Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1990/08/22 - Agenda Packet.�' 0701 -0 08 -22 -90 PO Agenda I of 4 0 0 VIA Public Hearings _ The'following Item are public hearings in which 'concerned individuals may voice ,.their opinion of the rereted project. Please unit to;'be reYognized by .the ChaiMrn and address the &Vnission by stating your nmw,.,aru_T address. ��il1 Ouch opinions shall be limited to .5 mfnutC,`' pilr individual for each project, sign in after spealanc;� s. B. ENVIRONMENTAL.,ASSESSNENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMEWDMENT 90 - P11 �SIJDALPtACC ARCHiTEGTS - A request to amen' -OIB the General 'Plan Lan(j Lv+ e: Map from Office to Medium Residential (8 -14 dwelling units per acre) for 3.56 acres of land located at the southeast corner of Archibald Avenue and Church Street.. The ;City will also Low consider Neighborhood Commercial' and'' .(tedium Residential as alternative designations APN: 1077 - 332 -26.. C. 1NVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AMENDMENT 90 =02 - PITASSIIDALMAU ARCHITECTS - A regamst.' to amend the Devr :)opmemf " Districts Majr frmi "OP" (OfficelProfessional "l to "M" (Mediva Residential, 8 -14' dwelling units per acre) for 3.56 acras of.land 'located at the saut,reast corner of Archibald Avenue and - Church' Street. The City will also consider "NC" (Neighborhood Coninercial) and "LM " (Low Medium Residential) as alternative designations - APN: 1D77- 332 -26. i D. ENVIRONMENTAL'ASSESSMEtT AND TENTATIVE TRACT' NO. 14548 - PATSCHECK /HAGKBARTN - A .residential subdivision and : -` Design - Review to convert 328 apartment units to condominiums on 29.51 acres of land in the Low- Medium (4 -8 dwelling units per acre) and Medium (8 - -14 dwelling units- per acre) zone of the Etiwandi Specific Plan, located' at the northeast corner of Etiwanda Avenue and Arrow Highway - APN: 229-04I -I1. E. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 78 -03 AMENDMENT - SAM`S PLACE --A request to extend the hours of operation for an ex sting bar and restaurant,`Iocated at. the northwest corner of Carnelian and 19th Street in the Neighborhood Commercial District - APN: 201- 811 - 55,_58, 59 and 54. F. MODIFICATION, TO .DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 89 -14 - AMPAC JNC. A request to modify conditions of approval relating to _ the timing of on- and off- site improvements* for a previously. y approved project consisting of two manufacturing buildings , tot aling 26,000 square feet on 39.3 acres of land in the heavy Industrial Qi "strict; . Subarea 15 of the, -!ndw trial Specific Plan, le -ated at' 121677 Arrow RouV1 A,�fN: 229 - 121 -15. _ AMW r � I G. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE 'PERMIT SO-23 -; ALLMARK. INC. - The request to establish a f j, building ,contractor's office and yard within the,;;. 'existing Sixth Street Industrial Park on 4.74 acres of . land in the General Industrial District,- Subarea 5 a4 the Industrial :Specifft Plan, located at 10096 Sixth' StreE.t - APN- 209 -221 40. , H, REN, EST FOR RECONSIDERATION OF A MODIFICATION TO TRACT' 13273 - LEWIS HOMES - A request-to modify a condition Q ;�- ` approval for a previously approved and recorded one-lot'" tract for 256 condoKinium units - ,within the Medium -High Residential District (14-24 dwelling units per acre) of °} k the Terra Nitta Planned: Community;' located ;at the southeast corner, of Milliken Avenue and Mountain View Drive'- APR: -227- 151- -13. VII. Old Business I. 'REGIONAL'11RAILS VIII. New Business J. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 90 -03 -' SPENCER AND JONES - The develop ent of w building 1 contractors office and warehouse,,, 15,,638 square feet on 2.18 acres of land in t�f,i General ,,.Industrial District, Subarea 13:0 the Industrial Spe4tffic'Plan, located at the southeast corner oP 6th Street and Rochester~ Court - APR: 229- 26304.,` j K. SHARED PA °KING STUDY FOR FOOTHILL VILLAGE, - NU WEST j COMPAIES - A L request to allow shared parking Within a neighborhood commercial center at the southeast corner. of Foothill Boulevard and Hellman .,,Avenue - -.- APR: 208- 251-58. IX. Director's Reports L. 1 COUNTY .REFERRAL 88 -05 - 'UNIVERSITY .CRESJ - - Masten- Tentative Tracts, Final Development Plan Map, and various Tentative Tract baps for 1,293 single :,family residential units, 53 acres of commercial, 4,5E acre park site, and 7.17 acre school site for University Crest Planned - development Proposal on 425.16 acres of ? land located north of iiIghland Avenue, south of utility corridor, east of Day Creek Channel, with portions west' of Hanle Avenue and y portions west of Etlwanda Avene.e _ within the` City's Sphere of Influence. The proposal-:- also includes the dedication as peemanent"open space q, 67.5 acres located within the national Fdrest.' X- fliCommission Business y S:R 'MAP .i rj ' �A % 4 ano sr m an an sr .® 1 w dolp y .w so 9NRi•0® IYfalwlTiQYAL 6f!'i�t; OM OF HAMM 4`UCAW* " CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STLFF REPORT DATE: August 22, 1990 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commissioi-i FROM: Brad Culler, City Planner BY: Beverly Nissen, :Associate Planner SUBJECT: TIME EXTENSI.ON F91 TENTATIVE TRACT 13564 - AKINS - A request for an e.tension of a previously_ approved county tract map consisting of 382 lots on 117 acres of land, Located north of Summit Avenue and east of Wardman Bullock Road - APN: 226 - 082 -24, 25, and 26. I. BACKGROUND: Tentative Tract 13564 was approved by the County of San Bernardino on August 24, 1987, and revised by the County Planning Commission on November 17, 1988. It iAcludes 5 phases nn Ill acres. An Annexation Agreement was approved by the Rancho l Cucamonga City Council and entered into as of January 7. 1980. According to Section 3.7 of the Development Agreement, Tract 13564 will ex-,ire on August; 24, 1990. "This section further states that the City will agree to extend the map two years (to August 24, 1992) upon request from the applicant: Commission policy has been to grant extensions in twelve -month increments. " II. ANALYSIS: Staff has analyzed the proposed time extension and has compared the proposal with the development criteria outlined in the Development and Annexation Agreement. Based upon this review, staff determined that the project meets ° the requirements of the Development Agreement and-Annexation Agreement. III. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: The Commission must make all of the following findings in order to approve this applications A. There have been no significant changes in the Land Use Element of the General Plan, Development Code, or character of the — area whtsh would cause the project to become. inconsistent or non - conforming. B. The granting of an extension would not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. IV. RECOMMENDATION: Staff 'recommends that the Planning Commission approve a one -year time extension for Tentative Tract 13564 through adoption of the attached Resolution. ITEM A f WILLUUM Cf Y0FFtMCH0GUCAM0NG1 pLANNINC, CiWS!ow 2131.0102 UNDGREN M JUN 3 Civil Engineers • Zand Surce}nrS May 30, 1990 Ms, Beverly Nissen City of Rancho Cucamonga 9340 Baseline Rd. Rancho Cucamonga; CA 91730 Subject: Extensioi 1 of `Pena 1ve Tract Map No 13564 Dear Beverly n ^. T.rr�rw`a r tba�yyy��. r7�f��C . Pursuant to Page 16, Section 37 of the Developmeat.Agreement, for the ai vereferenceil project, t I am re guesting a two year extern ion to Tentatrve'f�'act 1VTap No. 13564_. 7Cve enclosed the $62.00 processing fee r x - , Please � me if you have�any questions regarding this matter, ' .f„ K yz r: ' y. .. s x.C'h'F++.+Yk.rbn.i"�, }:. }.✓ .-h a.i••�+ arpe. :. _ .. we r.+.•'Ai •d. n:: +-t, ..Y wP+N�73C wXafaw>• -V ."� �.aN!c Y ,,+iMi as FUSCOE, VVg,LIAMS, Lips DGREN & SHORT IN x. 5 .t. r . alb- -- � •. lui G Ower, Pi. Project Manager _ `1 i JCOkec Enclosure I CW. Kew. ME= { Sonny Geary f( I i i 11651 Srerlin� Aivnite • mire A • Rimrside, Cat ifarnia 92503 • Phone (714) j54•0161 FAX F "1 #) 353•x1810 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMM_; SIGN THE CITY OF RAR;HO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPRDVING THE TIME EYIENSION FOR TRACT 13564 LOCATED NORTH OF SUMMIT AVENUE r±fr EAST OF WARDMAN BULLOCK ROAM AND MiAKING FINDING$ IN iUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 226- 082 =24, 25 and 26. WHEREAS, a request has been filed for a time extension for the above - described project, pursuant to Section 3.7 of the Deveiopment Aereemer for -act 135640 WHEREAS, the County ,-Planning Commission conditionally approved {'the above- described subdivision on August 24, 1988- SECTION 1: The Rancho Cucamonga,_ Planning Commission has made the following findings; A. Tha, prevailing economic conditions have caused a dic-,Yressed market, climate for development of the project= . B. That current economic, marketing and inventory conditions make it 'onreasovable to develop the project at this time. C. That strict enforcement of the conditions of approval 'regarding expirations would ; not be consistent with the intent of the Development Code, D. That the granting of said time extension Will not be detrimental to the P -blic health, safety, or welfare or materially inouriaus to properties or improvements in the vicinity. SECTION 2: The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission hereby grant!r a time extension for: Project oplKant pi Exration Tract 13564 Fuscoe, Williams, August 24, 1991 Lingren & Short PLANNINGx COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. TIME EXTENSION /TR 13564 - AKINS - August 22, 1990 ifi\ Page 2 APPROVED AND ADOPTED- THIS'22ND DAY OF AUGUST 1990. . PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF'RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Larry. T. McNiel, Chairman ATTEST• • Brad Buller, Secretary I, Brad Buller, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Ri \;ho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly end regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Plannirg- Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 22nd day of August 199P, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS': 4 i �t _ _r CITY OF RANCHO �UCAMONGA ST "F REPORT .Y DATE: August 22, 1990 "* TO- Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission p FROM: Brad Buyer, City -H annex 1 BY: Alan Warren, Associate Planner SUBJECT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 90 -01B - PITASSI /DALMAU ARCHITECTS A request to amend tie General. Plan L,ikno Use Map from Office to Medium Residential (8 -14 dwelling' units per acre) for 3.56 acres of land located at the southeast corner of Archibald 'Avenue and Church Street. The City will also consider Neighborhood Commercial and Low MediurR Residential as alternative designations APN: 1077- 3., -26. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT. AND DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AMENDMENT 90 -02 - PITASSI /DAL U ARCHITECTS A request to amend the Development Districts Map from "UP" (Office /Professional) to "M" (Medium Residential, 8 -14 dwelling units per _; e) for 3.56 acres of land located at the southeast corner of Archibald Avenue and Church Street. The City will also consider "NC" (Neighborhood Commercial) and "LM" (Low Medium Residential) as alternative designations APN: 1077- 332 -26. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTIJNc A. Surrounding Land Use and 'Zoning.- 1 North - Sing'" family residential; older homes developed at I a lowe- density than allowed South - Residential; apartments /vacant Medium Residential l East Residential; condominiums, Medium Residential Nest - hest side of Archibald Avenue, single family residential; Low Density. B. General Plan Designationsr Project Site Office ! North - Low'Residential (2 -4 dwelling units per acre) South - Medium Residential (8 -14 dwelling units per ac�el East - MWum Residential (8 -14 dwelling units per acre) Nest - Low Residential (2 -4 dwelling units per acre) 4 I. ITEMS B 5 C ;. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT GPA 90 -010 - DOA 90 -02 PITASSIJDALMAU ARCHITECTS August 22, 1990 Page 2 C. Site Caaracteristics: The site is currently vacant and the land slopes to the southeast with a 1 to 2 percent overall grade. Several elevation changes occur- with sloped bank conditions of 2 to '3 feet high on the site. There is no evidence of erosion or unstable soils. Vegetation consists of native grasses and weeds with no trees existing on the site. There are no cultural, historic or special scenic aspects to the site. II. BACKGROUND AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT; This land use amendment request is identical to GPA: 89 -02C which was before the Planning Commission late in 1989. At that time, the area's school districts indicated that there would be significant impact on their ability to provide services as a result of increased student enrollment from the planned residential project. The applicant was unable to provide adequate mitigation measures for this impact and the application was formally withdrawn from consideration in January, 1990. Staff has reviewed the Initial Study, Part I, for the new application, and the responses from the school districts and completed the Environmental. Checklist, Part II of the Initial Study, and except for potential school impaction, has found that no other significant adverse environmental impacts will occur as a result of the proposed General Plan Amendment 90 -018 and Development District Amendment 90 -02. In an effort to mitigate potential school impacts, staff advised the applicant to contact the affected school districts and resolve the issue of potential school impaction. Staff indicated to the applicant, that, before proceeding with the subject application, staff would need to obtain a letter from the affected school districts (Central and Chaffey Joint Union High School districts) _ indicating potential school impacts can be mitigater'.. On April 18, 1990, staff received a letter from the Central School District indicating mitigation of the potential school impact will be resolved upon execution of the attached Mitigation Agreement between the Central School District and Jeffrey Burum, the developer. The subject Mitigation Agreement has been executed, therefore, impaction has been resolved. (See Exhibit "D "). On April 20, 1990, staff received a letter from Chaffey Joint Union High School District indicating potential school impacts generated from the proposed land use change. cal be mitigated through the execution of an agreement to enter into a 'Community Facilities district (CFD). The applicant has agreed to Qnter into a Mitigation Agreement with the subject school district promising to annex into the Community Facilities District CFO) thus extinguishing any potential impaction. (See Exhibit "E ). *C- �2. 1 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT GPA 90 -018 - ODA 90 -02 - PITASSI /OALMAU ARCHITECTS August 22, 1990 Page 3 Therefore, adegjate mitigation toward resolution of the potential school impaction has been reached, ttus enabling staff to make the determination in favor of preparation of a Negative Declaration. III. LAND USE ANALYSIS: A. Apsroeriateness of the existing "Office" designation - The site is bordered on the north by a secondary arterial (Church Street) and on the west by Archibald Avenue, a major arterial with traffic volumes in excess %f 22,500 Yphicle trips .a day at the intersection. The interior lot lines abut Medium multi - family land uses. Generally, the location of offices adjacent to multi- family units is an acceptabie land use relationship when the offices form a buffer from the noise and activity of the arterial streets. Offices are viewed as only a .slightly more intense land use than multi - family residential and therefore, compatible to each other when appropriate buffering techniques are employed when developed. The Develepment Code further states that, "site development standards are designed to make such uses (in the "OP" district) relatively ompatible with residential uses." The issue of dispersed office sites was raised late in 1986 by the City Council. As a result, a General Plan Amendment application (GPA 86 -03E) gas initiated by the City Council to change the land use category, for this site to Medium Residential. At the public hearing, a representative of the property owner spoke against the proposed change and the Planning Commission recommended denial of the amendment. The City Council upheld the recommendation of the Plannine, Commission and the Office designation remained on the site. The General Plan states, however, "The intent of this land use category (Office /ProYessional) is to prevent the proliferation of individual isolated offices: Since the closest commercial /office area to this site is about 114 mile to the south, the above- mentioned General Plan provision is not compatible with the existing office designation. B. Appropriateness of multi -famii uses ses in the area - The close proximity of existing single family and multi - family uses vre tints no inherit land use ceaflicts for this proposal. There are 64 units in the apartment complex bordering this site on the south, multiple family condominiums to the east, and primarily single family residents to the north and west. PLANNING CommisSION STAFF REPORT GPA 90 -01B - DDA 90 -02 - `PITASSIIDAL14AU ARCHITECTS Au;lust 22, 1990 Page 4 v t Last year, the City Council expressed concern regarding the increase in multi- family developments. After reviewing a study which predicted a 65 percent single family /35 percent multi=family housing mix at buildout, members of the Council determined tha;' goal of 75 percent /25 percent mix might be more appropr4ce o maintain a predominately single family community character. The City Council drected staff to investigate the potential of ensuring a 75 percent SF /ZS percent MF or 70 percent SF /30 percent MF ratio,a buildout. A Council workshop of the matter was,. held on August G, 1990. All of the scenarios staff presented for review involved "down zoNing" of much of the existing multi- family, development to a next lower density. No definite direction was given by the Council, but additional information was requested and another workshop was tentatively planned for in two monthsv To put ' he proposed change of 3.56 acres to Medium multi- family development in -perspective ,with' the immeuiate area and the tat.1 City, this amendment would: - Increase the multi - family acreage it -the General City ' ff planning area (not inclutling the planned communities or Etiwanda) by .41 percent and by .18 percent in the total C.i ty. - Increase the multi- family units at buildout i<; the General City area by -45 percent and try .20 percent in the total City.` The increase to the - existing and submitted multi - family units would be .52 percent in the General city and .34 percent in the total City. - Increase` the undeveloped multi - family acreage in the General' City area by approximately 3..3 percent and bit .52 percent for the total City. - In staff's "across the :board" 75 percent MF /8 percen SF unit reduction scenario, the .added units of this proposal >would increase the multi - family unit count on ` the un^ommitted vacant land by 31 percent in the General City and by 24 percent in the total City. In the 70 ; percent SF /30 percent MF scenario, this,proposal_Would increase the mufti- family unit count on the uncoirrtitted % Jacant land by 6.8 percent in the +Generei' City and' by _ ,88 percent in the total City. This proposal,, and most eny proposal for additio:�al iitulti- family land, can affe. t how we obtaic a 75 percent SF /25 percent MF ratio as liuildout. If a 70 percent Sr 130 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF 'REPORT - GPA 90 -016 DD:A 9(1-02 PITASSI /DALMAU ARCHITECTS Augr :t 22, 1990" Page 5 percent MF mIx is pursued, staff does not believe this proposal will significantly affect our ability to obtain the ratio. Staff considers this amendment to be a very minor increase in the multi- family development in he im ante area and insignificant to the total City: Therefore staff believes that the Planning Commission's decisions should primarily rest with the issues relating to compatible land use relationships. C. Conformance with the General,,Plan and Develo ment Code - The Medium Density 8 -14 dwelling units per acre classification allows a wide range of living accommodations r`ang'ing from conventional single family units and mobile homes to townhouses. Building intensity at the lower end of the Medium Density range would be appropriate .adjacent to Low and Very. Low Density Residential areas and the housing types rommoo 'to this lower end of the range would likely be characteri2ed by detached single family housing - units.. Building intensity at the mist or higher end of the range may be more appropriate along transit routes and major and secondary thoroughfares, and near activity center's. Development at this level of intensity wou'',normally be semi- detached or attached units. Medium Dens) - �dential alv) serves as a buffer between Low Density k, ial areas and ,higher density, comreercial activities and ate,.. of greater traffic. and noise levels. The location of Medium Density Residential at-this site would not exhibit any land use conflicts witty existing general Plan provision. D. Consideration of alternative designations - To provide the Commission with alternatives to the existing and proposed designations, staff has included an analysis of categories . sim" ar. in character to those under discussion. Kr this purpose, staff "bracketed" the land uses with higFier ir.._nsity on the office side and low intensity on the residential side as follows: r Neighbt.rhaod Commercial Deneral Plan Development Code - INC" (Neighborhood Commercial`) i PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT GPA 90 -OIB - DDS; 90 -02 - PITASST /DALHAU ARCHITECTS; August 22, 1990 Page 6 This category include: shopping centers and convenience commercial clusters that provide essential reta4l goods and services to residents in the immediate area. The Development Code standards are "intended to make such uses compatible to and harmonious with the character of the surrounding residential or less intense land use area." Because of the limited of the subject property a major tenant like a super ,. would probably not be feasible-, therefore, a commercial designation would lead to the (development of a convenience type strip center. Since there is a major commercial area just 214 mile to the south on Foothill Boulevard, staff does not believe there is a need for a neighborhood commercial development at this site. General Flan - Low - Medium (4 -8 dwelling units per acre). Development Code - 'LM" Low- Medium (4 -8 dwelling units per acre). The C —aneral Plan states, "the low - Medium category is characterized by residential densities some..ttat lower than the Medium Density group. The housing types permitted at the 4 -8 dwelling units per acre include typical ;tingle family, single family zero lot line, duplex and under certain , conditions up to 405 toxnhouse type units. This category d would be appropriate within loch density areas xrj encourage greater' housing diversity without changing the siag�le family character of the surrounding residential area The designation of the site to "LM "' instead of "M" would reduce the maximum potential unit count from 49 to 28. The character of residential portion of the block or, which the site is located has been established as Medium 'Ly the _ General Plan and Development Code. Therefore, if the site is deemed acceptable for residential uses, it would seem appropriate to continue the Medium Density character of the abutting area to the south. If the Planning Commission believes either of these alternative designatins is more appropriate, a final determination should be withheld !until staff can provide an environmental analysis for the preferred alternative. IV. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: Based on the fac7,s and conclusions listed above,, staff believes the Planning Commission can make-the findings regarding General Plan, Development Code, and land use provisions favorable to this application as follows: b 1. The property is suitable for the uses permitted in the \V\ proposed land use and Development District designation f PLANNING COMMISSION S%7 REPORT GPA 90 -01& DDA 90-02 - PITPSSIJDALMAu ARCHITECTS August 22, 1990 Page 7 in terms of access and size as evidenced by the site exceeding the City's minimum lot size requirements, and coazipatibility with. existing surrounding land uses by the site's being bordered on the east and south 'by parcels with the same land use designations; and 2. The proposed amendments are in conformance with the s General' .Plan and Developmennt Code ,due to the site's capacity to promote the goals and objectives for residential development. V. CORRESPONDENCE The1e items hoe been advertised as a public hearing i:i►e Inland,.'lallev_ Ozi-V Bulletin newspaper. the property has been posted ark notices nave been sent to all property owners within 900 fleet of the prf$ect sIte. VI. RECOMMENDATION: Staff. reccra ends that tae Planning Commission adopt the ettac.ed Resolutions recommending apprtval of General Plan Amendmer:G'90 -016 and Development District Amendment 90 -02 to the :'Ity Council: and recommending _issuance of a Negative Declar - ion. thereby, allowing the`designationr. to be changed from Office to Medium Residential. Respectfully submitted, l i� Brad Buller f City Planner i BB:AH :mig: Attachments, Exhibit "A" - .General Pla►� and Development District Location Map Exhibit "32" - Area Map Exhibit °C" - Site Plan f Exhibit nO" - Letter from Central School District f B:xhibit "E" - Letter frnn Chaffey Joint union High School` District - Resolution - General Plan Amendment Resolution - Development District Amendment `=, - -� -- .. 111 law IL T M� 1 F i CITY OF RANCHO ci3G`AmONGA ` rm4. GPA au ba 90• 01 PLANNING DIVISION I ME GPA /VDA Locattnn M dps N EHEM °A• SCALE: "i LOW Rs�S. 2 -4 MU AG' LOW REST , 2 -4 D.U./AC DE 1ST: L. _ VACAMT Sill L FAMILY DEV. DIST: S.1:. _ R 1 ENCES RES. _SINGLE FAMILY RES. CHURCH t w CHURCH B � Church St. "i Mal L U CA a ii a w 1 I ` ILLL..Ip _st 2sds i m { VIA i se Ca < ge • OF_ s _ RL .,rte —T ��i !€#�1 � � 1•- e Z �? - -- 0 EE� �p Me : s W CO. = ADMINISTRATION ..�. Sonja . ;,'kites. Central School District Ingrid ldagel - in) <purt <uppfirendenr 9457 Foothill Blvd. j Rancho Cucamonga, California 477307 (774) 98947547 aw nY, 4nx s April 16, 1990 Sharonf i. Nagel ca €ii— �i;YOFNIi�1Qaar City of Rancho Cucamonga CrAw rR Community Development Department Planning Division APR 1$ Attn: Jeff M. Gravel, Assistant Planner M f.. P. O. Sox 607 RanJho Cucananga, CA 41724 RE: - irgnmen al Assessment and Tentative Tra= 14875 (City. cenera� F. ;an nd_meat U_ -=) A residential subdivision of a 36 unit single family attached project consisting of 18 i duplex buildings and one cabana /pool house on 3.556 acres of j land in the Medium Residential District {8 -12 dwelling Ur,41tc {f per acre) , located on the southeast corner of Church and Archibald Dear Mr. Gravel•. In response to your letter dated April 10, 1"c, T a'a submitting to you: 1) Central school District's Department of Real Estate School. Facility Report. this report is submitted to anyone requesting information as to the availability of school - '- ,cilities and we request that the entire report ie' - hclud3d in any disclosure required by State and lgcal laws. 2) A cagy of the Mitigation Agreement. Between central School District and Jeffrey Burum, the Developer upon execution of the mitigation agreement and payment of 876,990 mitigation, Pee, the Central School District will not oppose developmrht of the project or seek to impose other forms of mitigat.on and• will immediately provide the City with any docume:ttation necessary to certify that adequate school facilities will exist for the project and that any adverse impact that the project a,1y have on elementary schools has been satisfactorily mitigated. Sincerely. gin® In id Voge Assistant Superintendent, Business Services c: Sonja Yates, Superintendent Enclosures Debra it. SAw 2kh" A. Weer Mama 4Ite en, _ DAM L ft.VA Aaarew 0.Tartar - CIT� OF-RANCHO 'CU- ITFIw. Gru U- 01118=4 � Fi.A1 NING I W- SIOIi 1°P1R.E: fth" Wit. Letter N IEXHIB'M '*W SCALE: Chaffey Joint Union High School District 211 WEST FIFTH STREET, ONTARIO, CALIFORMA ➢1762.1698 • (774)998.8511 f 6VKi44lTRNCFMT OF BCNObI'i ASlOGU1W.=booFNT D6AADtJ87N1ET5 : KOMM E.IOnbr ,q�ntt been E. Steen Bali 0. "M Bn r_ lawn Aeymo,M J. Servo . ASSATANt$UFEWr-40FxT Chr4a J. Une1q - flttM! w. NbM April 17, 1990 :I'tYOfANN'Nt90�` a1bNps�Np7R>r':in• APR ZCi 19�D py CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Planning Dept. P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 ATTN: Jeff Gr,ivel RE: General Plan Amendment 94 -GIS Subjegt property is within the Ltixanda High ",*c'6,101 attendance area. Etiwanda High School is 'severely impacted; line to change the land use designation from office to residenS;al potentially exacerbates the prublem; however, the developer& of this property have entered into a mitigation agreement- with tha District, promising to annex into the Community Facilities District (CFO) the Chaffey District is forming to fund a now high school, and therefore, have no opposition ^9 the proposed' general plan amendment. Sincerely, STEPHEN L. BUTTERS Director Business services - SLB /sb eb100tI; "uia eaw . CMarFtt'aoutttw,UnoN . CwA[r . tirnu+w . MON1CtAM .: btirMO • V4tEY v!N f ITY OF -RANCHO �CUCAMONGA MV EPA "'C's 22A I'LAPJNiPdG i3M5ION` '1TlT.E: sohaor ®tsi. La +?rr . N i. EXHIBM •E• SCALE. RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION LF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 90 -01B, REQUESTING TO AMEND THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP FROM OFFICE TO MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (8 -14 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) FOR 3.56 ACRES OF LAND, LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF ARCHIBALD AVENUE AND CHURCH STREET, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APR 1077- 332 -26. z A. Recitals. 1 (i) Pitassi /Delmau ArchItActs has filed an application for General Plan Amendment No. 90 -016 bs described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this , Resolution, the subject General Plan Amendment is referred to as "the applNat;ooi" (ii) On August 22, 1990 the Vlanning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application.. (iii) All legal prerequisities to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows,. 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part "A ", of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced public nearing on August 22, 1990, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: (a) The application applies to-- r;roximately 3.56 acres of land, basically a recUngular configuration, located at the southeast corner of Archibald Avenue and Church Street and is presently vacant. Said property is currently designated as Office; and (b) The property to the north of the subject site is designated Low Residential and is single family units. The property to the west is designated Low Residential and is single family units. The Property to the east is designated Medium Residential and is residential condominiums. The property to the south is designated Medium ResIdential and is residential apartments/vacant. _ F - PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. GPA 90 -019 - PiTASSI /DALMAU ARCHITECTS August 22, 1990 Page 2 (c) This amendment does not conflict with the Land `•Use - Policie_ of the General Plan and will provide for development, within the district, in a manner consistent with the General Alan and with related development,. and (d) This amendment does promote the goals and objectives of the Land Use element; and (e) This amendment would roi: be materially io:jurious or detrimental to the adjacent properties and would not have a significant impact on the environment nor the surrounding propertlF$$, and that issuance of P; Negative Declaration is r?commended. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during, the above - referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows; (a) That the subject property is suitable for the uses permitted in the proposed General Plan Laid Use Designation and development district in terms of access, size, as evidenced by the site's exceeding the City's minimum lot size requirements, and compatibility with existing surrounding land uses, as evidenced by the site's being bordered on the east and south by parcels of land with the same land use designation; and (b) That the proposed amendment would not have significant impacts on the environment nor the surrounding properties as evidenced by the conclusions and findings' of the Initial Environmental Study and the implementation of mitigation agreements between the property owner, and the Chaffey Joint Union High School District and the Central School District; and I (c) That the proposed amendment is in conformance with the General Plan and Development Coee due to the site's capacity to promote the goals and objectives for residential development. 4. This Commission hereby finds that the project has been reviewed and considered for compliance with the Californi4 Environmental Quality Act of; 1970 and, further, this Commission hereby recommends issuance of a mitigated Negative Declaration. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions, set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, and 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereb,, resolves that pursuant to Section 65850 to 65855 of the California Government Code, that the Plam.:ng Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga hereby reeommaixis approval on the 22nd day of August 1990 of General Plan Amendment No.. 90 -018. 6, The Deputy Secretary of this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. e PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. GPA 91'_01B > PITASSIJDALMAU ARCHITECTS` August 22, 1990 Page 3 APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 22ND DAY OF AUGUST, 1990. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE r ;TY OF RANCHO CUCAMUNGA BY:_ Larry T. McNiel, Chairman ATTEST: Brad Buller, Secretary I, Brad Buller, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereky certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, a':.a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 22nd.day of August, 19'90, by the following vote -to -wit AYES: COMMISSIONERS; NOES: COMMISSIONERS: Ask ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: i `l i RESOLUTIOii NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMIS.ION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AMENDMENT 90 -02, REQUESTING TO AMEND THE DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS MAP FROM "OP" OFFICEIPROFESSIONAL TO "M" (MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL, 8 -14 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) FOR 3.56 ACRES OF LAND, LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF ARCH:BALD AVENUE AND CHURCH STREET, AND MAKING FINDINGS-, SUPPORT THEREOF - APN4 1077- 332 -26. rl A. Recitals. 9 (i) Pitassi /Delmau Architects has filed an application for Development District Amendment No. 90 -02 as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Development District Amendment is referred tows "the application." (ii) On August.22, 1990, the Planning Commissira of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed pub-tic hearing on the application and isezued Resolution No,, recommen6ing to the City Coop Y that the associated General Plan Amendment No, 90-015 be approved. (iii) All legal preoquisities to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. 1 B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE', it is hereby found, determined and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This 1'owission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Rt.. -; 1s, Part "A ", of.this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above - referenced public gearing on August 22, 1990, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission t:czeby specifically finds as follows: (a) The application applies to approximately 3.56 acres of land, basically a rectangular configuration, located at the southeast corner of Archibald Avenue and Church Street and is presently vacant. Said property is currently designated as "OP" (Office /Professional); and i (b) The property to the north of the subject site is designated "L" (Loy Residential, 2 -4 dwelling units per acre) and is developed E with single family residences and a church. The property to the west is designated "L" (Low E f _: PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. ODA 90 -02 - PITASSI /DALMAU ARCHITECTS August 22, 1990 Page 2 Residential, 2 -4 dwelling units per acre) and is developed with single fami% residences. The property to the east is designated "M" (Medium Resden" ` 8 -14 dwelling units per acre) and is developed with residential condominiums. The property to the south is designated "M" (Medium Residential, 8 -14 dwelling units per acre) and is developed with residential apartments and is partially undeveloped. (c) This amendment does not conflict with the Lard Use Policies of the General Plan and will provide for development, within the district, in a manner consistent with the General Plan and with related development; and (d) Thii amendment does promote the goals an3 objectives of the Land Use element. and (e) This amendment would not be materially injurious or detrimental to the adjacent properties and would not have a significant impact on the environment nor the surrounding properties and that issuance of a Negative Declaration is recommended. - 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: (a) That the subject property is suitable for the uses permitted in the propom development district in terms of access, size, as evidenced by the site's exceeding the city's :minimum lot size :•equirements, and compatibility with existhg surrounding land uses, as evidenced by the site's being bordered on the east and south by parcels of land with the same land use designation; and (b) That the proposed amendment would not have significant impacts on the environment nor the surrounding properties as evidenced by the conclusions and findings of the Initial Environmental Study 'and the implementation of mitigation agreements between the property owner and the Chaffey Joint Union High School District and the Central School District; and (r_) That the proposed amendment is in conformance with the General Plan and Devel.ppment Codc due to the site's capacity to promote the yaals and objectives for residential development. 4. This Commission hereby finds that the project has "en reviewed and considered for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 and, further, this Commission hereby recommends issuance of a mitigated Negative Declaration. Y-C 1-7 PLANNING,commISSION RESOLUTION NO. DDA 90 -32 - Pinssvr LMAU ARCHITECTS - ';August 22, 1990 Page 3' S. Based upon fiche findings and .nclusions set forth in paragraphs_ 1, 2, and 3, and 4 above,, this;,:Commission hereby resolves that pursuant,--to Section 65850 to 65855 of the California Government Cade, that the PIaj16NAg Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga hereby recormends approval on the 22nd day of August 1990 of Development District Amendment Na. 90 -02. 6. Tfie Deputy Secretary of this Commission shall certi fy t5 the adoption of t.ias Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 22ND DAY OF AUGUST, 1990, r PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Larry T. McNiel , Chairman ATTEST: Brad Buller,. Secretary I, Brad Buller, Secretary of the Planning Commission of t`he City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hPrpby certify that the foregoing Resolut!lon was duly and s regularly introduced, .passed, and adopted. by the Planning Commission 'if the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting' of the Planning Cowission held ' on the 22na iay of August,, 1990, by the following vote -to -kit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: i r ',e5r it ' '1 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ANh, STAFF REPORT i DATE: August 22, 1990 , i Chairman and Members 'of the Planning Commission i FPjJM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY; Jerry- Guarracino, Assistant Planner i SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 14548 PATSCMECKlNACKBARTH -'A residential subdivision and Design ,+ Review to convert 328 apartment units to condominiums on 29.51 acres of land in the Low- Medium (4 -8 dwelling units ,i per acre) and M2dtuL: (8 -14 dwelling units per acre) zone of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located at the nurt:aea0 corner of Etiwanda Avenue and Arrow Highway - APi: 229- 041 -11. I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action Requested: Approval of Subdivision flap, Site P1w11: garage elevations, and issuance of a Negative Declaration for the conversion of 328 apartment units to condominiums. B. Project Density '11.12 dwelling units per acre. C;. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning. North - Single Family-Residential; Low'Residential. (2 -4 dwelling units per acre) South - Vacant; ISidustrial Specific Plan Subarea. 8 (General Industrial) East - Edison Easement & Vacant; Open Space & Low - Medium Residential (4 -8 dwelling units per acre) Nest - Vacant; Industrial Specific Plan Subarea $'(General Industrial) 0. Gen?ral Plan Designations: Project Site - Low - Medium Residential (4 -8 dwelling units per acre) on the r;Qrth, Medium Residential (8 -14 dwelling units per acre on the south. North - Low Residential (274 dwelling units per acre) South - General Indus¢riRi ': East - Fiood Control/Utility Corridor Low-Medium Residential (4 -8 dwelling units per acre) West - General Industrial r ITM 1) PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT EA &,TT 454$ - PATSCHECK/HACKBARTH August 22, ,-Z-4g0 Page -c E. Site Ch.-- The is developed teristics: site presently as'`an apartmr complex consisting of 8 -plex and 12 -plex buildings arrant.,, :round a large meandering central open space. The 328 units are a mix of 80 one - :bedroom, 160 two- bedroom, and 88 three - bedroom units. The smaller 8 -plex buildings are located on the northerly portion of the site designated as Low- Medium °%sidential to provide transition of density from the adjacent single-family tract to the north. Access to the site is provided via a main entrance from Etiwanda Avenue with secondary access provided from 'Arrow Route. Both eitrances are gated and the project is completely enc'osed by a combination of masonry walls and wrought iron fencing. Project amenities include two recreational buildings (including kitchens, meeting rooms, and weight vooms), two pools, two spas, sand volleyball courts basketball court, tetherball court, and two tot lots.. The units, which were completed in November of 1988, feature security systems with a panic button, washer /dryer hookups, central air conditions ^g, and satellite television hookups. Toe utilities, with the exception of water, are _ all individually metered. Also, each unit has a private enclosed balcony or patio. F. Parking Calculations: Number Parking Spaces Spaces I Of Units Ratio Reouired P�rokided 80 - One Bedroom I.51unit ".O 120 160 - Two Bedroom 1.8 /unit �8 288 88 - Three Bedroom 2.0 /unit 176 176 Guests .25 /unit 82 82 TOTAL 666 665 Uncovered parkinq' 2Sa 250 Covered parking (carports) 208 208 Enclosed parking (garages) 208 208 TOTAL 666 666 I1. ANALYSIS• >. A. General: The applicant is proposing to convert an existing 328 unit apartment project to condcminiums. Associated w th the condominium conversion is the addition of 35 nPw parking i i spaces. The existing parking areas_ will be .upgraded through the construction of additiona'r carport and structUres to provide a total of 250 uncovered parking spaces, 208 i carport spaces, and 208 garage spaces, which is consistent E, with current Development Code Standards. L s PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT EA & IT 14548 - PATSCHECK /HACKBARTH August 22, 1990 M Page, 3 I i The project, which was completed only one and a half years q ago., is in substantial conformance with . the Development i' Standards. of the Etiwanda;Specific Plan and the Development z I Code with regards to setbacks, open space, density, and design guide'i i nes. B. Supplemental :Information: Section 17.22.030 of the Rancho Cucamongai',Muicipal, Code requires, "in addition to the informat m required by the Subdivision Map Act and Title 16, that supplemental information be submitted with a Tentative Tract Map f'or the purpose of conversion." The applicant has supplied this information (see Exhibit "H ") which includes: Building History Report, an estimate of the useful life of the physical elements of the project, an evaluation of interior noise reduction techniques used during conscruction,. a standard structural pest control report, and a proposed program to assist present occupants to purchase their units or k relocate. This' information -has been reviewed and found to be -in substantial conformance with the applicable development codes and specific plan requirements. Additionally, the applicant has supplied a copy of the draft budget submitted to the Department of Real Estate ,showing the anticipated monthly association dues and a copy of the Covenants. Conditions, avid Restrictions. These items will ue reviewed by the Department of Real Estate and the City Attorney through the normal subdivision process. C. Trails: The 'project. was originally conditioned by the Planning Division to provide a ,pedestrian greenway along the northern project boundary coanecting -the public sidewalk on Etiwanda Avenue to the future ;Etiwanda Creek Regional Trail. This greenway has been provided, however, the landscaping and irrigation improvements have no€ been - properly, 'maintai'ned. This was due to a misunderstanding on the -part of the applicant regarding who was responsible for the maintenance of this greenway.' The Engineering Division is not agreeable to the acceptance of this 'greenway , into a landscape /maintenance district and proposes that it be maintained by the property owner /homeowner's association. Currently this greenway is fenced off from the project site by a wrought iron fence, however, the Design 'Review Committee has recommended:. the installation of 'gates to allow pedestrian access' from the project site to the greenway as will be discussed later. D. Desi n Review Committee TLe Committee' (Weinberger, McNii.el, Coleman ) reviewed the proposed project on April 19 1990, and recommended approval subject to the fo':lowing conditions: 1. Provide two gated means of access to the greenway north of the proposed project and install connecting concrete walkways. