`'statig your name and,eddres`s.:All such opinignssfiald:be limitad to„Srrainutes der inatividua{for each project:';Pdease.sign in.aftereakfrcg, C. ENVIRONMENTAL: AssESSMEN'T` ANTS PAROEL' MAP, 13125 - �•, HURKE-COMMERCL4L'DEVELnPMEAIT „Areatiori�of one 9.6 ' accg par�:el for, condominium purposes_> IncfiuslriaT Parka strut#sarea fi.of`the._Irustriel �` ► S e iric Plan,located at the` southwest;coinor oY Trademark":Street ;and•';enter -Avenue APN V0.72-33, D EPI' IROI MEN'CAL'. ASSESSMENT- AND a 'CONDIMNAL'•USE: PERMIT" 90-01 '.ASSOCIA DX -OF;-1ZL�'PARDEDt' CITI7,ENS. ONTARIO AND POMONA' O iA.R C., :The requestFto establish a personal`service in a•leased'spac�o�M„420`sguai feet.within an existing `industrial'park.'or 8 72>'abma .of land.it► the GAneral` Industrial`Distriet,Subafe 3 df the'Industrial Area 90eeific Plan, located`' At 9007; Arco' Roue". Suites; 160 i►nai Al?N 209�111219 ti E. ENVIRONMENTAL,ASSESSMENTANDTr.'N i t'TRACTI3'717 WESTERN PROPERTIES ThyAdvelopmenV-dV,3.94,condmminium mits.,on ;=5.aeres dY larsd. 'iri''tha Nledium-;H.fgh Residential District (14 24 drteellIng ;inits;per aereY within the .Tecra,yista Planned Comiriuni% located at`the.ncwtheast corner oiP Church' Strmat'and*'�mae avenue-APNi; 1077-421 13..,' ., F „TIME EXTENSION'FOR TENTATIVE . ACT'13759 DE DESIGN_GROUP. A residential,subdimison oY S6 single family; lots,on, 14:OL r i6s of'!tirsd in.the I;ocv:ktesideriturl'Di�tPict'(2-4 dTrrslling units per acre➢"loeateil on ithe vnreat siile.of-Haven Avenue,; north of the So4thbrn Pecia-0.Rai d A 202=201 53. ;n VIL P3ew ' G. MDDiFEC,tATION TO DEVELOPMENT REVYEW 55-81.: REITER HAVEN,GATEWAY PARTNERS ,!� A request tsi modg . the elesrations or,an approved tbno stor office bui it within the, Gateway' Master Plan, in:the lhauk" 1,Park" acid F3aven. Overlay Dstricts,',S�are .6 .of`. the InrBust:ia ; secifi�� Flan; 1c0­ated.at thenftttedA corner of.,gIaven'Avg titre:and 'Sademark Parkwiay.Ndrth=APNQ 201466 17. 'H. FOPITA A STEEL sIGNAGE An appeaY of the City Planner�s deoisron to establish a ma�rimuii! letter height of 3 feet and 2 feet _resDecfively for tc40'signs and to not appeTove,an,il nlineted sin a412451'Arrow Route in`St�tarial5 oil the Indststriet Specific Pk i -APN 2�8 121-35',. j zi }: �r `L MEDifiI3:t3PEI�INGS AND LANDSCAPING;VZITHIN ML'DI.�N$IN t THE TERRA VISTA-PLANNED-.COMMUNr J CONSIDEW TION`OF EEPYAM:tdG.`A POBTis'iF7 ttF OCIiL5TT3It A'h�NJ& E$ 'Co�irriasloan � _ �. 'F�Fza iComrmemts Ties is the time and 'ptaaa''far thg .general ;�..tblic to address Lhe C71- arnm�ssion: Ztenis. be discussed:hsra are those:-which do not_ alreadyappeer on this agenda .; XL Ad mE Tha PYanratng Camtniaseaf has adopted Adrninistrr�#iwri Itegcrlatintas that set a611.p.»r. ndf6Urnment 46 04 Jr- itams,ga aeyarad that tirneu they ;shalt be hedr Only with,t3ee consent of:thP Co>ptmissior%; ii :{v . 5 T e2 Fes.. i lit , 1 f "1? i 1{� - ill i� 4 a U V Lt d t t t TY 'IN I �tp j u-, is S 4 - evCa • sda rr teubry !IMSA mik. �' F 69fa�9"smtOfeae�tac ca:�aP !A _ --- CITY OF RANy!CHO-C:g�U/pCAIVIO�j�NG^l DATE: February f4, 1990, T0: Cha•-rman and Members of the Planning Comraission FROM: 8 ad Puller, City,Pl'anner, BY: StevenPoss, Assistant Ptanher SUBJECT: ENNa ONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 89-25 BURKE,`rCOMMERCi L ,::DEVELOPMENT -`_ The;:;development of a multi enapt;business park-'totaling,141 130;square feet„on 9.6 aires`.of land in the IndusLri; Park District; Subarea . 6 of;' theIndustral .Specific Plan, ;located at. the' - southwest corner of Trademrrk'Si"reet and esn' ' Avenue ' APN: 210-072-33. (.Contirued"from January 24; I PROJECT AND S T A I E OESCRIPTION'-A. Action Reouestedt''.IssuFnce of :a Negative Declaration `I 8. Surrounding Land Use'and'Zon1'ho North - _ Vacarst;,Industrial Park r Oistract, SubareuV6 South - Industrial• bu' dings;` ndusstriz Parkr istrict, Subarea 6 . ;s Eait Office. and Industria1lbuiidings; Industrial Park ` District, Subarea 6 ; West - 'Deer.Cr'eek.Channel; "general rIndustrial;District, Subarea 5 C. General.PIAn Desi.onations: Project Site - Indust;fail Park North - Industrial Park South - Industrial Park East - ::Industrial Park West - ,Flood 'Control,`,.Genera:l Industrial" D. Site Characteristics; The site is vacant Wth no significant vegetation. E. Parking Calculations: Numberrof: Number;of Type Square Parking Spaces Spaces': of-Use Footag e: Ratio Required Provided 0ffi6 21,000. 1/250. 1 84 180 Manufacturing 120-130 1/500 240 240 'Total` 1s1,130 324 42U.{ ITII!A PLANNING COMMISSION S7AFF REPORT.'" DR 89-25 = BURKE COMMERCIAL,DEVELOPMENT February 14,'1190 ? Page 2 II. . ANALYSIS. A. General,: The,proposed site plan, consists`of el ling even, (1,1) buildings tota 141,130'square. feet. :;The pro ect"is intended to be 'used as a multi-tenant industrial park `t', The applicant is"providing "96 Parking Spaces over the',required no}tuber so that an,addit'ona1,23,000 square feet of tihe complex may be"conyerted to office use,'-should the demand.arise. The project,is in conformance with the intent of, the guidelines'of" the. Industrial 'Specific':"Plan Upon.-,.,,approval :of a Negative Declaration,, the'' City 'P.1anner tvila'`,grant <final "'approv31 of 'the project based on'conditions recommended by the."Desi',gn aod"Technical Review Committees: B. Design Review Committee:` The project `last" went before the D2sign Review Committee: Cftitiea, L/ inberger,, Bulli, on ;January 4,,"19g0. The Committee did, not approve the .project a'rid requested; �,hat the following revisions be made and reviewed by.staff before the project was scheduled for PianningsCommitM on. I. The main vive a _sTes should have ,increased landscaping and special paving treiimi nt; (interlocking pavers)` at the major corner nodes of the project 'to Create a; "plaza°'/effect: Staff response: Special paving, -and increased :landscape , treatIn_nt has been .shom, on the rev",ised plans to meet the Oesign,Revi;ew Committee`s request: (See Exhibit C.) }, 2. Landscaping".and paving 'treatment should also be increased'at the comlections to' the.- future :Regional ,Trail'.along the Aeer Creek' Channel. Staff response: Sufficient enhancement ' of the trail collections has been accomplished. (Refer to Exhibit C>) 3. The "alluvial rockscape"; shown ;in the plaza- ,areas ''should be replaced with plant materials Nowever,"a grouping of several large boulders within a planted area may be appropriate. Staff response: The "Alluvial rockscape" has been repl"aced, with ''a combination of ,;plant -materials and a grouping of boulders. `(See-Exhibit C` E- ;E- 1, 2.) In-ground up-lighting should be used below,the arbor'.structure, at the entry plaza: Additional' Iighting should be_used on 'the structures throughout the project. f Staff response: Applicant has; indicated that an•groundup " lighting will be used at<'the entry. plaza; an d can,:,type, down liyhyinI "will be used everywhere else` in th.e project..,. (See Exhibit E-1 ) ,PtAWNTNG COFf¢iISSIAN-STAFF.REPORT DR 8945'- BURKE'CO FIMERCYAL DEVECUPIiENI February 7$,;I990 Page 3 5.1 Functional and :durable,furniture' which complements the.Nesign of.the O'6ject should be, provided;i-n the plaza;areas. ,* Staff "response. The -design► ,of the furniture tiatill ,b, reviewed and, approved .by staff duri"rjg the plan<cleck process. 6. Detailed drawings clf a Ityp.icaT arbor structure and' the adjacent planter should .be 'submitted to reflect the cltianges.which are being'.proposed,` PF©to"s of existing arbor structures should be peav~ded to ..insure °ihe, feasibility of the isroposal., Staff response. Details have, been submitted and ''are - r ,r fea5i.ble jSee Exhibit E-:I 7. The perimeter fence along,:the west' property boundaty"should have wrought .iron .betWeen ':the, pilasters,. rather.`'than the- 0ropo.sed steel cables. Staff:response 4r6ught iron y-fenci'iig iviTl ;,'e used. ,See Exhibit E-2.) .;,� 8. The architecture of 8ui,1.dings 1, 20, and 28'should bi upgraded to enhance --views of i;he prio,fect`:froia`. Center and Trademark Avenues. 9gesti`ons .includeecessingthe concrete" facades, and accentuating the •ends of ;`the buildings with' increased, height and glass. . Staff: response: - The' elevations have, been revised tto 'comply with the Ummittee's recniamendations. (See Exh}btit E-3, E-6, E-7,) 9. The .sandblasted `band shown t41 tie west:,_elevai< qn of"Buildings 7, 89 and 9' should be. continued.. along, the Bear;elevations°;of all buildings on' the perimeter o�' the project. If.ahe applicant still proposes to subst3tu_te increased perimeter 1and5caping &0 the sandblasted banding, then the 'final decisions will be deferred to 'the Planning Coission'. Staff Response: The applicant has, revised -the plans to show the sandblasted band along- the. perimeter elevations as requested by the Committee. '( ee Exhibit `E-3 for typical elevation.) Revised plans have been reviewed by.staff end it`was determine3.that- these issues have been addressed; C. Environmental .Assessment: Parts.I and.IY of the Initial,.,,,Study have., been compl',eted and no :significant environmental impacts have been found.. PLAM NG COMMIT SSION 'STAFE REPORT .' DR6945 BAKE COKMFRCIAG EVELQPMENT February 149 i990 Page 4 1 III. ;FACTS-:FOR FTNDIPiGS The,, proposed use is consistent: my the General Plan and,the.`Industrial `Sped is'Plan.,'. The bu.ildin9 des1'gn and .site plan tE+�etheM`with: recommended conditions of approval are in ,compl,"Cil& with. -the. Industrial Speer-fie �Pi'an and all'..other "" Ci- e y Standards. M. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that: the Planning Gummjssion isswe a: Negative Dec larati on.��fo.r,,Dev�elopment�Review 69-; � `�.,�; Re c ul ly. ed, Bra 1 r City Pla ner „ BB:SR:ml9 � ^�4 Attachments: Exhibit "4". =. Site,Utiliza'tion plan Fxhibt "B" =Conceptual Grading;Plan Exhibit !W' Canceptua-1 Landscape Plan; 'Exhibit-'T.", - Detailed Site Pian r EXhibi.t "E"_d,.tieVet,ions= y� �A gel . C - i,- 3 1 1!ti ; 4 Y, I I r,L r J` ' 1 f /T 1 - iiVA 1I,1! It 1'L :.3 i l�•i 't t �' t1 I j ilti�� 1 tta': � ' �'.1� I�I : � Z ',�,�'� t• �1�. � t ` II► t�t 11 I III t 1, 1!t 1 t 1; � Intl �i t �•..:. t .a r;.• tit nl EI tt t III! I I, I i I k I Z F = L III j. 11` Ile Pp jlill.�./.0 tl.. -� ��• L T �is! .••�i, n i `3� ,i� �M'' v�` �, 1 ,--- r t_ jWWI .. _ `� a•fin.-91y a.eewti rr•n� 7. a N s J Rif J ` n2saa9 w w w • I �F I u� w: w M w �C a : w; u onmo�erowss w—b - � Y/Ri1PY7s�M1C1iA.�1'r>>�'Y1�� } f .ext• a1�� -`-?_3�iaa.y�sYli'a-.'-.�+� : Le i A3 3:S Y` a slt� e a A € ¢ ,�—_ �eeeaeeeeeee➢eee➢RRR�:Reeaee®� $a � $:]LyL } ➢� Ji 7J 77I J l..��..r s' �� ;� $1i •} g. pulls .......... � g 71 _ 3 �fffi/ I: Sm cm , = " 5t - n1 - irt-j. Q \i • i s� 1 P, Hyr fir. •i e_'M�O, �,'C "4: to .� �� •i i Lq rrg ty � f 7S S'•'los'�iu•w '� `*W�•aOp� r v}�` b6b 4 tn ri c 0 R, C� e 1 cm F y l� a�+a�awa�aa-Y ., � r �w.roa .naEl9h.a/ benly -. r - tifit g a, �• `� ' It a YTI,IG; '.maTmna=� n�7�Y%�/161L� ram'+. 14, a IG 1 AIL rc,l YA y y . Air 4 �e q � . x7`n`i Ct- S U. *Wl;' °r '+ x•'i a a.. n., A i , ,Z41- �. ME 68 r, A _ r 1 r'1. { •ill j y�{ 4 4 y 1lh C, yiy._ 3 w r h F i '?at ii.00wn.ram caster ��� ®e®si�s,�awwvsn-1! � �l�b-L Att�Int erg i Mom 1 cc UT- - _ IF- -- b e �1 I 1 a AT -- G=J- IF t z�a , -13 '` . . .. . ..... ... - w x } � of T r ill► ' � �V �„ t N -Awl � t P e r . 5'. i r� CI-IY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT s.e, 4' 1 y� �� E1 kffiffi DAT February 14, 1996 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FRCA: Shintu Bose, Deputy City Engineer BY: Phillip Verbena, Assistant Civil Engineer SUBJECT: Vacation of Utica Avenue - Tentative Parcel (dap 11410 - A.request to vacate.a portion of Utica. Avenue, .located south of Arrow'Route to the north property `.line of parcel 1 of Parcel Pap 10008 approximately 3 feet wide. and 766 feet long (APN 209a144-57) 1. BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS' y` On May 11, 1988, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No.'88-91 approving Tentative Rarcei Nap, 1?410,'located at the southeast corner of Haven Avenue and Arrow Route. ,r%condition of'tfi s.,parcel map requires Utica Avenue be constructed S.ull .wilth from Arrow Route to Join the existing improvements o the south: The U:timIP ate street centerline alignment and adJacent recorded maps indicate an excessive street ,'right= of-way wfdth exists for the westerly'.balf of Utica Avenue. As a rests of the ir]an check process, it was determined that_a. of Utica Avenue wilt reed to be Vacated concurrently 'w th,the Final Map. Th{6 subject Utica Avenue Vacation is a strip approximately I feet wide, 766 feet long adjacent to and along the entire frontage of Utica Avenue (/66 Ft. wide) as shovnti on the attaches( Exhibit ".A". The vacation.is /.onsistent with the Tentative Parcel Map, the Generali Plan ;and the Development Code. 11. RECOM14ENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission make the finding that the vacation conforms, with tAe General Plan and the Development Code, -This. finding will be forward+,d to the City Council for further-processing and final approval. Respectfully submitted, Shintu Bose Deputy City Engineer Attachment: Exhibit "A - im arwn6 PARCEL MAP NO.1i480 PERn na en.��uu�:u�vensrs a 59�� a.es�s+.•• ; ' sum ieti• an �,�� NOW i i� 4ve v,4carSaIle Cl1C,4M0A1a.4 PEA= Ti'N7"AT/tiE PARCEL -a, �_14 Ali' Af4,0 NO.'11410 �► n F f SITE, Y/C/N/TY N1AP-N.rS ci �+ �/AGATIQiy OF I�TaGA AVM. RANCHO CUC GNGA • T�nzraezlVt: . it4 io' ` CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT, DATE: February 14, 1990` TO. Chairman and rembers of the Planning Commission FROM: Barrye R. Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer BY: Barbara Kra'i; ,Assistance Civil 'Engineer, SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL, ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 13125 BURKE MGM. MEWRENT - The E-reation-7of one acre parcel or conaom n uta purposcR- h the Industrial Park District, Subarea 6,_of the industrial Specific `Plan, located at the southwest corner��f Trademark Street ��::.f-Center Avenue APW: 210-07?-33 1. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIJ"T"dH: A. Action Requested: J4)proval of the proposed Tentative Parcel hip as i 8 own on Exhion B. Parcel Size: 9.6 net acres C. ' Existing Zoning: Industrial Park ' District, Subarea 6 of the n stria strial Specific Plan D. Surrounding Land Use: North vacant South - Existing Industrial East - Deer Creek. Channel and vacant Nest - Existing Industrial i E. Surrounding General Plan and Development Code Designations: North - Industrial Park, ;u area South - Industrial- Park, Subarea 6 East'- Industrial Park,, `Subarea:-AS West'- General Industrial, 4�oArea 5 1 F. Site Characteristics: The site, is vacant and slopes gently in a sou awes er�y d'3rection. II.. ANALYSIS: The purpose of the Parcel Map is to create one 9.6 acre parcel or n ustrial condominium use. Development plans for the site are on tonight's agenda as DR 99-25. 0ffsite improve nts which include furl width street improvements gor. Trademark 'Street and Center Avenue will be constructed as a part of the project. IM24 C PIANNINC COMISSION STAFF REPORT. TENT PARCEL'MAP DIM ®URKE GWRvIAL DEaELOPFfENT `PAGE 2;- FEBRUARY 14, 1990 YII. ENYIRONt0:NTA► REVIEW: The applicant completed Part I c,f the initial~ u con ucted a:tfield investigation and completedF;Part II of the. Initial Study. No-adverse impacts upon- the envir6ime'nt Ire_ anticipated'as a result of this pr6Jeci.� Therefore, issuance,of;#iegative Declaration is appropriate. IV. CORRESPONDENCE:- Notices of'P,iablic hearing have been sent to surrounding 1 - proper owners and placed irttha Daily Report Newspaper. 'Poiting atythe site has also been completed: ,, .. Y. RECOMENDATION: It is-"reco enited(that the, Planning Coanission psider all npu .an elements of the Tentative Parcel Map 13125r;- If afteI, such consideration, the Co�iscion cans,recq ..and approval, then the�'i option of the attached Resoiutiori and issur:ce of a Negative Declarr.2ion could be: appropriate. ; ,� Respectfully submitted, 4 i1 Barrye R. Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer li IRN•BK:dlw Attachments: Vicinity Map (Exhibit "A") Tentative Map (Exhibit "9"). Site Plan (Exhibit "C".) . Resolution and' I Recmended-Conditions of Approval' f u: .r 4 ��; LLE SIXTH SY ' O P t w C►ty ��Ia�45 f 4 iQL3D� crry 00 PARC#LL MPP, 4312LS , 5 es V DIMO mmm • M i 25° ORAiWH6sE �. �Ae ACEL i A�Flq 9.9i�9 r= I i Pz/S0 CM or MAP IMAM - RANCHO C ONGA Tram TENTATIVE m8p ENGnCMMMG DAMON •- t _ R ti ,RESOLUTION NO. A RESO!'JTION OF THE PLA KING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF, RANC60_`CUGAMONSA,,. CALIFORNr_ CONDTT.IONALLY APPROV$NG TENTATIVE .'TgRCEL. MAP., NUMBER - 13125,.- LOCATED,- AT'- THE SOUTHWEST CORN ER OF TRADEMARK STREET AND:CENTER AVENUE, AND:MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN 210-072-33 WHEREAS, Tentative Parcel Map; Number, 13125, submitted Ary Burke Commercial Development, applicant,: fair, the purpose, of creating one parcel for condominium purposes, the r2a' ;property situated .in the.,`City,, oS' `Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino,, State`'of California,,idantified�,"s AP.N(s). 210-072-33, located` at the southwest 0r er. of Trademav`k,Street,.,and, Center, ` Avenue; and WHEREAS, on February 14,, 1990, :the,'Planning ;Caaanission helu a duly advertised public.hearinq for the above-described im6o. NOW,: THEREFORE, 'THE RANCHO CUCAtiUNUA PI�NNIN&'CCMMISSZON RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS: { : SECTION 1': That the following findings` have peen made.,, F; 1. Thar the map is consistent with the Genehal Plan 2. That,the improvement of the propo5ad subdivision is tenwhe cons t ;General'; Plan. 3.. That the- „si e k is, physically suitabi'e .for the prpposed development. . ' 4. ghat' the proposed subdivision ,and' fmprovements,WiII s . not cause substantial ersvironmental damage,or.publ,ir health problesi;s;`or have:°adverse affects on'abuti:ng property. SECTION 2: This. Commission finds and certifies that the project has beLn reviewel and considered in compl'tance 'iith the, Cal.ifornia Environmental quality'filet gf, 1970 and,..Turther, this'Commission he.rebyraSsues a: Negative Declaraticn. r SE(LION 3: That Tentative P,�rcel Ma^ ' � 13125.is 'hereb' yPp subject to ;the attached Standard Cchditions an8 the following Special Conditions: 1.. -Obtain; sufficient ` rightsof-way from . the propsrty (l r10 38 08) .on the'east side of ,Center Avenue to construet � e nortber),Y curb return. to City standards`. Yid. the` D2uetopo,��s I: Z 4. 7� y a� " ANNING CDMIIFSSI0N 'RESDLUYIDN 'N0, lens'•PARCEL RAP 13195 - BURKE ,coRmFRUAL-DEVELOPMENT rrEBRJARY 14,`;199a PAGE Z unable_ to obtain that right-of-way, , Center Avenue shall be relocated westerly, the minimum m dstance`necessary,to"coitruct..,' the curb return:wit ftiin~the: project. :.`However, such.a,relocation . will'`most prohably necessitafa a fevis on to Development Review $9-25 sa, 2. The strip of land7 located on the east side of .Center Avenue shall be deeded. to the property Miner to the east (APN 20-381=0aj ,:and a 'tot lint adjustment"recorded to. ,{verge ,the. strip.'af land with,,°;the.property"to the east prior to,recordat 4n of the Parcel,Map. 3. Provide.-'an offer of dedicatio -for a ,possible stor futuKe put�l.ic . m, ;drain extending frorrr;'Deer Creek",'Chaianel' to Center "Aveinue. centered within the-28 faot dri+ia ,aisle; fow Development Review 89-25t _ 4. The, Developer shall submit a .rroquest va',to cate,the,' existing east/we'st'..and',north/south storm' rirain easements. within he y project. The vacations shall _be completed prior.to.the`isisuance of building'permits `or recordation o"f the•Parcel Napa`whichever occurs, first.;, 5. Provide an offer, of .dedication for, a. storm drain easement and construct a, storm drain ,.pipe ,xithin"it westerly most .drive aisle fiM the .north ° 'ro ert `'line souther, p p y y.'and,westerly..to connect to the exi'stinp storm drain -connection to Deer. Creek, Channel. 6. Center Avenue and Trademark St;eet shall be constructed .full width, with the exception of parkway improvements ion 'the,east side of`Center Avenue. . 