HomeMy WebLinkAbout1990/10/10 - Agenda Packet0701 -02 10 -10-90 PG Agenda 1 of 5
0 0
v
5" C�1CaM�
CITY OF
5:
c
RAi1: M CUCAM )IGA
- m
PLANNING CCAIMISSION
y
1977
AGENDA
WED►'ESDAY OCTOBER 10, 1990 7:00 P.M.
RANCHO CUCAMONCA CIVIC CENTER
COUNCIL CHAMBER
10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFCRNIA
I.
Pledge of Allegiance
11.
Rail Call
Commissioner Chitiea Commissioner Mel.rher
Commissioner McNiel Commissioner Tolstoy
III.
Announcements
IV.
Approval of Ninu;tes
September 12, 990
September 26, 1990
V.
Vubiic Hearings
The following items are public hearings in which concerned
individuals may voice their opinion of the related
project. Please wait to be recognized by the Chairman and
address the Commission by stating your name and address -.
All such opinions shall be limited to 5 minutes per
individual for each project. Please sign in after speaking.
A. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND SPECIFIC PLAN 89 -01 -
CONSORTIUM OF ETIWANDA NORTH LAN5FWNERS - A request to
approve a Specific Plan for 5,080 dwelling units, 96
acres of commercial, and related school, park, and open
space uses on 6,754 acres of land generally located
north of 24th Street with portions north of Highland
Avenue, south, of the National Forest Boundary with
portions witKin the National Forest, east of the
extersion of Milliken Avenue, and west of the Fontana
1;4? limit. (Continued from September 26, 1990.)
I
I
i
IN
B. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAPS 14493
THROUGH 14498, 14522 AND 14523, AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP
13128 - REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AND
CARYN DEVELOPMENT = A request for approval of seven
Tentative tract maps and one parcel map for 633 dwelling
units, a 9.3 acre co;vne"1 al site, a 4.56 acre park
site, and a 7.11 acre schm)l site ;on approximately 179
acres of land ' located gi�-.-•.era% ly north of Highland
Avenue, south of a Soutinct California Edison utility
corridor; west of Hanley Avenue with portions west of
the future Day Creek Boulevard, and east of Day Creek
wash. (Continued from September 26, 1990.)
C. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
AMENDMENT E9,t6 - THE JANES GROUP - A request to amend
the Development Districts Map from no zoning designation
to Low Residential (2 -4 dwelling units per acre) fnr
7.94 acres of land located on the southeast ,Trier if
Milliken "Avenue and Vintage Drive -- APH: 225 -2510: z..
Related file: Tentative Tract 14508.
0. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 14508 - THE
JANES GROUP - A residential subdivision and design
review for '26 single family lots on 7.9�- acres of land
located at the southeast corner of Milliken Avenue and
Vintage Drive - APN: 225251 -47. Related file:
Development District Amendment 89 -06.
E. ENVIRONM €NTAL ASSESSMENT" AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT j
90 -02A • CITY OF RANCHO'CUCAMONGA - A request to amend
the Public Facilities- Element of the General Plan, in
conformance with - California's Health and Safety Code
Section 25135.7 (c), to incorprate by reference the Saa
Bernardino County Hazardous Waste Management Plan, as '
approved by the California Department of Health Services
June 15, 1990.
F. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 14486 -
L.P.C. CORPORATION, INC. = A residential subdivision and
design review of 35 condominium units on 3.15 acres of
land in the Medium. Residential District (8 -14 dwelling
units per acre), located at 9874 and 9892 Arrow Highway
just north of Ramona Avenge - APN; 208- 311 -03, 04, 21,
and 24. Associated with this project is Tree Removal
Permit No. 89 -48
VI. Director's Reports
G. CON7DITIONAL USE PERMIT 89 -03 - "SHOWBIZ PIZZA Tl�f - A
six -month review of the existing Chuck, E C eese
restaurant and arcade, located at the southeast corner
of Foothill Boulevard and Hellman Avenue -
APN: 208- 261 -25 and 26.
t �
r
H. TENTATIVE TRACT 14475 - SAHAMA INVESTMENTS - Review of a
proposed Scope of Services for preparation of a
Subsequent Environmental Impact Report for a- subdivision
consisting of 73 single family lots on 113 acres of Taad
located north of Almond, west of Sapphire
APN: 200 - 051 -07, 55, 56 and 57.
I. CONSIDERATION' TO INITIATE AN INDUSTRIAL SPECIFIC PLAN
AMENDMENT TO ALLOW SERVICE STATIONS WITHIN SUBAREA 2
`
J. COMSIDERATION TO INITIATE AN INDUSTRIAL SPECIFIC PLAN
AMENDMENT TO ALLOW AUT MOTIVE AND TRUCK REPAIR - MAJOR
WITHIN SUBAREA 15
K. , DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 89 -33 - CENTRAL SCFi4.4iL DISTRICT - A
'!
courtesy review of a proposed elementavy school on 8.6
acres of land within the Terra Vista Planned Community,
located on the north side of Elm Avenue, approximately
600 feet north*of Church Street - APN: 1077 - 421 -25.
VII. Comission Business
V111. Public C (ments
This is time and place for the general public to address
the Commi.sion. Items to be discussed here are those which
Amok
do not already appear on this agenda.
IX. Ad3ournment"
The Planning Commission has adopted Ada1nistrative
Regulations that set an 11 :00 P.M. adjourn!,ient time. If
items go beyond that time, they shall be heard only with the
consent of the Comm:ssion.
ik
F_y
y
IL
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
BY:
SUEJECT:
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
STAFF REPORT
,J
October 10;-1990
Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
Brad Buller, City Planner
Miki Bratt, Associate Planner
EMiRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND SPECIFIC PLAN 89 -01 - CONSORTIUM OF
ETIWANDA NORTH LANDO9R RS - A request to approve a Specific Plan
for 5,080 dwelling_ units, 9.6 acres of commercial, and related
school, park, anO open space uses on 6,754 acres of land generally
located north of 24th Street with portions north of Highland
Avenue, south of the National Forest Boundary with portions within
the National forest, east of the extension of Milliken Avenue. and
west of the Fontana City limit.
I. BACKGROUND /ANALYSIS: On September 25, 1990, the Planning Commission held a
public hearing on the subject application and continued said item to the
October 10, 1990 meeting of the Planning Comm, (see attached Staff
Report dated September 26, 1990, Exhibit 'AA ").
The purpose of the continuance was to enable the Planning Commission to
review Vie letter of September 26, 1990, from Mr. Joseph N. Dilorio on the
subject application (see Exhibit "BB ").
On October 2, 1990, Mr. Larry McNiel and Mr. Peter Tolstoy met in their
capacity as the Etiwanda North sub - committee of the Planning Commission and
directed staff to prepare a response to the subject letter, including the
documentation requested by the Planning Commission. Staff is preparing the
response and the requested documentation and will present the
aforementioned material orally at the Planning Commission meeting. -
11. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends adoption of the attached Resolution
Recommending Denial, without prejudice, of the subject application.
Resp lly s ated,
Brad er,f
City PYYanner
BB :MB /jfs
Attachments: Exhibit "AA" - September 26, 1990 Planning Cormission Staff Report
Exhibit "BB" - Letter from Joseph Diiorio
Resolution Recommending Denial
-- - ITEM A
FROM: Brad Buller, City 'Planner
BY: Miki Ovatt, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND SPECIFIC PLAN 69 -01
CONSORTIUtR OF
--ET-1WANDA NORTH LANDOVNERS - A request to
approve a Specific Plan for 5,080 dwelling units,
9.E acres of commercial, and related school, park, and
open space uses on 6,754 acres of land generally located
north of 24th Street with portions north of Highland
Avenue, south of the National Forest Boundary with
portions within the National Forest, east of the extension
of Millsken Avenue, and west of the Fontana City limit.
I. ABSTRACT: Although the City Council, the Planning Commission, the
Parks Commission, and staff have invested a huge effort to process
the Consortium's Etiwanda North Specific Plan, key elements of the
plan, are stilt missing or incomplete. Also, since February 1990,
there has been no response by the Consortium to City efforts to
continue processing the Specific Plan. For the above and other
reasons, staff requests that the Planning Commission recommend to
the City Council denial without prejudice of the subject
application:
II. BACKGROUND /ANALYSIS: Much Planning Commission, Trails Committee,
Parks Commission, City Council, and staff tine has been invested
on our Sphere of Influence and the Etiwanda North Specific Plan.
(See attached Exhibit "A", Vicinity Map.)
Planning Commission Workshops. Eleven Planning Commission
workshops on the Consortium's Specific Plan were held between
September 22, '1988 and September 7, 1989. The primary focus of
the workshops was design, including architectural styles,
neighborhood design concepts, and community design concepts.
These elements of the Specific Plan were revised at the beginning
of the Specific Plan process to respond to concerns of the
Planning Commission. These elements were to be reviewed again in .
the context of review of the entire Specific Plan.
However, key elements needed to be addre °ced before the Specific
Plan could be considered complete and reviewed as -a comprehensive
plan. Elements of concern included grading issues, infrastructure
4¢2—
T 'AA"
Ll
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
SP 89 -01 - CONSORTIUM
SEPTE14BER 25, 1990
Page 2
phasing and financing, parks, open space, trails, equestrian uses,
fire management, and wildlife resources management. Three ..
Planning Commission workshops were devoted to the Hillside '
Development Ordinance and subsequently; in January, 1990, the
Ordinance was adopted. The last Planning Commission workshop was
a joint meeting with the Park and Recreation Commission to discuss
park issues, a potential equestrian center, and trails.
Park and Recreation Commission Revidig. The Park and Recreation
Commission also discussed Etiwanda North park concept plans at
five of their regular meetings. In September the Park and
Recreation Commission requested major revisions to the Etiwanda
North Park Plan. As of this date, no revisions to the park plans
have been submitted to the City.
Further, the Flood Control District subsequently notified the City
that not only did they not want park uses indicated for Flood
Control Lands, but that the site proposed for a community
equestrian center, in the vicinity of 24th street and Etiwanda
Creek Channel, was not available for that use since it was
committed fo!° use as a wildlife habitat preservation and
mitigation area.
City Council Review. Tate City Council has addressed related
issues within the Specific Plan area, ireluding a Fire CFD and a
General CFO which includes Drainage Facilities and P,lice
Services.
Further, on May 2 and November 15, 1959, and February 7, 2990, the
City Council discussed and adopted policy on annexation as it
related to the Etiwanda North Specific Plan. The main element of
the policy is that City Standards must be applied to development
in the Sphere of Influence area.
At the March and April 1990 meetings of the Consortium of
Landowners, staff attended and indicated that City policy was
firmly in support of City standards and that there was a conflict
between City standards and the density proposed by the Consortium.
In June 2990, at the request of the Consortium, senior staff
attended the monthly meeting of the Consortium and explained that
the City Council policy to uphold City standards is in Effect and
reaffirmed that conflict does, exist between City standards and
density in the Specific Plan area.
Consortium's Draft Etiwanda North Specific Plan. The Planning
Commission bas received severe preliminary versions of the draft
Specific Plan. The last distribution was of the June 23, 1989,
draft. Staff reviewed the June, 23, 1959, draft and advised the
applicant that it was incomplete and that revisions would be
required. Grading standards was a key issue which was
PLANNING CGkMISS10N STAFF REPORT
SP 89 -01 - CONSORTIUM
SEPTEMBER 26, 1990
Page 3
LJ
subsequently addressed by adoption of the Hillside Development
Ordinance, Various other development standards continue to be an
important issue as well. Also, the park and open space sections
required substantial review and revision..
On February 14, 1990, the applicant submitted a screen check draft
Specific Plan for staff review. (A copy is included in the
Commission's agenda packet.) The applicant stated that one of the
changes in the plan was to decreate lot sizes by 10 percent
throughout the Specific Plan area in order to meet the City
standard of a 60 foot right -of -way for local streets.
The effect of that ch .,ange would have been to further increase the
density permitted in the Specific Plan area and reduce lot sizes
below the 5,500 square foot minimum then proposed for the
University tracts. Staff responded, stating that "substantial
changes" in development standards are proposed which will require
detailed staff review, as well as policy direction from the
Planning Commission and the City Council. As noted above, an
Etiwanda North sub- committee of the City Council was focTned and
the Council as a whole directed staff to finaly uphold City
standards of development.
Environmental Tmoact Report. An EIR must be prepared for the
Etiwanda North Specific Plan and preparation began in February
1989. In February 1990 the Etiwanda North EIR consultant notified
the City that additional services would be needed to evaluate
revisions to the Traffic Study and Resource Management Plan.
Staff evaluated the consultant's proposal and discussed it with
the applicant. In April 1990 staff requested that the additional
EIR services be funded by the applicant. No response to that
request has been received from the applicant.
Specific Plan Status. in March :990 staff forwarded a project
status report to the applicant indicating major items which were -
still incomplete. In April 1990 staff again forwarded a project
status report. In May 1990 the most recent project status report
was prepared and forwarded to the applicant. (See Exhibit "B",
letter dated May 21, 1990, and Specific Plan Status Report.) Each
report indicates that although progress had been made, key
elements of the Specific Plan were still missing or incomplete.
County Processing. In negotiating to process the Consortium's _
applications in the City, staff made it clear that processing of
applications in the County would be opposed.
At their April 1990 monthly meeting, Consortium members reviewed
the conflict between City standards and the Consortium's density
demands and decided to process development 'in the County. In
April 1990 the University Crest project was reactivated in the
4 '
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
ST, "F REPORT
DATE: October 10,:5990
TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: 3rad Buller, City Planner
BY: Miki Bratt, Associate Planner
,t
SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AF:D SPECIFIC PLAN 89 -01 - CONSORTIUM OF
ETIWAND NORTH LANDOWNERS - A request to approve a Specific Plan
for 5,080 dwe ling units, 9.6 acres of commercial, and related
school, park, and open space uses on 6,754 acres of land generally
located north of 24th Street with portions north of Highland
Avenue, south of the Naticiai Forest Boundary with portion;. within
the National Forest, east of the extension of Milliken Avenue, and
west of the Fontana City limit.
i. BACKGROUND /ANALYSIS: On September 26, 1990, thy: ;lanning Commission held a
public hearing on the subject application and continued said item to the
October 10, 1990 meeting of the Planning Commission (see attached Staff
Report dated September 26, 1990, Eybibit "AA ").
The purpose of the continuance was to enable the Planning Commission to
re.iew the letter of September 26, 1990, from Mr. Joseph N. Dflori'o on the
subject application (see Exhibit "BB ").
On October 2, 1990, Mr. Larry McNiel and Mr. Peter Tolstoy met in their
capacity as the Etiwanda North sub - committee of the Planning Commission and
directed staff to prepare a rosponse to the subject letter, including the
documentation requested by the Planning Commission. Staff is preparing the
response and the requested documentation and will present the
aforementioned material orally at the Planning Commission meeting.
II. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends adoptinn of the attached Resolution.
Recommending Denial, without prejudice, of the subject application.
Res Illy s tted,
Brad er
Ci�v P anner
BB :M8!jfs
Attachments: Exhibit "AA" - September 26, 1990 Planning Commission Staff Report
Exhibit "08" - Letter from ?oseph Dilorio
resol ut; on Recommending Dp:% al
ITEM A
CITY OF RAN17HO CUCAMONGA
S°IAFF REPORT
DATE: September 26, 1990
TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner
BY: Miki Bratt, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND SPECIFIC PLAN 89 -01 -
CONSORTIUM OF ETIWAND NORTH LANDOWNERS - A request to
approve a Specific Plan for 5,080 dwelling units,
9.6 acres of commercial, and related school, park, and
open space uses on 6,754 acres of land generally located .
north of 24th Street with portions north of Highland.
Avenue, south of the National Forest Boundary with
portions within the National Forest, east of the extension
of Milliken Avenue, aad west of the Fontana City limit.
I. ABSTRACT: Although the City Council, the Planning Commission, the
Parks Commission, and staff have invested a huge effort to process
the Consortium's E;tiwanda North Specific: Plan, key elements of the
plan are still missing or incomplete. Also, A nce February 1990,
there has been no response by the Consortium to City efforts to
continue processing the Specific Plan. For the above aad other
reasons, staff requests that the Planning Commission recommend to
the City Council denial without or-,'udice of the subject
application.
II. BACKGROUND /ANALYSIS: Much Planning Commission, Trails Committee,
Parks Commission, City Council, and staff time has been invested
on our Sphere of Influence and the Etiwanda North Specific Plan.
(See attached Exhibit "A ", Vicinity Map.) _
Planning Commission Workshops. Eleven Planning Commission
workshops on the Consortium's Specific Plan were held between
September 22, 1988 and September 7, 1989. The primary focus of
the workshops was design, including architectural styles,
neighborheod design concepts, and community design concepts.
These elements of the Specific Plan were revised at the beginning .
of the Specific Plan process to respond to concerns of the
Planning Commission. These elements were to be reviewed again in _
the context of review of the entire Specific Plan.
However, key elements needed to be addressed before the Specific
Plan could be considered complete and reviewed as a comprehensive
plan. Elements of concern included gradir, issues, infrastr <scture
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF nEPIRT
SP 89 -01 - CONSORTIUM
SEPTEMBER 126, 1990
Page 4
ASk
County. In June 1990 the Consortium filed an application for an N
Etiwanda North Specific Plan in the County of approximately 5,499
acres.
The smaller area Specific Plan omits Landmark's Oak Summit
application filed in the County in November 1989 for a private .
golf course and 620 units on 761 acres of land. The County
application also omits ail projects in the Etiwanda North area
which have already been annexed inifo the City. (See attached
Exhibit "C" Status Report for Sphere Projects, September 12,
1990.)
Applicant Intentions. On May 21, 1990, a letter was sent to the
applicant noting that applications had aeon r,' led in the County
and asking whether they intended to continae processing City
applications. (See Exhibit "B ", letter dated May 21, 1990.) No
response has been received regarding City processing.
III. SUMMARY: As of this oate, the applicant has filed and is
processing applications in the County which duplicate applications
which have been filed in the City. The City applications have
been inactive since February 1990. lwa applicant • h.s not
responded to the April 1990 request for additionai services and
funds for completion of tht EIR. Also, tie applicant has not
responded to the May 21, 1990, letter stating whether they do, or
do not, wish to process in the City. On the key issue of density,
the applicant has stated that the Consortium will not negotiate.
Finally, the applicant has riot responded to requests to revise
elements of the Specific Plan in favor of City standards.
IV. CONCLUSION: Based on the above information, staff recommends
approval of the attached Resolution recommending to the City
Council denial without prejudice of the subject application.