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF'REPORT EA & 'TT 14548 - PATSCHECKiNACKBARTN August 22, 1990 Page 4 2. Provide a capstone on all new retaining walls. 3. Increase the amount of fish -scale cedar shake on the rear of the proposed garages. 4, The underside of all existing and proposed carports are to be painted;. E. Engineering Comments. The City transportation model indicates that substantiail widening :=ill be required ht the Arrow Route /Etiwanda .`Avenue intd­'Iction at some time in the future. The developers' enVinevs prepared two designs for the intersection.: One requires moving the curb on the north side of Arrow Route 14 feet northerly (Option #1, ,Exhibit "E ") The second design would do all of the widening on the south side of Arrow Route (.Option #2, Exhibit "F"). Staff felt it'was unreasonable to .require the additional widening at this tine by t0 s protect (essentially a change of ownership), because the original apartment project constructed the existing improvements with►; the Last couple of, years. However, to keep all options open, the conditions require that the project dedicate' sufficient street right - of-way so that widening can be done on the north side of Arrow Route if it is decided' that it's th4 best course of action in the future. The impact of the widening of this project is shown on Exhibit "G." The curb would be as close as 18 feet to one of the buildings. Also, it is noted that ,a less significant widening of 3 feet will be required on Ctiwanda Avenue in the future. F. Environmental Assessment: Part I of the Initial St ^tdy has been completed by the applicant. Staff has completed Part II of the Environmental Checklist and bas found no significant impact on the environment as a result of this project. III. FACTS FOR FINDINGS': The project is consistent with the General Plan, Development .Code, and the Etiwanda Specific Plan. The proposed use and site plan, together with the conditions of approval, will riot be detrimental to the public nealth or safety, or cause a nuisance or significant environmental impacts. In addition, the proposal promotes the health, safety, and welfare of the residents of the City. IV. CORRESPONDEUE: This item has been a6vertised in The inland =Daily Bulletin newspaper as a public hearing, the property property has been posted, and notices were sent to all property owners within 300 feet of the project site as well as to each of the affected apartment units. 14 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT EA & TT 14548 - PATSCHECKRACKBARTN August 22, 1990 Page 5 V. RECOMMENDATION :. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Tentative, Tract Map 14548 through the adoption of the attached Resolution of Approval with Conditions and issuance of a Negative Declaration.' ' Resp f Ily su d, Brad r City P nner BB:JG /Jfs Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Location a'p Exhibit "B° - Tentative Tract Map Exhibit "C ": Site Plan Exhibit "D "'- Landscape Plan Exhibit "En - Street Improvements Option #1 Exhibit "F" - Street Improvements Opt-7 i`2 Exhibit "G" - Street Dedication Exhibit "H" 'Supplemental Inforr�iation (Pest Control Adftk Report, Noise Reduction Techniques, Structural Elements Report - ,'.Building History Report, Renter Ms istance Program) Exhibit "F" - Garage Elevations Exhibit " - -' Resolution No. 85 -56.. Resolution of Approval with Conditions _ I + � �z ,I L "1'.1'W��•b' �I•N�d' 1'�M'm�!!�� 7:r Eta w - Qum Ivy at C Z � > m --i m -C: i W P 1 > q ;u 0 r / p 3 ;u N '-.�i :... H I If" o z -P 3 JOEE1D .,.— ._.ate- —. < 7 t x Ira F to e I hl j criy OF R� C3��t UCAMaNGA rrEM PLAN iNtr � ViSIOIV Tm,.E• Lo oiiit�t� Nita N EiT r{�{'� SCALE.,i 15 a. T < r Lo I , Iry Lli KNIM � iiiRl�- i c MEMO 1 Minr KNIM � iiiRl�- i F- U F— d- ;€ i� Oil, -I if {lpi EE1,jlj+ ;j II (IE! W d' {E P ii illii ili'E�IE i! EI ICE i— • 'i�- .�,:I;ili 11i { I E'+ Iii U('� I� +; IE I � o Y � O � v u C e l .e : !� piiidei d v �2d5 �8d: El C, � 6�l�ii E � � 1= i. ; �h lt. Si •�� � I g { oi�__?.�. �! `..r— tj! f• !pzO � a ' � l 1 % Si1 -.�r�• 41i �f ow uj U I .,� /T�\ � 1 fir,• 1 � •� -',`�� Nl� */' 6i �OQ .� i•z lir- R. 1 ,/. �U �.: •t �, , S� � wlra is 1 .r�+ EE1 •� .. � «av �,,,�, � � , -`•'' o '�- `=P; gip\ -- . � • +.�r.�c ML E++ U f a co V* _5 J t CL 0 ld z tl !q j� II It cn O W!} �} li;�fl q ,Ii LLJ , jp 1; ►,r sr ,{4 Ili ., ;� ij Iji Iii (!: Ill',, `i` }', it __ a 1 o`• i I }_ ta— < � :! i�} (, }I! i 6t Ltt 6s Illo I�:IL }i �!I i�� �II� �1� {d=E w t— 1 li:. If ss a It It ki i a 1 tR r— ;J N ``�, r �ppj #1: ■y{ap: .. r. t r E: to elf it 4 �_�\" `.� �� �lat ll: a[ri Sirs r�i �I�a ���F + I � --�''�— FI • m Lam, A� �a ',y - y • O, • f"' . _ ' f y�.•� ,P„•, ' , ,'yam � C' .•.• —,`, ff1t 2 yl r .� ! .,1•,.�,.W�.�w•w,r /Jfry •.r /Y r�r r' ,t. �i.�:Y }h O a Ank fuew _ piv��� --�.w � •�- ''ssl^'s�'~`"��' :rz ='e �.L Via'." '� ^_ - -- `8 `!i I ^jay, A �-: , Z .. I Intl s G;' '� Via~• i , A r V w �m � o I y w W s! W `.• J i 3nN3A`d z Q LU < 1 0a;i "d _ III t t , 1 t t J da NWMI I M :erove 1 1 lo` v > t V35% asti yg = o I i o ak�� a Q J HIS i 1 � Ya Z ?P � Q 1,i w < V .t-1 tts. a� r �g ` z 4. CD Z o <_ �. Z W a: U v fn c , V b atS a 1 U. a tit < :. a. ¢o C m uj cn W a - > to Q �m , 0.. <¢ ..0 Cn W :erove 1 1 lo` v > t V35% asti yg = o I i o ak�� a Q J HIS i 1 � Ya Z ?P � Q 1,i w < V .t-1 tts. a� r �g E o� o a O C-1 �o it 3nN3AV ' ' Z`33�g �33�� i. F 653'*.: 1 film v , l a i ua 1 1 r all a 1B W S JG V(INbd/V f-L3 i L ' ' Z`33�g �33�� i. F 653'*.: 1 I l LLJ GFSRPORT I 45` J I d ,A, 3 V O Ge 4-:7 tY1 " Y. TI ANbA AVEmir w 1.= ..t• {— �: -yam. TU6. 12 :+i ?. VZ NT F.E%rT GOM '_Ot- ET.... P 01 STANDARD STRUCTURAL PEST CONTROL INSPECTION REPORT (WOOD-DESTROYING PEST: OR ORGANISAIS) this is an Insp.010. 1epOH only —not a Nollcs of Completion, t A M 01 5:C0. N'J, STAEET YISY,R�Jj}{T C V! Uj GATE �OF iNSPECTItJN D1 CIY j,.arCSG Iyyg '.. CO.C�E 7A Q4l11SJ96 Affix stomp here on Board copy only VIM XE T Cli XL•4! w 114. 714423-id90 A LICENSED PEST CONTROL c f W E, FRAiH BTmt Will AM, CA 9vot OPERATOR IS AN EXPERT IN HIS FIELD. ANY QUESTIONS s A•n RELATIVE TO YHIS REPORT (�A'¢_C557xAT,DN Np: EtAE. CO. REPOCF NC• $SAfAP TiO. y} SHQULD BE REFERRED TO H{A7. _ hspacfton Ordered by (Noma and Address) „rAm ke:pon Sent to (Nom'.. vnd Address)�ET' Cr.vner's Noma and:• dress Paw M&CA"05— M4444 Namo, cnda4ddres- of o Pony in Inlerost - - 0, ;;m ilego ❑ . _ 'supafemsrtsf Report Linit.a Report �) C.ntgEetl6n Report No. o! Pages: i/'.•iiv111 5_f �Uf..iN1 lELG.ti Yf Ses nr > ^.a>N xn M43 YES f(trfs SFS et>riF>M 6f.L1•'' :YtS tlbF SFF nt >r.Q>.1x Pf,MN 2. Was Staff ShawerwoicFteslTd ? ?MW . Did. floor eoverinas Indicate looks? R1 3. FOUNDATIONS (TYpa, ?e efian to Grodo, eta} iLi> > Ott yntt ra Amp ; 4. PORCHES.:. STEPS... PATIOS s itTT I&MCiEt} 5. VENTILATION ;Amount, Relation to Urode, etc,) r1FOlWTE ZMttcta'lstr 6. AE'J-MENTS...Stucco walls, caturnns,brch�' NYAg' 7. ATTIC SPACES Lac.osifbility,.In9uI0Ii0n, etc.) iI7F &E To rt1_KTpt(!TTr1,t 6 TtK114T*IMt 11f au rm 3. GARAGES {Typo, accossibilily, etc t_ y� - 9. OTHER j DIAGR, M AND EXPLANATION OF FINDINGS trig, mows h 1w,od b ,wd,a. er w-"s ,hww, oh df*"r ) Ciotti; Dascriptior. 2 SM AtYY7TStSR 7pf ei 11SFn rust Mptrn. 0119 errsrd Antg Inspertion Tag Posted (location) eetwteTaYYe C_h.rlr.,ptct:onT e:...� 1£ tool (A, PATMW RUIDIN i ACCESS W1 110MIFD ;7E TO CQ(9TRLC'TION 87 OUTw Sim OF I►FESTATIOM (1) THIS IS N LIMITED TMS'ECTIOH OF PMX M ATA(S) AT OW116' IMIES'T. j (C) TIE FCU -MIND W3 MW TIOPECIEDI -61, C ,.- RMTN(T !( ' TIE rA><X OF THE F3R3T i CF ClR JIr@�F(,1'iLk R tT OTATES AtE OLAAIitY(TFE FEAITR,.TFRISr COMOiT1oNS'T0D LINITATIOY , If TICS IS TO CERTItY TAT X ADWE PRCfM WM IPY,PMW CN 7W ADOVc VAjE IN ACCCtWa RI K U SIMCIIRiL PEST .MM ACT NO MZ AIR 1+E UTI" ADDPTED P(TE(1ilA' TFERE(O, AW THAT RD EVID a OF ACTIVE 1IFPSTATION OR MC(ION 4W@ FP". +1YSMICN FEEL 10.00 I ( \1 Insp cste ay PRICE, TM licence No. FibiP7S S;yna . .k2. d� _ YEb ARE EHRTlED t0 09IAtN M►:ES Of ALL AE70AT5 S.HD lOWIEitOH 86102 19 7I23 tMtdE•9SY ftEb TYITH THE I ^AAO QuNx4 THE MECEIIO�. T,Yti YEARS - Mll PAYwEH,Ty orr•A::i.CO SVPCH FEE. To jTHUCT= PEST COeIHOL 20Ak0, 1430 HOW AVE., SACAAWNTO. CA. 4982: �r 1TEM:'i '�' r . ly OF R' : CAMONGA PL,�N TV ', D S?�N ' c� „ �., EDIT: SCALE: iordan -vaffi ARCHITECTS, INC.' t January 23, 1990 Planning Department City of Rancho Cucamonga 9320 Baseline Road, Suite C Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Re: Victoria Wocls - 325 Unit Apartment Project Arrow Highway at Etiv/anda Avenue. Dear Gent;,amen: Per the request of Mr. Raj, Patscheek, I have reviewed the construction draw- ings for the subject property. The interior noise reduction between units was achieved via the use of a double 3 -1/2" stud wall separated by ar l" air apace. Both stud walls were insulated with 3 -112" of fiberglass Batt - insulation.„ This assembly was tested by the Gypsum Associates and found to rave an STC rating of 55 -59 (refer to NGC 2377). The projects floor /ceiling assembly has the STC rating of 50 -54 as documented by sound test KAL L 224- 28 -65. The assembly consists of 3/4" gypereta over 5/8" plywood over 2 x joists with 5/8" gyp board mounted on resilient furring channels. A layer of R -11 fiberglass Batt was installed in the cavity. These materials and installation procedures are consistsnt with the 1985 UDC requirements. This determination was made upon my review of the percitted construction drawings prepared by this office and my fiold observations during construc- tion. If you have any questions, please give me a call. Lince J an, AIA Jordan- Valli Architects, Inc. BDJ /kv rti;-T t �t Lt b 4NQNGPeny UCE crr.E aa ae N N 'D SION PLANh1 f� SCALE: EXHIBTT: v' VEIGA CONSTRUCTION CORP January B, 1990 Mr. Raymond R. Patscheok Patscheek`Hackrarth 640 N. Tustin f103 Santa Ana, CA 92705 RE: Investigation of useful life of elements at Victoria Woods Dear Mr. Patseheck: ` The following is a summary of our findings regarding the expected useful life of various elements at your ap^rtment project. :fie advi.ed that variations in maintenance prop:ams, weather conditions and other acts of God can materially affect this timetable. Utility delivery systems 30 years on site sewers & water 30 years Foundations, slabs & exterior walls 25 years Landscaping sprinklers 20 years Street and driveway paving 20 years Electrical system 2U year: Alarm system 20 years Heating and air conditioning IS years Roofing - comp. shingle 17 years Roofing - built -up 32 years _ S %imming pools - spas 15 years. Exterior paint 7 years Thank you for the opportunity to be of service. if you have ar y q'testi: ns, please do not hesitate to call. rmm Very truly yours, } a.. TiTt.E• UC`�'i.et't}.:1 ��1'!`1F�rl1S �� ,. � / E?CIi�f M "�.j�� SCALE: —� 'rad veiga Veiga'construction GA contractor Lie. #264967 C_TI'Y OF ���.: UC�'11VIONGA YON 640 N RTH TUSTIN - MATE 105 -� SANTA ANA, C rJ' 17 22.030 Application inidrmatidn. H. 3. Building Hist.. -ry _- Report: A. A building permit was taken out January, 1987 and all 328 units, carports, plus 2 recreation buildings were completed November, 1988. B. since completion of construction. ;i marketiAg program has been initiated to rent the apartments, resulting in approximately 85% occupancy to date. G. There haxre been no major repairs required or performed since completion. b. The land and improvements are awned in fee by Fatscheck /Hackbarth, a general partnership. C17Y OFCUCA4NGA •T23'I, !� ttr.ti Atit�cy (fir - t-A PATSCHECK DEVELOPMENT COMPAW 640 N TbAn Ave Suite 103 Santa gnm;QcjI f 92705 . ,,n, x(714) 5581433 -� '„Y a S '( •try. -_kg tit %t TvFL y z� Yry • � .. ' 30, -a 4 ^i . ? n; wAig I 'nSc4 i �a ra c 4 Mr. Jerry Guarracino Rancho Cucamonga Planning Dept, P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 j RE: Victoria. Woods Condominium.Convc -rsion p Dear Jerry: Outlined below is our proposed program to assist present occupants at Victoria Woods in purchasing their unit or alternatively to assist in their relocation. 1. Apply $100 per month of rent paid up to a maximum of $2,000 toward tenant's down payment.. 2. Give an allowance toward 'purchase price in lieu of renovation cost of tenant's unit.` 3. Notify tenants at the time of.lease that apartments are condominiums and may be subject to sale. 4 Provide' a moving allowance of $250 to tenant -if '­he elects not to buy. Because our sales plan is to operate the project sn -.,,l S., current rental status for at least a year, .we .may want 'to :nierid or add to the items outlined dependingY on` market':cr�nditxons :at ` the time•. Please feel free to call me if you have any su45estions•.or ques +::ions. Very truly ours, 7 a� 44 Raymor_ R:3 scheck tT�t tRtitii1 + +��.+"St�sY?A',Y4St4 tea siS. CITY OF RACHCucnrr�:� irEM: PLANNING-• FSMSION EXHtBrn- SCALE, --- 1 rr ❑1 6li y Au nip t �t Q , El wffaY I; i i L01 ❑�1 , wi- MOD I i �e x a RESOLUTION NO. 25 -56 A RESOLUtiON OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION' APPROVING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO. 84 -12 LOCATED ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER.OF ETIWANDA AND ARROW IN THE LOW - MEDIUM AND MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS. WHEREAS, on the,24th day of September, 1984, a complete application was filed by William E.. Davis for review of the above - described project; and WHEREAS, on the 24th day of April, 1985, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Lommission held a meeting to consider the above- described project. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has required a noise study and the project has been revised to mitigate noise impacts. NOW, THEREFORE, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission resolved as follows: SECTION 1: That the following can be met: 1. That the proposed project is consistent wtah the .bjectives of the General Plan; and 2. Th,t the proposed use is in accord with the objective of the Etiwanda Specific Flan and the purpi�es of the district in which the site is located; and 3. That the proposed use is in compliance with each of the applicabl-a provisions of the Etiwanda Specific Plan; and 4. That the proposed use, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially _ Injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. SECTION 2: That although this project will create adverse impacts on the Env ronment, mitigation measures are included in the project design or required as conditions. of approval that reduce impacts to a non- significant level, and that a Negative Declaration is issued on April 24, 1985. SECTION 3: That Development Review No. 84 -12 is approved subject to the following conditions and attar 2d Standard Conditions: PLANNING DIVISION: 1. Final landscape palette shall identify smaller sub - neighborhoods within the project using individual tree varieties. Resolution No. DR84 -12 = Davis Page 2 2. A continuous on -site greenway shall be provided to connect public sidewalk on Etiwanda Avenue with the Etiwanda Creek regional trail and shall be dedicated as an easement and designed the requirements o-V the Etiwanda Specific per Plan, 3 Any fencing provided at the terminus of Morton Avenue, Emmett Avenue and Cornwall Avenue shall he view fencing such as wrought -iron to prevent a "walled" effect. 4. Provide extensive landscaping treatmei,t at project entrances and between carport parking areas and drive aisles. Decorative wails and planters shall be provided at project entrances consistent igith approved plans. l S. Trash enclosures shall be provided with lattice -type- overhead shade structu. s and mail boXes shall be provided with solid overhead structures compatible with the Victorian architectural theme. 6. A continuous sidewalk system shall be provided, wherever possible, that provides an interconnecting linkage throughout the project. In ,particular, a- sidewalk shall be provided around the edge of the large central open space. Ash ENGINEERING DIVISION_ 1. Modified cul -de -sacs shall be provided within the project at the southern termini of Morton, Emmett and Cornwall Avenues. Right -of -way for same shall be dedicated to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 2. the main drive aisles shall be constructed as privatr: streets to include curb and gutter (28, minimum curb separation), AC pavement, and street lights. Sidewalks shall be provided on one side or an alternate approved - sidewalk plan approved. 3. The proposed storm drain system io serve the northerly cul - de -sac shall be designeil for a 100, year storm plus emergency overflow. Easements shall bi provided to the ultimate outlet facility. 4. All drainage facilities: outleting, into Etiwanda Creak shall be subject to approval and a permit from the San Bernardino County Flood Co9troi District. 5. A structural block wall and slope paving shall be, provided along the easterly boundary of the site subject to the recommendations of the San Bernardino County Flood Control District and the approval of the City Engineer. � �r Resolution No, DR84 -12 - DO-ris Page 3 6. Construct portop of the Etiwanda Area Master clan Storm Drain Line within Arrow Route from ctiwanda 'avenue to, Etiwanda Creek. Also outiet.velocity protectioKA measures will be rogpired.; Within the channel. This Condition r*placets- the pre6,,Ajs requirement for an onsite retentiec W .in. BUILDING & SAFEW DIVISIONS 1. Conceptual grading plan approved subject to the following;, a. Acceptable method of draining from. streets to baskn. 1-:. Permission to drain north cul -de -sacs to Flood Control. Ofstrict Channel_ *' and positive 100 year overflow backup system. c. Northerly and southerly property line wall be flood wall to required limits of 100 year l overflow from Etiwanda Creek. z d. Entire easterly property line wall to- be flood wall. e. Conformance with the revised site plan. Which indicates a 6 foot high landscape berm. 2. n.e 6 foot I'andscepe berm along the Arrow and Etiwanda `:,=tapes shall be contoured to provide an undulating appearance 3. Supplemental acoustical analysis Ahall be prepared for, all buildings within 1 400 felt of Arnow or ftiwanda. to indicate mitigation measures tG achieve, 46 CNEL maximum. Construction plans shall conform ',a the recommendations of said report. Additional noism level measurements Shall be takers if the Ameron plant operation has commenced operations at the southwest, corner ;of Arrow end Etiwanda. - Y� Resolution No, nR84 -12 - Davis Page 4 Mh ti APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 24th DAY OF APRIL, 1985. PLANNi OMMISSION OF 74E CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA 1 BY: L Dennis tp ut, dia=rman ATTEST: _ Ri G pasty ucretary 1, Ric Gomez, Deputy Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of t City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission hslc on the 24th day of April, 19859 by the'-rollowing Grote -to -wit: AYES: COWISSIONERS: REMPEL, BARKER, MCNIEL, STOUT' NOES: COMMISSIONERS; NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:. CHITIEA 1-2T J O Z .F.1 .^i Q. G LC µY ], 14 vN y. .11. Y . ' Sy��C'b' -f L- wna.LOOrui o.0 � 's ".o-L>qu � � v v ��'v�+, u�F„4Ng� iioe„I� o$•ri 'u�".+ n�« Y�oYo 4'O1P O� t L. uC LaeCC� b wn c 9 4 A Y Opp C O p C N�y i'—L N.CL �Y.UOL11L1. -, -OR^ LY.NU & l fYO Y —.O —O O EA T L V e.� 4y YY� Gt'aN 4 Ou ey Y L Y.3 a G ALP C� ~ v aC e N C� }_�C. �G 9 ■�wrY HS1 `y^ Y.w. aaY 4a ova .fj� $:.mss .io o.a�MZ` 2--. aZ M- . w..S� -9 Yogi �y OM.N CC iL � ■p 001 OY.Y`3 Y�e Yw4 C Os d$O Mei+'3 NMC Y�O OYYYY O�A ocC Y�C. >Y44` Y �Y� NV AV OL Y� G6� YY•fd L Ay .t tl O C M�yw CIS gpd S psY/y Oy —_� UN+1 L i > N O a o H ~ u g N Q Q+M. ~O y ^G L 4 Q V � J N O� p 14 YY Y Y yG. 4. Yp Y D 6 V. » w^i p�j i YL yM r ty `L% +9 ppC {Wy Y r i jj 4 A k. Y s� p � y M J� N /M1 • N Q+M. ~O y ^G L 4 Q V � J N O� p r�t� tli.Y G\V �.�. %. • Y�Yl�tl YO Vr • O l6rY• YC G �uwwa cY e+ar More �4ay Yak agyy s c - -youu «° `r WY NYY °MYyO GpN +4 L:U y N.� S aS S N °« Y yQ RN Caw O Y l� pO f! ZN ° +rter� yy p Y YZ'b W En S �S _ y° f N u s^ C M• Y Y L Y G Fp � p 0� C b ~ °p O.yR. W R �°.� awu Yy yYyy Q ..2 O Yy4 R.Z•�O�Ya Ya'A y vIZZG „Y.� Z ny Ny .d'�rg .`°,�° ". M j}�` �.0 'p"� Y° Y L Y Y✓ M,G i a V p 0^ V N W C Y T Y y I S N w Q: 48g. C' MSS V w `G YW� G tl r V •i uc -° $�un 4 -b2 w.gY ` +r G 1L �Sw auyV a� '`°Mfa +ra a °�•N, �.M ��\". 'N'aY A' .-S 2 NY.c Nc vv�cr ex- � °w V{YY.4MC Y�- «7'.i °� OM • �h. 4 ° Q` WQ$ r V r 6 yZ ( i9 s wN =S' {yY ~��YaL MW V�O 7w b'Ccz OGI �•'\C N v Ni GVe$ N yL iY,Z Q4S w p ^2 p >pQ 9G11! Rj R.t C� ianir $� y Sc i06N C r.+ Y]�S ^6 CY4 ^V VYS wyEy °^ pp 5. 63.5 O Y�GrY p ..4ay a: se M^ 6 3.5 I. W.= 7Q Az ,Ci 1% J V d C 6 � P1Y V >1 • Gw. ! � •� 4 �! N V Yr Y vao Fd Rv �`o'e.Y nQ,i `� � Gi $Y �c�r6y •°41q 6>'~.0 u.: y(+rd M. y` CO y i�,�bn?� ` V° A •+. M Y S N y■ _� 9 Y. i {r/ P� J+ N O 1G49O ; G. Y +pw a. Y ^Rai yyCVO O r x "OY Yy V..YV ice.^ 1NNC.Y< rM�` O� iGteYVM+p4 �� =.0 Nei �r- ✓cp''C Ni�a�ou °.-Y a9. YO�y Y .• V. An. K �tl�� > &N �YggO r aio �► ^ QO YS �'e. rW °c'`s +:15 1-9 u•°r�l e"yi �, '. ^. 6'~"C 4! K YN. '^ � $R °� „G�a••i, :iu ^{.a�'N' '•- +Y4y�JaVS.o ".y°. .Y.:w� VVY��^i'"o'py' L+Yw.0 qg.G .5V .Y Y. •.4 S.2a KRe9a 6�•.0 tfC ' >a y. RO2Y` iN1� CV wZx9 ZMb.5 C'� yr O O \YppY' y O,c ^•tl. Y� Ltl !Y X40 s�pQ 'OC �CC VV ^Gtl: ° ^'.5 +CS�tivW S ys S Cy C b �;6 ^° r° i1 °�M aiV ■� y.Y^ M.sO• tlaStY tl•'6 AOr� VIZ U 2 Y�"y �� p+ Nr� NY Yr Y�lyry K,VpO�A Mp \C �tlCYOY r �N • yy •n`J�O QG Z^JR GQ US- to Y.4 pQar -;!"c Uzi a� uQa tiUy. e.T' ap G..c oyy.° wrt. QY 7S pV,V . >•II•CO> OVGti ! p°p >C i b` ^qY gr iN. E.NY r Y+ Y' ►Y a4 n1Vr^ yJC ^...MY 4ypy sC' ^O �Y..E VO r ris W -dy {3 P. Cie c.o oy�E b" nay a �r Ya uN t�up p pV YL =t� L °Y °C 9LL 1` piC ?pS 1i:■ T-iY AVM GR i �+ LR «R' >•iNC.! � ^Na N.Y ,�tt tii J��O GV +Y {M� 1�r.}INCe F��•IE.Y'O: z a OA O G'TA.00 OHO d Y CL C pS ..Gp .L.a =0 a q� C N dwY pa YEN TLS. y� V CO 016 `aY u A 699E Na pq d� d 2a11.Y A •0a «G ..OL M. -N ee T� � Lr RL.. a L O ONN Y 9LA V �C pd�'O SA �� 'N ^ CO G SU 016 jNa UL? V GN C� U OL EE C q N ^ o� � 1 -d01 w p b V G 1 2 y W..Ca 9�t d '•' C V� w 0 �m O 1^i1Yd UmV V GGH 1� � O N O � d R • nYN 9.a ^ C � 9 1 .ate A 1"7 OR C A >H • a � O. O O. G A O.d � O. V 6nf •lC U �'G a y LC .5q GA O U _gg ^ c' N C 6 M^ V O G.yA O •'�� Y Y p i. `.. Ly gt lb-Z `mow. N �` C N V Euu9 uG O x'}? O h ..AG•Q 79, rl OI`a•r. 611LU 1Y1 Ae�JLY t!2 '��..~ L DYA Y / nib Gp�li.ga SS.Na o °p CuVV °'•C. A� C O •61 N NY VYNiA O N N O CC �O V UAp CLNy� iq�NU gC.yi d SNd� �' 9+y1� Y. tl N C �V pd �.eq7 -- O i- L >1 4 d =n->L tli � 9 N. • O. Y � 5` 41 p� � 11. � `- I EYY °co LLO U.a.c` GS �..' -ate -may s.N apiy. D O tJ4dAd di ••i OY C� L L•Y Y.N L0101 pV:ALOL ��$Eu ^=o JS.. ^� oN.e =i � N w 6wq < M em < N S N 9 �� h q da Z4, N V^ 01 i 019 N ',1 O! fJ O• < Y 0 9 6 N I «Y4G ..Gp .L.a �WC -E YEN TLS. rd •0a M. -N G O. fi ~N�Qlr a• $¢ g 1nL pd�'O C •• �� 'N ^ CO y�ai a� �Ce N +�' <d0 C y�N ra� G> +A }�� =V ON LO Vey p Ov OR C tN � YNy 11 �a yM Inc c O OY C is N C 6 M^ V {. 9 • O Y^ O 9. p. 49 Y Y p i. `.. `mow. N �` V Nu 1r. s.=i 1Y1 y u0 M.LCI O •61 N NY VYNiA O N N O CC �O V r L> L V� U y1 O=t•• �' 9+y1� Y. tl N C �V pd �.eq7 -- O i- L >1 4 p Y .� tli � 9 N. • O. Y � 5` 41 p� � 11. � `- I EYY 11 O^ y ya•. D O N TI` 'C NZN aVyT 6yYw )V T GcG..Qg G1�L NYC CO�)C. � 4OL..L �CQC � O. ± Ga® CS UrJ a� ~tl N�QQ n4e•�O aC wC.tlNOM�� I «Y4G ( N2 G p� O V"Ou i ��r nN �u5 L9N �� M YA YY9L OVU.... as. ^iy N'^a AWL O,Y` OrC •Jw Y � L•Ni � ^�� �O. 6'71► <•+NO }..S <+1 •.tl N i. ICON YL6 Pptn t{i L <P Lr JCL r�.N�Y `O(i <M 9 WY CYN 2 i I d ^� uta SOU• a �r� e+^• �e cu�� d� CV. V - OO_ •. � 6 wYO.Od �.� �� U L V c F.{ L L n d t0 S C� Yu Cw - Y V �C, �. d u • E TK. .. y Y w E yy C -.5.8 V V 'Od L o' • 0 0 GbEW b. d9 „A• 6y yU �•. Yew �Ea yIS•�i. w!� 9Nn Cu` ys°VO CZ LLb L %UN r Z idbr° OOQ 1..1 w A OW LYgg H�. 9rS �QO Y dY dA A.GUtSC �VV t. C` l4 •� NT 4. C¢4$ A> Y zr d- Y -4— 'a �`� W Q =�C Ecwg� Y t ® V OY G.SAV.EN me qG L �E.4 ���CC lbnAn�OCC COa �p �`O � EY 6VY1b Y � d GOB Nuq b1 i:QA 704 S 2tOd�Y tl G d_S �Gz O ~ VO q o bi ^ w O b^ L CI LL L^ YO C ! d O M yY ya> {� .0a OLE Cw w OG9= A M C ^c6 »A� VDU 6Z�td V-� t~1 �C gVSV y Oq.amay YVga� Y. Y .:a aa .¢ M •" V� h Lpp.� C TLY Ayp Ld. p y� S Q 4C9 M.GM O ii U S —Z. �SCFLI• �aU4b _ A N. w «v C Na O.^ eJ Y9 V T. F C�9� wtti0 N N N Y i:r.» Y .•LC V �Nn V C^ b nu VE:w CCELq dC."•. O •S C4 rui 6'sA J � ♦ C w JY Q." gb >Uy�� L'u {a 'D A a� SAC =rodA O.W6 4�Ym0 .4 Y.i G wYU� {�.O p {�. OLwC•A. S '�•�.N.C. Y >!� .Cgd'O _N LG.Lt YYwA1. � ^G � �YWi {O. ice. 6.0O 1SLN f.�A4O yV 1A L bV'O - Y s J a tt � W i wt� ^j CN�u ww Y.... V✓ S7U 3 V `C.� Yw �N. dOYL 8 6��rrO y ^a OTC �OY� w w.C.Y •6�V M • �a�Spp G� t+� by LLB c r� �W�A 4* l�y`� •��y.I aN4 NM^ 9's A-8. Y^ u ./ L„ �A W ♦. 9 .. � Ot � R Y A N�Wr a0 Yar ^L� U �O Y� jVO6 pLO p`S'Y y +u d "gyp L C� C4 pi °C..0 NOUN yL O I C dyC+ C� pp Z O 6V + L W p C V • Oy Y•s V4 U C Y � � q A pp Y+ 4y 44 { L N r Npp bC �a�6}, 4n Y V.-- LY _ -� 'O Y ! r ma:55 w. `w ✓arj .•n+b'r� CCtt ;.4 �N phi ■1 .9jMM �.Gp Y NULiY�v 6�C w V^ ~¢6'•.t .51 C > O a a? O _ ry Y N�a M N y 00 >�.L Q C4y �C a'C~•Aa •tl•r, L M r �L yy V•i Y�� A Oda O+1"Jw � L 0Y VL6 y S• L•F♦w N i a� 4" Y O. U•t. ��.aC `� Y9Cy wa O `OiS�. a °vP u� ! "t a O L C r r• C 4 A. •• 2.P. tl S i O a y GawO q� YVA » O E O y. CI L Ni' �j q.. � L'O. gLq�L' Lam. YMVI 2 `•CL y � LA QO • Oa. N ••• U► � p' � V ' a =D SL V• 0 { IN w i4 � �4Y � OCC V $$��. �OJ C• q�;r>4I¢NL yY. 4. ••• V L . YN` N�EOp I � .p. w�a U CO ��. �� 1♦DY �O C�V�•YW Y w +4�YPw .i'LO _'lf �wujas Ca {pC� S er Y •�•1 SNMw Y'a` CV YY E Ya. 2=—, ' p Cw o �YL +C �« 'OA S. 'C CCeC YOxw N T2 vs- LCaN �J I-.G OV Op ^p, L >Y�1 wN..OYY C. C. N N .• A� .�L O•• J 4! ^• � CO.0 OC F• s.• Aw OYM YQO KLO i'7 V.N+ C IY Y. !! W.F�7 Yr VM V moo Ococ «.c .L ; ✓ b u »ovc ^« b =� di.;sg. '^ Aa My , oY�o o v `yJ A A N bqD aN d Adak `UT `� 1�« �¢e{� p a�• N M. C. O � � c tl p yN Y N Y N CC y N V + -0OD y 0. CL ✓CQ q'NL yet wC.O a� D J r G L Y.. V H N b�-0 N °p�p k,i O 4�tl Q 44 bt mo'Qq n4N.CiOr. O t Od �• -1,ry:, N � L✓ LD, c Ng N,e V .gN CO. pN L ✓i', «aq (> ¢ NL •LOO qr »O tlN G,.S O� C ^D-:���0 ��� �. t c .t^ ... a" '° -C p`. O .+ �. u ✓ ✓ i ^ 6E Vie. a iD c'u Lyyc d~ e a y w �'a a yeoD aa� M ✓ ✓� ✓ C� {y�Yv NNW C. V� < ^O Sw!.. N 6N ♦�N N.a �C ij -tln��' �M �yy a d -0� AK wC. r � Y°r"in N ° A C� Cr C♦ C =° d PQ N O�i11 ♦L Y� L.qL C Ore �M ^ NL O O � L L V O O v 4 y»i pt y �: � Tr u.� GL .e 0CC0 IV O1M.9 N.♦ .0 O yVia O1 YLyY-..dp✓ VlJ }W Lc +^ U-0 L.m-0 'D V KO V pn Y .� tl .Y � pPcyyg G C 00'W O V O D♦ tlr `Z O L �w YO N IC4 u o4tY.,u rCH yWuq tl i al✓'RL.6 8.Y✓ 3. W °d a C^ Lc '61' C C r dPtl �`u T N a V N N {� O� 4 A C �• �$ DlLS` 'C O .� �>♦PN .iba Ntl 'D✓ » G✓ Oar r� LCViMO..O.r V �LtlrC.0 - .d.. N. °C♦ R }p L eQ.. �r a L Nip UYb {ye:1 °4'.Y�Y4 q�za. q..N w Sd�li M Qyl�ro. La C> �,, » ✓C G �p � a� N V C ✓bp C > Vq l K Y OCN PC. V 'yy[q( ' � sC� { SU MKO $woA LO.0 go L9y Yy bo Y a:.pN as C 4 '04i � V. >p . O - .4 Jr C C c VYw aq DY OQ✓ d91e ar S hr � $O �uyMM. +{1 N V_z, NCJ e y d'sp tl ••c �j W c 4'M w D4�'r NqQ* ✓✓D' ;V �9 wi «✓ ��C' dN T Y'� 7 nO.yi.�w w liu �Ypp Or q.. 3 06� tg.Lr �O.r Sa ry1a� ■G�^ Pape V r-0 L V bYg �tp Y -Ow r.°e f2 -.e„tl,s r� RC '6a v6 q is ores NV�Y O e�� sV itl. 1p q4 b.. ea _fr�'A OpY�Yi`. �i:�V ✓,� ,� -vL ✓Jy ayN yy4 a?C00! 9pp�Q { bCONO GLt M~ per! 6N 9� PV �] CC 0. CN .Ci wpp aa8 P p> �J LN C P V� s1 M �!-t Q .°O.r �N � VO.YVC. • Tr Y. �Y q�{OV1T✓^�d0 N isryi LF }♦ N to7 w �q M ✓> Aj' cc.9 NIsM1 0. ✓¢C wY �» `i6V VC .C.p✓ S! Yt B♦64 Y.q N /�ti Ae` •C pqr. ®>'b n0f OV,� YY n0V M t[ tl 6 H- A, O .Z4A Y ' Nyl. M V IL • W' L NF6 d Y. UYEI Y � Y I aY =70s t H O `• Y 9�9L � YL.� W vLOV C 1 n N Cy AO O c0 d O'. dAN 9 c Y� iaYN Y � UA O � C i "1 O N � d E �.` V.- A C 6 N L 9 s \7.ry1i1 .. Y t" V �OZ L a Y 77, ND _ q •Y Z ANYnS L A 'f .I[a IYi O�G Lw M� "AC GgT r YOI nNi9« w� M — . YO. 1 f u �' ■ MVaaO 1 •C' y.— G n N4 o= N� c N oy Y CC C 9 yw 6 a W n O T. N� cc{g�� N T " wCC�IOpK.y O to Y� L UL Y�Lam... ,euy„°.iL� LNw" Lw�E St?'L— =wa LIL LL' OLO a^ LY �Ya u?`y Kb cqa Try «.+ Lct I CYiV � 9 ^Y6 c..r MlO w w' fl YW n N P o q. L C Y^ L^ w Y w L S N y 4 o V W 5 -45 N «. .g a' EY my 2 ` °.cadS = Aa -°v Y O � V w . M "« — T �Ly N• y U a .L . N ®®YV "�w YY L V c .�N � I O— N A � ' o. A i YO O A N6WN� ln.nM HO.. NQ 0.FN t4.. W..NLLLI 'ip C 1 I u _ � L O 4 Y C St - �q C qn F � UA OYY' :�aaY.O a M C1Y1 �N r c Y f p 1 6 � yb S` r� ^tla4 Y 77, E _. IL L is C' L aW a Y 6 J y CC rOp� �OY 1 f u �' ■ MVaaO W N4 o= N� c N oy Y CC C 9 yw 7d Y w N wYr- Uw— cc{g�� N T " wCC�IOpK.y O N� UL rya -C WV IYy w Liwd n0; Kb Y.� I 1 I u - L Y Y N Y■ 9" O Ya 6 � yb L aW a Y 6 J y CC rOp� �OY 1 f u �' lv �° YG V.U. C Sb A C .G C°. O d G V Y t _ o a o �oo d. ru -VW oa YL cL dC 'a L �� °N n '°n Y.d w YNu . ..a as L` ` O• DE UY �1 A E N l^ . C d y d Y WOO M U Y CuEd l V 'V r d « q • W .o= O 6J.°J.dO �91°r 4•C^ » C, O' O.G.N 4+G•N iL6 6@ Fr N MI � G✓1 1 1 �IO� • +e^� C V I I I CI b 1 �' �« q O W9 ` Y CATY O Y •Ya ^ O dC: 'r ` V y d G 3 c %s i'g yw L ` a EtO CQ i w // ^ C, Y U V wd =� Y y' � �L •O � � L i. Yx Gu.g @ G $� °. °�.A tz pag Y G g A 6Vd •` L O4CL eLOQ' ^A GC W C nom.. � r pC Yyy 6sd Y i�Y emu; 4� G qy G YdO _■■ �y 'C _p {° .o 1r V:. CO M 00� a.L a�A @O ,Y•S gip. OL� a Ly� 12 n� w O AM @° O. TY9■ O A r l�� LA.� W M O, 4►y V I 4A 7 FL C c ° dOY C w � G °00 yam' � LY 00 Y a <@a K r �•s �' n C dd �A^ GL' MY E^ rte✓ d Or i K.. K i N IN 1�1I q In b p 43 O; RESOLUTION NQ. A RESOLUTION OF THE FLENNING COmMIF51ON OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TENTATIVE.TRnl` MAP 14548, FOR THE CONVERSION OF 328 APARTMENTS TO CONDOMINIUM 'UNITS, ON 29.51 ACRES OF LAND IN THE LOW- MEDIUM AND MEDIUM RESIDER fIAL DISTRICTS (4 -8 AND B -14 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) OF THE ETIWANDt SPECIFIC PLAN, LOCATED AT -HE NORTHEAST CviriiR OF ETIWAtIOA AVENUE AND ARROW ROUTE,: AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APH, 229 - 041 -11 A. RecitalS. (i) PatscheckfNackbarth has filed an application for the approval of Tentative Tract Map 14548 as described in the title of this Resolution.; Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Tentative Tract /:dap request is referred to as "the application." (ti) t'n August 22, 1990,.the Planning Commission of tl!e City of I!ancho Cucamonga conducted a ditly noticed public hearing on th�1 application' and conc7.uded said hearing on that date, kiii) All legal Prerequisites prirr to the adoption of this Resolution have cccurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THERE70RE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commnission of the City of Rancho Cy amonga as follows: I 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the f,cts set forth in the Recitals, part A, of this Resolution are true and `correct. 2. Based. upon substantial evidence presented to this Cowin tsion during the above- refererxed public hearing on August 22, 1990, in•luding written and oral staff reports, together ctith public testinow,, this I, Commission hereby specifically finds as fotlo:is:' (a) The application applies to property located at 8493 f Etiwanda. Avenue with a street frontage of 1,550 feet on Etiwania Avenue anA 520 feet on Arrow Route and is presently improvod with 328 apartments, parkilig for 531 automobiles, and associated recreational facilities; and (b) The property to the north of the eubject site is developed with single family residentil7, the property to the south a11d _west is designated as General Industrial and is presently vacant, and the property to the east is an Edison Easement designated as.ppen space; and AIM f, -i' PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. TENTATIVE TRACT 14548 - LEWIS HOMES August 22, 1990 Page 2 (c) The project, together with the recommended conditions d1 approval, complies with all the m?nimum development stand?rds of t:,, City of t, Ranc:,o Cucamonga; and (d) The conversion of 328 apartment units to condom niums on 29.51 acres is consistent with the tow- Medium and Medium Residential land use designation of the General P1an9 and (e) That the proposed project is in substantial` coil; ,)rmanee with each of the applicable provisions of the Etiwanda Spec' fic Plan and the 4_f,opment Code. 3. Based upon the substantial,ev;dence presented to this Commission during the above - referenced public hearing and upon the specific f;nding of facts srt forth in Paragraphs 1 and 2 ab:tve, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: (a) That the Tentative Tract, for the purpose of conversion, is consistent with the General Plan,-revelopment Code, and the Etiwanva Specific Plan. and (b) The design or improvements of the Tentative Tract is consistent with the General PTnn, Development Code, ~tttu Etiwanda 5oecific Plan, and (c) The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed; and (d) The design of the subdivision is not likely to case substantial environmental damage or avoidable injury to `tuaras or wildlife or their habitat; and (e) The Tentative Tract is not likely to cause serious'panlic health problems; and (f) The design of the Tentative Tract will not conflict with any easement icnuired ky the public at large, now of record,• for access' through or use of the property within the proposed subdivision. (q) 'The proposal is consistent with the purposes of Chanter 27.22 (Condominium Conversions) of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code. �N) The proposal promotes the hualth, safety, and welfare of the residents of the City. 4. This Commission hereby finds and certifies that the. project has been review9d and considered in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 19 70 and, further. this Comrissiort hereby issues a Negative Declaration. i PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. `•� TENTATIVE TRACT 14548 -" LEWIS HOMES ' - August 22, 1990 Page 3 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forte in Paragraphs,`. 1, 2, 3,, and R above, this Commissic,k hereby approves the.appiication stibiect to each and ;every scondifion set fo:r ".1h below and in the attached Standard Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.' Plannino Division - 1. Approval of Tentative Tract 14548 is subject to each and every. Condition of Approval container' in Resolution No. 85 -56,, approving Development Review 84 -12, 2. Provide two gated means of access to the public greenway on the north 'project boundary and install connecting concrete walkways, prior to recordation of the final map. 3. Provide a cap stone on all new retaining wails - Prior to recordation of the `Jnal map, 4. Increase the amount of fish -scale cedar shakes on the rear of the proposed garages. 5. The underside of all existing and 'proposed _ carport roofs shall be painted, prior to recordation of the final map. Lnaineerino Division ` 1. The existing overhead utilities (electrical except for 66 Kv electrical) on the project side of Etiwanda Avenue shall be `undergrounded from the first pole on the south side of Arrow Route to the first pole off -site north-of the . project boundary, prior to recordation of the - finai map* she Developer nay request 'A reimbursement agreement to recover one -half, the difference between the undergrounding cost tf the utilities (electrical) on tie project side of the street minus those (telecommunications) on the opposite side of the street from future development (redevelopment) as it occurs on the oppurtte side of the street." 2. Dedicate pnbiic access rights 0 the trail along the north property line connecting the public sideWalk. 'on Etiwanda Avenue to the Etitoanda 'Creek Regional Trail: Improvement, plans shall be submitted io and approved..''by the 0 ti :f PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION N0. TENTATIVE TRACT 1454a - LEWIS AOMES-' August 22, 1990 Page 4 City Engineer, Any deficiemc "es in the existing trail, including landscaping and irrinatiors shall be corrected prior to recsrdation of the final map; thereafter, the . trail shall be permanently maintained by the property owner,/homeowners association. 1 3.; Dedicate additional street right-of-ways of 14 feet on Arrow Route and 3�t,feet on Etiwanda A -qenue along the prcjact frofitaae for possible future street widening. 6. The Secret Iry to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution, APPROVED AND ADOPTED 'THIS 22.M DAY i!F AUGUST 1990. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, BYt - Larry T. McNiel, Chairman { ATTEST- ecretary , Brad Buller, Secretary-,- x, Brad Puller, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho j 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 Cucanoi ;ga, at a' regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 226d day of xagust 1990, by the fol,loriing vote -to -Wit. LIES: COMMISSIONERS; - NoESa COMMISSIONERS:' ABSENT; EOMtnisSIdN£N:. t A k_ � ti `�YUO.NYO u4� T •w•'t VC, -Cy �VNyym CY CL tc^ �4�y °ut- aLiNU—� °a Q�Y• �. 06M�.Li• 1� °�Y.My COStYO `O` iu90YJ'•a Na�;: L�Y.tr \< ,I qLi^ w.r C!1 ♦G NO.r Y � .Y Y y. yOy A. ^a P.i�Y OA °yy L�0N11a3 tr'. m�w°o�. eo d i6 �N ct YOa I d. o;� °has boo G o L 00 ^ee iy C } C Y` Yom\° E.5� o1, q.X -5 WO.cG~ .0 15 'o bOG cy� �Yssr6 coa NC� nob u arm nrY is ...a..q� A =.YT+3 .2 2-:5 Yge 4.0 Cqs D■ ^ rqG .� .Cwp VS. M �n C y y ° ` O` Q� I's L' C y6 c 6 L C W� .MOT. -V �....1 .. � : S T O �U 4 . YiC =Cc.9u NN= Q?.O• VJ. OYYG 4g eC Y Yp NY C Z YY p ♦..4 ..3 N O C C V yy O C 6C .=2 E 6 NVy . yuY Oy�v YN, O'V O OOGN cV a Fo m. Iii En V Y m C• I � O � �• V i A U 0� 6 H • 01 a Z. .1 `•Op 0 �€ a € ^Q9�a0cc�� W O a n� y y 2 Y sty ~ °. M y • +g $ ao YSpjYCYYN(ynn• cM L�C j., y S j k. ow Q N � f ^t BS 10.aao pY e$e i s�• S 'Y 'e «c4344 Y L- _ttNL LI YMyOyyQO3Yi 4 i gigX ° 4 1�•.. FP �.a.MiM i a Cr y Y M• wa• N N ' N 4 r , o. = uYC e�iec cO 1 � '$wM ■cc Nw YY � q$ ■ N 7 N R L L R� �4 L T l G O Y YYGC QYORUL0p4p ��. N YOB yC O L ��701Y•'L.OG ss CM!NK�. U'. 9 y C. as L yE_Cg� O G Ny�y�NYUN O °� O. kao� 12 H Y T{p O W p � C Y C O Y Y{ ■Cu■9 Y y r Y ■ 2tl L Y °4U �c�ppYn� V 6O � a.a.". Crp,yc c.y ii�tL V O i 0.�6 pGN V Y� M�INNLC a NYU N b o j[�i ^AQY V1 Y C SM�'L •p� Az `• � Nd Y.'..Y��r Obi W cON� •16 (Q P Y C s 94 Ci°s M yy u� « p LL 4 CLCOYY 0' CC TO.YM� C B `1G p `}Y L O L. y j 9 b e G �[w llNll i.Y$ 6 2=2 �,ij vfaY S w NI • 1 p.t %Z� 4!c ^.z 7 9y1 �. .YCw �+.4C. SOW L4 A4t A ®OY ° O�C 8W� ~ AL S'NY CyY OYU.Tp L�MY�O"Et `p CY00. Y04•`. a� Q -u �Y �LY LYO 6$ Y YLppy••Y os ` ��11 a:yyL `n47 ccv �O'tYy,1 •S 4 4j� ■ M yO` 9 ryqK C O `�i ^Vp1OM O c'�.4a YC�� `O u °O tLO UL Y� ^ ■�d��. _YY1 RY Y4 YYY V Ay «MN ■ Cw� ^ � l N LPL N ` at a A M y C N L e N w 9 1 9 Y L OOO y Y pc. CO �• q�p �� �f ep�N Q ..cCC GL BYOpV S� v' >=���5 C0� -ON SO «EYy. Ne° Q.. "� , .9. 8.53 `J'tiv peay$ sa uCYy �^y a a Y0 u7 ��{M1 r�a ■C. +.O RsCs CC�$ ^� NOa v`CW b O..'.M4y �0f ij,$ .3 w L LYE. c 'U .—In YY °� 9^ CU -.0 00 , Vi yN Ci } a1 CAN «v w =n =.y?= `.SW 'Y.c.Y +CV�Y9 `OGN4� 0Cx00 Ci0AO y ±LO~O. �C I &V -, `QNY Nt =O Nw Y3 A.��.UCO43M p !0 . va yY c � uc.w eo'•�w 3y. ^e �e i °_sb1c ,�"pO �y �. C,op YY. y & �4C�C YO. CY ,.OY Lis cay' =µms P Q�Cy�.. {1 y�`J11 11yy GGG ,c���11 eTp �L�N.O aS.i MC' �OV JCL Jfa j-��+ Im s �. (((���� aou� moo. � rdc O1uy OOOOYC �Y�Yy T•�•IO L 9 _yCL C L Wppy ALT Y9 Ya Nil 4a° C 9 X Y N pr u �N N N 6 yy w1pl1 �C 1 a Y^ LY � S w?.. 1 YCY Y e O9 C tL �O V1" Z e • ■ Y y9G� ` O L C � •' � S Ste' 1 G O� V y W> Y G� L t 9l Y C V O Z.O Cq SYpY C ! ` y c A.S iT.3. C ��� MV =kk °3 a Q~ C L T LO \ • ltty,°y y V L Y G LyCY ay VL. •yy�•��° OLY� �9 L.t` CC T • + Y C 4 Y .. S �YU•'� O °YIkL. V. 5^N I•. Y °N +�� ^KNY• ^�� YL.LGGN +••N S'.u. � Y PE �G�C Y� ai Y„� cG.^ ■�qL O`y�j' d +: OO.w ��Wnvdq �~p'N' +i �■ � �Y 4p V OCNNQp LOO '1� OV q41 N �� _ Y •a. OWNL� ,p�� V� L. •w�iY WF,YN LN YC Uri oY CY pgjYC - n_ 'p uwV. Gvv��%% it@ GA •jCpN O�� N:. O1q V� .4n C \4 LYYJI yL S d VO�LY LNpM YN 9CC CS.-g -IS . ■ry QqCL• pL�••O `L.99 uNu�t(. y� MCC VY vD n08 GW."G'L3 S' ��Oj,. -yGM A.X-S .•• 9 . Cq,L cNLS p L O. N °'n•+ J. DO. YNYYYYNw VYN is Yli Lwow °n CiQ'J9 qxs N� N qw PF °ai ■«p OVL {�/.VL+4�"yri 1I�. }. NI'_ OY.` YW « 6Li 2 rN. CSL 4 Nq «w�jO 9y p Y 9hYC S •L�� �./IpN M «'[L�Ct O p V N y1 \O G ^� OYys �CUC�•5 OCYNVy 9 V O a Y Y` Lp L 4 C '♦ V q GrI VYC! >. w L L �. S G a SOY•+ GM Y` C O O O N S. Sp4 p NJ ui�Y YY q° •� •L CS` yC� ICL �M � Y LCY pNO 6 ` S L^ Y NY�c V O ^ O YaVL. Y YC V 2 Y L y p� i N L ■ N q N � M q ill •C N w. ■ Y t' N e• M S N O H N L CpC 9 y t N Y � ••� W 9 �= 4 M S. � n= K A � S 4 K Y C IL 0 A 6 N C. C y�yC wYpgAC pN9� �u� ✓AW L V(C `. VC CCCC �C �•rY •Y YYy pDG VO9 �aV.i to •.v.� Y'yGy a6 L S w YYG.iT �6 °.G. Q`l G CR Csa ALT Y9 Ya Nil MV =kk °3 wrd aa' 4 ea oT am. ow °YIkL. Y.�gbv Y °N D I�we� r 1+••� My � Y �aYi. 0■ �G�C Y� 9$ YT�_O ' cG.^ ■�qL O`y�j' QYO p1 L�•�9 V�� +i �■ � �Y 4p V Q _Y MT■■ HVV9 CC L G O«. C:+ q -` Y ^M' + V E�j N�. � K N� G i •'`c V.w � N:. N$ \• yL Cr pp6� �O = >6a TS iyp• q•' �� $�pi+ •O ' Y +C S M 4 M S f i. ? Y �p • w VLV~ $! Y G • O. aL �, V N y1 \O G ^� OYys m � 9 V O a Y Y` Lp L 4 C '♦ V q GrI VYC! >. �CQ C.i ^n• Gam+ M O. pp V 9C.E NJ ° 4 weS M p�••V y �SY Ctl p� r'"Y MANY.i.L GC >YLO y'•O V?.4 VVy q0= C. C y�yC wYpgAC pN9� �u� ✓AW L V(C `. VC CCCC �C �•rY 4N �N O� C. \pY yY1yL L• MM� �N + Lp> ° ^CCy d�G O. V.:. uL •t+w0 t�•w� }. R9NfV•OM 6Li 69 l�O.°ir \�\ V.O KNtLiM C WL pgo-oz t 4. w �;TY[�) �. C @Y b Ni 'Y Q YY ♦ySL w Qtxa �?wycgV` iy V F CC �U ®�]VC V N ..s 9� W .Y i ats „ .i Y C �YL � a •a .=♦ e e+. e ' b 5:'; w L 13 Z P 7 4 S. y O C -4' 4 G� ..—a V Vye M CC« C i� L'9 O a • 9 y. 1 t C ♦. i rr 6S Q_Y $ �C+ JJ yip �e �, 4 t Y COQ O yw f uuT 1�xY ;BY.O� C W t V G b` LC� GY! upsp}. a� ^yy4e4y wCC L „ 7.3 �„ Y w u W 4 6w ~ N C�+ �a +per Qw L 4� �ty.'Y C�F� v ` �a QOOZv x ' Y— COLw Hgy4w r�.6 .88 gnu —�. V Lp MM xLr�aiv ��4tj�i cad M S.T�«� $ AN wMp =4 a' rza 4 0 L r V R 6} V O a �• O W "+ aLb wow 6VtSC Y'wN t�11,�} tyyC� OVV . y2V N `O ++ OI Ca�y� eye «b MDD N�S yFyr w� ■■G YYw• i3[�41�� G N iV°•LU ~Y` Lawa.VG y FC4.0 T CwQ iN „y/�^ ^y G «v1L Ji Dr Y`yy W.LY W CKp N ■NCY' ■ ■ ■ppp!Y YqY ■GO�1 �IY=•T.'i CaG6yyL pi{« V, O y MYM bL C1'Yj �L.ily +`ti L` yM� 0 =`Y ViV `yy^ WYC+Y..e. Y L CC �C —ta1. CS Npu�C M �i tw NYG G VVyO O«F+ d Ose—. L 3 yL^ fL• +• {. Z t �� 4 407 (05 �LLZ: ri�A � f_4W:' X. 0L4Y1 13 T ` l Y i .. I i i V4 y, pp ewod. G v pw .Y..#.0 •9d 4y +.tl a+inJ a +V 7C +w. `� n r.0 rwf,m` li ; `t' uric �N91 fYJ .�.. aOtvV p�C C. .emu « - » Y c+ 5'^.So MR c • v wa '�wnv c i•�y.L �e� ww �' i+u at v qq� a v'q"aYwe ,l Vq + b Sw9 OLT r. C b P� Si 2 . V + N ) O. IL 7�N q L `Vt rLC� Q VV�R NT Ly.; `• Ypww -Sal 2,u� a ash Z r„�°” pu�� O Cuab «VV i pw`.., GC � V" �VC M V.aN Qe."+ QsirYLiY •'+„4,HQ' '�Q,p°. y' NK y +y nZy Yea N vY Ct4 y0 cw:� CY °N �� L CY O•�.�+ � ON 4M �L � N' mow.. MN® O —�Ga a 1Cy a �y L. 4,.CCi fS i° fiC'`L C � ■. C Yiyv `:C«4. 40 p 1�,��yr. yD� VyW }yxyV d•�F' 9Ca.sw. ;C1 • YCY. M6c ab OI w A.(a��- NYC.Y x� 4 Y C Q cif-c- i•��_�.22'' C NNC � V NQGw s'J VO :1Y•� �•O— ~q yr,0 , qV» 4aC« 4 01'atin "CC C.C. �. •qT {L�^ C Q ^ Ni w+ tEq ` siL T w 60Qw 4 N is M6G. 04'N EQ If .�'.'e. �+ .pw <6 OuNw V t� C 'St I \�j n �I I'll N p a nf^ 4 S pp- C p LC 'S �� Mi l C`-� YpiA 6p O ^� u u C C «^ V t g Y v O t i.N.�y 111h tYw1� GT4. Y� Mti w`C 4. N ✓N'3 �Y �a'� C `' N q o� N Zt \� ` �9 ...8 F.�C4 �� aL �� ,J gu Y. �Oi.V t\i a b■ qn� ✓w.tt3. p3 AN✓ �c fi L � \' N 00 p� w,eN�O 'n.`.. �6,T■ N •�+ 4 i'1 O i ycy'oYyI CUy- sYs }i¢¢� � s •a�. aS `L �V pO ■N�a Y. irt. [f � �YV G 4,a�• e{A� , NX aCO Zi °Nw gasp ( -YU1 'Ca� S z i1M NM aC✓«M _� !F�6y�° ■; Y Vf9 1°r 0 4^ C O CCU M 2 � a V Y✓ D O O T? ;La C06= — eyff ^ ti� N L � V1 N.^ y N , � V � M Y' ✓ a1 V w L A p V q �uC. W'•'f 2+� N G 1. N a Of'^ N y �L V M P. ML ` f r w. M V a ^ C .✓. Y Cy D q � aM�ty N G A r +D V Y Cy ■ 3 V C gq�gqY ,C YLON'�.0 SN NA L N4 ~ ✓� .0 C� Sp. ~ yVXN3 rC °14 Rjaq� M'±�CpC Y�uL V O�n1� 61T ' 6 N. y..{yBpp�e. X24 5 LLmY 4�iVOOf� �� Y��N J YOYA LxCyyM))�L �y` +• 'O r5 ..•� i1� qt� 47� \a� e��. g C � p a nf^ 4 S pp- C p LC 'S �� Mi l C`-� YpiA 6p O ^� u u C C i 7 i Y v O t i.N.�y 111h tYw1� GT4. Y� Mti w`C 4. N ✓N'3 �Y �a'� C N q o� N ^ as CA� «� ^ C, Y-1 � p3 aYi Q.Y ILIP c N 00 p� OqY A Y. Yw cc w. ✓ �6,T■ N •�+ N i'1 O Y'+f4 S\ p+C�M2Y LC 'S �� Mi l C`-� YpiA 6p CY^ t i.N.�y 111h w`C 4. N ✓N'3 �Y �a'� C i ILIP OQ Y ■> O 4 OqY A Y. Yw cc w. ✓ �6,T■ N •�+ CN Y qg Sri i i ycy'oYyI CUy- sYs }i¢¢� � O 1yi� SV Y aS `L �V pO M� afY M 4,a�• �� 'pia spf °GY 61 �Ar gasp ( -YU1 'Ca� S z i1M NM aC✓«M pZ.. Y Vf9 ,Rr• in � f ^ss4N° tl4�! 4:i 2 � a q� L, D N v Pity � �� v: °ICLfA ;La C06= — V \ N j 0 2 ^ ✓ ^ � wO Yo 5 wgC•a N q9 St IL iYC. Y`O ypN A2Y ■■Mp G S Y� M q J— 4 Y O w rC wY�_� L R V lMY Gpi ✓z O 6 S p EfAG:C 4 a 0701-02 08-22-90 PC Agenda 2 of 4 O Q w6 OOO�G L. U• OL. y. d d d tJ L L6d Yd � A.9t • M Y ^ `` d . LL M. M' pq� b �q. Cp \. dL� 44N Y� >` C r N a NMG M. � p STDwd O.L N O •• N U py 1 Ni�by Via". LC.` N.nbti ± GV yew Nu« b c � 4 .G a e ��� V•6a �D i wu= gB Y I{1 01 L g yG N y °S 3 Y O y� O .bad L a v yy.L� yy Y� R V /pn� 4 6N�N dL O w.M n4'1t N� d GpY ab Yya S. � NYO. «yam Lmr ��{{i � ;gar nd cpv Hi iaa W :; s:s `L o_ e vas I I �� L��a N1 °Yp �• V~ a ��OI.N l GN V �a V pW d^ w Cb L L L •YLY� °e op iie i 'i4 1 ... o"'rn. b aC \O Y`av Y. yN Sq e ■p W 4� rY V_ OI c �^ Y= �� W L N� w r+ u it 4M aMDC i MG v a:� c' tiorbc a UrbN O -,% `OI Y O)b V"dp4 iyLY G LY �oY rY }y S�M O.^ p�p Oy W VIC 6Ya. �3 <U 6r WMNILta i6 VO 4:w pyuU-! G Y h0 YG. ssuL01 I�NVW <a. Y umll y ��■ N.rOd '�u ups. Vs au r V u bu Ga w°y� « aml Ldd P� 01t'�wss d s air �aYi by STDwd O.L `K waL r' a C O G O y o a G 6G d dr«J C L ^o yN A b% -M i b �d Pt- �awtl .G a e G5 r q8 wu= gB G`c^ °S �w r L L ` ` �/ � y ♦� p -CpyN ■ �a1 yy ■y C ±Y 6N�N dL O w.M n4'1t N� d GpY ab ► w n.