7. P. easement'uyer the internal drive aisles shall be provided to the City for maintenance vehicle=access;to the City storm drain. , 8. There shall 'be a mrnimunt, five-foot:. (5�)" separation (measu`red horizontaily) between the outer edge of'a mature tree ba.se.,a,nd the outside of'a store drain, pips:= 9. A depo.0 shal� .be posted with the City covering the estimated cost at`, apportloning. the -assessments -under Assessment district, 82-1 prior,to,.;recordation: of the Parcel Map jor both the lot line adjustmp;►,t and lot consolidation: 10. The ;9eveloper shall'com�'iete the purchase;of"the sdrplus county 01ood Control` Propetf to"ca'ted at the southst-Gorner of :'the sr'ce prior to recQrd"�tion df the ?arceliNap t 4. 4 PLANNING COFi�XSSION"ltESOLk� Oif ND. 'TENT FARM. HAP 13125 ,86RKE,COPERCI'AL OtyELUPMEW FEaRUARs 1990 PAGE 3 AP"_ -d AND ADOPTED THIS`I4Tit'DA1' Of i EBRUADY I99O� sx PLANNsNG .COMMISSION OE"THE CITY OE RANCHO CiJCAi4O.4 BY: Larry T. McPA#— , Chairman ' ATTEST• i3rad Bu11eP, Secretary rr a Brad Bul.1er, 5ectetary::�of the P anni'ng COmI01,0R:ofi zthe 7.City-9, Rafich0 Cucamonga, .da hereFry certzy that the forega_ln4 Rsolutton was duly,°a,nd regularly �i,niroduced, passed, ano adopted b ;:ttle.Plat njrig Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga,"at a,regular meeting of the ni,ATanng Cotai,ssiax� held on the I4th day of Febrl6ry, 1440, by"the; O')1ot lnngllVote�tt�-�iai� � AYE:,;" CONMISSTDNEiiS"" _ , �' HOES: CVXMIONERS ABSENT. COMMISSIDNERS, 1 4 I I 4� .{{F i4 / 4 J` u, i r _` �o 3v s �g ga a IL 10 a w Q1 a b B a AS: � •6B .ry fib. e r M tl ee quo "A CZ R.wY Mel a� Bb. Y& - e r bo a � � S� � . •4 rl IL 41 14 g i 4 ,ems" e tlmal us u ..� 6pii ds ® y em uice�'. a� • .Y•l 4:a p 8�.6' Wed �®W ;4�q 'e�i V � � • 4ti s O�d OY.u� yyp �v : rJC LL 4 d 4 C`q W A C < �'V D..' _._ t 4 u Sc ' C= �av -OOp�yy Cam. OYLLy -'14 C� OCpOiN... V O Y• .. 4 t G y y Q Y y W p 1� N. '� • �� y0, i! M 4'O 's0� tzo NT 6 Y ' '°• n'�� p4 ''��; tiN s S pp 53.9 ao. ..�L.• ag da s Su ;.m gdpp 's w. M® 'V$ ■y .N ' O� �.. �� q�� '��C 4L �N 44 �. O�� �xg� o �� 1q.Y 0�1 .O Q O ^1 y 9 V2 y\pF C vW �� NC :■u CO�' C� d 4 � — �. s0� NQ NL ` �N �•.'CO �4 N 6p$ �u0 C�" 6N V�. ^ .;1 e Qoaq��, oL• a•± YY �bqy0 EQO 4 Oa s �,W 41y � 44 uy J M go ' O b .� O L .�. L $ 9 S u4 Y _p �,40!O L Y R1' oie 4 q 2i: o -irN aL�L a-. — ' ...�a� =$nan �:e�.�. 4$0' a yLgj ��1� CITY OF'h ANCF€O CIJCAM®NGA STAFF REPORT. r DATE: '` February 14, ;19.90 TO: Chaiv�an and Mianpe~s of The 'Planning Ca se ion'r FROM: Brad ,BulTer,: City'Planner BY: Vince Rertoni, Assistant'Plan' SUBJECT: 'ENVIRONMENTAL-ASSESSMENT AW"CONDITIONAL ,'USE PERMIT 90-01 _ .< s . E request o es. s Wa'persona sery ce in a—teas�space of 4;420 :square :feet t�Ithin an existing ' indu trial"park ,on 8.12 acre . og Iand� in tS�e 'General Industrial .District, Subarea '3 of °the'Indus irrial" Area; .k . Specific Plan; losa'ted at 9007 Arrow Route, Suites i60 acid 170 - APN: ;209-012-19'. "'' I. P�RO4ECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action Re uested: Approval of a qvi-conrtruction ,Conditional Use—remit or a personal service nand issuance, of a Negative Declaration..' B. Sur�;;;din -Land--Use,'and Zohin North - xis ,ng apar en cumpiex and park; .Lovr Residential (2.4 dwelling units per acre) and.,Medium Residential (8-1.4 dwellIng-units per-'acres. South - Warehouse; General Industrial (Industrial Urea Specific P.lan Subarea`,'2�•. ' East - Manufacturing; General industrial (Industrial-Area Specific'P1an, Subarea 3). 'West - Pia nufacturingldfficit'; General Industrial '(Industrial Area Specific Plan , subarea 2). C. General Ptah tion9r. ro ec.�i e - enera ny4strialt ' North - Medium Residential and: parks South - - -General Industrial East - .General :Industrial t - West - General Industrial. " r D. Site Characteristics: The project site is developed with:;an ex s egg MU - enan-.industrial• park. ,1 rMl D r ,� PLANNING C"ISSION STAFF RE?ORT CUP 90-01, O.P:A.R.i;,'. February 14, 1990, '' Page 2 , E. Parking Calculations:'(` t.' Number of Number of Type Square Parking Spaces Spaces, ` of Use Footage Ratio _Re ug ired; Provided Private Schools (Proposed) 4,420 1:3+sari , "15 15 � 1:2 employees 30 students 10 employees Eating'& Drinking 980 ' 1:100 10 10 Establishment(existing) Office (existing) 17,016 1:20 68 �` 68 pT Office (vacant) 4,942 1:250 20 20 Multi-use (existing) 469614; 1:400 117' Multi-use (:.cant) ,. 26,492 1:400.. .; 66 66 Industrial/Manufacturing . 28,771 . 1:50o 58 58 (existing) Excess Parking . 25 TOTALS 129,235 354 379 F. Applicable Regulations:.` The; Industrial 'Ar®a Specific PI area 3 a,:ows personal ;service`s sub���t-to the approval` i 1 of a Conditional Use Permit.by� the Planning Com3rissian. II. ANALYSIS: A General The applicant is proposing a`personal service which willprorovide vocational. counseling, 3bb placement, .and on-site paid'work for adult clients with disabilitiese The vocational counseling includes training in-areas such as:being on time to work; and filling out time cards. Clients areialsa provided with individual placemeht services where they are provided with local jobs, then transported to the Job 'sites. The work performed on-site fincludes.`furniture refinishing`and .on..site custodial services for 'which the 'clients are dbmpensated. Clients will be dropped off and-picked-up from,.this site bg+ a. " van pool. PLANNING . QWIA SIORI$WF REPORT February. 14, 1990 Page 3' 1x, The hoyrs 'of operation wi1,1 be. iimited'`to 9:06 a,m to '5s00 P.m M.onday."through Friday, and the facility. ,will be ;closed Saturday and.Sunday.". There.w.il;t� be a"maximua� 'Of ten employees at this°location"vith' an anticipated nimber:af clien'ts,'not t- exceed 30. ,O.P.A R.G.'current y has offices=;in i6ntcl'air and. Ontario. .r%. -, B. "Issues.. The primary issues rebated tg locat ng'this typ�;of use: within. an industrial. settin surroundin g ,are .compatibi'1;ity :with , g .use's,; parking, ;availability,` _and, noise The . following sections address and Aiscuss:..these, sSues* 1. ._C�p'atibiTity of Uses: There arena variety of businesses , .ddfithin the center. Business. support services (such.`as 'ReprograPhicsl,. .personaa`' services ` (dance/karite), Word of,Life°Church, a deli!!'estaurant, medical .offices,- ^es Arch,development,, facilities;'"and light industrial activities are types;of 1�.�es-.al read y existing'"within this"i+u7ti=tenant industrial site." There are` uses similar to, elemen"ts cif the .one proposed, Medical "offices provide ,counseling and" Ili light industrial aetivit;.es aye sWUr�io the proposed furniture finishing. Therefore, staff believes that the;personal service wilt .nut"be. I.ncompatibl6 with',the ' surrounding?.Uses. 2. AvaiSabiltty of Parking: °The parking provided-for the industrial ;;nark .will be''adequate for ;the"pr®posed;vse (seeJparking calculations), In addition,: the'ap, cant is proposing to van.pool clients to,the site. 3. Noise Issues: The building construction should, provide adequate sound attenuation rei'ated" to the' furniture finishing with NO significant conflicts' anticipated?by staff. Included With' the " tiesotutian. of. Approval .are conditions `related, to noise. attenuation (Conditions- 3 and 6). . The Fire District"indicates that' a plan"check will `be re�luired prior to occupancX"(Conditi on.4}. C. Environmental Assessments Upon rev?'w of Part, l of_"the­ , -initial-3�ugy an eorta e_ ion of;Part 2 of the Envi�ronwntal - Checklist,, staff has found no si'gnificant."impacts related to a personal service locating within this industrial" center r. �- PLAN�i1NG COPFIYSSIOb STAFF,REPORT Y: CUP 90-01, O:,P A ( C February 14, 1990.,,>, Page4 9 jf dII. FACTS FOR FINOIN6S: 'The GpnF,i,ssion Mist make.all the.`,folTo:ming n ,ngs n o ..Ter t �appro�e;this appl3cati o�i.: 1. The, pr,'oposed dse is..in` accordance. o ith 'the Gerieral. Plan, and the bbjdctives of the bLiVelopiaent;Code,. and the:.purposes of the. I ustrtal Area 5peclfic" Plan , Subarea inrthich `the site is" � cated : ; P. The proposed'use, not be�--trimental to 'the public hearth, safety or" welfare, orr.,:,aterialTynjurious :to properties.or;improvements,in the ,Vicinity 3. ine proposed use.comp.]ies with each'®g the ;applicable provisions of.the ?ndustria� Area"Spee ,fic,Plan.} IV. CORRESPONDENCE:1. This_item"has been'advertised as_a` ppbl1c hearing n The Tally. _port newspaper and properly posted ; notices sent o adjacent property:owners-Withiw30tt,-6if,of the prpjAct; P. RECaENDATI0P1: Staff recommends,Approval of the 'G®ndi.tional Use" erm - l-through adoption of the .attached Resolution of Approval. .3: Res fuT1 mi ,ed, Br -B le City fanner,:. BB:Vo:3s A14tachments: Exhibit °Ap Vicinity,Map Exhibit "8" - Site Plan Exhibit "C°`- Floor plan, `. Exhibit "D° Letter From Applicant", Reso]ution',of Approval AW �d 17- � .. .. a } ;yi a+ �� bi �i9 x§� x��i ".� # t �:;, `c,'jS �'� i zd �6�•' .a s t ...� .emu' �• .. G s � x ARROW ROUTE i —� Tin, 8130 lit < - - -• — ' etso — - BLOG.2-9dOT Arrow Route e,aa Z _ MFIZ0.NIHE M OFFICE SPACE Q D:: f160: - — Itol:' t'.i 117ao. Me f ' m BLDG.1:9M7 Arrow Route c' 81ec: itw _ BLDG.3 9037 [I t+so nso, "� Arry of Rors', _ eteo - Ilea 4 - - - , errs nm - - 'p '. fr.}tl 1170 '. — BLDG.S BLDG.*$ �— BLDG.I 9037 Arrow Route SLOG,7 9017 A1raw Route 9t157 2077 PROPOSED LOCATION Arrow Route Arrow _ �'`Route — C 'C� .��,►WHO-CUCAMC�tGA Kii" 50 •— OUP .�n_ni Tc DSI�11T '1fCI'E.E 5Ii E PLA E7 tBTi: B .SG.LF- NONE } P4 LUNCH ROOFS ,i �r OFFICE cc WORKSHOP �I STROOM OT. � �� A PART J RESTRO RECEPTION t— ,L AREA 1 FINISH ROOM SANDING ROOM OFFICE OFFICE EQUIPMENT ROOM ,h r r 1 a7"y`0F,RAfq,'CjML"� A � �sA lT raoP 9o-oY PLANNING;MMION FLOOR PLAN, fir% C SCALE: NONE - ECE February2. 1990 rlYOR IVED - City of Rancho Cucanonga �at� city of Rancho Cucamonga; Planning Department FEBOS 1990 8lanutag Department 9920 Saaelina Road Its F February Z, 1990 Rancho Cucamonga, Ch 91730il+i�t1$i1Jr16 Lange 2 �. RE. OPARC C.U.P.Heating. Ladies and Gentlemon: The tafaraation listed below in provid+ad'to furtk.ar explain for eny of the above, training goals will include independent the v"atloaal training portion of our pr*51.= to be work with minimal supervision; safe, competent use of Provided at Arrow Business Park, 9007 CA Arrnv Route, Suite* needed job tool$ and equipment; and reliable work habits. 160 and 170, amoeba cucaaanga, 91730. Safe, reliable bill to be a priority. and £roe lob stte will also . At identified is the ding report, vocational objectives are aarabliahed according to Individual ellaut used, I hops the above information will be useful to the Department utaraat and ability. The objective& allow on individual In*$sitting OPARC In obtaining n Conditional Use Permit to participate In barn functloaal work training and actual. Paid work with goals being the ability to participate for thlo site. Your efforts are truly appreciated. Independently in one or both of the following activit;r Sincerely, arena: Paid work #t `�^ cn'14t - .' Integrated work Megan Callegbar Program ft"ger The activity/skill areas may ianlues. BNalG:cv A. On-site paid work: This option will involYa functional Paid work In a veziaty of areas such as contracts COPY tat Mary Boyd from worksites, wood refinishing, Custodial and yard Kathie Hubs aaintenanae. The purpare of this option is to provide Kau Mordboff Paid work skills trainingg. Lisa Stanger 8. Y,obils ctaw work: This option would lovely*training In A variety of custodial areas and/or yard asintenanra and cleaa-up. A small work crew of to more than A clients end I-2 trainers„npld go to a worksita and perform contracted vork. Trenaportstlou would be provided by MARC. C. Individual p2$Caisnt$. Focuai:g initially as daytiea businesses with pert-time work evadable, an individual will be matcbed with a lob and training will occur at the worksite with a trainer On an initial one-to-oye fE basis. If possible, support will be faded as natural aupervisioa occurs but hlx say not ba possible. As skill incraai.xs and job.;.sninga atv available, more than one Client any be working at a particular work-site. Possible placements Could involve car washes, movie thtaat"s. bufldu%cuatodialr nursery plant meintsnanCc and cast return. Transportation would be OPARC vRhieles,0WItrMs, Dial-aitids, or walking. ..' Y OF RAM -CUCAM )NGA PLANNMG DIMI0irt CUP 90-DI LETTER FROM APPLICANT EXHIBIT: Q SCA.LE. ;N q U ft RESOLUTION NO 7 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNiA ,PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE: PERMIT NO. 90-01, FOR A PERSONAL,SERVICE LOCATED IN THE LEASED SPACE e OF 4,420 SQUARE FEET WITHIN A---XISTING MULTI-TENANT'•PARK LOCATED, ON 8.72 ACRES OF I;AND IN THE GENERAL:, INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT (SUBAREA 3), LOCATED AT"9007 ARROW PATE, SUi?FS 160 AND 170,; AND MAKING. FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 209-012-19. A. Recitals. (i) ' The, Association of Retarded Citizens, Ontario and: Pomona (O,P.A.R,C.) has filed an application for the issuance "Of 'Conditional Use Permit..No. 90-01 at:described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in thil Resolution, the subject Conditional Use Peimit request is referred to as "the: 'application". (_i))= On the 14th of February, 1990 the PI-anning Con4nission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga ;conducted a .duly notice'ti ti;Public hearing on the application and concluded aid hearin 9_on that date,. (iii) All legal, prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. Ask B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, i" is hereby,, found, determined anda re solved by the Planning Commission of the City of'Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This ,Cormnission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct, 2. Based upon substantial evidence presented' to this Commission during the above-referenced public hearing on February 14, 1990, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony,, this » Commission hereby specifically finds as follows; (a) The application applies �o property located at 9007 Arrow Route with a street frontage of 770.63 feet and lot depth of,622 feet and is presently improved with 7 industrial buildings and parking spaces; and (b) TLO property to the north of the subject site is an apartment complex and park., the property to the scjth of the siter consists of industrial buildings, the property,to the east is industrial, and the property to the_west- is industrial; anu. - PLANN1tiG COMMISSION R�SQLtlTIOH N0.' `;2 �t- GUP' 9i',-�tl Eebruar= 14, 1994 Page 2. (c) .The subject property consists,of a wide var}`ety%of uses, includinip. business ' support services,'. medical offices,' research and development, light industrial, church, and karate school; and (d) ;There is sufl,., e.fit parkvng a+eailable for the`proposed use. - (e) Hours of operation are proposed to­be from 9:00 a.m. to 5100 p.m., Monday through Friday; and. the business:.arits. be closed-Saturdays , and Sundays. T;;a,majority;of tenants, within the complex, have .busine�,"flours between 8:06 a m. and 5:07 p.m., Monday through: iday,; 3. `Based. upon the substantial evidence pres,Aed to'th"is Commission during the above-referenced public hearing and' ispoa the specific findings cf ' facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above,, this Comm osioK'>',hereby`finds and concludes as follows: s' z (a) ';Jhat.tha,propos-m use is in Act .id Viih the tenerai Plain, the objectives of the Development Code, tfi6 Industrial Area Sppci.fic plan, and the purposes of the district in'which the .�fte is located. (b) That the proposed' use, togethew with, the conditions, applicable thereto, will not be detrimintal to .the r !sl Cc�fiealth,rsafety, or welfare, or "materially injurious to properties ,,or improvemehis':.tin the vicinity• ; (c) That the prig",sed use complies ,with each of the applicable provisions of the Developnr:,Yt. Coda., 4. This Commission hereby finds ,jrO.certifies •ghat the project has r been reviewed and . .;�dered in empliance wit!;" the 'Gali,forn a Em!ronmental '. Quality '--t of l fla, ana, further; thi3 Com,fssion heret�y issues a:Negative:- Declaration. S. Based upon the {' .sings and' conclusions set .forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, ,thisosm►ission hereby approves the application subject ' to each and ewrery condition set forth.:below: Planning Division: 1l his approval shall apply to. the perscnal service use Only. 2} Approval ishall expire, uriess extended by the Planning Commission, if, building-.permits are.not issued or approved- , not commenced 'within twenty-four (A months from thee; *late of approval: 3) Approval of this request shalt :not waive compliance with all,. ' sections of the -Development Code, Industrial Area �Speci€lc Plan, and PI other City.Ordinances. PLAW4ING COMMISSION RESOLUTION N0. "CUP 90-01`- O.P.A.R.C. W Febra, 4 0,1990.::_ Page 3 4) If, the operation of the facility causes adverse effects. upon adjacent businesses or'operations, 'including, but not lid ted to parking or, noise, this Conditional Use Permit ;shall ;be brought back before the Planning C.immssiun for consideration s, an0 possible termination of tfigc,usE. 5) Ocoupaney of the facility 4idf I not commence until such time ail Uniform °Building Code7&7d . *;te Fire Marshall's regulations have been complied t�ith. Prier. to occupancy, plans 'shall be submitted to the Foothil-f `firs Protection Y�istrict and the Building and Safety Division to show ztr compliance. . The building shall be inspected for compliance prior to occupancy. 6) Any sign, p4-6pasad for the facility shall b6.1 designed in conformance with the`City's Sign Ordinance and: any Uniform Sign Program for' the complex, and shall requiri� ,reviek!'and approval by the:o'' 'ning:Divison prior to installation. 7) The "facility shall be: operated in conformance With the performance standards for Subarea 3 of th;Y Industrial Area .Specific Plan, including, but not limiteC4o:,'III oIse levels. 6. The Secretary,to this:'Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. >. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS'14TH DAY 'OF,FF9RUARY 1990 ' - - ';,. PLANNINd COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA 4�t BY: Larry T. McNiel, Chairman ATTEST:• Brad Bu er3� , Secret ry 1 I; Brad Buller, Secretary, o 'rhe Planning Commission:of the City of Rancho . Cucamonga, do hereby -certify that the".1oregoing Resolution.,.was `duly and �egulariy introduced, passed., and adopted by the. Planning Commission, of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission hEld on the 14th day of February, 1990, 'by the, foiloW ng vote-to-wi;t* AYES: COMMISS'IONERS:. NOES: COMMISSIONERS i A3SENT: COMMISSIONERS: j l CI Y.CF RANC#. CUd, AMQNG`k :4 r DATE: February I4` 1990 T0: ChaSrman and Members of the' planning Co itission- , FROM: Brad Buller-,'City Planner ,`: BY: Brett Horner, Associate. Planner - SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL, ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 13717 s� WESTERN PROPERTIES• - The development of 394 condominium units om 23.5- acre°%''of land-in the Medi.um,High• Residential Distri`t (14-24 dwelling units ner acre) within, the'Terra, ' Vista,.Planned Community, located at the northeast 'corner of Church Street-and 'Spruce Avunue, APNr 2077-421-� , ReTated File Tree Removal. Permit. 8940: I. PROJECT AND SITE 'DESCRIPTION: A, Action Reguesteda Approval, of` the subdivision' map. ';;ard , issuance of-a Negative Oealiration; approval of"ilia canceptt,aI plot plan, grading plan, -landscape ,plan, and- bui:dtng elevations. B, Project Delnsitys 16..8 dwelling units per acre C. Surrounding Land 'Use andoning: North - .Single -frmily homes and vac'a'nt; Low-Medium Residential. (4-8.dwell'irg units per South - Vacant; Office Park, East - Vacant and apartments; Elementary school and Medium - High Residential (14=24 dwelling units per'acre) ' West - 'Vacant; High Residential (24-30 dwelling units per , acre). C' ' D. General t?i ;n DOsi4nations:, Project S'.'te - Medium and Medium High;Resident* North - Low-Medium"Residential F ,; South Office ' East - 'Medium Residential - West Medium-Nigh �ejidential „ r1 E. Site Characteristics: The-site ts_gresently vacant with some.,; grapevine vegetation,- •The site slopes� approxima.telyy?.pewcent from north to south. An east=west:raw of 12 eucaTyptus trees r PLANNING COMMISSION'sTAFF REPDRT, EA.AND „`13747 - WESTERN-,PROPEtYTIES February 14,..,1990 r. Page a exists . near the southwestern edge'10f the project: In addition,';33 olive trees of some hstorical,value have been boxed " for r�Tocation.: I For 'l ad'd i`tional information an the' trees,,see Section II!E II. ANALYSIS: A. General: Lewit•Homes proposes to develop the site iWith ,four" 4 . two-story building.