Respectfully submitted,
�P
Brad Bul er
City Planner
BB :MB :ml g
Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Vicinity Map
Exhibit "B" - Letter of May 21, 1990.and attached
Specific Plan Status 'Report, May 1990
Exhibit "C" - Status Report for Sphere Project,
September 5, 1990
Reseluticn of Denial
/1-
LEGEND
►111191411
I SPECIFIC PLAN 90-01 EIIWANDA NORTH tee° ®� Specifc Plan �9 -Ol
INCLIMM AREAS 2 -6 & A - B
2 UNrAM YOFCALWORNIAIICARYN
3 LANDMARKDEVLPMT.CO.
4 CHENO SAN SEVAINE
3 CEIANG
6 CHENO HILLSIDE
COMPLb`M ANNEXATIONS: A - CARYN, D - WATT INLAND.
C - AMMDiSON, D - WATT Rd-AND EM PIRRE. & 2 - BLAMMAN1HOMSTEADI
IILMiNOTON
Emma CITY SPIRE OF INFLUENCE
CITY OF _= UCAMONGA
P � ION 1�
�.J
11
�1
L�J
Tl'EM: ENSP 89.01
TrrLE: ViCIIVTW MAP u
EXHmrr. "A" SCALE: NONE
26 SEPT 90
CI'T'Y OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA rmt Office Box eom; Rancho Cucamonga, California 91729; (7114) 999.1831
I
May 21, 1990
Mr. Joe DiIorio
Etiwanda North Landowners Consortium
P.U. Box 216
South Laguna, CA 9267744-16
SUBJECT: ETIWANDA NORTH SPECIFIC PLAN 89 -01; ANNEXATION 89 -01;
ANNEXATION 89 -02, (UNIVERSITY TRACTS TT 14492, 14494, 14495,
14522, 14523, ETC.) AND CREST TRACTS
Dear Mr. Oilorio:
The County has advised us that a Specific Plan application for a portion
of the Etiwanda North area was submitted is the County on May 9, 1990
and that the University Grest application has been activated in the
County. Therefore, please advise us whether you wish to continue
processing the above applications in the City. A status update for
these projects is attached.
On May 2, 1990, the City Council affirmed that applications in the
Sphere of Interest must be consistent with the Rancho Cucamonga General
Plan and the Development Standards. Therefore, the Specific Plan and
Tract Maps submitted to the City must be revised to be consistent with
that direction.
It should be noted that the County General Plan requires that Planning -
in the Rancho CucaW. nga Sphere of Influence must be consistent with
County General Plan Policy LU-9 which indicates that City Standards be
used in Sphere areas where higher than County Standards.
The City Council has directed staff to process any and all applications
in the City's Sphere of influence to be consistent with the City General
Plan and City.Development Code. Therefore, are invite the Consortium to
either modify the Etiwanda North Specific Plan to be consistent with
this Council directioa or withdraw your application. Please tat us knew
your intentions as soon as possible.
EXH[T °B"
uaw.
William 1. Aksander t; Charles,[. Buquct 11 Onf A..
Drums L. Stout Deborah N, Broom Par..ela 1. Wright Pack Lam
Jae D1.Ioria
Applications
May 21, 1490
Page 2
If you have any questions please call Larry Henderson or myself -tt
(714) 989.1863.
sinesl* v.
Cit3rnne'e '-'
88- LH :mlg
Attachment: Etiwanda North Project Status Update
cc: Jan Mkels
Jack Lang, City pianager
Rick Gomez, Community Dev. Director
Sharon Hightower
John McMains
l�J
ETIWANDA NORTH PROJECT STATUS UPDATE MAY 16, 1990 1
SPECIFIC PLAN. The application for Specific Plan is still incomplete.
Specific Plan Consistency with the City General Plan, The
application as submitted by the Consortium is inc cause a
project phasing plan has not been completed and because an
application to ameh the General Plan has not teen received.
In accordance with State law, a Specific Plan must be consistent
with the City General Plan. 3ecause to date, ro application for
General Plan Amendment has been rer.aived from the Consortium, the
City Council has directed staff to revise the Specific Plan to be
consistent with the City General Plan and to proceed with the pre
zon tig of the Specific Plan area.
TRACT MAPS. The applications for Tract baps are still incomplete.
Tract Mep Consistency with ,he City General Plan. Tract Map
submittals and review must proceed on the basis if consistency with
the City General Plan and the City Development Code.
University and Crest Proiects. Because large areas of the
University and Crest Tracts are desinwated as open space in the
City's General Plan, Tract Map review cannot proceed until 3n
application for an amendment to the General Plan is received. As
stated in pre - application meetings prior to the Specific Plan
application in February 1989, City staff is receptive to a General
Plan Amendment for the University of California property because of
urbanization of the surrounding land uses, the residential
designation on the County General Plan Land Use Map, and the
University's proposal to transfer all development rights off a 675
acre property on the upper Day Creek Watershed and dedicate it as
permanent open space. This is consistent with the City policy of_
no'development above the National Forest boundary.
Potential Land Use Consistency of the University Property. A
change from open Space to residential use designation of the
University property would be consistent with surrounding land
uses. The adjacent City Standard is Low density, 2 -4 dwelling
units per acre, and Very Loge density, less than two dwelling unit,,
per acre. The County Standard :s generally resi�,n0 al, and also
varies from south to north from "up to 3 dwelling units ;,r acre"
to "up to 2 dwelling units per acre."
Land use plans submitted to the County artr" to the City indicate
several tracts as residential use in the ensity range of 4.8
dwelling units per acre.- This would not be consistent with tae
surrounding land uses and a General Plan Amendment for this
intensity of use Could not b+ s4p,orted by the City.
ETIWANDA NORTH P70JECT STATUS
Page 2
Project. A portion of the Crest project is esignate" as Vopen
space in the f;ify General Plan. The existing County designation is
^.sidentia,, "up to 2 dnell Is units per acre." The City
designa:ion would be Very Low density, up to 2 dwelling units per
acre.
Consistency with the Rancho Cucamonga Development Code, The
following is a review of general lot size and development standards
of the City and comparison with County Standards for the University
and Crest Tracts:
A, Lot Size Standard for University Praoerty. County Development
standards Section 88.0520 and City Development Standards
(Section 17..14.020D) provide that a Specific Plan /Planned
Community "ma," differ from general Development Standards.
Howaver, the underlying' standards and compatibility with
adjacent development for the zone provide a reference for
evaluation of proposals.
The underlying City Standard in the Low range requires a
7,200 square foot minimum lot size and 8,000 square foot
average tot size for development on a slope of less than 8't.
For slopes greater than 3S, the City Hillside Development AMk
Ordinance density formula must be applied. Also, the City's IF
method of calculating density is on the gross acreage after
the deduction for parks, arterial, secondary and collector
streets. The underlying County Standard for the blest Valley
area is 7,200 square foot minimum lot size.
B. Lot Size Standards for a Portion of the University Tract. The
underlying City Standard in the Very Low Oensitg designation
requires a minimum lot size of 20,000 square feet and an
average lot size of 22,000 square feet. The underlying County-
Standard is for a minimum lot site of 7,260 square feet.
C. Density Bonus Standard. Excellence in design is the base City
Standard for development, therefore, the City does not offer a
dansity bonus for ooEd design. The County offers a'density
bonus of up to 10S'oased on public benefit above the minimum
standard for development.
ANNEXATION. The applications for arnexation are deemed complete on the
basis of complet -on of the City's Fiscal Impact Study. The Council has -
directed staff to proceed with Annexation actions.
Intent to Annex. The City Council approved Resolutions of Intent
to Annex territary at the May, 15, 1990 meeting of the City
Council. -The purpose of adopting these resolutions is to keep the
annexation process on track so that the application for Specific
Plan and Tract review can be processed in the shortest amount of
time consistent with the complexity of the applications.
=A*
Cify of Rancho CucaJl miga
DAZE: September 12. 1990
40 TO: Distribution List SUBJECT: Si
FROM Advanced Plann..Ang
Yttus Report for Sphere Projects
Joe Schultz
trrojxt
A Hcaat
Acres
Il1Ts
Grow
Dendty
Lot elm
Av e/
tas Lead Planner
8tat
Ingrid Blair
Name
Application activated In County.
Miam.
Final Development Plan. Master
of
City Council adopted Resolution of
11
Ten%&Ne and Tenative -Tract Maps Mad
Unty ersity
California/
`126
1293
Intent to Annex on 5/ 16: applicatlior
6.000
in County: scheduled for City CC 9/5.
f- 'ar5'n
of Intent
City PC 9/12. Co. PC 10/11. EIRio be
EnWIANDA
Resolution to prepare Specific
NORTH
City
6754
5080
not
V8rle8
Plan approved 6/20; Specific plan
SPECIFIC
avail,
pir aMa
contract awarded 7/ 18; draft due 9114
PLAN AREA
10.580
Landmark submitted County
Land
EIR aevlatons in progrew screen check
620
0.8
sq ft avg.
application for Planned Dev+..lopmrnt
& General plan Amendment. Find Dev.
Oak
Deevlpmt.
draft due 8/31.
10.000
Plan/Tractmap® /Parcel maps w9lbe
Summit
Co,
Eiendersc -%/ Blatt
El
0 1 _.> Included In Edwanda Distribution:
North Specific Plan I I
Fw0WMkodAMWrAM
s.m. aJt,re�etle
R/letterl >aa map key
Citycounca RlckGomez
Joe Schultz
Super. Jon Mikela Brad Bulky
Karen Emery
PlanriingCommission Otto Kroutil
Shintu Bose
County Referral 88 - 05
('M
F
Jerry Fuhvoodd //Bev Nissen
Ingrid Blair
Application activated In County.
University
Final Development Plan. Master
of
Ten%&Ne and Tenative -Tract Maps Mad
Unty ersity
California/
`126
1293
3.1
6.000
in County: scheduled for City CC 9/5.
f- 'ar5'n
sq ft min.
City PC 9/12. Co. PC 10/11. EIRio be
t'li St
amended. City opposes County
processing. ISbu glel Bratt
County Referral 89 - 03
13e1
Landmark
10.580
Landmark submitted County
Land
761
620
0.8
sq ft avg.
application for Planned Dev+..lopmrnt
& General plan Amendment. Find Dev.
Oak
Deevlpmt.
10.000
Plan/Tractmap® /Parcel maps w9lbe
Summit
Co,
sq ft min.
continued to OcL DRC. EIRwiu be
required. 1Fabkl Blatt
County Referral 90 - 02
14a1
Ettwanda
Pre - application resubmitted to
Heights
County for General Plan Amerdment
D,,.co..P./
172
450
2.65
7.000
from Flood- Control to Reskkn'ial.
San
Cb.'ng
ft
City opposes General Plan Amendment
S8vaine
County staff does not support E[liwill
be zegr'red.
[Stafford] Blatt
County Referral 90 - 03
[5°1
Pre- apnllcation submitted to
County GP Amendment. s to
Chang
11.76
40
4.35
101000
RES City Plan
No
Sq ft min.
Amendment County staffidoes not
Title
support ElRwM be requirccc.
IStasordl Brag
I6 "1
plwanda
County Referral 90.07
gZ ='ghts
Yfi
128
not
sot
Pte- applkxtion. City comments wiSl be
No
rren. Corp. /
avail.
2vaiJ.
fore arded to the County.
Title
C
Bract
County Referral %-W
171
5500
2875
not
panes
Same as application in City. EXCEPT.
Consortium
wag.
per area
does not Include Landmark g projects
annexed. Mft Britt
TMA S for Projects
1530.8
2531
1.76
��"��
��
99 7uy��py P 1
.
0 1 _.> Included In Edwanda Distribution:
North Specific Plan I I
Fw0WMkodAMWrAM
s.m. aJt,re�etle
R/letterl >aa map key
Citycounca RlckGomez
Joe Schultz
Super. Jon Mikela Brad Bulky
Karen Emery
PlanriingCommission Otto Kroutil
Shintu Bose
Jack Lam Dan Coleman
Betty Miller
Jerry Fuhvoodd //Bev Nissen
Ingrid Blair
Bruoe Bucldngbam
(County StaQ1
AcrTenn /wha r m..290
EXHIBIT °C'
City of Rancho Cucamwrlga
DATE: September 12,199D
sine 9tlitus Report for Sphere Projects
(continued)
Corrrpteted Annexations
( *!letter) =y map key
Acrarmr /.ra caucsYo
EM
rName
Applicant
Acres
Y Vo
Gross
Lot D/
8tataa / LSMA MOner
vil
LAF'CO CerUL=tion
Catyn/
January30. 1989
Etiwanda
Stundas:i
303
546
2.0
H%blands
Pacific
(13564/13565)
et, al.
Nissen
L.AMOCerMication
�)
September2l. IM
Track
Lind tt
96
252
2.6
1352?
Nissen
ror
LOCOCerdflcation
anuary 30.1989
Ahmanson
Tract
53
131
2.25
14139
Nfaaeni
mr
L UCC;Certlacation
November14,1989
watt
Tract
Inland
53
110
2.26
13812
Empire
Grahn
LAMOCerulleation
iEr
Blackman/
January 5,1990
Tract
Homestead/
25
?U
3.12
-
13835
Nissen
Annexed
( *!letter) =y map key
Acrarmr /.ra caucsYo
EM
e :.ter, ar.:T:r.•.!;� i.�.,, `.� �........ ra7 3 i VW •i!. !nelil
!� . . ......... ................. ..........
'BPHBEaE.4 LllEtl`
WIL 13
sum
0
lw SAM tYalMAS ®aM� /�tt1M�9 `� - --
LEGEND
OAaiN#w 1 SPECIFIC PLAN 90-01 EnWANDA NORTH
=> 24MUDES AREAS 2 - 6 & A - E
2 UNIVERSITYOPCALIFORNiMCARYN
3 LANDMARKDEVLPMT.CO.
4 Ciir'NG SAN SEVAINE
5 CHANG
6 CHENG HILLSIDE
COMPI EM ANNEXATIONS: A = CARYN, B = WATT INLAND,
C = AHMANSON, D = WATT INLAND EMPIRE, !'A E = BLACK MlAN(HO;VM.STEAD/
REMINGTON
EXISTING CITY SPHERE OF INWJENCE
TIBM: STATUS FOR SPHERE
MY ®F C ONGA TM.E: VICIrM MAP
p 13 tON� f
xmrr: "A" SCALE: NONE
N
i. . *:It
The Caf
Poet Offrce Box 9216. Flo, L SUM CA 92677 -0216
Ofike (714) 499.692.4 TAX (714) 499 -5173 �
September 25, 1990
Chairman McNeil and Members
of the Planning Commission
City of Rancho Cucamonga
P. 0. Box 807
Rancho Cucamonga, California, 91?29
Re: Staff Report for Environmental Assessment
and Specific Plan 89 -01'
Staff Report for EnvircA mental Assessement and
Tentative Tracts 14493 through 14498, 14522,
1,4523 and Tentative Parcel Map 13128
Dear Chairman McNeil:
we have reviewed the Staff Report prepared for the September 26,
1990 meeting of the Planning Commission, City of Rancho Cucamonga.
We believe the Report is mmtsleaaing in the following eight respectsx
ET1WAND NORTH
1. Parks and Recreation Commission Review: Staff says we didn't
make major revisions requested in September, 1989, but the Etiwanda
North Parks Analysis, including park plans, grading plans and asso-
ciated costs, was submitted to Joe Schultz on February 7, 1990, and
additional correspondence occurred throughout Marche 1990. Staff
says the Plood Control District says the equestrian center site isn't
available, but Caryn owns the site (10 acres).
2. City: Council Review: it is untrue that strict adherence to
City ftandards was the "main element" of the annexation policy dis-
cussei by the Council in May and Novembei, 1989. Additional state -
utahts were made in support of a Specific Plan setting its own stan-
dards,by Mayor Stout at the meeting with Supervisor Mikels on May 22,
1990.
3. Consortium's Draft Etiwanda North Specific Plan: In direct
opposition to Staff's Report, the February 14, 1990 draft of the
Etiwanda North Specific Plan did not propose any increase in density
by the addition of dwelling units. Staff continues to misuse the
City's definition of density. The "detailed Staff review" promised
to the Consortium in March has yet to be done. Again, the Council
did not direct "Staff to firmly uphold City standards of developmengft
if it"Tiad, Mayor Stout's statement in May would have been in confli
,4—//7/ EXt IT *BW
Chairman McNeil & Members of the Planning Commission
Staff Rc,ports for Environmental Assessment & ;specific Plan 89 -01
Staff Report for Environmental Assessment and Tentative Tracts
14493 through 14498, 14522, 14523 and Tentative Parcel Map 13128
September 25, 1990 Page Two
' v
4. Environmental Impact Report: Staff.says we didn't respond to
the request for additional funds for the EIR consultant. We did
respond. we said both we and the consultants were surprised that
such extensive additional work was suddenly required when it appeared
the EIR was ready for circulation. By that time, the EIR had taken
twice as long and cost three times as puch as Staff's original estimate.
S. Specific Plan Status: Detailed comments derived from City
Staff's analysis of changes in development standards as well as
other revisions made in the February 14, 1990 draft Etiwanda Borth
Specific Plan have not been received to date as implied in the
April 3, 3990 Etiwanda North Project Status letter. The politically
based.letter of May 21, 1990 referred to by Staff was not written
until after the City had beta informed we were transforrinSI pro-
cessing do the County.
6. County Processing: Processing of the Plan in the County was
initiated to prod,,-,e a better Plan in a more respectful and coopera-
tive atmosphere. Staff tries to maintain we switched because of a
"conflict between the City's +standards and the Consortium's density
AOL demands ". That statement is untrue.
1. Applicant Intentions: Staff would give the impression we have
not responded to discussions of City processing. To date, just in
the past month or two, I've met with the City Council, its subcom-
mittee and Stafg, the Planning Commissicn (three times), 3rad and
Rick (several times by phone; once in person) and the Mayor. With
preparation time, I probably have spent more than 50 hours "respond,ng"
8. Summary: Staff tries to maintain that density is a "key issue ".
it shouldn't be. The Consortium expects nothing more than to.receive
densities allowed by the County's General Plan and implicit in -the
City's General Plan. Over..a11, those densities axe lower than any other
area in the City. Staff says we haven't responded to requests (which
we believe were demands) to change the Specific Plan to reflect City
standards. we have done this wherever we thought it was not a detri-
ment to the quality of the Plan or the long term interests of the
City. Some of Staff's demands are not in the beat interests of the
Plan or the City, and we will not submit to those demands.
Regarding the Resolution you are being asked to approve, I believe
Findings 3(a) and 4 are illogical and legally inappropriate. A
Specific Plan cannot be "not consistent with the General Plan" if
the General Plan 'Mows for specific plans, which ours does. That
"environmental studies have not been completed, therefore the appli
ca.ion is not in compliance with CEQA" is a Catch 22. How can anyone
determine whether an application is in compliance with CEQA until the
envirormental studies are complete?