�E � NYO. «yam Lmr ��{{i � ;gar nd cpv Hi iaa W :; s:s `L o_ e vas umll y ��■ N.rOd '�u ups. Vs au Z lgg: ad{ ap swi dG$i �3ro Ga w°y� aml P� 01t'�wss STDwd O.L `K waL r' Lb «L ar V rl IR milill iii r q8 wu= gB ' a by C ±Y 6N�N WM gv.; tgo tv n.�E � NYO. «yam Lmr v Hi iaa nLa era e vas I I �� c m(Y�.. y ��■ N.rOd '�u ups. Vs au Z lgg: ad{ ap swi dG$i �3ro Ga w°y� P� 01t'�wss STDwd O.L `K waL r' Lb «L ar V rl IR iii r q8 wu= gB ' a by C ±Y 6N�N WM gv.; tgo tv n.�E � NYO. «yam Lmr v Hi iaa nLa era e vas I I �� `: 1 e L CO % • L� OI Y VM 4i{N�� L 9F ss C ..• O q 1. J^ Y Y. C q Y� � L O O Y��yy e C dP; W�a by `: 1 e c9C T _.. o Ofb bN OI Y q ^ 9F Y. by O� •p pOOYrO$C ` d Y Y00 E Va A�YV e0+ Y •N YYr Y� L yN O Y y� ` O_� ~�N GLY JLCO Y•� ^ C q p [�� r. p` b E: S W O 6 6_GYG O ■9` CC -a r L M�W� �qpM O � L � • ��1 Y sC W CY OEE W Is Y L� YL a` d. M ,yf�C�l Y YM Y b j' O N y V d Yc GOGG QYp p�� y�O1.. ,G� -1 YC 4.{�6 �b p. �i ®- G 4 C A 0 M I L` u► �) w 4 ^� Nw! r ^' a �"° 4 ~ b C y C b Y pD` ■w �. r..O�• U +q {' �I L•p pG aL Ou.lLC ~ � W0 OrY LLY4 eL OAaE upq 4 9a � C� RUS GAL. Ye WL 92 e E u■■' N G uywN 4046 Ogg w ■ Y Ly^ b !•e�y,.. ^�.O IL �NNb '�� YE; ^C N b 1 0 9 C p •W.�,O r^ IL 4R `NON Fa L c M beyy pw to o b Adak CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REDO L ... DATE: August 22, 1990 TO: Chairman ind Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner' BY: Nand Fong, Senior Planner SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 78 -03 AMENDMENT - SAM'S PLACE - A request to extend the hours of operation for an existing bar and restaurant, located at the northwest corner of Carnelian and 19th: Street in the Neighborhood Commercial' District APN: 201- 811 -56, 58,_59, and 60. 1. ABSTRACT: The applicant is requestinC. —that the existing condition of approval limiting hours of operation from 11 a.m.. to 11 p.m. be amended by extending the closing to 2 a.m.' II. BACKGROUND, In order for the .Planning Commissi to assess the applicant's request, it is important to review •fie background. The business location has a long history of non- compliance and nuisance problems by prior tenants as summarized below: On December 27, '1978, the Planning _ Commission conditionally approved the Boar's Head. restaurant with bar and entertainment. Due to consistent complaints relating to noise, loud music, fights, and loitering, the Plannifig Commission had. reviewed the Conditional Use Permit several times and modified the conditions of approval to 'mitigate these problems. Some of the mitigatirin measures added were limited hours of operation to 2 a.i:..,_ structural changes to buffer noise, and installation of speed bumps within the shopping center. In 1983, the Planning. Commission again reviewed this, Conditional Use Permit due to complaints received and modified the conditions of approval through more restrictive hours of operation (11, p.m. dosing), additional ncise attenuating materials to reduce exterior and interior noise, and required implementation of a dinner menu. In 1985, the Planning Commission further modified the Conditional Use Permit by keeping the operating hours to 11 p.m., and eliminating the live entertainment use. On September 6. 1985, the City, Council heard an appeal by the applicant, and 'upheld the decision of the Planning Commission. � 1 l£i9 E 1 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT AMENDMENT.TO CUP 78 =03 - SAM'S PLACE August 22, 1990 Page 2 In April of 1958, thl� Boa 's Heed closed and was reopened as Strattons under differrint, ownership; No compiaints were received during the per?od that Strattons was open. III. ANALYSIS• A. General. This applicant took over he business of Strattons in March of 1990. The business is renamed Sam's Place.. It serves lunch and dinner with full bar facilities but without live entertainment, Ther4f are no changes ;to. the interior. The menu has an Italian emphasis as shown in U"hibit''C," The dinner menu has more variety, than the.prev ous businesses of Strattans and Boar's Head Bar 6' Grill. Attached for your reference is a letter dated May ll, 19.90, describing in detail the business and the reasons for their request to extend the closing t °me. B. Extension of Hours of Oreration: The current operating hours for the bar and restau,,, are limited to between 11 a.m, and 11 p.m. The conditl6n ;%- approval war, imposed to addref,s the past problems of .disturbances and noise: Since the`1'imil 4ion of hours of operation was imposed in 1988, the City his not received any complaints from'surrounding residents. The request to extend the hours to 2 a.m. may create an opportunity for' problems in the future. The site is very close to single family vesidences at the west side as sharm on the site plan, Exhibit "A." Parkiro areas for the patrons of the bar could overflow to the parking area immediately west of the building which abuts the residences. Ceftain activities such as drunkeness, noise, loitering are likely to oecur due to the nature of the bar business. Such 'activities could adversely impact the adjacut residences. C. Purpose, of Neichborhood SF,upoino Center: The purpose of a - neighborhood shopping center is to provide for immediate day, :, to day convenience shopping and services for the residents of the immediate neighborhood. S'te development regulations and performance standards are intended to make land uses in the shopping' center compatible and harmonious with the character of surrounding residential areas. Staff is concerned that extending the hours of operation until 2 a.m. may net be in harmony with the single, tzmily character of the surrounding areas. ^�L PLANNING COOMISSION STAFF REPORT AMENDMENT TO CUP 78 -03 - SAM`S P ACE August 22, 1996 (t Page 3 The a lic &nt ointed out that the Planning ommission 'had approved, point other bar and restaurant businesses with longer operating hours in the evening, such as the Pepper's Cantina, at the northeast, corner of 19th Street and Archibald Avenue. Ire reviewing Pepper's Cantina restaurant and 'bar, staff finds the situation different, 'as there are no single family residences immediately abutting the site. There are apartments located on the east sidoi of the site While Pepper's i is closer to ' ;Archibald Avenue on the west side. The single family residences are all buf er6d from Pepper's Cant'na by Archibald. Avenue and 19th' Street. D. Fire and Sheriff Departments:. Both the Firc`and Sheriff Departments have been contacted for comments. The Fire Department indicated, that they foresee Lno problems with the extension` of hours of operation, HoweVee, the Sheriff's Department - recommended maintaining the existing closing time •._ of:11 p.m. 'given the history of the s. te.­., E. Conclusion:: Based on the above, staff concluded that the extension of the hours of operation may be detrimental tn.._the surrounding single family. residences < because of thee„ else. proximity and because of the nature of the bar facili ies. j Therefore,, staff would not recommend the extension of the hours of operstion. Should the Commission disaoree, other options are available: ` 1. Approve request, i.e., 11 a.m, to 2 a.m. daily.': 2. Approve extension to 2 a.m. for Fridays and Saturdays only. 3. App; ^ove, a limited extension1, possibly to 12 p.m., either daily or on Fridays, and Saturdays only. III. FACTS FOR FINDINGS :_ In order to approve this application, in full or in part, the following findings must be made by the Planning Commission;; A. That the proposed use is in accord with the General Plan, the objectives of the Development Code, and_ -the purposes of the district in which the site is located. B. The proposed use will not be detrimental to the.pubic health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious -to` properties or improvements in the vicinity. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT AMENDMENT TO CUP 78-03 - SA14S PLACE August 22, 1990 Page 4 C. The pre posed P P use complies with each of the applicable P__ -� provisions of the Develops ent Code.' IV. CORRESPONDENCE.` item has been adve -tOsed in The Inland Valley Dai1v Bulletin' newspaper, the property has been..jOsted, and notices have been sent to all property owners within 300 feet of the project site.. V. RECOMMENDATION. . Starf recommends that the Planning Commission deny the request to extend the hours , of `operation to 2' a.m.; or consider dne of the options noted above. Attached for,your review is a copy of'the Resolution,of Denial for your adoption. Respectfully, submitted, Brad Bu er City Planner BB:NF /jfs Attachments: May 11, 1990 Letter from Apr"Mcaot Exhibit "A" - Site Plan exhibit "B" - Floor P1ap; j Exhibit "C" -1 Menu for Sim's Place Resolutionof Denial r Y I. JOHN D. MANNERINO SAL BRIGUGLIO May 11, 1990 ... {p �.`/• - .. LYE Mr. Brad Buller Ji Crry OF RANCHO -CUCAMCNGA i Planning Department , 9320 Baseline Road *' Rancho, Cucamonga, CA 91730 Bear Mr. Buller - m , Please be as- that yre t Saamm Pie,- at the address as set forth in the atto;hed'.lUidtatmi Apput for CCoanditional Use (Permit. The- current o rr.I:u>a�. P.: took a!m of the busLqeas during the _sew . of `Y z4 'th: business from Thomas Mulhollar4 vhe did 1xtl as• . mss >A�1 • -�, 19f; While the format of 2heD aaaeue�e'h to Italian food, nevertheless, the pLimwy� .. �` Vie. bars >aaftor !9:00 P.M. remains that of'_sm�i :'ng >stabllshm®aat. Since the hours d= ,1 �1i period of tivie tM. businaas'' " yu a the closure of. 11:00 n p n .anther' _ torn to increm fhe t$ dui? '. ?0a:. number of bar and.,. f, and, perhaps mom- tom:. � 11s at the corms of ' �a>e '°! z °tat this places our clien6 a::l i as $igni ° + '.� t:onipete in the marhetpiace ,� � ' . $s tJae we of food ad vin hours to. tBi - (9) days a We 177ite new this Both Mr March 1 orderly, presume be nulls has man their• we 9333 BASELINE ROAD, SUITE Iii oar - r, at or'' 6 T Since Is I9 to n to . to I the as �w R• QIIQIf; G$; i C QW4) 989 11001 FAX (714) 941 -8610 Mr, Brad Buller CTY'Y OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA May 11, 1990 , r ?age 2;� We therefore respect%ily request that you consider this expareion of hours to require R closing time as set forth by the Alcohol Beverage Commission. This Is .ibaolutely nece&u" to allow, this business to compete with other like businesses to the am. and will cause no hardship whatsoever an the surrounding community. Very y yam$, & BRIGUGLIO BT• JD qp- AIT tov �„ af'r �� ,,•+ R �.�` w`^',1^Xrt� � rTy,`"� ' �"wa• wryq. �aA � f .e�.M1,�,aS.�.i.2 'i- \ .6� {.+e y x �kt :�w��ycy. �. `n•*�� .tip '7dn ti F a 4 "iw �" C7n+!r t � Wn .� �. .'.,� �� -.y.r -�` "° =� ��.-.• w/'.n �r��, sir- .yi r �z{=aur, x � 6 i,.. ,v��.•Ejs`i3t`5� �.ei, � �!i re's' Y xAri rch \ s � L9- 9 _•r— a:.ple.rrr un.n�w.w ....w.wuonl � .. • n ! ' . „ W..w lnax• ...N.•. .N1 Ir...� .w. 4 1V I;i VNO tAt an V.1.1 m 6b�� una�tua»wuo it S Z , o b till Awn '. I Sol ri f �• 1 palm � n Q x 5' 5 � V f00T p14L I� +� { /IICC ®DTI r t A .'.1 t i • ' ` Ij `y :+ -�tj' Galt �l.r th�'�l. 1 ',,.• �; � ""- ' —��'—' i4� � ;� <� r,+ ,•s• • , s art `y� #jam E n l > G� 'stiE =.si• e c,��;� -- - t t ! f L. fi uu J r'tc crC Er "y ,S %S _ +,; + f L.t.• •. /YJn T�t��'Iy�v �• / ®• t 7 fI ,'�/ � �� �( w� ' ate? t� ' f f • '., is. y It ego a w In(y �w�Sii :piorii a �nj �+nm, _ r i .�. F � �.__. t. i .. i F �o .'W o .s� + } Sr -'�7r ✓. CR1i Ur Ai ca ro z Wp� ui o€ €g 3 1 W 4T >S < X F3 jj a G 3 @3 3t y]f Q <O O Vim. LL$ i�li w0 eri � O> N 1��, 1ff It2 0 O p O q p S en $ S 4c 4c co 0 F '-Lu.., r rn Ci o' 2 0, 30 w r W$ oo . 0. iU a N u W 0.j y. E-2 if a CC 0 Lu U, ul 44 m ul am! 40 ca L!i If EL I Ll L RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF ThE 'PLANNING COMMISSIM OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, DENVt,,' AMENDMENT TO CONDITION,iL USE PERMIT NO. 78 -03 FOR EXTENDING THE HOURS OF OPERATION TO 2 A.M. LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF 19TH AND CARNELIAN ST ?PF,TS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL DISTRICT,; AND MAKING "VINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 201 - 811414 , 58, 59, AND 60. A. Recitals. (i) Sam's Place, Luanne R. Pellegrino, has filed an applicaion for the amendment to Conditional Use Permit ,No. 78 -03 as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Conditional Use Permit request is referred" to as "the application." (ii) On the 22nd of August 1990, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said hearing on that date. (iii) All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and corset. 2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced public hearing on August 22, 1990, 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 19th Street and Carnelian with a street frontage of 1,037 feet and lot depth of 240 feet and is presently improved with a shopping center; and (b) The property to the north of the subject site is a fltture freeway, the property to the south is an existing shopping center, tM property to the east is an existing shopping center, and the property to the west is existing single family residences. (c) The extension of the hours of operation for a bar from 11 p.m. to 2 a.m. would not be compatible to or harmonious with the single family character of the surrounding residential land use. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. AMENDMENT TO CUP 78 -03 - SAM'S PLACE August 22, 1990 Page 2 3, Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission, during the above - referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs l and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: (a) That the proposed use is not in accord with the General Plan, the objectives of the Development Code, and the purposes of the district in which the site is located, (b) That the proposed use, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. (c) That the proposed use complies with each of the`appTicable provisions of the Development Code. 4. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs I, 2, and 3 above, this Commission hereby decries the application. S. The Secretary -to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTER THIS 22ND DAY OF AUGUST 1990. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Larry T. McNiel, Chairman ATTEST: Brad duller, 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 Commissions of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 22nd day of August 1990, by the following vote-to-wit. AYES COMMISSIONERS% NOES: COFM SSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: �a Im CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA � F STAFF REPORT ;' '79 Date: Avgust 22, 1990 +.4 To: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission 2's From: Oarrye R. Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer By Ping Kho, Assistant Engineer Subject: Modificai; on to Development Review B9 -14 - AMPAC, Inc, - A reques : to mo y -conditions or approval relating zothe timing of on and off site improvements for a previously approved project consisting of two manufacturing bdildings totaling 26,000 square feet on 39.3 acres of land in the Heavy IndustMal District (Sub -Area is) ` of the Industrial Specific Plan, located 'at 121L?_Arrow Route APIs 229 - 121-15 The Developer iz requesting a condition modification pertaining ¢a the deferral of improvements which will be affected by a MWO project estimated to be under construction in December 1990. ' Stalif is requesting that the project be cont''7ued to September 12, 1990 to ��Jow additional time to clarify the locasAon of .existing overhead utilities to be undergrounded in relation to the MD pry ;ect. Aft Respectfully submitted, Barrye Hanson Senior Civil Engineer BRH:PK: pain a1�EI` �E CIT Y OF RANCHO CUOAMC NGA STAFF REPORT DATE: August 22, 1999` l TO: Chairman.and Members of the Planning Commission FROK: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Bruce Buckingham, Planning 'Technician SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL. ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 90 -23 - ALL:1ARS,c INC. - TILequesc -te establish a building contractor's office and yard within the existing Sixth Street Industrial Park on 4.74 acres of land in ithe General Industrial G'rs-�.r -kct, Subarea 5 of the Industrial Specific Plan, located at 1OU96, Sixth Street - APN 209 - 21140, I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCIRIPTIONc A. Action Requested: Approval of a non- construction Conditional Use Permit for a- contractor's office and ,yard within the Sixth Street Industrial Park end Issuance of a Negative Declaration. B. Surroundinc Land-Use and Zoning:' North - I t; General Industrial, Industrial Specific Plan 1—a a) South - 1. • Gsnerai Industrial, Industrial Specifiy Plan (Suov -. 5) East - Vacasit•, General Industrial, Industrial Specific Plan (Subarea 5) - West - Industrial Park,. General Industrial, Industrial Specific. Plan (Subarea 5) i' C. General Plan Desiarations� C Project Site - General Industrial G K- -th - General Industrial South - General Industrial l -ast. - General Industrial West - General Industrial �r i �z PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CUP 90 -23 - ALLMARK_. INC: August 22, 1990 ' Page .2 D. Par%ino Calculations: } z UNIT USE ARE". PKG allSINESS I.S -.P. USE Bldg. 1 A/B Office 1,200 s Ultra Shield Wholesale Warehouse 9,650 10 C Courtyard 5,425 6 Rm Builders Bldg - Const. U O,f¢'ce 600 2 ESD Electric Wholesale '" cruse 4,823. 5 Bldg. 2 E/F Office 1,200 5 Keystone 6u t Wholesale Warehouse 9,6EO 10 G Office Soo 2 Hans Schnitzler Wholesale Warehouse H Office 4,825_ 600 5 2 Spectrum Scient. Wholesale Warehouse 4,825 Bldg. 3 1 Office 600 2 . Ad Dimension Lt.Mfg.iWhsle, Mfg. 2,722 6 Warehouse 1,822' 2 .1,K,L Office 1,800 7 Pro Products Wholesale Warehouse 13,662 14 Bldg. 4 M/N Office 1,200 5 CEO Electric Wholesale Warehouse 10,058 10 0/P Office 600 2 Pacific Mold Lt.Mfg. /Whsle.' Mfg. 4,47i 9 Warehouse 2.983, 3 83,328 117 Total number of parking spaces provided is 171 E. ADplieable Re tion: The Industrial Specific Plan allows for contractor's office and yards subject to approval of a Conditional Use Permit: F. Site Characteristics: The site is developed with an existing Multi - tenant Industrial Park. II. ANALYSIS• A. General: Vernon R. Morrison Construction Company and-it's affiliate company, R.M. Builders, Inc., are proposing to occipy 5,425 square feet within the Sixth Street Industrial Park. Approximately 4,825 square feet will be usod as storage for materials, furniture, and files. The remaining 600 square feet will be used as office. The applicant is proposing hours of operation from 8:40 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Monday, Wednesday and Friday. Since the construction company i �z PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CUP 90 -23 ALLMARK,,INC. August 22, 1990 Page 3 employees go directly from home to work, only two employees will be on -site during normal besiness hours. There, are no,eehicies storedN on -site and no outdoor storage. In addition, the applicant has very few visitors to the site, for it is used primarily as a bookkeeping location. B. The primary issues in locating a contractor's office and yard.within the Sixth Street Industrial Park are compatibility with surrounding businesses and parking requirements. 1. Compatibility with Surrounding-Land Uses. The Sixth --treet Industrial Park is located .Within Subarea 5' of the Industrial Spec?'ric Plan with a land use designation of General Indcstria:. Subarea 5 allows for such rases as light aneI medium. :ranufacturing and light and medium wholesale` and storage. Currently, the oredcminate use within the complex is ligh rarehouse distributions All the businesses within _the Sixth Street Industrial Park maintain typical hour: 'of operations from 8:00 am. to 5.00 p,m. Therefore, %:iaff anticipates no compatibility problems with the applicants proposed use. 2. Parking: The Sixth Street Industrial Park is a fully developed site of 83,328 square feet with 171 parking spaces. The applicant's proposed use requires six parking spaces as defined by the Development Code. Currently, there are 117 spaces; - required for the exifting 'tenants.:, Based on the current number of spaces required and the number of provided, staff anticipates no parking problems. III. FOOTHILL FIRE !DISTRICT /SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT: The Foothill Fire District" was notified of the proposed Conditional Use Permit and expressed no concerns about the proposed use, (See Exhibit 0.) The Sherift!s Department verbally,.confirmed that they also have no concerns regarding the proposed use. 1V. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: Upon ra:•aew of Part I of the Initial Study and completion of Part II of the Environmental Checklist, staff has found no significant impacts related to a contractor's office and yard within the Sixth Street industrial Park. i —.PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF 'REPORT - CUP 90 -23 - ALLMARK,; INC. August 22, 1990 Page 4 %t ,• V. Correspondence: This 'item has been advertised as a public nearing i•n The Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper, the property has been posted' and notices have been sent to all property owners and tenants within 300 feet of the project.- VI. RgS�,mendation: Staff recommends approval of•Cond tional Use Permit 90- 23' through adoption of the' attached Resolution and: Issuance of a ?•. Negative Declaration Res p u y su ted, Bra Bu3 City nnv: BB•BB :js Attac,hmsnt5: Exhibit "A" - Subarea 5 Exhibit "Q" Site =Flan Exhibit 13V - Floor Plan - Exhibit "D" - Foothill Fire District Comments: Resolution of Approval k . �I lC � � E IV -38 6-5 Of S�9pQ �a � g a : B,$ f la 9 gs� e �.n � ,os 3�8 Ali • 4q x g 0 s d g g$ am[ l �jT�Yp s N gty mp H O W y W 111.. Nd 6�J 4i i y y O 0 O o O 3 F e I I + iss V IV -38 6-5 Of S�9pQ �a � g a : B,$ f la 9 gs� e �.n � ,os 3�8 Ali oil �• i i � • ray � , 64 c� . 14 ,t of '! --. g�. � -• E• "f� .;� � � �.ie. t ' 'fit r � •° i . ►. � . miw -- la3t+rra161l1 /1lTMI t ` ' 04INE #Ago as % �• -. ! 1 RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DIS'T'RICT RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE t PERMIT NO'. 90 -23 FOR A CONTRACTOR'S OFFICE AND YARD LOCATED AT 10096 SIXTH STREET, UNIT C. WITKIN THE SIXTH STREET INDUSTRIAL PARK IN $UBAREk 5 OF THE INDUSTRIAL SPECIFIC PLAN, AND MAKING 'FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF. - APR: 209- 211 -40. A. Recitals, (i) Ailmark, Inc. has fil'�,id an application for the issuance of the Conditional Use Permit No. 90- 23`,:as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this ;F41 olution, the subject Conditional Use Permit request is referred to as "tne`eppli'cation." ('ii) On the 22nd of August;)190, the Planning Commission r,� ¢fie City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a dul,'I Poticed public hearing on the application and concluded said bearing on that do %e. (iii) All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution, NxiW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolvedr by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A. of th {s Resolution'`�re true ar: correct. j 2. Based upon substantiai evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced public hearing on August 22, 1990, 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 ID096 Sixth Street, Unit C, with a street frontage of 316=°' Meet and lot depth of 616.15 feet and is presently improved with the Sixth Street Industrial Park; and (b) The property to the north of the subject site is General Industrial„ the property to the south of that site consists of General Industrial,, the property to the east is General 'Industrial, and the property to the west. is General Industrial. (c) The predominant land uses on subject property that, currently exist are light warehousing and storage and light manufacti;ririg. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. CUP 90 -23 - ALLMARK, INC. August 22, 1990 Page 2 (d) The applicant will maintain hours of operation from 8:ob a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. (e) Approximately 4,825 square feet will be utilized for storage. An additional 600 square feet will be used as office space. (f) A total of six parking spices are required for the use'. Currently, there are 171 parking spaces availah'ie on site with o -y 117 Spaces ` being utilized. 3. Based upoi the substantial evidence presented to this Comnisrfon during the above - referenced public hearing 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 proposed use is in accord with the General Pan, the objectives of the Development Code, and the purposes of the district in which the site is located. •r (b) That the proposed use, tog'e.yher with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. (c) That the proposed use complies with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code. 4. This Commission hereby finds and certifies that the project has been reviewed and considered in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1370 and, further, this Commission hereby issues a Negative Declaration. S. Based upon '`he__findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs' 1, 2, 3 and 4 above, this Commission hereby appr`aves the application subject to the following conditions set forth below: _ (1) Approval of this request shall not _waive compliance with all sections of the Industrial Specific Plan and all other City Ordinances. (2) If the operation of the.facility causes adverse effects upon adjacent busir-�sses or tenants, including, but not limited to noise, the Conditional Use Permit shall be brought before the Planning Commission for the consideration and possible termination of use, (3) The facility shall, be operated in conformance with the perfnrmand standards for Subarea 5 of the Industrial Specific Plan. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION. N0. 1P 90 -23 ALLMARK, INC. August 22, 1990 Page 3 (4) This approval shall expire, unless extended by the ­Planning Commission, if bu'lding permits 4 are`, not issued or approved use has not commenced operation within 24 months from date of apprl,ival. (5) No storage facilities or vehicles shall be exposed to public view. All storage will be maintained within the building, 5. The Secretary to tr is Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 22ND DAY OF AUGUST 1990. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY. • Larry T. McNiei, Chairman ATTEST- Brad Buller, Secretary I, Brad Buller, Secretary `of the 'Planning Commission of the City iii' 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 s regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 22nd day of August 1990, by ::the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: M1' CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT *,l DATE: August 22, 1990 T0: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Brett Horner, Associate Planner SUBJECT: REOUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION OF A MODi.FICATION TO TRACT 13273 - LEWIS HOMES - A request to modify a condition of approval for a previously approved and recorded one -tot tract for 256 condominium units within the Medium -Nigh Residential District (14 -24 dwelling units per acre) of the Terra Vista Planned Community, located at the southeast corner of Milliken Avenue and Mountain View Drive - APN: 227,- 151 -13. I. ACTION REQUESTED: Reconsideration of the Commission's decision to deny a requested modification to Condition No. 11 of the approved Tract 13273. II. BACKGROUND: On July 11, 1990, the Commission denied the applicant's request to modify a condition of approval requiring trail improvements along the south property 'tine of Tract 13273. The attached report dated July 11, 1990, outlines the request in detail. III. ANALY' qF REQUEST. Rather than appeal the Commission's decision to the iity Council, the applicant has elected to return to the Commission to resolve this issue. As xas discussed at the July 11 meeting, park improvement plans have become very complex which _ affects plan check reviews. The review and design of this park, in particular, was made even more complex because its location was changed, because it is next to the YMCA, and because it interfaces with the Greenway Trail in Terra Vista. IV. DISCUSSION: Given these factors, it may be appropriate for the Commission to reconsider denial of the applicant's request and seek an alternative course of action to address the problem. Staff notes that since this is a request for a modification to a condition of approval, the Commission has the opportunity to add new conditions and to require public improvements not originally required as part of Tract 13273's approval. For instance, the Commission could require, that the entire Milliken Park and portions-of the Greenway Trail be completed prior to completior tf the project (see Exhibit "P), Since the project was appruved ITEM H PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT RECONSIDERATION OF MOD. TO TT 13273 - LEWIS HOMES August 22, 1990 Page 2 when the land south of the tract was not a park site, completion of Milliken Park was not made a condition of approval. The n �V is required to be completed by other surrounding project.. —z most of these are still in design stages and have not been issued buildi-g permits, The Engineering and Planning Divisions have drafted a revised condition of approval which would allow phased release of occupancy of the apartments in proportion to the degree of completion of the Milliken Park and Greenway Trail improvements. Hence, as work progresses on the park ;'3nd trail, additional apartment units could be released for occupancy, with the phased release to be carefully monitored by the City Planner. This condition also ensures that the entire park and' the portions of the Greenway Trail adjacent to Traci 13273 and the portion connecting to the Nest Greenway Park is completed prior to release of 95 percent of the 256 uaits, in accordance with City Council Resolution No. 88 -557. V. CORRESPONDENCE: This item t+as been advertised in The Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper as a public hearing and, notices were sent to all property owners within 300 feet of the project site. V.I, RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Commission reconsider the applictnt s request for modification and adopt the attached Resolution of Approval which contains rRvised wording for Condition 'No. 11 as discussed in this report. Re�sp0y submit Bra Bull City ary{er BB:BHOjfs Attachments: Exhibit "1" - Letter from Applicant Exhibit "'-' - Staff Report of July 11, 1994 Exhibit "3" - Sit. Plan Resolution of Approval 1 i j I l Lewis Home's Management Corp. e 1I56 North Mountain Avenue I P.O. Box 670 r Upland, California 91735 t 714/985 -r;1 FAX:714i949- 6706 {, . August 10, 1990 Mr. Brad Buller HA2dD _DELIV City Planner City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Drive P. O. Box 870 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Re: TTH 13273 - Modification to condition No. 11 Dear Brad: on July 11, 1990, the Planning Commission denied our request for a modification to Condition No. 11 (amended) of Tract 13273. Subsequent discussions with you and your staff have resulted in a proposed compromise that wa would like t> - Planning Commission to consider. Therefore, we request reconsideration of this matter at the August 22, 1990, Planning Commission hearing. Thank you for your assistance. very truly yours, �S g4OME5 D" ^ AGENT CORP. J (fsegh) M. Oleson V ce President enior vice President JMO :ksk cc: Rick J. Gomez i OF UCAMONGA M ; P L A N Irwrt ION EmArr.. SCALE: i. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF DEPORT \ AML DATE: July 11, 1990 T0: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Brett Horner, Associate Planner SUBJECT: MODIFICATION T4 TENTATIVE TRACT 13273 - LEWU HOMES - A request to modify a con ion o approva or a previously approved and recorded one-lot tract for 256 condominium units within the Medium -High Residential District (14 -24 dwelling units per acre) oV the Terra Yista l- ,nned Community, located at the southeast corner of Mi Liken Avenue and Mountain ViodOriv4 - APN; 227- 151 -13.. I. ACTIOM REQUESTED, Approval of a requested modification to on ion o. of the approved Tract 13273, II. BACKGROUND: The tract was approved in May of 1987. The ent. re southerrn [ioundary adjoins the east greenway corridor (see Exhibit "A "), which is the major trail spine of the pedestrian circulation system through the Terra Vista Community. The Planning Commission tied the improvement and construction o'' the greenway to the tract development as stated in Condition No. 11: 11. The Greenway Trail adjacent to the project's south perimeter shall be developed as part of this project. Complete improvement details for the Greenwalf Trail shall be included in the landscape /irrigation plans, subject to*the review _ and approval of the Planning Division. (May 1967 original condition) You will recall that the land use configurations south of the tract wer%: revised, primarily due to establishment of the YMCA (see Exhibit "B ") but also because the park locations ire revised. Because of these changes the Greenway Corridor is now part of a .ark site, rather than an independent trail. Taerefore, the improvement plans needed to address the entire park site. Although those plans have been submitted for plan chec.:b,,. the processing and approval of park plans is a more lengthy process than those of the greenway corridor alone. In fact, the plans are still under review. .1617 Zlq-41 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT MODIFICATION TO TT 13273 LEWIS HOMES July 11, 1990 Page 2 In February. of 1989, Lewis Homes requested and was granted approval for a modification to the original condition to gain up to 50 percent occupancy of the apartments prior to =Meting the trail /park improvements. The condition was revised to require improvements on the north side of the concrete trail walk only. The walk is 'located along the northern park "boundary (Exhibit The revised condition reads as follows: 11. The greenway sidewalk system within the YMCA park site shall be constructed and landscaped from the walkway, northerly to the tract boundary, for the length of the south Property lines prior to release u r. (February 1989 conditiou within Tract revision) ANALYSIS: A. Request: Because the improvement plans are still not approved, and the apartment project As very close to completion (50 percent of the units have already been issued final occupancy), the applicant is requesting a phased release of the remaining 50 percent while the plans are under review (Exhibit "C"). This would amount to the release of 32 units per month (rssuming the units are _ready for release after inspections) until the final 32 units are ready. The last 32 units of the 256 -unit project would be held until total completion of the trail improvements. Although the applicant's request would still #.insure eventual completion cf the improvements, an option was presented to Levis Homes, by staff, to satfsfy the amended condition, without having to change Condition 11 a sacond time. Under this option, a temporary irrigation connection would b2 made to the apartment project and the trees, shrubs, groundcover,_ and other improvements could be completed while the final plans -ire being reviewed and approved. If any changes were made, the applicant would be responsible for rectifying them (such as planting additional trees, relocated trees, etc.). The applicant would also be responsible for the maintenance until the entire park site is completed end passes final inspection. However, the appiicait has indicated that this would not be acceptable because of the time it would take to develop even this interim plan. B. Considerations: Staff notes the following facts for the omm ss on s considerAtion: PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT MODIFICATION TO TT 1 -273 - LEWIS HOMES July 11, 1990 Page 3 x. As required by she amended Condition 11, the park/trailt improvement plans for this area should have been submitted, approved, and the improvements completed prior to 50 percent of the units being released; a,-d 2. The park /trail is an amenity which provides needed recreation facilities and aesthetic relief to the general vicinity, including screening of the enclosed garages which border the park site, and 3. The park /trail plans have been submitted and have _gone through initial plan check reviews. The plans require several revisions; and 4. The trail does not Currently lead or connect to other -existing portions- of the Greenway`Trail. Although', the Milliken Avenue underpass is constructed, the Greenway Trail to the east Sad nest of this project consists of vacant land and will not be improved for sow time,; and S. The City is not in danger of not hLy -ing the park and trail installed (eventually) since occupancy of so-ine units within Tract 13273 (the applicant proposed 32 units) can be held until complete improvements are installed; and 5. That there are other options to get the required trail improvements, including an interim plan in which the improvements are made and a temporary irrigation Connection is made. In this ''scenario, the final acceptance of the improvements would not be made until the entire par% site is completed. `' IV. OPTIONS: Staff has outlined the following options for the- Commission's consideration: 1. Grant the request by re -wording Condition 11 in a manner deemed appropriate by the Commission (suggested wording is included in the attached Resolution of Approval); or 2. Deny the request by keeping Condition 11 as modified by-the Ccomission in February, 1989, thus requiring the improvements before any further release of occupancy; or 3. Direct the applicant, to pursue the interim solution ae. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT r: MODIFICATION TO TT 13273 -LEWIS HOMES July 11, 1490` Page -4 V. CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised as a public hearing e= n and Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper, the property poste . an notices sent to proper y owners within 300 feet of the project site. VI. RECOMMENDAT1OR: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission consider e7 °`34ions outlined above and direct' staff to proceed with the appopriate course of action. Resolutions of Approval and Denial are attached for the Commission's consideration. Resp ly su led Bra er City P nn BB :BH /Jfs Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Greenway Corridor Alignment Exhibit "B" - YMCA Park Site Layout Exhibit "C" - Letter from Applicant Exhibit "D" - Resolution No. 87 -82A ' Resolution of Approval Resolution of Denial 1, �CY PR RK d.G.r ,l"w Alw -gym. f OF Western Land Properties 11;61 nh Ikuntatn Avsnua! P.O.6ou 670IUpOand, C4titomla 91785 714138;-0971 FAX, 7141081 -8799 4 3une 6, 1990 Planning Division HAND DELIVER city of Rancho Cucamonga P, ssox 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 971730 Attn: Brett Horner Ref.: Modification - Tr. 13273 (Res. 87 -821,) Gentlemen: Thank you for your efforts to expedite final approval of the Milliken Avenue Park plans to enable us to start construction, but .so much time has now passed that we must seek modification of Tract 13273's conditions to allow phased occupancy of the remaining units during greenway construction. As you recall, back in February of last year, the Planning Commission modified those conditions of approval to allow occupancy of the first halt of the project before completion of the greenway along its south boundary. This was done with Debra Meier's support, because we wanted to build the entire park instead of just the greenway, as conditioned, and we all thought that the rewording would allow us plenty of time to design, go through plan check, and build the entire Milliken Avenue Park. We were wrong. Our landscape architects, Land Concern,,. Ltd., had to l concentrate their efforts during the months, immediately after to modification on the several redesigns of La Mission Park,- which had to be approved and partially graded last year in order to provide storm drainage for the project to the north of it. That laborious process, as well as the time spent in "fine- tuning" the Milliken Park design concept with Community Services' staff, kept them from starting working drawings j until late summer, and various design problems (see ecnlosed 1 transmittal letter copy) delayed our submission for plan check unt. 1 late September. At that time, with 10 months to go, it still appeared that the City's normal plan check process would allow us plenty of time for construction. It did not. Although we met with Community Services and Engineering staff last month to try to wrap up the processing and expedite release of the grading permit while time still remained for jl H—/A C� Plannt,' g Division City of Rancho Cucaemonga June 6, 1990 Page. 2 t construction, various problems (resolution of conflicting commento,, etc.) have :prevented us from - Obtaining it even to this ;day, and we now find ourselves without enough time left to do all the grading `(two. weeks) , storm drain. construction (three weeks), and sidewalk and landscaping/irrigation installation (another month) before the second phase units are ready for occupancy. The biggest problem is,that,since we don't have a permit to start: the work, we can't even giv prospective tenants a projected occupancy date. Fdr that " reason, we need to get on the '`rst available,, agenda so we'll know where we stand. obviously, we want {.-o build more park (and faster) than you -d require of us, or we wouldn't be it this situation at all, );ut iff you still feel that you want 12273's occupancy conditioned on the greenway completion., a simple phased release schedule of, say, 25% (32 units) per month from the timb we finally get the grading permit until -we complete tl=� irk should assure you that we won't forget about it. The last 32 units could be held hostage until eventual completion, in case another unforeseen delay arises and, of course, all units would be released as the work is completed. As to the timing of the hearing, as the slight modification we suggest doesn't seem to us vo require public notice, we'd appreciate being scheduled for June 27 (by copy of this letter we are asking, the City Attorney if public notice is needed) and, if there is any way you can put it on earlier, we'll give up our spot for Tr. 13859 on the June 13 agenda. In view of the above, we mope you'll support our .quest for this modification and, if so, that you'll 1, us 'know immediately so that we can decide haw to handle ').:bspective second phase move- :ins. Please call me or Tom Dellaquila (949- 6689) if you have any questu 6s. I didn °t think it necessary to go into all the gruesome details of design and redesign, unless you or the Commission have, questions, since this request doesn't seem at all controveTsial to me. I think we all want to get the parks built as soon as ' possible (as a matter of fact, we're quite disappointed that we weren't able Po get both La Mission and Milliken F3rk open by this spring) , but none of us had any idea how long it would take.to get to this point. Enclosed is our $398 check in payment of the modification fee; 1� r • l Lewis Homes Management Corp. 1156 North Mountain Avenue I P.O. Box 6701 UpW4 Cdifomis 91785 7141985.0971 FAX: 7141981.9799 September 28, 1989 Mr. Dave Leonard Community Services Department City of Rancho Cucamonga 9320 Base Line Road Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Dear Dave: Enclosed plear> find the working drawings for the YMCA Park. As you are aware, development of these working drawings was significantly delayed by several factors. The master plan for Terra Vista originally included two separate parks, the East Greenway Park and the East Retention Basin Park. The school district's decision not to purchase the school siee adjacent to the East Greenway Park led to the need for Plan Amendment No. 6 and made the East Greenway Park location inappropriate. Both parks were combined into one larger park in 'he current location, a design in the best interests of the City and the park users. Further complicating the situation was the need to - develop the park design and the YMCA site plan as an integrated design. Once this design was completed, the City had to separate the two sites in such away that maintenance responsibilities 'f were clearly defined it) the field. This definition of :resppns•- ibilities caused some delay. Lewis Homes began working drawings of the park by phases. This proved to be not acceptable to the City,, and we were directed to hold development of plans until the conceptual park plan. for Phase II was approved by the Park Commission. After we obtained this approval, we began preparation of the working drawings for the entire perk. This caused further delay.' AM c f! -/3 Mr. Dave Leonard September Re, 1984 Page 2 Despite these Complications, we believe that we have arrived 4t the best possible park (+n the best loaation. Our concern is with the conditions of approval requiring canstruct�oin of the %park to be partially completed prior to occupancy of our apartments ad3acent to the park, "tract 1$e73. We ask that the City work with us to expedite the plan check process. Lewis Homes will initiate co;�struction a$most immediately once these plans are approved. La MiztJon Park has now been in first plan check for six weeks and we Lave not yet received comments. We ask your cooperation in turning around the plan check for the YMCA Park in considerably less -time. Thark you for your past efforts in getting these parks designed . and moved through the approval process. if you have any questions regarding this letter, please call me at (714) 444 - 6694. Sincerely, LEWIS HOMES MANAGEMENT CORP. f Gir1�- Tom DelZzquAlj Staff Landscape Architect 1'D%cjc1dly8492 o, E 7, - RESOLUTION N0. 