�types., -The project ►tins, esigned as-two d ° distinct -vtil,lages; each ,with, its own arc�hitecturaT :scheme: „ �I The units tca, the north of the site 'will have a contemporary ` aepearance: with,si,di»g, stucco:and flat tle^oofing ht,7;e the units to t:he south will"have mediterranean,;style w � stucco and s=tile roofs,: Three separate recreational f4cil1 A S ,are,,�rovided .and the site includes three pools, two recreation b uildings, two,tot lots, rva sports court, .and an';open play area,,• A;traiI/walk connects .�all =of these' fac;iltIes.,an3 , is� uninterrupted' by ,9 , w vehicular drive aisles. In-addition,,the, project borders''the proposed '!a Mission.Park to the soutFi`;Which has been approved by thez:?�rk and..Recreaton Comtissaon B. Desian R`ev'iew Committee the 'Coimnittet reviewed the proposal on, ,December 1, 1987 Emerick,°Tolstoy,,Colenxin); `Februar"y 4, 1988 (Chitiea,._Emerick,-Kroutil`), December 8 ..�1958 (Blakes�ley, Chitieav Kroutilb March 10,:1989�, (McNiel', :Emerick, Krout September 21, 1939.(Blai<esloy; McNiel, .Kroutil),;and November 2, 1989 (Blakesiey, McNiel, -Knutil) ;`:;At, the ta'tt review, -ttie Committee :_recommended appeovaT:of�the project subject to -the foliowing.cond.iti:ons: L A scored colored concrete band should be used outside:the- garages. A. 'second typical crnc'rett,band__ nd should be used next-'to this colored .concrete band. The design details Should be.worked,out by staff`and the applicant: STAFF C NT: The applicant has submitted rdeta'iIs of",the driveway paving` which is'shown on Exh%jt.- D-3.: Condition 1 proi,idi 'for 'precise. details with the final-Aandscape;plan. 2 A ain mum two foots'wide planter area should be prodide� between the _low screen walls and the curb. eifgri ,for drive aisles STAFF CEFil': Added. as Condition '2 in the Resolut(os of :Approval �j r. PLANNI►tVZOMMISS'ION`STAFE REPORT, EA AND;Mb717 -•WESTERN PROPERTIES r` 14,'1990,' Pa!2 3< 3: The., patio areas outside. Buildings'11 and 22' should be reduced to:ma're`them farther from fid.street. a STAFF CONMENT: The .applicant has comple ed this on'"tf%e revised plans. 4. The paving;at all'pr!aject entries should`be extended the full l nett ;of the drive 'aisle. favi'ng "should also be , proyi"ded by Building 25 ,and Lot A:. ' STAFF GQ Added as Condition 3 in the" Resolution of Approval. 5. Additiana -Tree"plantings should be provided,•'ou-cstd.e all ..",street facing patios:., STAFF co Aisiled .,as Cdndition 4--inthe, Resolution af"_ Approval C. Technical Review Comm ttee:• The Committee, eviewed- the'. project and`determined:that with'the•-recommended".Condiffons of Approval, . the... project" is -,consistent with all applicable standards;:and or'dI nce"s. �i D. Environmental Assessment•• Part,-J. of'the Initial: Study hat bce.sompleted by" the applicant. Part IL of the Environmental Ghecklis-t.,' completed by, found that althoughi�the project ay' havee-a significant. effect on 1. the environmept, ;'there'will not be ,a. significant " effect in this case 'because ',the ,'- mitigation measures, IdentifJe_d fin',the Initial Study have been added to therpreject a¢provai 1.' Naisei The project is subject"to s�gm"ficant"no,ise ` impacts along Church Street and Spruce Avenue: °two preliminary i acoustical studies have been prepared whitFi identit_ mil gation'measures E"sound'"barriers}•:. needed to bring the site into conformance" with titv. noise standards, A float acoustical report will be. submitted (Condition No - 4) to identify precise measures which must be,incorporated into,, the final project design. Z. Schools: On' June 39 1989:, the City Cnunc l adopted Urgency Ordinance Na. 395 Which establisles= a policy fora Cond:ation to be .pl aced, nn-:a.i Rending: residential-projects ' to ensure" :adequate school f capacity: This condition has ,been, added- as Planning, DiwisionCondiL�ion,No.; 1 of the"Tentjtwe"." Tract ResOution of Approval. ' PLA44ING COMMTSSIOM STAFF REPORT EA AND TT 13717 - WESTERN 'PROPERTI;£S February 14, 1490 Page 4 £. free Removal Permit 89=7d: A total of 45 trees exist on site. There are12 large eucalyptus'`trees a windrow type planning and 33 mature' olive trees which,have al read;-¢een boxed in' movable planters. The trees were,part• 'af what eras known as the.Mission ` p village for the wort ers of .the Mission Winery,.(now Camp, a small referred tc as the »irginia Dare Winery).'. To commemorate this site, several •of tho olive frees wi1T be relocated, within. Le=tMissI Parr adjacent to the��oroject,_, In addition; a sma11 plaque will also erected in the parl�:ner, the olive trees. The applicant is recjuesting;to remove;the eucalyptus trees and plant the remaining OIJ ve trees within, the'.new.tract. Staff recommends approval of the; Tree. ReaoVal' permi .on the condition that ithe eucalyptus trees are• re a one-to-one basis. In..addition, the Olive trees-should" be -retained,. and, planted 'onat te' once the project is built. Should any of these trees-die,.l-eplaceingnt should, occur on;a one-to-one 'basis with the,{ largest nursery, grown size- available III. FACTS .FOR FINDINGS: ' The ptivject is consistent with'the Terra Vista Plarged .Community and `the.; 'General' plan. The project wil`i not.'be detrimental to adjacent properties or cause .significant environmental impacts. In addition, thc: proposed u3e is, in compliance' with the applicable provisions of the',Terra°Vista Gommunit"y Plan, the,Development Code and City'Standards. - IV. CORRESPONDENCE: This item has` been advertised in The Daily Report newspaper as a public hearing. The property has-been posted and notices were sent to all property owners within_30 feet'of, the project site., V. RECOMMENDATION Staff,recommends that the Planning Commission approve Tentative Tract 13717,, subject to' the Conditions of Approval, through adoption of the attached_ Resolutions: and 'issuance of 'a Negative Declaration. Res ully ltted Bra Bu ,e City anner BB:BH/jfs Attachments: Exhibit "A"' Location Map 5 Exhibit "B" Subdivisio.n Map Exhibit "C"/�- Site Plan Exhibit "D',',r°� Landscape Plan- Exhibit "E"`- Buil.din Elevations' 9 Exhibit "F` Tree Removal,Permit 89-70 Resolution of Approval with Conditions Resolution of Approval for Design Revi6w with 'Condition's I x ■. --- .:. nib®{li n t� Omni AAf/jq 11 1 liii S � r 10 71�7i�°I": �it � tt�ett®'�- �a��►utu P.ca jir)I ' �'�4�fs►�'!. S �•,r as � t tt� W' Awl • � JL y 1, i IN f ♦ 1 I�t��t\ Iw'- r����ii f e '-�• 'f �• fir:` �y `'` � „�. I Jf•7/ �' 4 ' r. drITY:OF RA14CHO CUCAMONGA tM �ZZ:L3 17' PLANIl�Ad� EX HIBM `P.J SALE;'YID Est ♦ r^ L,,a ,� ; II �t, f'' L°� �. ��`• Y '..' a�a � � \ III �1 '+:;r. ,.�� r•;� as a• _ .� ,4 '�� ^�,' ., �'=t '; a �. tATC,:��0• �r' ' `.a <`a Ott. � •` •.. ,� t( _ r, r -„� VN 44 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ,I1'm." TT J37/ '"PLANNING t)MSION , EXHISM `:SCALE: 6'19 r y (8 g s -� � •+ �� r' .. tag •A_ aid. 4 t; Q` 4"r r�"s f M� Via. -•i, . �� .Y� V r�r aj��j 2 ��Ty� 1 r, e� ��.?'�., ^laX,"_ �} 1i,. tt�. � �." •� Y' l,.rY`: (,r-4a�Jk^y t C) Q a. ^4v k (•�1�� 4 ] ' � fir._ �Y ��a�' ��a'�t�tr rt. .pMpj�i;Y � h,.� •,t�' I .�fy^..p iyCd��: � *T� :+L7f�r -r,y ..Ct+k�..iia -3 `h.:�r. z '^h•j .a+"'i��iyWx�f� f u ?^8' IO '... w t el :• dh -:', .� �`{ * i e �r4� • � r Ja�,i 2 Y �T.. r # t ate- 4t Itii)(`TYPI B •'• y1 �� Y: f- ""•-7 r : � pp _ %4rnRlim �' M � tMtf 11 lafint ,�� 1-NWIj1�ia`V lyltlniM ftlls ![rlai2Q1/tMGY HIH TRAFFIC COURT/FIRE LANE, ^r" LBLDG TYPE D .� �•nwmam .. • =�� tra.ain r7lTna SMM1: MIOM Ha1KAl lfla�MiC[5 }4 rOfltlUltalnR+ '--7 " ���• -3 r l�•i-T 1. _ .'Z.ir-•{i'Z:, TZ` r BDIOMA 'n..r. L("STREET • HARDSCAPE ('0'+;.I PT TENTATIVE TRACT NO.'13717; T E R R A Y 1 ! T A t 1 T [ C T Y. a [ • "'1 a A M M / M. G =,"1 �'t r ®1 '. iTi ZITY OF RANQ- �"'LVCp.Iv ONGA FFEF+4:a 3717,•� '1 � I '' tISI�111I }17 �) Ilirr EXHI�I1�'::�`3 SCALE: F?Dl9G . 0•'ti/ s ` iY9 Vb�� � s - -Poop`c pv •+• 'r1 3'HIGH'RETAINING SCREEN WALL e a LANDKAPING ,r SIDEWALK b :o CITY R.O.W. =lANDSCAPED SLOPE _ ACCESS COVE I TERRA VISTA TRACT NO. 13717 TERRA, VISTA - � RmGAo GuoamonQa:Catilomia 1aw16 Nemai CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPE SECTION SCALE: 1/2"=l'-O" ,I CITY OF RANC`Hb CUCAMONiGA t' t: 'T . PLANNING VIV.SIOIN Z411t.E; Se��iew EXHIBIT .P-y :SCALE: PlOPM a y_ r lava lama INA 4 ■■ a�� _ ."` r " i _YZ w. �r u c r 2•� � f , �r raS.a -Er'� v r t i � r p sit< ML a' w -_- I: ry t w v 1ha Ile a m 2E- r} z IN =` n ` , ' Jhe•-- � w p�� ' v a r �;w r. >o J p W L�r � qQO tic, til, j - I i y F'{ 4 f . t s siia Ai ! i , .P iC;e 7 r r--1 _ F.M. tj - <. _"F- r_ r t, 'L� _ •'gyp ' i N 7 t..c� Fi K rs ♦'K�'., 7T K d a i7� ...����2> ip,j,.•.� `'�»��;. ;fie J ! SS � j a _ a �r v O w r' xV , C, FriT :i a '� ?^ Mot y r t sL'•��a v.��a�i r . �_.yy� •V �� *T �Ifi�S ��k"i� :7�7s3� v;I r� 10 t44' t d::r fit , 1E:S I 4 z i - a u W - � a . a 1 W i W ..ram M. li t "n l(= fill ` I TT 02 Pii IT u Y UJ •e 1 p i az1' Am r. 1. # r 1 '/-if I 1�.I�� ,� �ru � zy � �1 y t TY sk `r '� , , r Iti '� by ITT, f__ t�jil,tll No I �.•1. y rt ,. ■�t�t�I t_�tt! 4a- �k r i P z F i. v F- t u 0 I�h r f ;� _ Y'�i MAJ LI 3 *i t S ij R II ' s < S "i it d if � ✓i 1en1l� " It Il !! I _ 1 t�l �, •�7 I try. 1 1• C t! .. r 7iEe i �I OC ce V - If 1 3 :i .. is •s �_� � � , I = i + r A W W �., ;; �- _ 'Yacht .' 1 w 11 < ti i MI I► �ii ,d k imm iitltti`: -t y I Afi �i•'`t11 , 'a } il4ill 1,,1 001-J. r Avow uit;;1; a 1, �],•,�<.►At� r y P z i i f% i a � �� •r,. r •\�+. }}yyam��, T��i�i�� NpMIX • w.�i r a, � �iri�� s yli {�t�•� 1 tU� i 1 A4 f r t� !A 1 k ig E ppc J � o ,t S t t ..�•t•� i �$rm �•� Ww �I rl t-k S T J � X}.t ♦.(1.. y the - r Yd� fi x , fit+ 1� � ;ttit;1 t4: v. ft p 1� ' t 'EELW w-> a � 's M t i'+4,..y" .�us`t t� 7 ^sue' t��'��t� r�r.f 1 1 •I x7 4 ;sue ty.` 1►:� sty. ,y �_ � w It �L i1l.J • Y 1 a�, .y t rc� �♦. a Y 1 i�� 1 ' r • �r r - :: f �x i y 5 yf Owl �1 k�rr, � �1�. * aim; l2 `x:,�z'*.'U ♦ v r , x a � tilt *hW� 1 �_ . j •a r _ r iC —re - z E sty of Tree Removal Permit Cucamonga DEVELOPMENT 0 9q- 70 055 �} - ;'' Ordinance No.276,pertaining to the preservation of trees on private property,requires that no person remove or relocate any woody plants in exces3 of fifteen(15)feet in height and having a single trunk ® ' circumference of fifteen(15) Inches or more and'multi•trunks having a circumference of thirty(30) inches or more(measured twenty-four(24) inches from ground level),without first obtaining'a Tree Removal Permit from the City. 45 ®. LOCATION OF SUBJECT SITE: Vhfi A �8'NlIL 'r ME? I _ NAME,ADDRESS,TELEPHONE OF APPLICANT: _Ll '* C.AuFary4A jig@ NO. 'ENr r`t•,s IM—r Li Pr Ar am Cl. 9117&U Uj NAME,ADDRESS,TELEPHONE OF PROPERTY OWNER(if other then applicant): 0 REASONS FOR REMOVAL(attach necessary sheets): ' A►� 41 `?A m4L Willi OfR PC*= mr Ib IigsLdlii�r8.16� Li PROPOSED METHOD OF REMOVAL: ftg A-Iw® RJEE&&ff 9P p*rr. WAt`lrIM z APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE: DATE: ' This application shall include a plot plan indicating location of all trees to be removed and retained. The species,number,and size of the trees to be removed shall be so designated.If a tree is diseased, LL LL then a written statement from a licensed arborist stating the nature of the disease shall be required. z Uj ❑ APPROVED ❑ DENIED By Reasons:_ cc Date: Notification of application shall be given to property owners within three hundred toot radius ten days` prior to approval.If no appeals are received,then the permit shall become effective ten(10)days from the date of action.This approved tree removal permit is valid for days from the date of final map recordation or building permit issuance,whichever comes first.Should applicant fail to remove the trees within this 90 day period,a new permit shall be required,uniess an extension is requested fourten(14)days prior to the expiration of the permit. •r . Condition of the trees? Most are heal tidy. Several of the boxed trees are in fair t4_Aoor shape. 2. Proximity town existing structure or interference with utility services. not applicable: 3. Is there any confkict with proposed improvements?(Streets,building pads,walls Trees conflict with proposed drive aislaa and buildings_ i�,. 4. Proximity of other trees in the area. ' No trees within 600 feet of subject trees. 5. Effect of tree removal on the aesthetics of tho:area and the-public health,welfare and safety, Will impact the existing area._ However,, trees planted in rgnnynctia,nn with project development will enhance area. Replacement trees will also. " 6-. Can the tree be preserved by pruning or relocation? The boxed trees can "eserved and replanted- 'The aiwalyotus tra«�5 Cannot. 7. Do the trees constitute a significant natural resource? The trees do have some sinnificanc as th y Ware formerly tho site of a mission camp. See staff report for details. 8, Are the trees required to be preserved by any specific plan,condition of approval or historic land- mark designation? No s. 9. lsanarborlstrequired? One has been completed: Sae atta bge. .� NEW Fes:' Est grown nursery size available per the Tree Preservation Ordinance_ on a one r one basis if an of the replanted art-site and replaced Y 33 trees die, with the largest nursery,grm m size available a. J _ A t x 14 518--Golde. ►vas Riv_erside.0 t'rt 4 r r± r�sly Y cy LEUPS.S F3®USES '. JOIN HELCHER 9156•Mouatan Ana FOW ' � / ~-.• ;ter s K .� ~ s"� { `"'.C'�.v.'. � SAC!ti'•i` OBSERVATIONS AHD RECOMENDATIONA REGARDING TREES'AT �.. r - n A `TERRA VISTA TRACT,11549' EiIHAND �f, T a PROJECT••In < u r 4�zpat � ham„ ._ g .�. •Y� \ N r .. PREPARED AEY SAli9EL L. &PIAPP 4' KNAPP TREE SERVICE. ^� l e y .a^MIM—! January 3,•1986 s ��r ,,•,c'- v �h-....Y. fir''. - P�3ssicnvC i �'�-�=v k'a8e 4 4 • Yl i" y '�-�'�•. Aff�3Q', 4Al9P �OLTVE GIRQ,�, ,' ,cam �;,r,*4a � -.s,a ..o✓.,.. 'j \ .'r� Y`4fi-mt W , C !-b. rt1 ..J. .. ld ii•7.�j�'S• �.?1' �rwe r. ir,mq .hrse t33 -. (olivel trees ga v®. 8lovea,- (".1 jaere?aarYq as-being inago d"aondit3oa for reloo�tis� ooation uroul ., :iv OlQo+1traenchiaa�8adz r�xat prunii the"soiLrco atid.'correctivw . ���tri r to Lbw ancatbaoangpyIt, s eati�nted"th�tt " ca uld bg spproz- ,z� -t�imately tfrelvegtho}uasad ($i2'pQ00)�per tsc9e. for the reiooatid ro9esa `y�"'� '6,y�`S- .tom VL' the looalhhiateryaZasaoeiatodd fa th tbahgeoveili� fight o vtemsible ~ ` `to solicit contraA to usdhrrarite,'.relooation costs ®itheaor. taaividua t trees•or-foVtpart ox� all of� he'`grove'aa a unit. The,trees�ia�and of',themse ves ? rould''be dramatic and�valuatile:lsndacape additions, the,factcst,they have ' heritage/historic value;could.make'them•valid and uni(ue'*oo11'eotoris' items " �ZtY'oould aaivi"tW,site ind:tbe'dity'with:a most u)m al•advertiaing thous, H2iile p s®wing the trees=find"aiguific$ntly itai ncina2property value at their Ynew lr ation(s) Capart 4'rom'pros??active.acquisition by;individuals, some or_all might-be moved; in a pro�eEit 'iud®d?by philanthropic anddor oivc� agencies `;for tte.purgose`oY pr®seating living,2listory Khtle enriching the tP�Iet�ctard value of the relocation site.` } +G -Z- -tz Y { ' r a� RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION .OF THE PLANNING.COMMISSION ,OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAM64GA,APPROVING TENTATIVE;TRACT MAP NO. 13717= a" FOR THE DEVELOPMENT'OF 394 CONDOMINIUMS, LOCATED WITHIN THE Tf.RRA°VISTA PLANNED COMMUNITY ON ;THE NORTHEAST CORNER ' 1l OF CHURCH STREET AND SPRUCE AVENUE IN THE MEDIUM'-HIGH RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT, ;AND MAKING FINDINGS;, IN SUPPORT THEREOF,- APN: 1017-421713 A. Recitals. (i). Lewis Homes has 'filed an. application for the approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 13717` as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter i, thiS, Resolution, the subject Tentative Tract`,,Map request is referred to as "thjj pplicati6n". ` (ii) On'ithe 14th of February, 1990, the;Planning Commission of the City of Rancho ,:ucamo6g& conducted a.,,duly­ noticed, public hearing on the application and ;oncluded 'said hearing op that date. 1 (iii) .ill legal * prerequisites' to the adoption of. this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOH, THEREFORE, it is hereby'found, determined and resolve[ 'hy the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as;follows: I. This Co*ission f ,reby specifically 'finds,that' all of"the `ctts set forth in the Recitals,.'Part A of this Resolution;are trui and correct.; , 2. Based upon substantial evidence presented 'to thi, Commission during the above-+referenced public hearing,.on February 14, 19F), including written and oral ''staff reports, ; together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds 'As follows (a) The application applies to property located at ;the northwest corner of, -,Church Street and Spruce Avenue and is presently unimproved; and (b) The property to, the north, of to subject site is vacant land and single family homes, the property to the south of that site,consists of vacant land, the property to the east is vacant `9and -and apartments, 'and the property to the west is vacant. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to thisCommissinn. during the above-referenced public hearing and Upon the specific-`Findings of facts'set forth in paragraphs, I and 2 above, this Commission heretiy °aids and' concludes as follows: PLA N NG OMISSION RESOLUTION:NO,. TT 13717.=�FtESTERN'PROPERTIES February 14,,.1990 Page 2 (a) That the tentative tract is consistent with the:General Plan, Development 'Code,' and Terra'Vista -Community Plan; and C) (b) That the design or,improvements of,the tentative. tract is consistent with the Genera{ Plan,; Development Code, and Terra Vista Cd-mmunity Plan; and (c) ` That the site is physically suitable for .the •type of development proposed; and '(d) That.the design of the subdivision, is not 1'ke1jl to cause substantial environmental damage and aV idable' injury.' to .humans and wildlife or their habitat; and (e) That .he tentative tract isirnot:likely to cause serious public health problems; and (f) That 04', esi,gn of the tentatK* tract till not-conflict with easement acquired, iy the public'at large, not of record, fo.r access through or use of th,t property within,the proposed subdivision. 4. This Gommissidn hereby:,finds and 'certi°fies::that the project has been reviewed and considered in <compliance with the Ca,�fornia Environ;nental Quality Act of, 1970 and, further, this Commission herreby, issues a,Negative Declaration. 5. ` Based;upon the findings and conclusions set forth in;paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves°the application=:subject to each and every condition set forth below and in the attacW Standard Conditions,'attached hereto and incorporated herein by,this Ye4,,,eince. Plann%3 Division 11 Priori to recordation of the final map or the issuance of auilding permits, ,whichever comes= first, the applicant shall consent to, or participate in, the establishment ss'7 a M61lo-Roos Commun`ly, Facilities' District pertaining to the project "site :.to provide in :d'nj nction' with `:the applicable School District for the :construction and maintenance of necessary school, facilities. :However, if any School District has; previously established-. such a CoWuM ty Facilities District, thesapplicant shall, in the alternative, consent,to, the annexation of tlie, projidt stiite into the territory of such"existing District 'prior td''the recordation of the 'final :map or :the; issuance of building permits, whichever comes first.- t� I; rxi 3 Pi RNNINtr COMMISSxON RESOLUTION NO. TT 13717 - WESTERN PROPERTIES _ r February 14, 199Q Page 3 further, if VA.,affected School District i-as nat formed a Mello-Roos Corammmnity Facilities District Wittiin iielve C " months of, the date of approval of the project and prior to the recordation of the final map or issuance of building, ` '''permits for said project, this condition shall be deemed mull and void. Engineerinq Division 1) 'Construct the following,' . Master Plan Storm Drain facilities:' a) Line 1 from Deer Creek Channel to Church Street; b) Liries 1-2 in Spruce .Avenue, 2:-1 in Church Street, ,and 9-2 in' Elm Avenue; c} The extension of Line 2-2 northerly, along the east boundary of the future school sjte, to We sit Greenway Park;, and, d)' The retention basin in-.La Mission.Park 2) Construct the following portions .of streets full width, except for off-site parkway improvements which may be deferred until development of the adjacent property. a) Spruce Avenue from Foothill Boulevard northerly. to meet the existing portion; I ,b) Church Street from Spruce Avenue to ;Elm'Avenue; and c) Elm Avenue. from- Church Street to Spruce Avenue, including portions of the Community Trail on Elm Avenue. } 3) Lot Line Adjustment I No. 316 and the related easement .deed shall be recorded prior to approval of the Final Ma p. or issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. 