Chairman McNeil & Members of the planning Commission
Staff Report for �,nvironmental Assessment & Specific Plan 89 -01
Staff Report for Environmental Assessment and Tentative Tract
14493 through 14498, 14522, 14523 and Tentative Parcel Map Three
September 25, 1990 PAgG fibres'
in closing. �vhile we do not necessarily object to these resolutions,
we do seek further clarification with respect to City policy and
procedures as to why these actions are required. The City is invited
to stay current with our processing efforts and participate in the
County process at the appropriate time. We look forward to hearing
from you and continuing to work towards a mutual uudarstanaiag of
all concerns.
Yours truly,
oseph U. Dixorio
President
cc. SL1vsrvasor ion ASikela
DW. Tim .Tohnson
Ms. Valerie Piimer
' Mayor Stout 4 City council Metabers
Mr. Rick Gomez.
Mr. Brad Bull'es
Mr. J•. Roger ;5amuesen'
Mr• Fete Daaasrmond
l
I
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION _OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING DENIAL,
WITHOUT PREJUDICE, OF SPECIFIC PLAN 89 -01, GENERALLY
LOCATED NORTH OF 24TH STREET WITH PORTIONS NORTH OF
HIGHLAND AVENUE, SOUTH OF THE NATIONAL FOREST BOUNDARY'
WITH PORTIONS WITHIN THE NATIONAL FOREST, EAST OF THE
EXTENSION OF MILLIK,EN AVENUE, AND WEST OF THE FONTANA
CITY LIMIT.
F
A. Recitals.
( The Consortium of Etiwanda North Landowners has. filed an
applicai ?rn as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this
Resolution, the subject Specific Plan.is referred to as "the application."
(ii) On the 26th day of Septemtrer, and continued to the 10th day of
October 1990, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga
conducted duly noticed public hearings on the application and concluded said
hearings on that date.
(iii) All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution
Aah have occurred.
IV B. Resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the
Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as fol'iws:
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 m _ this Commission
during the above - referenced public hearings on September 26 and October 10,
1990, including written and oral staff reports, together with public
testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows:
(a) The property to the north, south, east, and 'west of the
subject site is undeveloped.
3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission
during the above- referenced public hearings and upon the specific findings of
facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and
concludes as follows:
(a) The Specific Plan is not consistent with the General Plan
and Development Coda.
X-17
I
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
SP 89 -01 - CONSORTIUM
October 10, 1990
Page 2
4. Environmental series have not been completed, therefore, the
application is not in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act
of 1970.
5. Based upon the findings and coi:ciusions set forth in paragraphs
1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby recommends denial without
prejudice of the application.
t
6. The Secretary to this Commission sh;,11 certify to the adoption
of this Resolution.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 10TH DAY OF OCTOBER 1990.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY:
Lary, y T-. McKie , Chairman
ATTEST:
Brad Buller, Secretary
I, Brad Buller, Secretary of the P1anr'ng Commission of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the 'oregoing- Resolution was duly and
regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the
City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held
on the 10th day of October 1990, by the following vote -to -wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
f4 /9
I
STAFF ANALYSIS AND DOCUMENTATION 4:
LETTER OF SEPTEMBER 25, 1990 FROM MR. DIIORIO TO CHAIRMAN MCNIEL
RE. SPECIFIC PLAN 89 -01 AND RELATED MAPS
The following analysis and documentation follows the numbered item
format of the subject letter and includes the number plus the heading
for the item. Fallowing the heading is staff's analysis with
documentation attached in the form of numbered exhibits or referenced.
The subject letter is included in your staff report.
1. "Park and Recreation Review:"
Parks, trails, and open space have been presentee by the
applicant as having high potential in the Etiwanda North
planning area. Planning Commission, Parks Commission,
Trails Committee, and staff have reviewed and commented
on a number of plans since discussion of the Etiwanda
North Specific Plan began in 1988.
From the first discussions, staff has emphasized that
the City's General Plan policy requires that in
undeveloped areas such as Etiwanda North, park sites be
dedicated and developed according to City specification
as a condition of approval of development..
A number of concept plans have been reviewed, including
the February 1990 Etiwanda North Park Amlysis prepared
by Land Plan Design Group. Parks staff indicates that
all the submittals, including the February 1990
submittal, have been substantially identical and were
identical to the sites reviewed by the Parks Commission
and the Planning Commission on September 7, 1989.
Therefore, the February 1990 submittal was not
responsive to the commends previously forwarded to ttt
app'•'cant by the Parks Commission. Staff met with the
applicant's consultant on February 26, 1990, to discuss
the reasons why staff would be recomm €riding denial of
all park sites in the plan with the possible exception
of the Southern California Edison surplus land site if
it could be obtained. Staff recommendations were
forwarded to the Parks Commission for their meeting of
March 8, 1990, however, because the applicant did not
appear, the item was continued. (See Etiwanda North
Development Park Analysis Log, 'Exhibit "A -1 ", Staff
Report to the Parks Commission, March 8, 1990,
LETTER OF SEPTEMBER 25, 1990
RE: SPECIFIC PLAN 89 -01
Page 2
Exhibit "A -2 ", Etiwanda Worth Open Space Parks and ±
Trails Plan, Exhibit "A -311, and Reference Community
Services Project files.)
In the subject application unencumbered property which
the applicants own has not been identified for school
and park use. Most of the park and school sites Have
been located on SBCFCO, Southern California Edison, Los
Angeles Department of Water and Power, or Metropolitan
Water District land or easements. Most of these sites
can be landscaped in a limited way, but are constrained
from construction of permanent facilities.
Other site are encumbered by seismic faults, drainage
easements, slope condition, or other utility
easements. City Parks policy is to not construct
permanent facilities on such easements because of the
high probability 1�f loss or replacement costs.
It should be note. that the applicant, at the request of
the San Bernardino County Flood Control District, has
relocated twu park and school sites within the
Consortium's specific plan submittal to the County.
In rc5ard to tie trails, it should be noted that most of
the trails are located on utility easements. Review by
County staff of the County submittal for the University
Crest application, indicates that many of the trails
which are planned for the utility easements are based on
the applicants' assumption that permission to use
utility access roads will be granted by the utility and
that neither improvements or maintenance is planned to
be provided by the a_pplir ?ry
In regard to the equestrian facility, the SBCFCD has
provided the City with a map of property owned in fee
and easements, as well as made suggestions for future
land uses. The SBCFCD is proposing development of much
of its property. They are reserving some open space
areas for Flood Control use, some for groundwater
recharge, and some for mitigation areas as required by
permits for habitat alteration from the U.S. Corps of
Engineers and California Department of Fish and Game.
A mitigation area is always a natural hahitat preserve
and is usually an area of habitat enhancement with all
incompatible uses prohibited. Most of the proposed
equestrian site has been designated by the SBCFCD as a
mitigation site. Mr. DiloriC s 10 acre parcel is under
a flood control easement and surrounded by the
LETTER OF SEPTEMBER 25, 1990
RE: SPECIFIC PLAN 89 -01
Page 3
mitigation area. An equestrian facility would not be
compatible with a wildl,1 abitat mitigation area.
Therefore, the potential ror the site for an equestrian
facility is poor. (See Exhibit "B".)
2. "City Council Review:"
While the City Development Code provides that a Specific
Plan may set its own standards, from the initial
meetings on an Etiwanda North Specific Plan, City staff
indicated that the Etiwanda North Man should build on
the Etiwanda Specific Plan. As indicated in the
introduction of the Specific Plan 14'11e Etiwanda North
Specific Plan i:z designea to exV.,nd the historical
character, low density apd neighborhood character of the
original Etiwanda community of Rancho Cucamonga north
and westward," It should be noted that residential
standards ii) the Etiwanda Specific Plan achieve low
density y' being higher than standards in the City
Development Code. It should be noted that City Council
policy on annexation was set forth in Resolution 89 -568
adopted November 28, 1989, requesting County support for
"all development standards and policies of the City of
Rancho Cucamonga." (See Exhibit "C ".)
3. "Consortium's Draft Etiwanda North Specific Plan."
Density. Density in the applicant's Specific Plan
application has been an issue from the beginning. The
applicant's premise is that historically thL County has
used an entitlement standard, and therefore, a
calculation can be made in advance of development which
establishes a unit count.
On the other hand, historically, City unit counts are
stated as a range and are based on a performance
standard which requires extensive site analysis. Thus
there has been tension between the concept of the
entitlement method of calculating density and the
performance method. This has been stated in a shorthand
way as follows: "Staff will recommend approt11 of
County base density provided that City standards c n be
..iet."
The February 14, 1990 screen check draft Specific Plan
indicated that City standards comparable t,) the
residential standards in the Etiwanda Specific Plan
could not be met, as indicated by the reduction in lot
sizes and setbacks,,
LETTER OF SEPTEMBER 25, 1990
RE; SPECIFIC PLAN 89 -01
Page 4
The decrease it( unit count from the July, 1989
preliminary draft plan is 328 anits. Of these,
180 urdits were deducted to correct an error in the
entitlement calculation by Landmark, but still included
a request to the County by Landmark for a General Plan
amendment to increase County Base densities. The
remainder reflect changes ir. acreage calculations and
changes in unit counts in a;;plications processing in the
City.
Hodever, it should be noted that the density stated in
the screen check draft is not the nticipated built -out
density of Etiwanda Nceth. The San Bernardino County
Flood Contra! District is the largest property owner in
Etiwanda North. At the urging of Mr. Dii:orio, the
District has identified properties tt: t will soon be
declared surplus in the future as s result of the
completion of flood c,)ntrol facilities. SBCFCG has
proposed potential land use designations for ail land
they expect to deem surplus. Discussions between the
District and staff are continuing, but preliminary
analysis indicated t- a proposals could result in up to
2:361 additional units. (See Estimated Dwelling Units
for CFCD's Proposed Land Uses, Exhibits "D -1" and City's
Response, Exhibit "D -2 ".)
Also, the plan creates a problem in regard to parcels
not owned by consortium members. Staff analysis
indicates that requests for higher densities would be
made based on the lot size s,:and;ds in the plan.
Indeed, several requests to increase Jensity have been
received in the City and the County from landowners.
Overall density of the Specif ;c Plan. EtiwaaUa North
cannot be =pared to any other "Planned Community"
proJect in the City, because in both the County and City
General Plan it is limited to single family residential
development.
Further, much of tP area is unsuitable for development
because of hazcpds birch as flooding, steepness of
slopes, seismic faults, or location within the National
Forest boundaries. Densities on the developablz
por tions are proposed to be as high or higher than
co; )arable developments in the City. (See companion
Tract Map item on this agenda.)
Detailed staff review. The February 22, 1990 letter
from Brad Buller to Jess Harris was intended to indicate
staff's concern almut the direction the screen check
'It.
LETTER OF SEPTEMBER 25, 1990
RE: SPECIrIC PLAN 89 -01
Page 5
draft was taking to further reduce standards of �-
developme.tt within the Specific Plan. (See Exhibit
"f ".) The "review" referred to in the letter was to
policy direction and not to a line item review of the
Specific Plan, unless the policy direction so
indicated. Before the City's policy direction was
finalized, the Consortium met with Supervisor Jon Mikels
and County staff and filed applications in the County.
(See Consortium Meeting Log, Exhibit "F "; and Reference
Consortium file.)
The reduced standards proposed in the February screen
check draft Specific Plan took staff by complete
surprise. The first mention of them ocairred at the
February Consortium meeting February 7, 1 '0. Staff
attended that meeting and orally requested t;.t a letter
from the Consortium explaining their new proposal be
sent to ifir. Buller. In lieu of a letter, Mr. Harris
scheduled a meeting on February 13, 1990 . and included
the reduced standards concept on an agenda with a number
of other items, indicating the proposal was only a
"minor" change in the Specific Plan.
Upon receipt on February 15, 1990 of the screen check
draft Specific Plan, staff noted that the 10 percent lot j
size reduction was across the board in every sub -area
and would open the way to requests for increases in
density from landowners. Because the density in the
Specific Plan could not be a cap, but only a minimum,
staff sought policy direction first from the City
Council, because that body has historically been
involved in development agreement negotiations.
After the City Council approved preparation of the
City's Specific Plan on June 20, 1990, and approved a
contract for consultant services on July 11, 1990, ali
analysis was forwarded to the City's Specific Plan.
consultant. The analysis in the form of red line markup
of the June 1989 preliminary draft Specific Plan, was
forwarded to the consultant, along with all Planning
Commission workshop minutes and all staff Technical
Review comments. (See Planning Commission Log,
Exhibit "G ", Technical Review Log, Exhibit "H ", and
reference Specific Plan project files.)
{ It should be noted that the entire development standards
section of the applicant's plan was deemed unacceptable
and deleted. The proposed development standards section
will reflect residential developmr -At standards in the
Etiwanda Specific Plan and restore perfor -mince ,riteria
r
P
LETTER OF SEPTEMBER 25, 1990
RE; SPECIFIC PLAN 89 -01
Page 6
for establishing unit counts. T`ris is consistent with
Development Code criteria for a Specific Plan in that
the standards are proposed to be higher than those in
the geoeral City.
4. "Environmental Impact Report."
Additional funds. Additional funds requested were for
analysis of the Austin Faust Traffic Study when
completed, for analysis of the Resource Management Plan
when completed, and for project management which had
become much more interactive with the responsible
agencies and the applicant than originally
anticipated. The environmental Sensitivity of the site,
as well as the undeveloped nature of the site, has
resulted in complexities which have yet to be resolved.
Time and cost of the EIR up to February 1890. The
original cost estimate was based on the applicant's
statement that all the necessary reports end studies
would be complete and submitted with the Specific Plan
application. . The application was received on
February 3, 1989. Several pounds of studies were
attached. (See Etiwanda North Bibliography,
Exhibit "I ".)
Standard environmental studies such as the air, quality
and noise analysis were not included and were added to
the City consultant's work order. Other key studies
have still not been completed including a Resource
Management Plan and an Infrastructure Phasing Plan.
City j nsultants wiil be requested to provide these
missing documents for the City's Specific Plan. The
applicant's Traffic Report was deemed inadequate and the
most recent report must be revised one more time to
accurately reflect proposed land uses in addition to
residential uses, then the air quality study must be
reviewed and revised as necessary. (See Traffic Report
Status Loo, Exhibit "K'" and Reference Engineering
Project files.)
5. "Specific Plan Status." See item 3 above. (Also, see
attached Specific Plan Correspondence Log, Exhibit "J"
and Reference Specific Plan Project files.)
6. "County Processing." Staff's understanding is that the
Consortium went to the County because of the conflict
between density and standards. Other reasons were also
iven at the A rfl C o t° t' S
9 p. one r gum mee Ong. ( ee Summary of
Consortium meetings, Exhibit "F ", and Reference
Consortium rtie.r
1
LETTER DP SEPTEMBER 25, 1994
RE: SPECIFIC PLAN 89-01
Page 7
7.. "Applicant_ Intensions." Staff cannot speak for the
applicant,
8. "Summary." See above items,
Attachments: Exhibit "A -1" - Etiwanda North Park Development Log
is Exhibit "A -2" - Staff Report to Parks Cor=ission,
i March 8, 1990
Exhibit "A -3" - Etiwanda North Parks and Open Space,
Parks and Trails Map
Exhibit "a" - Proposed Equestrian Facility Location
Exhibit "C" - Resolution 89 -568
Exhibit "D -I" Estimated Dwelling Units for'CFCD`s
Propesed Land Uses
Exhibit "D -2" - City's Response
Exhibit "E" February 22 1990 Letter from Brad Buller
to Jess Harris
'Exhibit "F" - Consortium Meeting Log
Exhibit 1161" - Planning Coaimiss;:on Workshop Log
Exhibit IV Techrical Review Log
Exhibit "I" Etiwanda North Bibliography
Exhibit "J" - Traffic Report Status Log
Exhibit "K" - Specific Plan Correspondence Log
i
Etiwanda North Development
Park Analysis z-q
October 10, 1990
Prepared by Karen McGuire - Emery, Associate Park Planner
AUGUST 1989
3 Memo to Larry Henderson, Senior Planner and Miki
Bratt, Associate Planner from Dave Leonard, Park
Project Coordinator re: Etiwanda North Draft
Specific Plan dated June 15, 1989 and those items
requiring resolve by the Community Services
Department and the Park and Recreation Commission
- Items included: 1) Park locations and eizes. 2)
Specific site information (topography, utility
easements at%) 3) Areas proposed: for development
adjacent to an including utility corridors /long
term easements and Iyamorandums of Understanding,
and 4) Kethods or funding. (cc: Park and
Recreation Commission, Joe Schultz, Karen Emery, "
Joe Dilorio).
9 Meeting between Joe Dilorio, Caryn Development,
Jess, Harris, Steve KrIly of Land Plan Design
Group, Joe Schultz, Dave Leonard, Karen Emery,
Discussed sizes of neighborhood park facilities
within the development as well as methods of
funding.
3.0 Department review of Statistical Summary of the
Etiwanda North Specific Plan Park Calculations
-total of park acreage proposed versus proposed
budget versus current construction costs.
17 Regularly scheduled Park and 'Recreation Commission
meeting Discussion of Worth Etiwanda Development,
Brad Buller, City Planner and Miki Bratt,
Associate Planner present.
.1. Locations and sizes of proposed parks.
2. Site specific information - topo, utility
easements.
3. Use of utility corridors /long term leases.
4. Method of funding.
S. Development of a Park Implementation Agreement
Workshop date of September 7, 1990 with
Planning Commission set.
31 Memo to Brad Buller, City Planner from Miki Bratt
re: Etiwanda North Parks Recommendation: that
item be discussed at toint Planning Commission and
Park and Recreation Commission meeting of
September 7, 1990. Due to the "Costs" the
original Etiwanda North concept of an integrated
park and open space plan was viable. Proposed
parks no longer appear minimally adequate.
EXHWIT :A -9
SEPIT24 M 1983
7
Joint meeting between Planning Commission and Park
and Recreation Commission. General consensus �.
-Site - locations are generally °suitable,
unencumbered usable par acreage determines park
credit therefore a grad ng study must be silbmitted
- usable acreage mind yield 5 acres net..... SEE
ATTACHED MINUT °S
21
Park and Recreation Commission regularly achedvled
meeting. North Etiwanda Park allocation on 'the;
Agenda. Item deferred - to:Octobeekr 1989.
OCTOBER 3.989
10
Park and Recreation Commission regularly scheduled
meeting.. North Etiwanda" Park Allocation on the
Agendas Mr.. Dilaric, applicant present. SEE
ATTACHED MINUTES,
13
Mebto for PsrX and Recreatior+ Commission from Joe
Schulte. subject - North Etiwanda Park
Al:locr Ion. Response to items discussed at
Septu�_-:_3er 7, 1989 joint meeting.
JANUARY 1990
is
Regular!: scheduled park and Recreation Commission
meeting. Etiwanda North on agenda, applicant did
not appear... SEE ATTACHED MINUTES.