87 -82A A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A MODIFICATION TO ti TRACT 13273 AND DESIGN REVIEW THEREOF FOR A ONE -LOT SUBDIVISION ON 15.8 ACRES OF LAND IN THE MEDIUM -HIGH RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (14 -24 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) WITHIN THE TrRRA VISTA PLANNED COMMUNITY, LOCATED ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF MILLIKEN AVENUE AND MOUNTAIN VIEW DRIVE, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 227- 151 -13 A. Recitals. (i) On May 22, 1987, this Commission adopted Resolution No. 87 -82, thereby approving, subject to specified conditions, a one -lot subdivision for condominium purposes in the Medium - High Residential District (14 -24 dwelling units per acre) of the Terra Vista Planned Comounity, (ii) Planning Division Condition No. 11 states that: "The Greenway Trail adjacent to the project's south perimeter shall be developed as a part of this project. Complete improvement details for the Greenway Trail shall be included in the landscape /irrivation plans,. subject to the review ant! approval of the Planning Division." Leris Homes has filed a rbyuest for the modification to Condition No. 11 of Tract 13273 as described in the title Of this Resolution. (iv) On the 8th day of ?ebruary, 1989, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the requez.+ed modification and concluded said hearing on that date. occurred. (v) All legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have IIII B. Resolution. _ NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined and resolved by the Planning Comwission of tlae City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: set forth in the Recitals, Part hereby this fResoluyition are true and correct ads ... Based upon substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced public hearing on February 8, 1989, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically fit,ds as follows: pry i PLANNING COMISSION RE'SOLUr-ION 410. 87 -82A MODIFICATION 'TO TR ' 73 LEWIS February 8, 1989 Page 2 a) The application applies to property located at thi !outheast corner of Mi1'iken avenue and Mountain Viers Drive with a street frontage of 634.00 feet along .l!"liken Avenue and 654.50 feet along Mountain View Drive and is presently O!A mproved; and land, b) The property on all sides of the subject site is vacant 3. BasO4 upon substantial evidence+ presefited to this Commission during the above- referenced public hearing ant, upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs i and 2 above, Ws Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a) The tentative tract is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, and specific plans; b) The design or improvements of the tentative tract is consistent with the General Plan, bevelopment,Tode, and specific plans; proposed; c) The site is physically suitable for,the type of development d) The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause substantial environmental dan%ge and avoidable injury to humans and wildlife or their habitat; e) The tentative tract is no% likely to cause serious public health problems; f) The design of the tentative tract will rat conflict with ny easement acquired by the public at large, now of record, for access through or use of the property within the propo :.4d subdivision. 4. This Commission hereby finds and certifies that the project h. -- been reviewed and considered in compliance'with the California Environmenta< Quality Act of 1970 and, further, this Commission hereby issued a Negative Declaration on May 27, 1997. E. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3 and 4 above, this Comission hereby approves the application and modifies Tract 13273 by modifying Planning - Division Condition —iio. it to read as follows: R. PLANki.:G- COMMISSION RrSOLUTION NO. "87 -82A MODIFICATION TO TR : _ -3 - LEWIS' February 8, 1989 Page 3 1p "The greenway sidewalk system within the YMCA park site shall be constructed and landscaped from the walkway, northerly to the tract ..;undary foie the length of the south property line, prior to release of occupancy for 505 of the units within Tract 13273." 6. All other conditions of Resolution 87-82 ^hall still apply. 7. The "Secretary to this Comnissio shall certify to the .'',option of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 8TH DAY OF,FEBRUARY, 1989. PLANNING CC07SSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMON6A"i, Tarry T. WHi Cnairmap ATTEST: rAQUIX , wcr_ 3qErU0 I, Brad Buller, Secretary "_of the Planning Comejission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby cerkt. ,; -that the "foregoing Resolution eras duly and regularly introduced, passed,`iind adopted uy the Planning Commission..' -if the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular ri-eti;ng of the Planning Commission held on thr 8th day `ruary, 1989, by the "foil ;rg vote -to -wit: AYES: CCMMISSIOAERS; SLAKESLEY, CHITIEA, EMERICK, MCNIEL, TOLSTby NOES: COMMISSIONEPT" NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NCNE - e r GREENWAY �-� -P/ RIO( u A I P-A I L- J�Lj, AF-f-As MAXJ�ZD A AND D ty\'Jb-r mom& bE C4MPLVT6D wp-- P-acw-SID. toOD14-WS CH OF OUCAMONGA PLA�i E SIGN nTLE: N SCALE: TIOU., ff EXHIBM A Im RESOLUTION NO, 87 -326 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A MODIFICATTON -TO TRACT NO. 13273 AND DESIGN REVIEW THEREOF, FOR A ONE -LOT SUBDIVISION ON 15,8 ACRES OF LAND IN THE MEDIUM -HIGH RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (14 -24 DWELLING .UNITS PER ACRE) WITHIN THE TERRA VISTA PLANNED COMMUNITY, LOCATED ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF MILLIKEN AVENUE AND MOUNTAIN VIEW DRIVE, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREC - APN: 227 - 151 -13 A. Recitals, M On May 12. 1987, this Commission adopted Resolutfon No. 87 -82,: thereby approving, su1ject to specified conditions, a one -tot subdivision for condominium purposes in the Medium -High Residential District (14 -24 dwelling units per acre) of the Terra Vista Planned Community. (ii) On February 6, 1990, this Commission adopted Resolution No. 87 -82A, thereby approving a modification to Condition No. 11. (iii) Pianning Division Condition No. 11, as amended, states that. "The greenway sidewalk system within the YMCA park site shall be constructed and landscaped from the walkway, northerly to the tract boundary for the length of the south property line, prior to release of occupancy for 50% of the units within Tract x3273." (iv) Lertis Homes nas filed a request for the modification to the amended Conaition No. 11 of Tract 13273 as described in the title of this Resolution. (v) On July 11, 1990, the Planning Commission denied said request. (vi) On July 30, 1990, the applicant requested reconsideration of the denial vote by the Planning Commission, (vii) On August 22, 1990, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded s ?id hearing or that date, (viii) All legal prerequisites prior to the .adot on of this Resolution have occurred. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 87 -BZB MOuiFICATION TO 71713273 - LEWIS HOMES August 22, 1990 Page 2 j B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specificarly finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Fart A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced public hearing on August 22, 1990, 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 southeast corner of Milliken Avenue and Mountain View Drive with 'a street frontage of 634.00 feet along Milliken Avenue and 654.50 feet along Mountain View, Drive and is presently improved and under construction; and (b) The property on all sides of the subject site 'z� vacant land, and c) The applicant desires to construct the Greenway Trail concurrently with the YMCA park site which is adjoining the trail. (d) The Greenway Trail does not exist east or west of the subject property. (e) The apartment units can be released as work progresses on the Greenway Trail and Milliken Park. 3. Based upon the substantial evidenre presented to this Commission during the above - referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs I and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: (a) The request is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, and Terra Vista_ Community Plan; and (b) The design or improvements of the Tentative Tract is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, and Terra Vista Community Plan; and (c) The site is not ;affected by the applicant's request, in that the ccadition pertains to off-,site improvements; and (d) The request is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or avoidable injury to humans and wildlife or their habitat; and (e) The request is not likely to cause serious_ public health problems; and PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 87 -826 MCOIFiCATION TO TT13273 LWIS HOMES August 22, 1990 Page 3 Alk (f) The design of the tract does not conflict with any easement acquired by the public at is -ge, now of record,, for access through or use of � the property within the proposed subdivision 4. This Commission hereby finds and certifiv that the project has been reviewe6 and considered in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 and, further, this Commission issued a Negative Declaration on May 27, 1987. 5. Based upon the findings and wonclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application and modifies Tract 13273 by modifying Planning Division Condition No. 11 to read as follows: "The applicant shall construct and complete, in place, the Mil'licen Park -ind the adjoining portions . of the Greenway Trait connecting to the east along Tract 13273`s southerly border and Westerly to the West Greenway'Park. Approv ?i of utility connections to the remaining unocrupied units may be granted incrementally and in proportion to the extent of the completion of off -site development improvements (including Milliken Park and adjoining, Greenway Trail connections to the east and ;west) as determined by the City Planner, up to a limit of 95 percent of the total units of the project. The balance of the remaining units shall be released for utility connections only after the completion of all development improvements, including the establishment period -?^r landscaping and acceptance of the improvements by the City Council in accordance With the City Council Resolution No. 88- 557," S. All other corwditions of Resolution 8782 shall remain valid. 7. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 22NO DAY OF AUGUST 1990. ;LWi'NING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA L- $Y• !I Larry T. MccNiel, Chairman l ATTEST. Brad Buller, Secretary PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 87 -828 MODIFICATION TO TT13273 - LEWIS HOMES August K. 1990 < Page 4 I, Brad of the Planning .Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do herlby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly Ird , regularly intrdulac4,'., passed, and adopted by the Planning f-9mmission of the City of Ran6o Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Pl�nhii6 Commission held on the 22nd day of August 1990, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS;, ' ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS; r t ' � 2- �l 4 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT r. DATE: August 22, 1990 TO: Chairman an;' Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Dan Coiemin, Principal Planner SUBJECT: REGIONAL TRAILS L. RECOMMENDATION: - Staff requests that the - Planning Commission reconsider their previous direction concerning location of Regional Trails. II. BACKGROUND: At *th€' July 25 meeting, the Commission reviewed the issue of whether Regional Hiking & Riding Trails should, be located on only one side of flood control 'channels, except within the Equestrian /Rural Area (see July 25 staff report attached). Staff and the Trails Advisory Committee had recommended that they should not be located on both sides because it was not ne!,essary for the functionality of the Regional Trail system ;nd was cost prohibitive. Within the Equestrian /Rural Area (abov.— anyan), the Regional Hiking and Riding Trails should be provided on both sides of the - hannel to promote maximum access to adjoiW,ng develoynent and allow equestrians to travel separated from bicy: lists. - To the contrary, the Commission determined that the Regional Hiking and Riding Trails should occur on both sides'of the channels below Banyan, with priority givfn to first ;funding Regional Bicycle Trails along channels below Banyan. This dacision has significant ramifications on the total cost of instatling the Regional Trail system because of the number of street undercrossings involved. At the time the issue was discussed, staff indicated that the preliminary estimate for the cost of each street underpass for the Regional Trail system was approximately 1312,000. The consultant has worked with C1ty 'Engineering Division and completed,cheir cost_ estimates which indicates that the cost is 41,200.000 each. Obviously, providioc_, Regional Trails cm both sidn of the channels requires dual underpasses at each major street; hence, the overall cost of the- Regicaaf grail system would double in the millinns of dollars. - -- ITEM Y DATE: TO: FROM: BY: SUBJECT: ,y CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ;. STAFF REPORT July 25, 1990 Chairman and Members of the Plannin^ Commission Brad Buller, City Planner Dan Coleman, Principal Planner DRAFT TRAILS IMPLEMENTATION PLAN (Addendum Report) 1 I. RECOMMENDATION: Staff and the Trails Advisory Committee recommend that Regional Hiking & Riding Trails be located on only one side of the flood control channels, except within the Equestrian /Rural Area where they should occur on both sides. Staff is seeking your direction on this -issue, i II. BACKGROUND: Since 1981, the City's General Plan Master Plan of Tr . is has designated multi - purpose Regional Trai -s along the many flood control channels. The City Council adopted "their Resolution No. 8343 which established a design standard for Regional Traits showing hiking, •riding, and bicycling trails - coexisting side-by- side aloh.q one side of the channels. This issue was discussed by the Trails Advisory Committee on July 18, 1990. The consensus of the Committee was that Regional Hiking and Riding Trails: should be located' on both sides of the channel, as opposed to one side only, within the Equestrian /Rural Area, Their deliberations focused o„ the potential safety concern created by bicycles distrubing horses if the trails were both is -aced on the same side of the channel. The Committee cited the example of how well the Demens Channel Regional Tail has worked because the bike trail on the south side is separated from the hiking /riding train on the north side by the channel. To maintain the Regional Hiking and Riding Trails along both sides of the channel, and provide a safe, functional, interconnected system, underpasses must be constructed where the trails cross major streets. These underpasses would be similar to those along the Cucamonga Creek Trail at 19th Street and Base Line Road, A total of 21 locations are planned for underpasses (see Figure 6). Accommodating hikers eind equestrians on both sides of the channel within the Equestrian%Rural Area, instead of combined on the same side with bicyclists, would require that 4 additional underpasses be constructed at an estimated cost of $1,248,000. PLANNING COMMISSION 'STAFF 'RfiPORT DRAFT TRAILS IMPLEMENTATION PLAN July 25, 1990 Page Z ! ., R4submed, s9:DC /Jfs Attachments- Figure 6 r i i r i i AW a� ccl CL b. CD® m a c Y i Y i I I CITY OF RANCHO CU'CAmONGA STAFF R,EPGRT rl� `ATE: August £C, 1990 ' TO: Chairman and Members of the 'Planning Cormission FROM: Brad Buller, Cite Planner BY: Vince Bertoni, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMEW, REVIEW 9^ 0_ 03 SPENCER & JONES The development of- a building contractor's office and warehouse tataling '8,638 square feet on'2.18 acres of land in the General Industrial District, Subarea 13 of the Industria" Specific Plan, 1'ocate0 at the southwest corner of 6th Street and Rochester Court APN: 229 - 263 -04. I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action Requested: Approval of site plan, grading, and budding elevations, and issuance of a Negative Declaration. B. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North Vacant; General Industrial (Subarea 13 of the Industrial Specific. Plan) South - Existing Warehouse /Distribution Building; General Industrial (Subarea 13 of the Industrial Specific Plan)' East - Existing :30n- conforming s!, \pgle family residence; General Industrial (Subarea 13 of the Industrial Specific Plan) West - Vacant; Genera? Industrial (Subarea 13 of the Industrial Specific Plan) D. General Plan Designations: Project site - General Industrial North - General Industrial South General Industrial East - General Industrial West - General Industrial D. Site Characterisiacs: The property is developed with an existing vineyard. I� d PLANNING COMMISSON STAFF REPORT DR 90 -03 » SPENCER,& JONES - August 22, 1590 Page 2 F. Parkinc± Calculations: Type Square Parking of Use Footage Ratio Office 3,984 1/250 Warehouse 11,654 1/1000 Extra Parking TOTALS 15,638 Number of Spaces Reguire3 16 12 28 Number of Spaces Provided 16 12 2 30 11. ANALYSIS: A. General: The applicant is requesting approval for construction of a concrete tilt -up industrial building to be used as a building contractor's office and warehouse. The - existing driveway along Ut project's southern boundary will become a shared driveway for this project and the existing industrial building to the '�nuth. In addition to concrete tilt -up panels, the proposed.b6 lding utilizes concrete with a. sandblast finish and glass. ':-.'site is in close proximity to the Devore Freeway (I -15), therefore a 6 -foot concrete panel wall is proposed along the eastern property line with a row of yvergreen trees planted approximately thirteen feet on center in order to screen outdoor storage -"•rom the freeway. B. Design Review Committee: On duly 19, 1990, thf, Committee Chitiea, Tolstoy, Kroutil) reviewed the project and recommended approval subject to the following conditions: 1. Add v- groove lines above the 12 -inch wide accent stripe to provide more definition, 2. Submit revised accent stripe with a more clear color ' value, 3. Provide a screen wall or landscape planter between - the building entrance and employee plaza to prb;ride separation for the entrance and privacy for the plaza. 4. Revise the parking lot entrance to include exposed aggregate with natural concrete banding to t,atch the existing parking lot entrance to the south. S. Provide a pedestrian connection between the building entrance and the sidewalk along k0hester Court. D PLANRING COMMIaSSION STAFF REPORT DR 90 -03 - S ENCER & JONES August 22, 1990 Page 3 6. Add enhanced landscaping on the northwest corner of the' site to provide a project statement along 6th Street (major arterial).. 7. Add a mesh or solid backing to the security gate to screen the visa of the outdoor storage area. 8. The wood trellis above the employee plaza should utilize Q x beams instead of 2 x beams. C. Technical Review Comnittee: On July 17, 1990, the Committee reviewed thr project aV determined that, with the recommended standard conditions of approval, the project is consistent with all applicable standards and ordir:ances. On July 15, 1990, tNe Grading Committee conceptually approved the project. 0. Environmental Assessment: Upon review of Part I of the Initial Study, and completion of Part II of the Environmental Checklist, staff bas found no significant impacts as a result of this project. III. FACTS FOR FINDIVGS: The ornposed use is consistent with the General Plan and the xndustrial Specific Plan. The building design and site plan togeth� with n?cammtided conditions of approval are in compliance with the Industrial Sperific Plan and will not be detrimental to the public health, safe: ;,or welfare or materially injurious to properties or impt<<vements in the vicinity. IV. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the r,;nning Commission approve Development Review 90 -03 through tha L ,ption of the attached Resolution with conditions art 'gsuance of a Negative Declaration. Res lly su bed, Bra u r City P ann BB:VB.js Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Vicinity Map Exhibit "C" Detailed Site Plan Exhibit "C" Conceptual Landscape Plan Exhibit "D" - Conceptual Grading Plan Lxhibit "E" - Building Elevations Resolution of Approval itandard Conditions i � I IN rnvoli VAMW ,. ,SAG LoT .r— YPafiYu 4tdMd �1 M' /R � s � � � It ♦�`� • .L Y�IRa4 dK"p.1y 4La.+c rnxls'iq. ,� z 1 E( 317 _ "`.�"'!� $ � a+G'nr•r U 1 f. t 7l ,/Na.e• 5 I� _ r ., h•g. OYL rti• i I Pr'.•!�. W.. 'iJNI• Lm� { yJM µ.n• 'L' �� 3 - +- reae3tMw. tTT o E ' N,. (� t Ir Try O� '� �: DR 90 -43 PLO. y �; Detailed Site Plan " ` E9C% MM- B SC ALE: NOME ww1 v+. xal..0 ,r'+^ a t ^•• e ; 95.x' reE°`.,w Nwr 3' rove fnc� r- � - p-KS•! t6�t t:I1R IM✓611 �� V V 1 — JNU.w ants P�rle� wL: v I _ 1tK1sPdtiiN" e: Y'GS +iI. V• yy .1 Y VI� " C T94e, LIT`f i'buwnli,` q . f'es ai � .a..n r" 1 I Q - �' s6i� 4.Y6T. OGC�• t �R1. yu 4..saL• /M O�Ip(r. 11W1^4i1 1 r "!L: Nt'•Y.. t. J6 ..wi. j INR'�L n ,4 �i t./I '^iK My . •.tc e. �+., s r..w.i �,�s .+�.'• 6Y(9e�►Slfo Ti. M .••p 1. hfo..•am wsu•ux 1 a.. aa.44p[ �140i� n y'l+:• .'� bdo •M. } � �r li if IVf • d.U. I11.[iwYL9 ..loll'+ 1.W� -�L fitlWMM pi�'A�b ��GW��.H:.. 6. R/fuiA �+� KM ylW $tK° lfYlY1/i li.M�WDIr cm Or- RANCHO- ,CUCAW�I NG-A 6R 90- 03,�� -- -- y L TANNING, DMSION TrrLE: an N B NONE r 6 TH STREET — - -- — y -j t 4. C" 1 -! �� �• 6" CURB WITH IB' GUTTER 6' CURS QHSY - ^Al 36 P.C.C. GUTTER y II J 9 s pi s s IL me o ye_ . ,n*, SPENiE. t!uD, J0NE5 CITY OF RANCHO CIUCAMONTGA ITEM R so_o T,AP3NiINTG UI$1ISION6 'PME. � radim Plan EXHIBIT'. 0 SCALE NONE Td '. ` i �o �z 3 a I F. o A. L,r 0 m y a 1t o W .1 a 41 z W m O ^ 47 cm L'4 m "1 �I RESOLUTION N0. A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANAING COMMISSION APPROVING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO. 90 -03 FOR ONE INDUSTRIAL BUILDING TOTALING, 15,638 SQUARE FEET ON 2.18 ACRES OF LAND IN THE :GENERAL INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT, SUBAREA 3.3 OF THE INDUSTRIAL SPECIFIC PLAN, LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST { CORNER OF 6TH STREET AND PC,NESTER COURT, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THERrOF - AIIN: 229 - 263 -04. - A. Recitals. (i) Spencer & Jones has filed an application for tite approval of Development Review. No. 90 -03 as described 'in the title of this• Resolution, Hereinafter in thin R: solution, the subject Development Revie request ..,! is referred to as "the application." (ii) In the 22nd of August 1990, the Planning Commission of the City (,-f Rancho CucaEonga conducted z meeting on the application and concluded said meting nn that date 'iii) All legal .7rerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. �^ B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Ca,.amonga as follows. 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the faits set forth in the R- sitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct.; 2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to this Comicic,'sion during the above - referenced meeting on August 22, 1990, including written ana oral staff reparts, this Commission hereby specifically finds as followf,: } (a) The application applies to property located at the southeast corner of 6th Street and Rochester Court with a street frontage of approximately 512 feet and lot depth of 270.15 feet and is presently vacant. " (b) The property to the north, east, and west of the subject site consists of vacant land and the property to the east is developed With an existing non - conforming residence. 3. Based upon the :substantial evidence presented to this Commissio,l during the above- referenced meeting and upon the specific fird,hgs of facts -s9t forth in paragraphs I and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION N0. OR 90 -05 [ SPENCER & JONES August 22, 1990 r Page 2 (a) That the proposed'praject is consistent with the objectives of the General Plan; and (b) That the proposed use is in accord with the objective of the Industrial Specific Plan and the Development Code and the purrGses of the ' district in which the site is located; and (c) That the nroposed use is in compliance with each of the applicable provWons of the Industrial Specific Plan and the U�_velopment Code; and ,f (d) That the proposed use, toget+er, with the` conditions applicable thereto, will not be detr*ental to the public health, safety, or _ l welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements ti the vicinity. 4. This Commission hereby 'k %nds and certifies that the project has been reviewed and considered in complii.ice with the Californit En.rironmen'tal' j Quality Act of 1970 and, further, this Commission hereby issues, a Negative, I Declaration. I 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth .in paragraphs iI 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every eonditi ,7n set forth below and in the attached StandarJ Conditions at-Viched lareto and incorporated herein by this reference. Planning Division 1. V- groove lines shall be added above and below the 12-inch wide accent stripe to Fr)vi('e more definition. 2. A revised accent stripe with a more clear color f value shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planner. - 3. A screen wall or landscape planter soall be provided between the building entrance. and employee plaza to provide separation for the catrance and privacy for `+:lie plaza. 4. The parking lot entrance shall be revised to include exposed aggregate with natural contreyc banding to match the existing parking lot entrance to the, south, ' 5. A sidewalk connection shall be provided between I t7 the building entrance and the sidewalk along Rochester Court. Y PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. f DR 90 -03 / SPENCER & JONES August 22_, 1990 Page 3 6. Enhanced landscaping shall be added to the northwest corner of the site to provide a project statem:,%t along 6th Street which is a majc."arterial. 7. A mesh or solid backing shall be added to the security .gate to screen the outdcar storage area from public'view. _ 8. The wood trellis above the employee plaza shall utilize 4 x inch instead of 2 x inch beams. I Engineering Division: 1. The median island on 6th Street shall be landscaped from Rochester Court to Charles , Smith Avenue in conformance with the 6th Street median landscape master plan. The developer may request a reimburse-ment agreement to recover the cost of the . andscaping in excess of the cost of the one -half width of landscaping fronting his project from 'suture development of adjacent and across-the- street Auk properties. 2. Landscaping within the "Limited Use Areas" for the project driveway including the' intersection of 6th Street and Rochester Court shall_ be approved by the City Engineer. 3. Install "No Stopping Anytime "' signs on 6th Street and Rochester Court along the project frontage. 4. Street improvements (including street lights) _ shall be constructed for the south portion of 6tti Street from Rochester Court to the B.C.R. of the future realigned street of Charles :Mirth Avenue and extend beyond the BCR to the existing intersection of 6th Street and Charley Smith Avenue. Off -site parkways may be deferred until development of the adjacent l prc1 z, -v, -. The develaper may request a rdim§utseme,t agreement to recover the cost of off- side improvements from future development of the adjacent property. Also; an access to the street shah be provided for the existing house 4« the southwast corner of 6th Street and Charles Smith Avenue. `1 rJ F PLANNING COMMISSION RESOL;UiION N0. DR 90 -03 / SPENCER & JONES August 22, 1990 J Page 4 5. The Developer shall honor the reimbursement agreement, which is in process by the City, for ~ the construction of improvements on Rochester Court prior to the issuance of building permits. 6. The 6th Street median .nose on she eas side of Rochester Court shall be reconstructed to provide the curb to City Standard, 6, The Secretary to this Cormrrission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. :) APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 22ND DAY OF AUGUST 1990. PLANNING COMINISSION OF THE GINTY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: - - Larry T, McNiel, Chairman ATTEST: Brad Bui.er, Secretary . I, Brad Buller, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify thst the foregoing Resolution was duly " >and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of he City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning CoMission held on the 22nd da.i of August, 1990, by the following vote-to-wit! AYES: COMMISSIONEKS FLOES, COMMISSIoi,SRS: ABSENT: COMMISSItINERS: (Ff Su]L�tt u:Tuo LLir�i qq 04 = 93+Tc,. 12,9-8 -1Z ��u jL�4L4WaN aWaUO O'°psN °C{}1i pY. 4.5 gVV d O II YY� o q lO � pp a 6611L � Y L q r■ O V` °yZ L a A 0 6�= 0 G 0 9. 6 N ■ O V L C C �t Y Y Y V C Y q Y ��G. �� qq T Or 4 Y M Y L L �.d T• y O O Y Y ^' Y U Q N. L C L W O C 6i Y G. Y Y w uY a�.6YNPs-. « "c Y ^u� a aoo. «Q «gu c aoc' Lo�4Y uywLO ado c ooL. CCO y q y � C r � _ �.S « d � N L �Y • ^ Y S � O� O�=L «°11`.E u•-e °. 1O oario�� �'` -i C� ovq�a� waLi� ■� °�L� •� A •�d7 nom^ Y YN •rl \k C�YgC a• ^_ �'°•ni � °e. S.e .moo °c o'Na� a q a■ V ^' �.O � L d z�; 3QOLC s N , % -1 2 40 A y ul� CC Q� O Nom. N y4� y■ L d `OL Oyu qL L C..1' . LL. X. BOGV' �TL�'q a•c O dC�Ty rggm _ gl!lee q C•�`YYa N.N Cq.L <COI M >O �C Obi. Z. a M LOS A L+ z dGs % .04:!% ° 6 CY �•I� V uG L L O� Y L �v06M�N l�Y C•. OY"aYyaY °V. o g L •. f, L ^ V V 0 4 9 ►. %f � 1 Y 4� ■■ G eq y L Cy O 4 L Y 0 L'C C q N NC� ° L 4 O L O A U HYU� .YCNY� M. Y. EN.N OC O+•jYj�� N tlO� 3 L��2W�GG..C.�O 1Y� � W'N^ da.4 NY•S UL >��^ a�ywY� o3'w dLa, -CO_ ` UY•. Y.� C LCCCV. M VO.� Y-ygLt p G` 6 a y A 6 0 i N L q� �• O !� b La G CL Y 4 N Y N S �C O N� �• C 6 Ll } d d� L 00 oa� Tf�J a oL d 0 Y .. �cY Y y Y 4 C e« ae -K Y �f t O: H C•Na�p « N Y4' O•L4L= 6 M O q ON ^O el T o S �n ,p c =. 4 4 � Ya ':I ,_ �i q.�. 1= p I l o L N N= Z a ag Yd 15.9 Flo III-v i 41 �' Q Y Cj hY Y F _5 ' � O Z la �At5 ■ •. q.{1 � ��y]i Y Y leg01w L 00 oa� Tf�J a oL d 0 Y .. �cY Y y Y 4 C e« ae -K Y �f t O. .o.^. �YC�b�CaO CpM�. OgN. C.i Y U M O V C Y� O Y q•"�' O V W� N^■ L MY yp 4_4 ~Cs L C.N. YOI"•9 OL�O.0 LT ^LOi A° a1. V NCi Y'. r `M Y, �vGiKY voc9 Y Y�o°.LEG� fC- 2 �e a U W a ■�L L ^C a O OI ^.^ �p q wMr a� N^ TF � Val.•y 5y0! n gOq LLY e uu Y s� T V L■ M 6 6 L TT i M Y � w u �c 9�'uai ao � A o�ra r�•2' �CC {CV. a. MYW O L OMr �YaALa�' YNY1M � MA� NC ■ ♦. A U OC y01. l,id �• al L O ^y. L,^ �VLVyC^ ^ pCNCU u «ww ��N as N Oo 5 V O C LL V ^� Uxx O ` '.M e A O C D• al C =�= L 4 a NN• V G. �GOC�NVt Cn'C lip^' W. C IY Aa K Y1 v cCCC �6 zy PAN �4 9 t�u�`{{��yCO ^1Y MV.C6.M Qtt4D 9'O .2 u Y� �Y� M'� Qf.i9 pN�Y "1~JQ• ~J9V 6y �O Y^ HYY�s C Y L�"_N.���M `Y �r�LLO YYiIY y y F u. i sW Y:a �g a �aae its q�ai3t Ci 4Y ° V� C.LO t6 �� L A yU a+�LY LN�ip CY1 ,•� p p M i% a V a n p re V C ^ Y c l X u 7.' ; Y aVy� COYG YAy l� ^iN` `Cp eu =L M y�Y � j Ems. a± b M ~ 5 10 & �^ N u n Y s St- a F�C py OS 1,,uJSi C�O�4 CN..N U OWN L7M �!99pp1s R Oho =9 `Slim k N4 a: �'W0 C O CV`O Gf1 C 011 C C q w- CVO IL, ' q c_ Ms.N LD S NCO Y�.,MOO5. �la NC O «6 QO OV N =~ aYM �� yyW C a• Y E A Va ]C1' � � � O yN � r�. T � � � Sv Y J _ � � N M p/ N N O 11 N •� d � M A. WsNpc V:� ~S1. 10 �M C4OC ,� C`O eypV K Y L y V +• L 04 O C a! Q y� �I N b: C V O" c.°r 8co gala. lizz ic� X �n�9 $u g$v� .�"' `R' L`5 " .£ o H }E ' pON+ �tO � �Y qY OGOCOOq�YC1N L.YY �� �C/l�Y. C C 4V (�'t ^gPbl Y ^ia ^ CId •� ;`0�4� p }OHO. CL �V1Q� O 46. V. ;pp N � bC LMY ^ ^O Y qC 6. C+^•Lb9 ~. IV N ~3C N yy .CYO •b b pq CgtYQQQF Q7 b w�GYy N L p N 1 W Q b Y' �. ■ L y` w q Qty Q .�i99.�0 K q ON Cw. CYCD O! 6N N.(. ^ YOB t �/�8 \/O -0L4 L I G Iw« V aLL ..qA MwOd YMO��N 4 C NX C Y 3w ¢ Ln NT a ri w�.v W Aw/.^•. ^$.c �.N.a V' «aNN «+ O y L l L, .21 C M R^ Y. y wN O O N O a 4 C ^ Q N C b NC a M Q1�.1 • YM 4^ O. .�..b 4..y.4 Cw �4L.N �YC Neb �` _Ct •a «C 01 Y« N~ I n. 0 r� N CA Y A V T^ O ag y q. � zC O.yyJ^ i y4yA yN 0 NV w Li P8N� U.S.2 zSE j1.5 Y N f T K M! L a .991! . 9 z.0 d40 ti♦ Y6M O LM4w��4Vy* Z v.C•yM NyyY .=4 90 1 aY OI� C N i 0 1 • . 4 Y L Q b Q Y O. N R� A N C. M L w�.a.4. �r�.m. o.LMYnY„S�Ly. -y ��.�d•�1yM.. eCpMy�� d 6dY O ~ \oY Yn." -0•$ LNZ.YYL ^.. 6w M�4 U-4 yYL ^0Myy Y1 L i yq ..N4 Y L i C> w VN • L Y QL 1 I ■ v° ■ 4 C° � ° . ° Y : Y L s a N ^$ L ^ L NL .u�O' . y - D tL- t O oO . cc � y Y N^ a r b yy wc N Cp r LO wCY b$« n + « .40'. 4t; NOs U C Q O L / ^ C Y CC v1—N YM SN NO 1L•Ni tl\1Yti�Cl >P;NOO L•vC•06 !4 SLL014N �aY adc 2.5 =Hw CL Q a+w cu -1,, _ li __a �04 y p L 0 4 . C 4 ,4 re ft qNj. vMri^ iV N�)1 Vb {1�Em N } K w"'�� YC='-0 C Y•b M �� LVy:C O' VY```� YY « T Y'JL Y�C NtY OI > Y v~ Y a = 1� C R • t N C y Ny • M '� 4 O -Y® Y CD �b + �. Y Y Yqy N�•b 6 �� 8N'IbYC s <.c •.g +� � NC Ni • �= �Y�.0 na�a •w � y{i ' b(�Y 6 N YO^ Yb N N 6 = 6.� : q Cu■ 4 y L N L Y w L « b C z+ A Y ^ S A LCL `CC NL$N~Y ■N ;�$f bpNYey It I ^Nr NON bnY >�1.N 0. MQ L��y� gYVLy1y� y?G .9 �� 6� �i VGM ^Y •� y -0� V11.V Lgbww ■b w Gp C_ ■C >. 5 V6Y Vu Lq wCj qsi. 4YGL� NL^ 3L _N ^w�N'wYl C 7•w HOC s •V y{$«Y alc M 5 fi�.gw N3 MV w saN N G w ^ Y �u O? «C •O ` .s[0Y bb uC[n�N w �IrV w V�p yT �w N�Y O YV pY Yy a N 1. C wYiOl 1.Y «9� Ho, OG LY «'^ n■C p a1 Y �••• R� V i. >M{. CyY N4 qYl K =w.0 -C la' Y 6CN 1�: Q.M <V <Q GNrC•; �Ci KMYM W6 GM �M0 M � N{ 3 cAO l_ 4E L4C CC G ..c�wirnw orJ 4 O'O,L y6�4y 2 Lw Cy y^Y'y4L Y pN yY1L. V A C aMN� C �N 4r d- ~ NMV °Nt�yCy 2. C Bu «M Y.FO w � G OL C 4 •^ N C O�1 y4SVepl •��G4�Y��r ��aVL �+ }V•^• }�{jWL ioeo fr dS E�ev 4C N >Y� h M Z-a 2�Yy N S A+:+ :p «: T� i • «�b� � V. D V ipp[ .G • 7yu� �*4 Ti CC OMB C+.i$�S `NppN •'i 4' YQYf raY+ T N C T Y M O G^ � u ^ « M C p m �r by-9 6Y� «po La GG'' Cl _ yj! _ g �.rs.i, ,Gi r $ n e~ � ear'• �� ny r NU ���, G «a°•� n 4 p 44 a VU 5 KO L w Y -.4 T y '�! y. M6 via -a O w m v- u Q Y L Y , 71 p O M w aa'Ta y° $ ' ..LS,'°G'�' _q � «�vi ! Nei 'a, gas + �° 4' ■ 9�LR0. ,ss C ¢p L ■ M L. N _t = t �� QQ CC gas N � {{�� {y1/ 1yyS�[� «p N RIDS Y v YY.Y 1G0 Y Np��CO29T �C` Oy{p�E✓� CyyM vG ■3O N ,Al `q .aw V Y Y r.r CYLO ► L VAS C C7 YV L N OTC �0 (]C� FA.��w Y O N `CC 4 ° �� L C� ^ Y n R N 9� � L G Y� M I pp Y4 C J ■e. Ff�{ 6 n 1 L Nom. 44 C' C6C nC ! 12 Y{ O 7R �`+• 4 NG V« VI $9r rfl ■�. 6 FYr N� i:6� a S 11 G P R4 C�. L A. 00 C.Y itc QYQ . �I c -Rig: u�g�.. � w° >G' ^ 4 a VY yypp �'C CC p7p O V ~i VL M�'.'. rCgs V . VI via. - 5 jc Y CN Q 6N $=a .e2M tv- z. R o a $. � � p 541Y �aj� J39% nLiGYgT,yy•�� NC °M- 0� .2. «.t'� ^eR� °i Trd b era w^°• N °• v y a° 4 ^C4 y Nagyy p^ G��i( M M �N CY Nye P 4- Y4 D.^ Y' & H � 7 Y atea!! Y4 3 1; .scw as 4G�•yL yEOYi� `^ °.u$ O.Yi �p�ppY Lf ��JJm1 Y�LG° L NY6 Z°'4Y0 cAO l_ 4E L4C CC G ..c�wirnw orJ 4 O'O,L y6�4y 2 Lw Cy y^Y'y4L Y pN yY1L. V A C aMN� C �N 4r d- ~ NMV °Nt�yCy 2. C Bu «M Y.FO w � G OL C 4 •^ N C O�1 y4SVepl •��G4�Y��r ��aVL �+ }V•^• }�{jWL ioeo fr dS E�ev 4C N >Y� h M Z-a 2�Yy N S A+:+ :p «: T� i • «�b� � V. D V ipp[ .G • 7yu� �*4 Ti CC OMB C+.i$�S `NppN •'i 4' YQYf raY+ T N C T Y M O G^ � u ^ « M C p m �r by-9 6Y� «po La GG'' Cl _ yj! _ g �.rs.i, ,Gi r $ n e~ � ear'• �� ny r NU ���, G «a°•� n 4 p 44 a VU 5 KO L w Y -.4 T y '�! y. M6 via -a O w m v- u Q Y L Y , 71 p O M w aa'Ta y° $ ' ..LS,'°G'�' _q � «�vi ! Nei 'a, gas + �° 4' ■ 9�LR0. ,ss C ¢p L ■ M L. N _t = t �� QQ CC gas N � {{�� {y1/ 1yyS�[� «p N RIDS Y v YY.Y 1G0 Y Np��CO29T �C` Oy{p�E✓� CyyM vG ■3O N ,Al `q .aw V Y Y r.r CYLO ► L VAS C C7 YV L N OTC �0 (]C� FA.��w Y O N `CC 4 ° �� L C� ^ Y n R N 9� � L G Y� M I pp Y4 C J ■e. Ff�{ 6 n 1 L Nom. 44 C' C6C nC ! 12 Y{ O 7R �`+• 4 NG V« VI $9r rfl ■�. 6 FYr N� i:6� a S 11 11 Q O O c F^ wr 3 JL•�\ 3 `o.'s' y.. K-4 4c q « 3 P��Yi yYLL. F V N L qy ^^ ° Q !V1 y■ 4 4 wY. L L` O Y �w' '�' U e Y (� V � G. � �!P -_ GC.of t Y ■■ pp _5 Y — 2 YM■CC TC }O� � 4J+ M O. y •3N L-7 O O =S c c:` v w" c■�i WH Nf 4 no WYY �I }Cy� "7 iim hL ^4wM q O ?u?u u1u1 ee u� yyy YYpp C O N N Q L_ ff��yyyy■ i ■�yy■� _V zt y �YL OOp. _�ltt uY f_"' G Y o C V N 9 Of 6w �°a 4 L � Y CC C C C{ Y 1 r AM G q yG r g' OsA Sol. N �— —� gdf..1 N w 4U O�. I4i ti W w RM (i "w OIy CNOL CYIr —Q a�OCL w�yC ` _ F_ �fYY� O M y�1 ct �TV- Op_ a a4f BE NpYpQ u�` ow mu: 'iz Lc > E.g. 04 o w CL.Y 6L v9. Q Y CI C C C� M. L/Q �l 2 Y 11 Q O O c F^ wr 3 �L 4c _5 r_ L-7 O O =S c c:` v w" c■�i WH Nf 4 no WYY �I �6 I i C J A O• C t 2 •V Y m A c IFC C C p q fc� 4i Y C O F 4 'rC. 14 E f x4 Y�/LP� y4 ~ VY „p C..� 'yij Y�a. p w 4CYy. N+ CMHG o�e N. 03 €' .Y."G v;VLA{ay1. p.^p `.� � ►■��� �YCy NL LC.LR� p v3�Lws t5 -.-.0 -�°.- 1 c 0701 -02 0 08 -22.90 PC Agenda 3 of 4 0 N . -o 12 0�6: 'au 0 c —tac . - {Y� V L 2 M 11.Z 21 (� _ ) Y O � YUY �Gp0 « C .. ~ L v O � • C. ^• �y r0. N �. � C Y O •. w 96'1 <Y ` L w4.Y ° ■p Y cY`,, q Y �$= 9 y A 9 s 8M L C T 6 A a �•°• �� O' ice � « •�� Nc � N= L O 0 .5-2 N BIKINI 0 1°.� P ccyy■ � � � � CGy■ d P G x a Q .® y 4 s � i VV MEMI Y 60 y `- Cy OI Nq N L 010u L. M` HOC NN a LV y= V A C $L ^ pw q.YYG _w wY �feyC[N Y 90 CI y�4Y` Q CN Y �M � �CY = QYw QJ LyY� NC LL O.Y. nY � ~Y C iGG VVyy•O a 9 � 9 gMVN 4y N �.Y-..�U1r' w 09 L L� N OD 9gT.P ai TcW OL�M VP aL9N Y� �L O�LN CC �C O..L aWC6a CL LAL �YC OIV �L Y��gpp aY . L w•Y °� QO p s =.,i 9CC �V� .0.•`A CU O Y 2— N �L Y6� N + =V VL O L. V g N 4 p.. y Cw. Ott, Y yy1 t C Nw w.• Q c Y Z am.; ■ d Y Y N r L V .+ W 9 V a-- V E V C N` -.1 C W A.C� = y y N 4 Y.� Q ■ Q O rL d d V 1n �y'1 Y G« Q y YsY. VLyY- L L� O:zLi wY ie.i� .Ya�M ��1j CV 6w •�L YC L OI •O O� NO.�MW NO 01YrY iH b.C• W.M'N LLii 36 Lola iw °C. F9a✓YW io.N i NI N i aL Y au �Cyl. 6.1 {Y� V L Y M we ro «� and Y U O1 q 1 1 8M L Off« `11 a BIKINI 0 1°.� P ccyy■ � � � � CGy■ y0 �.YCi 4 s � i VV MEMI Y 60 y `- �. NVM Nq N YwOi. 010u L. iY� a LV ■u• :�E1Y It N J YLO NY ,NCB O • Mw vyy w� YV.� 01f.i'� 4 z; J �1. V .'r701'Z11D u� o� Mao. -$1 c� 0 V d W V ° Yy Lpw Y Y GM'C A L I pu Y Y M Y V OE_�8 oz C emu ~ � V O ieU8j• ^C^ iL.CV tl`Yr� rQ \, 9L�� LrY 9�p a.'LA rp�VVyV rV.C. uMY �1� HOWL^ i�W NCB 19 pWO „ � ^i•� v S W Em" 11 allml BIKINI 13101 i MEMI 5-1101 :�E1Y YLO NY ,NCB O • Mw vyy w� YV.� 01f.i'� 4 z; J �1. V .'r701'Z11D u� o� Mao. -$1 c� 0 V d W V ° Yy Lpw Y Y GM'C A L I pu Y Y M Y V OE_�8 oz C emu ~ � V O ieU8j• ^C^ iL.CV tl`Yr� rQ \, 9L�� LrY 9�p a.'LA rp�VVyV rV.C. uMY �1� HOWL^ i�W NCB 19 pWO „ � ^i•� v S W Em" 11 t O ^Cy � rGa �pp ��v C M Y CYO yb d0 L L Y.G Ll. ^.� ) r Y (C ■� N C b �6i N 'C� L.p ^ y O LL� q L qC b b � G ��••� O Y 9 C Ya N. W M U W W ; y �. \wrfw C^• L '.11p. D V� �•p aT0 H 9 OIC a C •�pY -. aC.N °cam =`•?a r�'— y4{L"�i p�z Yq^ L C09 M L oil VOO L O d 6Na V -It.2 50 _ `y4 +4u Cq V saq T.2 C^ S O•^ N L� q Z. ^^� a L` "aCi1V V0 Y��Y Y y O N 7•• � 4 V w O Y i WY o•„'0 gNppn 1►C ea L -X5L y' ou 'Cv Aso v�E aa. V d y O F p W C y Y y L A �Y O N C RS tl u ab . �yri „•o;`•u $ gNx,4 n �a quy No 54 N� _ ep�yQ L V r q CL = Y b y r y t L C L CG G O b V IS Rig O Ix. Tg �p.4V 1Yy.CA9 Yq C6� ,u,CC SO Oy� ■�Cq.q 'M Q ^COQ �� YG1�N OY. C raV air. � _d]� s 'O L q.N L N C I✓ q Y y C 4Ng0 Oq yM et•. i,,�C O`G Napa i �uO6 C�yy iW ��I w+ �.�� O.M 6' L.y yCOM ur p y L b L R^ C `• O� G Y Pei Og 4 y + O 4 4 w C V a N C y A <.'. «di% ra`wo= sa n`N'.°N E� ca m o`Sua $ °niL o' b M! pL CWC loftd e JYY O d A :5 c Co S uO.E� p A _ O q' G •t- V Sii •C.=r QYO O u M d t O ^Cy � rGa �pp ��v C M Y CYO yb d0 L L Y.G Ll. ^.� ) r Y (C ■� N C b �6i N 'C� L.p ^ y O LL� q L qC b b � G ��••� O Y 9 C Ya N. W M U W W ; y �. \wrfw C^• L '.11p. D V� �•p aT0 H 9 OIC a C •�pY -. aC.N °cam =`•?a r�'— y4{L"�i p�z Yq^ L C09 M L oil VOO L O d 6Na V -It.2 50 _ `y4 +4u Cq V saq T.2 C^ S O•^ N L� q Z. ^^� a L` "aCi1V V0 Y��Y Y y O N 7•• � 4 V w O Y i WY o•„'0 gNppn 1►C ea L -X5L y' ou 'Cv Aso v�E aa. V d y O F p W C y Y y L A �Y O N C RS tl u ab . �yri „•o;`•u $ gNx,4 n �a quy No 54 N� _ ep�yQ L V r q CL = Y b y r y t L C L CG G O b V IS Rig O Ix. Tg �p.4V 1Yy.CA9 Yq C6� ,u,CC SO Oy� ■�Cq.q 'M Q ^COQ �� YG1�N OY. C raV air. � _d]� s 'O L q.N L N C I✓ q Y y C 4Ng0 Oq yM et•. i,,�C O`G Napa i �uO6 C�yy iW ��I w+ �.�� O.M 6' L.y yCOM ur p y L b L R^ C `• O� G Y Pei Og 4 y + O 4 4 w C V a N C y A <.'. «di% ra`wo= sa n`N'.°N E� ca m o`Sua $ °niL o' b M! CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT ;'ATE: August 22, 1990 T0: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Brett Horner, Associate Planner SUBJECT: SHARED PARKING STUDY FOR FOOTHILL VILLAGE NUWEST I. II, r] COMPANIES - A request to allow shared parking within a eighb(,rhood commercial center at the southeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Hellman Avenue - APN: 208 - 261 -58. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action Requested: The applicant requests approval of shared parking within Foothill village to allow ?dditional restaurant uses to operate within the center. B. ADolicable Re ulations: The Development Code Section 17,.12..0400 ) authorizes the City Planner to allow the use of shared parking subject to review and approval of a parking study, which the applicant has Gubmitted. The City Planner may refer, as in this case, ttie matter to the Planning Commission. ANALYSIS; . A. General: The Foothill Village center is currently comprised of 10,000 square feet of family restaurant (a future Chuck E. Cheese Pizza facility), 5,45`0 square feet of furniture sales, and 44,340 square feet of retail shops. An additional 25,190 square feet is vacant at this time. Exhibit "A depicts the Site Plana B. Specific: The shopping center has a total of 433 parking spaces. Of these 433 spaces, 133 were allocated for the Chuck E. Cheese restaurant. The remaining 300 spaces allow for only those uses which have a Narking ratio of I space for every 250 square feet (general retail uses) or less. Restaurants and other uses which require more parking per square feet could not be permitted and hence, were not proposed. In order to allow additional restaurant uses within Foothill Village, the applicant has completed a shared parking study.; This study, Erased on Urban Land Institute studies and actual ITEM . K f` PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT SHARED PARKING STUDY-FOOTHILL VILLAGE- NUWESi August 22, 1990 ' Page 2 observed c ^r;jrren as at two other existing Chuck E. Cheese'; resta.irants, demonstrates that with an additional 7,000 square feet of restaurant use, Foothill Village's maximum park -Tg demand would occiir on weekdays at 7:00 pm. At this time, 431 parking spaces would be neeO3d (the Saturday peat would occur at 1:00 p.m., when 426 spaces would be occupied). III. ISSUES: A. Policy Implications: ''Although the City has permitted the use of shared parking in other projects. based upon off-set peak demands of different '•land. uses (i.e., theater vs office), it has not been used to a great extent in shopping centers the size and type of Foothill Village. If shared parking were allowed at this shopping center, it is likely that the City would see an increase in requests: : for this concept in other similar shopping centers. The Commissior. should determine whether shared parking would be acceptable in other commercial areas as well. B. Monitoring: As shopping centers begin to be to sed out, it becomes difficult for staff to determine the availability of parking. Problems occur when uses, which require.%pore parking than general retai[ uses, locate within the center; and use up arty additional parking which the developer provi'led with the project. This occurred with Chuck E. Cheese at Foothill Vil lager With the approval of a shared parking concept, the monitoring of available parking is complicated, espW ally as uses and the tenant mix changes. The shared parking study indicates that should Chuck E. Cheese leave and another° restaurant occupy its space, thzre would be l•1 *'1e effect on the parking (i',i fact, parking demand would be lowered by b parking spaces). However, t'..-ere are still m3nitoring difficulties as_ other uses in the center change, C. Future 'Tenants: If the shared parking concept is approved tonight, Foothill Village will not be able to have future tenants (such as optometrists offices, dentist offices, and barber shops) which require more parking than general retail (i.e., 1 space per 250 square feet). It is likely that sometime in the ful, - -e, the applicant will wish Cn have these types of uses loca',T1 within the center but will be unable to. Staff would recommend that the applicant develop a long -team plan to establish' their desirable tenant mix rather than use shared parking reports and other strategies incrementally to resolve parking problems with each new tenant J PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT SHARED PA ."KING STUDY- FOOTHILL VILLAGE- NUWEST August 22, 1950 Page 3 that comes on line. It is possible that less than 7,000 square feet of restaurant space may occur, in which case there may be additional parking available for dent st`s offices and t the like. But a new parking study would need to be generated to verify available parking and Would add to the monitoring difficulties discussed earlier. D. Parkinq Buffer: The Commission will recall that the approval of a shared parking program for the Virginia Dare Business Center included a 10 percent buffer. The buffer provided 10 percent additional parking spaces during peak demand hours, above the shared parking peak demand, so that drivers would not have to circle unnecessarily waiting fora parking space to become available. The 10 percent buffer ris eeconunended by the City traffic Engineer and supported by the Planning Division and approved by the Planning'Comnission. The Foothill Village shared parking indicates that only two parking spaces Will be available as a•;buffer during,the 7 :00 p.m.. peal: hour on weekdays and seven ,offer spaces during the- Saturday peak at 1:00 P .m. This !-a-presents only a .4 percent weakday peak buffer and a 1.6 'percent Saturday peak buffer. Based upon the projected peak parking demand of 431 spaces, and consistent with past Planning Commission ac i6ns, an additional 43 spaces (10 percent) should be required as a buffer for a total of 474 spaces. However, the site has only 433 spaces available. Therefore, the shared parking concept for this site cannot comply with the (10 percent) buffer and provide 'for an adequate level of service to customers. E. New Information: Following the July 25, 1990 Planning Commission Meeting, staff was contacted by Mr. 