4) Construct the Community Trail along the`east; boundary of the future;school site on the north side of Elm Avenue 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall -certify, to., the adoption of this Resolution. y� 39' li PLANNING COMMISSION R€SOLUTION NO, 'TT 13717 - WESTEPA PROPERTIES ' February 14. 19RO J� Page 4 APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 14TH,DAY`OF FESRUARK,-1990 PLANNING C9MMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO COCAMONGA, BY: Carry T. McNiel, Chairman ATTEST: Brad Butler, .Secretary I, Brad Buller, Secretary+ of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that thg,.foregoinq Nesolutfon was` duly and . regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning!�Commissian of ;the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of'the Planning Commission held on the 14th day of February; 1990 by the following.Vote-to-wit; AYES: COMI.SSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: i i k� ,, t3 r� } . CAI 12 1 '$LU q &« �.�Y.egaY$ i VCV�u�. c CC �Lp$ a�1i0 Oyy Y� .. • =0I-R ey i1:., .��• �$ O�� @+�q�Tp�L+ gg_ t0tyyr a:lyvy Szz ®!I•8 r N 1qA g �j ®ipr �.d'�+��La�a�a1 v�q+ �� IYO Vd /• itld � a�f3 . jjso i NNE � ..r V�' �om ps•,ra�. CZ4� . .PC ad. p, {� • L� mw 4N..Y0 ®a`1 �. N tl aNMMu��:b it is .. o Y �q P p�tl W � Y LIM- 11 t tl �q Vi� O�tlP a 9 Val sl Pit Ut s.d_�as_ ago: bib sbam � sg y$. U. Gt d {� $ Mpd$} _ A Aj !T6 9 L. q ®®yypppp9 u n g b MNYpytY MY Nm+ S'y s_Qp -.al �g -^�� mu '22 E " �qg«�& I"P 406 V�d r e e.o$ �'—aygaYyn aN dpppMotp $ 2¢¢ , ®I �Ymo yn 4-.2. �l j ®'H Y :ty 9 "ta �y pW .31 It Sul 430. E +g IS ffige 'tl� $w .. �Y= +,y•<o °'R..g�&gEi ,b'=m .. 3-2 ,.:r LS�+�• 41 L' �pd Y S" App\p o : L Y �� �r._w� i0 Y�• 4�1Y.V V Yss IC. Ol" p tl � 1.� IF. Oa_QY ,p.�YYy1�.. �yP9� iYC qWp�pyppy is (W(yy �t@96 p Oyu.@' o Oat, Hwy ii~ L ��aQpp�6i WgI fp�GY w 9d 6. 1d4 H�aiPKS/ 'ma?y. NO �� �r'� jS' at o `SS i �O y p$'m+r �ffigg i' UPpM.V tl g@ya�yy ggs i 41Y `,tj' tpp Bp M _ OR yp ft —bit VaTTL 9{ N saw = �� � � a$C tl g NCh � @§qq 5i$�� `° yr f M .b�-. , 1 . in 'f lSa Aug ®� "'� .,.�5 f y srr 7 +®a4s N g ! ci it IR y u ax 00 • � VS ^ yqa A� g V �y1WWr 6: O �`• /C�� ` pqY. G. `„ Cif •^r0. Q C = -G YRL o@ •� '�u:4tl 'sG•gpVu.Y��BA Ot1�s:U G • V°�y C c�Naoq S�Nopi%7 fat � � e ` Y GSA �:�c q.�' �= t}r9}i•M; ,i�tv' �.y,'f NqO L'0`n YA Aa��p `�`� 'a�N e• s rrp qq i @@ �V_ �1y¢¢¢Q Q� a�-gtlAN •�`'��C��w J. .2K �e� 6� ��YQ � y Y CqN LyY ^ON•'ep. ON�.p ¢g.K9�•pw ® ���AI O Ey.O P s`r O—.•l aC..ai•n k � MG w" N�'�rA4p'..N�w bu �"G NO` gM�Mf 3@• Sq v u VMNr 4 ;.i` .4 y 4N.pO VQ111^COp yOr `yy.4�MM" ��.i HRH •�L..Ndq ��~�:qx1'+ qC3 •.. {•. �� 'yp� @�1 ..;L Y ^lyY�Gq {��i`�1r YYy�w+q � 1'.4 �prL ■' � 0b f•+lY�" .S.m i1Qi•MYr�.6M YYYA •y .GAO _.Y ND Or66p' m b tta id L y+ �pYC '�q qISE �'e` ' s ® Cty ;�10®` •. 83 i g i p�1e. �r� �� � � � ��� e� w� w•`.o�vs.. ..III `o `a s T` EVE , •6yCy� N dNp, � lw.gw�14^. Tj 'tlN N_ �p4.ga `6 HL q.Y � O •.�.ryp jA �..Q ���y wOA�/�9{il.M, 0�•� Q b a � D: ~ gYl b T. rot Of NYC' zZ Is-if ^ y�1.�� tQRs Mp yRatY gaUNZ rieo ,t®:w wq;b a 4aaa '21 Id'•m n° oa a *P g �� �•yi��! -a� V'+> rY ^YKLg 9y y yV .� cs yA 4 ilr iC 4 ilt all x2 rev yp� y 4t aa $! �y( q Q �F�, $ W �rT�r xggQ {��Ypp �Y CYO � �O tjw W. (. Sit E �+�"� ti Mix >a � p Y '� ({ f y� !'9^� b N1 9a y���tt AC4: iN i44p� � 7iA CJy } JQA .. LY..' q Y V W OUZ yC69y � Y AIR (�� 4q~g�ayp �3g31}}�Y�YyI �Nrr4iY4 a• N �r� all Ig��Lpq bg�� gNG�q C7 AI ���Y. 'd bWKb M+i it '.� � r a! j Hit its- _ 13 $ t; '�^p',,s ��. » B t u� pl Mya sY ��.a�f o. as UH ya�� �.. � _�� `sy�p f:� u� ql � N u(� ,✓ l't.� gg. e �b Tat v No' 64 ; it @rrbA ,is Sin "I r � � o o - III 1 I U-15% lid g 04 i ` s L qg a s- 0 1 y y �$®R Ise. !C •wq�@{{� L.�� N V L M b� V � � .M@tl0 'pL.' � V y p .. Pb�Q 1 �q�1 VF::A CM 'E 4k AD Ar �C; u .`pB��p�6NO QL>L 6 m Q q 92 9 � .N�w IIX `S iq.' US: y� CL Ug V�Q pCW� 9■�.a+p p �yM u,.,WBi Y B;X A� tl;C 1� 0a -�0 P. aw• ..N Y�09 �N'.wpgMCw N� ' C O ,. Al U �.p p .rq[a�� QP } fL V 6@4 Uzi _.O O t V O U� 00 Y v��ee0 � g , It are r s $e y s ZZ M Royypce s� myysaa�pp � PY i V b y{Ty R xv 41 ®a _ tea" .. t a � r%tl1i @ tl �O Au +� � � 2 mnK $� 6 s �� .. � * ' ®. �� dam . �p `s a� @ ffi g �p® MMg P-06 pub- , ra� b-- tl `; -yu tl1 r�:� 1 ".r S. W@@ �T, rk� �•:B SOGG® ®�s pBd� r Is '® � � �w Nd `A cV ®® rq® p 4 pv S S 4 � 9 14 � 77 `l'l Y : 321 d ,11 Jy �� M $ 10 a qz$ O 4 * C M O r {� Ae .� .�"A _ x k vea a�3 w451 �o• JSEw.. Cv cl ri a L _ ed� n�..�ew � [9�:���' �5.' Vd�• ,q�'� L�,. B� re r$u� .$� �A9'q � •� ^G It,L {qW.� M tl_.ZS 6 .Own r.� NaM V®099Y aR..6 �CL' q 7CLf � �Vtl VO `f.� "y0 1 —C r� 8 gurpp�'.A,�o$�wl 'y$�.$'" �� �C. • . ®S�c _Qre �+a.$.ri� ti� �m� 6v o� -.:WMa is aP0 l3V 6`,:,-� �.� a C �'fJ• do O p u '`p a Aw'y C]�• rtlaIs or gIf Al 31 so It p 1pya s Q r e B�ti Q w X` lD6�ISL„o�a Win... Y o Sao S., � r p L 0 p s r p Atl r v y, M.Y• LL 1-1 M.� s� e' e e 3r ag "a3 � aL LQ o b L c n $� C y'YI sCb� G L U L O ^d Os✓tg VP� fix gas C Vp_ y s Y Q.y ppL q`Is M qb u q`¢ Y7peo S$�[ 41 V it bs6_Li, u,6 i YQ6 M T (�ae9Y Pa ?Y® 1p 6 y a0.`M O BbOim a 1P2 YIL Zim Za d3 Via_ i� ��,p�;� �s®bed � ��s� .®pq ;g" .� s�.o «® :���•. I C I I I I i ,4 r' rr I .a r �r r '4 r T- i - AX RES J ' �. p•uF � t r: m` a "� � tt tom. `� I�I) n ' �• 2 t l• It' w • �In�g \Y tR xZ S �a � i r� rl t wxe 'y11;Itt ,�Y�lF- ty ,O% •MlI��I , , at�2�4 f � I ® �u cidf r+•l� .i + �. } , � :i1 111i1 aY1J11F � y.- i low, ss, Rc— To ax• .!' � is • i• RESOLUTION NO, A RESOLUTION -.0i THE PLANNING COMMISSION'OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORKIA', APPROVING DESIIGN REVIEW FOR TRACT N0.'13717, .AND 'RELATED= TREE' REMOVAL�PERMIT 89.40, FOR:: THE DEVELOPMENT 'OF' 394` CONDOMINIUMS LOCATED WITHIN THE TERRA VISTA PLANNED'YCOMMUNITY ON THE'NORTHEAST CORNER OF CHURCH STREET AND ':SPRUCE ;AVENUE IN THE MEDIUM-HIGH RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT AND MAKING 'FINDINGS I,N . SUPPORT THEREOF- APN: 107T-421-13 F `l A. Recitals. , t . (i) Lewis Homes has filed an, appl1L�atiw for the Design Roy'w of Tract -No. 13717 as"described in `the tiyl,e:of this Resolution. Hereinafter, the subject Design Review request is reeferred to as "the application"'. ii 0 f 1\ ( „) n February 14, 1990, he Planning Commission of.,the City of Rancho Cucamonga held a iiieetina to consider the application., I (iii) All 'legal ;prerequisites to the adoption of this. Re olution have occurred. E. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is 'hereby found, determined 'and resolved by the Planning Commission of the"City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that 'a1l_of'the, facts set forth in the Recitals, 'Part A of this Resolution are'true and correct. 2. Dased .upon substantial evidence presented to, this <Commission- during the above-referPjced -meeting.on"february 14, 1990, including. written and oral staff reports;this Commission hereby specifically finds as, follow 1) That ttie proposed project is'consistent with the objectives of the Generai Plan; and 2) That the proposed design' is in accord with the objective of the Development Code and the purposes of the district in which the site it, located; and 3) That the:.proposed design As in compliance with each of the applicable ,provisions of the Development Code and Terra Vista CboWnity Plan; and = j 8 ' PLANNING�uuMMISSIOW RESOLUTION NO. k} OR FOR TT 13717 WIESTERN PROPERTIES February 14,'1990 Page 2. mil`i 4) That the, proposed design, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will 1, not be Y detrimental to• the public health, safety: or w( fare, or materially' injurious to properties or Improvements in the vicinity. 3. Based upory.!the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1 lnd 2 above, this -Commission hereby approves the application subject to each J;1 ?nd every condition set forth below and in the attached Standard- Conditioner attached hereto and incorporated herein by this;-reference. 1) A colored; scored concrete apron shall be provided outside the garages. A second natural concrete band which maybe used as a gutter in some locations_shall ''al to be provided adjacent ;to the colored, scored concrete apron., The design details, shall be shown on the,construction documents and be reviewed and approved by the City Planner. 2) A minimum two foot wide clear planter area shall be provided between the low.screen wails and the curb edge of the drive aisles._• 3) The enhanced paving at all project entries -shall be extended the fu11 length of the entry drive aisle. The paving details shall be shown on the construction documents and shall be reviewed and. approved,.by the .City Planned. Ji 4) Additional tree plantings shall be provided outside all street facinc �tios. The additional trees shall be shown on the landscape construction documents and re ewed and: approved'by the City Planner. 5) Gas meters and/or any other utility fixtures ; shall ' be screened from, ;uilew -with low,, walls, `.berming, and/or landscaping ;(These fixtures may also be enclosed within outdoor storage :areas i'f possible. 6) The project shall be constructed consistent with the preliminary acoustical studies. A finat acoustical study . shall be prepared and suW teed for review prior to issuance of builZng permits. The study shall address ''the .nase along both Spruce Avenue and Church' Street and shall identify mitigation measures to be incorporated 'into he final project design. 7) The project perimeter wall between, La Mission Park and Tentative Tract,13717 shall be constructed in conjunction with the, La Mission Park improvements to avoid.,destruction of; the park improvements should the park be completed prio to construction of, Tract 13717. PLANNING COMMISSION;RESOLUTION N0 DR FOR TT 13717 - ASTERN P.ROPERT-T-ES February 14�°1990 Page;3 low I 8) Tree ,Removal Permit No'. 89-70 is hereby approved 'sub3 "to the;°following: �.; a The 12 Eucalyptus trees shall°be removed and replaced'+ w• on-site on a one.-to-one basis,with minimum '15.gal 16n size Eucalyptus` maculata (Spotted Gum) prior `to occupancy._ b The 33 01xe trees shall be preserved as follows: . , Y , i. Twenty-seven; (27) 'to be.,'transpJanted elsewhere on-site, prior'io occupancy. ii Six (6) to be boxed and stored for" future -planting within the adjoining La Mission Park. iii. The., applicant shall be responsible for the protection .of ;transpiante_�trees, .including, ',but not li6n ed to, �m stalling appropriate construction barriers, sec,rja4 _the trees against vandalism or theft, waterTrig;: or, any other measure:, necessary ,for maintaining their continued health and growth. c The trdnspianted t,ae'loca�l`ons •and replacement tree locations shall be clearly delineated om the detailed landscape'plans''and grading plan prior to issuance'of any permits.,,-, 4. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the. adoption of this Res-''t tion. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 14TH DAB OF FEBRUARY, 1940 PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO' CUCAMONGA BY: Larry T. McNiel, Chairman ATTEST: Brad'Bulier, Secretary n tr 'PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. OR FOR TT 13717 + WESTERN Pl2QPERTIfS February 14,`1990 Page 4 ,! I, Brad Buller, Secretary'c?'the Planning Commission of, the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby, certify that the foregoing Resolution was ;vu%and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by; the Plan0jg ,of;;the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Plannin§ Cor.Rio on Qd on the l4th day of February, 1990,:by the following vote-to-wit:. AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS:; ABSENT: COWSSIONERS: 7 f[' nj 1 r emlot :Y •� �Vp® �' �� ` ._MAY, ;��"•V®. a�Ci.�o as aA "du �°' •�� e � u s-e -21 epee ao6 � �� � �$e p`emu':� •a��'S eh 'p�'�"tr�� ��w v�+� �{. b id Gy V y O d $ ���e�pas�3 •«$$ �cr'�§ 4'�� C_�aQ'Y �gv` {o&.-�t��'tl'p _u^ reap >e a� tl �¢{ Vc � V OtlY6 V�hQ p9�' y-gqp� wp»_GGSSN_. �'C! ,M O w•. Y1 w i�p w�. Nao.x _ wY9 at�,L L� F a3 'i Y.a{ Cpw Nw ® 6w gQ `` I; I L W 22 e 6l {`� qqQ ®aOC i�V g4Y Ike P 0 � e tl I 1Y u�i • ft PI � t IMW A Q�'n -a Vqm� Otl NP. a ak. �9 YVK q :0=.e 00 so- ii5b o o s IF �>o g{!1 to �� 3 ® bay $� op mpYbN Na E a:'�so5v � ft $'' ayM �by'�v�".{ �Yt,r ` $:o b^m _„`o • pyr a3�O 5p.pq.�.N. O �t�. wo`�®�. 1,7 0g�113' e, �i _� ..'N :Y9^�" b 0 �p�90N Qom' ~Y®d.: Q -p:y g ` 09,^ O.N.m` �� -. ^tYe 5 t Na ® PS 31, Ji .D m P a Y 6S q p QQ .e OR T Y ti > 'fl Y' �. 2.2 O M A e N^YF.'N S.d�� .ea�•a 'y.V �; `qb ,�.6Md��6 ]M 6 TL u�b� � i :6�w0�4d bC':N. �P :OOSYOe1�al��:eua�.. 'Ce`.�ass1.a,{Cs� �IANYq. e_pmv a3-SE:6 oe 1 rMV d- NMwMEi VV V 40'w aQ3a. f A t�SV 6: qa�i N1 I^ V N _We �.a q gwQ [r.-• � 6btl NV uC6 �gd4 fir,, dg: � , Fe tl _"� Hlme ®. r�. � tl«®":gy 0m:.`yy! bb.4n .be SA`� �� S�2LS�r�^ by$ �`�w ®yip NEa$b LOW p M W V@R � % ®a3 a6b .s:":s ,: � m� --art ... .. e Y O ne Z tlas ®�& a e V 6f y w of�.s_ �=s� � �Y � ea : �w �8 o'saaa_a^r•s CX®1� s '' LY Q � y g e gq ®Yry Y S Yp �.- �po s.g `n w �"m �og L a'1�®$w.�..�tl•�® YY ReCa '� ,'a�'$ ,....�CI ci RR C MIS ^.Ym Y O YO q0 9,qO Y.wq p� TTIS ��� V V COI ip SS�i :. �Vw v ®O L �1 � :' q Y L Y60:• YE qNy �' �wOGC.Qg ce.bYN _.:w��Yia^ •o.ob'.: �aY.w� `aa8`L �b�^. •g.wC.��:wuOp""93V�p � ��i�3mgtl��.,wN aH'eb Vv.bN q$T.`Y.=..Y LN 11 OG- I. - IL N.... YOB �p��®. �ro_GN . Wnnas ®wwy `O,L'1' ~ V Natl •46 C 6�•�w�GO ��N S V` p�b 4 L_O �Ol�m '. WdW . •p N.N `.�wwgb�eryq •O VM A YNy 111i�1M� V't. QGwby� Y 9 Y,�Y 5- a C _G w d V 6 H O L q 1S N M Y> ^y N.•L Y N�.•.e M <n.•� tN 9 N o H 64v..2.2 wa 01YNIL V LC Y O`C C C A Gp a gigs, rCC_� -V dQy .d eiG O 9__:v".:Q Ai— +teaCbyIL Yw`� r�L' a �pq q�p W. op Y bilq W�{'�1 wbO tlq �®p �rY Y��YM Y,� +a.�y y ..�d..P �Y IL Iz w.pw w -''a �E O.$ Y�wA • ym �t9 v7i Op Y, '� wly INwor gd ON N� ® oy:S. i �B^q ��l isbi G=! �®`�-. LL®lL®.,-.w SY3�«' t V +.�v S� + s {des �3j�p' _-��`3- V7. ®,b0 y 6 Oyy d}49Y � ^ � ...Sn ■ e�.:ww IE d� 64. c�::�3Po m _ �° O W ..� 0_8 Y~: .y yY � •4 o6�V ]1 �vi~ 60M1Ytl > Y ON. CC�fm('� �6e1 6O Qy.I. tl1 S ~' ' V:O `B!Y •_ ��. gS� Off.' $��e `' aT a ���tl +5s ..$ Ei, ew,1 � tl Y.oe ~,e awcY %�6 rd ai'i$ vilZ :,tj mA $ :vQ C.-y p,. VQVIN �gk a v0 Y ;ZzGi��.w. L_m9d '0 N Yip_.. OS. OM 1Dtl Ci �q �C6 w4 L W�i� 4VyLI�C tl YyQ•� � .. S^S N0• �a�qm �®�� M Vp �C xJ•yL ^NYC NL e� a Ytl=Ci .Q ®Ci.b .. .(G�a �... Vw .gNg �-4� i'L is N '� ff..®p C �Y r. pp tl ee-6Y Y.~R y yY' .9 O Oia 41 ti_cN .� gyq , .O_?r N.CYK 'L .�O� 0LS '� b Q�H� N91 I~Va V iIC . Z. so°s{S�V �$aim gQJ!O' y •SI �� ^ill � M1.� �Q � � ��� � wvo gat ri c a:M^ vyg �4 Sim•. rj s$$ �.` ttl,$ , ��yy®S `{y� .- Y 4c - C1-.`® � �n@1 H�-� dv• .4� - v qV��Y - N d M 9p V 'pVi S d �Y y�� V V A cl .r p m P, Y�1 gq N ps . jg H1O T Q O -`® s yG�`0p^� • eo V 0.6 C Q � �'®JS®! 1®�bl Y 3$`" 1l gs jp' �' ~-wv ea YZ V Y �Y(iN •10' 6 M Ni N� O�hM N pe OY m® �p@O �'_�- �®O �.: aLq jQsi�NMQ�•.�'.�o V$4@@.� �ac'Na o 1 ;a B M ysyO lice q .V Hal �=w CIO�o Y - �P •@'� and AA..'AO 'p. C -a wl I ® pID Y b_g BE FS _ � gm2 4gg 04 S bill af - 4:a=g Kit zi yi ...�a }ju w ,;�� <., cv Imo i2 ���Y a 3 $es + `Q •- ~ V �". � W cob bo zk% _a CC r "A.tl r a a�.- .i A �. o, Y .I.e.u■ ac _NO ��syys ' .: si';�a asapCe —24 Vft �Y _OgP yi ®V BQ 0 eYA M i d A i tl i Y M V w a7 M Y W 'D S— AO r w r gg r v w11 v, ! M6Y o v e® ■ A$$$ �. �� ii .a Vl v� • V •P 0' ® Gir �a Lt pYp W V� ® 4 pe�p�ii i st pp oyoy u� ?� �1 �®•� �Y� �m��„� �'.: Spar.i�"� $ ti° � � .. ��� :.`� �� • �1y gQ yY�C '�1 to @ Zia 46.::Lj! E 3 Tali 7' y •3 E N� Zmu �o N� zz, S". gy I&N o-y @iVa0 10 $q •s-�.�.. qo •�► _ e�.Y3 OW qYC 4 gGq ~ .p $L QGY 6yBs _.q �y « :C q u$Y� y9A py •= - ®�Y- C�. 0'b@Y •1 @yC .�[Vtl. : i �p�p RY'e -O WM O`' O®i4 ; _ OO`p^«= L4®� _ „�:�.. ■'.� @^ dmC N Y+O«.O.t66. MMy� ab ya4 VLF VptrG . Lq _q� y b yC _ C m it 11 _ O 1�1 _ '.-C b « W $ G G « �j�@ 0,4 y m ►m tlC: E bar@Y d0 2- az �zoo",aal am W«Nb.`V aS'� bt. °s>' 'L a lea '� yy gyp@ p �lGi O A Gfi, C n A �@ 4 @ t $6 $ �. Ls &Y: ey IQ] MR a ayee ®3® P 0 NZIMB OZ au a g C . t `V p c$ a�E N5je ..g L�'V s fGGi.�.9 Otl gqY�ssy} tll !i I t ' pp p f� O O pqb 1i cep/-� L C f p C 7 �91d M of a L e N jBQ�iT LL wwV 016�6 QH]OL" `-3 Is UZ IL �^w Mr 60 M H {S RL ayy l- O VV iail 1�'® B Y It — Jr a ST II— a AD f Pon �I N A f1. f Lk :i CITY OR RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPOR DATE; February 14, 1990 TO: PZdairman and ftmbers of the Planning,Cori' ssion FROM: Brad Bu1Ter, City Planner BY: Tom.Crahn, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: TIME EXTENSION FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 137W.- OESARCH DESIGN GROUP: resdential subdivision, o, sin a am y lots on N 01 acres of land in the Low Residential District (2 4 dwelling units per acre) located'on :the west ,side:Hof Haven Avenue,'. north.'of the Southern', -Pacific Railroad - APN 202-201-53 I. BACKGROUND: Tentative Tract 13759 was origina1ly'approved on ' January 27, 1988, to expire.on January 27,, 1990. According to the Development Code, extensions for a Tentative Traci";Mpp may 'be granted in twelve (12) month increments, not to exceed five-':(5) years from the original date -of approval. Therefore, ties applicant may request two (2) additional time extensions extending the Tentative,Tract Map.untiT January 27, -1993. The applicant; is currently. requesting -a one (1) year time extension, to expire on January, 27, 1991. _ II. ANALYSISz Staff analyzed the proposed time extension and compared Proposal with. the development, criteria outlined in the Development Code. _-Based on this review, the project meets the development standards-of the'Low Residential District. However, staff noted that the standard condition requir,,ng the submittal of a school "will serve" letter, prior. to either the issuance of building permits or recordation of the Tentative Tract Map was not conditioned o6 approval of the tract. Therefore, the map was found to be inconsistent with Urgency :Ordinance No. 355 pertaining .to the evaluation of adequate school. faciliti f q es or proposed residential .developments. The applicant'has consented:to the imposition of the following condition of approval to ensure that adequate school facili.ti'es' wilT be available>fa� the proposed subdivision. "Prior to the recordation of the final imp, or the. issuance of:building,permits, whichever comes first•,`'.the applicant'` ahal consent to, ,or participate in. the 4 ; establishment > of a Mello-Roos Coralunity ,Facilities District perta.ning to the project site to.''provide in conjunctions,with the applicable School District for:the ITIIK:F w,. PLANNING Cf}! lISSL9N SYAFF REPORT" `TIME EXTENSION R Tt,13X5g OESARCH OESIGh' GRouo,_ February x ,igsk.�1 • Page 2 tr construction` and maintenance` of. necessary school, faciTxties H W ver�, if any School Uistrdct., has previously establlshed such .—a omMunity Fadl,fties District, tha' applicant shah;. Cn.-:'the alternatiae, consent vtg;the annezatian ;af the,prnject site:into 'the territory Of such .existing bistn'lct, prior,.to ,th.4 recordation,of the final,map bt. he issuance`of building permits, whichever'comes,first.;" Further, Af the"affected 'School bistrtGt has-;not f6med a Mel.la-Rods Co�tunity Faciiitias.t'dstrict•within tw�l.ue : C1� months`"of the date` o aA 4aral bf item.'time extension and prior.to the rectlrdatidn,af..the final map or issuance of"building-permits ^for' said, *ct; this condition,shall be deemed null and vo€d" III. COWSPONDENCt: This item: haS been:_:-advertised to:The_Daily , R_ apart newspaper,as a public gearing and 'notices sent to aI., pri"opew.t^y-oamars within `300 feet of.the project s!te;: M a. IY. RECOt '9ENOA3I0Ns. -Staff recortends that the. Planning Commission grant;-a one i year exter sibn of.^time for Tentative 1►act 13759, throDgh the " adoptigr of th attached Resolution: Res u1T Fitt Bra ler '. City, anner BB:TG13fs `Attachments: Exhibit "A".- Letters fr1 Applicant Exhibit aBU '- Location Flap Exhibit "C" =;Site Plan., J .. Reselutiontta. 88=20 Time Exteflsian>ResaT�rtion of Approval: a Cq k%F.®av)deon Associate s ENQINEERING PLANNING SURVEVNG ARCH December X 969 Project XG.