23
Memo to Miki Bratt from Karen McGuire- Emery,
Associate "Park planner. Subject o Response to
Etiwanda North Draft EIR. Planning Departmoat:to
provide response to applicant.
30
Letter to Jerry Fulwood, Joe Schultz from
'Joe
DiIorio re: southern California adison surplus
I�
prv7erty.
i
OrrMT A �'�
FEBRUARY
6
Memo to Brad Buller from Joe Schultz by Karen
McGuire -Emery re: Response to Etiwanda North Draft ,.
EIR list of items generated in asponse to park `
issues i.e., dedicated park land on unencrmbered,
non- restricted land, Parcel to be minimum 5 acres
net. etc. (cc: LLar;y Henderson, Miki Bratt, Dave
IAonard).
lZI
Regularly scheduled Park and Recreation Commission
meeting. North Etiwanda on. Agenda., Staff reported
that although requested, the Etiwanda North Park
Analysis from tt;e Consortium was not providrw' in
time for staff to do a detailed study. Item
deferred to March 1990.
26
Memo to Joe Schultz from Karen McGuire -Emery cc:
`
Dave 'Leonard, Milo Hratt re: Etiwanda North Park
Analysis dated February 2, 1990 - review of
specific proposed park sites in Etiwanda North
Planned Development. Report included staff's
recommendation to deny 'approval of 6 out of 's
sites.
26
12 :45 Nesting Scheduled with applicant, aoe
Dilorio to discuss site Specific analysis of
proposed parks in Etiwanda North. Applicant did
not appear however staff met with his
representative cress Harris of Land Plan Design
Group and discussed recommendation to deny
approval of 6 out of 8 park sites.
MARCH
8
Scheduled Park. and Recreation commission meeting,
Agenda item Itiwanda North Park Analysis dated .
February 2, 1990. Applicant not present at
meeting... SEE ATTACHED MEMO TO THE PARK AND
RECREATION COMMISSION AND MEETING MINUTES.
APRIL
19
Regularly scheduled Park and Recreation Commission
meeting. Agenda item Etiwanda North Project status
discussed. staff provided update that applicant
is proceeding through the County and that staff
will work with the County in recommendin5 same
park development standards as currently exist in
the City,
EXHSIT A- t
—CITY OF RANCHO CUCA:MONGA
MEMORANDUM
Date: March 8, 1990
To: Members of the Park and Recreation commission
From: Joe Schultz, Community SeVvioes Manager
BY: Karen McGuirli- Emery, Associate Park Planner
Subject: Etiwanda North Park Analysis
dated February 2, 1990
Staff has reviewed the Etiwanda North Park Analysis presented
by the Consortium and has prepared the following comments and
recommendation fa each park location. Please review this
information for future discussion of these proposed
locations. Staff does not anticipate a representative from
the Caryn Company or the Consortium at this meeting, however,
staff will be prepared to answer any questions the Commission
might have regarding the proposed plan.
Location Dl
e Possibly located in the Red Hill Fault Zone.
o Less than five acres net (unencumbered land)..
• Reversal of the school /psrk locations as requested in
joint meeting between PC and PRC (9/21/89) has not been
accomplished. Even if this were to be accomplished,
school site now shoWS 240 S.D. proposed (Tent P.M. No.
13128, dated 12/15/89). Therefore, school site is
"enm,mbered." Also, Parcel 2 ( proposed park site) on this
map shows (1) proposed 48" S.D., (2) Proposed 8" sewer,
(3) proposed 25" public utility easement. Therefore, this
portion is also anaambered.
• If the park is to be located adjacent to a school site,
staff requests review of the school plan.
o staff rarests review of the surrounding topography.
• Both school and park 2acilities are to be sized so that
they can exist independent of one another.
Staff Rec2mtndatign Deny approval of proposed park site
for credit. Require rslocation of park site.
EXH13ff A-2
Park & Recreation Commission
Page 2
Location - pa
• Request in joint Meeting between PC and PRC (9/21/89) to
relocate park site out of flood plain has not been
accomplished.
• Current site pos«ib?y in Red Full Fault Zone.
• Staff requests relocation of park site into development
to east.
Staff-Reg Mmendation: Dany approval of proposed park site
for credit. Require relocation of park site.'
• Located in Red Hill Fault Zone.
• Per joint PRC /PC Meeting (9/21/89), not suitable for Bark
credit.
Staff Rec=mondat?on: Deny approval for park credit.
Location - D4
• Per proposed plan, grades are not within rand* of
"developable land."
® Bike lane required to be deleted frcm "gross ;.ark
acreage."
• Per joint PRC /PC Meeting (9/21/89), all ±35 acres of
Edison surplus land are to be obtained (east of Day Greek
Blvd.).
Staff Recommendation, .Provide surrounding topography;
redesign facility; lesson grade on park site; resubmit.
s Landmark park site is = to be includQd in acreage
figure or proposed costs for parks credit within Etiwanda
North Development at this time. Landmark Development is
processing their project independent of the Consortium.
Loca&Uon - D8
• No slope plan provided.
e Entire site is equestrian use only.
v Corral located loss than 30" off of Day Creek Blvd.
• No park amenities provided, i.e., play area, restroom,
exercise station, picnic tables, stexde structures.
Staff Ftecom lydation• Deny park credit.
EXh
ISIT A-2
Park a Recreation Commission
Page 3
i
Ixcatioz -'D7
® No slope plan provided.
• Entire site is equestrian use cnly.
• How is this site accessed by vehicles?
• Site is apparently located on flaod control property.
staff -Recommendation: Deny park credit.
iacation - DS
• Require surrounding topograpi4y (fnr review of sites
surrounding community park site)
• Per joint rC /PRC Meeting (9 /21/89), applicant was
requested to dedicate a minimum of 25 acres (for loss of
horse property within Equestrian Overlay Zone. No park
credit is to be awarded for eq~tsatrian cantor.
• delete $1,000,000 from Park Analysis summary, Tablet 1.
Staff Recommendation: Deny park credit, deny funding; out of
park monies.
General Not*
a Yn addition, all items discussed at joint PC /PRC Meeting
(9/21/89) apply.
e Staff requested that items being submitted for a park
credit be separated from those items being provided by the
Consortium.
Js /RE /kls
cc: Dave Leonard, Park Projects Coordinator
Miki Bsatt, Associate plannrr
LEGEND
® PARKS
')PEN SPACE
O RESIDENTIAL
® FLOOD CONTROL CHANNEL
Q PROPOSED EQUESTRIAN CENTER
® TRAIL HEAD
AYJCLE REIDENSE WnC1 MINUD RESIDENTIAL OVERLAY
OPEN SPACE AND /OR PUULIC U §ES
NOTE. 03 PARK LOCATION IS OIAGRAMATIC
ONLY. THE EXACT LOCATION AND SrZj MAY
DEVELOP/ ENT. REFER TOSTHE DEVELOPMME.TNET
REGULATIONS IN THE SPECIFIC PLAN.
11111111110111111 BICYCLE TRAL tom 6781171
016001111 BICYCLE TRAIL GOFr 67N1CT1
601111101111 REGIONAL TRAIL
00000 WALKI Gi WfI1G TRAILS
66666666 EQUESTRIAN TRAILS
D•1 PARK KEY
YH{ WALKWGIHIK94G TRAIL KEY
TIWANVA"ffllRTH'
wommmmmmmommmmmaw
{11�•N06 N06TN CON6ON Tly
LCIGN
GROUT'
c
D
EXHIBIT 14
OPEN SPACE
PARKS AND TRAILS
PLAN
Ill 34
,EXHIBIT A -3
'.., 2
Z
Lr
J"\ ti cq!
0
K7
-AVG
----------
EXHIBIT B
H
Vol,,
■LI
LU
LL
cc
Lr
J"\ ti cq!
0
K7
-AVG
----------
EXHIBIT B
RESOLUTION NO. 84 -568
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
BERNARDINO COUNTY�BOARD EQUESTING F UPERVISORSU RELATIYE TO THE
CITY ACTIONS TkANNEX THE ETIWANOA NORTH SPHERE AREA
WHEREAS, the City has arrays maintained that out, sphere of influence
is vital to the welfare Of cur community because of geographic Zqcation,
inter - connection of drainage, circulation, topography; environmental and
service relationships, and.
WHEREAS, the City desires to foster the expeditions and logical
annexation of said sphere of influence;, and,
Interest inEfossttering improvedasub- regional 'andrlocaiscaaperationhin planning;
and
WHEREAS, the opportunities are now present 0 enable a coordinated
approach to land use and development in the sphere, and
WHEREAS, the City desires consistency in development patterns and
regulations between the City's sphere of influence and the City, and
WHEREAS. the City feels that the dichotomy between County and City
development regulations, policies, and standards encourages developers to play
one against the other,, thereforz. frustrating any annexation attemrts;.and
WHEREAS, it is in the public interest to ensure enviroro%iitally, as
well as economically sound planning for the sphere of influence, and
Successful WHEREAS, the annexation of said sphere',ts a .key_71aator, ts, tine
coordination Of moderation infrastructure facilities and ultimate development f rthe
area.
NOW,,^THEREFORE„, the -City Council of the City of Rtacho Cucamonga •does
hereby resolve as fol7orasr
L The City reggests the cooperation and consent of the
409nty in annektill• a,11 . Countyowned land kithia:
Raancho Cucamonga's Sphere of influence,
2,. The City requests the Board of Supervisors support
for the City's efforts to annex the remainder of
it's northern sphere,
3. "rhe'County grant to the City through a cooperative
agreement review and processing of all planning and
development proposals (with all requisite processing
fees) within the sphere of influence, While having
the County retain it's approval authority;
EXH1W C
Resolution No. 89.568
Page 2
The City urges the Board of Supervisors to adopt a
Position that all development within the Rancho
Cucamonga sphere of influence 'is required to follow
and adhere to all development standards and policies
of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, and
S. The Board of Supervisors consider a 90 -120 day
suspension of devclopment upalications in our sphere
of influence to enable the proper planning and
coordination of policies between the City and the
County, and that a technical eomwittee comppised cf
City and County ;staff be- treated to study same.
PASSED, APPROVED, and k,9OPTED this 28th. day of November, 1989.
AYES: Alexander, Buquet, Brown, Stout, Wright
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
f
s L. tout, ayo'r_"
ATTEST.
ueora J. AdAMR t y . or
California, do hereby certf y that the foregoing ResolutioRancho uly pa2sed,
approved, and adopted by the City Council of the City of Raistho Cucamonga,
California, at a regular seating of said City Council held or the 28th day of
November, 1989.
Executed this 29th day of Novesber, 1989 at Rancho Cucamonga,
`California.
era s,4 yCeiTr
EXHM C
pal
ul
-ul
M * T"Vi
r,5 y'Y Fife
pal
D-1
M * T"Vi
r,5 y'Y Fife
D-1
0. Iwo
bo
CL
eis
SO
LU
co
CITY OF RANG V CUCAMONGA Post Office Box uo7, Rancho Cucamonp. Caufomia 91719, (714) 989.1851
February 22, 1990
Mr. Jess Harris
-Land Plan Design Group
134 Executive Park, suite 150
Irvine, CA 92714
SUBJECT: ETIWANDA NORTH SPECIFIC FLAN SCREEN CHECK DRAFT, FEBRUARY, 1990
Dear Jess:
Ten copies of the sebruary 14, 1990 screen check dr.Pt:it Specific Plan have been
received. Substantial changes in development standards are proposed.in this
draft. These proposed changes will require detailed staff review and
comrtent. They will also regvire policy direction fruir the Planning Commission
and the City Council. It is anticipated it will take! 2 to 4 weeks to cnmplete
this review and get policy direction. Ip, the meantime, there is no firm basis
for review of tract map applications in the Specific Plan area. therefore,
staff will be unable to continue pri. essing tract maps until these changes are
reviewed and policy direction from the decision makers is received.
If you have any questions, please gall Larry Henderson or Miki Brata st (714)
989- 1861.
Sincerely,
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLA DIVI _
Bra er
City PI nner
BB :Mg /jfs
cc: Joe DiIorio
Tracy Haig Development Co.
Shintu Bose
Betty Miller
Dan Coleman
Beverly Hissed
Larry Henderson
Miki Bratt
Cnxruifnwaettn EXMT E
Wme WiUiam 1• Alexander Charles J. Buquet 11 CGty A "..here
Dennis L. Stout Deborah N. Brown Pamela J, Wright lack Lam. AtCP
CONSORTIUM OF
STIWANDA NORTH LANDOWNCRI MONTHLY MEETINGS
JANUARY 1990
- Screen Check Draft SIR reviewed by
Consortium; Traffic Report incomplete;
City requests that traffic impacts be
reviewed on City Gravity Model; cost
$30,000. Trials Committee requests 15
acre equestrian center site and phase I
development be donated to mitig1te logs
of equestrian property in equestrian
overly—zone.
Dilor »'._o negotiating with SBCFCD
regarding use of Flood Control
properties for school and park sites;
golf /residential, development; and
habitat mitigation. SCE surplus lands
may be acquired and used for park
requirement. LPD preparing Sceea Check
draft Specific Plana
FRBRUARY 1990
Miki Bratt attended. LPD has prcrared an
Etiwanda ?forth Park analysis which
Includes concapual park layouts and
estimated costs.
i
Dilorio coordinating proposed use of
Flood Control property for future
development; Jon Mikels reviewing
Consortium's proposals. DiIoric
negotiating purchase of 55 acres of SCE
surpluu - property offered for $2 million,
LPD discumsead reduction of lot sizear to
meet 601R'',W requirement - Average lot
reduction 500 sq. ft; equestrian lot
reduction from 20,000 to 19,000 square
feet, minimum 18' driveway length,
minimum setback from face of curb $0
reduce minimum lot depth by 61, reduce
rear yard satbacks; Bratt r :quested
letter to Buller discussing these
changes in Specific Plan standards.
Resource Management Plan in p eparation.
MARCH 1990
- Larry Henderson and Ulki Bratt aXtendeda
IC
SIR. put on bold pending receipt of
additiourl funde; from Consortium; SBCFCD
meeting to bo hold [in response to
Consortium proposal for land
development2'
Jity staff explained lot size.concorn on
University tract; City staff suggested
f
ExHiwr F
that plans utilizing smaller lot sizes
not be submitted for review pending
rbview of the,$ssue by the Et1wanda
3orth sub - committee of the City Council.
Dilorio responded that lot sizes were
governed by County density and that
overall density of Specific, Plan had
been reduced front 5408 dwelling units to
5080 dwelling units. [Landmark count
reduced from 800 to 620, remainder due
to acreage adjustments or tract map
processing revisions,] City staff
requested matrix of density tvdnsfers.
1
Henderson stated that the Februar},
Specific plan emphasized the conflict
between City Standards and density and
that he believed the decision makers .
were going to emphasize support for City
standards.
i
APRIL 1990 - harry Hendersop and Miki Bratt attendeod:
Con &ortium members had held several
preliminary meetings with County staff.;
Consortium members unanimously agreede
process Specific Plan appl- ication in xhct
County. Landmark's property to he
excluded. U /Crest to be included.
HQsever► Dilorio will activate U /Crest
project in the County. County Blood
control properties will retain their
existing County General Plan
designations.
Reasons were stated for County
processing:
o City does not honor Dev.
Agreements
• Cost of Police CFD
• Hold on tentative tract maps
unfair because only "mfmor'l issues
Involved, i.e, minimum lot size to
accommodate 60' ROW and density
transfers
o City Bngineoring gtvision "out of
control"
o In general City review process
o'.cmy
o City pursuit of Flood Control
Lands ,Policy unreasonable because
it will take up to 2 years to
resolve
o lack of access to City Council
EXT F
o SIR mitigation measure expected
-
to be unreasonable
o County support of County
proceasing _
MAY 1990
Mika BTatt attended: City discussing
preparation of Specific Plan and
completion of EIR;,MBA to remain City
consultant if City elects to complete
SIR. County densities acceptable only of
City Standards can be maintr.ix % = -7.
JUNE 1990
- Rick Gomez and Brad Buller attended:
Consortium requested using City SIR.
JULY 1990
- City staff did not attend: County
County preparing RFF for SIR for
Specific Elan; City Gravity model
completed and results forwarded to
County for review of U /Crrest project.