'Frederick M. Chan, President of NuWest Companies requesting discussion of options to Staff's initial recommendation of denial. Attached is a letter from Mr. Chan outlining his justifications for the proposed shared parking and two possible options to mitigate the City's concern with the shared parking proposal. The property owner states in his letter that he shares staff's concern that insufficient parking will be available when the shopping center is fully leased'.' However, the owner requests that the Commission allow additiona: restaurant space anyway on the basis that the center is not fully leased. To address future parking problems (when fully leased) the owner suggests: Ask PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT, SHARED PARKING STUDY - FOOTHILL VILLAGE- NUWEST August 22, 1990 Page 4 1) Restrictive Covenants To preclude future leasing to us(s,, such as optometrists, dentists, barber or ° beauty _'` shops, that would require more parking than retail. However, staff notes that this is incronsstent with general concerns expressed by the Piann�ng Commission regarding shopping centers that do not provide for the ' full ra; ,lge of neighborhood services as intended. 2) Parking Control Program; Require employees to park in the rear parking lot on the south side of center., This is a prudery step for any shopping center manager to take when parking becomes a'- problem whether or not its offered as a mitigation. Further, the City has no means to effectively control where employees park. Although such a, parking control program could be conditioned upon the Conditiot:al Use Permit - the only recourse to the City would be revocation which Could negatively affect other businesses in the center. In conclusion, the parking' problem is self - imposed by' the owner who has effectively put "all his :eggs in one .basket" by using up all the available parking for restaurant users in one tenant - Chuck E. Cheese, The two suggested measures offer additional options for the Commission to consider. However, the issues of AOL pol'cy, monitoring, and the 10 percent buffer as discussed above qW must still be weighed in the final decision. IV. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission deny the request for shared parking for hack of adequate buffer. However, should the Commission find tiie measures presented by the applicant sufficient to justify the proposai, then staff should be directed to prepare a Resolution of Approval with conditions and initiate an amendment to the project's Conditional Use Permit for the purpose of restricting the uses and operating times of those businesses in the center. Respectfully submitted, Brad Buller City Planner BB :BH: js Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Foothill Village Site Plan Exhibit "B" - Shared Parking Summary 1 Exhibit "C" - Parking Study Exhibit "D" - Letter of August 9, 1990 NuWest r —` 9309 104s1fii. p�9349 �t f 97I,.e 1 • t sxrn acw t V10eo plea t= ! Wa•ar � ! f 1 t i r• 7 J I • r t i e3t0�i ` rl OA1C. LTD ,' ! r 8 •' 1 gfFO � �,j�� e11i•e. I. � � 1 K 1 � •alter may.y— T � me•If < <� 1 •i 1 1 J• eslea ��!r � 1 .�i+ ETE 1' F•ARR'S CRDCL' ROUSE j OF STATZOti1:RS. '• C �C 1J ust • s :�s IC r FASRZCS I 1 �' irl ,>pla errrrrrlrr jj(fiflU ` i :ri'' l 1 — I i, ' t, t _11((11(1!` 1� • I � CITY OF x ONGA rM . P$SIGr• 1 lTiY�E: �✓-t� is Morie- 3 SHARED PARKING ANALYSIS CITY PROJECT PLO TOTAL SPACES jluQMZ T i3OTD 8788 -- T_ R>rQiTtREA,?11l.IT R @ Retail 4434 4.00 AW 177 Hkit Sabra (1.O8 TM &00 2.00 lair 16 Nail Salm ;M TSB too 1013 Abair 1$ Purwtcm 5.45 zoo trw 11 Yaeaat (ftemi) W9 4.00 ASP 73 Vscaut (Reftaun= 6.00 10.00 IMF 60 VUda 6 75F) Vamt (Rotaumt 1.00 MIS /MF is Ova 6 TSP) Chuck i; Cheese Re=uraat 10.00 10.90 118E 109 gi)'dAL 9634 078©6/1993 10847 . FROM AUSTIN FOUS.T ASSOC. TO PAT ENGEL P.02 ; r WISTIN-FO ST A OCZATES, INC. rRAFF[O EN0/N81!R1NO. ANO PRANS.PORTAT /ON PLANNING 2020 NORTH TUSTIN AVENUE • SANTA ANA. CALIFORNIA 22701 • TELEPHONE (714) 667 -04�a FAX (914) 667.7952 TO: FROM: W. Michel Roy, 1duWest Company Joe Foust SUBJECT: FOOTH LL VILLAGE PAiiMG STUDY DATE: July 4 1990 DiTRODUCPION In the past Austin -Foust Associates, Inc., (AFA) conduc-ed a parking study of the existing Foothill Village in the City of Rancho Cucamonga for the purpose of determining the peak parking accumulation if a 10,000 SF Chuck R Cheese Pi= facility were to be approved for the canter. That study was initiated before the enter was sWficantly leased and occupied and relied x pon 11:storical parking trends for retail uses to forecast parting demand. The center is presenly more than 6S percent occupied about BC percent 1 and a second idn study has been 1?� P ( 1 ) �" S undertaken. This updated study approach examines existing usage (ho'n by hour) and forecasts only the parking demand generated by the e: istiug vacant retail space (including 7,000 square feet of vacant restaurant space) and the proposed Chuck R Cheese Pi= restaurant The vaunt retail and restaurant parking demand is based on city code parking (4 spaces per T'SF for retail, 10 spaces per TSF for restaurants under 6,000 SF, and WS spaces per TuSF Yor restaurants over 6,000 SF) and the typical hourly fluctuation associated with retail and restaurant use. The Chick E Cheese parking demand is based on actual case studies of two existing Chuck E. Cheese facHitles. The total hourly parking demand created by the e,asting recall use as well as the presently unoccupied retail space and the proposed pies restaurant are then compared with t!.e available spaces (433 spaces) to determine if sufficient parking -it provided. ANALYSIS ExistirIg parking within the Foothill Village was counted on two typical weekdays and one Saturday. The results are indicated in Table 1. Fumiration of this table reveals the current leers (65 percent occupancy) are generating a peak weekday parking demand of 179 spaces and a peak demand of 213 spaces on Saturdays. Given this existing parking condition, AFA has estimated the hour by hour demand for the remaining unoccupied retail and restaurant space based or- shared parking relationships developed by the Utban Land Institute and documented in their publ ='r;, ' Y, 01i06/1990 10=19 FROM AUSTIN FOUSS ASSOC. TO ;1876491 q - P.03.,. Told 1 FOAI7�II1,'YII.1ACi8 PARKQ40 S[)RV6^Y ... �------ PAPXJN0 ACCLTMULAMON - - -- WZDNEWA%Y THURSDAY SATMAY SEGINNING DAY 1 4nUM DAY 2 DAY 3 1li4/M _ 4mA0 PF-49 HOURLY PARY.I�C? _3W 7:00 AM 5:00 6 13 3 s a $ 17 9:00 33 54 52 46 77 l0%00 11:06 a8 7a N' )om 131 17A 171E 1 1t00 PM 171 165 213 200 140 168 212 212 300 109 118 1833 183 4vV 110 106 zw 3 00 IV 373 &00 143 139 192 192 7.00 PM 177 179 Tx 222 A4sma = Avwkwo Spam . 431 I f TMe HOURLY ACCUbOAATION OF 3ARMNG SAY VACAISC VACANT TOTAL HOUR CHUCK I- C HEM (O ) RETAIL (Q ) P-MAX RESTAURANT 0000 a) (11000 sly FUTURE OCC)UPIW OP DA 4i SPA 4 3lACF1S I RAW I SPAC218 RAW 1.00 AM 6 896 6 2% 2 14 M AM 43 is* 13 5% 4 30 ` 9:00, AM n 42%'i 31, 10% 8 91 10.00 Abi 75 0 s wo t 16 241 i 11:00 AM 19: & 8716 64 3915 23 180 1200 NOON le% 15 LS1 9791 71 5096 39 2% Doom 1696 17 171 ims 73 70% 55 316 2w PM 16% 17 168 9796 71 0 47 303 3:00 PM 2416 26 i16 fts 69 rA% 47 260 l 4.^00 PM 3296 33 110 57% 67 Ism 39 249 5:00 4'M Am 50 127 79% Si 7096 S3 290 60 PAi 80% 87 143 8291 60 9096 70 360 . 7..W PM 100%'r 109 179 84'16 65 1%% 78 431 8:00 PM 93'95 181 179 as 64 100% 78 4'22 MAXiMUhI PARKWO DEMAND: 431 rpm 29 7:07 PM SOURC 1 U10m Land IhstUM 1W r 07/86,,1990 10150 FROM AUSTIN FOUST ASSOC., TO $BY6499 P032 Tanis 3 I SHARED PARKING ANALIMS � CPY P1=cr PARK m TOTAL SPACES YAK t� �1J[R itrOUiR� RdRA 1 5 H 43m (1.t6 7m 00 � Nail S:. -'4 (88 TSF) 6.00 3.00 /dish 13 Foshum - 3.43 2,00 AW 11 v =10t 23 lw 4.00 AV 73 Va=: (po-uoml 6A0 10600 1136 tv Under�T4' va ®e (Ramon LOO 1&ia /1SF l8 chuck E. Cbma Rau mul 10.00 10.90' (tSF lw TOTAL TANG 4 HQURGY ACCEMULA370N OF PARMNG SATURDAY =AL O(iJF38D CHUCK E. fm858 RETAIL 'VACANT VACWr SPAC$ CAAM HvUik OF I)AY tom) f�J t+11J '! t SPAC.Et4 51.RCF� X SDAGES t) ..._ % sNl�;'F- tr+� �Pu9) SPAQ - 7.00 AM 8 3% 2 25 2 12 W AM 17 10% 7 316 2 26 9.;00 AM 46 30% 22 6% 5 73 10:00 AM 77 45% 33 2% 6 716 11.-00 AM 420 4d 99 73% 53 10% 8 206 12:00 NOON "% 97 176 85% 47 30% 23 338 1c00 FM 100% 109 313 95% 69 45% 35 426-,t PkAY- 200 FM S'6% 10$ 222 10011 73 43% 35 425 3-v PM 95% 104 183 10016 T1 43% 35 395 4.'00 PM 93% 101 158 90% 6i 45% 35 360 S..00 PM 9416 102 ISO 73% 55 60% 47 354 do FM 88% 96 192 45% 47 90% " 70 405 7:00 PM 93% 99 212 0% 44 4596 74 421 R�00 PM 73% so 712 350 40 100% 73 410 MAX MM PARK( O DEMAND. 126 apace at 1:00 PM SOURCE: Uftn Lod 7ntitute;1%7 11 Nu'Er_ COMPANIES August 8, 1y90 Mr. Brad Buller Director of Planning City of Rancho Cucamonga P. O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Dear Brad: International Real Estate Finance Investment •(5evelopment • Management Re: Shared Parking Study for Foothill Village - Nu West Companies This letter is to confirm our telephone conversation today whereby I advised you that we have ready -to -go restaurants for Foothill Village. I also expressed to you that due to the slowdown in the economic climate and retail market, our shopping center has experienced a slower lease -up far below our original expectations.: However, we have had many inquiries for food- related uses in the Center but due to code restrictions, we are unable to accommodate such interested parties. Even though I shared your concern regarding future parking in the Center when it is fully occupied, I also feel it would be to everybody's interest to accommodate these tenants who can occupy the space today.. our interest today ranges from tenants who can occupy up to 7,000 sq. ft. as a single use to smaller uses in sizes of 2 -3,000 sq. ft. in order to alleviate the City's concern regarding any future parking problem, Nu West is prepared to offer the following: 1) Providing we can obtain up to 7,00n sq• ft. of additional food /restaurant usage, we will record a restrictive covenant to eliminate future leasing to such uses which would exceed the normal retail requirement of one space per 250 sq. ft. such as optometrists office, dental office, and barber shop, etc. This restriction would run with the property and be binding onto all future property owners. 2) In the event that the City determines in the future that the parking is over- crowded in the Center, we would agree to initiate a parking control program whereby all employees would be required to park in the rear parking area so as to free up parking in the front section for customer use. &,q /,.5,-T- - D 12300 Ush re Boulevard, SWL 300. Los Anoeles. Ca5lorma 90025.1004 • (213) 826.6600 • FAX (213) 826Z120 Mr. Brad Buller August 8, 1990 Page 2 Y hope the above measures would prove to be satisfactory to you and the Planning Commission in approving our application for additional 7,000 sq. ft. of food use for this Center. sincerely, Mt Commercial Aevelapment Corp. Chan President FMC /MR1rc c.c. Michel Roy The C&yn (7ompetly PWIOfflce box uo.146une. CA�d677 -0216 01PM (714) 499 -5929 FAX (714) 499.5173 August 22, 1990 Mr. Bead Buller, City Planner CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA 105WCivic „enterDrive Rancho Curusasnga, CA 91730 RE: UnivemityXcM Plawaa Development County Referral 88-05 DearBrad: Wehave receivedacopy of ibe City ataffreportion tWs pza ct repared for the Pis ir;g Commission scheduled to be presented on Anguat 22,1990. e would like to clarify our positian on several Items discussed in the stafi'reporL Please refer to flue attached letter of the containing rraporeues to the staff left pwgamd by 3"ou�If and ide al as Exult C anport. Mt#jor llama discucl wltltiii fur respae icttr r include information abou` '&e projec¢'s relationahi to i flee p:rajeci's relaticaAShin to city tom watH�s d p 80I°�°g p�!%s, . Plan, asft°'eDen', adeuacyofderAea criteraa, ct,nsiatencyw� the City General y, . icy afthe ptapor�ed cor°.T- iceacisl eit r .:�nee►tal issues y �e �P rrxas of the p.v3ecfa appmwat t timg in reia�t ®nship o a specific p , , The staff report seems to refer i, the City deval pment code as abads for its analysis, However, as we understand it a planned eomntatniW/plaaaad development is intended to e_stabliah its oven development criteria. (Aiesse rs �;to the City of Rancho Cc:camornga Bzvelopment Code chapter 17.14) This concept was reaffirmed iu ti a nu Demme Stout in the committee m etirgvr'rth Mayor enenths ago. on Efl A�Narth hw,, ) by Mikels atveMI Following is a brief overview of the merits ofthe ilniveasitylCress plann,a development followed by an item by item response to tha ML or arm identified in Section 11 of the stafi'aepott. There ate three ind:viduai owners afp¢opey that taut formed a cooperative planned development. T his approach W aflowed paeservation ttf $75 s of prime darn space to be rata W as permanent open space, ac • 73e total deasicy pe rmitted by the County 11" been armaged b,, locating lower density to the north and increased duty to the south. This has in turn crated "along es c from 6,000 to 12,J01 square foot lots with a)me 2 1,000 squaarra foot Perimeter- This allows fora variety ofhousb4 types and &We&,, t Mr. BradEuffe CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Phga 2 &22 90 I • This project provides fora S acre park pei, 1,000 population, plus a school site, mo$ume landscape s i sin beer, es and highly upgraded nelAborbood and entry North 5 agreed that the archltectural standsads ofthe Etlwanda pecific Plan will control housing design. • This project also provides as much or more for fire, schoolr,, roans and trails as in anyother part of the City. Wherraa a 4 it l app=rach utilizing c�uronr to Devriop, meat Code StenNardls Ymad of ,sr generblly all unifomn lot sixes and less amenities in terms of open spm end pablic improvements. The major concerns of City staff are repeated here in itdics tbllowe-Z by our response: Apposition to a;` Couai @y dioieyfronus of 119 units " ONGdd 'an to cawit gze denW deasityand bonms oftrpprm-- a:ih -ly 38 unl& for school and parksites. Density calculations are is conformance with sta:ndae,County procedures as utilized In previous County;rojects. * 0ppa.rfi0fi to midimma lot s#u of6,000 sqwm feeds compadson to Countyw d GYtystandardsofs7,Z00squac faotnthiftum, Oppadbt des to siiifNuglob fmw the aw site to the I xversity&,te, arsui'tirrgin dsnddes ofmord than fourdOxIlingunits ptmwm ar at lout two univeaaitytr ,eta. 'We uelivsa t%m issues directly relate to the previous dir�.rssion of the planned dwe opment concept. In addition, it is our understanding that there is notes City or `n1F WgedaM lot size for planned developments. In referenco to "densitles of tiv,n four &,velliM d,ulte pperaac on at least two University tracts ", the density 'MI dente- tract, to the nearest tenth, is 4 du/ac. 'A Lwc katsehm1catudfesfor5chda. dperksiteswhii- hawlcewedwifb3nara&cent tothzCity °sRcdMHFxdtselsmiestudy e. �loratory studis� have been gr�ared.whicfi indicate no faults ace present oa the dt3►eiopmetEt sit& aiil,ough trenching studies have not yet been perfos ried to confirm this. Pleare t,ott the site is not within the State of Califon speclsi studies zone. Further ��iarrtia ctadies prv�atsed ecent pxaperties within tht �itjs study zone hav0 not yieldedenlrcvid that theState xonc shrx,ld be estencied. j. n U AUCT- 21 -IS90 15'54 FROM PENINSULA GROUP,INC. A4"Ua lst 21,1990 Ms. crew= Stang - charlton 001w of COMM CIF SM BMMAltDWO 385 N. Arrowhead Avenue, 3rdMoot ,a B+exnar&% CA 92415.4182 RE- tTiAvtt'ity/CtCSt Den Ms. SwO.CWhon: Following is an ifAt'vyr raspcmae to cptesdow raised by Brad Buller in his letter to yen dated August 6; 1990. Ezela comment by the City is listed and follow d by a resxacnse from t1r:zaaut. ', • INS, ¢.� ,1990. R : Revised plaits and maps were rec ived on duly 23 lrldal sobmieW ofthe Tentative .T het Maps to the City ol*Rarscho Cocamoagn occurred between September 1J59 and March or 1000 with the Preliminary Development Plan submitted to the County, uattd avpilabde fc r tevic� in .4�rll of 199t1e W%fiv other &a6mita ds were made to the Couirty on louse 19 abed ruiy 23, 1990, theao coatalmo-d oudy minor cfi&.. ;gas from the orlSibad City submdttsls. 2. INGONSI 10 =L0 I'A4U — TRP MAa%Eit ' NiA?IYdE TRAMS FINAL Eamax inairsr, Property boundaries are unclear. 'dire boundaries an the Preliminary Plan of Development are not consistent with the Tract Map boundaries. For example, asteM and collector shuu are not included within Tentruiwe Tma Map batuilaries. 2rcrpetty owstaatlip bounds om an not clearly ind icateai an the maps. ��ereFoce, it cannot be de�ttaaainecl # Pal1, part, or Wont of Day Creek is plmned to L. wngtructed mgt SCE property eW of IT 14493, et al. The CSdy should refer to the Master Tentative Tract N9p for property boundaries. These items have been addirmed as of the August g, 1900 PXC at the County. "^ Lt The Master Tentative Ttact Maps do not include the ecitool and pa ' e sites. At the very least, a acpatatcMaster Tentative TractMrap for the school and park sitca should be added to Ike peck of agptications prior to app of any of the a9ppWon s. .I 9xecvUvv -Park Su'1ta 1901 Irvine. CW06 is 92n41 M4147442001 FAX: M414744M AUii -21 -1990 15:48 FROM ' PENINSULA° GROUP, INC. TO ?87649_ P.07 Ms. Gretchen S Charlton COU1eP>CY OF SB t�WINO WY 726.1 Page 7 WOO 9. INCONSIS VV T CITY 1dE AI Ai eat Ar. mentioned previously, the City Viral Man designation for thn Utrivemity property is ones space. This desii =Ncn is consistent with the a ompondence recei ted from the University of Califotmia rePrdiag the educational use of Ito University Reserve System. It is also consistent with the exemption receives by the UrAvemitY f'com Property tax paymews on the ply which have bran granted every year since the ppra-+aetty wars acquired is 1977. Also the cdsiiag City designation Provides a bra% er to the Cvtiu y�P roved gtavef mining and cement batch plant operation. '1Us poteatigUy conflicting land use should be resolved before Proceeding with any fariher lama. use changes. A City Central Plain 2mendramt should be processed prior to approval for develOpment being granted by the County. The COURty General Plait xis previously noted, indicates Res -3 for the site. The Uaalversity of Califora3ris has, over the years, made several public oral and written stater antes regarding Their objectives for their properties. We believe the t. w ozampt abetsys for the pawperty is appropriate aandl it is cle" that the properly is allowed to he developed. It should be noted that the Countgr General plan Circulation Map is not consistent with the City General Plan Circulation Map. The County$ map should be brought into consistemcy wish the City's map. We would $agArest that the City match the County's Circulation Plaan. We believe thst our tmffic reports and tie City's conclude that the County's plan is more wropafate. Further, more discussions ahaild be held annottg County staff; City staff, surd including but not limited to, optimum Avve a n(See attached S� Pattern streets, Study, July, 1990.} We would be happy to participate in any further circulation discussions. 10. ]PIMI1'Y M City standards for Low and Very Lgw Density Residential deve",opmeat would not permit the density proposed for this project. We believe we can develop this property at the density► proposed in the PrOliantinas1ryy Development Plant a ad meet the City's lot size requirements, althoaagh ant Indicated In our previous comment under item dS this project ,a a ply d D l EI standar4 tall®red to the desigv of the ppiect as as wholAnn ,l'r we aserai to have one continuous lot size for all density aarmw that Project cou,?d melt City lot size requirements but ibis would provide � homogeneous and' � _r `'�. •'or plate to €hey one prapogod. Auk IE KIII AUG-21 -1990 1544 FROM PENINS" GROUP.INC. TO 987645x9 P.02 Ms. Cietchm 5tar41- Charltm COUNTY ®F 5AN D MAMINC UCP 726.1 Page 2 01/90 Current Mastrt Ten ative Maps indarde the se1'toal and panic sates. Emma t: The formattLng of the subject applications is different for each application so that it is difficult or impossible to compare the tract maps to the preliemincry and Baal plans of development. The plans read maps should be consistently formatted tl� rs..c Ib to review and plan chedi ft. We agrat with the City9s commentas ou foraruat that it is sometimes difficult to tampon plaaaa. however, the County has specific requirements that use different fo Aosts for tentative maps and psr•IlzIv&ryWnal development plans which we are folloasing OfF i— Coaastrta on; Tentative Tract Map 14446 in tnew that grading Mill occur on SCE property north of the site. Tentative Tiratct ,14612 indicates that road construction will oem on unidentified property east of the site. (As an example of inconsistency, this triangle is included as part of areas H in the Preliminary Plan, of lDevelopment.) Thesis tac onsiatencies should be corrected. Please note, the Southern Califonds Edison surplus property in question is planned to be ,purchased by i be applicant Property issues have been addressed since the August g, 1990 ,URC 3. 1 OF IiTF=A°t10P7 AEOLI'u` U 61IOWSi1IE TO AD192xNG PROlaERPIES. ft BernaWinm rMnty to PJAR ft the nv. The Univewy PmpatyIs virtually smarounded by Southern California Edison power corridors. Improvement and amenities are proposed for the Southern Casiifornla Edison cortidors and surplus property. Also, �iflag. and roads are proposed to be constructed on `�nutherra California Eftn a corridors and surplus property. School facilities a v proposed to be _ constructed on the MWD easment at the southeast corner of the Univeusity property. Wiltten permimion'to plena anduse;mere areas squat first be obWnedi. Also, City policy encourages ragional trails to be located an existit g San Berardino Cawty Flood Control DIAttict maIntmace roads. SCF - The applicant is platrning to purchase the surplus SCE propegg and bas roecchs -d a asales agreament from SCU. Within i the SCE carridort, road crossings and use of service roads for trails &r proposed: Several meetings with SCR have occurred and formal approvals an anticipated in the oezt two to three months. 7he applicant is not opposed to being conditioned for these approvals prior to the roc®rdation ofFinatiiMaps. ,w_ VD - 3'heyissue aecelved our plans &ad conceptuallyqpre to the proposed use, AUG-21 -1990 15:45 FROM PENINSULA GROLtF'.INC. TO 987645 P.03 Ms. m Stanpi•e8merltOar , CCUNTYOiF SAN BERNARDINO UCP 726.1 3 $�2I19i1 Y ,R091 0881 Trails - Will be tddreszed farther ac ,part of the '02aada lyoa h SpociDc Plan. ,it is inteeded to atilize eel$ soar'" roade A re910nal trails. This is idetrtllied in the ,i�lnatl Datrelopmeat Platte. P. vats lm— Day Creek Boulevard is proposed to be constructed privatelyheld parcels south and east of dos Uaaveasity site. Tibia mrterlal street assns through on clew ug private resit w--- -. Provision to acquire right.of way should be wade. � We agree with this Comment &aad art lttov3m9 forward on this effort Further, the University maps wrap - around adjoin pare eb to the south and east Of Tend ie Tnu:t 14522. 111 Route 30 conidooraad Day CmakBoulevard Witt iil.ait accxao, tO YiiataSe7 Drive. Alit ugh toterlor shoetaccess is iadtcsted, a fres3bk Plan Of e3eSnelopanent should also be indicated to determine ?fthc access would be adequate. :4n *sample of a f*.asWty study is iacludecl bttweuesa T T 14497 and the schoottpak site where feasable street accM Iot and planaiy are' Indicated. Also, It is not clear whether Day CII+►s;<. .Boulevard will be constructed substantially on University owned pmperty or on the Southern California Edison corridor. This location for Day Cmek Boulevards wilation, to site boundaries should be clarified. _ Refer to the cutraart .iilaster Tentative Marps which iodicete this 3aiorettstfoe. Day Crack Boulevard Will be constructed cawpletely on dealivetsity property. tad %CCtlt ��C tt7t, ai _ 'Else ROCk Cn�sh�p h..t�t, jacertt to the Day .� The avWect applicatlons are ad Caretc �lmsb on the west which b under a CMmty contested lease to this Fourth Setter, Rock Crrftr. The developmentpmposd s disc= 70ld its relationship to AA wash arm, with add without the Rock Causher. Particularly► the feasibility ar./3 timing of enca ft ands acxs the Day Creek Wash aisonld be ad& aced. The of Octs oar the Fourth S^trcet Re1ck Chaber to surrounding d"VIOPMent -'M atdrlaeased by than Barirmameatal Lnpaet Report. Wileaq Aventre a tewiOn across Day Creeat grads is consistent with the County's General Plan. #Bk&,Pu Arav re exteasiom is implied ky the County's Genetasl .Plan. The Rock Crasher 070fidldoaa allaWs tbese roasts to cmas t$rot:gh 60 lease bold a". * AUG-2i -1990 15:46 FROM PENINSOLA GROIJP,INC. TO SG76499 x'.04 M& Gffthtn 11'4.x1726.1 Page 4 WOO i srttplas Property a SS acres A Southern CaMorda Edison 4es the University Blois the CiestpXVpcnY• All SS acres have been offered to the Caryn Company /Consortium of Landowners for M0,000 an acre (Consortium mevdus of January 10, 1990). The applicant proposes to use 17 acres of this p to meet and shdghtly exceed the Quimby requirement of 3 acres per I.W. The land use proposed for the remaining 38 acres should be discussed and a feasible use plan indicated. The use of the temalader for park and open space amenities above County requhMents aWd be considered. The applicant intends to purchase tide entire S5 acres. The remainin 38 acres will designated _,s natural open space, araless the be e .igt wsada Community Scab 49ar trot materialize resuldfigin the 33 acres to be raduzed as s commue ty level park as part of the Btlwaads North Specific Alan. The UnisrersitylCrest $Tanned ,IOWalopmeat in b9yix9 the assure 55 acres and fwprov ng spproliwately 17 acres as well as improving an additional 4 -5 acre park next to the sebW, will absorb dollars per unit approAdmately two braes as high as the City park fee. Ra addition this project provid:a a 5 acre 1,000 population park star,aW e$cceding by nearly 70M the City park requirement of 3 ave-z per 1,000 population. z ; Tentative trams 13527 and 12659 are located east of Univerai ysite. The land uses for them tracts are sketchy and leave open areas which are not add =wA as to use or rccen. No faasibility study is Provided for the site $oath of Tentative Tract 12659. Construction and improvement of 1fWcy Aveane is not addressed. Also, adequate access for the site is not 7be City ralses questions about certain" tracts wfil"', an got a part _ Of this application. MaleyAycoee is not needed for access to the prvject tracts. HH, inlay is provided, then the street crossigg the SCE corridor from, lay Creek is not needed FAT[.d`irta'dG R+dpEl' t'£y pr e��rttves c°rrss�f,P •r,nc. AS CUU kite rioted that substantial portdoa3 of ib.. orforf icia rise subject aWlic a ions pas bs n submitted is designated as open space under the City General Plan and is currently bOWAx to remain open space wader the CiWs version of the Etiwandr Pl'ar h�l{c Plan until an application for a General Plan Amendzient is pwcessed. City staff' invites a General Plan Amendment Ml8cati�on which would be consistent with the County's General Plan p --dons (ace item #9). AUG -21 -1990 I5 :46 FROM PEN INkLA GROUP, INC. TO 9876491 ' P.05 MS. Gret&ft sun " COUNWOPUNDWARDINO UCP 726.1 Page S ti V9a z: The Co2vntl oeseral '� ?Aft has this Ares M,62tlfied as Rea -3, which Is the b2s a of our plan., nc City ofltancho Caca mpsgat bss been mare for natmber of yesm of the iraadversdty's nlliaste plain to aeAd this area for dercdopraent mitt in order to ,fend open space acquisidea s tee part oft a Universitp's Naaftual Xwoaree Systeaa. As stated, we arts to saxbtsrft a General Plan Amendment a licsa'iotr as as Ca-U00SY, out believe it more eatl�leatetat to do so mtth Ike Brlwaudi*b -hlk Specdfie plate. tTaadex t;�c C:rrntgr's it3s:'�a3tY of dawaaloebmnet. eeadiadn.,.:,.a...aa_.. o.i.__ ....ow..err s�n•� , . , 'vuzare not lick kd to, Me X?cnciop .,,c C2r y= Mi �,iso, City's' ApWw dendty d one of 2.4 unit per acre as w;I` theCottnty xesidq AW, up to 3 umim pvracre; and that t$t+e Citys ver;t RiIVP d�ys:sity desiMtioti'of lets h 2 waits isms acre is compsmble to t1a CoUm d 6 a ofrenideWid up to 2 utats per em I Witbls a DRC avacJaW at the Coanty, Coarnty s7aeMAIdidated athasr j this project coxrao rznrs to Abe CRYfilllsdds staandws. a wort, it diould be sated that Oty development Vandards for X ow Density reas { require�a minimum lot —* of 7,200 squats feet with as size of 8,000 square fw and would alai permit a miullmum lot size o - V to square feet. And, for the Very LoA'y Dendty des Melon, the City staadaW vroarld require a minimum Pot size or20,000 squaw feet and an avet�Ss lot size of 21,500 salraart+e feat and would � permit a miatimum Rot size of 7,200 square feet within this designation. (Sea atUnhed C mp&riaon of City arrd U01veasity Crest Development Staaidatdaa.) City srtffCOndtrues to refer to Its development code as atliss basis for its analysis. This project is a PD and much I'aa the City's Planned Communities (PC's), it create# staendatrds taffonead to the individual site. daa the E dwandae 1Vortair greeting hosted by IGO 1lfiirels Mayor Dennis Stout Indicated large projects skould ba: loehesd'at on a me AY case basis and sew standards devela!_1 that are site specific The The UQ1veraa?t r1Crest Pre1<lmiaaryDevelopment Plan reflects a clustered design geecrat€ng Ba addidonael aaxtdts than would be achieved by using the Cd W s standaerds. 21* clustered design rel7ccts the desire of the CRY of Rancho Ca4mangap# Pltanndaag COMMIasion to have a lsmter vardatioxa da loaf adzes, with lot sizes increasing from south to noreb. r E lu AUG -21 -1990 15:47 FROM PD41,11SL)LA GROUP, INC. Ms. otetchen Stanoc adton C©ilRi yOFW1 BERNARDINO UCP 726.1 6 8/ IM 70 Sa?6495 P.06 5. ZLUItE'rp MEET CITY- r'�'TM' tx ^ +; Conditions forwarded tajtYstaadatds have t pnpsred by the Fnoneerity� Division and You under separate cover. Tire City of Ranebm Cucamonp Road Staendatda dwuld be reciuired for ali street;, PJMcular attendon is di icted to City stamdatds for spec streets wbich require an additional 7 -root m'em-P 8114 a z-fOOt minimum to be added to the ulft%te 13 foot parkway far landscaping bardst reawchina the pariaaeter wail of the tract, e.g. ►Day Crtcric Boulevard and V�ilaoa Avenue. (See attached. Connpa,lon of City and University CrW Dtvelopsaeat Staadatds, Footaate 3.) A detailed camp"?soft of the C lOr's staadards vakv made. City standards aven wed except im a felt cases where County staff determined tfist, d'ounty Stsndardar were more appropriate. We bedlere we meet air saceed City parkway standartir a;rd would be happy to review ill a arpprwpd3ate plan& 6. F�JLL.Uitir `' DUI DING ANn sa'orvTv N nA1RnS- Comments reflecting 'City l3nildirg and. Safety requirements have been forwarded under separate cover. We have not ro"Ired these commentn. Xv addition, we behave w.T are meeting buildit and safety standards. 7. elf of tt� 6 ® tit°atK N r,�r �Tar�ABp i . B�REOUtRED. sadrtians reiiecTing the Rancbo Uiimottga Fire Diatrict standards have beet PvRxmd by the Fire District send forwaaded to you under coyer: County staff and City shave been coardinat&g over The past several months' We will coanpply With these stau arch as rtgteed beta *ea City and County as we asderstead theca. We would like to note, this pta ect is Within the Daly CF,D of the Rancho Ciacanrongrt Fite %rtiotecdov .District, drat pays for both the capital and operstivaaal costs at a 1,,0701 satlstietory to provide the accessary services. 8. Did I 4382 ,. Vx subject appUcxtioas are Wuded within the EdwAnda Ne th Sped ie Fin submitted to the County the week of 7'uly 2 tbr+a�agh July 6,1�9Q. S�eific design criteria iaeluding iatigbboritood identi6ct=�toa and subt+.rea daige critEtia are included in the s�ciHC Plan. Ffovrever, nose of the subjecx applicatiox� re£etance the Spscif3 JP9att. The n►'t appiicat%ra tdraarld be subiect m ills Specific l?ka design criterE+� upon apfirovat of teat Spetdflc plan. 2'be Faisal Developmeaat Purrs Include Vcrlf% design criteria. Sam aP,prooyed criteria will be included into the Etlivanda North Spec & Pis 2. 1 RUG -21 -1990 15 :48 FROM PENINSULA GROUP.INC. ML Gretchen Suasg-CMdton COUNWOFSANBERNAMINO UCF 726.1 Page 8 8/21/90 TO SE76499 P,08 n e ?he L7nivetsity Sup Under S on $8.051 a) (2 the applicant has requested a density tretufer of 17 base units plots a 2 -unit density brnrus. Th,- Property Is indicated as having limited development potential under the Comity General Flan, i.e., WBF/,PD- 1/46. However, this request does not VNv to meat the conditions for a dsnety ta=far under the Devgiormeat Coda beau se the PrOpertY is encumbered by,pk.,icd hamrds. Due to the steepness of the tert dn, IM) the fsui that a flood control rm meut covets the lower one - third of the property, the actual potential for &-velopment is virbolly nil. The Forest Servioe has meted that public access sbouid be limited and that no improvements to the property should be permitted. Therefore, if a density tmusftr is allowed, the PmPertyahould be preserved for u:;d evalopW open apace and Q development rights sbouid be removed fivm the PU=L The only use memaims to the propertyshould be University sponsored research consistent with the University Restive Systeut Char►„ r Acs—as should be restricted to current mock of access, e.g,, undeveloped use trails. Ths City calculation for the base & sity on the 675 acre parcel is 16 units. The rationalization for granting a density bonus on the U2usfeired units is unclear and should be discussed In the FDP. Development coaatxaints on the propnrt�r are not srigz9ftcant. At least 19 lots could certainly be aci e�eloped ou tba 675 asses (1 du134 acres). Regardless of the level of development, all the property srld be Privately owned and public access completely illc'.a. i7re 675 acres will be maIMIAI ecd as permanent open apace. We do not belle" z two or three anit bonus M return for Me 675 acre open space IJ acappropflate gadeou ;g N,,., et- ft; The appiieation is rmqueasiag a 10 percent density bonus under Section 88.0515(x) (3) of the County Development Code. They do not appear to meet the minimum requirements to gaalif,, for such a density bonne, neither in quality of design, or by amenities provided above requirements. However, since County eta has agreed in concept to the 10 percent density bonus, the City that, if the City's objeAon is not considered and the bonus is granted, t�e bonus provided be substantially equitable to the benefit received. ?gptdling Traject design, the only thing unusual about these applications iv ne lack of on -site amenities. This is a barely modified grid of development. It Lacks the curvilinear desip features of the o concept plan. 'Erect intarlors have no special amenity features. For your convenience, a comparism of the origin si ttsegt plan to the present plan, plug a third concept suaested by City staffisana bee d. City standards vrould reTdw a redesign k1these maps. EN 11 LA AU5-21--i990 15 :49 FROM PENINSULA WOUP.INC. TO `987645 "s' P.09 WL Grrhen Sw1- Marlton CL"XW "1'X OF SAN BERNARDDNO UCp 726.1 Page 9 &2190 P1 .3e note the intemal palesttian and pedestrian paseos connecttag to open space and to arterial =and stttiets.. At a minimum, the latter amenity should be added to the tract design (See attached Land Use Study attd Street ltattem Study Prepared for the City~s Planning Division by RJM Design Group.) Thd project does provide STS acmes of open space and 21 acres of par's which is substaatisbly in crews of any aimila,r aMenity in the City. 47re City requirement for park# is 3 acres per 1,000 Population. This project provides S acres per 1,000 populadou standard. 210 interior tact deaiu is s bdmuce Of what we per dve to be the City Planning Commission's desires u ,reference to lot sizes, graduals standards and street designs and has been developed from the initial site dedga. We would be ,happy to discuss additional apes spseelpaseo covaectibns. Severs] paseos have been added. The reservation of land for school and park use is presented in the preliminary Plan of development, but is Only minimally eddtessed on the Master Tentative 14492 by reference to "future ichoolipark site". Them is `no lan$aage or condition in the preliminary plan of development to ensure this basic amenity Packap- The appliROt is willing to be conditioned by the County on the Preliminary Development Platt for the provision of the school/park site.. A 19•,tere park site also discussed, but is even more nebulous, because it Cdsta On property that is owned by Southern California Edison and not the RVHCML 7i hero ate referees to park improvements and to improvements to ememcnts adjacent to park site in order tp exrAnd the effective area of the park sites. However, there are not conditions to quantify the area, quantify the level of improvements, or to ensure that park improvements are provided as a conditim of gtan6nL A dermity bonus. As indicated earlier, the SCE area has been deemred suarples and is boingg aaegotiated for acquisition. This project mi'll meet park standards as established by the County forpx& development. Virtually all trail amenities an located off site on casements. There it no e or condition In the plan or maps to ensure consuraction of these amenit es. The titer step would be for the applicant to obtain letters of petmiasion to mstruct improvements from SCE, MWD, and the SBa -CD. RUG -21 -1990 15:50 FROM PENINsULP mmp,INC Ms. TICm�tche aSc�p I- Ch rko�oD T UCP 726.1 Page 10 &2M I 987545 P. 10 a Trails are sitoWar in accordance to CitylW&SterPi'an ofTra ka. The appllcaat Aas met with SCE' atad SCG and atatleipstes approratls for trarils in the SAV ft,* to three raoaths. SBCFiCD is not pan of the t adrersltyluicst,projeces "it propoatals. Tweaty- -eight acres of reecrestion area an identified in the Prelimin Ity Pun of development applio ton, however, only 21.9 acres arc for dcdlwcd Will kI pe� .These is no andysh of where the six additional recreWon cares The great proposal is to provide for 11 senses of improved pmar equivalent to 5 acres ar wk par liv6@ plpadat1vv- n add?tiosatl 6 acres Ofintpravad encumberedpaak land�y gy be povldod Sy ge Et3traada North Specific Platt err the SCQ corridor adjacent to the trolversity Area scbooMpa ksite. Also, while this would provide park levels wit;.'► +hie plagued development amter than three acres per thousand, it is unclear that the three me per thousand standard will be met if the cumulative pax* requirement for the Ptiwanda North area is con ie cd. To snake a deteraninsdoa as to whether the Mu park requirement for Etinanda ftra -, is met requim an anaws of the park Mpir>emews and provision in &ttitmods. North SPeclSc Plan wW,:h is just beginning the County review pa+ocees. This project has park staaodaatis ,that satisfy and exceed City requirements. It ala:o will be cozksistent with the etiWWds North Sperfic.Plan. ne SCE surplus property is available only as a 35 -luxe package. no entire 55' acres should be considered as pats of she amdenitier package qualifying this prmrject fora density bonus. It b possible that other amenities such ra donagonn Of a at 1001 site, should also be coostdcred. This project ,,pproviders Parks ie axed" of Glt9 requirements, providers as 6 f acre ©pen space Prone,, and pmvisiogs for at school ziit4 all of erhicA 49slify iblir project for a density Moans. of�amenities which are provided arse no gteatcc thm would be wired Y Pan ofdevelopm4mi. Lundarcarp* amenities are designted to be a balance betwee. City plartalag and City eaginverlarg. The entry monuments and landscape provisloars are upgraded significatatly iiom typazcael. trsets. i i I i i i AUG -21 -1990 15:50 FROM PENINSULA GROLF, INC. TO .370495 P.11 1 Ms. Gmtehen SU060AMM COUNTY OP UN BMNAMINO UCP 726.1 Page 11 m1no E There have be= oral r .foreaca� to 1 =boa of *a 675 erne psctxl within the national forest as jsstiocation. of the density bounss. However the University Is. in effect ca Ukaing 165 acres of developabla ]end, svbi�i does not mcc University Reserve d�te criteria, an which they arcs no tav+es, and which bas substaantiaily mlt�ted in v9ue sex action 1977 far 675 acres of non - developable which meets tha University Reservt cdterla; therefore, there is intrinde value in die 5.� for the UniveMity. It should be noted: that the density calculations should be revised to MROct.the more accurate acreage calculations on the Teative Tract neaps. In tbo V`)P, density appears to have been inadvertently uslZMA to the parhand schotL aitc. AccordinS to i'at McGuckian, Counts+ Developnsent Coda Section, paw and school sites, as well as commercial sites, mustbe aibtt dadprior to calculaft density for s Planned Developmem applicatka We believe the City is jucorrect It is our uadentanding from the County Sisf1`'that there 4UV gtgrAxtc ways of calcttiatlag decslir for these areas. This was confirmed by Iohn IWOMe Aw st the August s, 1990 County DRC. in the PDP the applicant is raques. a total of 119 bonus units p1L' 19 units for transfer for a combined total of 11293 units. City calct ladon, iced on use more accurate tract map acreage Snformaiion, indicates a base density of only 1,142 units which would yield 114 bonus units plus 17 units rttatdnnunt for ttatzsfer froth the -pen owe pux d for a combined total of 1,273 Units. (See wtacL,td Density Atmlysis Tables.) no County is tacatrraged to review the densitycalcule iota. After reviewing the current engineer sercage calcubitlons, ogle dwelling anit total is sllghtTy Under tfra Maria AM ;permitted- The back rag information is *vsilabla for Your revioru. Whether or not the dcndidesam revived, the County is also enc0ur49Ed W DING further consideration to the equity of thZ valuy received from file .gropostd amenities package in== for grantinS a dealt hue. Ifs dtsssity bonus Is meted, it is requested that the amcMft package be firmly tied to the County approver I ocsss, atzdlw that a aterastiec I+acksgo be zaquiieed of the IFaothing also, this project is prepaare4 to PAY to !ht County Muireaurr nts for parks and open: opsee two and at half t,Gaaes the City's requirements fora tans_W1de Improvements or approxlarately 6.S willion dollars. AUG-21-i990 1551 FROM PENINSULA GROUP.INC. Ms. Gruen S - Chariton COUNT VOF WjBE NARDINO UCP 726.1 PAV 12 WOO TO 9375499 P.12 A t UsiveasiSY City Policy desires that deBaity decrease row loath to north. That f- ; icy is not Achieved by these maps. oAnty policy requires clustering to preserve Open enacts, such as prewar a,,/,W=ceMcnt of the two blue lice streams that tan through the site. Open apace is no*reing preserved on site. Therefore, no benefit to the County or to the City is occunbg by transferring w9ts from the Crest tract to the unhVdty tote) We believe we meet the City's policy o. decreasing density from south to north. TheFe are no correctly ideetii?ed hlue line stmanga -.! Ygla the p,oject:Tea as determined by drainage data. The 695 acres cpeu space bet prokened is a part of tac site. We would suggest City staff confirm wilt% the City planning ComMisslos regarding the beneftt► of our designs philosophy of decreasing density in the north &vLf Increasigg density is the south. On the other Trend, liabilities are occurring by QoncanatinF densities oil the University uwts beyond their capecits, to receive d�sity. AL., liabilities are Occurring by concentrating density on the University pact in comparison with densities allowed on adjoining property. The ftuatcx Route 30 Freeway will pravlde a natural barrier of the Victorat Planned CAmmunity to the south and Day Crack Cbmi nel and the Day Creek Nash provide natsral Imniere to the Caryra Planned Community to the west. Thcre Is no barrier to p"rty in the Etiwanda Specific Plan to the oast Which is designated Wry Low Density Residential Use, lose than two dwelling units per acre. Thu a '%o conceeratiw of density ou the Univecalty tracts Introduces a higher in"Ityland use into area phoned by the County for up to three, units per acre and by the City for a Low and Very:, Int- susity Land Use of leas than two to three dweliitxg traits per acre. This increase in intensity, in aura, costes a pressure to increase the intensity ofuse on adjoining parcels of laud. Density aolosed in the south cod of the sija ,reflects the County Gamend �lw a nd we believe that 74, �Ii oocl aonerol chaaraal arrd similar density to the `best, tho Dpghway acrd worc latense uses to the south, and' less intevse arses to the east across the 300, side SCE corridor, the dcusi ties , .ioposed fmm a land arse petspectivc ane jus lle INA>%ROUAC.raE THE CaMi FI r ep Ue size and location of the PmPOUd commercial site is not adequate according to City guldei£�r.$ for commercial development. A better location we uld br Wjac to the northwest corner of the intersection of the Route 34 Freeway and Creek Boulevard. This location would jsave store visible aoa ss and provide a buffer to residential development to the north. (See ittac- ad L and Use Study, July, 1990,) 11 El ` AUG-21 -1990 15 *51 FROM P£NINSOLA GROUP, INC. TO 927649E P.13 t iJX�iT9t QFQF S JBfiR�dA�JDiHO Alft C 726.1 gage 18 8/2D/40 s A coasime: cial site at i?Aj Route 3d Prema*ap and Dap Crreck i?souleva}rd does not work because of flea necessary geosetry of t be site sad .mccess probleLva. 2'dr,a Sdte location at .$aay&dAvcnae was chosen 'o imm a a 9"'ater sense Of comaaaaddty► kub with its neighborhood park and ale estaa y sehool Experience has shown that approximntcly 15 acres is opemal for a ndghbod =4 commercial center. nerefore,•City statiwould support a lsagsc commercial site and oppose a liar lens thorn 10 act ecret for co mmemial development. Furtiter, tine P101101irn9 Plan of Development List of Potential Users includes a drive -in. theater. The alote pentlosied use would ^'et be aWrepriate and should be deleted ftm the; list vflpotentid usm We would be willing to iAM=W IV eotMarcdal site acraW but car marked remcamb kdacates Oat we Would der so at tiro deWment of the proposed Edwand'a Cos�Wu dry Center touted at :Filson and East Aveaves. The drdtre -in Mortar leas btau deleted as a permitted ase Design criteria for the commercial site should be included to the preliminary and/or fiscal plans of development. R?ea� er3teria should be cansiateat wig tit: design for the surroun &hg residential dev ant and with the neighborhood desijx ihrsnc in the Etiwas►da North Specme, the Cd1Wt7 rngnit*0 Mar corMCAW&l site tooprocess is aepetaatedtl•,y at a later mate u8dera 00,00 101W rug peewit. 