-470996S CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Planning.Division P.O. Box 807 6' Rancho Cucamonga, C.A 91729. Attn: 'Karen Rissack, Planning. Comissfan Secretary . I Re: EX WSION OF CT 13759 Dear M. Kissack• On behalf of our client,; DesArch Design Group, we haxeby request that approval of Tract 13759 be extended one year past the current expiration date of January 27, 1996. Thi filing tea of $62.00 is enclosed. The primary reasons for the d®ley,in .complation-of Tract 13759 are (1) the_proce>seing of agreements tith'thea SorA-_ srn Pacific Railroad regarding storg drain construction, and (V the negotiations with an offsita property awntr "ragarl; q construction of a cosuortboundary wall. Thera is 4 gpod possibility that the'SO iesues will Faaa reacIved within the next month; however, wa cannot be caxtain that`construction.will begin before January 27. Therefore,- * are requesting a one year extension. Thank you for your considasation in this matter. .' it you have any questions please =11 at (714) 835-1082. very truly ymm, eF. DA ZHC Tim PFal Rssociate `bivi2' Snginner cc: Eric Chase, Dosarch basign Group . Mark Ha, ru Kai kited Partnership M:lig coItwp letter cab 3830 Lemon Stntet.Witi300 1091-0 3.ML V6mQn Amnue 73M El P86eo,Seim 108 27349 Je7b�ary 5,rte t t 5 PO.Box e53 CoKon,CA 9232d P21m 0ewt CA 97280 P.0.801E M Rwemt*.CA 92502 (714)825-Ir 1819►346.5691 Ranetiti'C41ilomua CA 92390 FAX 89fi-0844 FAX 71< 5 9sa FAX 81SOWS2Q V14)67B'7710 FAX 71h*�G5454 FAX 71 1981 J3 ftf iT a t J.P.®avidi 1ose !`�e�j✓� l�I�li� }} law 00HWING PLANNING 5a1MVANG AMMSMUFff, LAMWAFEA1�Yti7SCTURE Minuary 16, MG go. Brad Buller, city Plawr er, =r eNN 7(= aA CITY OF RMCHO CUCAk OM" �3AlV 3'$ P.O. Box 807 'gg{j Rancho Cucamonga, ;AL,:917:29 Be: Tentative Tract-13759 Fu kai Limited Partnership Dear Par, Buller: Tentative Tract 13759 is as residential sub4ivision containing Be single-family lots. Approval -of this prajact expires January 27, 1990, and we have applied for a one,year extiinsiqu. it is our understanding that the Planning Staff, in accordance with ordinance 399 now requires than tha? applicant = be conditioned to participate in the formation of a Mello-Roos community Facilities District for the construction and r maintenance of school facilities, or to annex to: an• ixistis ' district, priair to recordation of the map or,issuance of building permits, whichaaver comes ;firstt.' on behalf of thei applicant, FU Mai. Linitid,Partn ership, we hereby consent to the azendigg of tha; conditions of approval. for Tentative Tract 13759 to incsluds the condition .described above, very truly yours, J.F. DAVIDSON ASSOCIATRO,' INC.; Tie Solsi: Associate ineaer ,f, L cc: Eric Chen, Desarch 'Design;Group Mark Ma, F+u Mai Limited Partnership G• 38&j Lw3*sN$treeL Suite= 1091.0 S UL VWMA AM" 73-M E)PUft su1L t116 27349 je%mal,Suite t is �� P0:6oxa33 Catton.CA92324 P&11DGWCA92260 PO.BM340 �_= Arverswe,Cr+$.502 1714)8254082' CAC?393 is 1714)686-0644 : FAX 71442"SW FAX 6193Aa•Qs28 (Iu167{fm0 FAX 714.68V.—e5i i FAX 714-699.1981. . t — tIVIT t1A 11 Irz Yam. .. .. .. mew--� � Oa Qi s w �w�� ► t$ {,'iA �Q 1'SS! � Qffi �T � • ta Mistr R q R i i 1 . W J Q scit7w ago @ l9 .... .. ..... A i e i #q �. s lop (h. •f.oaf. r e $l A e d? � " sz 4l CN a " ' d ffi@ A (IDffi a 0 ux it R v • i �J n 0 ffi cblp .. 1 •Ie,rt 'tu• 'i �: I,�SS •ri ? It „t'' � :;. t �= lip: = t At �� �� •f �� s «i i J�i. Y 5• a 14 �. ff t) - '� tl �•�' i�! tip• .��_ .....•y..•_t.a.hE—e'as:a�m.i�st.__�.'t1P..4..:...�.�.� •f _' A -i 11,,r K y TA AtGd� }1 ,t��t3hR .+ S• { "�•�iyj�?. Jam..I��S y r 0 -,.4 - '17j 'J9a� !J :iSttt #1 1• �.,j- !t�'+. S✓�t fnJ N•��� � � i i rJ• CITY Og IAA cHo..c cARZONJGA ZT ts1! PLANNING DIMIONd 714 ILI Gt CAM v _ _y 1 ...i�'I flra� u• r�[_� � �"1�.:.ytt i `,L r ���',1 � :...: F" �'[-1�t ti-;{'1 t..i r (1 �rr.. _+�� r»ib•rl pad!r.•N�� a� li.'_"'i °t 1 u.. t�.L-_ �t 11 � � a.. � ��x� i�J.J 4+1 i tl, ,• 1 �i ta•eZ.JpS. . � i~ �r� _..2 1 -_ •+; 1 _ rr(..T�1• ....:9:i it�.�' 1 .i. i •��i_ �� r T-T . ` 7 77 y a>' PO -.-J144 r. Y _ .. ��• a�R^ a.•Aro � Iwii► - �rJ' -�—liir.•a .R•v raaii. r x, jy -Ar✓ silo, VWM Meat: W4 t = CITY OF IANCHO..CUCAMONCA Almaj PLANNING DI I®N E7SHmrr. 2 SCALE ~�� RESOLUTIOM KO. as-20 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF' RANCHO CUCAMONGA APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAC+ NO. 137S91 �. LOCATED PEST OF 'HAVEN AVENUe, NORTH OF THE SOUTHERN { PACIFIC RAILROAD 14 THE LOW RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT - APN: 202-201-53 A. Recitals. (i) The Des Arch Design Grnup has Filed apple 3tion far the approval of Tentative Tract Rap No. IB,�9 as describedrn in tfil4 title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Tentative Tract eta request is referred to as "the application% p (ii) On the 27th of January, 19F', the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed_ public %±earig on the application and concluded said hearing on date. ({ii) All legal ;prere4iisites to the adoption of"this Resolution have occurred. B. Resol ution. NOW, THEREF"E, it 's hereby found, determined and resolved by the Planning Co-wission of Ehb- City of Rancho Cucamonga as fcl'lowsc 1. This Commisvt n hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, P,art' A, .of this Resolution are true and corre:�t. Based upon, cubstantiai .idence .presented to this Commission during the above-referenced public hearing on January,-,27, 1988, including written and oral staff-'reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds 'as follows: ia) The application applies to property located ais`'the west side of Haven Avenue, north of the Southern Pacific Railroad with,a street frontage of 494 feet adjacent to ,Haven Avenue and lot depth of,1269 feet; (b) The property to the north e¢, he subject site is Low Residential, the property to the south of that site consists 0-`Low-Medium Residential, the propeerty to the east is Low Residential, and the property, to the west is Low Residential (c) The applicant has filed an accompanying -free Ret�ral Permit for the proposed removal of three (3) windrows from the subject property based upon arborical 'survey and.graddng impacts. (d) "A geologic report has been+prepared, consistent with the provisions of' the Al qui st-Pri ol 6 .Act and certified by the 'City' ,Geo:091- .­Zinsultant, indicating that evidence of'a near surface, active fault.ii,ne Baas not encountered :on the site,, PLANNING CMISSIOU 4tESOLUT1011 3J0: 88-2D, TT 13759 - DES ARCH DESIGN G90UP January 27, 1988 Page (e). :A preliminary acoustical study has been prepared in aabrd with the provisions ofthe Noise;El,ement°, indicating, that a .minimum seven.(7) foot high barrier is required adjacent to Haven Avenue.:; (f) The proposed subdivision design has minimum and average lot size-- of 79210 and 8,268 respectively- which are consistent with. the re sjir vents for the district in which fZ is le.: ted. (g) The proposed subdivision desio and accom-panyind maps have been reviewed by the ,Grading, 'Technical and design "Review Committees and approved subject to the conditions contained.within this Resolution. 3. Based;upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced public, hearing and upon th4, specific findings of facts set forth in ;paragraph 1 avid 2 abo_ve,, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as folIowsr (a) That �:ntative tract is consistent with the Gereral 'Plan and Development Cede; and (b) The design or 'improvements of tire: tentative tract is consistent with the General Plan and Development Code; and . (c) The site •ig physically suitable for the type of development proposed; and. (dD The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage and, avoidable injury to hWans ;and wildlife or their habitat; and (e) The tentative "tract is not likely to cause sorious public health ;problems; and (f) fie design of the tentative tract will not conflict with_any easement acquired by the public at large, now of vecord, for access trough or, use of the property within the proposed subdivision. 4. This Camission hereby finds and certifies that the.project has been reviewed and considered in compliance with the California Environmental . Quality Act of 1970 and, further, this Commission hereby issues a, Negative Declaration. 5. based upon the findings and conclusions ;set forthr paragrap o 1, 2 and 3 above, this �Coma�ission hereby denies the application subject to each and` every condition -set forth below and In the attached :Standard Conditions attached her and incorporated herein by this reference. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO, 8840 TT 13759 - DES ARCH DESIGN GROUP. January 27, ;1988 Page 3 Planning Tentative Tract (1) The rear yard slopes of the lots :on the north side of La Vine (33-35, 42-53) shall be redueed; to the extent: possible, in order'to. provide,^ Iarger u,"ble rear yard ' areas, by Lowering the p•-lds of the lots to the immediate north. (2) Dank, protection shall be required adjacent to Haven Avenue. Design of the bank and wall shall be subject to Planning and Engineering review and approval prior , to the issuance of building permits. (3) A sound barrier, which shall be'a minimum..of 7 fbet,in. Might above street centerline grade,' is, required a aunt to:Haven 4i Avenue.and shall Wrap-around L;,t >< to the north and Lots 6- and 7. to the south: `The barrier pay be constructed with, a ce;;ibination of earthen berm and decorative block-wall. m. t (4) Due to'development requirements and poor health of the trees, the existing windrows on the site -should be removed and replaced subject to the Poll®wing: a. The windrow adjacent to Havenr Avenue shalt be replaced pursuant ' to the C y's Tree Preservation Ordinance #276- with Eucalyptus maculata (Spotted Gum) which sW 1 be a minimum of 15 gallon in s,rze and spaced 8 feet on center. b. To the interior of the tract; a more intensive Landscape treatment, ; which is to include Additional tree`plantings, shall be provided in areas with required planting (such as slope areas and along interior street public rights- of-Way) (5) A final acoustical study sha11 b6 prepared .for review and approval prior• to the .issuance- of buildi�� permits. (6) Parkway i7rovements on lil3ven Avenge shall conform to'. ~" the findings of the qi-cps Haven Parkway- Beautifi-catian Study. (7) 'A in-l;ieu fee, as contribution to the construction of �,�j the median island'within '.Haven Avenue shall be paid,. l�tecr . �, l to .the 'City prior :to �a!ilding ,permIt issuance or !1(O& '�e¢ recordation of . the fi:aal map, whichever occurs first. The 'amount of the fee shall be $57.'00 pel. "tlBid�t�10A AL -3 aA a ' -- - ''PLANNING COMISSION RESOLIdION No'. 88-20 IT 13759 - DES'ARCH DESIGN GROUP ' January 27, 1988 Page Q linear foot of property fronting; onto ,Haven Avenue ? 6096 feet).. (8) An in-lieu 'fee, as cojr, lAbution to the future undergrounding of„the existing overhead utilities (electrical and telecommunications) on 'the opposite side of Haven: Avenue,' shall,be paid to'tha City,prior to approval -of the final map. The fee .shall be one half the City adopted unit amount times the length ', from the north project boundary to the southernmost terminus pole. (9) The existing concrete .channel (I foot aaep).north of the north property line, extending from Mesuda 'Street to Haven'Avenue, shall be remove. (10) Pad elevations for lots within the flood hazard area (Lots 1, 2, 3 4, 5 and 6) shall be a minimumof one (1) foot abode the base flood elevation, as detenm ned by the final drainage study. (11) Construct City Master Plan storrm drain improvements as determined by the final drainage study approved by the City Ehgiheer. These may include one or more of the following: a. A'Plaster 'Plan Storms Drain No. 4-L and/or; b. rAdditional facility beneath Southern Pacific Railroad'. teacks, t© parallel existing box' culvert. Standard drainage fees for the site W11 be credited to the cost of constructing Master Plan facilities and, the developer shall be eligible for reimbursement costs in excess of those fees in accord?Fte with City, Ordinance No. 75. �<oaU111NA �dr„ (12) Approval shall be obtained from, and a "railroad tt license granted by, Pacific Railroad prior to M�otHE - GNW V construction of stortm drainage improvements within the 1uA right�of-way. 1 Design Review (1) A block or, masonry -gal l. shai l ba erected 'al ong the. north property;'Line wherever an existing fence„is of•ra ; /%. Material -other than masonry or block (such as mood or cha',[d link) or is, not.adjacent'to the:,p'ropenty line. fie;app3icant shall 'work with adjacent prop rty.;or�ners to `resolve any double.Wal1 situations�.pr�ar co the issuance of uuilding,<permits. a "PLANNING COMISSION"RESOLUTIom uo. 88-26 IT 13769 DES ARCH DESIGN.GROUP January 27, 1988 Page 5 (2) A decorative block will treatment shall be provided along <utie southern boundary adJacent to the. Southern. - Pacific Railroad right-of-way. The decorative treatment shall include the use"of a darker colored '? textured block for the lower retaining portion with a lighter decorative block on top, h-hich is consistent . `. with the wall along Haven Avenue. In addition,. climbing vines shall be planted along the southi ace of the wall (31) Drought tolerant, low maintenance plant material including vines, and a suitable low maintenance ' irrigation system shall be installed within the; Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-way adjacent to the proposed walla for .a! distance of 0A feet;, subject to, the aPprot+al, of thl Southern Pacific Railroad. (4) The barrier wall and landscape treatment Used along . Haven Avenue sha11 be consistent with the City's- beautification' plain for the Haven Avenue corridor. Landscape and; irrigation plans shall be reviewed .and approved by the Planning i and. Engineering-=Divisions prior to the ssuance of building;pmrmiirs. (5) A drip irrigation system shall be utilized for trees on any slope areas In .addition to normal groundcover irrigation techniques. (6): All dwellings shall have, rear and side elevations'. upgraded with id—Attianai detailing representing 360 degree architecture. 6. The Deputy Secretary to this Comission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. ' APPROVED AMP ADOPTED THIS 27TH DAY OF JANUARY, 1988. PLANNING ISSI N OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAl10NGA BY 441 , arty a], nainian 'I ATTEST Brad Buller, Uepu y Secretarylo 1, Brad Buller, Deputy Secretary of the Planning Commission of this City.:of . Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that:the foregoing Resolution was duly.;and regularly introduced, passed; and adopted by the, Planning Commission of the, City of Rancho tucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Coonission held on the;27th day of January,`1988, by the following vote-to-ar t: _ " - , 7 'PLANNIK6 COMMISSYON:RESOl1JTI0! NO: g8-20 3 ,. 'Tr 13759 DES ARM,DES461M, GROUP Januar 17; 1988 Page41 AYES:. COP�iISStONER5: C"ITIEA, EM JiMIEL, TO-STOY NOES: COItISSIONEftS BONE ABSENT. ' C4,�tYSSIOidEitS gLAKESLEY �' ' f t< • t. a, t' (3 '1 it G S�L�9grIrL . bill cgs N Y .aL �. JV xi1' "LVY L06.. gO�rY tWl ®H Q�I O.rA.. S . Yr Our6$ a qYM GS�sydy6 y. S�qfg6: •-��-y}-w �Q� 'a�»as^; any Y�YtTi .$. o g s ..off ®o6r Jig its 31. 9 i V 1 �p»YY - ® W ��� Z03 Vi� 462,41. IJ sit o � YYJUIL Wa MA a Id al N itN Y P{ � � w Q Him I 23ii a 54: Et-p I -i I izZ INS2111 srs �_ is Qa «� a� p r 'gL 83 v„rO V A� - i_ WYM�p—•aY. � 4yXm 8 5 Mm case ry q�gy1 _ 4s p y , — •,gPQs.. M p�r`N ra�,n p®,—� �Y`N ^m Q .; LC F wit Za Y Lyye � • A P fi r CJ NO ���� �� ���a �� o—$ 4 : �t���444•r' iiB spy ca A � '° g Qgq$ S ® Yl Y 1® Y *ago plift r_ Y Eviv z' we X = gas ; asp a st ;6J zu"A — ry :beg wp IUN �t .. �, ► qyWq a p`` }} ytici p qpg ggg ac •N� 1 N �� tlq tyq.�pltl®®�.q QW" yi�e1J"$ 8htl tl Y� ® Ya Y'`�Mrtl.® MOEY r. N wqm jut 4 w`wd a D H W M' C q`�O C M V q d q�,�tl Y1 V S l Y b�.W P r M .V 9 q a� tin e Ica �M4': � M '� 3 $ -sg aar ®w»i' Ea of ^i .�® o b tl`wa®.v! >® P EA sSt � q g sM mmmbs�W ® `w yd ]yyy�[_Mf O21 LO qL.' r+w q ri1:.. 19 • ppf�{ : ^»tl 111261 00 swo 3 H—w/w <qq aC..w 9MM Ma� IN Yq► p Q0� ® 6: 1 ode �r3 29 rp OftIsss q¢my �1� Vm Pr, tlO .1-2 22 mail SM ��pp Y9 ®pp YY s Y Y w IIi �e � " » Pled' �•' ® q q "' � P ZOO affiar o t'S a q ' gtl$.y YmgaC� a ffi� 3 f y+� �C.�® Y � ✓• 9Y' Off: 4dYMMb� W —fly far ggN p RW �Mw9A� < �: WYM � e N 4z gal ig r. IJ YP QQ D `YV : raw Y 4 its •:O V r O@ "ems yy VVVV g O > Mt Nag V& its «.@ v o $8 v Sipp$ i` i� `aS.. i� Or ti tl g pA ry Q _ it '� ® stl �� pHYQP � L tl. A. i POW. 7$r9yig ® ,..tltl. �Wzf SC' w oY Y ®a&v 5i . ^ yypp •Y+L� P Beni ilY=32 l yM 'Y _V�l► Lq Y! :0YaM Mp p:.� —V p py aYi qqq p`0g• g �- b P Q 1yeQ�� . P w 1i6 w —bV Y • !.P WA $alb � a �2 a r Ill I S2 ' ' P 0V P ys, r ®®qp O 6pq y. V4 H Y 21 m ay1— 1 g a� its n '-ate . set if fit �qq ` Nw . tl 6 tl►'_ :Y` 9py w• YQ>.6 (y/p q6 �! oqJ•' �a..�Yr 6,Y �Y N.�Rtl '4 M M ;Mgab �$ m i�b f• A W, by C`1� Oi411 CVO•• Yf 1i a B�Y� ♦L CCC Y 9 4 17 far>i�3.r- �a q p �;1�y�' 10 b s%T ZEE -as_s�g{ . .'",.._-by-jA. ae.qj AH nSp ~ b — • V pe •fir}}. :gyp YC e �$ pp/�O J➢� .6i 3 ,4Y\ -0 � Yilp pY M .tl a N^.pyft .Y tl�. m SS_ oo _ M M 'r 211 C..Ot BCI O C 341b y_LY—g r �y Y I N4 N • N tp w .. I �l I` .22 S ys 2 _ , ga use FIX TL s � � - _ _� �: -cgs Il.. • 21 v g� III t® eyA s� Ib '_`*® rs1. � sI^g.;, " 14 tlo a SKI 12 ZZ mg 3L` o IT � a- F.- Sit- ts 4p�^g6-0 312 Rill i 4 � Lam. > »Y 6.` _W� � e,�6�, ®� � � •'� Y B }3A N.1M `Q w� MV `\� iAAR U. $ 'WMML�y a9 ­Tj -S 0.• � u ♦ `TS ° r a ,j® g M 0. a 3C 16 me 111 MORE _NIL k L. $ a H El all CZ, ' ,.. r u gg 7v It >. y YryY •40 ,Y e "x. c� e' All �oS � I '0 V-0311 PI Oe x r Yle • - �'$$ M�N Syy$$t(( V n `--IZig `g 46 r t N \d VgEAU . -saw yr —, H jig fii i s q �sy u qq N r ti ® -I N '. F- � € v, �' RESOLUTION Nil. A RESOLUTION .OF THE PLANNING commrsStON OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA,.CALIFORNIAo APPROVING A 'TIKE EXTENSION AND MODIFYING THE CONDITIONSt OF APPROVAL: FOR'TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. :1375,9, A RESIDENTIAL'SUBDIVISION OF 56 LOTS OR' 14.01 ACRES'OF.LAND LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF HAVEN AVENUE, NORTH OF`TH6 SOUTHERN 'ACIFIC RAILROAD IN THE LOW RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (2-4 DWELLING UNITS :PER ACRE), AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: ;202-201-53 A. Recitals. (i) Desarch_Design Group has filed an application for the approval of Tentative. Tract , Map No. 13769 as described in the title of this Resolution, Hereinafter in this Resolution,,. the subject: Tentative Tract 'Mao request it.. refQrred to,as "the;application"., (ii) On January. 27, 1988, this Commission adopted its Resolution No.. 88-20, thereby approving, subject to specific conditions and time limits, Tentative Tract No. 13759, and'issu& a Negative Declaration. (iii) or, December 21, 1989`,the applicant filed a request 'far a twelve (12) month' time extension. (iv) On the 14th of T: bruary;,.1990, the; Planning Co nission of the City of Rancho :Cucamonga conducted a 'duly nod ed public:�.earing` on the application and concluded said hearing on;.;that date. (v) -All legal prerequisites prior to thy,.= Et on of this Resolution have occurred. 8. Resolution. , NOW, THEREFORE,, it is hereby found, detems-ed and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga.as1.'311ows: 1. 'This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the :Recitals,-Part, A, of this .Resolution are true .and ccorect. 2. Based upon substantia,-'evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced public -hearincct on February, 14, 1930,.Lincluding written and oral =staff repf,rts, together with public testim'onyr, , 'this Commission hereby specificallyjinds as folIowsa (a) The application applies to property locate' at the west side of Haven Avenue, north of the Southern Pacific P_ai road with a street frontage of 404 feet adjacent to Haven Avenue and lot depth of '1269 feet; and �r PLANNING3 C"ISSION RESOLUTION B0. TIME EXTENSION FOR TT 13750 DESARCH 'DESIGH GROUP- February. 