AUGUST 1990
- canceled
i
EXCHIBIT F
I
PL"N! -NG COMMISSION
WORKSHOPS'
SPECIFIC PLAN 89 -01
i
SEPTEMBER 22, 1,988
OVERVIEW, COMMUNITY DESIGN
ELEMENTS, ARCHITECTU, GRADING
3CTOBER 10 1988
OVERVIEW AND CO4!X.Zv0ION CONCERNS
D:ZCEMBER 8, 1988
PLANNING CONCEPTS
:,ANUARY 23, 1989
PRELIMINARY DRAFT PRESENTATION
FEBRUARY 3, 1989
COMMISSION AND STAFF RESPONSE
MARCH 3, 1989
FUTHER DISCUSSION OIL CONTENT
MARCH 30, 1989
PLAN AND ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN
JUNE 22 1989
CONCEPT AND PURPOSE OF PLAR
JULY 20, 1989
PRELIMINARY REVIEW OF THE FILLSIDE
DEVSLOPMERT ORDINANCE
.AUGUST 30, 1989
rRESENTATION OF HILLSIDE-
DEVELOPMXNT ORDINANCE
SEFTEMBER7, 1989
REVIEW PARRS ELEMENT
EX t IT G
a
SPECIFIC PL1 89 -01: TECHNICAL REVIEW LOS ~
[OCTOBER 6, 1988 : LPD/ STAFF : DRAFT DESIGN CONCEPTS]
['JANUARY 17,1989 LPD /STAFF : 1ST PRELIMINARY DRAFT ENSP]
[FEBRUARY 2, 1989: LPD /STSPF : PRELIMINARY DRAFT #21
MARCH 1, 1989: ENGINEERING /PLANNING COMMENTS ON
LRELIMINARY DRAFT #2 - TRAFFIC; CIRCULATION;
GRADING, GENERAL
[MARCH 1, 1989: LPD /STAFF : ARCHITECTURE GUIDELINES]
MARCH :, 1S89: PLANNIS7, STAFF /COLEMAN I PRELIMINARY
RESPONSE TO EMLELIMINARY DRAFT #2
MARCH 3, 1989: PLANNING STAVO /COLEMAN : ADDITIONAL COMMENTS
ON 'PRELIMINARY DRAFT #2
MARCH 3, 1989: ENGINEERING /PLANNING : COMMENTS ON DRAFT *2
MARCH 3, 1989: CCWD /HENDERSON COMMENTS ON FEBRUARY DRAFT
MARCH 22, 1999 :MURPHY /BRATT : PRELIMINARY REVIEW TO DRAFT
SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 2
MARCH 20, 1989:MILLER /BRATT : O.OMb2I NTS ON DRAFT #2
APRIL 6, IS89: CCWD /CIT' : C014MENTS
APRIL 13, 1989:BRATT /HENDERSON : TRC FOR APRIL 18, 1989
CANCELED BECAUSE OF INADEQUATE GRADING
REVISIONS
APRIL 14, 1989 :LPD /PLANNING : RESPONSE TO ENGINEERING
COMMENTS DATED 3/20/89
[APRIL 27,1989:LPL /STAFF APRIL 27, 1989 DRAFT ENSP]
[JUNE 23, 1989: LPD /STAFF: DRAFT ENSP]
JULY 24, 1989: COLEMAN /HENDERSOE': COMMENTS ON JUNE 1989
DRAFT. SPECIFIC PLAN
JULY 24, 1989: 43CWD /PLANNING : COMMENTS ON JUNE 1989 DRAFT
AUGUST 1, 1989:MILLER /HENDERSON :. COMMENTS ON ENSP
AUGUST 1, 1989 :POLICE /PLANNING COMMENTS ON DRAFT SPECIFIC
PLAN
EXHIBIT H
AUGUST ?, 1989:LPD /HENDERSON .; RESPONSE TO JULY 24, 1989
MEr;3RANAUM BY COLEMAN
AUGUST 10, 1989:COLErAN /HEWDERSON RESPONSE AUGUST 7, 1989
LETTER
SEPTEMBER 22, 1989: HARRIS /MILLER : RESPONSE TO TRC
COMMENTS OF AUGUST It 1989
[HILLSIDE GRADING 0RDINANC3 IN FROCEW]
[FEBRUARY 14, 1990, SCREEN CHECK DRAFT SPECIFIC PLAN]
I
EX
ti
REFER2NCES FOR ETIWINDA NORTH ENVIRONK.?NTAL ASSESSMENT
Responses to NO?*
General Plan*
Development Code*
General Plan Master Env. Assessment General Plan 8IR*
Etiwanda Speciftc Pltari*
West Valley Community Foothills Plan EIR*
EN Specific Plan Preliminary Draft #2*
EN ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES
o Biological Assessment for Portions of Etiwanda Specific
Plan*
o North Etiwanda Specific Plan Cultural Resources
Assessment*
o Confidential ?nformation North Etiwanda Specific Plan*
Cultural Resource Assessment*
• Community Fac,lities summary **
• Seismic summa,•y **
• North Etiwanda Study Area Traffic Analaysis Revised
January 23, 1989 **
• Traffic Noise Impact Study*
• Air Quality Impact Analysis*
U /Crest EIR (Not Certified).
• Draft EIR U /Crest Project*
• Ba logical, Resources Assessment
• Historical and Archeological Investigation* of the
Etiwanda Rock Cairns*
0 Biological Resources Assessment U /CAeat*
o Noise Study U /Crest*
o Air Quality Impact Assessment for U /Crest*
Development Plan W138 -49 Etiwanda Highlands.
o An Archeolagical Assessment of a Stobne Foundation Located
In the Etiwanda Highlands of San Bernardino County Cal
o Biological Resouil :as Assessment Etiwanda /San Sevaine*
o Planning Area PUD*
Other
• Draft EIR Etiwanda Heights (Plot Certified)*
• Etiwanda Heights Seismic Study*
• Etiwanda Heights Sewage study*
• Cordiera Drainage Study*
• Cordiera Geology study*
• Engineering Geology Feasibility and Subsurface
Investigation Sections 20 and 29*
o Engineering Geology and Subsurface Investigation N 1/4 of
Section 20*
o Preliminary Geotechnical Feasibility Evaluation Wassem
Property ** EXHBff 1
3
N
• Saismic, Roach **
• Seismic, Frank **
• F;eismic, Mistretta **
On File MBA
o Rancho Etiwanda PUD Final Supplemental EIR (Certified)
_<repared by MBA
o 4th Street Rock Crusher Final EIR (Certified) prepared by
MBP,
Requested from Consortium for MBA 7/19/89.
o Infrastructure Phasing Report for EN Consortium, by FWWS,
June 30, 1989.
o Etiwanda Creek bra uage Corridor, Design Concept Report,
by FWLS, June 30, 1989.
o EN Draft Specific Plena, by L /P /D for EN Consortium, June
23, 1989.
o Etiwanda North Study Area Traffic Analysis for EN
Consortium by DKS, revised Aug: 7, 1989, original Appendix
A.
• Fiscal Impact Report for EN Consortium, July 1189
• Draft EN Fire Study for R.C. Fire District, by 1, -,mt as
avialable
Other Documents which may be pertinent, may t3 requested
from FWLS.
o Day Greek / Etiwanda Creek /San Sevaine Drainage Area k1ster
Environmental Impact Resort /Statement Day Creek Water
Project, Day, Etiwanda, and San Sevaine Creeks Drainage
Plan, Master Plan for the San Sevaine Channel for S.B, C:i.
Flood Control, Planning Network, Bill Man, Aug. 1983,
certified 7/10/85.
o Environmental Assessment San Sevaine Creek Water Project,
March 1987, Engineering Science for S.B.Co Flood lontrol
Etiwanda Drainage Plan.
o Etiwanda Area Master Flan of Lrainage, for City Rancho
Cucamonga, BSI, 1989
o Final Environmental Assessment Day Creek Water Project,
for S.B.Co. Flood Control by Planning Network /Bill Mann,
September 1986.
*TranamitteO to MBA 3/3/89
* *Transmitte, to MBA 5/18189
-)rob I
ETnQW A NORTH SPECIFIC PLAN
Traffic Studies Chronology
Date Item
8/1/88 Kunzman Study
10/25/ ,18 N;eao: Russ to Larry
12/15/8$ Kunrzmn Revised
2/3/89 Lettr: Russ /Diorio
3/1/89 Letter: Dilorio /Russ
3/14/89 Meetings DiIorio, DKS,
4/17/89 Letter: DKS /Paul
5/16/89 Letter: Russ/Dilorio
6/22/89 DRS Study received
ConTents
Comments on Kunzman Study
method not gomprehensive
- use 13.25 trip generation
- street design guidelines
heview of Ku=- n revisions
- method 1padequate for growth management
- City traffic model will be available to
developers
Reaction to issues raised
- propos,• regional fee
- DKS hired
- disagree re Vintage, curve in 24th, etc
LPD, Engineering staff.
Meetinn Followup
- Rock Crusher impacts
- Protection of Etiw ndr Ave
- 24th St. curve
Sizing of Cherry Ave
- EKtention of Vintage Dr
Provide a comprehensive study; stop
submitting arguments in letter form
7/10/89 Letter: Russ /Dilorio Study received; mcnxLi to resp=4
- only alts are "preferred" variations
- identify offsite mitigatiof
- lane configurations for all alts
7/13/69 Letter: DRS /Russ Response to tents
8/1/89 =3 S =—jr insert received
8/10/89 Re wised MM Stui4 x +ived
8/25/89 Mvisicns to insm t in DKS Study received
8/22/89 Letter: Russ/Dilorfo Review of DM Study, as revised
- Don't assume 4 lanes on Highland
- Use V/C ratios, •t ?fIT's
10/11/89 . Letter: MM/RUss R�px.,.se to comf- g
11/8/89 Revised MM Study received
11/29/89 Letter: DKS/Betty Memo to accompany report fQrth�ing
-12/1/89 Letter: Betty /DKS Cost estimate for City's consultant to
complate additional studies should be
available at same time
12/19/89 Emcutive SuWazy received
12/21/39 Letter: Russ/DiIorio Provide $30,000 for - -- to run model for
cW; 10-12 w to �gslete
1/12/90 L1iIoriq cFleck reG2lveci
1/15/90 Ccnti-act sent to Austin -Foust (A -F)
1/31/9L` New DKS M=tive Statrmary received
2/15/9 DiIorio letter re circulation Issues
2/16/8 A -F Startup meeting (DIM attQxW)
5/25/: Memo: Russ to Council Response to Dilario's letter to Mikels on
3/1/90. Model completed in 1/90.
7/5/90 Draft A -F Study received; copy forwarded f,> County
7/18/90 K-- Oting: City staff, County staff, DiIorlo, M3, :BPD
EM BIT J
Y
1
1
SPECIFIC PLAN 89 -01
MEETING /CORRESPONDANCE LOC
FEBRUARY 13, 1990 SESS HARRIS, LPDG, MET W/ LJH
NOTIFIED CITY THAT LOT SIZES IN
WEBRUARY SCREEN CHECK DRAFT SP HAVE
BEEN REDUCED 10% ACROSS THE BOARD
TO "MAKE UP FOR" INCREASE OF ROW ON
CUL DE SAC STRE$"S FROM 501 TO 601:
WILL SEND SEPARTE LETTER ON THIS
ISSUE.
FEBRUARY 15, 1990
10 COPIES OF SCREEN CHECK DRAFT SP`
]RECEIVED; LOT SIZES 'REDUCED SOX
ACROSS THE BOARD: DEVELOPMENT
STANDARDS INAD20 ATE ', LOWER THAN
CITY DEVELOPMEN'.d . STI►NDARDS AND MUCH
LOWER THAN ETIW..KDA SP STANDARDS;
UNIT COUNT ASSIGNMENT TO SUBAREAS
FROVIDSIS UNEARNED GAIN TO
NONCONSORTIUM MEMBERS ARD MAY BE
INAPPROPRIATE; UNIT IRANSPERS MADE
PROM CREST TO VARIOUS SUB -JIMAS
INADEQUATELY DOCUMENTED; UNIVERSITY
DENSITY AND LOT SIZES UNACCEP "ABLE;
AREA 6 LOT SIZES AND DENSITY
EXCE `* S "VERY LOP" Db"SIG`IATION;
CIRCULATION PLAN IrCONSISTENT WITH
EN91", ,RING COMMENTS.
FEBRUARY 22> 1990
BULLER TO LPDG:
EN SCREEN CHECK DRAFT NOT
ACCEPTABLE: [NEED POLITY GUIDI:LINEZ
PROM DKGISION MAKERS]
MAROU 2, 1990
LPDQ TO THE JOHNSON GROUP:
2!'.q' DRAVT CONSIDERBr 'GRTEHCHECK
AND NOT VCR CIR^- ` i�
MARCH 7, 1990
HENDERSON,-' -'_ .ENDED CONSORTIUM
MEETING: D3tS,0d5SION OF 20%
REDUCTION OF LOT SIZES; . "IJH
REQUESTED THAT PLA'°IS USING SWtlI R -
LOT SIZES NOT BE SUBMITTED TO CI `l
FOR REVIEW UNTIL ISSUE RE50a',7 %[l;
LJH REQUESTED MEMO ON UNIT
T r%r' tSFERS WITHIN SP; FWLS
DISTAUBUTED HANDOUT ON COMPATRISON
CITY /COUNTY STANDARDS; DIIORI0
REQUESTED MEETING WITH COUNCIL SUB
COMMITTEE;(S^,,,?CD REQUESTED MEETING ,
ON PROPERTY 6SES1 DISCUSSION .;F
CONSORTIUM CONCERNS WITH CITixHI T K
0
PROCESS3NG; LJH STATED THAT THERBl
_
IS CITY RESOLVE TO'UMLD CITY
STANDARDS OF DEVELOPMENT IN THE EN
AREA.
MARCH 9, 1990
LPDG TO MB
NOTICE OF RELOCATION Cl 117 UNITS
FROM CREST SITE TO UNIVERSITY
TRACTS, AND SUE AREAS 20, 6A, 60,
6D; AND R$LOCATiON OF UNITS WITHIN
TRACY PROJECT SUB AREAS 2D,2E,
30,SH,3I.
APRIL 3, 1990
BULLER TO CONSORTIUM:
STATUS OF Eta PIOJECT: COMPARISON OF
CITY /PLAN STANDARDS; EIR STATUS;
REQUEST FO „_ADDITIONAL FUNDS FOR
SIR
APRIL 4, 1990
BRATT ATTENDED CONSORTIUM MEETXNU;
LETTER OF 413/90 CIRCULATED: ALL
LANDOWNERS PkISENT AGREED TO FORMAL
FILING IN COUNTY
APRIL 6, 14#90
DITORI') TO LJS:
€'IT” CONDITIONS FOR CITY PROCESSING
APRIL 11, 1990
. VIIt3RM TO Br'jLRR
.ISAGRES THAT "SIGNIFICANT CHANGES
MA -, IN SPECIFIC PLAN" : COUE?TY
PRC-LZSJ2NG TO BE EXPLORED; i3t"AGRES
T30 ADDITIONAL EIR ITEMS DEED TO
X38 REVIEWED.
MAY 2, 1990
BRATT ATTENDED CONSORTIUM '
MEE'T'ING: CONSORTIUM RESOLVED TO
PROCESS IN COUNTY; IF CITY
STANDARL: UPHELD WOULD REDUCE
DENSITIES
MAY 1B, 1990
BULLER TO CONSORTIUM:
PRR UI'TY C4MICIL: DEVELOPMENT MUST
CONVORM TO THE CITY GENERAL PLAN',
THE CITY =MLOPMENT COD$, AND THAT
PROCESSINQ FOR DEVELOPMENT MUST
OCCV -R IN THE CITY.
MAY _9, 1990
BULLER TO CONSORTIUM:
BP 89-01 AP ."LICATION INCOMPLETE;
CITY TO COMPLETE SP AND EIR
MASS 21, 1990
BULLER TO CONSORTIUM:
EicHW K
SP 89 -01 AND RELATED MAPS INVITE
CONSORTIUM TO MODIFY ENSP OR
WITHDRAW APPLICATTON
ATTACKED: STATUS 16FDATE MAY 16,
s99O INCLUDING DETAILED REVIEW OF
DIFFERENCE BET'YMEN FLAN.60
STANDARDS'.
MAY 22, 1990 MIKELSPWOUT /PROPERTY OWNERS/ CITY
COUNTY STAFF MEETING
MF.Y 24 1800 DIIORIO T4
AFOR MENTIONED 3 LETTERS
IUCONSISTENT WITH
STOUT;MIKELS,PROPERTY VWKIR MEBTiNG
OF MAY 22, 1990
JUNE 6, 1990 BULLER /COMEZ ATTENDED
CONSORTIUM MEETING; CONSORTIUM
RDQUMSTED CITY COOPErAkTION WITR
COUM P110CESSSING
EXHOT K
CITY OF ]RANCHO CUC". 01-IGA
STAFF REPORT
DATE: October 10,:'1990
TO: Chairman and Members of the Planting Commission
FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner
BY: Miki Bratt, Associate Planner
f
SUBJUT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTAi
wiLrrRJII T ur VftLll'URlilri mnu ld,n11s uryrLy - -nrm - n fCyuCbL ILr
apprcyal of seven tentative tract maps and une parcel map for 633
dwelling units, a 9.3 acre commercial site, a 4.56 acre park site,
and a 7.17 acre school site on approximately 179 acres of land
located generally north of Highrand Avenue, south of a Southern
California Edison utility corridor, west of Hanley.Aven:ie with
portions west of the future Day Creek Boulevard, and east of Day
Creek :.ash.
I. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS: On September 26, 1950, the Planning Commission held a
public hearing on the subject applin „tion and continued said item to the
October 10, 1990 meeting of the A ng Commission (see attached Staff
Report dated September 26, .1909, r t "AA").
The purp'ase of the continuance ,.as to enable the Planning 1 --mmission to
review the letter of September 26, 1990, from Mr. Joseph N. Dilorio on the
subject application (see Exhibit "BB ").
On October 2, 1990, Mr. Larry MCNiul r:nd Mr. Peter Tolstoy met in their
capacity as the Etiwanda North subecomriittee of the Planning Commission and
directed ztaff to paepare P. response to the subject letters including the
documentation re..lested by the Planning Commission. Staff {s pr3 paring the
response and tie requesteI documentation and wil' present the
afo�ementionea material orally nt the Planning Commission meeting.
II. RECOMMEMJi1TION: Staff recommends adaption of the attached Rss-.-lution of
denia% atithout prejudice, of the subject application.
j liespe.submi Cyd,�
11 ,�
d, e.t
Attachment: n:,,ibit "At September 26, 1890 Planning Commission Staff Report
Exhibit "8$" — Letter from Joseph DiIorio
Resolution of Denial
ITEM B
CITY OF RANCHO CUP—A—, TONGA
STAFF REPORT
DATE: September 26, 1990
TO: 0airfan and Members of the Planning Commission
KOM: Brad Buller, City Planner
BY: Miki Bratt, Associate PlaunPrf
SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACTS 14493
THROUGH 14498-g-1-5-22 AND 14523, AND TER:
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
TT 14493 -98, 14522 -23, P.M. 13128
REGENTS UNIVERSITY /CARYN DEVELOPMENT
September 26, 1990
Page 2
z i
B. Specific Plan Status: The status of the Consortium's Specific
Plan will be reviewed by the Planning Commis ".an elsewhere on
this agenda. The Consortium of Lan4owners is not pursuing
their Specific Plan application in the City. The Consortium
was notified in February ''990 that the Specific Plan screen
check draft, February 14, 3990 could not be supported by
staff, and thee! "(ore tract map processing could not
continue. (See attached letter.) The Consortium's response
was to file an application for a Specific Plan in the County,.
C. General P1dn Amendment Status: An application to amend the
Land Use and Circulation elements of the Generai Plan are
required in conjunction with the subject applications because
the current land use designation for the site is "open space"
and Day Creek Boulevard is planned as a curved section int
Wilson /24th Street. To date, ro General Plan amendments have
been filed.
D. Envirormintal Review Status: Finally, environmental revs;;.,
fo: the subject applications is required. However, the
Consortium, i�icluding the applicant is not pursuing co- ,Jletion
of the City's Etiwanda North Specific Plan Environme ^?al
Impact Report which would provide the basis for envirramental
review for the subject applications.
E. tract Map Status: For Tentative Tracts 14493 through 14495
and 14522 and 14523, incompleteness letters were sent on
October 10, 1989. A letter response dated November 29, 1989,
was received, but did not resolve the incomplete status. On
December 27, 1989, a second set of incompleteness letters eras
sent, but no response has been received for those letters.
For Tentative Tracts 14496 through 14498, incompleteness -
lntters were sent on January 4, 1990. To date no response has
been received for these letters.
F. RelationchiZ_ of Tract Maps to Referral 88 -05
University Crest. It should be noted that the subject
applications are for the University tracts of the University
Crest Planned Development applicatior, first submitted to the
County in June 1938, Beginning in February 1989, the County .
application was put on a month to month continuance. The
continuance of the County application coincided with City
processing of the Consortium's Stiwandr North Specific Plan.
In April 1990, the applicant activated the University /Crest
Planned Davelopmpnt application in the County and also filed
applications for tentative tract maps for all the University
and all the Crest site.