12. e3t�iMli'iA1LiSS9iES• Seismic Cn 41m adequeof ! . '�Cityof>vRancho hasideatifiedtlat: Rod Hail lFault Seismic 5tsrdy Zone. i lee FDR places a scliwl and a park site wi0tin th5 adjacent to the fault zone, but trenchlig studies were lim ted to a line approximating the alignment of Dw Creek lBo evard. Additional trenching should be mpired prior to the appswal ofteenyplan. I i Wir have surd will continue to sarjor► all seismic staady tegarixemasrtai. � e sti „eta • lire l aft Flal lM taferrarces Mly Kuaztan Associates; studies blew been provided by DKS and Austin F'±+qt Associates which should be referenced in the Ems.. The City ftManizes the Austin Faust traffic mitigac'son MWSures is sdeqnatc to gddresa Csttyyr teaflld impacts. The Austin p'sust tttitigstfiion measure should be Clsculated_ to Caltraas for comment en the adeToacyof the re&ml mieW ionmcasiM. AUG-21 -1990 15:52 FROM PENINSULA GROUPONC. TO 9876499 P.14 � Ms. Green $y�s��5�7,,�'����•t�9�M��o�rpt� Cif ®7 sk ^ l${.i1!\I�Si'.r l O UCF 726.1 Page 14 sri0 .ti The rsesults AMM tie City traMe model mateh closely WgrA tYtose previ!easly pro, bP the appiiea nt aged rsepreseet a co wits out two artlrd a halt' t..taca greater thxau the pity catrently raqaxirea of devel®pmpot. �say 9Y �e___� +�� g� :6.�GL1kTE M fiAQ- wb DI & EMAM. TWO SGS 011ie �[e Itraws V411 be elowd according to the proper Plena of dvvelopment fob 1ha aubjoct applicatioms. l�titigstion meamm v4U be t W&a bar the CaiifoaU �,ut of Fish and Came and the i7.S. Fish and Wildlife' ry ce but him not been axsaaree liirraas gemextt s°datt is diligently, usdorwxy as pad of rhs P1livande North Speciiic Flan and khe City is Jarited to part'icipaate. As prorloady mated, then v ablue- ige &,!rams -avers iracorrs. ^tiy identified according to cttarmat deaina1g;4 data. P- Ovirov rental impact AepOlt aaa3gr lfir leas concluded that Oe 675 acre, Veal apace is adequate abtigatfon. MI I as on Ma:►it na P3 -+± Not krmo i ft The miti eon measures in the IrTR should be reviewed for awza cy by OU xcaponatble amden and a mit floe monitorft plan be pr Meal in order to establish the adequacy of implementation of the rulWon nreasuM Prior to approval of the subjea plans and mapc.. A mitigation monitoring pleaaa has bvea completed ao part of the M. Since dediention of the 675 acre Open space Is accepted mitigation, enf®rsement a ribie nuid swiota will be easy. cift atel -re : The =Mea platy and maps are included In an application to the arty for u ;Pacific Flu Posing 2,575 dwelling units. Additional #7, an aPplication for a 6ro unit residedw developnaeat curd golf his been 81eei in eoune the w�icYt is i�smediatel�r uloxtb tuf the site of these ep(alir.atienxss. Also, the ock Crstahor site is immediately west of the site oY applicatiM& T'hwe be will siig�nnlf$r„ant e mno>gative impacts associatcd witia these and other applications which mausebe adsquatelvsddrrmood prior to approval of ftpwjaL The items referenced by the CRY tee part of the Edw ande. North Sptadfic .Plan Ox ether County development mad me to be ;Manus addressed as vent of that Specific Flan. Coidit.ions attacked to this applicARIO u are bviieved to be consloreet with the Spacit% � Pima and a cotuditioe may be attached that regaires compliance with ?,tact conditions devefopcd from the Avview of the rSpeciiia plan. ,cif' AW -21 -1990 15.53 FROM PENINSLt A GROLF,INC. TO 9di8499 PAS � MS. �'idW„'Ci6t!'II UCP 726.1 INO Page 13 Ai WO 1 Zzas requested fiat an MR adaerx t ®be prspa�ed Or a MMIed Of tits date, the addendum is plat ca fete and bu beau circtclated for re"M The ndeTeadaraar. is arsa�r completion &0 focaaaear pripaa+rlly o� torli?c lsaaaes w1�3c.3 are ad�aaed oj&awh , fe cluding but not limited tO the Ci Cal Zforain bta agencies, s, FLSh and Cant:, and U.S. ty, tom., and CallfOtctia of ]3gwbz eixt F"?, and Wildlife &Mce dmuid Mve as Mottvaity to comment on the of the in, the context of the cumulative ;nagads of 160Proloct "When to ad&Wum is avSWe for wvicw the Citymqueds won offt &W daft MRtagotls.v & *e&dde to ail tespowible agencies for commem prior to approval for the sub "t "Plickdo . This p��roro,,pecu conforms to "quiremengs Of'CEQA aaad all other applical Iol sales and rar,2ulatio= for,prePAMUON arfAzl BIR. ; 13. ..�. tyI: et lazas'snd MP at this time isPuttinthe cattbe ore thckm Sri reladou to t6a dwanda NOrtL Sp c1fic Plan d es atppticants forthe r, iy.., ,intpropo"k-are min- aapp�PslicAnts for they Specific Man submitted to the Count in lulyY 1991D, �ha Univerti 1Crrai PWFOW is included in ate 3 pedflc Phi.. The Specific iuncludea -alp cdwb, backbone Jfralgtucurre Plauaa, and other �rngon . new for the © t11► level of this open and nndaevcl arm. Tw Elm for the S�cli% Phn 1111 address the cumulative impacts of dMlopmeot which otherwise must be adilmsed ploomeal. it is utt Cly *at developmeW of w Univetsityxmt PwPMtY C= occur Until the knes raised in tits Spe ific Flan are Mowed inslucti� the Mod for a •iiomcinl to provide the r'��ed bmicl one Therefore, a Of aw ultivowtylCeest tract Should be postponed until f Spedfic plan is approved. - As p1mmers we sou %d artg,��eeSt that the Coid PraaPt'Rg area extaada frOW !!Milliken Avestan. st rIM... t9 the eaastern City limit ne City Aaas barest approedsg developmeaw in that Ares without may connection to .s specific pdrati; W,6110 tkis applia ratios is i'or so ap"Orovalf obatt relates to 8 speeif c AM -. The CRY should be lat'w- etely is miller w*h than,Ut?evacds RO"k Specific Plan and wt rema% WYlllug to address any sp*ciflo questions The My may. bavm. f' ALG`21 -1990 15 =53 FRDM PENT4S5 GROUP,'INC. To ''376$97 P.16 t tx� ��ritAf8l�t�l't; UCP 726.1 Page 16 &2X*Vo staff ` aRSed oa the 13 mot' issues dban-qW ab wcz City Pimp ub i eve fecar�tmertdal substasttLrl 'or denial of the 1Pniverdtyl� test proposals if these W11cstions hQ beet? roaiev4d by the City. Becmm it appow though; as only minor fCVI$io= are being m ggated by County stag and tha site in is the Ci=15 t ease oflafIueaCS, City sa}il� p� curls Ons sud casditioas. Yam feo ng that tht- Lbe inco imated into tho County lice of ooad#tieos. Tho City ltm Include conditions _ aCp by pbnaiag, �, rand the pig lyistait svhieh have fbt�taided uautr SePamte ICO96F, tta Weil a3 tlw fist afteted of additional coudidons w itch reflect the itma dUcamed is ft letser. PAcwt would Me to VVO& -dosely With the City &W the Co ttty to develop the figtt reaidentiol community in the fnlmrtd F-V*fe, f"Pwona prime PMPMV Etta and commmdtygood. ' ye tstady y+aara, 's Pdadpal X11 CC cc Brad Bider, City Oflteacbo.Cucammp d J i3Liardo, T aeere The Sham tower, CoUnty of John M 8iim, of San Banrdi�go Corr - Cbron i I f ; 'r 110 CITY OF RANCHO CUC AMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE August 22, 1990 TO: Chairman and Members; of the Planning ,ommission 'v s FROM: Brad Buller. City Planner BY: Miki'Bratt, Associate Planner SUBJECT: COUNTY REFERRAL - 88 -05 'UNIVERSITY CREST - Master Tentative Tracts s, Final.Development Plan Map; and various Tentative Tratit Maps for 1,293 single family residential units, 6.3 acres of commercial, 4.56 acre park site, and 7.17 acre school site for University Crest Planned. Development Proposal on 425.16 acres of land located north of Highland Avenue, south of utility corridor, east of 'Day Creek Channel, With portions west of Hanley Avenue and portions west of Etiwanda Avenue within the City's Sphere of Influence. The proposal also inLlude -a the dedication as permanent open space of 675 acres looted within the National Fores' I. BACKGROUND.: The subject proposal consists of 1,293 single Family residential units, a 6.3 net acre commercial site, a 4.56 acre park site, and a 7.17 =,re school site on 425.16 acres of land generally located north of Highland Avenue, south of the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power/Southern California Edison utility corridor, east of Day Creek Channel, and with portions west of Hanley Avenue and portions west of Etiwanda Avenue. The proposal also consists of 675 acres of privately owned land within the National Forest in the Day Creek watershed to be dedicated as permanent open space (see at 0ched Vicinity Map). The The proposal was first sibmitted to the County in 1988. In 1989, it was submitted to the City as part of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan. In reviewing -the maps, the Planning CcAunission` commented that, in.general, lots should become increasingly_ larger in size north of Highland Avenue. The Commission also supported density transfer:a to achieve larger lots in the north so long as the receiving 1,arcels within the Etiwanda North Specific Plan area could absorb dansity. On several occasions, City staff advised the applicant that a General Plan Amendment would be 'requirud for the University and Crest properties to change their Land dse Desigf*tion from open space to residential and that Lnw Density (2 to �dwelling units per acre) was the highest intensity of use which would be ITEM L PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CR 83 -05 - UNIVERSITY /CREST August 22, 1990 Page 2 consistent with the County Land l..$se Designation of Residential, up to three units per acre. Staff also advised that the density on the University tracts was too high and the lot sizes too small to meet Low Density development requirements. In February 1990 the applicant submitted a screen check draft Specific Man to the City which raftaed all lot sizes by 10 percent. The applicant said that the. across the board lot size reduction was the only way they could meet the requirements of the City's Engineering Division for 60 foot right -of -way for local streets, On February 22, 1990, City staff informed the applicant that no further processing of concurrent tract map submittals in the Sphere territory could occur in the City until the conflict about lot sizes was worked out. The applicant said any other solution' would require a reduction in density and that density was not negotiable. City staff repeated that the City's positio)i was that City Standards must be met. With that, the City and the applicant appeared to be at an impasse. In March 1990 Joe Oilorio met with County staff about reactivating the County University /Crest application. On April 23, 1990, Mr. Oiiorio, acting for the Caryn Company and the Regents of the University of California, submitted a revised Preliminary Plan of Development to the County=. Soon thereafter, the Tentative Maps and Final Development Plans were also submitted to the County. A copy of the most recently revised Preliminary Development` Plan, dated August 3, 1990, has been included in the Commission packets, Attached is the Land Use Plan. On May 9, July 2, and August 8, 1990, City staff provided comments to the County Deve vpment Review Committee meetings on the subject applications. Staff comments on the subject applications are intended to be consistent with tt,- City General Plan -, Development Code, policies, standards, and guidelines, as well as previous direction from the City Planning Commission and City Council. Staff comments dated August 6, 1990, are attached. During the August meeting of the County DRC, Mr. DiIorio stated that the comments received_ from the City reflected staff's opinion and did not appear to reflect the opinion of the City Planning Commission or the City Council. Present at the August meeting were County staff, City staff, the applicant's technical team, a representative from Supervisor Mikels office, and a member of the County Planning Commission, Mr. Raymond Ferguson. II. ANALYSIS: Staff's comments include a list of concerns coupled with a suggested list of conditions which would mitigate the concerns. Following is a summary of several of the major concerns; E PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CR 88 -05 UNIVERSITY /CREST August 22, 1990 Page 3 * Opposition to the County density bonus of 119 units. * Opposition to counting residential density and bonus of approximately 38 units for school and park sites. * Opposition to minimum lot size of 5,000 square fc t in cowparison to County and City standards of a 7,200 square400t minimum. * Opposition to shifting lots from the Crest site to the University site, resulting in densities of m -)re than 'Four dwelling .units per acre on at least two University tracts. * Lack of seismic studies for school and park sites which are located within or adjacent to the City's Red Hill Fault seismic study zone. * Absence of formal agreements: between applicant and County guaranteeing amenities and - improvements proposed by the applicant to- justit,'. the density bonus, most of which are located off -site, * Absence of formal agreements by agencies and property owners granting permission for use of property fur off -site improvements and amenities. III. NOTICE REQUIREMENT: There is no noticing requirement .for a County referral, however, staff did notify the applicant (Caryn Company) and invited them to attefld the Planning Commission meeting. IV. RECOMMENDATION: Staff is requesting that the City Planning Commission review staff comments and direct staff to forward the aforementioned comments to the City Council. The Planning Commission should also recommend that the City Council direct staff co forward the comments on to the County Planning Commission in a format appropriate for the County Planning Commission. ly ete /QCityP ex 8b:MB /jfs Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Vicinity °Map Exhibit "B" - Land Use Plan Exhibit "C" - Staff Comments, August E, 2990 d �I 1 1 .e wt tst� wl fkaw s t\ ` 8614 AM ... -... LEGEND 1111114111 1 SPECIFIC PLAN 4D-01 BTIWANDA NORTH => INCLUDES AREAS 2 - S & A - E ® 2 UNIVERSTTYOPCALIFORNIAICARYN 3 LANDMARK DEVLPMT. CO. 4 CHANG 5 CHANG COMPLETED ANNEXATIONS: A = CARYN, B = ME LCHER, C= AHMANSON. D= PULSAR, & E= BLACKMAN/HOMESTEAD EXISTING CITY SPHERE OF INFLUENCE TiEM: UNIVERSITY /CREST PROJECT CITY OF UCAMONGA TULE: VICINTfY MAP N. PLAN D ION r $~�"'..C� EXHIBIT: "A" SCALE: NONE E-11 � I L] t. LEGEND 1 SINGLE FAMILY � SF 6UOA 7200 SF = 'MINIMUM LOT SIZE - SINGLE FAMILY 6000 SF = MINIMUM LOT SIZE ,: SINGLE FAMILY 8000 SF = M NSMIlM LOT SIZE 8 8 PUBLIC, (PARK & ELEh' SCHOOL) r riOMMERCIAL .•+.p+Yr;w: �L'_ i"I �,.ao NOTE: REFER TO OEVEIOPMENT REMXATKM FOR DESCRFT*N i�" OF ABOVE USES J� `, .. OFCQS; 4�JGAMONGA TTENY: UNZNERsrrY1CREST PROJECT PL � I'� ION TTIZ.E: PROPOSED LAND USE ; EXH BT;: "B" SCALE: NONE Cr Y OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA August 6. 1990 10500 Civic Center Dn •e. Past Office Box W7 :7141 4ao.1441 Rancho Cucamonga. California 91::9 Fa t: ta6:•niW l Gretchen Stangl- Sharlton Office of Planning 385 North Arrowhead Avenue, 3rd Floor San Bernardino, CA 92415 -0182 SUBJECT: UNIVERSITY CREST PDP W121 -49; MASTER TENTATIVE TRACT 14492 (UNIVERSITY); TENTAfIVE TRACTS 14493 THROUGH 14496, 14522 AND 14523 (UNI'.IFRSITY) FINAL, DEVELOPMENT PLAN MAP (UNIVERSITY); MASTER TENTATIVE TRACT 14605 (CREST); TENTATIVE TRACTS 14606 THROUGH 14612 (CREST); AND FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN MAP (CREST). Dear Ms. Stangl- Chariton ` If the above applications were being processed in the City of Ranck* Cucamonga, they would be recommended for denial for the following reasons: 1. INADEQUATE _TIME FOR REVIEW: received on July 239 1990. 2. Revised plans and maps were Property Limits: Property boundaries are unclear. The boundaries on the Preliminary Plan of Oeveloplaent are not consistent with the Tract Map boundaries. For example, arterial and collector streets are not included within Tentative Tract Map boundaries. Property ownership boundaries are not clearly indicated on the maps. Therefore it cannot be detarmined if all, part, or none of Day Zreek is planned to be constructed on SCE property east of TT 14493, et al. School and Park Site: The Master Tentative Tractr'Maps do not inc ude the school and park sites. At the vlry least, a separate Master Tentative Tract Map for the scl►ool and park sites should be added to the package of applications prior to approval of any of the applications: Format: The formatting of the subject applications is different for each application so that it is difficult or impossible to compare the tract leaps to tha preliminary and final plans of j development. The plans and maps should be consistently formatted to facilitate review and plan checking. EXHIBIT M ltan„ William I Alexander Charles I- Buquet it �yrr c•. . Dennt. L Stout Deborah N. Brown / r Pamela 1. Wnsht hack Lam alt V Ms. Stangl- Charlton RE: University Crest August 6, 1990 Page 2 Offsite Construction: Tentative Tract Hap 14496 indicates that grading will occur on SCE property north of the site. Tentative Tract 14612 indicates that road construction will occur on unidentified property east of the site. (As art e)tcmple of inconsistency, this triangle is included as part of area H in the Preliminarj Plan of Development.) These inconsistencie -, should be corrected. 3. LACK OF INFORMATION ABOUT RELATIONSHIP TO ADJOINING PROPERTIES. is virtually surrounded by Southern California disan power line corridors. Improvement- and amenities are proposed for the Southern California Edison corridors and surplus property. Also, grading and roads are proposed to be constructed on Southern California Edison corridors and Surplus property. School` facilities are proposed to be constructed on the MWD easement at the southeast corner of the University property. Written permission to plan and use these areas must first be obtained. Also, City policy encourages regional trails to be located on existing San Bernardino County Flood Control District maintenance roads. Private Inholdinas: Day Creek Boulevar" :s proposed to be constructed through privately held parcels South an,3 east of the University site. his arterial street runs through on existing private residence. Provision to acquire right -of- -way should be mave. Further, the University maps wrap around adjoi -ring parcels to the south and east of Tentative Tract 14522, The Route 30 corridor and Day Creek Boulevard will limit access to Vintage Drive. Althoug'i interior street access is indicated, a feasible plan of development should also be indicated to determine if the access would be adequate. An example of a 7easibility study is included between TT 14497 and the school /park site where feasible street access and lot planning are indicated. A1sa:- it is not clear whether Day Creek Boulevard will be constructed substantially on University owned property or on the Southern California Edison corridor. This location for Day Creek Boulevard in relation to site boundaries should be clarified. Adjacent Property. The Rock Crusher Leasehold, The subject applications are adjacent to the Day creek Wash on the west which is under a County contested lease to the Fourth Street Rock Crusher. The development Aroposal should discuss its relationship to the wash -7 MS. Stangl- Charlton RE: University Crest August 6, 1990 Page 3 area with and without the Rock Crusher. Particularly the feasibility and timing of extending roads across the Day Creek ti Plash should be addressed. Southern California Edison Surplus Pro ert : A Southern California E,lison surplus property of 55 acres separates the University from the Crest property. All 55 acres have been offered to the Caryn Company /6onsortium of Landowners for $40,000 an acre (Consortium meeting of Janaary 10, 1990). The applicant proposes to use 17 acres of this property to meet and slightly exceed the Quimby requirement of 3 acres per 1000. The land use proposed for the remaining 38 acres should be discussed and a feasible uue plan indicated. The use of the remainder for park and open space amenities above County requirements should be considered. Property to the East of the University Site: Tentative Tracts 13527 and 12659 are located east of the University site. The land uses for these tracts are sketchy and leave open areas which are not addressed as to use'or access. No feasibility study is provided for the site south of Tentative Tract 12659. Construction and improvement of Hanley Avenue is not addressed. Also, adequate access for the site is not addressed. 4. FAILURE TO BEET CITY PLANNING STANDARDS: It should be noted that substantial potions of the area for which the subject application has been suLaitted is designated as open space under the City General Plan and is currently heing proposed to remain open space under the City's version of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan until an application for a General Plan Amendment is processed. City staff invites a General Plan Amendment application which would be consistent with the County's General Plan designations (see item 119). Under the County's intensity of development, conditions reflecting City Standards have been prepared by the Planning Divivion and forwarded to you under separate cover. City standards include, but are not limited. to, the Hillside Development Ordinance. Also, the City's low density des €ilttittion of 2-4 ,nits per acre is comparable to the County residontial, up to 3 units per acre; and that the City's very tow density designation of less than 2 units per acre is comparable to the County designation of residential up to 2 units per acre. Ll Ns. Stangl— Char-lton RE: University Crest August 6, 1990 Page 4 Therefore, it should be noted that City development standards "or Law Density areas would require a minimum lot 0ze of 7,200 square feet with an average lot size of 8,000 square feet at.d would not permit a minimum lot size of 6,000 square feet. And, for the Very Low Density designation, the City standard would require a ninimum lit size of 20,000 square feet and an average lot size of 22,50f square feet and would not permit a minimum lot size of 7,200 square feet witt.in this assignation. (See attached Comparison of City and University Crest Development Standards.) 5. FAILURE TO MEET CITY ENGINEERliIG SY ANDARDS: Conditions reflecting City standards have been prepared by the Engineering Division and forwarded to you under separate cover. The City of Rancho Cucamonga Road Standards should be required for all streets. Particular attention is directed to City standards for special design streets which require an additional 7 -foot average and a 5 -foot minimum be added to the ultimate 13 -foot parkway for landscaping before reaching the perimeter wall of the tract, e.g., Day Creek Boulevard and Wilsor. Avenue. (See attached Comparison of City and university Crest Development Standards, Footnote 3.) 6. FAILURE TO MEET CITY BUILDING Xi0_ SAFETY STANDARDS: Comments ® reflecting City Building and Safety requirement.. have been forwarded under separate cover. 7. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE DISTRICT STANDARDS MUST BE R OUIR 0: Conditions reF ecting '',ty of Rancho Cucamonga Fire Distrt.t standards have been prepared by the Fire District and forwarded to you under separate cover. 8. INADEQUATE DESIGN CRITERIA: The subject applications are included within the wanda North Specific Plan submitted to the County the week of July 2 through July 6, 1990. Specific design criteria including neighborhood identificaticn aad subarea design criteria are included in the Specific Plan. However, none of the subject applications reference the Specific Plan. The subject applications should be subject to the Specific Plan design criteria upon approval of that Specific Plan. 9. INCONSISTENT WITH THE CITY GENERAL PLAN: As mentioned prevw�-is y, the ity General Plan designation for the University property is open space. This designation is consistent with correspondence received from the University of California regarding the educational usa of the University Reserve System. It is also consistent with the exemption received by the University frog property tAx payments on th-i property which have been granted every year since the property was acquired in �-9 41s. Stangl- Charlton kE: University Crest August 6, 1990 Page 5 1977. Also, the'existing City designation provides a buffer to the County approved gravel mining and cement batch plant operation. 'This potentially conflicting land use should be resolved before proceeding with any further land use changes. A City General Plan amendment should be processed prior to approval for development being granted by the County. It should be noted that the County General Plan Circulation Map is not consistent with the City General Plan Circulation Map. The County's map should be brought into the City's map. The County's map should be brought into consistency with ``•w City's map. Further, more discussions sho;ild be held among County staff, City staff, and the applicant to determine optimums circulation for minor collection streets, incl ding but not limited to, Hanley Avenue. (See attached Street attern Study, JL'-y, Ya90.) 10. DENSITY ISSUES: City standards for Low and Very Low Density Reside► +tial dedevelopment Mould not permit the density proposed for this project. Inadequate Justification for Transf_:rin Densit_y from the Upper 675 Acres to the Universit ubarea: Under Section 88.0515(a)(2) the App`i..nt has requested a density transfer of 17 base units plus a 2 -unit density bonus. T,�e property is indicated a!% having limited development potential under the County GenE._. 'Ian, i.e., MF /PD -1/40. However, this request does not appear to &eet the conditions for a density transfer unamr the Development CQaz hecause the property is encumbered by %-al hazards, due to the ;Lc:epness of the to rain, and the fact that a flood cor.�rol easement covers the 1=3r one -third of the property, the actual potential for development is virtually nil. The Forest Service has commented that public access should be limited aI:i that no improvements to the property should be permitted. Therefore, if a density transfer i9 allowed, the- property should be preserved for undeveloped ;;�en space and all development rights should be removed from the parcel. The only use remaining to the property should be University sponsored research consistent with the University Reserve System Charter. Access should be restricted to current mode of access, e.g., undeveloped use trails. The City calculation for the bate density en the 675 acre parcel is 16 units. The rationalization for -ranting a density bonus on the transferred units is unclear and should be discussed in the M. Inadequate Justification for Density Bonus: The applicant is requesting a 10 percent density bonus under Section 86.0515 {a}(3) of the County Development Code. ►hey do not appear to meet the minimum requirements to qualify for such a Ms. Stangl- Charlton RE: University Crest August 6, 1950 Page 6 i amenities density bonus, neither in quality of design, or by provided above requirements. However, since County staff has agreed in concept to the 10 percent density bonus, the City requests that, if the City's objection is not considered and the bonus is granted, that the bonus provided be substantially equitable to the benefit received. Regarding project design, the only thing unusual about these applications is the lack of on -cite amenities. This is a barely modified grid pattern of de- .klopment. It lacks the curvilirjar eisign features of the rriginal concept plan. Tract interiors nave no special amenity features. For your convenience, a compari,on of the original co;acept plan to the present plan, plus a third concept suggexted by City staff is attached. City standards would require a redesign of these maps. Please not% the internal pedestrian paseos and pedestrian paseos connecting to open space and to arterial and collector streets. At a minimum, the latter r:cdenity should be added to the tract design. (See attached Land Use Study and S+ • Pattern Study pvepared For the City's Planning Division b„ AJN Design Group.) The - enervation of land for, school and park use is presented in the preliminary plan of development, but is only minimally addressed on the Faster Tentative 14492 by reference to "future school /park site." TE.ere is no language or condition in the preliminary plan of development to ensure this basic amenity package. A 17 -acre park site is also discussed, but is even more nebulo,ls, because it exists oh property, that is owned by Southern California Edison and not the applicant. There are references to park improve+nrnts and to improvements to easements aijacent to park site in order to expand the effective area of tine park sites. However, there are no conditions to quantify the aree, quantify the level of improvements, or to ensure that P rk improvements are provided as a condition of granting a density bonus. Virtually a;° trail amenities are located off -site on easements. There is no language or condition in the plan or maps to ensure construction of these amenities. The first step mould be for tta applicant to obtain letters of permission to construct improvements from SCE, NWD, and the 59CFCD. Twenty -eight acres of recreation area are identified in the Preliminary Plan of development application, however, only 21.9 acres are proposed for dedicatmd park purposes. There is no analysis if where the six additional recreation acres will be provided. E Ms. Stangl- Charlton RE: University Crest August 6. 1990 Page 7 /a Also. while this would provide park levels within this planned � development greater than three acres per thousand, it is unclear that the three acre pc, thousand standard will be met if the cumulative park requirement for the Etiwanda North area is considered. To make a determination as to whether the gross park requirement for Etiwanda North is met requires an analysis of the park requirements and provisions ii the Etiwanda North Specific Plan which is just beginning the County review process. The SCE surplus property is available only as a 55 -acre package. The entire 55 acres should be cnrsidered as part of the amenities package qualifying this project for a density bonus. It is possible *that other amenities such as donation of a school site, should also be considered. Laidscape amenities which are provided are no greater than would be required of any other plan of development. There havo been oral references to preservation of the 575 acre parcel within the national forest as justification: of the density bonus. However, the. University is, iE, effect, exchanging 165 acres of developable land, which does not meet University Reserve System criteria, on which they are paying no taxes, and which has substantially appreciated in value since acquisition in 1977 for 675 acres of non- developable land which meets the University Reserve criteria: therefore, there is intrinsic cgiue in the trade for the Ur'yersity. , It should be noted that the density calculations should be revised to reflect the more accurate acreage calculations on the Tentative Tract a ps. In the POP, density appears to have been inadvertently assigned to the park and school site. According to Pat Mcr'ucwian, County Development Code Section, park school sites, as well as commercial 0 tes, must be subtracted prior to calculating density for a Planned Development applicatica. In the POP the applicant is requesting a total of 119 bonus units plus 19 units for transfer for combined total of 1.293 units. City calculation. based on the more accurate tvact map acreage information, indicates a base Censity of only 1,142 units which would yield 114 bonus unity plus 17 units maximum for trarsfer Pram the open space parcel for a combined of 1,273 units. (See attached Density Analysis Tables.) The County is encouraged to review the density calculations Whether or not the densities are revised, the County is also encouraged to give further consideration to the equity of the value received from the proposed amenities package in return for granting a density bonus. If a density bonus is granted, it is /a 3 0 i Ms. Stangl- Charlton RE: University Crest ;august 6, 1390 Page 8 requested that the amenities pacE.age be firmly tied to the County approval process, and also that a stronger amenities package be required of the applicant. ;- vp Ihadeauate Justification for Transferring Density from the Crest_ Subarea to the University Subarea: City policy desires that density decrease from south to r rth. That policy is not achieved by these maps. County policy requires clustering to preserve open space, such as preservation /enhancement of the two blue line streams that run through the site. Open space is not being preserved on site. Therefore, no,benefit to the County or to the City is occurring by transferring' units from the Crest tract to the University tracts. On the other hand, liabilities are occurring Sy concentrating densities on the University tracts blyond their capacity to receive density. Also, liabilities are occurring by concentrating density on the University tract in comparison with densities allowed cn adjoining property. The future Route 30 Freeway will provide a natural - barrier of the Victoria Planned Community to the south and Day Creek Channel and the Oa;~ Creek Wash provide natural harriers to the Caryn Planned Community to iR west. There is no barrier to property in the Etiwanda Specific Plan to the east which is designated Very Low Density Residential Use, less than two dwelling- units per acre. Thus, the concentration of density on the University tracts introduces a higher intensity land use into an area planned by the County for up to three units per acre and by the City for -a Low and Very Low Intensity Land Use of less than two to three dwelling units per acre. This increase in intensity, in turn, creates a pressure to increase the intensity of use on adjoining parcels of land. 11. INADEQUACY OF THE COMMERCIAL SITE The site and location of the proposed commercial site is not adequate -according to City guidelines for commercial development. A better location would be adjacent to the northwest corner of the intersection of the Route 30 Freeway and Day Creek Boulevard. Thit location would hAve more visible access- and provide a buffer to residential development to the north. (See attached Land Use Study, July, 1990.) Experience has shown that approximately 15 acres is optimal for z neighborhood commercial center. Therefore, City staff would support a larger commercial site and oppose a site less than 10 net acres for commercial development. Further, the Preliminary Plan of Development List of Potential Uses includes o drive -in theater. The aforeftationed use would -not be appropriate,, and should be deleted from the list of potential Useso J__13 Ms. Stang'.- Charlton RE: University Crest August 6, 1990 Page 9 Design criteria for the commercial site should be included in the preliminary and /or final plan of development. Design N criteria should be consistent with the design for the surrounding residential development and with the neighborhood design theme in the Etiwanda North Specific Plan. 12. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES. Seismic Studies Inadequate: The City of Rancho Cucamonga has identified the Red Hill Fault Seismic Study Zone. The POP places a school and a park site within and adjacent to the fault zone, but trenching studies were limited to a line approximating the alignment of Day Creek Boulevard. Additional trenching should be required prior to the approval of any plan. Traffic Studies Inade ugi : The draft Final EIR references only Kunzman. Assocfates trt7ic studies. Subsequent studies have been provided by DKS ano Austin Faust Associates which should be referenced in the EIR. The City recognizes the Austin Faust traffic mitigation measurf.m as adequate to address City traffic impacts. The Austin 'Faust mitigation measure should be circulated to 'Caltrans for comment on the adequacy of the regional mitigation measures. Resource Management Plan Not Provided Two USGS' blue line streams will be closed according to the proposed plans of development for the subject applications. Mitigation measures will be required by the California Dapartment of Fish and Game and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service but have not been addressed. Mitigation Manitoring Plan Not Provided: Tht mitigation measures in the EIR should be reviewed for accuracy by all responsible agencies and a _mitigation monitoring plan be prepared to order to establish the adequacy of implementation of the mitigation measures prior to approval of the subject plans . and maps. Cumulative In Acts Inadeoaatel Addressed: The subject plans and maps are Included to an application to the County for a Specific Plan proposing 2,975 dwelling units. Additionally, an application for a 520 unit residential development and golf course has been filed in the County which is immediately north of the site of these applications. Also, the mock Crusher site is immediately vest of the site of these applications. There will be significant: cumilativs impacts associated with these and other applications which must be adequately addressed pr nu to approval of this project. Ms. Stangl- Charlton RE: - University Crest August- 6, 1990 Page Environmental Impact Report Addendum Unavailable for Review: The -County has requested that an EIR addendum be prepared for the subiect applications. As of this date, the addendum is not complete and has not been circulated for review. Faiicre to Circulate EIR Addendum for Comment: Responsible agencies, including but not limited to the City; Caltrans, and California Department of Fish and 'Came, and U.S. Department Fish and Wildlife Service should have an opportunity to comment on the adequacy of the EIR in the context of the cumulative impacts of the project. When the addendum is available for review, the City requests recirculation of the final draft EIR together with the addendum to all responsible agencies for comment, prior-',to approval for the subject applications. 13. APPROVAL IS PREMATURE: Approval of the University /Crest plans and maps at this time is putting the cart before the horse in relation to the Etiwanda North Specific Plan. The applicants for the University /Crest proposals are also applicants for the Specific Plan submitted to the County in July, 1990. The University /Crest proposal is included in the Specific Plan. The Specific Plan includes design criteria, backbone infrastructure plans, and other components necessary for the orderly' development of this open and undeveloped area. The EIR for the Ash Specific Plan will address the cumulative impacts of development which otherwise must be addressed piecemeal. it is unlikely that development of the University /Crest property can occur until the issues raised in the Specific Plan are resolved including the need for a. financial package to provide the required backbone infrastructure. Therefore, approval of the University /Crest tract should he postponed until the Specific Plan is approved. SUMMARr AND CONCLUSIONS :. Based on the 13 major issues discussed above, City staff would have recommended substantial redesign or denial of the University /Crest proposals if these applications had been reviewed in thA City. Because it appears as though only eminor revisions are being requested by County staff, and the site is in the City's Sphere of Influence, City staff has prepared recommendations and conditions. I am requesting that they be incorporated into the County list of conditions. The City lists include conditions Prepared by Planning, Engineering, and the Fire District which have been forwarded under separate cover, as well as the attached list of additional conditions which reflect the issues discussed in this letter. _ ! :5'" Ms. Stang►- Charlton 1 RE: University Crest August 6, 1990 Pa9e 11 - If you 'have any questions, please call Miki Bratt or myself at (714) 489- 1861.: ti i re r. Bra le City fanner MB :sp Attachment, Requested i'onditions, Density Calcui,'4tions Comoarison Comparison of City and University Crest Development Standards.., Tract- Design;.Comparisons Land Use Study, July, 1990 j Street Pattern Study, July, 1996 cc: Sharon Hightower Pete Dangermand" Joe DfYorio Land Plan Design, Group . i i RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS FOR: UNIVERSITY CREST POP W121 -49; MASTER TENTATIVE TRACT 14492 (UNIVERSITY); TENTATIVE TRACTS 14493 'THROUGH 14498, 145,212 AND 14523 (UNIVERSITY); FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN MAP (UNIVERSITY); MASTER TENTATIVE TRACT 14605 (CREST); TENTATIVE TRACTS 14606 THROUGH 14612 (CREST); AND FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN MAP (CREST). The Planning D', #ision requests that as a minimum the following conditions be placed t;n the University Crest Plans and Maps. 1. CITY REVIEW. Applicant shall submit all revisions, plans, and maps to the City concurrently with submittals to the County and the County shah allow a ninireum of four weeks for City's comment prior to County hearings or a.-.ion. 2. a. Property Limits: Prior to Planning Commission hearing, clearly indicate property boundaries for all property in Preliminary Plan of Development. All property so indicated to also be clearly indicated and included in Master Tentative, Individual Tentative and Final Plan of Development. b. School and Park Site: Prior to approval of any Tentative Maps, a Tentative Tract Map shall be submitted for the school and Frrk site south of TT 14497. c. Format: Prior to Planning Commission hearing, revise foc-mat of Preliminary Plan of Development. Master Tentative Tracts, Individual Tract Maps and Final Development Plan to prov4de ccnsistency among all submittals. d. Offsite Constrietion: Prior to Planning Commission hearing, letters of n� gent to permit site alteration and also to permit proposed uses must be received from Southern California Edison, Hetra,iolitan Water District, Smn Bernardino County Flood Control District:, and any other property owner so affected. Prior to issuance of first grading permit, agreements with aforementioned agencies must be completed and accepted by the Planning Departme;it, and recorded with the County Clerk. 3. LACK OF INF041ATION ABOUT RELATIONSHIP TO ADJOINING PROPERTIES: a. Southern Callifornia Edison SCE- Metropolitan Water District (MWDI, and an Bernardino County Flood Control District 55CFCD Permission to se r# eerrzy Prior to Planning Comm ssion review, a letter of f -- -F Rg to offsite uses and improvements must be ootained ftm all affected agencies and property owners. Prior to recordatt'oh of the first Tentative Tract Map, signed A r`r,71 Recommended CondW o -s RE: University Crest August 6, 1990 Page 2 agrel�ments with the aforementioned agencies must be obtained and recorded. These agreements must permit trail impru.ements, trail access, trail use, park improvement, park use, landscaping' improvement, and fire plan maintenance. The term of the agreement shall be for 50 years with provision for renewal. b. Private Inholdinas: Prior to issuance of the first grading permit, all arterial and collector road right-of-ways must be acquired. c. Development Feasibility for Adjoining Property: Prior to Planning Commission review, provide circulation access ano development feasibility studies for all adjoining praperties, e.g. east and south of TT 14522; east of TT 14498, 14497, and school park site; north of TT 14498; north of TT 14496; SCE surplus property between Master Tentative 14492 and 14505, north of TT 14610; east of TT 14507; 14609; and 14610. d. Rock Crusher Leasehold: (See Planning and Engineering Division Condition, e. Southern California Edison Surplus prowort Prior to Planning Commission review, provide a developmes_ feasibility study and circulation access for the entire 55 acre SCE surplus property. f. Property to the East of the University Site: Prior to Planning Commission review, indicate proposed extension of Hanley avenue and relationship to school and park site, and also to TT 14497, and TT 14498. Also provide access to park site from TT 14497, the aforementioned access should be in the form of a pedestrian paseo. 4. City Planning Standards: (See Planning Division Conditions.) a. City Hillside Development Ordinance: Prior to Planning Commission review, maps mall be revised to conform to City standards of development, including, but not limited to, minimum and average tot sizes and the City Hillside Development Ordinance. b. City Develo ,ent Code: Prior to issuance of first gradir ` permit, pans shall -be prepared which meet or exceed. City standards as indicated in the City Code of Development, City Standard Drawings, and other specific materials provided by the City Planning Division. 5. City Engineering Standards: (See Engineering Division Conditions.) a. City General Plan Circulation fig : Prior to Planning Commission review, all mips shall be revised te ronform to the City General Plan Circulation Map. MI Recommended Conditions RE: University Crest August 6, 199f Pays 3 B. Design Criteria: In the matter of design, including neighborhood design, landB_ aping materials, and product design, all final plans and maps shall b2 consistent with the Etiwanda North Specific Plan as approved. All preliminary plans and tentative maps shall be cons ±stent with the draft Etiwanda North Specific Plan Architectural Design Criteria Section as submitted tc the County for review, July, 1990. . 9. Conformance with City G•neval Plan: The following c.,nditions will bring the City General Plan and the County Generel Plan into conformance with the proposed preliminary plan of development. a. University Property: Pricer to Planning Commissions review, an application shall be submitted to the City for amendment to the General Plan for Master Tentative 14492 and TT 14493 through 14498, 14522, 14523 fron open space to Low 0ensity Residential Use, 2 -4 units to the acre, as well as for a commercial site of /7 b. City Riaht- of -Wav Standards: Prior to Planning Commission review, all maps shall be r:wised to conform to City Standards of Development, including, but not limited to, right -of -ways for all arterial and collector streets, as well as an additional seven (7) feet average and five (5) t,:qt minimum of landscaped parkway along each side of 'lay Creek Boulerrd. c. t:ity Development Code: Prior to issuance of the first grading permit, final grading plans, street plans, drainage plans, and landscape plans shall be prepared which shall meet or exceed City standards as indicated in the City Code of Development, Standard Drawings, and other specific material provided by the City Engineering Division. 6. City Building and ., Safety Standards: (See Building and Safety Division Comments. a. Prior to Planning Commission Approval for Master Tentative Map 14605, and Tentative tracts 14606 through 14612, plans shall be prepared which meet or exceed the requirements of the City Hillside Development Ordinance. b. Prior to Planning Cornission approval for TT 14496, plans shall be prepared which meet or exceed the requirements of the City Hillside Development Ordinance. c. Prior to issuance of the first building permit for each tract, plans shall be prepared which shall meet or exceed City standards as indicated by the City Code - of Development, City Standard Drawings, and other specific materials provided by the City Building and Safety Division. 