14, 1990 ; Page 2 Residential, they property to the south fs 1.044Kediu the tubject site o -Lour (bJ The prope-It to the north of P p y m Residential the property- to the east is Lot,: Residential, and the property to the -vest is Lou Residential; and (c) The applicant, has filed an accompanying ing Tree Removal Permit for the Vaaoposed remavil of three (3) 'windroi4s fromthe 'subject property based upon, arboricA. su)vey and, grading impacts; and (ai A geologic report has been prepared, consistent with the Ai provisions of the quist-Priolo Act and certified by the City's Geologic, Consultant., indicating that.evi4ence;of a•near surface, 'active.fault Tina was . not encounteree on the site; and (e) A preliminary acoustical study,has been prepaIred in accord with the provisions of the ►A s Element indicating that a minimum seven. (7) foot hiCh barrier is I, uired.adjacent to Haven Avenue; and (f) The Proposed :;ubdiv€rion design has minimum and average lot size, of 7,210 square feet and 8,268 square feet respectively,.which are consistent with t 3 requireme,,ts for the district in which it is.Iocated; and I r (g) The proposes subdivision design an,i accompanying iwkpis have been review•:d by the Grading, Technical and Design Re,4iew Committees and' approicA sutiect to the conditions contained within tP.m;Resolution. 3. Based upon the,substantial evidenc* prerzented to this 'Commission during the above-referenced public hearing ;and upon the specific. find n6s of facts set forth in paragran4s 1 and 2 above, this Cot ?ssion hereby, finks and concludes as follows: (a') That the tentative tracts is consi tent with the General " Pran and Development Code; and ., (b) That the design or improvements of the tentative tract'Icr consistent with the uuneral Plan, Development Code, and (c) That the site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed; and (d) That the design of the subdivision is not likely to` cause substantial environmental 0mage.and avoidable injury:to human.and wilolifo or their habitat and (e) That the tentative tract is n,:r, 'likely to cause' serious public health problems;:and. . M That;the design of the tentative tract wi11 not.confrict",' ' with any easement acquired by the oubli- at large 'now of" record; for•access: through or use of the property Within, e. proposed=subdivision. PLANNING CONAISSIONR'ESQLInFON 'N0. � . �+ 'TIME EXTENSION FOR.i 15759 DESARCti OEi1,S1 GROW= February 14,-1990 r t Page 3 rs 4. 81sed upon thefindings and conclusions set •forth in, paragrph5 and 3 abGve, this"Ccrmmitslon�-hercby;apkproves tha,applicatisiri suh�ect to each, ,and every conditiol. et idrth bellow and in .tha attatihed. Standa�°d' Condit on,s -attached heretulan4 incorporated herein by,this reference: .ti Tentative Tract All'_ Condtie►ts of Ap'prava7,;. ds contained in;.Planning Cdlmnission :Resolution No.• 88=201 'shallapply, exceptwhere mod ified,`h&'rein.; a• 2)7 Approval 'shall expire ;on. •January tt , 1991, i f ,butldiny'. g , permits. are not issued., unless extended, by the`Planning'' Comm3`ss i on-, 3) . ,Prior 'to ttas recordation of the' fi�ia! map. or the.issuance of.building permit•,,'w;ichever crimes' first, the apolicant shall.consent.:to,,ir participate ,in,,the establishmQnt ot';a Mello-Roos Gommun�t, Facilitiet District Rirtaining,to the pro3ect,,siLo to provide, in Conjunction With the applicable School Di tt i�$; forconstructiW an Ir d_'mar'ntenance ,i necessary; school 'facilities'.- Hotaeber, if any, Schogl District has pprevioes1y st�ablished -k� a C6mmanity Fact ides District, the '.�applican, r71;. in ihl tv native, ;consent to,'the ann6katir a pro3ect .sift k ta�`r'ritcry'of' such existing; y,rti�t prior to the recordation of the final map„or the, ssuance os:budding permits, whichever'comes first:. Further, it the affected School bi,strict ;his not, Tonned"a Mello coos Copunity Facilities Daslrict with#�r, t�We1ve (i2) months of trg4, date of;approval of-the time extenriov! and prior to _the recer'atlor of trg *firm map'-oi- Issuahce,of > `peririts; for s;iid pro 3ect bu l,ding ,it,xis„condition shall be { deemed null vfcc � 4) Iaa ii� rdarice` M,°mil»Fpe 14 ution�l�a, 8-j ri �53% an l in-iieur fte ;,is a con*ribwttion to the, const uctoti or the median is3a,.�' within Haven Avenue 'shall`be paid to the, ri*y pt'fior to.la,ld3n9 permit issuance or`recordation of find map,, w ichever- occurs first The: amount-dT the fee stall ,be the .itv'adopted afHt am.►+.j rt i,4 or'I '&Se I; „ timp^; the linear feet of property�frWiting onto Haven Aveni,e (}! 496 ioet)'- ` £ dos pve3b ;G�ndatit , 5i `s. ,fie obtained ,from,-' and a rail road'.license g, � `herr Pacific Railroad prior-to approval �'�f I the N� Study b `tha City EngiaaerAl ;• ,k.{ 'PLANNING COMP6SION.RESOLtlTTON M0. TIME EXTENSIOti FOR TT 137#g, D SARCH DESIGN G90UP February � Page 4 is 6) '` .It` shall: be the Developer's`. responsibility to ,have -t,r ' current .FIRM cane-A desjgnatioh..removjd', from'•the project � area �Thg Devetoper�s.;,Gngine&. shall 'prepare aT1 necessary. ` repgrts, rags hydrologic'/h d aullc co';t laxian n etc`. PrQl imz6ary,a'pprova7 Shall be obtained, frtim.FE,hik prior`to. aurovat of thew,;reLord;iiian oy ssuapce of bu7iding'permiLs 'I .'n�chever; occurs first The designatzgn-''sfiall ,b,e J o fic�?�:ly rcaiovea pr,3or, to, oCcpancy or improvement : l z acceptange,, Whichever occurs first S. Theme Sretary 3to chi- cot�miss.ion shall certify to the adoptions of this Reso;ut'ion.. 1t • s; o APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 14TH DAY OF FER!<UpRY,e • AN OF THE IT�? RANC1PLANNING'COMMI.. OMGA. Larry T T�cNel, Chairman -A_TTESTz - _< Brad. tsq.k I er, secretary Brad Ul;er, Secretary of the:,_i�lailning 140mmission Qf the*City o€ Rancho rucamonga,?do;,hereby' certi f,+ .that i°the.•-;frFepninn .Resolution was "duly and regularly intrar;uced,.- passed, and4 adapted': by the R ahfi;nyy Cotes ssion of`the City of Raf�cho Cucamonga, at' regu"tar_meeting of'the-Planning Commvssidn •W& tin the 1tfi day o` February,`IggO,'b `t.Zefalloring Void-to-wit. AYES: COMMISSIONERS::. �NOES: COMMISSIONERS:� A SFNl; COMMISSIONERS: �I I - X a F s gSy4 ._i df 31, s2-12s,s�a��. at �d fig 4- niij q�. e= . ids i_S � "��$ �«� �' "fig • :�o�� 3r ..a g: b d ZCV IS-4 Zia -ID • �s a `a 421, 5 yS amY rUPS �T t Awd.gp and p� Y! O " so w� a M �q e C® SIPS at " a ell 34 fif Ij, za 'asom � Via`" a �r� '� �N >$ " P Z$ k.J a$4 �.�. aa" � -•� ego � �r -s �_� '-� as ;pe s,;= r tatg s: y0 � Y.pie ® QI� ��fYs� L! Y4 it ^.ypNb�f '��'0 ..�[ Ai VOVD b Y G m '- g « 7 g « . s mil,,; - a": s a$ it v . - '' r as• � �' �qo g- :83 .tea 1 a. gal �6 y �1 4_ � Y e►M � �M C 6� q Y A m � � a-gY if -I R 2, ELAX z.a j 'Ibbill s- 14 -52 gal all do Of a _ IJs� � 8ro all Sf gh HiZz Zvi via- =' m s _ssm s _ C Y `oA6�p.; g.3 eag 9 ,A ma rho=�sa�� . ���$� Y ca A ro uq g $ ¢ a^o'O —ay.?— V.YN �—. ®=iiGiii �L � Ww NLyN mm wOt®Q�MYy�.,�6 gN®oM g ,R � . .1.0a4N:ag!'OCtlw Lqp...Vy N NJ�w x"' — I N::b�` — Y `�YMbi^++M Ot� � 6 •d 'S9fOCy # �W N Q� Sri ig :n_.NaN vae a7' .s n`n ►N.� Bdi�p� Y��o �.'�a`�_ p, fi� ye 8�'�� i T A Y� �® g �.� �� age �=; �� i a N lag a •t7Ij lain 3j ji .2. Zj I' jai fe p N Q n wp Q Luz- get a aN, e ' aria gift It dm W Xv WWI r am eff Yg -sit - g . s si ` te a4 $.3 { " � Vpap C6: 2 a"=ka• Yy -•ate..�ygyi OL \ u(�V V.W+ gSg S•$ �Qq`��pNj ~ r G .q: s d nn Q14� - -�L V� tl 4 A _ • d V d. O ..N r Y H � ���i 0 HI ,YI i 3 q �.w 3 gggg���L• � �YV `�a`? S. -79 pr 6 4tl.r {{y���{L�Y .tl Mai � :,� �•�P �pa p® W Vp� my V 1 • a_P®(6y p q_ MNY•� .VVy M�®p16 �YM(� •SIN^31L • .�aO. e•4tl• .�J.�IIA ppgYp�'�.—L-4�" Of:`aA Y1 L�@@iY/NR� ppiN� �Aip —'�Y9 Vj� r(w GC' tl SyL YY rqa r�$ ��' P..9"y•_:.. ®^o} .i C•iMS �w`.p�}gy� ®YOg-q1� Y.�mPI N Litl n��•oat, ai N fq YY $ @t A M 'nil I Ica � BIN .22 WO 5 yy u4 • a.95 g g`d a a e '° ii. Z� .8. d® is A, lit a -ax RIP J-.v h all vi ip� o p • _ $� g �: S • Op � P. a® 131a e a PU r SI Apr y. g b rS .gfi-� o a g v a' W " ter a r'� $$ I $ ^A$ �$ erg ril S4.1 i CCtlt p ptl _ Y Y Oaa��y a��� 11q�bY b Y 6 Q E.a C w. lRRCC.e�mYr w•�'�^Pura 3 $��� �.� � d ��w '��ap it W 0 4 q S Nei i is i DID Lp V d' ya�( �p1 qqqqq $ qq av ab � AiIf H __V ..a zz V affi Z�f i tea;, �31 b l Sa w m � � 9 _ JV F -} IM t .i s :g � -� Y $ e ;, s' � � :� fa ® t - a _s ue _� it w=; . al" _. WEE r 8 �.0 y vu .� P C p`Wo`o ppz 1p�vp � —h,— 2 , ',fir ,S'k =® ,� 3 OV of jj is's 1 �- : q � e gg � �. ►j ~T3� A�p i i�::p s b m � ffi ZZZ K, o s'•s fine � i$� rw c� all Ha t I 8 Anal s Y - N Y Y C `.i �. OtlO O tC Y s a m i b `�•�ffi' Vim_ a � �V�,' �Y �E� b b ® { OK X's ' 5�..�gtlWi �®Rp � � s .�b .tl� •Spy® j tl �Y . r �p Sal _ w 623 its Y tl® •erg �$ SUR m_ s a FT` �-mac '!TY OF RANCHO CUCY UXONGA STAFF REPORT' DATE: i'.Februaty 14,(J990 TO: Chairmn and Tnmbers of the jPiac ing Consnission FROM: ;;rad Buller, City'Pianner BY: Nancy Fong, Senior'TlaMer SUBJECT: PIODIFICRTIQR! 'T0 DE VELOP1iOT'REVIEW 96-31 - REITER/HAVEN 1 I" STSiAY'-M - A re es�o mu�u ' fie elevationSr for an approved�hree-story office bui `�ng"within the Gateway Master .Plan, in the Industrial Par, °and Haven.Qverlay" Distrit:,, Subarea 6 of the Adusttial` Specif,tc Plan. located at the nor*iast 61mer of '`Maven Avenue An.', I Trademark Parkway North ,APN: 201-03-11 I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: 4. Action Requested: Approval of detailed site plan. and e-eva oni ns. Surrounding Land Use and::Zoning North -Vacant; 'Industrial Park and Haven NLrlay Districts, Subarea 6 South -;scant; Industrial Park"and 14lven Overlay Districts, k Subarea 6. f` East -Mul -Eenant 'tndustr;ai Park under :onstruction; Indus�Irial 4A District, Subarea 6. West - Vacant; "Cffice' buildings; Industrial Phrk and Haven Overlay Districts, Subarea 6. C. general Alan Designations': Protect Site - "Industrial Park North - Industrial Park, Gen�ral Industrial ' South - Industrial Park_ East - ;Industrial Park` West Industrial Park PLANNING cowIS5ION STAFF REPORT OR 85-31 MOO.` - REITER/HAVrN GATEWAY PARTNERS , 'j February 14,, 1990 Page 2 j4 D. Site Characteristics: The site. contains two (2) one-story o`er ce u ngs. a site area for the proposed three (3) Off Ice. buildings it rough graded, Al street imrrovwcpts-> have been completed. E. Parking Calculations: ' Number of, Number of r' Type Square, Parking Spaces Spaces of Use Footage Ratio > Re aired Prodded Exist off. bldg 3,537 (net) _ 17250 38 39 Exist, off. 01dg. 9,537 (net)- 1/250 38 38 Propsd. off. bldg. 69i� (net) 1/260 277 274 (See note below? 88,208 (net) 353 ' 35 ; *Note: 'Three spaces credited far providing bicycle racks. _II. ANALYSIS: A. General: e site is Phase' I of thE: master yllan whicli..was approve on >,eptember 11, 1985. The two, (g),one -story office buildings are' complete except•;for,the three-story office ;pad area. The applican4 is reques*ij*,,to modify the elevations for this three-story , office\•,building. The building orientation is similar to the precious site plan.. The shape of the building is slightly modif;ad in that t`re. 'northwest side of the building is recessed and provided wtith a plaza which opens up to Haven Avenue.,, 1, The proposed elevations consist of medium sand=blasted, • concrete panels. 'and blue reflective glass with blue alumino mullions, simii r•' to the . existing building, The northwest. side of the build,n,.='rs treated with ;glass and colummt featurear.,rrfrich t:¢et• a.an entry statement that faces Haven Avenue. Cc Deegn Review' Committee: The Design Reviev ComMittee (Gnitiea 'o s oy andL eman) reviewed the `proposed project on January 18,. 1990 and recommended,approval, subject to- the following conditions: =;s 4r''9 PLANNING COMISSION STAFF REPORT DR 85-31 1100. - REITER/HAVEN GATEWAY PARTNERS February 14, 1990 k 3 1. A public art scut Aure should be provided at the' plaza that faces Haven Avenue. Design of the art sculpture shall be submitted to the Design Review Committee ^for review. The, art. sc ho ulpture suld be in: a scale:. proportioni±e'46-the building. The art sculpture should be maintained for the life of the sculpture. 2. Canopy: trees should be*provided within the intr:: plaza 3. The d2sign,and material' of the enriched, textured Davement, with the plaza area should be submitted to Design Review Coaramittee for revier� and approval, 4. The roofing equipment screalning material should be tha, same blue glass material, YIT. FACTS FOR FINDiNGS: T►tie project is eonsisten with the General Plan an e ti us rial Area Specific Plan, The prc�ie�: will not be detriments] to public health 'and safety, cause nu •sences or have any significant adverse environmental' impacts. Ina:�dition. the proposed use and site plan, :together with`the recommended Conditions of Approval, are in compliance with the `applicable regulations rovisions of ,the Industrial Specific Plan and all other City IV. RECOWENDATION: Staff reconr�^dS that the Planning Commission,': approve the modificatiD, to,Development Review 85-31. Res fully~ itte Bra er l City F annex , BB:NF:so, Attachments: Exhibit "A" a Previously approved master'pi`an Exhibit B Previously ;!approved site plan Exhibit "C" - Modified site plan Exhibit "D" -Conceptual landscape plan Exhibit °E" - 'Conceptual grading plan Exhibit "F" ftposed.elevations Exhybit "G" - Prospective view from`*Ven Avenue,,_ Exhibit "N" - Floor plans Resolution of Approval r 'A GL f° �� ��rig` �`a'c���-��T^�t�`s- :.ti« •_. t_t��� 4 ,,.! ! q _� d p I � I �7) , cj � �WZVVIIRtG.Wf�r— n e n n n THE GATt-WAY I s ,�,�ys,�,� �' �• RANCHO CUCA➢CONCA. C�'GiCOENtA I ar.=.Bums:+ acq•tetaates n �re.tr 1 7•t4 iemme.w. ftw�wat i tj rNOM RiA NMO y�/7 PLAN( Nr, D1 Y 1JlQN GAA7ip u y nja 4 a e p 1 r � a`uraat �lfrl1 i S9 �7_� L ry •� I . ! U i i �y 3 En t Ij i= - - _ l s,z a =i E»li3 30wo,kboiS E EMA - r a: a a • � '=F PIT FE � s 47 Lt 1 t � iti e LIJ G • u I �rax�d ranwa f G--ED I ; s r r; _. HEy '' •. lift ''::. ,�1 ;y _ �l•°.• tom. ice`' �� �.. �...� i1S .. �!•. ` c `7- ..r�dE �y>;'. �, lid. 1�� 1'�'/ ISM' i��r�T^ '' �®�_ � y`��►'' �� 1\ �.:_.it I �?�?"JS'P• yl���� i'�J �� i Nvld"a. ii ONIaYklO AvhL 1�03i4t i ai i . ._: OUPOOLROLG1 axwmm +v I_. �wSIM pug UPJM•O UGWI om wn 141 INN --k 40 at t ki I� � a i Y_$ Q, I IL ��,..d.11. 14 �� y ar w � LlON OWN W!La aw WOFJu t,r.. ■t�I® ids n H ®sr�■aa w. � �y m isn` SAW ■■msL®� ■a—ILI no ® ®tea RSA■` &� ®— spa molt; ' ON 1=41 man ■.--- In Kwi Ha sum Is In Is AM _■:■� ■ -■ �� ��~t air s "rRC:tL'C/_�.Ci: ■Cia='srr va®ors s . 'w. r. ,.. ■..Y, ��.—airy xe.. �� � !!■ tt® ". IN In OR In am Sal-i H HE IN s = sst ■® ■ lip ■--®.�11 �o�■■� K1,, M■Mi■. M«' ---r—®■ aft ■!®m■® E1t�. lo:ver. ��o■ r ®u®m®■n �1 e" tt i4 wig Room R a. ARW nr*�- w.r �j■ r~ } i dl �d � G is a, e�6E Cis �� t M Clef _►aL`�i�it�; r � : `*: #o®®�®®� .NJILAM If IF All,II r <r 51 0 ®wwa•mvewum m"=AV• ^.q AVtlilYp wuaQeone�varxaawn 77 r 1V C i a � z� t a o t IS' � �l �• � Wi - I + 1 � J e Sa y 0r i q W W �i �1lO�itlC�•1•W/ i ! f ae�a t AVi . oar wncne � 60 �. eow�aoawavmarus �eemvaniswo aev - . cuuewnnve`eo•auaorY 'la1�R M. X" Y �� �y Y lh 3 Y � •' L S 4 1 .j � GGGWJJJ K S l•� 'Srw srrl.�r+�Nra rV• row •. F A O 1 !� ra99 YmO.IN1p.l rlwi.. braY..w-iim-M' '�M lYM>11YY11 rcaal/ NE.,. o 4 N , Ui N � VC y N , W . t y J� i. RESOLUTION NO 85,-33A 4 A RESOLUTION OF THE '_ILANNING ,COMMISSION OF-7HE t-:7Y OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA;, `CALIFORNIA.' APPROVING -DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO. 85-31'`MODIFI'CATIOH, A REQUEST TO MCDIFY. THE PREVIOUSLY_APPROVED ELEVATIONS FOR A THREE-STORY OFFICE, BUILDING LOCATED 'WITHIN THE GATEVAY MASTER 'PLAN AT'THE NORTHEAST" CORNER. OF HAVEN AVENUE`'AND:TRADEMARK PARKWAY =-tl NORTH IN THE INDUSTRIAL PARK AND HAVEN. OVERLAY DISTRICTS, SUBAREA 61 OF ;THE INDUSTRIAL SPECIFIC=PLAN, AND MAKING FINDINGS tN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 20T-08=17 A. Recitals. (i) Haven Gateway. Partners.has filed an application -for­the approval of Development Review;No: 85-81 Modification as,described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution,:ith,e subject Development Review requ St is referred to as "the application". (ii) On the 14th day of February, 1990 the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted- a meeting on'the a.ppl.icat said meeting on that date. LC'"1 (iii) A11 legal., prerequisites to the adoption of this, Resoiutioi) have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, .determined and resolved. by the Planning Commissiov of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1.. This Commissian hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A. of this Resolution ire -true and correct. 2 Based upon substantial evidence' presented' to this 'Commission during the above-referenced meeting on February`14, 11990, including written and oral staff reports, this Commission hereby specifically,finds as follows: (a) The applicatt,�n applies to property located at the northeast corner of Haven Avenue and;Yr�demark Parkway North, with a street frontage of, approximately 1,378 feet and 'a`,I�lot depth of approximately 350 feet and-, is presently improved:tiith two (2) t,,ne-story office buildings, and. (b) The property toiithe north of the subject site is vacant, the property to the south is vacant, the property to the east 'is an Industrial Park under construction, and the property to the west .is office buildings.and vacant land, and G ' PLANNING COMMISSION,RESOLUTION Nam: 85-33A DR 85-31 P90D, REI,ERMAVEN GATEWAY PARTNER` February. 14, I990 Page 2 (c)' The ;proposed revised elevations meet the design guidelines of the Haven Avenue Overlay District: 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this, Commission during the above-referenced meeting and upon the specific findings of, facts set forth in `paragraphs '1 and '2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as.follows: (a)' That the propose project is .consistent with the objectives 6f 'the General Plan"; and (b) That the proposed use is in, accord,with the,objectives of the Industrial Specific Plan and the purposes of the district ili which the site is located! (c). That the proposed' use is in complaance�,iwi.th each of the applicable provisions of --the .Developm6nt. 'Code and4 the Industrial Specific Plan; and :A (d). That the proposed :use; together^with)`'the 'conditions applicable thereto, wil'+. not be detrimental to the public health safety; or welfare, or materially injurious to properties'or improvements in<th'6�vic n5ty, 4. This Commission hereby finds and certifies that the, project,has been reviewed and conside^ed. in compliance with the California En-,'ironmental Quality Art of 1970 as this Commission' issued a ,Negative Dec;iaration on Sept6mber 11, 1985 for the Gateway Master Plan. p� 5. Based upon the findings and :conclusions set forth, in paragraphs 1,, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the apptica"lion subject: to each and every condition set forth below; Planning OVvision 1) All pertinent conditions, as contained in Resolution No. 85=33 shall apply. 9) A puC.,'ic art sculpture shall be provided at the plaza that fa es Haven Avenue. Desigr:,If the art sculpture shall be submitted to Desig;i 'Review Committee for review. The art, sculpture shali be in a scale proportionate to the building. The art sculpture shall be maintained for the,,life-of the stulptur'e., 3) Canopy trees shall be provided within the,interior,af the plaza areas. t� ;s PLANNING COMMISSION'AESOLUTION N0. 85-33A DR. 85-31 MUD. - ,REITER/HAVEN GATEWAY PARTNERS February 14,;1990 Page-`B 4) The design and material of the enriched textured pavement within the plaza areas shalt be submitted for Design Review Committee`review and approval p,,`ior to issuance of a building permit.. S) Any roof equipment screening material shall match the blue glass, material of the building., 6) ,The existing ;roof. mounted equipment on the existing -two 1 2) one-story' office buildings shall . be screened. `Detailed plans shall be-submitted for:C4ty Planner review and approval prior to issuance of'a building permit for''ihe three-story office building. 7) Tree maintenance criteria shall -be for the project and submitted for City Planner review and `approval to;">. encourage the I natural" growth characteristic'v of the selected tree secies. 8) Night highlighting shall be provided to the 'plaza areas and to the sculpture. 6. The -Secretary to this Commission shall -cert,_',ry 6 the adoption of this Resolution. f ` APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 14TH DAY OF FEBRUARY. 