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
TT 14493 -98, 14522 -23, P.M. 13128
REGENTS UNIVERSITYjCARYN DEVELOPMENT
September 26, 1990
Page 3
F
City staff has reviewed all the plains and maps submitted to
the Conntr and recommends continuance or denial of the County
applications until outstanding- wssues, including environmental
adequacy, timeliness, density, and design, can be resolved.
The Planncng Commission at i.heir meetings of August 22 and
September 12, 19901 and the City. Council. at their meeting of
September 5, 1990, directed staff to request the County
Planning Commission tc continue or deny the University Crett
project in the County until the aforementioned issues hoe
been resolved.
III. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial without prejudice of the
subject applications for the following reasons:
A. The subject: applications are incomplete.
B. The environmental review for the subject applications has not
been completed.
C. An application for a General Plan Land Use and Circulation
Amendments have not been filed.
ANk
0. The City does not have the authority to approve tentative
tract applications until the site is pre -zoned and annexed
into the City.
Respectfully submitted,
Brad Bu er
City Planner
88:.B . js
Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Vicinity Map
Rcialution of Denial
SEP -26 -1990 15:33 FROM CARYN COMPANY Tu �u�n":.ib 1
The Ca,n Cofl pafly
PCV10lTice.box 9216.80. IWJI.18. CA 92677 -0216
9f17ee (714) 4915929 FAX (714) 4915173 ti
saptember 25, 1990
Chairman McNeil and Members
6f the Planning Commission
City of Rancho Cucamonga
P. o. Box 007
Rancho Cucamonga, California 91729
Re: Environmental Assessment, and
Tentative Maps 14493 through 14498,
14522, 14523 and 13128
Dear Chair%, -" McNeil:
We haves reviewed the Staff Reports prepared for the September 26,
1990 meFtinV 03 the Planning Commission. We believe the Report is
misleading in the following respects:
A. Agreement for Concurrent Processing: Staff's rationale that Aukk
the City cannot. approve-* Tentative Maps •Until the territory is annexed
into the City is not the pertinent point. The pertinent point Ls
whether the City wants to reach agreement with the applicant on a
mutually acceptable desig;, to induce the applicant to annex intc the
City.
B. Specific Alan Stajus: Staff maintains the Consortium started
Processing in the County in reaction to Staff's February, 1990 deci-
sion that processing could not continua in the City. Staff didn't
have the legal or ethical right to make that unitatexal decision.
Only the Commission can recommend that decision and only Council- can
make it. The Consortium was never given a chance then to appeal to
the Commission and Council. The Consortiurii was also never giver. any
specific reason why processilg was stopped. In late February ere were
told we'd be given reasons in early March. When early April came with
no response to our zepeated requests for reasons, we dacid2d the City
wasn't intexostod, and we vent to the County.
C. General Plan Amendment StQ—us: Contrary to Staff's statement,
an amendment to the City's General Plan is not legally j;equired until
the Tentative Ma7s are to be approved, which, as Staff has already
pointed out, cannot be done until the territory is annexed. Contrary
to Staff's implication, I'm ready to discuss the Ger._ral Plan amend -
ments, and have been for some title. City Staff comuents, written on
February 7, 1990, indicate the City would not accept a General Plan
amendment for the circulation element until the traf;ic model was
cs :vp1ete. However, effective disacussicn requires that staff prepare
a position on the circulation needs of the City, which they stem ur.-
willing to do, even though the City -wi63 traffic model has been done
for some months, paid for in part by $30,000 in extras %ions from
Etiwanda North. '� EXHIBIT "813"
Chairman McNeil & Membnrs of the Planning Commission
Environmental Assessment and Tentative Maps 14493
ASk through 14498, 14522, 14523 and 13128
IV September 25, 1990 Pag6 Twet
D. Environmental Review Status a Staff charges the applicant wi'
"not vursuing completion of the Cityle Etiwanda North Specific Plan
SIR ". . believe that if the City has decided to do its own exclusive
5peciiic Plan and FUR without the involvement of the Consortium, that
it is then the City, not the applicant, who should pursue completion.
U further believe the environmental documents prepared on this project
in the last two years are sufficient, q:haustive and could be accepted
by the City if you were to decide to xeview them in a proper non -
political process.
E. Tract Map Status: staff talks about the "incompleteness" letters
sent to the applicant in late 1989- early 1990, says no .:e?pMs8 %as
received, but ignores the £act that a complete and revised set of
Tentative Maps was received in March, 1990. That set of Mapos for
all 1,293 lots, represents a lot of time, effort and money. Yt was
probably the largest submittal ever received by the City and met the
grading and other pertinent standards the Commission c_nd applicant
had worked so hard to establi:,�h. we weren't evan givan the courtesy
of having the March submittal accepted for review , and now the impli-
cation seems ta7 be being made t!sAa since we didn`t have the maps
accepted, we never submitted them.
F. Relationship of Maps to County University Crest PA: Stiff says
they have reviewed all plans and map., submitted to the Count}. Does
anyone also find it strange that Staff would have reviewed Vie nub-
mission made to the County but has yet to admit reviewing that same
submittal made directly to the City six months ago? Perhaps Staff
shoulie. review the material more thoroughly before they recommend
the Commission and Council act in an adivorsarlal -im nner •on the "out-
standing issuea". Staff has admitted to me they had erro ;,7od and
overstated they density issue in our last Vublic hearing, but that
error is not corrected in their presentation to you toftigh;a. If they
errored on that issue, isn't it poesible they have errored on others
as I think they have?
staff reportx a more adveruarial conclusion to our recent commission
and Council meetings than I remember. Y rememLer more of our desire
to try to work together !or the best loag tom interests of the com-
munity. Given current circumstances, you sad the Council may not
think it's possible to work peacefully together and that Staff is
correct. if you'd like to at least it.vtatiratee whether it's possible
4o work together, I suggest you direct Mx. sutler to, report back at
louz next meeting with a. plan o2 action.
As far as the specific agenda item is concerned, Y'm not suze who's
ides it eas to put it on the agenda, whhat the purpose of the action
w *, or what would happen if you do fallow Staff's recomendation.
wouldn't do it for those rya +sons, but if yor scant to, I .could r�comr-
mend you strike Staff's reasons for the recommendation and the pro -
posed findings because they are inccrract based on my analysis and
substitute the true reason, than the application is also being pro-
' in the Ccur� ;y.
��F-2n-i�yY1 l�c.:a tKUt4 t- H1Si:31.LiirHt�11 tiv
Chai.'Aan McNeil $c Members of the Planning Commission
Environmental Assesoment and Tentativ& Maps. 14493
through 14498# 14522, 14523 acrd 13128 AAIL
September 25, 1990 Page 2nreei
Ploptse ay;loi* MO to answer any questions you may have.
Sincerely,
i ,
72resident Dilorio
a
M /jas
cc: Supervisor Jon Mil,.e13
Mr. Tim Johnson
Ms, Valerie Pilmex
Mayor Stout & City Council Members
Mr. Rick Gomez
Mr. Brad Rullar
Mr. J. Roger Samuelson
Mr. Pete Dangermond
I
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION 'IF THE CIT° Or"
RAN,HO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, DENYING, WITHOUT PREJUDICE,
TENTATIVE TRACT MAPS NO. 14493 THROUGH 14498, 145?", AND
14523 AND PARCEL MAP 13128 LOCATED GENERALLY NLKTH OF
HIGHLAND AVENUE, SOUTH OF A SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
UTILITY EASEMENT, WEST OF HANLEY AVENUE WITH POR'PIONS
WEST OF THE FUTURE D;v CREEK BOULEVARD, AND EAST OF DAY
CREEK WASH, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPOf: THEREOF.
r
A, Recitals.
(i) Caryn Company has filed an application for the approval of
Tentative Tract Map No. 14493 through 14498, 14522 and 14523, and Parcel Map
13138 as described in the title of this Resolution- Hereinafter in this
Resolution, the subject Tentative Tract Map and Parcel Map requests are
referred to as "the application."
(ii) On the 26th of September and continued to the 10th day of
October 1990, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga
conducted duly noticed public hearings on the application and concluded said
hearings on t"t.4 date.
(iii) All legal prerequisites prim to they adoption of this Resolution
have occurred.
8. Resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolv,d by the
Planning Commission of the City of Narcro Cucamonga as follows:
1. This Commissirn hereby specifically finds that all of the facts
set forth in the Recitals, i-art A, of this Resolution are true and correct.
2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to this Commission
during the above- referenced public hearings on September 26 and October 10,
1990, including written and oral staff reports, together with pub Lic
testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows:
(a) The property to the north, south, east, and west of the
subject site is undeveloped.
3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission
during the above - referenced public hearings and upon th8 specific findings pf
facts set forth in paragraphs I and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and
concludes is follows:
(a) The application is not consistent with the General Plan and
Development Code; and
(b) The site is not physically suitable for the type of
development proposed.
g- v
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTIIN NO,
TT 14493 -98, 14522 -23, P.M. V128
October 10, 1990
Paye 2
i
4. Environmental studies have not been completed, therefore, the
application is not in compliance with 'the California Environmental Quality Act
of 1970.
5. Based upon the findinPs and conclusions set forth -rj paragraphs
1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby denies without rrejudice the
application. t
6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption
of this Resoiution.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS iOTH DAY OF OCTOBER 1990.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF TKi CITY OF RANCHO CUCA,MONiGA
BY:
Larry McKie , G airman
ATTEST:
Brad Bul er, SecrA z
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 aftrted by the Planning Commission of the
City of Rancho Cucamonga, at . regular reeting of the Planning Commission held
on the 10th day of October 1990, by the - 7ollowing vote -to -with
AYES:
COMMISSILNERS:
NOES:
COMMISSIONERS:
ABSr.4T:
COMXISSI04ERS:
STAFF ANALYSIS AND DOCUMENTATION
LETTER OF SEPTEMEER 25, 1990 FROM MR. DiIORIO TO CHAIRMAN McNIEL
RE: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE MAPS 14492 - 14498, `
14522, 14523 AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 13128
The following analysis and documentation follows the numbered item format of
the subject letter and includes the number plus the heading for the item.
Following tha heading is staff's analysis with documentation attached in the
form of numbered exhibits or reference. The su')ject letter is included in
your staff report.
A. "Agreement for Concurrent Processing ":
Regarding design, staff has attempted to communicate the Planning
Commission's direction on design to 'she applicant.
The Planning Commission has reviewed the design of the University Crest
project, as follows:
* Support conceptual site planaing which increases lot sizes from south
to north
Provide interior paseos as a project amenity
* Provide paseo connections to offsite open space and to school and
park sites.
Based on Planning Commission recommendations staff reviewed and commented
on preliminary plans and following the above referenced applications
forwarded written comments to the applicant. The submittals were
piecemeal making it impossible to review the University project as a
whole. The first submittals were made in September 1989 and resubmittals
were received in November and December 1989. All submittals received
incompleteness consents on December 77, 1989. No further resubmittals
have been received for the subject application.
A complete set of maps for the University and Crest tracts may have been
prepared for submittal in March 1990 but they were not submitted. In
March only one map for the Crest site was received. The application was
not accepted pending resolution of the Specific Plan issues. See Exhibit
"A ", letter of March 18, 1990, Nissen /Olivier.
The Crest site tracts are not part of the subject applications. Staff has
been able to analyze and comment on the University /Crest project as a
whole only through review of the County applications.
-15-C/917
Staff Analysis of Sept. 25, 1990
Ltr. from J. Dilorio to Chrmn, McNia" -
Environ. Asses. for TT 14492- 14498,
14522, 14623 & TPM 13128 - university Crest
October 10, 1990
Page 2
ti
1
The correspondence log is as follows:
* October 10, 1989 Coleman /Oiiorio; incompleteness comments
* November 29, 1989 Horris /Coleman-* letter response
* December 27, 1989 Coleman /Dilorie: incompleteness comments
Staff analysis indicates that the design wt the subject tracts hits been
regressive with each submittal. I. April 1990,, after the subjec- tract
map applications were submitted to the County ':: review, staff began
preparation of a set of three maps to illustrate the regressive tendency
of the project design and to em, hasize wha• staff was requesting. The
three maps are a "Conce t Site Plan ", an "Analysis of Larl Use" and an
"Analysts of Streets." fSee attached E- nibits "B -1 ", "B -2 ", ?nd 118 -3").
Regarding negotiations, staff will continua to follow the direction of the
Planning Commission and City Council on negotiation~ with Mr. DiIurio and
with the consortium.
Staff interprets as a oagotia+tion of *fer Mr. Dilorio's reference to a plan
with a minimum lot size of 7„200 sgaare feet and "voluntary" reduction of
38 units because r) such clan 'ia been submitted +;,a the County or the
City. However, staff would continua to negotiate fav additional reduction
in density and improved design eased on direction from the Plann'ng
Commission on August 22, 19:0, September 12, 1990, and City Council an
September S. 1990.
On thole dates staff was directed to prepare comments for the County
Planning Commission, including:
Opposition to approvals until a SpeciFic Plan for the entire Etiwanda
North area has been completed and apr /roved,
* Opposition to a ten percent density bonus increasing the base density
by 119 units.
* Opposition x density credit, for the school and Park siti of 38
units.
Revardinq density, density remainz, a 'key issue for the University and
Crest sites. County base density for the entire University Crest project
is 1,174 units, including 17 uni' for the 675 acre site within the
National Forest. With a ten pen mt density bonus the density is 1,293
units.
The County base dervAty for the university site is S32 unit!. The County
land use designation is Res -3, up to three dwelling units per acre.
However, tract submittals from the County add part of the density bonus,
the redistribution of units f+tim that 675 acre site, and n1so units from
Staff Analysis of Sept. 25, 1990
Lcr. from J. Dilorio to Chrmn. McNiel -
Environ. Arse,,,. for TT 14492 - 14498,
14522, 14523 a TPM 13128 - University Crest
Jctober 10, 1950
Page 3
the Crest site to-the University site. The "Residential Planning Area
Summary" far the University site indicates that 633 units are proposed.
(See Exhibit "C -1 11) For comparison purposes staff's "Concepts Site Plan"
yields approximately 501 units for a gross density of 2.8 units per acre.
Althougr I applications for the Crest sites have been accepted, it is
necess, to discuss their impact on the University site, as well as on
the Specific Plan as a whole. The Country baser density for the Ct,e,t site
is 625 units and with the ten percent hom►s 709 u,'ts. Of these, 188
units fall under the Csunty land use designation of Res -2, up to two
dwelling units per a�.ra. The Planning Commission indicated that
equestrian lots would ba desirable for this pr tion of the Crest site.
Mr. Pilorio indicated that in order to provide equestrian lots in this
Res -2 portion of the Crest site, some lets would have to be transferred to
another area in the Specific Plan to accomplish minimum 20,000 square foot
lot sizes. Staff agreed so long as the number of lots transferred was
reasonable and so long a* the receiving site would be able to accept
additional units.
The "Residential Planning Areas Summary" indicated that 660 units are
proposed for the Crest si!:e. (See Exhibit "C -2 "). In contra,:t, the
Specific Pian indicates that 709 units are permitted, but 560 proposed.
In response to staff's request to show how the Specific Plan proposal was
accomplished, the Consortium`s consultant prepared the memorandum of March
9, 1990, ir,ricatirg that 149 units were exported fromm the Crest site and
distributed thr. !ghnut the Sped ; -tc Plan subareas. (Sec Exhibit "D "). No
analysis was of-.cred on the number of equestrian lots made available or on
the ability of the receiving site to absorb the additional units. The
Specific Plan - ld "ve 'reducwd the m'.nimum lot size from 20,000 square
feet to 19,000 which would have required a waiver of the minimum lot size
for equestrian use or resulted in reducing the availability of equestrian
lots.
Subsequent to the aforementioned March 9, 1990 ;nemorarJum, preliminary
staff analysis indicates that the receiving sites would need to change
land use designation from rL, less ht 2 units per acre to L, 2 to 4 units
per acre, in order to receive the additional units. If this is the case.,
it would be an example of "paint yourself into a corner planiing" and
staff would not recommend the trans,. -Ar.
All the above discussi =jn on density is based on the applicant's premise
that d_asity considerations are eased o,, an entitlement standard rather
than on a performance standard. Wi'h the density range concept, the City
has always put site consi�,erations first. With adoption of the Hillside
Gradi.,� Ordinance in January 1990, Planning Commission and r ".y Council
sent a sicnal that with slopes and other hazards in the E".iwanl North
area, the site should control density and not %he other way around. This
p0 icy will remain an important factor in future negotiations on the
University Crest project and on the Ftiwanda Nrarth Specific Plan as well.
0701-02 � a 10 -10- 0 PC Agenda o 2 of
Staff Analysis of Sept. 25, 1940
Ltr. from J. Dilorio to Chrmn. McNiel -
Environ, Asses. for TT 14492- 14498,
14522, 14523 & TPM 13128 University Crest
October 10, 199D
Page 4
In regard to dentity of projects adjoining the University Tracts,
densities -are substantially lover, (See University Site Density
Comparisons Map Exhibit "E ").
B. "Specific Plan Status ":
In February 1990 staff did not make a decision to deny the Specific Plan
or the subject applications, but only to put the subject applications on
hold until the Specific Plan issues could be re:;olved. The applicant
always has the right to appeal a staff decision to the Planning Commission
and City Council and did not do so. However, this public hearing does
provide the applicant with an opportunity to appeal the staff decision to
put a hold on the review process.
Staff originally accepted the tract maps for concurrent processing based
on the premise that they could be reviewed against a complete and
acceptable Speciiic Plan. n complete and acceptable Specific Plan has not
been received and staff has no basis an which to review tract maps. (For
a discussion of the chronology of events leading to and following staff's
letter of February 22, 1990, see "Staff Analysis and Documentation" under
the Specific Plan item on the Planning Commission agenda of this date.)
C. "General Plan Amendment Stags";
As stated under the discussioi for the Specific Plan item an this agenda,
amendments to the Land Use ;�7,d Circulation elements of the General Plan
are part of the discretionary actions related to the Specific Plan and
must be identified and analyzie z3 part of the EIR.
0. "Environmental R3view Status ":
The EIR is c technical document which forms the basis for political
decision making. The environmental documents are far from complete. For
discussion see the Specific Plan item on the Planning Commission agenda._
E. "Tract Mao Status":
Once again, because the Specific Plan could not be supported by staff,
there was no basis for review of the tract maps. Also see Item "A" above.
F. "Relationship of Mans to Count+ University Crest PD ":
Z taff had no choice but to review the County submittal in order to respond
to planning issues in the City Sphere -of- Influence.