7. City of Rancho CUGdmon a Fire District Strndards: (See °ire Dist +ct Conditions. B. Design Criteria: In the matter of design, including neighborhood design, landB_ aping materials, and product design, all final plans and maps shall b2 consistent with the Etiwanda North Specific Plan as approved. All preliminary plans and tentative maps shall be cons ±stent with the draft Etiwanda North Specific Plan Architectural Design Criteria Section as submitted tc the County for review, July, 1990. . 9. Conformance with City G•neval Plan: The following c.,nditions will bring the City General Plan and the County Generel Plan into conformance with the proposed preliminary plan of development. a. University Property: Pricer to Planning Commissions review, an application shall be submitted to the City for amendment to the General Plan for Master Tentative 14492 and TT 14493 through 14498, 14522, 14523 fron open space to Low 0ensity Residential Use, 2 -4 units to the acre, as well as for a commercial site of /7 Recommended Conditions RE: University Crest lugust 6, 1990 Page 4 L not less than 10 acres net. It Should be noted that City +density is based. ,j a gross /net calculation which subtracts acreage for, arterial ';d collector streets. Therefore, the gross /ner shall, not exceed 3.999 dwelling units per acro. Prior to approval of the first Tentative Map, approval of the aforementioned General Plan application shall be obtained. b. School and Park Site Summit Avenue: Prior to Planning Commission-- eview, an application shall be submitted to the City for General Man Amendment for the school /park site from open space to school and park site. Prior to recordation of the first Tentative Map,—approval of the afore.Aeotioned General Plan Amendment application shall be obtained: c. Southern California Surplus Property *55 acres Prior to Planning Commission review, ,,n application steal be submitted to the City for General Plan Amendment for the SCE surplus property from open space to park site and other use to be determined. Prior to approval of the first Tentative Map, approval of the aforementioned General Plan. Amendment application shall be obtained. J. Caryn Property Prior to Planning Commission review, an applications shall be submitted to the City for General Plan Amer.: .nent for TT 14611 and 14612 from open space and low density residential use to very law density residential use, less than 2 ftL dwelling units per acre. Prior to approval of the first Tentative Map, approval of the aforementioned General Plan A,mendmer.; application shall be obtained. n. Circulation Plan: Prior to Planning Commission review or prier to approval of the first Tentative Map, the County Circulation Map shall be amended to conform to -the City Circulation Map. Also, the applicant, County staff, and City staff shall confer and determine the optimum circulation design for minor collector streets, including but not limited to, Hanley Avenue. Tract maps shall be redesigned as necessary prior to Planning Commission review. 10. Density a. 675 Acre Parcel: Prior 20 recordation of the first Tentative Mai, the University of California Reserve System shall -jbtain clear title to the 675 -1 .e parcel within the National. Forest with deed restrictions as .olli WS: * all development rights are forgone forever; * use shall be limited to research under the provisions of the University of California Reserve System Charter; ,_ I Recommended Conditions RE: Univei -sity Crest August 6, 1990 Page 5 ° all access shall be limited to undeveloped use trail or trails. b. 55 Acre Southern California Edison Site: Prior to recordation of the first Tentative Map, the applicant shall enter into a purchase agreement with SCE for the ertire SCE site. Prior to issuance of the first building pe`. .tt. the applicant shall complete the purck se of the site and submit a development plan for the entire 55 -acre site to the Planning Department for approval. Park development for the site shall be consistent with City standards for park improvements. Prior to issuance of the 323rd building permit, the 17 -acre site shall be deeded to the County. Prior to issuance to the 646th building permit, the applicant, at the applicant's expense, shall complete improvements for 17 acres of the aforementioned park site. Also, provision for park maintenance shall be provided by the applicant either by means of a Homeowner's Association or a Landscape Maintenance District. Prior to issuance the 969th building permit, the applicant shall deed the remainder of the site east of Day Creek Boulevard to the County. Also, at the applicant's expense, park improvements shall be completed for the aforementioned portion of the site and provision for park maintenance shall be pr^ -ided by the applicant either by means of a Homeowner's Association or a Landscape Maintenance District. Also, prior to the issuance of the 969th building permit, the applicant shall also complete landscape improvements for the area west of Day Creek Boulevard and includn maintenance by means of a Homeowner's Assoe!i%tion or a Lam'scape Maintenance District. c. Park Site, Summit Avenue (approximately 4.9 acre: Prior to recordation of the first Tentative Map, the applicant shall deed the site to the County Parks Department. Prior to f aance of the 323rd building permit, the applicant, at the al,ilicant's expense, must complete improvements for the aforementioned park site plus additional improvements of approximately four (4) additional acres extending the affected park site access the SCE easement to Day Creek Boulevard, all in accorc�!nce with City standards for park improvements. d. Trail Ameni"es: Prior to recordation+ of the first Tentative Tract Map, sinrd agreements with the SCE, MWD, and 3BCFCD must be obtained and recorded permitting trail improvement, trail access, trail use, and trait maintenance. Prior to issuance of the 323rd building pens +t, all trail improvements shall be Alh completed it accordance with City Trail Standards. Trail maintenance nali be provided by a Homeowner's Asso::Iati ^n or a Landscape Maintenance District. The term of the agreemRn- shall be for 50 years with provision for renewal. Recommended Conditions RE: University Crest August C5, 1990 Page 6 Tract maps shall a redesigned to include internal pedestrian trail amenities. At a minimum, pedestrian paseos shall be provid,,i to connect to open space areas, community trails, and tai collector and arterial streets. e. Prior to Planning Commission review, the density calculations in the PUP tables shall be revised to reflect the more accurate acreage calculations on the tract maps, aiid no density shall be calculated for the school, park, and commercial sites. f. Export of Units from the Crest Subarea to the University Subarea: Because the negative effects of intensifying use within the University subarea outweigh the positive effects of reciucing density in the Crest subarea, no export of units from the Crest subarea to the University subarea shall be allowed. Therefore, prior to Planning Commission review, all maps shall be revised accordingly. 11. Commercial Site: Prior to Planning Commission review, the commercial site shall either be relocated adjacent to the Route 30 Freewi r and Day Creek Boulevard and ncreased',to a minis -im net 15 acres or shall be increased to 10 minimum net acres and TT 14494 evised accordingly. Prior to recordation of TT 14494, plans for the Commercial site shall be cc;mploted in conformance with City standards and shah be consistent with design guidelines in the Etiwanda North Specific Plan as approved. On an interim basis, the aforementiored plan shall be consistent with the Etiwanda North Specific Plan as submitted to the County, July, 1990. 12, Environmental_ Issues: a. Seismic Study: Prior to issuance of the first grading permit, seismic stud.es shall be completed within the Red Hill Fault Study Zone as identified by the City. The ,proposed school and park sites shall be specifically investigated. If evidence of active faulting will prohibit the use of the school site, then an alternative site acceptable to tha Etiwanda School District must be found and acquired by the applicant and maps revised prior to recordation to he first tentative map. b. Traffic Mitigation Plan: Traffic mitigation measures shall ccnfrmto th- a Austin Faast Traffic study. (See Engineering Conditions.) Also, pr; *p to Planning Commission review, Caltrans shall review and comment on the Traffic Mitigation Measures proposed by the EIR addendum. c. Resource Management Plan: Prior to issuance of the first grading permit, a resource managemotnt plan shall be completed with Consultation from the California Department of Fish and Game and the U.S. Department of Fish and Wildlife; also, 1601 and 404 permits shall be obtained from the California Department of Fish and Game and the U.S. Corps of Engineers, The aforementioned Resource Management Place shall be consistent with the City's Resource Management Plan as approved. Recammended Conditions RE: University Crest August 6, 1990 Page 7 d. Mitigation flonit2!: Plan: Prior to recordation of the fr;•st tract map, or issuance of the first grading permit, whichever comes first, a - mitigation monitoring plan shall be prepared 113k staff and /or the environmental consultant who prepared. the EIk. The aforementioned plan shall estatlish the adequacy and timiw;g of inplementation of the mitigation measures as approved by the Board of Supervisors. e. Cumulative Impacts Discuss n: Prior to Planning Commissioti review, all cumulative impacts shall be adequately reviewed in the addendum to the EIR. Cumulative impacts include, but are not limited to, all applications of development currently on file in the County within the RancFo Cucamonga Sphere of Influence, i.e., the EC:wanda No'r:h Consortium of Landowners' application for General Plan Amendment and Preliminary Ptan of Development for the San Sevoine Wash area; and the Etiwanda Heights Development Corporation 'Preliminary Plan of Development for the area east of the Oak Summit proposal. f. Addendum Review: Prior to final Development Review Committee review, the adderdum to the draft final c'IR shall circulate for review and commz`nt to County staff and to all responsible agencies, includinl, but not `limited to Caltrans and the City. 13. Approval Timino^ Final review by the Development Review Committee and subsequent _nsideration ty the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors shall be continued until Vie first day following approval: of the Etiwrnda,Xorth Sis-cific Plan !kubmittsd to the County in July, 1990. The a0licant shall agree to this provision in writing. MB:sp RE'3FDMIAL LAND 031 DCSI4NATION czrz VCPUD SMUMARDS� L L plan Arran A -D Plan.Area 9-1 LO _ ARSA Avg, 22,500 8,000 S min. Net 1 20�, 064 7,200 6,000 60000 DUe. /AC. Up to 2 Tip t* 4 Up to 3 Up to 3 M7N. pm 1300 sq. 1000 3Q.� 1200 SQ. PT. 1200 3Q. FT. SIZZ — FT, rT. t 90Avg. 10Vaar. i 100 I 10 so 30 42Av'g. i 107ar. I 55Avej, War. 70 70 i 40 20 37Ac g. War. 27 27 10//15 5200 30 N/R 30/5 I 2AJ5 33 33 26% 40% PIRIVAT mr—a—HP. /2nd Flr) 2000 /NR 1010 /RR �J�R ST. f sZT^ "AC�zs Artar a � 20Avq.lsmin. Collectar} 1 E:..4g,1$Min. 58 Min. N/R N/R NIR N /:c N/R 2s. sA vrq. 24.5 Mitt. (Side aa: Gar. 16.5) 15Local 2SColl. 5/5 60,>Lot5 /1 0 1s N/R 33 40% N/R Plan Area 9 7,200 Up to 1200 SQ. FT. 55 M3r.. 55 Min. N/R N/R N /rt N/R RJR N/R N/R NIR r N/R N/R 31.5 31.5 24.9 Min. 24.5 Min. (Side on Gar. (Side on Gar. i 16.5) 16.5) 13Local 25Coll 1RLocil :15Coll. Z /5SO' >Lot5 /10 Z/5 60' >Lot5 / :O 15 '� N/R N/R 35 35 40% 405 N/R N/R I N/R N/R NIR axwY1ioTL9 La�rsv>�s3= �sa:s� � ro�?RCIAL LAND o' E CITY I UCPUD STANDARDS I InIGESORHO.-r COMMERCIAL { COMMERCIAL LOT AREA MIN LOT WIDTH MIN LOT DEPTH ALDG. HGT. Ur•T a . VERMCRS 3 Arterial 3 Collector/ Local St. Aft Rear PL Adjac3nt to 5 acres for a Neighbor- hood Shopping Cuter 300FT. 3005'7'. 251T. Within 100FT. of Residential. Other 40FT. 45' from face of ultimate curb. Parking 30'. J:and- scaping 45Av9.w /30'Efin. 35 from face ox ultimate curb. Parking 251. Land - soaping 35Avg.w /25Min. Resic3nntial. (20' Bldg. /10' Parking /10 !Landscaping. Interrior i Side PL t' Adj. to Res,120' Bldg. /10' Patking!10 I Landscaping. N/R 9.39 gross u4. proposel with no 21mitattan on i paroels or master plan requirement. f N/R N/R J5FT. { 20' from ROW I Pariting Ii /R. Land - scaping N /R. H/P 1 N,! K/R N/R 'I. i3Ai2RY3dG :! 290 RFA 1 1 %2O0 GFA NOT NOTES: i. Density calculations Vitween the City and the County are not the same. The City deduaaa the for major streets, parks, schools ate., while the County includes thi3e areas for the purposes of density calculatJjn. 2. Setbacks Z the City acre measured fram the face of the ultimate curt location, thr --fore bat, UCFUD Octbacks were adjusted accordingly. Setbacks in ... eeasured from the face of the ultimate curb with result the, 'r streets like Day Creek au addi; m a a V a a ya E G a a a 0. FS to 3 a w E a G a' y U N �Z s < w ?zp 5: ED Q Cl N m /u v 0. t Air ~a0. r UaF- t h8• v v 4 0LIM4 M_U 1 O inner n * M A p+ Q a Q ui r+ n m co l r P fl w+° M ° m cc M r n n m N I N 0 h co U CV tlC f0 a ( rr r ol 4 w y d dB� Q N 6f re m ! (� a rr N W p. U U M UI Q m N Q ri ai to a Qp Q O N m a a V a a ya E G a a a 0. FS to 3 a w E a r r o E °c 3 v ai y W R }U h LU LU 2' 7 2 ,C -a? m® N h M N C a 0 a 0 n U a g e�+�to� J �D a °O��m., o- � a�-�= � z c a a v v��W = ..a • �i d r °a x °a 8 ° a 4 r r v J pNj^ A N A Y to 1H P9 A^ p9 O p.. q O r N N.-N N `* V .�. Q' r t � a a l y 'f Q W r N Q 1 Gi W is a N W Q V Q f Z. ,C -a? a 0 a 0 n U a J �D a o- a a Y N • �i d E 8 ,C -a? § � � § .) \ � k k ( K K �� § | a ■ �kk \ §@� �k{ u z 2e 8 z � §§ ■ lloc §� C4 ) to /■ �k }. k 2. C.. In ° §0 ) SIC � ■ 1-0 � U2 �. . § ■ & ■ 7 � .. . _ - � .. . �■ § ■ �.© � _ . & ■■ ■ ` - $ � s . � k � : _ ■ 2 � - _� ■ �. \ k N 2 \o �� a UNIVERSITMMEST PROPERTY - Preliminary I evelogmwv Plan WI22 =49 ,`, County of San Bemarfto,`CA t For: THE REGENTS OP TBE UNWERSTI'Y ®F CALIFORIUA ".JIE CARYN COMPANk ETIWANNDA HIGHLAND PROPERTIES, LTD. r I:A?il) PLAN DESIGN GROUP 34 Executive Park, Suite 150 livine, CA 92714 Augnst 3, 1990 � AwJJ� I CREDITS: i ti PROJECT SPONSOR The Carya Company 34 Executive Park, Suite 155 Irvine, GA 92714 (714)499 -5,329 Joseph N. DiIosio, President Univeraity of`Califarja c/o Pete Dangetmond & Associates 1721 Second Street, Suite 203 Sacramento, CA 95814 (916) 447,5022 Pete Dangermond, U %; j;epresenta,-vc Edwanda Highlands Ltd. c/o Mrs. BettyAf };,;Jay 7600 Calle 0winQ Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 (714)982.3070 LAND ILANNING CONSUITANT Land Plan Design Group 34 Executive Park, Suite 150 Irvine, CA >2714 (71$) 474-4200 Jess Harris, Principal CIVIL ENGINEERING CONSULTANT Fuscoo, Williams, Un6jren & Short 2500 Red Hill Avenue, Suite. 100 Santa Ana, CA 92705 (714) 250 -1500 Ray Allard, Project Manager HOOD CONTROL 0,)NSULTP NT Bill Mann & Associates 1802 Commerce Center West, Sune A San Bernardino, CFA 92108 (714) 885 -430it Bill Mann, Prasident PLANNED DEVELOPMENT TRAFFIC CONSULTANT KunznsanAssociates 4650 Banana Partway Irvine, CA 92714 (714)559 -4231 John M. Knin, Principi 1 BIOIAGICAL RESOURCE AND AIR QUALITY CONSULTANT M icbael Drandman & Associates 2530 Red I ill Avenue Santa Ana, CA 92705 (714) 250.5555 FL Lee Jones, Principal NOISE CONSULTANT Hans D. Giroux 26 Sunriver Irvine, CA 92714 (714) 786 -0782 Hans D. Giroux, Principal GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT C.H.J. Incorporated 1355 E. Cooley Driv Coicon, CA 92324 (714) 824 -7210 John P. Leuer, Project Engineer Gary S. Rpsmussen & Associates 1811 S. Commerce Center West San Bernardino, CA 92408 (714) 388 -24..7, Wessi.y A. Reeder, Geologist CoverPhoto by: Alm Wong UNIVERRSITYJC'tr F..5T PLANNM-. V, T'�JPMENT 'n TABLE OF CONTENTS ti PAGE credits ii.m Table of Contents W -Z! List of Exhibits vi List of Tables A L INTi10DUCnON & Legal Description 1' B. Project Description C. Project Tabulation 5 II. LAND USE A. Relationship to San BernaTdino County General Plan 11 P;. Development Regulations and Standards 11 M. HOUSING A. Foisting Conditions 20 B. Housing Demand 20 Aft IV. CIRCULATION A. Relationship to San Bernardino County General Plan 21 B. Proposed Circulation Concept 21 C. P.-otectior. of Sonic Iiigh -, s 22 V. PUBLIC SERVICES AND FACII. IMS k A. Public Services aad Facilities Needs 29 B. Community Facilides 29 C. Financing Alternatives 31- D. unfrastracture 31 VI. (' OMMUNITY DESIGN A. Landscape AJ B. Grading 52 {j VII. CONSERVATION AND OPEN SPACE I 4. PrmervationofNatutatResources 5 UNIVERSITY/CREST iv PIANNM DEVEMPMEPiI" PAGE VIII. SEISMICHAZARDS AND PUBLIC SAFETY A. Summary of Subsurface Engineering Geology Investigation 45 B. Safety Features �y IX'. NO! '7331 56 X. APPENDIX (Un&z Separate Cover) A. Traffic Study B. Preliminary Geotecbnic al Feasibility Evaluation C. Biological Resources Assessment D. Acoustical Study E. Air Quality Impact Assessment Study UNIVERSITYMIREST PLANNED DEVELOPMEN EXHFBITS mu Exhibit i Arearap 2 . t Exhibit 2 vicuutyl4�p 3 Exhibit 3 Base MapRraperty /0"eiship 4 Exhibit 4 Planning AwasVeigisbcihoods 6 Exhibit 5 Emstini, lam' Use Plan 12 ,Exhibit ff Proposed Imid Use/Concept Lot layout Plan 13 Exlu'bii 7 Trail System 23 EX-%bit 8 Circu!atilan Pisa" 24 ebibit 9 Street Section Key Map 25 ;-Aiiblt 10A Stmt Criss- sections 26 Exb -bit ton Street Cross-Sections 27 Exhibit i0C Strut Coss- Sections 28 Exhibit 11 On Site`*Vater and Sewer 33 Exhibit 12 Off SitORtgional Water and Sewer 34 F -Aubit 13 On -Site Stnmr Drainage 35 Exhibit 14 Existing Site Condi�rons 37 � Exhibit 15 Regional Drainage Arias 39 Exhibit 16 Existing Utiiitics 42 Exhibit 17 Wcal Frm'. Yard iaaduving/Drlvettw 48 Exhibit 13 C izcp%dGradingPlan 53 TABLES. 1 Table I Project Tabulation 7 Table Y[ Statistical Summary 9 Table 11` Plant palette 49 T, INTRODUCTION A. LEGAL DESCRIPTION Being a subdivision of a portion of Sections 20 and 29, Township 1 North, Range 6 West, San Bernardino Meridian, in the County of S% Bernardino, State of California, according to the official plat of said land approved by the Surveyor Get-- al, dated November 13, 1885. All that certain property in the unincorporated territory of the county of San B- .mgW!no, State of California, more particularly described as follows: Government Lot 1, Section 1, Township 1 North, Range 7 WeF ; ,San Bernardino Base and Meridian, according to the offici S plat of said lat.J. The Southeast one quarter of Section 6, Township l Norih, Range 6 West, San Bernardino Base and Meridian, according to the official plat thereof. The Fast one -half of the Southwest one quarter of Section 6, Township 1 North, Range 'r 6 West, San Bernardino Base and Meridian, according to thrr official plat thereof The South one -half of the Northwest one quarters of Section 6, Township 1 North, Range 6 West, San Bernardino Base and Meridian, according to the official plat thereof. The East one -half of Section 7, Township 1 North, Range 6 West, San Bernardino Base and M,: 1dian, according to !ire official plat. B. PROJECT DESCRIMON 1. Site Cony ext YL he site is located on alluvial wash, gently sloping at approximately 4% to S% wi,h higher elevations and steeper slopes in the 675.8 acre parcel to the north. The site is situazc d in the west portion of the West Valley Foothills Planoing Area adjacent to the City ofRt_,icho Cucamonga. The San Gabriel mountains are located to.the north and provide an impressive background to the site. (See Exhibits 1, 2 and 3). The project site, containing approximately 1,101 acres, is owned by three land owners. The University of California (UC) owns approximately 176 acres adjacent to Day Creek Blvd. while the Caryn Company owns nearly 249 acres mostly north of the University property. The remaining 675.8 acres, locat -d in the foothills, are owned byEtiwanda highland Ltd., apartnership managed by Mrs. Betty McNay (see Exhibit 3). An additional site currently owned by Southern California Edison is proposed for an improved park with aPproximately 17 acres. E_XHOBIT 1 AREA MAP SAN BERNARDINU COUNTY CALIPARMA NORTH 1 UNIVERSITY I CREST-"', PLANNED DEVELAPMl�- FoR r: University of Calfornia WCIRAN Caryn Company DEWW Etiwan& # w-d PrwAtNes CROUP 2 SITE PRESERVED OPEN SPACE 'DEVELOPMENT AREA SA4 't c DAY CREEK ' SAN SpVAW CREEK e ri� r s 7I�Mt�.1 CREEK • COL"ffY OF SAN SERNARDRt(11i (�`/�y .$2iR5• w p� Ste} �c.r.r..��a.r.a. Il�i\ �1 �i�rs�rnr�t rna �'■r. .�f 1 ��w..a e��� f ,■ 1 CITY OF RA � % CUCA1�4� �i '.'WA . " WWRE OF OFUENCE � CITY OF RANCH CUCAMONGA CffAFFEY • BANYAN AVE c + , • .,....., , F���..��,1► 1. no �fOPOSED ■.a■■ft uy f.ut.or fGa f:�`. a■■ ara■a`r° ■ f■a frs: • BASEI.W AVE. i` FOOTmL BLVD. i f 4 � A LtI lli . yti 4 < U-i i w 4c ■ I SAN BERNAROMNO EREEIYAY t ca EXHIBIT 2 UNIVERSITY / CR- -^T 1 UNITY MAP PLANNED DEVELOPMENT T f•aRt BY: f .Kversity of Cawforraa LAND} AN Ik Caryn Ccmpany DESIGN FA N BERNAP,OW MUM WORT), Etiaranda .30tiand P.Wwtles I `4 0701 -0 0 08 -22 -90 FCC Agenda 4 of 4 0 y The Plan includes 675.8 acres in Day t" anyon which is proposed as Permanen'1. open space. This land area, which e.ctends approximately 2 miles into the national forest, would be valuable as open space, for protect;,,: of water resources, minimization of fire hazard, informal recreational use, and posy bly as an area for University level natural science study. Seventeen dwelling unit, will ba transferred to the Un- vemity o�Rned portion of the site, a. nominal total given the benefit of the open spacepreserve. The site arca:proposed for development'ia bounded on the north and west by the SCE utility corridors. Highland Avenue (future Route 30) marks the southern boundary. The eastern edge of the site, south of Wilson Avenue, is adjacent to Hanley Street, while further to the north of Wilson Avenue the site is bounded by Edwanda Avenue. 2. Project Qmcept The proposed Preliminary Development Plan (F.D.P.) is planned as a "move up" single - family residential community, containing approximately 1,233 dwellings arranged in nine "neighborhoods". An average gross density of 3.1 dweli'ing units per acre occurs in the developed portions of site, excluding both the 675.8 acre open space preserve and the commercial sites. The mirisnum lot size for the areas south of the recreation hub is 6,000 'square feet. The northeast area above the recreation huh is also 6,000 square feet, and the northwest area is a minimum lot size of 7,200 square feet. The residential areas are onpitized arc and two major "hubs": A "recreation hub" of approximately 17 acres is located at the northerly portion of the site and a "community service hub" of approximately 22 acres, including an elementary school, park, and retail uses, is located to the south. (See Exhibit 4). i A graduated system of collector and-neighborhood streets i utilized to facilitate proper movement. of traffic. To minimizt, ;mf is through residential areas, most homes will be located on cul -de -sacs or closed loop streets which connect to controlled access collector streets. Roads have been sized to accommodate . possible adjacent development. All streets will be dedicated public streets. C. PROJIECT TABUTATION Table I reflects the project tabulation: The project tabulation provides a summary of site data including total acres, sub- area acreages, dwelling unit counts and overall density ratios The total gross' density of the site its 3.1 dwelling units per acre. ` Gross density is determined based upon the sum of all property ownership acreages (excluding the 675.8 acre nature preserve, commercial site and ` community park site) divided by the totr' slumber of planned dwelling units. ie UNIVERSIMCREST 5 PLANNED DEVELOPIl1ENT • �f S.C$. tumor F El E I } RECREATION HUB LEGEND D ' JOR ENTRY 9 !� B 1 - NEIGHBORHOOD EtJTRY a`I $AM RECREATION f COMMUNITY SERVICE HUB CO MUNITY ��H NEICHBORHCOD AREAS HUB L� s.•. ..1* 30 NOTE: PLANNING AREA IS THE 675 ACRE PARCEL TO THE NORTH. SEE EXHIBITS 2; & 3 FOR ITS LOCATION. EXHIBIT 4 UNIVERSITY [ CREST PLANNING AREAS/ PLANNED DEVELOPMENT NEIGHBORHOODS FOR: BY; University of Californl3 . NprUW Caryn Company 'GROUP SAN BERNARDWO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA NORTH Etlwanda H1911and Properties ` ! 6 AOL TABU, Y �, PROJECT TABULATION PROPERTY QWNERSI1IF: University of (Wifornia 175.87' Caryn Company 249.29 Etiwan3aFighlands 675.80 Total Gross Site Acreage t :100.96 CALCULATION OF DENS-M. PLANNING GROSS BASE UNIT DENSITY1 UNIT AMAS AQES -SM SUBTOTAL. MIMS A 33.05 99 iG% loq* 111, E23 54.07 �.o 162 10% 178* C 38.35 3.0 115 1090 127- D 51.97 3.0 156 10':b 172' 1 AML E`, E2 92.54 3.0 278 10% 305* F 38.02 3.0 114 10% 126* G 18.10 3.0 54 10/0 _ , 60* H 89.66 2.0 179 104'0 197* 12 675.80 025 17 10% !4 Commercial 9.39 TOTALS 1,10096 1,174 1,293 f 0 7 6 LANNM P'BLQPl14ENT , ', Footnotes: I. Based upon overall project design elements that integrate parks, school, open space, trails, community services, and residential uses, a 10% density bonus has been Included as permitted within the County General Plan., 2. Planning area T' is planned as permanent open space and its density of 1 unit per 40 acres is transferred to the southern portion of the development within the planning areas A -D. This is consistent with County polie:es. Within the City of Rancho Cuca,-nonga, the Etiwanda Specific Plan Open Space Objective 3.33.700 state' `encourage the preservation of open space in sensitive areas of Edwanda thmugh the use of tmnsser of . development rights or other appropriate implementation tools,," 3. Planning Area B1 and B2 actually contains 63.5 acres of which 9.39 acres are designated for commercial uses and are not counted in density calculations. The unit total for each Planning Area may vary above or below the quantity shown providing the development standards are met for ear.- area and the total unit count does not exceed 1,293. Notes: 1. Combined average gross density is 3.1 dwelling units per acre within all developed parcels: 2. See Exhibit 4 for Planning Area locations. 3. Southern Califnmia Edison currently owns the land where the plan proposes to provide 15.17 acres of improved park if the prrperty can be acquired. If not, the developer will pay equivalent fees. the Coun :y,or provide an alternate park site. I i i I i3 PL k4\TT\'ED DEVELOPMENT � 00 c- ° S�a . py o "a » viva oo t: :�LG yy y C4 Im P r N.i` M. ou No w In N W Nn co 9+Ih0 0.."1N w�+N O V3 W 00 O0�.+1 QNh CE CWT NM¢! V nM OMO. OSS �f ..(S NtlOQ ENO t-: 00 aN� vi c; 14 y a0g QO co rA o yn='a yyWD a�a � c qq� QWZ o a M O o .�Z 2 ti N N N Mrf Al a N 2 ' Wpw "�v+ �� t3 +o Qe- wv �'N �O �.a +-+ •- �' �¢M� •MeO+ta.�.oaoO ov Foatnotes: ~ 1. All calculations in this table are expressed in gross acres, which'include roadways, rights -of -way, and open space, within Parcels A -I. 2. The dwelling units may differ from those indicated on Table I. The units shown on Table I are calculated total allowable units based upon gross acreage whereas the units below reflect current planning efforts and are consistent with thetentative maps being processed. The project total dvic4ing units of 1,293 remains the same on both tables. 3. Estimated Employees: 433 Estimated Customers: 817 Employee projections assume: 1) construction of 10,890 square feet of retail uses per acre; and 2) 236 square feet of gross building area per employee. Variations in type of use, lot coverage, operation, etc., will change these projections. 4. This development is voluntarily proposing park ,related improvements for approximately 21 acres of land in the ,project area equivalent to 5 acres of park per 1,000 population. Of these approximately 16 -17 .acres occur at the recreational stub area on Southern California Edison surplus land. If it is not possible to acquire the surplus land; the developer will pay equivalent park fees to aphieve a 5 acre per 1,000 j parks standard or lacate a.-r alternative park site. S. Land use is divided into 3 categories; Building, Roads and Op.n Space, Building. j coverage in the University is based on a 2,500 S.F. footprint and in the Crest, the footprint used is 2,800 S.F. (Footprint includes garage.) load area is based on a curls to curb measurement. Open space includes all area other than roads and building footprints, 6. This area includes an elementary school and an adjacent park and is apart of the total gross acres for Area D in Table I, 7. This acreage is proposed as permanent open space, 8. This total excludes the 16 47 acre proposed park located currently on Southern: California Edison surplus land. 9. The grading total accounts forAreas A -Has well as the recreational hub area- Areal is proposed permanent open space and no grading is anticipated. Notes: I . All figures above are estimates and are subject to change during the Tract map process, i l UNWERSITCREST 10 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT 11. LAND USE A. RELATIONSHIP TO SAN BERNARDINO COUNT'a' GENERAL PLAN The proposed ]Preliminary Development Plan is designed to be consistent with the goals of the County's General Plan for this area which asks that development be an extension of adjoining communities but no. in competition as an urban core snd that development be an extension of adjacent residential land uses. The subject site is located directly north of the Victoria planned community where lots range from 3,000 square feet to 7200 square feet, and directly south` Of Oak Summit, a proposed planned community with Iota sizes ranging from approximately 10,000 square feet. The site is currently dcaignated for WF,'PD- 211, WF/PD -3/1 and WF/IN uses (see exhibit 5). The proposed plan for the subject site provides a densitytransition and provides home sites tinging in size between the. Victoria community to the south and the Oak Summit community to the North. Lot size within the southerly portion of the site area. will be a minimum of 6,000 square feet. Lots to the north (Planning Areas E, F and G) will also have a 6,000 square feet minimum with planning area H increasing to a minimum lot size of 7,200 square feet. (See exhibit 6) Section WF2.0201 - Directive (2) asks that planning strategies foster a sense of identity at the neighborhood level. The proposed plan creates neighborhoods defined by open spaces and amply landscaped collector and entrystreets which will be enhanced by enriched entry feature, ,and community theme walls. The two community hubs will provide parks, a school, retail and community services for the residential areas and are designed specifically to encourage a sense of neighborhood identity. In addition, the subject site area contains over 150 areas of SCE property which will create natural open space amenity areas for community trails and recreation and will enhance the Hentity of the neighborhoods. B. DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS AND STANDARDS 1. General Standards and Regulations a. Whenever the regulations contained herein conflict with the regulations of the Development Code of the County of San Bernardino, the regulations contained herein shalt take precedence. Where a regulation is not covered refer to the developmen> code of the County of San Bernardino. b. Grading will be permitted within the project area outside an area of immediate development upon the securing of a grading permit. UNIVERSITY /CREST 11 PLAI±';`1ED DEVELOPMENT v LEGEND WF /PD -3/1 WEST VALLEY FOOTht%-LS PLANNED DEVELOPMENT 3 UNITS PER t ACRE WF /PD -2/1 WEST VALLEY FOOT #S PLANNED DEVELOPMENT 2 UNITS PER 1 ACRE WF /IN WEST VALLEY FOOTHILLS S.C.E. CORRIDORS NOTE: THE 675 ACRE PARCEL TO THE NORTH THAT 1S TO BE PRESE!r�'ED AS PERMANENT OPEN SPACE (NOT SHOWN ON THIS EXHIBIT) IS DESIGNATED WF /PD - +l40 (1 UNIT PER SD ACRES). SEE EXHIBITS 2 & 3 FOR ITS LOCATION. EXHIBIT 5 UNIVERSITY / CREST EXISTING COUNTY PLANNED DEVELOPME T LANG USE FLAN , FOR ate: University of California LANMAN Caryn Company DESIGN SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA NORTH Etiwanda Highland Properties GROUP RAA•A MG. - r aA%%et #3Sme- i�R161 Milan w 9'HgMABS XL{.y kbRRX��� a %fiXiea ya. MUM Qmg :elS.i�9H #� SIN -. x �1 it "A i�. a &aaA In aa 9 �St n A.° ..16 %t ,J :- C. During the site development, constructioa hours of operation shall be limited to between 1;00 a.m. and dusk, Monday through Saturday. No activities will be permitted outside these hours, including maintenance work that might be required on any equipment used in grading and(or construction unless a temporary, waiver will be granted by the Building Department. No such waiver will be granted where such work is to be conducted adjacent to existing and occupied dwelling units except in cases of emergency as determined. by the Building Official. d. Regardless of the provisions of this text, no construction shall be allowed within the project area except that which complies with all the provisions of applicable County codes. e. Model hooves, garages and private recreation facilities may be used as offices for the sales of homes within a recorded tract and subsequent t Qcts µ as allowed by the San Bernardino County development code 2. Residential Development Standards a. Temporary ruses Permitted (All subject to provisions of San Eernardino:development code.) 1) Model homes, temporary construction offices, real estate office and signs. b. Permitted Uses 1) Single- family dwellings, schools, religlous facilities, community services. 2) Open space, parks and trails. c. Accessory Uses Permitted 1) Garages and carports in compliance with the site development standards provided herein 2) Fences, walls, patios, patio enclosures and patio trellises 3) Swimmingpools 4) Accessory uses and structures necessary or custorrizzi►y incidental to a principal use permitted in this district are allowed subject to approval of the Building Official. Provided that accessory and primary use structures do not exceed the maximum lot coverage :~ specified within this text. UNIVERSITY /CREST 14 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT d. Walls Walls constructed as acoustical barriers shall have height limits as required , to iaeet County noise standards. All other walWfences shall be limited to a seven (T) foot height except on major entries as noted on the Final Development Plan,, A maximum T -6" wall shall be permitted within the - front yard setback urea. Such walls shall not be closer than 4' to the nearest sidewalk. e. Trellis Open trellis and heam construction shall be permitted to attach the garage or carport to the dwelling and may also enterd from the dwelling subject to County Development Code standards and to the approval of the offices of Planning and Building and Safety. Patio trelllis and beam construction shall be included irt calculated site coverage. f. Garage and Carport Placement '; 1) Where garages/carports are entered from local streets and the garage doors do not face the street but are instead turned at right angles to the street (side entry garages) the setback shall be ten (10`) feet minimum from back of sidewalk. g. Site Development Standards: I ) Lot Area: (See exhibit 6 for locations.) Single Family (SF 7200) ' 7200 square feet minimum Single Family (SF 6000) 6000 square feet mi:dmum 2) Width,_ Fifty its : (55') feet minimum, measureu across building setback line of lot. Lots of 7200 square feet and greater shall have a minimum width of sixty (60') feet. Wid& may vary dependent upon lot size; 3) Coverage: Building: 40% maximum of hh area for building structures. Paving, driveways, patios, or pools shall not be calculated as part of building coverage. Imp l) UNIVERSITY /CREST 15 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT 4) Building Setbacks: a) Font Yard - Planning areas A D: minimum eighteen (18') feet with an Average of twenty -two (22') feet from back of st,'. ;.vaik to provide variatioro Where side enix -y garages occur, a ten (10') foot setback from the back of sidewalk is j required. r b) Front Yard - Planning Areas E -A: minimum eighteen (18') ' feet with an average of twenty -five (25') feet from the back of sidewalk to provide variation. Where side entry garages occur, a ten (101 feet setback from back of sidewalk is required. c) Side. Yard - Planning Areas A -D; Five (S) feet minimum from the property line Witha building separation of least ten (10') feet. On lots 60' wide and greater, at least a fifteen (IT) feet building separation is required' with minimum five (5') feet and tm (IV) feet side yards measured from property lines. Fifteen (IN) feet minimum for comer lot side yards adjacent to local streets and twenty- five -(2S') feet minimum for comerlois side yards adjacent to collector level and greater size streets measured from back ofsidewalk. d) Side Yard - Planning Areas FH: Five (5') feet minimum with a building separation of at least ten (10') feet. On lots 60' wide and greater, at least a fifteen (15') feet building separatia :, is required with minimum five (3') feet and ten (101 feet side yards measured from property lives. Fifteen (]5') feet minimum for comer lot side yards adjacent to local streets and twenty- five (25') feet minimum for corner lots side yards adjacent to collector level and greater size streets measured from back of sidewalk. _ e) Rear Yard: Fifteen (15') feet minimum. 5) Building Height Two Story, thirty -five (35') feet maximum. 6) Parking Requirement 4 per dwelling (2 in garage, 2 on driveway) and sufficient streetside parallel parking to accommodate .5 cars per dwelling. UNIVERSITY/CREST 16 PANNED DEVELOPMENT UNIVERSITY/CREST 17 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT 7) Dwellina Unit Size One thousand two hundred (1,200) square feet ,minimum, not includinggarage or carport area. Lot ratio: unless otherwise shown on the approved tentative tract maps, width to depth lot ratio shall not exceed 3: 1. h. Metropolitan Water District (MWD) and Southern California Edison (SCE). An eighty (801) foot MWD right of way crosses the site as shown in Exhibit 3. This project will conform to requirements ostmblished lay MWD for improvements (i.e., roads, landscaping, etc.). Minimum road improvements will need to occur within MWD; landscaping willbe provided within the MWD corridor subject to MWD conditions. A number of SCE easements bisect and border She site at several locations as shown in the exhibit. The project will conform to Yequirements established by SCI; for any improvements (i.e., roads, slopes, landscaping, etc.). 3. Commercial Development Standards a. Description and Purpose. This district is intended to provide for commercial retail and service uses and facilities appropriate to serve the needs of the general community. It is the purpose of this section to regulate the design, development and use of a comploe, gray of commercial activities responding to these suffering needs for commercial services. b. Permitted Uses. Uses permitted in the CommercialDistrici are subject to review and approved of a conditional use permit issued by the Office of Planning. Those businesses listed below shall operate in compliance with the intent and standards of this district. Each business shall be evaluated in terms of its operational characteristics and specific site location. i ) Retail commercial establishments, including but notlirnited to- n) Apparel store; b) Appliance, television or. game electronic equipment store; c) Auld parts store; d) Bakery; e) Book or stationery store; UNIVERSITY/CREST 17 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT y f) Camera store; q) Ciothir.gstore; h) Confectionery store; i) Drug store orpharmacy; j) Dry goods or notions store; k) Florist orgiftshop; - 1) Furni.crestore; m) Grocery, fruit or vegetable store or supermarket. n) Hardware or paint store; o) Ice Creatn parlor; j p) • Jewelry store; q) Meat market or delicatessen store; r) Service station s) Shoe store; t) Sporting goods store; and u) Any other similar uses deemed by the Planning Commission to be consistent with the intent of this district. 2) Servt,b commercial establishments, including buaaot limited to: a) Applia: -e repair shop; b) Bank, $wings and Loan or similar financial institw. =un. c) Barber shop and beauty shop; d) Cafe or restaurant. e) Clothes cleaning agency and/or pressing establishnin?, f) Dressmaker or millinery shop; g) Clinic - medical, dental, chiropractic or chiropodist; h) Laundry - agency or self serve; i) Photographer, j) Shoe and repair shop; k) Tailor, 1) Theater and drive -ins; m) TrairC agency, 3) Administrative, business and professional offices. 4) Cultural facilities. 5) Restaurants and cafes. 6) Ce.amunity facilities and services. 7) ' Public Utilityuses, structures and facilities. 8) Accessory uses and structures clearly incidental to any of the above, 4) Temporary uses and structures clearly incidental to any of the above. Subject to the conditions and approval of a temporary use permit issued through the office of Building and Safety. r UNIVERSIT YICREST 18 PLANNED DEVELOPMEA'T C. Building height:1�4aximum height for ail buildings shall be thirty -five (35)',-t feet not to exceed provisions ofanf cablebuilding codes. d. Building setbacks: As measured front right -of way line: I) Day Creek Blvd. 25' 2) Summit Avenue 25, 3) No setback shall be required from interior lot lines abutting only a parcel designated for commercial use and not abutting a,street or public area 4) Minimum ten (10') feet setback of commercial building from property line when adjacent to residential lot. e. Parking One space per 200 square feet of gross floor area. Rest :urant requirements shall be subject to County codes or staff determination. f.. Use Coverage: Building coverage shall not exceed 30%. ANIL g. Exterior Architectural Appearance: Architecture to be compatible with community -wide architectural elements, 4. Institutional Use Standards a. Temporary!' <Pennitted (Alt subjem, ions ofSan Bcmardino development code). I ) Tempotaei- cLA struction offices, real estate office and signs. b. Permitted Uses (All subject to provisions of San Bernardino development code). i) Office, religioLS 17acilitles, cultural facilities, day -care center, other public uses. Uses incidental to any of the above. C. Building height, setbacks, parking ratios, coverage and exterior architectural appeRm-nce: standards shall be the same' as those for commercial development, except subject to case by ras° review and determination. ;. 'tip r UN?VERSITX /CREST 19 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT, III. HOUSING � A. EXISTING CONDiTIONu The West Valley yi oothilis Plan Area is primiri,y undeveloped. Currently, approximately 36 single-family exist in theWest VaHcyFoothil;«. These residences are scattered throughout the area as expansive hillside residences or as. rural residenAw" #wellirgs. The project site is completely vacant, The Generr` —a designations will permit the constntctia- af'approximately i 7,500 dwelling units in the West Valley Foothills Area: B. HOUSINC, DEMAND The West Valley Foothills Planning Area. z located in the west end of the San Bernardino Vuliey(Regional Statistical Area 28). This portion of the Valley fins experienced s-2bstantial growth during the pasi decade. In 1980 RSA -28 was estimated to contain 346,000 people; by the year 2005 the region is projected to house 731,000 residents. J populations projected by the County's General Plan are realized, the West Valley planring area of which this project is a m, n, will eventually house from 15,900 to 21,700 persons. increases in population will create proportional demand for housing in the West Valley Foothills Planning Area. The proposed project will help to alleviate the regional demand fo: housing. At buiidout, this project could provide dwelling ualts for appro)Smately 4 200 people. It is expected that most of these units wii be purchased by "move up" home buyers. As the project progresses, conditions may arise which warrant change in the specific lot types and densities which have been outlined in the U, -tdUse Plan. The need to construct different housing types may result from :;hanges in political. economic, and markzt conditions. Table I indicates the number of lots permitted in the development f E UNIVERSITYAMEST 20 PLANNED DENELOPMENT IV. CIRCULATION �. A. RELATIONSHRP TO SAM BERNARDINO COUNTY GENERAL PLAN The proposed project responds to the circulation element within the County General Plan. Directive^ (3), Actions (A) and (C) ask to "adopt road standards that are compatible with those of adjoining coritmunities" and to "coordinate the circulation system with the circulation goals of adjoining communities ". The circulation plan proposed by this Preiiffiinary Development Plan (P.D.P.) will provide residents access to roads which ace compatible in character and standards of adjoining communities. B. PROPOSED CIRCULATI(' CONCEPT A traffic analysis uy Kunzman 9:nd Associates and addendum by DIGS Associates ha -a been proposed for this ?!DP. Numerous meetings with both the City of Rmicho Cacamarga -c, , I County representatives occurred during the formation of the report a!:d addend=a. Copies of these: documents are -included in the appendix The aMen, %m was conducted to update the previous report by Kurtzman Assoi ifn�s find to incorporate the results of the recently completed travel demand model for the City, of Rancho Cucamonga. As a result, the traffic projections for the PDP have been modified and are now con ;stent with planning documents in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, thus providing a coordinated planning effo.1 for the region. � - 1 The study included detailed analysis and documentation of existing traffic conditions, traffic gene =atett by the project Lnd by she surrounding, areas, distribution of this traffic to roads in tlia area anci an analysis of future traffic conditions, The project site and the surrounding area is at present mainly undeveloped. Substantial additional development in the vicinity of the project is currently - being planned. To accommodate the additional projected traffic �,olumes, an entire road system is planned,to handle not only the needs of this project but j also those of a major part of the proposed development throughout this area of the Foothill Community Plana f The entire project when completed will contain approximately 1,293 single family residences, arsine acre commercial center, and one elementary school. f Approximately 22,439 daily vehicle trips are anticipated, 1,795 of which will occur during the evening peak hour. UNIVERSITY /CRESS 21 H ANNED DEVELOI'1tiiEl+Tf !f Y 1 The project site has excellent access from Highland Avenue through Day Creek Boulevard. Day Creek Boulevard is planned as a four lane roadway north of Highland Avenue to Wilson Avenue. if agreed to by County and City, Day Creek Boulevard has the available width to achieve a six Irate divided section. Wilson Avenue is planned to link with Day Creek Boulevard providing good "r project sr „cess from the east and west and creating the lower loop road important ” to the regional circulation of the Etiwanda Specific PIan. The plan provides the flexibility for bath Wilson Avenue znd Banyan Avenue to continue west across the Day Creek Wash. For the project area north of the 1,'lilson Avenue, upper and lower loop streets are planned to provide eastfwest circulation and access to the neighcorhoods as well as the northerly-planned futwe developments. The traffic study concludes, in gent.M that the proposed circulation system will adequately sentice 'futureprojected traffic volumes. Exhibit 8 outlines the circulation concept. Cross sections for the various road cond ?eons are identified iaexhibits l0A through IOC. Exhibit 9 provides akey map r each of the cross sections. C. PROTECTION OF SC—zMC HIGHWAY C" There are no scenic highways in the immediate area of the project site; however, in the event that any are proposed in the near fixture, consideration will bee given to the guidelines setup by the regulating authority. Ij, Y� ��e e•a•es•.re•••••vo••••renee•eee• sw • uaaaovtw A �: (_TTtj�h'1+t*4LLLL}}�lh}1YI _••aaneNaaeuhVS.ei4e39 �j• • a 4 • '••De• • `~'!P0� Eby. I • t ` arx' �g • 1. �� • g, KA 0 Wft- A­ LEGEND EdUESTRIAN TRAILS e 4 Em:.