1990. PLANNING COMMISSION''OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Larry T'L,,McNiel, Chairman' ATTEST: Brad'Buller, Secretary I, Brad Buller, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City ;of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that, the foregoing Resolution was, duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted- by the Planning Commission of -the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting;of the Planning Commission held on the 14th day of'February, 1990 by the following vote-to-wit:, AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: 7 ` 1,t^ CITY OF F;ANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: February 14, 1990 TO: Chairman and:Members, of the Planning Commission , FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Brett Horner, Associate Planner SUBJECT: FONTANA STEEL SIGNAGE - An appeal of the City Planner's decision to es s a maximum ,letter height of 3 feet And 2"feet respectively for two signs and to not approve an illuminated sign at 12451 Arrow Route in Subarea 15 of the Industrial Specific Plan - APN: 229-121-35 : I. BACKGROLA11): The applicant has, applied for a Sign Permit to cons ivc o wall signs. One of the signs faces.:Arrow.Route and the other sign faces westward to the I-iH Freeway. ,The signs,meet all technical sign ordinance requirements. However, staff believes they do not comply with the design standards outlined in the Industrial Specific Plan, and Sign Ordinance. Hence, the signs were referred to the.Design 'Review Committee. Staff subsequently approved the sign permit subject to the conditions recommended by the Design Review Committee. II. ISSUES: The primary issues involved include the size of the signs an'Tc Tie fact that one sign (the sign facing Arrow (toute) is proposed for internal illumination. The applicant, proposes one 4 foot high sign and one 4 foot, 9 inch high; sign which staff feels are inappropriate. Staff also feels that the proposed illuminated sign is inappropriate. A. Size of Signs: The Sign Ordinance allows a maximum.sign area o � o - the building face, not to exceed 150 square feet versus the,110 square feet area proposed for the sign facing Arrow Route. This absolute maximum standard is further clarified. by the Sign Ordinance which states its intent that "the sign area of each sign shall be, proportional to and visually :balanced with the size of the building." Staff believes the size of the signs exceeds those which have been approved elsewhere in the Industrial Specific Plan. Staff's research indicates that the only approved signs of this;size include those within largs cercial; projects such as Terra Vista Town Center R foot, 3 inch maximum height). Even these signs were approved based on the substantial distance (585 feet) ,of the sign from the street. In contrast, the Fontana Steel sign facing Arrow Route is only about 80 feet ion H PLANNING COMMISSION 'STAFF°REPORT FONTANA STEEL SIGNAGE 4 February 14, 1990 Page 2 from the street. The elevations on Exhibit, "C" depict the size of the signs as proposed by the applicant and as recommended by staff, B. Illuminated Sian: The applicant proposed an ' internally, illuminated sign facing Arrow Route. Staff's research indicates that illuminated signs are typically only approved for commercial uses, such as retail maricets"`�ihich operate at night. Industrial, warehouse, and manufacturing uses,,nave not been approved for i11. inated signs primarily because they do not operate at ,night and do not coed to be identified for non-employees such as customers and clients.: The Sign Ordinance contains no direct standard relative to the,. issue of illuminating wall signs. • Essentially, signs must be of a style and design which is harmonious with the building architecture. The Industrial Area Specific Plan reaffirms the intent of the Sign Ordinance by requiring that "signs shall be used for the purpose of identification and Idirection'." C. Design Review Committee: These two i,ssues,were 'brOught.to'the Committee Chitiea, Tolstoy, Coleman) for review on January IS, 1990. At that meeting, theL applicant was directed, to make the following revisions: 1. The .sign facing Arrow Route should be limited to a maximum of 2 feet, 6 inches in height. The sign should be illuminated only from: ground,mounted fixtures and not from internally illuminated channel letters. 2. ' The sign on the nest elevation; should be limited to a ` maximum of 3' feet, '0 inches in height: Based on the Committee's recommendation, staff has issued an approval letter .based on the conditions listed above. The applicant has appealed this decision to the full Commission. Staff believes that the appeal of the " 'Committees recommendations raises . a broader policy issue ^egardjng illumination of signs within the industrial area. I11. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: Staff>notes the following findings for the Commission's consideration: 1. The, proposed signage is inconsistent with the General Plan objective of: 1) making the. City attractive to residents, visitors, 'and commercial,. industrial, and professional businesses-while maintaining economic stability through an ` ra PLANNING COMp4�5S N��,"STAFF_NEPDRf FONTANA,STEEL tlGNAGE ' February SA,,`lg9li- �>>` Page 3 at cactive signing program; and 2) The.General Plan policy of providing;;a reasonable 'system of controls for• signs to ensure the development of a' hign qualty visual environment. 2 ThSt the.proposed signage Is too 'large given the scale .of the, � � i�ngsan e street,b e 8. That the`revisions to tfie Signage as recommended by City staff and .the Design"Revievi'Committee are appropriate giVeil the sife r factors and green ,current,and past,sicinage approva3s� 4. That the aond�+�,o�s plat'ad',on 'the sign approval xeo allow the' applicant;adequute business ideiitifieation. IV. RECOMMENDATION Staff recoim"4nds: that the 'Pl'anninr­ Camenission Lpnoid the City Planner's decisign by denying .the appl uant's appeal. p` l Bra City=Planner 13B•BHml g Atta6hments. Exhibit "A" Appli:cant'i letter of appeal Exh I$i "$° ;—Location-hiap and S'i:te Mlh, " Fnx4�t''��`- Sign;£levation� r, M"_f £xhib'it "D° City Planner Appro�al°LetterAl Resol'ution of Denial , Y - _ a M 4 i s jj ff SIGNS BY Ild .•.., , 07,sOun ,,CALIF sz4 o PH 714^E8$-4478 ' FAX Januaky 2S, {';: ;I� ;RA6�1AAlCdUi�}A8S31 City of Rancho Cucamonga . Planning Dept. y 9320 Baseline. ' Rancho,Cucamonga.r CA 91701 _ r Dear Planning Depta , Our client Mr. John Ware;. Leneral Manager of Fontana Steel wishes to appeal the dacis '3n framStaff for tho,prcpo signs. e Our, proposed drawings indicate.'the north elevatif,, have (1) set of indiv idual 'ante n�tlly ,illuminated channrrl letters',' 48" & 42+1, tall ;wit` an overall length?of 2Z�6". Th1e lea of; signage = 110 sq. "i'r.: The present code allow-- 15D:s.q'. ft. Faith regards to the-size of building. The 'west elevation that we., (. propose is (1) 'set of non illuminated ,3ntliv dual.,metal dhlr ne.l !' letters, 57" &-`4L" tall, with;an 'overall`,length of'3V6"<` -,. The areaof signage 149 sq. ft'. The present code allows 150 sq. ft. with'r.egards ,to the size oP building. We would very -p`ach, l ' 4 to maintain. e an attractiv well designed building 'with '� cd: 5ct proparti'n' of signage. :We feel- that the staffs is 5-d& ion Poi, 24" letters on the naith -pleva tion snd 36t- 1, on toe west; elevation mill not be 'propor- tionate to the b+xs .Sing size. sincerely yours, QUIEL BROS ELECTRIC SIGN SERVICE CO;., 'INC;. - Gary Qu el Tom-Tr2iiner John War, GQ:gzf. SALES SERVICE• EA iNt3 o MAINTENANCE•CR%ANE 1,ckE t•NECI(d ;7 ' Ca4i!c+vve�ara ll:cnw'nio 2+7365 arm' o�-.�� � i' ;: `fir: •'� 77+— �l 1` ; E l F A.. f¢..1 1. S � � I 1 j A I`3 PLANNING ,D ISIG 'd?13.E P+�re4►�'et� Mkt i��`. ;° k { raj _ } i F TrI s 3 D Ile 4A '` } 14 F7� rig `` •t , ^ fit n k ® SAA N In I I 1 � CTl`il or Cf4®C IJG1h30NGA, eon oe.�e.8"907.Rancho Cacaump,CAMOTFia 9172%.VIT69-1851 mr ruary 5, 1990 Mr. Gary;Quiet Qoiel Brothers 272 South I Street. - ' San Beernard1no, CA 92410 SUBJECT: FGHTA A STEEL SIGHS ®ear Mr. ,Qlael Thank you for submitting the sign pernit app`iication for Fontana Steel. As you will recall, staff determined that for aesthetic reasons, the,signs should be limited to a two-foot wxill height. his' decislon Was, based in part on previous sign approvals in the.Industrial Specific Plan aria. Although the proposed signs technically met the Gity's Sign Ordinance, Staff was very concerned with the size of the Signs. ', For instance, one of 'the:two signs is jeo,1 one Square inch below .the t�ei Sign S an,footage alti Because of this, and the fact that the applicant taas.uo711111 to the maxim two-foot height, the ,sign permit was referred to, the',Besign .Review Corm t lee. On January 18, 1990, after reviewing several exhibits,. the ittee deteralined that the moxi,=m sign heights should bo giro feet: for the sigh :facing Arrow Route and three feet for the sign facing the I-15 Freeway In addition, the Comittee expressed iconcern with the proposed illusainatad Sign facing Arrow Route. The ittee recomnded that the sign be lit fi gr"nd bunted fixtures to not: be internally itluoimated. Based, on the' ittee°S 'review, staffs d&Asion is to approve. the:sibns Subf atUcho U0319n; v ew wee Pecumandazions,. This decision shall be final unless appealed in writings together wittt a $62.00 applicatic"i fee, to the Planning iSSion Secretary within teit days. PIEese feel free to contact , Horner at 90-1861 with a1W questions.'. Sincerely, COMUNIV MCAMW UEPARVESiT PLAgRINGI DIVISION Brad °ter City Planner BB:SH:Sp _ ,1 Attachtnnt .0 a cc: Toga Kaney, ®ntana Stea:1, Inc. — $ Caanada m m Ma.ar Winiam J.Alexensier Chatfn 1•BuqueB It _ Cry stun. rr Dennis L.Stout Deborah IV,Brown Pamela J.Wright 7acU Lam,;,ICP Z:t�tRCIAt!F:iDUSI'RI�. t ' COUMIi Janu?ry b8, 1990 FWARA STEEL' , ' ratt- ftViaet m€v1311.+gignif. C eafitta : Action: TW Coffaittee- (Chit en, 7761stay ;and Coleman) did riot apprabe. the .signs as propesO� . . he'applicant a�as directed to make-the i'olYoaiptg:revisions: 1. the sign ` faci;Rg=.Ac oia Rsute shou1d,6i tia3tsd to a'max mum o¢ 3ght.' the sign should y +e ilbia l"ated only, roll gradnd `�ountes�.'iriztures an not fray t�uernally llutaineted r 2 11e sign;, on Lhe, west elevation should be limited ,Lts'A_ Mki* . 9' 0 in height I I 7; �i ' RESOLUTION N0. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF.771E CITY OF RANCHO' CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, DENYIN :•AN ArrEA! OF 'THE CITY PLANNER'S DECISION TO ESTABLISH' A'�IA MUM. LETTER HEIGHT OF 3`FEET'-,AND 2 FEET RESPECTIVELY FOR TWO ;SIGNS AND NOT TO,APPROVE AN ILLUMINATED SIGN 'LOCATED 6JM51 ARROW ROUTE itU THE HEAVY'i INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT O#`'THE INDUSTRIAL SPECIFIC PLAN JSUBAR.EA 15) APN:, 229=421-35,, AND MAKING'FINDINGS IN,'SUPPORT:THEREOF . . A. Recitals. (i) Fontana Steel has. filed an appeal for the approval of Sign Permit No. 90-14 as<described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject 'appeal, 'request is; ferradL to as "the application (ii) On January 17,' 1990, the application was -reviewed .;by the Design Review Committee with several recommendations 'for revisioris.� (iii) On February 5; 199OK 'the City Planner approved the Sign Permit (90-14) subject to certain conditinns, a (iv) On the ,of 14th day of February, 1990, the Planning Commission of the City ;of Rancho C camonoaL conducted a meeting on the application, and concluded sa)d meeting on that date. All legal prerequisites to the,,,adoption of this Resolution have of:curred'. B. 'Resolution: . NOW,' THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined an4 resolved by the Planning Commission of the City.of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that ail of the facts stt forth in .the Recitals, Part-A of this Resolution are true and correct., 2. Based ,upon s':bstantial evidence presented to this Commission . during the above-reference meeting on 'February, 14, 1990, ;inciuding written and oral staff reports, this Commission _hereby specifically finds as follows: (a) The application ar,plies to property located at 12'�51 Arrow Route with an Arrow Route street;freintage of. t886 feet and lot depth of 710 feet and is presently.improved with.-" manufacturing facility",Ond. (b). The property to the north of the subject site is vacant, the property to the south of that site,consists of a,_manufacturing plant, ,the property to the east is a manufacturing plant and the property to. the west 's a utility easement. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NOo. r FONTAU STEEL Februa^y"14, �1g90 Page . 3. , Based upon.the .substantial evidence present d' to this Commision f during ,the above-referenced rn eti'ng and up6h the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs V an;A 2 above, this` Commission;.hereby firids._and concludes as follows., (1 That �h� proposed request is not :consistent'" with thl ob7eca,r„c�o,f the General Plan, and (2) That; heel. 000sed request U.not,`in.accord`�a�th tFae Lzbject'�4dt_nf the-Utvelopment,Code and;,the purpasz_T)j tie diste..a in, �shieh the.'sitie'.is located; ��n `' �- W O That the ;,7sd refit_ �c�- ^mot 7n=compliance with "eaCi)� of,Fthre appl4cable.�provisiion of the, 0e4elopmen kr�ade, (4). That the V..oposed signage is.' inconsis tent r+with .. V the General ' Pion, ob3ective of. 1)'making the r ractve , tor dCity att vs ,. cormehc5al, ndustri:ai, ." and. pnof�ss :oval. businet"bs�whilld:maintaining economic stabi�lity. through an'attractive:'sign program: and 2) ,tfi, General ''P1art pd icy,�A , providing a •reasonable = system of ,controls �4a signs; to ensure the . development L of a nigh' 'quality visual environment tE� (51, That the ,proposed-sfgnage is too i.arge,.given the scale of the 'buildings sand distance 'from the street. (6) That-the revisions to the .signage recommended.. ; by City;staff,and the Design Review, Committee,- Mare appropriate, ,given the site factors. and en cuwrr�nt_and .past:.szgn age,approval.s': "(T That the 'condi'tions placed on the sigq apvproNr;1 ` do allow, the sine applicant' adequate�.; ss identification.,`: , 4. Based 'upon the findings and conclusions "set forth in paragraphs �1, 2, and 3 above,,this Commission:Nereby denies the aP7ea1. 5. 'The Secretary to this Commissi on,`shalI certify'to the adoption of this, Resolution. '�•� III M!* t' PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION M. F" - `' FONTANA.STEEL! February, 14,'199O Page 3 APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS .143H DAY OF FEBRUARY', 1990.'' PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE `CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Larry T. McNi41, Chairman: i, ATTEST: ' Brad Buller;, Secretary I, Brad Buller, Secretor,?-sk'f then, Planning Com►issiorr of.the City-:of*Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby.cr.�ri fy that ;th- foregoing "Re'so'►'ution was =duly and regularly introduces, pagk ld and, adopted by the, Planning Commission of the City of Rancho CucartAngayyat;a regular,meeting.of the-J., nirq,Commission held. on the 14th day. of, Februa` ' ; 1990, by thQ folilowing vote t�-±sit:. AYES: COMMISSIONERS- NOES: COMMISSIONERS.; ABSENT; COMMISSIONERS.' �s :r drr l ` L, li I i3 /} 7t CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT f � DATE: February 14, '1990 T0; Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Brett Horner, Associate, Planner SUBJECT: MEDIAN OPENINGS Aln LANDSCAPING :WITHIN MEDIANS 'IN THE I. ABSTRACT: Staff is seeking ft,,ecti on.from the Planning Commission oT min' island designs in Terra Vista with respect `to their location and the amount of, landscaping that is available when median breaks are allowed. II. BACKGROUND: Lewis Hones is zroposing a median island opening on. TFurch STreet, between West Um Avenue and Spruce ­Street (see Exhibit'A-I). The opening being proposed is to provide access to a proposed condominium project, Tentative Tract 13850. The issue of a median opening has also come to the forefront because Lewis desires to construct Church' Street from, Haven to Orchard and cannot complete the design plans until this issue is resolved. (See Exhibit B ) Staff believes "the request raises fundamental questions about med an es Sn within Terra vista, c are eyon she mope or any Ingle project. The Church St?idt/Terra Vista Parkway. loop is the key,circulation ' element of tnw Terra Vista Planned Community welch 'organizes access to the "Crior of the-comapnity (see Exhibit E). The loop parkway, is also a key component of' the landscape design for the, planned commynity: r_ The Church Street/Terra Vista Parkway loop will signal to drivers that they are entering a special community. It will provide a unique--visual experience for visitors-., and residents alike with distinctive landscaping treatments ... including; a raised median planted with trees will be continuous all the dray around the loop-,.. For all of these reasons, the `loop parkway will be a unique road lending identity to a11 ' bf Terra Vista. Both functionally' and visually, it will tie the entire coMnity together". IT�a 2 s PLAQVi COMKISSION STAFF REPORT MEDIAN'OPENINGS & LANDSCAPING - TERRA VISTA February 14, 1990 Page 2 III. ANALYSIS: A. Landscape Issues The primary f sue is whether the median provides ena, area or landscaping. Staff maintains that, in many cases, very little landscape area is left in `medians once breaks and left turn pockets of mid-block. openings and public street crossings are provided (i.e., Elm Avenue, Spruce Avenue, Milliken Avenue, Orchard Avenue, Poplar Drive, etc.). As Exhibit-A-1 depicts, the two median islands have a length of 140- 150'fE,et, once the minimum left turn pockets and taper distances are subtracted.: :,,This reduces by approximately 250'feet, the. avail'abie area for planting, particularly tree planting, Staff believes this is contrary to the goals and obdeetives of the Terra Vista Community Plan. The Church :Street median street tree is the Crape'Iyrtle, which is to be planted approximately one every 20 'feet. Based on this spacing, the median opening eliminates about 18 'bees and leaves room for approximately ; 7-10 tress 'Within each median island. Therefore, if the median opening were approved, only 14-20 trees would be planted for this block which it ovee l,200 feet long. in addition, some trees may be lost due to sight line clearances for traffic .safety at median openings although preliminary studies indicate that perhaps only one tree may have to be. pliminated within the median closest to Elm Avenue (see Exhibit A). B. Traffic Issues., A.%3econd issue with the proposed median opening shown on x rF15#-c Pi=1, is whether the median openf:� is acte.ally needed.- The applicant has indicated (see Exhibit B) that the site on the south side of 'Church 'Street,may be developed`with office 'uses (although the site's .current designation 'is for High ' Density Residential` Development). and that the median is needed to service the proposed office=site, However, the most iagical place for the entrance into the office site appears to be off Town Center'Dr ve, the street which `Parallels Church Street to the south (see Exhibit A-2). The City's Traffic Engineer,1,g Section has reviewed this particular prgposdl and has c6ncUdeC that the opening would not seriously irpact traf,4C safety, However, they did conclude that the op o1og was not warranted 'based on the number of :vehicles entering and exiting the properties involved.` There appears to; be at least two opportunities for driveway entrances (including left turn movements) along Town Center. Drive into the proposed office :si.te. In addition, Tarnr GenCer Drive:does not have a median and therefore" would not have problems With having. to provide median openings. n Pl.ANNIIA COMMISSION STAFF REPORT MEDIAN OPENIMS& LANDSCAPI_ki - TERRA VISTA February 14, 1990 Page 3 Further, right turn movements could still be pemittrd on-` hPWrch Street even if the median opening was not allowed*, on Church Street. .A solid median on Church Street tould also tend to keF�p .and direct. office traffic south of Church Street, away fram .the, residential areas in the, interior of the planned community. Staff believes these, factors, further support the position.. that the proposed redian;o pen fin9 ors Church Street is not warranted. 'V. OPTIONS: In the pas"*, the City had not established any minimum median length,. and median openings were reviewed individually on a� project by project. basis Staf notes the 'fallowing; 0itiens for the Commission`s consideratlon; 1. Direct staff to prepare a, policy resolution which sets forth a minimum distance for length of medians. Staff would. recoamend a minimum length of approximately 250=320 feet, not including the taper distance•, or, 2. ' Continue to review proposed median openings on a project by project basis thraugn the Technicai and.Aesign Review'Comnittee process; or, - 3. Direct staff to prepare a policy resolution which sets -Forth minima spacing for median island,openings on Church Street and Terra Vista Parkway witl in-,Tarra 4ista. V. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning, Commission consider ffie op _on—s-ITsted above and direct staff to proceed with the desirable courss of action, if any,=s desired. Staff also recommends that the Planning Commission determtine whether this particular request for a median opening.is acceptable. Resp ily fitted, Bra .•er { city Planner k 89:BHJJfS Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Proposed Median Opening on Church Street Exhibit "B" Applicant's Request Letter Exhibit "C" > Memo from Deputy City Engineer to City Planner Exhibit "D" - Letter to Applicant from City Planner Exhibit "E" -.Excerpt from Com°minity Plan c. Isd1! �x to r v� W w, Qz D� 70leA� Wqk v i E�t�ttfir�-f ■ ±I �1fill TM_, Loi�J. son rr ^ hit l�,.—® v k \i1i; a .� 1s/ti®!/m � ms `/!1 It►o►��t(i✓;'� ,� �. ��,, . '�11�IlIQl111 1/Pf>l sd1! will if jj o11►ltr`= p�1515n1p15 11111111111► ®`nnSW� o ♦ ���®®illl/ ® ®! Aw t� � O�+►� S�f�r �t...��. � 1 1�ejffflttl Lie` � ®''"'"►j�0/O'® :. .. �� e� `� �r j�� ])II �� ;.`c ..tee® x� � a � ,� .®®� liut,� .!►may}�Zi�, C' lisp _11 ,.n, lill 1 1 r }. .• a s E _ �+mot t+ liiilllt� �" i sae— W 'al 1 '''"'a. �tiiii�.•.+i�rr,�a�`� �..il"'—�--�-�r +� may{ �/ Levis Roues anaaement Corpse `� 9 trrY.OF RAry 714i985-09310 FAX 71d198,97 ox 670/llpiaod.Calltgca(a 91785 E161ry eiry 0 Vi��$Ajpryry� December 27, 1989 VGA t4ESSEliGER' ' Hr. Brad Buller, Planning Director City of Rancho Cucamonga P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucapaonga, CA 91729 Re: Church Street Heiftins Dear Brad: As you might imagine,. we°re a-ixiaus V12 build Church,.Street frJm Haven to Orchard, but find ourselves unaiLle to complete the design of the missing link between West Elm and Elm until the'mid=block median break between West Elm ' and Spruce is set. Paul.Raugeau told me a,couple of weeks age chat he had reviewed the plan and given his recommen"tion'on pocket,1 gths and tapers, and he thought it was now up.to Planning to`review ttie amount of 7.andscaping left in the median. Please arrange to expedite this process at):!we can get the plans:complered as soon as'possible. I don't'`think: there is any^problem with 'the break east o£.Spruce, but 1 ` believe there was soma question about allowing; one 'tietween West T Elm and Spruce, as an entry into Tract 1,3859. As we have-always:underst-o& that one mid-blocu breakwould-be appropz:,'iate as long as the block is over 1;000 feet" long, and this one is close to 1200 feet, I'-am not sure what the'question is. ` It is also probabi .worth noting :hers that we think of the"high density apartment site across`Church from Tract.IUVI as a future'Office,park !--,that seems to make sense behind To,an Center and between the business park and office zoning = which would obviously require a median break ots.Church, as both the Elm and Spruce frontages.are too short for entrances. We would appreciate your hurrying this along for us. Cordially, T' LEWIS HOMES Y NAcEMENT CORP.: µ Dc,Wald M. Thompson n Authorized Agent D,�T:va cc:{ Russ liaguire, City Engineer -- u. t ;CITX OF RAIt?CHO GIJGAFiIOIVG.� •; ���o= 4, P DATE January, 1990 J 0 O ry T0: Brad Bu1;1er, City Rlanner '`. .. 1977 PROM: $hintu Bose, fleputY Cii< Engineer== " SUBJECT: Church Stweet Medfan�.openingsrra Vista Pro, ect _^} _ ti= This refers to the,letter: dated"December 27., 1969 frc+m Don`Thorn saa of Lewis Haines dcopy ateached) requesting a median opening'On Chur'.cb. Street } for Tract 13859. As you are aware, the req+airement'of the Median islands along'Terra YistQ,. Parkway and Church 'Street'rsaa-based on aeothetic;.reat6n.• In tha past; some members of the Planning -CL, ission raised sash'xoncern reenrding providing too many .median ''openings," thereby- reduci ng. ,t he a+=Aoun of landscaping an these medians. Russ Nag re Dan Colemi recall those discussions in the Planning Cacrm+issi.on:and 7RC #oetings Paul Rougeau reviewed the' traffic ar+alysis for. -the reques4ed median; breaki a copy,attached. He finds., the traffic'count is insignificant, to warrant dny. ,break. Howa6r; if the opening.`is.',ai,ioweai';, it will{,'not seribusly. impact the traffic safeltyz,oyv the street. The question ,stilt: remains, if the +)iening As provided, will the re-raining portion ef the, landscaped ai*a .within the block meet the.. . expectation of'the.Commissio6 rs? I would likn to leave. that .3edg nt up to you. SB:dlw ;r Attachments G 5.tx. 7, i Crry OF RANCHO CUC'.AMONGA post ottice eux soh}toncho Cueamo� � }�- tbr.Galitomia 91}19.,f U4)9891851 17 January 24, 1990 Mr. Donald M. Thompson Authorized Agent Lewis Homes Management Corporation 1156 R.:Mountain Avenue P.O: Box 670 . upland, CA 91785 SUBJECT PROPOSED MEDIAN BRIE ON .CHURCH BETWEEft ELFA ANR,SPRUCE ' Dear Don': 1 have reviewed your., request with'.the, Engineering ,Diviaion. and 'if is our opiniost `that the'brea�, in. the csedian 'is .0ot. Warr��ed further'.; the •break, will decrease the ataount of Qatentiial radian.,island`1' nd:scaping ;,Yn ,the`past, the reduction of landscaping has been oV'concerd.to the."Planning C®mmis'sion. Therefore, it is my recommendaiion_ that should ,Lis Flames°«desire" to pursue this matter further, that we set this far .a Planning C,gMission Weeti,ng'under Directors Report for a pokey deter�inition on median Vreal:s within I Terra Vista Co sanity, P13ri. If it is, yf+ur. �:ish to °pqrsue this -with the Zlannidg Commission, I wi11 peace it an the first available' Fiarning.,=Ssion geet,isig upon receiving your. request..- . Please give me a call when yau've t mada jitur decision. 4. Sincertily, ) COMMUNITY DEVELOPAE€iT DEPARTMENT Pq VIS a' BCr BS/3fs cc: Russ Maguie'e ,ems. William-!." j, Al&,x an'd er Charles J.BUquet I[ Gty Neeep., Bennis t Stout Deborah +; Brown ,. :. Pamela J.WAght Jack U IrP , + G N A A L. 3 n) At d �+..+ 1 1 d:'Q 1 r C d:'ty A 'O i 2{7�+ •.' O1 C.0 am O�+.s m,Ot.C'a d C L aT° pm `..dC ? O.3YpyL rCn4 , �or+.� 77b dGCyt1O.rC0U 3 � Y G V >' U dN »aO L nitn > OdtoQJf a+UV 9 EOu4 (a «.O d:..0 �>..1 S. W� C U O V N V dt d S• „O. L O C Oy.0 Y. '�J /g 0:`a 4l tl i. 0 `�+aO.r C uOi � 7 V C��` V y.E= C.'C•.Y .G d v 41 VDU.. m o7 V=L a•C+ d�_F'O in d dNl N •G A t9 t0 3 L O 10 d N N y O1S3 X L. « S'.'y, C>.0 dL. d-OL•COO.� Na) "O1S !0dFO ® C.d dU wCFtiCteR A > ULINCaa+ ELad ✓� ORE- N > CC ,a N O N L'� N 10 N d O :>F d da1.O C.L O d d=I Min ,d.+ 19d.:39 .. N'l7' OL.:- 0�'wNA� vdi LU_ 3taU�Cd� V10C Vd�DL7 Dd6w� � W0in NL W L r fA e to 4-w. C O ¢ •+LO 4 p >V C d:3 y O. 7 Y idt a ? /0 S �.y V dLW t. OL mQ«._ 3y _• s. NC'= V�_ V.Airo.A+ M Sd.. d tO / .0 ,p d C M....- C..- L t rA 7 w L N C N .O Ip d.�'« O @ C C O d N A jp L O N >. C. .y F++ d t: ' O N d O Q•ttf a�.F p U ,. f0 •ti'C C L N« N d L U. 19 C.- O)O.A S„M N'E.- 10 O L j �tnH � � ya_ cR � s-a x« cE �r a«. o o G" U. Z L O 4. O 4- cN d O .0 C L Dl d d O G W in -}"''Q p.-. L N♦.a y i0 F L r. to L. d u:d N L w... a>r.3 x PW...O L d LL"L •C: > d. y> to Ul L 10 (naa.+ -.Gd 'C,. C- t6ZAt C.NC-a:ad+ Fi AEyC.« '++ L M Wu y U.0 AL O m C.O d d, in .- C �+.+ O C C Nrn�°--�3pCaE.. � 21kol CUD -�:-°, Ico � °L pp Cw d a' ER S O L L. d 'R A C v..'O dj f0 tL.� u.. d V U d N'.7_M L a+ Ip rw.- :N L O d O C._ O L d)..0 >.�.0 G d w W :. E �L pf.d� .0 E E v C ..c w roJ C d` to m 3 a+'4:..p d ` E C U.a..'A aC7."D L G e aL+ O L L O y-L E:G m N 3 t�� O C r O �-+N..c0 d d E pn SL F O.C.? L 1p fj a.+. w N y.- d= d C O �1 N O al'C d d v.+ 10....:•-" d7aS O.�dOtCVlm.. oU7"u'CC.,j in Gi EEC:>'" "'�.+Luaei omo �_cc` o « � otn to O .1 Maoo C'm4, 0b: L hy000 ..� ? d r- aviu. E O= 40Zu.. iotd.6C« EC-4" CCra 3O .0 3 cf U L d d O)C51 :C.O+ O_ C d oy :rn. > NaNiOt) e �°'of.=.he r �dvVM C U N a.c.: C <7 3 d : 'p d d•- 'N r L N•-�: d L >3 ccS¢V C A O ..+ CC L 7'fl O.wd C = L y; L OC..O tn 0E'0.ti CLM5 in 3 C.d d C d a. to N. O d Map+ .+ tC3 2 (M V•O C tn tO O N aM CL d.L L. ?JL .d � a)U O;.�y;n'L O N C L d t S V 4) L U o L !0 d y L L y C O d E.to . -6 3 N V O L to M (,.. d. y..r+.a.Q� d:.a 1to 6 p .. U Nam.-L b C O ate*' fC0 -:A N e m N y� C N ''« L«'Q, ai¢ F �Va+o� i•.. m'LEcLCa MLa - O ', `�+yO C� Od � d r'O�wCatn ai ItfV. w+a.rLNtoc ?�". rrdm> Oy x rod R� d.G•.- t0. N d O C /a d y e EJ �C p d C E t> W t-s O OE- 2 L OP m 0� «aM — 0 FA� ey s lhial�. � dw� N `0 AN "'�.". d.Odto .Ld' C1N0 > > N A� dmL O V LC.Ci des, eO � CCeyy►m ddi¢ d 3 3m4FXW Nme+Eedo,;rL-, o y0U w C O d L $ 9•p : d 7 U Y YEN O'O:LF -:n 3 L Q•.O' C cA0 V< OdRNIC0 L dAdLI .: L. cLp -• MA.L id,70 CLcn-.c,d V C d N > R & at O U to 16 w 9 dm NNaLiV o � oa ¢ ¢Y > d O.ivefl-�` � i• y A S, �,,,.. ,y er 61 L 3 N p e.+() O O,.L .0, N C A fp.+ R d•- U ou m u .og � cn.$— > � � W % 1. od o_� - � o U > v 10d L C F4;In r.� L3tyilGt= O V N m yod Oda+� N� �-. O id ` Ca1 $ d d > � d7 yYpCrotn wO av N O dI C Cl �r L E a+ d d:� m p I .CLtO ®yC O»: O LC.:CrO L tSSltdC 'C �_NdL•- LO al IL VO.W� d3'63M toM'CnmmF F F.+ 10 Tt�Y • �'CAjJ��;yr �4� '41•�'�':gar 91T ^t,✓; �'}-Y' .s , rNCp%a L rd ._, 4yL-Cd4)a�O'nOLi 4cC"1'"4Nl �•S.S�N „> j C� 1 LV 4CN. R OC.00 CwO mG pV d.L. n'W `'" C 4,d).0 4, c.Q. e++' 47 ::0 O®•,3 r.,p�S Gx o1 O N y U_ s y,:t~.01 . PO1 OQ.ZA d C C.,.. MMc-L (D N't; 3 .:4, odd o�N ° > 0 ia> � 0Ec � c � > Ea=tom;,' Vi ' Vja " Oas, w6eLx' N'® U w VN EO c4 C oS LQ) N •.t.c 40 M ° ) .0Cy t , LL C M 13— � - O 4l tSj� p p 70 1T.41 p~ . p•, E O^ L L 10 3 O ,, L N �.„ O. C IDCZ C TJ..j N.puU 1-..p+. N MC L r$ 41 E+O°.d jp m;o L N-.y t Z L. L a i in 3- N ro �:,_ u1� b ru r� o of L-E.3 �p b� Q.:L G.a+ 41 cp... R cm toRH to MaaX O`d«aO+ V NN .:C— O f4 C L N 4)yr C 'DG L N L V d V p N «'r=�� A. LCSN�"O CO�ae QL �.j N- OO O N B, "> M u..I R Q �a0+�-•:L.c � aLi c r m i� y �+Cf t f0 O N O M N O p VI L 4) }� 4. O Ql: Y� N �BL 7 QV Sd.Q 41.N O S.� 10 L� O'N L L N Nye O L m„yELL i- 3� IaF- 4w E- EC � �c oLu � Rm� � L C.p O O Q1 ® F^ C�+:�.�. _.4L M N a+ N�a+'.�tr N ++ 1 S7 aO+ i J C..t V U G Q.d pQS eS,,.'8 C O d CD 0,0 C C oS+ O V++ 3.0 S. d~ CL-X (a ® 3 N.C '". C a^ S L N ivO ® 10 L. Y L-V •3 3 to (U N �•Yo $ V�aso,�eo � p � vE>:s ro0o+ l6 S T 61 O �. O L.� 19 4) N L O L �^ �� cn"317Mt3rsT3Lo v Q:3 - t3A 3:L A .7 O Y 4 7 o''.N N �: ;p y.. L"C m 1 G A d Y s~ „' 4) O Q.U,W A d V 4)C p.,o @ N :a N C:10 0 6" „ -.M QL. G c'flS S wY 1p 7 Q .0 N u �� N � o� cnu:u� � ' '° M paC0to to o 0�..m:C. � Ly.,C ��.s � yr'.7 s '":.:4) uC.d Omya6pw1Ze � t4e)G.d eoyN� SA�� 41iZlMt���_ ud� C — NLVlL0 E . oMM 0:2 _ b. C1� cm c .L tp.'wE 0.Q a 4) L pO.,•O0 O.O�in — +S' C� � C� 'a O.O y_S p� CD °n'a 0 Ora � 40) O m C b•C C Cpmil."N L O 0 YM N NM L CZ N G M L G? 9.. C Jb�C V 4).. O L C > 10j1'Jw.E CCft^". 61 = � V 7 `�~ N 6r ^. O L � E L F'.tl)m fJ�Lp�j.0 41 M ej C �O -.C L w:V . > V S L O e VOID C N.O V— 6 U� ,a�3 1p V > IM CL�M_ _� 47 m O a+ C V.n3 a p C 7 O N�r v �S Tj ,. aS. 1-: p p'� a� p O C C o Cw_0 ,yp Qi's'® ®. � 'C1C- 4- c:-= iI_ ,a � O > La« i0 C d 7 S C g S = S G SO L— L O 10 ".� C 4)a+ N G. c d N` !- .°: o p F W 31- _ 4)4- o 3 P.N`7 < ZNp tip> 4 1 i I Lewis Hi mesh Wig�ment Cs>:Irp. { d155Matlf[Sam4tnAvdnue/P.:1.8ox674/tipl�ndCa tttla4170517149W-W.71. R= i : . February 12, 1990 Mr.Brad Buller,Planning:Clrector ` City of Rancho Cucamonga P.O.Cox C07 Rancho Cucamonga,CA 91730 Re Church Street Median,Breaks Dear Brad: Before your request for Planning Commission direction on the above,I wanted to remind you of a couple things about the requested break between west Bien mid Spruce. I think I've mentioned these before;but here they are again. 1. This block,at just under 1300 feet,Is well over the 1,0W feet guideline we were given a few years back for allowance of jrild-block breaks,and is longer then the block east of Milliken,'which has a break. 2. it seems a bit-inconsistent for the city to deny this break while at the same time requiring that 20°110 of.each median be paved,to,conserve water. why not conserve water and improve traffio flow.as well by allowing,this,break? 3. Tract 13859 has been designed VMh,the.entry off Chuguh a-0 its main focus,and was Intended to refie&-.the entry to the future high-densit} project across Church. ` 4. If, as now seems likely(though of course the future market will dictate our direction),that high-density project south of Church were.to eventually be rezoned to office use,a median break on Church would become more essential,as both the Elm and Spruce frontages of that project are too short for any driveways at all, The business park currently under construction not only has three entries, but also a median break' in a shorter block of Church than the subiact. As our submission of plans for check hat already been delayed quite a while because of this dispute(We had hoped to have a permit by now),we hops you can:give us ft"all c -r _ s P Mr..Brad Buller l Page 2' ; after:Wcdn®sday's Commission msetsng �We"re anwa0s to compicte �r�urch F,etvueen Haven'and Milliken,andthis block is tho last dnk;., SS ..Cordially. , 1,. m omes age enitcorp. Don Thompson DMT✓vs �, t l 4 r � { i i .lt 1 , ------- CITY OF RANCHO CL'CAMONGA STAFF REFORT DATE: February 14, 11100 TO: Chainaan and ILmbers of'-tile Planning Commission FROM: 'Brad Duller, City G+1 anger, BY: Alan Warren, Assot:i'aie Planner SUBJECT: GOtJSIt?ERATIOPI ",REPil4fl3Ii�G:A,PORTION OF ROCHESTER-060E I. BACKGROUND AND _OISCUSSIOMSs- 'The Planning ';Division•has`received a rqquest froat r:. ry ng agar of"Leisure crafts to initiate the Procedure for consideration of changing 'the name of certain portions., of Rochester Avenue near_ its int-ersoctions with 6th Street. - (Refer,to enclosed letter,�:--veei*ar 26. 1989.) City. code Section 12.12.040 allows far the Pianning' Coimsissdon t® initiate the procedure by a Resolution of Intention. Mr. Augur 1+ill soon occupy, a space within 'a multi-tenant industrial building which has frontages on the "old" .and "new" portion of Rochester Avenue (refer to Exhibit 1). He is concprned over potential confusion regarding the addressing of-_two," Beets t�ith the same.name. The duplication of names was the result of the: city's realigning of Rochester-Avenue in anticipation of an I-15 Freaway,on/off'tamp'at 6th Street (per General Pi an and Industri l Specific 'Plan pre visions). When the roadway was rezonstructed, staff began. referring to the portion located between 4th and 6th Streets, and' closest to the freeway as, °Old" Rochester. The new alignment was referred to as "New".RcAester. All of the street name signs i..pvolved list, both new and :old roadways as "Rochester Avenue," A6 new street portion t"rminates as a stub street approximately. 600 feet, .south of 6th Street, and new industrial development south of the, Street terminus mould apparently preclude any further extension of the 44aw" Rochester. j With additional industrial development expected in the im:sediate area, the potential exists for similar street addressing $rotit. ;ns on surrounding'parct:ls. At the very least, the present situatian can be confusing to motorists. a v , PLAN ING CMIssjo 57AfiA REM PIT REHAAM PORTION$ Op ROC6fESTER AYEtiUE . February, U.;�tggo ; t Page R' After revieW' of the situatiori`by the`Planning Arid Traffic;sectians, the Fire'district, and- sheriff's Depai�r�erit _sevAral. alternativ6s; . all of wtrich would,,,improve the -situatic'tn, are Wq tts .of farther consideration by .,the.,-PIanning Coninissiort.: _ - ii.. RE»iE�;DATION; If ihe' A1_anrting 'Comrrissian' concurs" yith `the `concerns-;o r ..Aucgur and believes the issue should be studied further,:, it" �ivuid'` be apFaropri$te for' the Plsrining CoMr ssion to dieect�staff to� begin :th&process.tO formally:considar haprirg=a subJec� Fortiun.of'Rachest6rAAvenuie bX the,;adoptian.'Of the,attached Resolution. Res"liy submitted,, Brad er, City'P anner BB:AW,.Js u" Attachments; letter,from K".'Augur, Gecejffier° Exhibit 1 -"Arse h3ap Resolution of intention , r P.Q.BOX 5528,3061 MANIA STREET,RANCHO DOMINGUEZ,CA 90224,PNONF:(213)774.6610 FAX(213)632-1141 TM a Qsure r@/f s art and craft material since 1902 ECEIVE - Decembber 26, 1989 JAN" 9199D 6 1; City of Rancho Cucamonga 9320 Baseline . Rancho Cucamonga, Ca. 91730 Attention-. Brad Buller, City Planner ` RE3 9387_Rochester Avenue, P.C.`'No. 89-16253 s We have entered into an agreement,to.occupy. ,the.building currently designated as 9387 Rochester Avenue:,' Two &Wcinot y separate businesses will occupy this building. LeisureCraf_s Company will occupy that qW portion of the building facing i-15 and the older street currently designated as Rochester (old)rrVan, Aksn will occupy that portion.of the building facing west and front on a new strest.desi.gnated As I, Rochester (new?), This is terribly confusing and,*ver. a period of time'will present problems from a safety standpoint (fire or police in event of an emergency), as welA, as a ttyrribly tonfusing:'situat on for-customers, suppliers, transportation companies,' map maxers, etc. We expect to occupy these premises about March 15, 1990. We would hope that the City of'Rancho Cucamonga could rename one of these streets so that LeisureCrafte Company facing east would K+ve one street,name and, number and that Iran Aken Internati6nal fronting' the new streetwould have another street name atd"number.l Thanking you for your kind consideration in this matter, I am, sincerely zms , \ ing Au r pre t - i• to: F " r Co" Yon �+ Ok S. �� North Por Sic.; 18, ris, . AX4 • ROCHESTER m d x- _.:_ _ - u.•s as•itr tt •s rr Ms: fS'i.92. '..21T.2 �r fd1[. \�o • ' 4. N! (N ,r,•.,r e i aCL �C7! cl � .� -J' se6.zs. O i V• � NN ' O y i aJs u ,R N a' rn m � Qi � (� � N ►N N n�N e fyJ1 `I C.. �. (Q D o toQD ro N M {{ m r.d' 4• k M 4. N.ah O o® Q 3� 39F Be O S.Q6.zz gaJz ,�'1r ar. ""T _ ,3• t s ?� td e •� Cu C~e a a t �CD N % h ®s 7 a-ss. = I •L®B.Sr S?I•iS v 00 r 479.Z4 6 Z3r�+b rar. �2 ` 2 .Z4 I q p b to ,t. ICI'I°Y OF; MNCM.LCi1CAMONGA rra&Rcrxegze RMJAAJIAje(r . PLANNING EiMSION T:&: A ",NAP 2 SCALE: ,ti ; RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION DECLARING ITS .INTENTION TO INITIATE THE PROCESS TO RENAME PORTIONS OF ROCHESTER AVENUE IP£►tEDIATELY NORTH AND:SOUTH OF 67H STREET A. Recitals. (i) The City of Rancho Cucamonga has received a written request and justification froth Mr. Irving V. ;Augur of Leisure Crafts to'rename'a portion of Rochester Avenue south of 6th Street. At its regularly scheduled meeting on February, 14, 1990, the Planning Cormiission reviewed Mr. Augur's request and Justification. (iii) That the requested was reviewed pursuant to Section 12.17,.No of the Rancho Cucamonga ,City, Code. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rrnr:ho Cucamonga as follows: . 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part, A, of this Resolution are true and, correct. 2. "Based. upon 'information presented to this Commission at the_ above-referenced public meeting, including written ,and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this .Commission hereby specifically finds :as follows: (a) That 'Rochester Avenue currently intersects 6th Street at two locations as the result of new Rochester Avenue street improvements and the retention of the elder Rochester Avenue roadway. (b) That this situation does not comply'.with the City's street naming provisions of City Code Chapter 12.12 and should be corrected. . (c) That this Commission 'hereby'd'irects staff'ta. begin process to correct this street name problem, pursuant to City Code Sections 12.12.040 and 12:42.050, to change the names of portions of Rochester Avenue immediately to thelftrth and south of its intersection with 6th Street.. (d) That staff shall provide this Commission with street name alternatives,for its consideration during the formal street nataing'process. Aft3. The Deputy Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resa1i,tion. PLANNING COMMISSION'RESOLUTION Y.p: RENAMING PORTIONS OF ROCHESTEP, ,AVENUE a5' February 14,<1990 Page 2 APPROVED AND ADOPTED TNIS` 14TN DAY OF FEBRUARY 1990; PLANNING COM'AOISSION p�7tlE,`C1TY pF RANCHO CUCAMONGA { BY: Larry F. McNiel- airman ATTEST: araT6u I ler, ecre ry ,, I, Brad Buller, Secretary .of the Planning Omission of, the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify, iha't the foregding Resolution was -duly and regularly introduced', passed, and adopted ey the .Planning Commission of the City , Rancho Cucamonga,. at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 14th day of February;1990,by�,the fol.ioelng vote-ta-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: c"ISSIONERS:. ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: 4 � it