Regarding the overstatement of -the density, on the University Crest
project, staff apologizes for the typographical error in the staff report
to the City Council, !Qotember 5, 1990. The paragraph referred to should
have read:
Staff ,Analysis of Sept. 25, 1990
Ltr. from J. OiI)rio to Chrmn. McN?e1
Environ. Asses. for TT 14492- 14498,
14522, 14523 & TPM 13128 - University Crest
October 10, 1990
Page
For a nut aer of reasons density has been added onto the University
Tracts so that the overall gross der -0ty is 3,83 dwelling units per
acre and 3 individual tracts exceed 4 dwelling units per gross acre.
For a summary uF the density of the Univei�si -;,+ and the Crest sites see
Exhib'` 'is "C -1" and "C -2, discussed above.
MB:sp
Attachments; Exhibit A Letter of ''larch 18, 1990 Nissen /Olivier
Exhibit B -I Concept S';te Plan
Exhibit B -2 Analysis of Land Use
Exhibit B -3 Analysis of Streets
Exhibit C -1 Residential Planning Area Summary /University Sitr,
Exhibit C -2 Residential Planning Area Summary /Crest Site
Exhibit 0 Memorandum March 9, 1990 Trevino- McZeal /Henderson
ExkIbit E University Site Density Comparison Map
r
7 IL
t , =fir:. `•,.� - � . : u f . .
71 CUCAMONGA
.fir,. `•'oklc a ._ie.nenoe'Yi ` ;+ Uep. e s
'Marco !3, 1990
Mr.. John Olivier
Nuscoe, Williams, Lindgren and Short
f551 Sterling Avenue, Suite A
Riverside, CA 92503
7T
SUBJECT: SUBJECT: TENTATIVE TRACT 14607 SUBMITTAL '
Dear John:
Regarding the March 12, 1990 submittal of the above - referenced tract in
the Etiwanda North Specific Plan area, please note that the Planning
Division will accept your ^,ibmittal at this time. Howe%er, as you are
aware'no review-or procesa ', of this tract may occur until such time -as
the February 14, 1990 draft- Specific Plan has been reviewed and policy
directi ®n has peen provided by the Planning Commission and City
Council. At this time, the fee submitted will be returned to you. The
fee will be accepted at a later date when formal processing of the
project can begin.
Should you have any questions do not hesitate to cont=act me at
(714) 989 -1861.
Sincerely,
COMMUNITY OE'>dELOPMENT DEPARTMENT _
PLANNING DIVISION
Be!!erI issen _ .
"a
Associa P.l:sti` �-
ON
A r•
ssr
cc Larry Henderso�n�, Pi incipal� P1 n etr; "
..•y(. � �'��L,le. •Cl F T •1• P ••M,r,.. .. 1.�i.. „ -
EXHIBIT A
w.. William 1. Ateundes Cwsci(wowMn Chug
1• B UgYet 11 Co. 1/s.rVr
Dannii L Stout Deboah N. Brown Pamela 1. Writ-ht reek t— afrP
7--l`iil--�"--`
T
THE CARVN 01MILOPMENT CO. 3925
P.O. SOX M 714-44S-SM
SOUTH LAGUNA. CA 5,28X7 -Mf9
is - 411M
PAY
Tc. THE
ORDER OF-j:��lf-
ee)
ARS
SMWRIW PACIFIC MCKWUL SIANK
38MM=
FORLI-asc ALI
Ak
o
EXWBTTA
- --- -
-- .
1, two
!3 EP
:L PM
NT
EXHOff ®-2
a �
�'� mac. r►�►
ST EE 'ATTERN STUDY
R CREEK PLANNED DEVELOPMENT
S
i
>-4
44 LU
,Ipr�P
II
a�G U
N
I M�4
P
M M
II
0 ry
ar
40 r�
v
O� N
m �
B
N V.
o�
s ..
m M C4 C4
z
a
O Q.09 eV M m C9 V1 0: °
Nit
w'
EY
O pbi pp. � Oe1 6f? y �D
f. e"S. rq eel M fef e+R� M'R � i
f
8
oo ea VI r4
_o
to
dc
C4 ,G
C
a
w
S
< v
M H %D t
I:
EXH OIT C -1
7 AM
ca
LU
Ch W
Wi
�1 ® 99 !'�C
N
4
® <<
�. yr" ^.
■el
N
M
� r �
N
e3 w1 rj
I
w
� � A
•
I
J
Mw
M "f
N
Q Al s
wlflV. ri
li .
r
irC4 m
tD
N
5r
8
lC
at
N
N
C
e
h
ffi
:
M
Y
F
�
zi
EXWBpT C -2
M
.
tD
N
5r
8
lC
at
N
N
C
e
�p
ffi
:
Y
F
�
EXWBpT C -2
_ na. k? yo sr _AHD.Ptair Dcsfiti ,.- P.02
LAND-PLAN
iz
DESI _
I
� -
GROUP 1?
M MVh 9, 1990
To:
lando Cucamonga
From: Anitaarevino -bla l
Lamd Plan Design Group
Re: Revocation of AweRing Units Among
Properties Within the FA4SP
ly :
Job No.: NES 376
t
CountyDensity Acwd
T
7
Cast 709 5 0 (+149)
L7nlvetsI�► 594 633 (.49)
-
MCNay 1Z Q la 17} -
Sub ToW 1,310 1,193 +1170
-
° MW 117 dwcll�g tuft have been relocsted to the following MM
203 53 Units
6A. 32 Units
-
6C 16 Units
16 Units
Tms relocation ofu*ita to dwe areas was this resat: of meetings witift the Planning
_
-_
CammiSSion Wotl hops These changes provided for larger lob is the Crest plcnning
nuns, in particular,.equatrim size late were located on the west and noA pordotts of the
Crest Site.
E)CHNIT
Q
. 34 Execulivo Patk, Wts.160 / irrins. California 9271.11 (714) 474.42001 FAX: (714) 474.4209
NO 376
Par 2 3
ti
Totdamis allowed $03 dwelt3wits.
TOW ate trans pt r to a&e nu pa in vocen am 499 dwaftsualts.
Tye 499 unbr, hm bm rdocaW as foUawr.
2D 110
2E 218
30 . 19
Af = sa
X 95
I%c QW negaaeatoj th* ,reiccadon of units dsa&rocd aboae is otar to waac ths. st tots
to the aorth poldon of the site.
Corr 16
i
r
cG cha+nn
I
EXNIOT p
/O DU� C CrT.EdSS,,,�
/Z3 "Z,4r-
2 D Ltii �C C GLUOtrI�a IW4� /AY
l6re4 ".7), -
Yh
i
t
E �..._
i
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
STAFF RE -PORT
DATE: - October 10, 1990
TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner
BY: Steve Hayes, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENT& ASSESSMENT 'AND DEVELOPMENT_ DISTRICT
AMENDMENT-89 -06 - THE JANES GROUP - A request to amend the
Deve oprent Districts Map from no zoning designation to
LLw Residential (2 -4 dwelling units per acre) for 7.94
acres of land located on the southeast corner of Milliken
Avenue and Vintage Drive - APN: 225- 251 -47
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 14508 - THE
JAKS GROUP residential subdivision and design review
for 26 single family lots on 7.94 acre, of land, located
at the southeast corner of Milliken Avenue and Vintage
Drive - APN: 225- 251 -47
L. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION:
A. Action Requested-. Approval of a subdivision map, site plan,
building elevations, conceptual grading plan, conceptual
landscape plan, Development District Amendment, and issuance
of Negative Declaration.
B. Project Density: 3.27 dwelling units per acre.
C. Surrounding Land UL2 and 2onin :
North - Existing single famri y residences; Caryn Planned
Community
South - Vacant, Future Foothill Freeway Right -of -Way;
Medium -High Residential (14 -24 dwelling units per
acre)
Ea::t - Existing single family residences; Caryn Planned
Community
West - Single family residences; Lots- Medium Residential
(4 -8 duelling units per acre)
D. General Plan Designations:
Project Site - Low Residential (2 -4 dwelling units per acre)
North - Low Residential (2 -4 dwelling units per acre)
South - Medium-High. Residential (14.24 dwelling units per
acre'.
East - Low Residential (2 -4 dwelling units per acre)
West Low- Medium Residential (4 -8 dwelling units per acre)
ITEMS C 8 D
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
DDA 89 -06 /EA & TT 14508 - THE JANES GROUP
October 10, 1990
Page 2
E. Site Characteristics: The site is vacant and void of any
significant vegetation, with the exception of the street trees
and ground cover that have been planted along the V * -tage
Drive frontage. Curb and gutter' exist along the entire
Milliken Avenue /Vintage Drive frontages and the curvilinear
sidewalk is in place along Vintage Drive. The site slopes
from not•th to south at approximately 5 percent.
F. Applicable Regulations: Since the site has no official zoning
designation, the applicant is proposing to adapt a Low
Residential zoning designation for the site, which 4s
consistent with the underlying General Plan designation fcr
this ,Flarcel
II. BACKGROUND: The subject site was annexed to the City as part of
the Caryn annexation, but "is not a part of the Caryn Planned
Community Development Plan. According to the applicant of the
annexation, the anticipated use of tha site was a church and /or
church related facility. A church is conditionally permitted in
any residential zone; hence, a zoning designation for this parcel
was never adopted.
On January 25, 1989, General Plan Amendment (89 -01A) and
Development District Amendment (88.08) applications were reviewed
and denied by the Planning Commission. The applicant for these
applications was proposing to "upzone" the General Plan and
Development Districts Map to a Low Medium Residential
designation. Although never heard by the Planning Commission, a
Condit'�.-al Use Permit (89 -01) was submitted in conjunction with
the amendments for the development of a congregase care facility
on this site. This application was withdrawn, after the denial of
the Development District and General Plan Amendments.
III. ANALYSIS•
A. .General: The street layout is derivad from the requirement
for twe full means of access fur cul -de -sacs in excess of 600
foet in length and access l;mitations on Milliken Avenue. A
small portion of the improved Vintage Drive street frontage
will be removed near its intersection with the proposed street
"A."
An existing General Telephone Switching Station is located at
the southeast corner of the site. Currently, the substation
is accessed by a driveway from Milliken Avenue, which runs
along the south property line of the proposed subdivision.
With the development of the tract, the GTE parcel will become
a lettrzed lot A. inclusive within this entative tract map,
and iP access revised to be off the knuckle of Streets "A"
and 'd.'°
E
E
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
DDA 89 -06 /EA & TT 14508 - THE JANES GROUP
October 10, 1990
Page 3
Lots range in size from 7,452 to 11,760 square feet with an
average size of approximately 9,212 square feet. The
applicant is proposing a total of three floor plans, with
three elevations each which range in, size from 2,526 to 2:944
square feet. All plans are two - stories with three -car garages
oriented toward the street.
B. Development District Amendment: in conjunction with the
subdivision map, the :ppiicant if requesting t;; have the site
designated Low Residential (2 -4 dwelling units per acre),
which is consis`cent with the current underlying General Flan
designation of Low Residential. The 'pplicant is proposing a
t4ngle family detached product which is compatible with the
surf unding singlo family tracts. Furthermore, the density of
the p�,oposed suodivision is less, and the average lot size is
greater, than the Garyn Planned Community, For these masons,
staff considers the proposed project to La compatible with
adjacent land uses and the Development District Amendment
warranted.
C. Design Review CommittQe: On September 6, 1490, the Committee
McNiel, Melcher, Coleman) reviewed the plans and did not
recommend approval of the project as presented. The following
changes were reconnended:
1. The Building Pad on Lot 10 should be flipped in order
to: a) greater separate the Lot 10 and GTE parcel
driveways and provide a landscape buffer in between and
b) provide a greater setback from the switching station
to the residence. In addition, the proposed retaining
wall between the driveways should be eliminated and
repiaced with landscape mounding and shrubbery. In order
to meet these requirements, it may be necessary to
increase the street frontage of Lot 10 by reducing the
width of Lots i through 9 by a few feet each.
2. All retaining walls within 15 feet of a front property
line should be eliminated. Instead, grade differentials
between lots should be taken up gradually within, the
front yard area.
3. All driveways should be necked down to a maximum width of
16 feet, as measured at the driveway approachE:,
4. The retaining walls within future City maintained areas,
on the north We of Street. "C ", should be faced with
natural river rock.
5 The gable on the garage side elevations of all plans
should be completed to achieve a more finished
appearance.
PLANNING COMMIS510N STAFF REPORT
ODA 89 -06 /EA b Tt 14508 - THE JANES GROUP
October 10, 1990
Page 4
AML.
f-. The base element (rock or brick) should wrap around the
side' - levations to the return wall locations on all
applicable plans.
7. All chimneys shall be treated as to match the base
element of each plan type (example - a wood sided house
with a brick base should have a brick chimney). Since
Plan 2B has no base element, either a rock or brick
material could be used on 06 rhimnryys.
The applicant than revised the architectuval, site, landscape,
and conceptual grading plans for the site based upon the above
referenced issues. The Committee (McWiel, Weinberger, Buller)
reviewed the project on September 20, 1990, and recommended
approval based on the inclusion of the previous meeting's
issues.
D. Technical Review Committee: On September 4, 1990, the
Committee reviewed the project and determined that, with the
recommended conditions of approval, the project is consistent
with all applicable standards and ordinances. The Grading
Committee conceptually approved the project at its meeting of
August 31, 1990.
E. Environmental Assessment: Part I of the Initial Study has
beer completed by the applicant. Staff has completed Part II
of the Environmental Checklist and found that there could be a
signifricant noise impact on residences of the subdivision if
the proposed Foothill Freeway is constructed in the future.
Also, significant noise imparts are associated with the close
proximity cf Milliken Avenue to the site. An acoustical
analysis recommended that a 19 -foot high wall be built in the
rear of the lots backing up to the future freeway off -ramp to
mitigate future noise problems. Also, the noise study
recommended that a 7 -8 foot high wall be constructed aling the
Milliken Avenue frontage to mitigate noise impacts associated
with Milliken Avenue traffic. Staff has recommended that the
sound mitigation walls be constructed ttith the development of
th'_s tract, so that all residential subdivisions on this
corner will have their walls in place at the time the freeway
is constructed, consistent with the requirement on.surrounding
,crscts.
IV. FACTS FOP FINDINGS: The project is consistent with the General +
Plan and Development Code. The project will not be detrimental to
the public health or safety or cause nuisance or significant
adverse environmental impacts: In addition, the proposed use,
subdivision man, and conceptual plans, together with the
conditions of approval, are in compliance with the applicable
provisions of the Development Code aad City standards.
PLANNING COMMISSION': STAFF REPORT
ODA 89 -06 /EA & TT 14,508 - THE BANES CROUP
October 10, 1990
Page 5
V. CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised as a public hearing
lu the ilnlan Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper, the ,property has
been posted, and notices were sent to all ad.-Went property owners
within 300 feet of the project site.
VI. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission
recommend approval and issuance of a Negative Declaration for
Development District Amendment 89 -06 through adoption of the
attached, Resolution. In addition; staff recommends that the
Planning Commission approve the Subdivision Map and Design Review
for Tentative Tract 14508 through adoption of the attached
Resolutions with Conditions, and issuance of a Negative
Declaration.
Rasp Ffy so d,
Bra ler
G ill t lanner
BB:SH /jfs
Attachments: Exhibit "A1l - Site Utilization
Exhibit "8" - Subdivision Map
Exhibit "C "`- Site Plan
Exhibit "D" - Conceptual 'Landscape Plan
Exhibit "E" - Conceptual Grading Plan
Exhibit "F" - Building Elevations
Exhibit °G" - Floor Plans
Resolution Reccmmending Approval of Development
District Amendment 89 -06
Resolution of Approval for Tentative Tract 14508
with Conditions
Resolution of Approval for Design Review for -
Tentative Tract 14508 with Conditions
4
C
y unuzvnw,�tr
e�rao :'JCewUGA
rrea ara casos
rYfAifrs Or
L .•uf amp r rw
fmaf ✓.K✓ mb aTq
Rmwrm CKmwarem�am f.afe
N✓1fa»a]
:PIY OF UCAMONGA i'm&L. Du,$ 132 -ob
PLAN ION 1 14
x�.
IE7QrLM3 rr. SCALE: •'
I
V.
tki
r
x :2211:! ,� V
7 ~ W
— aiaw. Cc u+ v
Ln
tr
aj
IL
rj
�jil
co
del
xe,a
t.l Jt
1 p
z
NkT
g%i-' Z UJ
0 0
5
s _� • ° Q i � 3 � Is�� k s,
Ili
• Ul Z
�_ QU < W
0
r
s
-a
r �
r t i
a a !
tf'tf €tt
ssss` �
gi1•(37�q�(�g
i
i
a
cc
June �=+
'Rill1
s
EX413_I7
.1
a�
co
0
U
VQ
Z0
UlU
t=-
zz a
m
r
Y.,, of � esi;e:�wt4rp�r�I�q . v�,•,�"
Y�
'f \e
{40.JVre� 3fi {t� ti
' fig ; of �i1'lj��'��S w % �4�r•��«'
,. �� ,'S l..- .c��V1�.: .if 11 �r r ■' ;t" r �Jl .�
j ,Iii. ► '.+�,Y�,
���rF lF Df! G2 till ii1M�
�
�
1 a� i►
y��•-r --"
i
C
..�� f
■� /MA w
,Z � - � •i
{.f t' ia:
��.
Z �,,..�
,::. i��r■ �.
■ti. �
,§A °«
\ $$i
■ \ �
i. #k -
� �■ � _� ■ :. \ \� �
\ ## � #■* k■ y� 2 ?� ::
d r o
.. ,
+:i :are arlr.lar� arjat >_ a� �
i
■r
_
_ OWN �
w NOW.
-Awl ..16 _( -
7
,r��'
I6
'Y:
�,
WN EmE {E7EmI KIM
to 3 r,
y
i
..o...L..n....i + u...r:
777-, ■
4 la
Rip
n
Am CM
co tt 1
XxI TO
.i wax
aa8_..
ti
F.J
UlknIL ERMI AI
Right Elevation
1✓'I.AAt TfTf UCAM ®NGA TME: Am IE1,�.,s N
-;tort
` R
C- c9 7
Ff
limps,
.
RESOLUTION NO..
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMAGA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF
DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AMENDMENT 89 -06, REQUESTING TO AMEMD
THE DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS MAP FROM NO ZOAING DESIGNATION
TO LOW RESIDENTIAL (2 -4 CaELLING UNITS PER ACRE) FOR 7.94
ACRES OF LAND LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF MILLIKEN 0
AVENUE AND VINTAGE DRIVE, AND MAPeING FINDINGS I4 SUPPORT
THEREOF - APR: 225451 -47 e
A. Recitals.
(i) The Janes Group has filed an application for Development
listrict Amendment No. 89 -06 as described in the title of this Resolution.
Hereinafter in this Resolution, the ,subject Development District Amendment is
referred to as "the application,"
(ii) On Octroer 10, 1990, the Planning Commission of the City of
Rancho Cucamonga convicted a duly noticed public hear.q on the application.