- •• • •s® BIKE PATHS (OFF STREET) i wBIKE PATHS (ON STREET) 8 'n Arafs z IIh �.� '•. tf �� 017� a • saaat Ara •a E F �•r;- rile _ Sim .i FVjNaM AYt- =r Ful �. itoult A. • • a EXHIBIT 7 UNIVERSITY / CREST R�iIL ®�� �:� PLANNED DEVELOPMENT FOR:' BY: University of California LANDPLPN CarynCompany GROUP SAN BERNAHDINO COUNTY NORTH Etiwanda f�ighland Propaities 23 LAAWP. Gpr4p 4 Inc cwfr . _ III. I Ill ' i - . -•�— . —_.�- _ �_ srF-o"k°' q LEGEND r LLECTOR SECONDARY NE — = —s ®♦ -DIVIDED) rrrM a • ,e •. COLLECTOR LANE DIVIDED) J (2 - o tt5' COLLECTOR aa JJ (2 LANE - UNDIVIDED) m ai ■ • 1CgNSr6 ACt: Iolw floY11 �D EXHIBIT 8 UNIVEREiTY ! CHEST CIRCULATION PLAN PLANNED DEVELOP !T FOR: RY University of California LANDPtAN SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY NORTH Cann Company Etfwanda Higtdantl Properties DESIGN GROUP - 24 LAD WP. C,&VM r • - - H a F r ! Clow. !i (1 G� - Ka LEGEND f� A a H +® St=NDARY COLLECTOR LANE- DIVIDED) •.• COLLECTOR (2 LANE - DIVIDED) COLLECTOR (2 LANE- UNDIVIDED) D QA SECTION KEY mj _ __29A— — Wild Routs 00 i EXHIBIT 9 UNIVERSITY J CREST S°ECTI(D. N KEY MAP PLANNED DEVELOPMENT FOR., BY. University of California IANDIIAN Caryn.Company DESIGN SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY N® Etiwanda HgWand Pro!*"•' —, GROUP Sr�f l j 4' MEANDERING WALK EQUESTRIAN TRAIL BIKE PATHWAY , (MAY MEANDER) C••:n. - :r��f 1. AWL LANDSCAPE 1p SETBACK VAR 6 IES c ' 2' N _ 1— 02-- . _ fl.O.W. s LANDSCAPE SETBACK SECTION 4' MEANDERING WAL ' �y�';+�= 8' BIKE PATH (MAY MEANDER L y mss; , INTO S.C.E. CORIDOR) LANDSCAPE v — , K VARIES -- 10 2+ NOTE: SECTION WILL FLA��E TO 6 LANES AT R.0 W BANYAN AVENUE AAtD WILSON AVENUE INTERSECTIONS. ����� ®LV ® B MEDIAN WIDTH VARIES V THROUGH S.C.E. SURPLUS PROPERTIES 8' BIKE PATH (MAY MEANDER INTO S.C.E. OR LANDSCAPE SETBACK) A' SIDEWALK MINIMUM.x LANDSCAPE SETBACK 11' 20' 14' 20' VARIES 11' S.C.E. O—Q LANDSCAPE SETBACK L 76, - - -- W R.O.W. VARIES E SECTION C EXHIBIT 10A UNIVERSITY / CREST STREET PLANNED DEVELOPMENT CROSS SECTION FOfi BY: qq Univetaity of Cafitotnia IAhDPLM1 c a yn .,ompany DESIGN SAN BERNARDINO CDUNTY NORTH Miwanda HigNand Ptepetties GROUP 26 i `� -- 4' SIDEWALK B 5' BIKE ROUTE E,UESTRIAN TRAIL m c SETBACK a' ��' 12' VARIES ss` 'C _ LANDSCAPE SETBACK R.O,W. N° s SECTION I r** smwALK i i i —5' BIKE ROUTE LANDSCAPE VARIES 66' R.O.W. N g SECTION �.� 2:1 SLOPE MAX. EQUESTRIAN TRAM NATIVE SOIL So N ) 7' 44' 11' LANDSCAPE SET?ACW low ss' -VARIES S(S R.O.W. SECTION EXHIBIT 10B UNIVERSITY ( CREST STREET PLANNED DEVELOPMENT CROSS SECTION ..FOR: BY: - Urriversity at Calfornia lAkDMfN Caryn Company GROUP SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY NORTH Etiwanda HigNand PrWertfas 27 a i I 1 'ti 'l k 6' SIDEWALK t Jaik t2 36' 12 so' R.O.W. SECTION G TYPICAL INTERIOR STREET PUBLIC UTILITY SECTION H TYPICAL CUL -DE -SAC EXHIBIT 10C STREET CROSS SECTION SAN BERNARDWO COUNTY kt7R7H ��l UTILITY EASEMENT UNIVERSITY / CREST PLANNED DEVELOPMENT FOR: BY: University of 03forrlta LqIDPLAN Caryn Company DESM EtManda H IIP.anct Properties GROUP 28 Vi V- PUBLIC SERVICES AND FACILITIES A. PUBLIC SERVICE AND FACILITY NEEDS The land uses proposed in the West Valley Foothills CommunityPlan area are basically an extension of ),he development pattern occurring within adjacent communities. Densities ptvposed for the planning area were derived with these two considerations in mind. the ability to provide services to the planning area and the region's natural constraints. The absence of development in the planning area provides rn excellent opportunity to design a comprehensive and environmentally sensitive plan which responds to local and regional issues. B. COMMUNITY FACIL=...5 1. Schools The project site will be served by the Etiwanda School district (k-8) and Chaffey Joint Union High. School. In accordance with the ratios suggested by Mr. Ffton Lightfoot, the Etiwanda School District Superintendent, for 1,293 homthe site will generate approximately 805 k-8 students. Approximately 265 these would' be intermediate level (grades 6 -8) and 540 would be elementary level (k -5), To accommodate The reeds for school facilities, an elementary school site is proposed tote provided along Summit Avenue nearDay Creek Boulevard. It is envisioned 01 be part of a larger community hub including apark, community and retail facilities. A future intermediate school is proposed nearby to the east of the develojoaera The developer will pay his fair share of the cost of this school. 2. Police and Fire Service Police protection for the project site is provided by the San Bernardino County Sheriffs's Department, Rancho Cucamonga Substation, located at 9th Street and Hellman Street in the City of Rancho Cucamonga. For the projected population of approximately 4,200 residents, the site would generate a need for approximately4 officers of 1 "60 hours per week. Fire protection will be provided by the Rancho Cucamonga% Fire Protection District. The nearest fire station is lowed to the southwest ofthe site, at 12158 Baseline, east of Milliken 1-'venue. Fire services for this site is covered by a Community Facilities District. 3 3. Parks and Recreation Recreational oppor:,rnities available within the West Valley Foothills planning area currently include informal use of open and undeveloped land for hiking, equestrian and motorcycle use. Forest Service Trail IN34 provides public access into the National Forest and other trails that lead to Mt. Baldy, Cucamonga Peak, Lytle Creek, and Pacific Coast Trail, among others, Two regional parks are within a reasonable distance to the West Valley Foothills planning area. Cucamonga- Guasti Park encompasses 54 acres and is located. approximately 6 miles stuthwest of the planning area. Glen Helen Park is a 500 acre parK located approximately 4 miles northeast of the planning area on Interstate 15. This project adds 675.8 acres of environmentally attractive land to permanent open space. Other regional recreational facilities have been proposed for the West Valley Foothills, including a regional park between Deer and Day Creek. In addition, equestrian and hiking trails have been identified and are consiston with the proposed Edwanda North Specific Plan. Thep ins call for a regii lIal east -west trail at the base of the foothills, connecting local trails adjacent to ma ;- -; drainage courses and/or utility service reads, fire trails, and flood control service roads and washes. This development is proposing park related improvements fo apiroximately21 acres of land in the project area whit": is equivalent _a a acres of park per 1,000 population, These include an. approximately to 5 acre area next to a proposed elementary school and full landscape improvements for an additional 16 to 17 acres at the "remation hub area" in the northern portion of the site. The recreation hub area is located in a Southern Califomia Edison "surplus land" area. If it is not possible to acquire the surplus land, the developer will pay equivalent p!--k fees to achieve a 5 acre per 1,000 parks standard, or locate an alternative tz, _ site. These areas will provide for use an active, ballfleld and passive picnic uses. In addition SCE utility corridor areas aO,lacent to th:: school site wHI be fully landscaped. Refer to Exhibit 4 for1,=tions of the park site. Exhibit 7 reflects the equestrian andbike trails designated for the area within the West Valley Foothills Planning Area and the Edwanda Specific Plan. Trails along Wilson Avenue and Summit Avenue are located on the south side of the right -of -way. The trails planned In the SCE condor are to be; located per SCE standards. It is intended that the trails will utilize the current SCE service roads within the corridors. Additional community trails in the SCE corridors maybe incorporated into the overall system, dependent upon SCE's approva]<. TINIVERSITY/CREST 30 PLANNED DEMOPMENT M, C. FINANCING ALTERNATAIFS 1. Infrastructure, Planning and Financing Streets, wars, sewers, storm drain, acid utilities will be provided and phased in such a manner as to be compatible with the City of Rancho Cucamonga The developers of this P.D.P, will provide amounts for infrastructure improvements that are associated with this development equivalent to the City of Rancho Cucamonga's "Systems Dm.- lopment fee". 2. The project will also spend an amount equivalent to o,' exceeding Rancho Cucamonga's Park fe to develop parkland. 3. In addition, the developer is working cooperatively with the Cityand County w provide adequate flood control and infrastructure through a combination of developer contributions and Community Facilities District Financing Similar cooperative planning and financing will provide for the school shown on the plan to service both this project and neighboring developmcr.*s. A community facilities district for fire services has already been estWished for this area These infrastructure, planning and financing techniques are similar to those used successfully previously by the County, City and the Caryn Company. D. INFRASTRUCTURE I. Water Supply Domestic water service to the project will be supplied by the Cucamonga County Water District (CCWD). CCWD is a member agency of the Chino Basin Municipal Water District (CW -4WD) which is a member agency of the Metropolitan WaterDisten of Southern California: (MWD). CCWD derives its water from three (3) major sources: ground water, surface water, and imported water. Ground water is extracted by wells in the Chino and Cucamonga basins. Almost ninety percent (9095) of the water supply is from underground sources. Water quality is considered excellent. _ Surface water is obtained from Day and East Etiwanda Cenyons and is treated at. the Royer - Nesbit Plant which is located near Day Creek. Dazing the summer months when surface flows are low, the coyer - Nesbit plant also treats - ,nported water from the Metre-politan Water District Foothill Feeder, which distributes water from the Colorado Riv% Aqueduct and the California Water Project. The CCU. J water sysipm is adequate to sr..—vice the project site since the Waters System Master Plan is based upon land use projec -)ns identified by ere Rancho Cucamonga General Plan and the high-end projections of the West Foothills Valley Community Plan. The pruect site is covered by four (4) water p.essure zones as defined by CCWD water system master plan. These arc zones 3, 4, 5C and FC. Pressure zone 3 at the southerly tip of the project has existing pipelines in and around Highland Avenue that will be utilized to service O-is axex. Pressure zone 4 lies north of pressure zone 3 and extends io approxinh—teiy' Olson Avenue. Water in pressur zone 4 will be supplied by existing 16" lines in Kanley Street and lower Summit Avenue. Pressure zone 5C lies to the north of pressure zone 4C and c is nearly to the northerly tip of the project.; CCWD has started the ?nitial dc�g..;rb� =ce for ' construction of reservoir 5C, its booster, ststion, and major transmission lines to service the SC pressure zone. Ali these facilities are identified in CCWD Master Plan and their cost is estimated at $1.3 million. Pressure zone 6C covers the notthweazerly come: of the site and like 5C no existing facility are constructed to service the area. A reservoirbooster station 7 and transmission lines are required to be constructed for the development to occur. Yhese facilities are identified in CCWD masts , Aan and their cost is Ah estimated at $0.7 million. For the location of all proposed on site water facilities see Exhibit 11 and for the location aof all proposed off site water facilities. see Exhibit 12. i; i CCWD is currently in the process of updating their Water Master Plan to II include this project and others of Highland Avenue. 2. ,Sanitar Sewer System ` Sanitary sewer service will be provided by CCWD. The construction of this- project will require extensions of two sewer trunks identified in CCWD master sewer plan. The sewer tranks are the Day Creek sewer and the Etivvanda . Avenue sewers. The Day Creek sewer will be czendea from an existing sewer near Baseline and future Day Creek Boulevard. The sewer will extend approximately 5,000' northward to the site an' will follow the alignment of future Day Creek Boulevard. This sewer is "- pected to service the western half of the site and the areas south of Wilson Avenue. These areas include areas A; B, C, D, G and H. I,rNIVER.3lTYJCREST 32 PLANNED I EVEMPMENT 1 f 10 0 u � tlj :a W. s u n. b bo. re it�tf. -10, *a LEL31END _ PROPOSED SEWER 1rW PROPOSED i' WATER EXISTING 1 WATER r s FIWATER PRESSURE j X ZC NE BOUNDARY I DOTE: ALL FACILITIES S PIPE SIZES - - SHOWN ARE PER COCAMONGA COUNTY WATER DISTRICTS SEWE 4 WATER WASTER PLANS. i �-- "R � s�vws0 atilt n tits EXHIBIT 11 UNIVERSITY / CREST ON_-SITE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT WATER E R AND SEWER' Y tT E SOMM. FOR: BY: Univers {ty o1 California L9MD AMS Caryn Company ESI N SAN BERNAgOINO COUNTY, oAtiPORnaa NoRrFt SUSHO i Ellwanda F�ynlana proptMet Gr4LIP _. P 33 "G P� LEGEND r °- - 6c PROPOSED SEWER " p 8�.- -- - J PROPOSED WATER �-- _J it`N I -"� - EXISTING WATER = 5X /ST. I _ __: r �� i PRESSURE ZONES 2? " ; _L —� Na. 30 � P r ® 6a, - 1 Q� V1 /2 fps EX /Sl.' /5 4.45E LW-= AVS. _ /oiN EX• /5" SE.crJ. r EXHIBIT 12 UNIVERSITY / CREST WATER REGl NAL PLANNED DEVELOP T ^, V A l ER AND SEWER SOU14CE: FOR 9Y. University of California DEpp+ �N UNDCM Caryn Company DESIGN SAN 13ERNARDWO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA NORTH &SHORT Etlwanda KgMAnd Properties ,RCUP Aft The Etiwanda Avenue trunk sewer currently terminates south of Foothill Boulevard. Plans are approved and construction is in progress that will extend this trunk to Wilson Avenue. Plans for two tentative tracts currently being processed will extend this system north in Etiwanda Avenue to the southeast portion of this project, below the SCE Corridor. For the location of all proposed on -site sewer facilities refer to Exhibit I I and .locations of all the off- -site sewer facilities refer to Exhibit 12. CCWD has sized all the off -site sewer facilities but they are currently in the process of updating "their Sewer Master Plan, therefore, specific sizes are unknown at this time. This report shows the sizes as currently depicted in CCWD sewer master plan. 3. Solid Waste Solid waste disposal will be handled by one of several solid waste handlers licensed to operate in this area of San Bernardino County. Handlers will contract with individual homeowners. Solid waste will be deposited in the Sate Bernardino County landfill, located oa Sierra Avenue in Fontana approximately 0 mile north of Highiand. One or two additional vehicles will eventually be needed to service the project site at build -out. I 4. Stoma Drain System i On site storm water facilities will be provided on the ro'ect site as art of the development. These facilities will be constructed to meet rational method crimria of the County of San Bernardino. All streets will be designad( so that storm hater does not exceed the top of curb fora 25 year storm and the right -of- way line for a 100 -year storm on any street, the excess will be picked up in a storm drain.. It is proposed that all facilities will be designed to handle the ultimate drainage that would be tributary to the area. All on -site flows will collect and outlet into Day Creek orEtiwandaMastsr Plan Drainage systems. Exhibit 13 indicates the basic conceptual design of the storm drain system. 5. Flood ControYDrainage Purpose The purpose of this preliminary drainage study is to inventory existing and proposed onsite hydrology and investigate regional flood control facilities._ This report is intended to serve as the basis fo; subsequent more in- depth analysis. Ongoing studies by Bill Mann & Associates and Fuscoe, Williams, Liridpran & Short wil' discuss items, such as detention, downstream capacity and debris collection. UNIVERSITY/CREST 35 PLrt IM—D DEVELOPMENT LEGEND ON -SITE z% CONNECT.ON t OFF -SITE STORM DRAIN R.I. aa_ � NIDNLAND AYENNE IL SCALE EI FEET EXHIBIT 13 UNIVERSITY / CREST ON-SITE PLANNED DEVELOPNFIUT STORM DRAINAGE AGE SOURCE FOR: BY: FUSCOE University of California LANDMAN WILLIAMS �N�RES Caryn Company DESIGN SAN SERNARDINO COUNTY. CALIFORNIA NO ,TH $ S$�l®Ri Etiwanda HigWand Proper8es GROUP 36 C-1 1 0;=,. t EXHIBIT 14 EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS S615RCE: PROJECT IFUSCM RID= SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA NORTH &SHOW LEA `� PROJECT °•, LIMITS EDISON o-1 TOWER DOMESTIC WATER LAND USE DRAINAGE BOUNDARY 0.x NODE R LOW U.S.G.S. BLUELINE STREAM AM* .. Im UNIVERSITY / CRESTtl PLANNED DEVELOPMENT FOR: 8Y; University kit California, Z Npy Caryn Compan{ - DESIGN Ettwanda Highland Properties GROUP 37 Existing On -Site The site falls basically from north to south at an average rate of plus or minus 6% (see Exhibit 14). All calculations are br ted on the San Bernardino County Flood Control Manual utilizing the ra!ior�al method and a 100 year storm frequtacy. For purposes of the study, thy; site has been divided into three existing drainage areas (see Exhibit 15), Drainage Area I is the west ';calf of the site from the SCE towers down to Highland Avenue. Water in this ares sheet flows north to south towards Highland. At Highland there is a corrugated pipe culvert to carry water under the street where it ultimately flows to Day Creek. North of Highland there exists a graded levee to protect the residential development south of Highland from flooding. Drainage Area 2 is the northeast corder of the project Flows to this area are intercepted by a graded ditch north of the access road to the Cucamonga County Water Diistricfu (CCWD) filtration_plant. The Wilson Avenue storm drain (graded ditch) traverses this area. There are two off-site drainage areas identified to the north of the project, These flows will be intercepted prior to entering the site. The location of all flows can be seen on Exhibit 15. Ile Federal Emergency Management Agency IFEMAI The Flood Insurance Rate Map (Panel 7900 of 9375) indicates d:at the project area is covered by three zones. The southwest portion of -the site in Zone A and subject to I' deep sheet flow from the Day Creek system. The eastern portion of the Crest area is designated Zone D. Zone is an area of undetcnmined, but possible flood hazards. The remainder of the site falls within Zone C and is explained as an area of minimal rnoding. Current applicati,Ins`to FEMA address the flood potential for the project site from both Etiwandaandthe Day Creek system. - Proposed Onsite For purposes of this 6tudy the site was divided into sub areas 4Trresponding to the lot layout plan (Exhibit 6). Onsite flows will be collected in closed conduit reinforced concrete pipe (RCP). The approximate location of these pipes can be seen on Exhibit 13. The system is designed to be consistent with the existing Master Plan of Drainage for Etiwanda Area and Day Creek. The storm water is transmitted to either Day Creek or to the Etiwanda Master Plan system: in Etiwanda Avenue and Summit Avenue. Both of these facilities are discussed in greater detail below. UNIVERSITY/CREST 38 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT W.�]. i7 DAY CXrr K BREADING GROUNDS DAY CREtK—/ CHANNEL 30 w t a LEGEND ; AREA Is PROJECT SITE BOUNDARY iika4& vl'e� MAS71 EF� I PLAN f tl^tt Vr%, w t a REGIONAL DRAIN AGE ; AREA Is BOUNDARY iika4& vl'e� Agr-A ty 22 ecrxolNe t 31 32 3_ EXKIBIT 15 UNIVERSITY / CREST REGIONAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT,, DRAINAGE AREAS SOLW;e FOR: BY. WRXCOE University of Caglorniia UUIMS LANDPLAN \_L/ LINDGREN Caryn Company DESIGN SAN BERNARDWO COUNTY, CALIFORMA NORTH &SHORT Etlwanda KgWand Prop"es 39 Regional Systems The site drains into two regional drainage systems, Day and Etiwanda Creeks, which have been defined and studied bythe City of Rancho Cucamonga in their Master Plan nof Drainage and also by the fire of i3f11N;ann& Associates as part of the Day - Etiwanda -San Sevaine Master Plan, approved by the County and the City in 1983. Data from these studies will be utilized to insure this project conforms with earlierwork. Adequate downstream capacityv+rill be insured for increased run-off genetated bytho proposed development. The Day Creek System is a 4 \'`cis dam and concreteilned chaiimel runrdng north to south along the wester bf.. der of the piaject. For sites that lie within its dmiwige area, water will be collected and outlet into the creek through gunnel inlets. Existing inlets are Iocated at Highland Avenue and 1.5 miles north of Highland Avenue. Two new channel inlets will be constructed to 4iansmit flows to Day Creek. The Etiwanda Area Master Plan of Drainage, prepared in February 1989, outlines the drainage facilities netted to .-w-n1 surface runoff and protect i property wthin.the . Etiwanda area. The master plan facilities are partially shown on Exhibit 15. The predominately east/west system channels flows to Etiwanda Channel. 6. Utilities Gos, telephone and electrical utilities are currently existing in the general area and shall be brought to and constructed within the project area by the developer. Maintenance of the utilities shall be performed by the appropriate utility company and the costs will be borne by the individual homeowners through monthly service charges, 6a. Electricity Electrical service in the project area will be provided by Southern California Edison. Existing facilitiL. t a Highland Avenue shall be up -sized as required to- provide adequate service to the project site. On -site connections shall be made by the underground conduit, 6b. Natural Gas The Southern California Gas Compacy will provide natural gas to the project area. The gas company shall design the sersice systems requited to accommodate the demands of the expected population. I UNIVERSITYICREST 49 j) P"NNED DEVELOPMENT AML 6c. 'Telephony General. Telephone Company will provide telephone service to the project site. Required plans for on -site service shell be done by Venetal 'Telephone Company at the time of development. (Tor all existing utilities; see Exhibit 16.) k li I _ UNIVERSITYXREST 41 PLA>I1�1ED Dw, LIPMENT rA H nE2 z E1 ° Q qc Z10 a c1° 3 s C r �dv r� WILSON AVENUE B2 P� SUMMIT VV fL , W A ' z z /� 5 {Y POLS a > i�i 2 (EDIaoM� Q Q en�ee ■eooeeenu �Jvi bC rsis eeue°�uwepuneee�w iridv'rri osiiriw eeennuuueu .wr�si ®sri ci�oeeuunueeeu� _ ul C.EXhT. CAS Q W CG Q z F t ?, W RS ® W S.P.R.R. LEGEND EXISTING EDISON LINE •, EXISTING GAS + + +. LINE EXHIBIT 16 UNIVERSITY I CREST . EXISTING UTILITIES PLANNED DEVELOPNF&T SOURCE: FOR. BY. � University of California 6tNDt9M � � J �1 Caryn Company DESIGN GROUP SAN BERNAPDWO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA NV./ $t 51f®RT Etdwanda nd Pra ` rides 42 ',w I. COMMUNITY DESIGN A. LANDSCAPE I Introduction The intent of the landscape plan will be to create a strong community image through the use of simple tree masses and street ftft planting, as well as reinforce and extead the existing landscape charaerer of the area. Special attwtion will be given to the use of drought tolerant and native species of trees, shrut; , vines and low growing ground cover, thus emphasizing a more coral and naturalised appearance to the area. Theme walls and entry areas will have flowering vines w ':dch will serve to reinforce the landscape ooncept. Lawn areas will comprise less the ?i 30% of parkway areas. Neighborhood areas A -D (see exhibit 4) are characterized by avenues lined with stately eucalyptus windrows, palm lined medians, with backdrops of pines and flowering trees. In addition, the neighborhoods will be characterized by enhanced entries. Neighborhood areas E -H are characterized by avenues massed with a predominance ofpines and flowering trees. The entries in these neighborhoods will also include enriched entry monuments. Landscape PalettaDesign The plant palette (see Table M) was developed wi`` ,:.e community theme in mind along with plant suitability for the area Selections were made with respect to drought tolerance, low main�ce and native species along with their relationship to climax_ and soil condition-- Suitability of plant material for high free hazard areas was also an *inportant parameter in determining the plant palette. Landscape Standard's I . All residential, commercial and public land uses shall be landscaped using the plant palepa (see Table M). These standards shall apply to all landscaped areas with the exception of private residential yards, in which case they serve as guidelines. a. All landscaping must be done with plants from the palette of tr^m.'shrubs, vines and _vToundcovers listed in Table M. Plants not included to the palette but recommended by a registered landscape ambitect, may be used ifappmved by the County Planning Department b. Horticultural soil t-zts are important for proper landscape; development. Such reports are recommended for the public landscape rreas and shall be obtained prior to landscape installation from a qualified agricultural laboratory. The test summaries should include analysis of soil fertility and agricultural suite. itity, and provide recommendations for pre -plant amendments, backfill mix and post plant maintenance:fertilization. UW- VERSITyX?tEST 43 PLANNED DEVEL0' %DR IT L c.. Automatic irrigation is required as a part of landscape development of the~; public common area Irrigation systems shall be designedwith coverage necessary to accommodate seasonal wind patterns. All developments sb a4 Include a. Calsense control system as part of the automatic irrigatic- system or similar system to conserve water. The automated system shall be designed and constructed to accommodate adaptation to a master computerized control system. Plants using similar water requirements shall be grouped together and metered to assure that tha watering requiremenw are met. It shall be the responsibility of the developer providing the public landscape improvements to coordinate the design and location of the irrigation systems with the County to insure compatibility with existing systems. Controllers shaI3 be capable of repeating individuals systems during the course of the day to expedite plant establishment. Moisture sensors or similar devices shall be used as part of this system. Brown line pipe may be used on slopes within private lots and "located on the soil surface. All other pipe shall be buried below ground. Additional equipment such as controllers an3 backflow preventers should be located to minimize their impact on the streetscape. d. Prior to issuance of any building permits, landscape plans shall be approved by the County Planning Department for the project. Landscape plans must address all of the appropriate grading and landscaping standards and guidelines coawined in the Planned Development. e. Specific planting, staking, wh.�:ng, and replacement requirements shall' be established by the responsible service district for any landscaping in public areas including, but not limited to street rights -of -way and parks, f. Slope areas shall have the following requirements: 1) Slope areas are permitted within the public landscape areas at gradients not to exceed 2:1 or prevailing County standards. The intent within the slope areas is to create an undulating character and should include primarily 3 :1 slopes with a maximum 2:1 condition. 2) Grade slopes shall be re- vegetated as soon as feasible with groundcover or a combination of groundcover, shrubs and trees from the approved lists. Hydroseed may substitute for groundcover plantings. Groundcovers shall possess moderate or high erosion control qualities and all plantings shall conform to tho applicable community landscape guidelines. 3) All 2:1 or greaterslopes adjacent to arterial and collector roads must be planted with trees and woody shrubs to attain 100% coverage at maturity. I 1 UNIVERSITY/CREST 44 I PLANNED DEVELQPM,:NT 4) interior private yard slopes required to be landscaped shall include' drought-tolerant, low maintenance plant material. All slopes shall re eive groundcover, shribs and one (1) tree (5 gallon minimum) for evens i SO square feet of area. 5) Transition arms - Areas ac ;scent to rm dential development or manufactured slopes adjacent to open space lots which are natural or manufactured slopes at 11 or steeper will be planted with trees to 40% coverage at maturity and irrigated with a .lisp or bubbler system. g. Where required, planting withit naturalized open space and futl modification zones mustbe with fire•Tesistant low fuel --load plant material. The open space will be planted with drought - tolerant trees required by Planning Department. h. The landscape adjacent to major streets cowributes significantly to the character of the area. The roadway, parkways, edges and medians should be fully 1ar4scaped with plant material selected from the approved plant lists. L Street trees should be long - lived, deep rooted, and require little maintenance (structurally strong, insect and c iseas* resh(tant, and require little pruning). Tree selection shall be from the approved tree list. j. Street trees shall be planteA, not less than: Twenty -five (251) feet hack of beginning of curb returns at intersections - Ten UW) feet from lamp standards - Tarr (10') feet from f to hydrants Five (5') feet from miters L Street treeashall be a minimum =trYiaer eat of fifteen (15) gallen, with a minimum ratio of one (1) 24 -inct box to ovary three (3) 15- gallon tree` - planted in parks. Palm trees shall have a minimum brown trunk height ,o fifteen (15) feet. All street tree selections must generally conform to the standards of the Salt Bernardino GountyThinsportationDepartment.. 1. Street trees in residential lot areas shall be planted With an average ofene (1) tree per thirty (30') feet of street frontage, m. In commercial areas, street noes shall be planted at the equivalent of (1) tree per thirty (M) feet offruntage. UNWERS)TY/CREST 45 PLANNEDDfi LOPMWr t. n. Packing lot trees in commercial and park sites shall have a mature height and spread of at least thirty (30') feet and spaced an average of one (1) tree every sixth space. They should also be tong - lived, clean, require little maintenance (structurally strong, insect and disease resistant, and require little pruning). Trees shall be a minimum size of fifteen (15) gallon. Tree selection shall be from the approved tree ;`_.2. o. Roadway landscape includes the land area lying between the paved road and adjacent private development. It also includes median planting where appropriate. Underplantings within roadways shall consist of shrubs gtoundcover or grasses. They shall conform to the character of the _, tighborhood in which they are located, and be selected from the approved landscape lists. Medians shall have a minimum of 20% to a muximur.- of 40% enhanced hadscape. p. When trails occurwittin natural open space including utility corridors, no landscape treatment is required. When trails occur within road right-of way, the adjacent landscape treatment shall be as required for the roadway. When trails occur within publicly maintained paseos, the a�.djacent landscape treatment; shall include tree masses and an uAderplanting of shrubs, groundcover, or grasses. The tree sizes shall be mixed five (5) gallon, fifteen (15) gallon, and 24 -inch box. Larger sizes are permitted. q. Within parks turf and compatible water consumptive plant material may be used, with a minimum of 10% shrub and gro ndcover areas. r. Landscape maintenance costs will be paid through a special assessment on property owners tax bills as part of a special assessment district. The Iandscape maintenance of the common landscape areas shall be the responsibility of the special assessment district. The maintenance shall be inclusive of practices necessary to keep all landscape areas healthy, neat and trimmed. Diseased and/or dead plant materials shall be removed and- replaced. The district shall also be responsible for the maintenance of street lighting, neighborhood entry lighting fixtures and -ignage. An easement may also occur along the public facing surface, of perimeter Theme walls, entry walls and view fences adjacent to common landscape areas to provide the ability to repairAnaintain walls that are not adeq ately maintained by the adjacent property owner.. Trees that are required as "street trees" within front or side yards may be included in a "tree easement" and maintained by a special assessment distr, ct, S. In general utility corridors -shall be maintained by their respective owners, e.g., Southern California )3dison or Southern California Gas, including trails that occur within these properties. (It is intended to use existing paths or unpaved road beds for equestrian trails or paths within these areas.) Some exceptions may apply where it is necessary to include landscaped and irrigated arerm within utility corridors in the maintenance district, however, these conditions will be kept to a minimum. tJNWERSITY /CREST 46 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PLAIM CONCRETE DRIVEVa °AY AND ENTRY WALK WITH A MEDWM COARSE ROCK SALT FINiSH AND DEEP SCORE JOINTS AS INDICATED. PLAIN CONCRETE DRIVEWAY AND ` ENTRY WALK WITH A COARSE ti BROOM FINISH AND STC €L TROWELED EDGES AS INDICATED. ,I i REDWOOD HEADER t 4' MINIMUM ' 1 60ARD (TYP.) I SIDEWALK. I i 1 ACCENT TREE 1 ACCENT TREE i PER LOT. +,5 Gf1L t PER LOT.. 15 GAL i 1 t —'t + 1 I ' r SEEDED TURF.�❑I I PLA BE WITH SHRUBS GR ND OVER ANMFN S STREET TREES 30' O.C. AVERAGE j PER LINEAL FOOT OF STREET. MAYBE CLUSTERED. NOTE: ABOVE IMPROVEMENTS TO BE INSTALLED BY BUILDER OR BY HOMEOWNER USING BUILDER ALLOWANCE. IRRIGATION (MANUAL OR AUTOMATIC) PSGUIRED. IRRIGATION AND LANDSCAPING MAY OCCUR AFTER OCCUPANCY OF HOME. IN THIS MANNER, WATER METERS WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR CONNECTION IN OWNER'S NAME. k EXHIBIT 17 UNIVERSITY / CREST TYPICAL FRONT YARD PLANNED DEVELOPMENT _IANDSCAPINC /DRIVEWAY FOi - BY: f TREMMEN i. t7 University of Cz ilornia LANp(LAN Caryn Company DESIGN SANBERNIARDWO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Etiwanda Hi0and Properties GROUP 0 TABLE III PLANT PALETTE REFS ACACIA SPECIES ACACIA ALBIZIAJULMRISSIN SaXTREE ALNUS RHOMBIFOLIA WHITEALDER ARBUTUSNENZIESII MADRONE BRACHYCHITON ACERTFOLIU, i FLAMETREE BRACHYCHITON POPULNEUS BOTTLE TREE CEDRUSDEODARA , DEODARCEDAR CERATONIA SMI QUA CAROB (MALE ONLY) CERCIS OCCIDENTALIS WESTERN RED.BUD - CLNNAMOMUM CANTHORA CAMPHORTREE EUCALYPTUS SPECIES EUCALYPTUS FRAXINUS VELUTINA - MODESTO- MODESTO ASH GEUERAPARVIFLORA AUSTRALIAN WILLOW GDWO BR DBA MAIDENHAIRTREE WALE ONLY) JACARANDA MIMOSIFOUA JACARANDA ROMEUTERIA RIPINNATA CE UMSE FLAME TREE KOELREUTERIA PANICULATA GOLDENRAIN TREE IAGEMMOEWAINDICA CRAPEMYRTLE LIQUIDAMBAR STYRACIFLUA SWEET GUM LIRIODENDRONTULLMM A TULiPTREE 1VLAGNOLIA GRANDWWRA SOUTHBRNMAGNOLIA MAYTENUS BOARIA MAYTENTREE PILAUS CANARIENSIS CANARY ISLAND PINE PINUS ELDARICA MONDELLPINE PILAUS HAL.EPENSM ALEPPOPINE: PISTACIA CHINENSIS CHINESE PLSTACHE (MALE ONLY) PITI'OSPORUM RHOMBIFOLMM QUEENSLAND Pl'- MSPORUM PLATANUSACERNOLIA LONDON PLANE's."M PLATANUS RACEMOSA CALIFORNIA SYCA, -ME POYMCARPUS GRACILOR FERN PINE PRUNUS BITRY"ANA FLOW lWG PLUM PRUNUS CALLERYANA CAROLINA LAT AEL' PRUNUS CERASIFERA "ATROPUREA" PURPL&IYA;� PLUM PRUNUS ILICLFOLfA HOLLYLP,AF CHERRY PYRUS CALLERYANA "BRADFORD" BRADFORD PEAR PYRUS KAWAKAMII EVERGREEN PEAR QUERCUS AGRIFOLIA COAST'f.IVEOAK QUERCUSILEX ;' OAK R IANCEA FRI AFRICAN SUMAC SCH MUS TEREBINTHIFOLIUS BRAMIAN PEPPER SOPHORAJAPOdICA IAPANESEPAGODA YJNiVERSTTY/CREST 49 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT TREES (CONTINUED) ti TIPUANA TEPU TIM TREE TRISTANIA CONFERTA BRISBANE BOX ULMUS PARV°ITOLTA (BREA OR DRAKE) EVERGREEN ELM WASHINGTONIAFILIFERA CALIFORNIAFAXPA?.M, WASHINGTONIA ROBUSTA MEXICAN FAN PALM ' ZELKOVA SERRATA SAWLE.AF ZEUKOVA S'jMUBS ABELIA "EDWARD GOUCHER" EDWARD GOUCHER ABELIA ACACIA SPECIES ACACIA AGAPANTHUS AFRICANUS MY-OF-THE-NILE ARCTOSTAPHYLOS SPECIES MANZANITA CEANOTHUS SPECMS CALIFORNIA LILAC CISTUS ,"ECIES ROCKROSE COTONE,, -TER SPELM -S COTONEASTER DIEM BICOLOR FORTNIGUT LILY DODONAFAVISCOSA HOPSEEDBUSH ELAEAGNUSPUNGENS SILVERBERRY " FEIJOA SELLOWIANA PI MAPPLE GUAVA GREVUJFA "NOELLU" NO COMMON R&i HEMEROCALIB SPECMS DAIMLY ILEX SPECIES HOLLY JUNLPERUS SPECIES JUNIPER Ask MAHONIAAQUIFOLIUM "COMPACTA" OREGONGRAPE Alp MIMULUS CARDINALIS MONKEY FLOWER NANDINADOMESTICA "COMPACTA" AEAVFNLYBAMBOO NERIUM OLEANDER OLEANDER OSMANTHUS FRAGRANS SWEEPOLIVE PHOTINIA FRASERI PHOTTNIA PTITOSPORUM TOBIRA TOBIRA PTPTOS°JRUM' OBIRA "VARMGATA" VARIGATED PIPTOSPOP.. UM PLUMFlAGO AURICULATA CAPE PLUM AGO PRUNUS CAROLINIANA CAROLINA LAUREL CHERRY PYRACANTHA SPECIES FIRETHORN RAPHIOLEPIS INDICA PINKINDIA HAWTHORN RHUS OVATA SUGARBUSH - RMES SANGUINEUM PINK WATER CURRANT TECO><fARIA CAPENSIS CAPE HCNEYSUCKLE XYLOSMACONGESTUM XYLOSMA UNIVERSITY/CREST 50 PL kNNED DEEVELOPMEi`Tf TIEDERA SPECIES HYPERICUM CALYCINM JUNIPERUS SPECIES MYOPORIM PARVIFOLIUM NANDINADOMESUCA"HARBOURDWARF' PHYLANODI WRA ENGLISH.IVY AARON'S BEARD JUNIPER NO COMMON NAME DWARFHEAVENLYBAMBOO LIPPIA ROSMARINUSOFFxi NNALIS"PROSTRATM" DWARFROSEMARY TRACHELOSPERMUMJASMINOWES STARJASNUNE TRIFOLIUN FRAGiFERUM STRAWBERRY CLOVER TURF PREmllgEDMDL 90%TALLFUSCUE (10% =' "UCKY BLUE A -34) CAMPSIS RADICANS COMMONTRUMPET CREEPER CISSUS SPECIES NO COMMON NAME CLYMST014ACALLISTEGIOMES VIOIETTRUMPETVINE FISCUSPUMILA CREEPD GFiG; GELSEMIUM SEMPERVIRENS CAROUNAIESSAMINE JASMINUM POLYANTRUM NO COW.ON NAME WNICERA JAPONICA JAPANESE HONEYSUCKLE MACFADYENA UNGULS -CAT! CkTS CLAW T'ARTHENOCLSSUS TRICUSPIDATA BOSfONIVY TECOMARIAA CAPENSIS CAPEHONEYSUCKLE WISTERIA SINENSIS CHEgESE WISTERIA I UNIVERSITY/CRES 51 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT �. ` 1;r n B. Grading Concept General grading of the site will be done according. �i the guidelines establishedby the County of San Bernardino General Plan. The intW- will be to minimize grading within the site. Exhibit 17 shows the,conwplual gradiva plan, including bow some typical section areas maybe graded upon establishment of final lot configuration. A All grading will conform to the latest County standards, Ur :form Building Code and the geotechnical repoit. Slopes between lots could be up to a maximum of 2tY except within publicly maintained landscaped areas, which may exceed this height. Per County standards, rill between the site shall not exceed 3W. Grading concepts are designed to respect the City of Rancho Cuc aalinga grading standards to the extent possible, while meeting the requirements of the County. The cut -fill lines and quantities on the conceptual grading plan reflect the mass grading concept shown. As the tracts are designed the futura grading will more closely resemble the Section AA and Section BB sown on the Conceptual Grading Plan. As these tracts are designed the eaAwork numberswill increase. I I k c i UNIVERSITY/CREST 52 r.. PLANNED DEVELOPMENT i SITE SLOPES as-is SITE SLOPES bt -cs 1.G6 {T aes-t LEA iSQ PROJECT LiUlIT ESURtIOUNDING -1, ZONING aes-a . 1L1LL r •tzi EXHIBIT 18 CONCEPTUAL 'GRADING PLAN SAN BERM "DINU COUNTY N�7M UNIVERSITY l CREST FILANNED DEVELOPMENT SOLACE •FOR BY: FUSCOE Urharstty of Caktorda tNw0itl.A1't VWMUAMS caryn Company DESIGN' rswmR7 Etfwanda KgNand Properties GROUP 53 , :I 4 VII. CONSEk-VATION AND OPEN SPACE A. PRESERVATION OF NATURALRESOURCES 1. The West Vg''syFoothillsPlaw ngAreaiscbamctedzed `yavarietyofnatural resources. The complex hill Ind canyon lanCforms v,:.rch supply the scenic backdrop to the valley floor also pimvide the natural habitat for a ldlife, and the watershed for ground water recharge. Much of the scenic value of the regional p'.anningarea today is attributed to its natural features. In order to preserve, a portion of these foothills, a large area (67+ s acres) has been proposed as Permanent open space (a neture preserve), as disz`ussed in the introduction portion -of this report. The area contains a live stream which is tapped by the CCWD for general domestic water supply purpeses. This natural preserve will come under the ownership of the University of California Reserve System and will either be ' retained for University's research purposes or t ceded to the National Forest Service for minimal recreation and open space use. To maintain the feeling of the natural landscape and to integrate this project into the adjacent communities, attention will be given to the use of landscape matesii is that are native anclor drought tolerant, and which are similar to those found in adjoining communities. ` 2. Mineral Resources The Development area is known to contain aggregate resources but is not in an MRZ zone. There is a proposed sand and gravel operation site located west of the project site. Potential dust impacts can be mitigated.at the source through the implementation of dust c:- ..trol measures outlined in the Fourth Street Rock Crusher EIR (Michael Brandman -Associates, V86). An air quality impact assessment by Michael Brandman Associates is included in the Appendix. 3. Biological Resources i A biological resources survey of the site was conducted by Michael Brandman Associates, Inc. (MBA) in April, 1988. It is included within the Appendix. VIII. SEISMIC HAZARDS AND PUBiLIC SAFETY A. SUMMARY OF SUBSURFACE ENGINEERING GEOLOGY INVESTIGATION: The purpose of the investigation was to determine whedier Any active fault traces traverse the site. A previous study done in 1983 identified presence of subtle and discontinuous aerial photograph lineaments L-2versing the site immediately north of the unpaved extension of 24th Street. This subsurface investigation was intended to address the existence and star: of wtivity of suspe(lzd faulting associated with these lineaments. Appra 'mately 426 feet of trenet was excavated in a north to south direction immediately north of unpaved 24th Street. The trench varied from approximately 10 to 15 feet wide at the surface and 10 to 12 feet deep. The alluvial materials observed in the trench consisted of gravel, sands and silty sands with abundant cobbles and )oulders up to 3 feet in diameter. An analysis of the present stmtig,$phy was done and although continuous bedding across the entire length of stench was not observed .discontinuous overlapping bedding features such as )$p alignments of clasts and sand and gravel lenses viere cbsemed throughout m. ,Gt of the length of the trench. No evidence of faulting was observed in the trench. Based on the results of this subsurface investigation and the results of the previous investigations (Rasmussen, February 10, 1986), no evidence has been found to suggest that an active trace of the fau..ing known to exist: east of the site continue to the southwest or west through the site. Therefor, ground rupture due to surface faulting through the -ite is not expected during the lifetime of the proposed stnictures. An additional geologic study has been recently completed to investigate sub- surface geologic conditions in @lanning Areas E, F, G and H (see Exhibit 4). tresence of an east -west running fault was encountered upon preliminary _ investigations. Trenching studies have been performea along this fault and it is determined that the fault is not an active one. Detailed reports on the above investigation ate enclosed in_ .ppendix. :3. SAFETYFEATURES The probability for ground acceleration at :hr site maybe considered similar to Southern California as a whole. Horizontal accelerations induced by an earthquake may affect structures and/or earth embankments. Experience has shown that wood frame structures, designed in accordance with the Uniform Building Code, tend to resist earthquake effects. In addition, on -site grading will be limited to a maximum 1 1/2:1 ratio (with approval by a soils engineer and the County of San Bernardino), and whi`l conform to County safety standards. ;' RVERSTTYXREST 55 PLANNED DEVELf"?1viENT IX. NOISE Noise impacts are commonly measured using the Community iioise Equivalent Level (CNEL) noise index. CNEL is a method of representing the: average daily anise exposure at a given location. A detailed acmilcal, study has been performed for &c site. The study utilized results of an overall traffic assessment in calculating the traffic noise exposure at noise sensitive receptor situ adjacent to the roadway system ,within and surrounding the development area. The study concludes thai through proper use of sc and attem.,ation systems such as acoustic walls and landscape buffer zones, noise ]eve's in development zones adjacent to main traffic arterials can be Wrought down to aczTtab;e levels. For additional deta::s please refer to a copy of the study attachr3 in i_ w;pendix. sil , AR