(iii) All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution
have occurred.
B. Resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby sound, 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 ;:nd correct. �
2. Based upon substantial evidence `presented t4 this Commission
during the above- referenced public hearing on October 10, 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 Vintage Drive with a street frontage
of 1018.41 feet and a lot depth of 848.05 feet and is presently improved with
curb and gutter along Milliken Avenue and curb, gutter, sidewalk, and
streetside landscaping along Vintage Dive; and
(b) The property to the north of the subject site i-s
designated Caryn Planned Coinunity and developed with single family
residences, the property to the south of that site is the vacant future
Foothill Freeway right -of -way, the property to the east is designated Caryn
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION N0.
DOA 89 -06 - THE JANES GROUP
October 4, 1190
Page 2
Planned Community and includes existing single family detached homes and the
property to the west ii designated Low- Medium Residential and includes single-,
family residences.
(c) This- amendment does not conflict with the Land Use
Policies of the General Pl, , and swill provide for development, within the
district, in a manner consistent with the General- Plan and with related
development; and
C
l
(d) This, amendment does promote the goals and objectives of
the Land Use Element; and
(e) This amendment wou i not be materially injurious or
detrimental to the adjacent properties and would not have a significant impact
on the environment nor the surrounding properties.
3. Based upon i)e substantial evidence presented to this Commission
during the above - referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of
facts set forth in paragraph i and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and
concludes as follow,:
(a) That the subject property is suitable for uses permitted in
the proposed district in terms of access, size, and compatibility with
existing land use in the surrounding area; and
(b) That the proposed distr ct change would not `ave
I
significant impact on the environment nor the surrounding properties; and
(c) That the proposed district change is in conformance with
the General Plan.
4. This Commission hereby finds and certifies that the project has
been reviewed and considered in compliance with the California Environmental
Quality Act of 1970 and, further, this Commission hereby recommends issuance
of a Negative Declaration.
S. Based upon the findings any conclusions set forth in paragraph
1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby resolves that pursuant to Section
65850 to 65855 of the California Government Code, that the Planning Commission
of the City of Rancho Cucamonga hereby recommerids approval on the 20th day of
October 1990 of Development District Amendment 89.06.
6. The Secretary to this Co- mission shall certify �-i the adoption
of this Resolution.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUT1ON N0.
ODA 89 -06 - THE JANES GROUP
October 4, 1990
Page 3
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS
10TH DAY OF OCTOBER 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 `Rancho
Cucamonga, do h,... °by certify that the foregoing Resolution`
was ,dl ly and
regularly introdu.:ad, passed, and
adopted by the Planning CommissioW of the
City of Rancho Cucamonga, at ,a regular meeting of the Planning
Commission held
on the 10th day of October 1990, by the following vote-to-wit-
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
1+C'
E
E
W1
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT
MAP NO. 145508, A RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION OF 26 SINGLE
FAMILY LOTS ON 7.94 ACRES OF LAND, 'LOCATED AT THE
SOUTHEAST CORNER OF MILLIKEN AVENUE AND VINTAGE DRIVE,
AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT TnEREOF - APN: 225- 251 -47
A. Recitals. e
(i) The Janes Group has filed an application for the approval of
Tentative Tract Map No. 14508 as described in the title of 01 Resolution.
Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Tentative Tract Map request is
referred to as "the application."
(ii) On the 10th day of October 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 adeption of this Resolution
have occurred.
B. Resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the
Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows:
1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts
set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct.
2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to this Commission
during the above - referenced public hearing on October 10, 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 Vintage Drive with a street frontage
of 1038.41 feet and lot depth of 848.05 feet and is presently improved with
curb and gutter along Milliken Avenue and curb, gutter, sidewalk, and
streetside landscaping along Vintage Drive; and
(b) The property to the north of the subject site is developed
with single family residences, the property to the south of that siwe is the
vacant future Foothill Freeway right -of -way, the property to the east is
existing single family :(etached homfst and the property to the west includes
s°,ngle family residences.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION N0.
TT 14508 -- THE JANES GROUP
October 10, 1990
Page 2
3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission
during the above- referbnced public hearing and upon the specific findings of
facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission herby finds and
concludes as follows
(a) The tentative tract is consistent with the General Plan and
the Development Code; and
(b) The design or improvements of the tentative tract is
consistent with the General Plan and the Development Code; and
(c) The site is physically Suitable for the type of development
proposed; and
(d) The design of the subdivision is not likely it cause
substantial environmental damage and avoidable injury to humans and wildlife
or their habitat; and
(e) The tentative tract is not likely to cause serious public
health problems; and
(f) The design of the tentative tract will not conflVct with
any easement acquired by the public at large, now of record, for access
through or use of the property within the proposed subdivision.
4. This Commission hereby finds and certifies that the project has
been reviewed and considered in compliance with the California Environmental,
Quality Act of 1970 and, further, this Commission hereby issues a Negative
Declaration,
S. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs
1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission he►sby approves the application subject
to each and every .condition set forth and in the attached Standard:
Conditions attached hereto and incorporated , herein by this reference.
Planning Division
1) The GTE Sub4ation site (including the
driveway) shal'i become a lettered tot "A" on
the final,, map.;
2) The project shall be constructed consistent
with the recommendations of the Preliminary
Noise Study. A Final N oise Study shall be
submitted prior to issuance of building permits
in a standard format as determined by the City
Planner. Said repo ^t shall discuss the level
of interior noise attenuation, i;he building
materials and construction techniques provided,
and if appropriate, verify the adequacy, of
mitigation measures included in the building
plans.
Im
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
TT 14508 - THE JANES GROUP
October 10, 1440
Page 3
3); The developer shall provide each prospective
buyer written notice of the Fourth Street Rock
Crusher project in a standard format as
determined by the City Planner, prior to-
accepting a cash deposit on any property.
4) The developer shall provide each prospective
buyer written notice of the City Adopted
Special Studies Zone for the ked Hill fault, in
a standard Format as determined by the City
Planner, prior to accepting a cash deposit an
any property.
Engineering Division
1) The existing• overhead utilities
(telecommunication and electrical) on the
project side of Highland Avenue shall be
undergrounded from t1ae first pole off -site east
of the project's east boundary. prior to public
improvement or acc:ptance of occupancy,
whichever occurs first. The developer may
requ,est a reimbursement agreement to recover
one =half the City adopted cost for
undergrounding from future development
(redevelopment) as it occurs on the oppozite
side of the street.
2) The developer shall pay an in -lieu feL- to the
developer on the opposite side of Milliken
Avenue as reimbursement for the landscapi,: of
the Milliken Avenue median island from Highland
Avenue to Vintage drive prior to recordation of
the final map. The foe shall be one -:alf the
cost of the total amount of landscaping,.
3) The east one -half of Milliken Avenue from the
project south to highland Avenue shall be
constructed, including sidewalks and parkway'
Landscaping.
4) Install "No Stopping Any Time" signs along the
project frontage on Milliken Avenue and Vintage
Drive.
5) Parkway landscaping on Milliken Avenue shall
conform to the Milliken Avenue Master P1,.n.
6` Landscape easements shall be provided where
City landscape areas extend beyond the right-
of-way line.
PLANNING
COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
TT 14508
- THE JANES GROUP
October
10. 1990
Page 4
7) Radii for meandering sidewalk shall be between
600-and 1,000 feet. `
8) Landscaping within the "Limited Use Areas" for
the project intersections shall be approved by
the City Enginc�r.
9) Since the 'street trees cannot be planted within
5 feet from the outside ofta storm drain pipe,
the street trees shall.be relocated behind the
sidewalk and a 6- foot -wide tree easement
provided for Lots 119 12, and 13.
10) Provide additional catch basin capacity on or
near the frontage of Lot 9 to compensate for
the lack of an overflow path for the sump catch
basin.
11) Only one 30 inch maximum height retaining wall
is allowed within the landscape easement on the
north side of Street, "C." Also, the retaining
wall shall be rock 'because it is easier to
maintain (less subject to graffiti and
cracking).
12) The landscape material within the areas to be
maintained by the City shall conform to City
policy as approved by the City Engineer.
6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption
of this
Resolution.
APPROVED AND ACOPTED THIS 10TH DAY OF OCTOBER 1990.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA -
BY-
Larry T. McNiel, Chairman
ATTEST:
Brad Buller, Secretary
Amok
1p
Al 4,b �
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
TT 14508 - THE JANES GROUP
ctober 10, 1990
page g
I, Brad Buller, Secreta7Y of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga, do' hereby 'c <;rtify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and
regularly introduced, pas,,,ad, and adopted by the Planning Commission. of the
City of Rancho Cucamonga, at .4 regular meeting of-the Planning Commission held
on the 10th day of October 199x. by the following vote- tC-wit:
i
AYES: COMMISSIONERS.
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: r
i
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
ACk
�N+ Vii
`.q 3pou�suee`y�:
H s•�i$wt
- � ' §.1
C Y
po `��annY�..Yf.oSp
J ����r 0 pM�•t
e
0
Pe
S �
5
�B
22 UZZ
31 uNy ds �_
ayyy6.Mp�� ON. C�p�� �•MV•Y��
gCYCOYSg■UFM O CoN C
is
$N� 2-3 to
0 9 id si
4M
iQ �e y s ��n Y g o
K j ^_
wCgCw .re�. S G� O` -.1.1 ?Od
Y
i
M Y y c r
}W� irk r
�g3 a x
1
5
rs5 r
c . =
uv = -S S
GvY�ew�M� V `i �L
pp
gli
Y .TL YY2
L O C M p^ V �� Y .�� F» c N
Sap i_� ;291 i� Y1++LeB_rel
O p °M^ O °YS «�SDB
4�.Y 01 • C— ��Y �`•r�LYByay.v�
H�`l iNy V'C MiTH �'M WY
�I I
H 1W2 �a� 2 *z -- 31,
; gg� gg T mu 82
° 5r SYr '" gib'
T - LJ, Y— ^y 8 » �S
M_A 0.
�ru �
Z
S — Y ° S Y
sr Via' usey ��$¢3 _„r;„L
--a I 6 m' �W +Z = �..
» y! got LO
pY �L1ga. 6h Nf � w O „� � Sr Z O wT
YC C Ys L~^ •Y�' a > a or&.93 i SC.
— >M.�' Ei_ gat. •�°ifE
s 'eS �r »Y�Y .4. ly=��•`..$�
s Y
B
.'[.L,tx4�S,�ar�pr I o
a .21 1 vex w s
.21 Y p p oo Y��C.0 YEEQE Z i }`T �a ,t; sQ as s
oam CO 9212; W!M Y 1w! $4 ; �w. -j 4w Y.O' LO
y
rI �I .I �I ',-I N%7-I -I I
4
E
0
El
°N1 300` go $ fit_
Nus ON !! sp�N 47_ OlO y*Af o -_u
°Y. Illfff"�111$ YC4Yi�0
Y �R f ^ �` �6- 4'OYM ►iM�
C N « Z
- S LA
°
C R•
Q V
°t1�0 gv1 �CO �� MyLO =� Nc, _L- SN YMY�w
�sv� �i9R� N Sa`1" E N °��Y ✓LLL �.��f
CM °L .f� ° 1 ✓ >= M�° � c``L �VwO
yO N,Y6 �O
C
N
C M �Lq "y iM
ullf-
E 1� MOY +C `M
,N V ■ C ✓O
ail L^
C,i1 00 ��P �wypl $ °L �I' C
N M S M Q M t. N =40 i K N S.
TI NI bI ^` iI
E
08 -SH !g IS t i t: ses€
LA j 31 u CCr E
�iK oCY`O -t✓ S ,•`Y �°
Maui
is-
a�ty a .i1 f`g s ..
w..YY�.11 E eL a C 1
+'
ifl
4 L O M � �1 � fl + O L
y O
r
° C
L S y 113 t 13
p L✓V . T -w
UP
j 3: is 8a eN 'si
a ;N� s
8 : ;—
11862 $'hr
!
tgl�Et w�sN
C p
O_
Is! s
ypyN
pw g °TL .M$ v [
sst "g -_i°'
I;
N° tail Swill'
^P'
U_V �CQnY O.
So ti�
4 IY &Sao&
Cb Z®~,s. i §p«s V�� S � +�M• {- _�N3''�'• 5 W N
�ZY. OHO
Um
a.
xu
ig-
Ing MIA
a, e-� � �Ca.. 3
:S: L'•' fiMg?- It §�.5� � e��3 ��'e�� �+• *S� 4 �,�
V« ' LES
L —a pus. ♦—. y •
:qVYO° §{{I� _YffiY $ e 1o�e
CCY^
a'Q °LL ► uClPe 3t = %"I. %-101 _ §g 1 75
1r'M. Ptali
M � gV
Ab Va. § @w§ 3ZEC4 4i
0 Y^ �r ma -r+
ti c F€ru x. fbifi � A 9 F1
—LA
Ftl
�NCp
wM N$grr Z
3 C Y
�P>i
r
rte.
v Y • V
a' A�
Y � a
W, gs
s v ,5
o €
Y�9NY
i �• uAj
v
1a
a N'TE fib
a
ms'
x
e�
CC ppLZaJ 9»us -�
9v* T14
A$
M
z
3
i
g
s
R
M "J
S •�
s sg
A � C
ti
g�
aqs
S
��
°X
�g
Y
so
"_FY
�
x�
—pa.
ML
A=
N ^_
I
Cal
O
V
WJ
9Y�
ffCC.. u
O M!
Y
ot�
Em
V § Og
o8�s
sits
1sVV,
T `•
L
3! be
Y
�� r
V4
11
F]
s V 4-
N
0�4 s g�c.R" O i 3i r C Oc Y Ys.
g
g�a - :- sha
3IRi
_p=
$. & i3
�g a d Tt � � e, o�S ya; 7i "�� a���.+.
"a 1 iY : e.` mho eo
\- p r
SAT is �Os6
A�L�
Ca q tltl ^ :it Y i Y
JIM
NJ tit
CQ
`
Saw
C
A.
9
vim$
UL
i &°$O.
.p~eO
YJ
y
$\
°ec
c
t+iLia �`g0
w
01
ST€
6s:
4g
'l
lz
51
ob-
�� r�
Y ®NO
�y
.
Y
b It :.•
N
Zgf-
E/�i��0■
Y�46t
C t g
YL
a \Y� c
6
c
O �H
�i
S.
N
°y
bOi�UN�
�Y�QN
X` @@ 4Ya1 Y44
w i
0+
N c$7
tCMl Ym
R p
OIL'
,NM
CrY.^ YY
Y
Y
n. ��.tl
$ R
LL
$ 3
^
�.1
��i�•"�
�_
C�aN
all
M� ^M�Gai
may �o ae
�
�
u`
���i s'yy�i
��f�
s^
��
�v
g
ppub
�S
�a+��ye�
Y
s V 4-
N
0�4 s g�c.R" O i 3i r C Oc Y Ys.
g
g�a - :- sha
3IRi
_p=
$. & i3
�g a d Tt � � e, o�S ya; 7i "�� a���.+.
"a 1 iY : e.` mho eo
\- p r
SAT is �Os6
A�L�
Ca q tltl ^ :it Y i Y
JIM
NJ tit
�o
Y
�a
L
PCI
P!
a,
»r
LAY tdiY
q��Y yyC
i `
�C
ot°w °
.P f1 V »
Vi -� &I:
O � �v�
11146 b q3
N
P •
a
ors a�P;,
3$g gp`6
Elm HEO t
y
CM
S
8y
7 sYY
_
Fs
«W
t ii
LPL
�
`Y
4°.�
�Cr
YY
O
eeWY
»V3�
.°w•'�
"6�$�
'"fie
x
�LL!
��ffi��
Y
�
t'M
..
C
i .11 H
` 04i
Yti V
$
g ti
o
YCLS
Cp=
CCGA
�.S4L�
4CI
e1i»gay ccY
�—
O
�jU
F Lo
« °O�o�
E9•
£ as
3
o»
V pya9
»
»
Se
a W3
»r�.2
~ �
L
t. 1.2
t
%^
Cg4gs
PS
rev
O 4
1��o
vz
a
'ppp�Lia"'i%-a`
E
�`�
'�b�'a�
Mot
ww•.".
�•N
M�
&Z
C�W
f
N
G
°�
T
G rvi
i4
y�
»�
a
cy2��pp,1
13
t �!
yF_q }.
L
KUYy'H
lark
yw
�
yYi
C
Iii O�YA
N9
LY.�
sfi
Yom•
ail« M
y
YOL
ml
a�
�1
'I
�
I-SI
�o
Y
�a
L
PCI
P!
a,
»r
LAY tdiY
q��Y yyC
i `
�C
ot°w °
.P f1 V »
Vi -� &I:
O � �v�
11146 b q3
N
P •
a
ors a�P;,
3$g gp`6
Elm HEO t
y
CM
S
8y
7 sYY
_
•C
yy
4°.�
�Cr
.�y
C
i .11 H
` 04i
Yti V
J
�o
Y
�a
L
PCI
P!
a,
»r
LAY tdiY
q��Y yyC
i `
�C
ot°w °
.P f1 V »
Vi -� &I:
O � �v�
11146 b q3
N
P •
a
ors a�P;,
3$g gp`6
Elm HEO t
y
o y 9i� ZT2 i re:S r s s ; CM H —oij
�^ L
sum d a t s +`
C • YyR° C° • T3
s , I er
Yae pq� M �
•iii y Va vg
Nr 8CC
�1y aNL� 9L Y y_ yM lei }`�° y I��_ °ui �i L•�
g
6H 4Ta �.°. ai ». 3 °�t L° uyL^ '+a+?
a All
asa
OU
rf
�" iO ° � �i Y °yq w � yY6i r
Y 6 R Fa �s ism F•..0 �.
M
C °
v
R�
IS L
1 M
W
\
tt�
O�•
O�u
L O
�C
YY L
�
J
s
V N
+
Y
yy R@
4�C
OZ
aC�any��
d
°L
ryp
�g�
8yi
%k -IS
M05
191
o y 9i� ZT2 i re:S r s s ; CM H —oij
�^ L
sum d a t s +`
C • YyR° C° • T3
s , I er
Yae pq� M �
•iii y Va vg
Nr 8CC
�1y aNL� 9L Y y_ yM lei }`�° y I��_ °ui �i L•�
g
6H 4Ta �.°. ai ». 3 °�t L° uyL^ '+a+?
a All
asa
OU
rf
�" iO ° � �i Y °yq w � yY6i r
Y 6 R Fa �s ism F•..0 �.
RESOLUTION NO,
A RESOLUTION,OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Or THE CITY U- ~
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE OESIGN
REVIEW FOR TRACT NO. 14508, A RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISIP-5 OF
25 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS ON 7.94 ACRES OF LAM. LOCAiED AT
THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF MILLIKEN AVENUE AND VINTAGE
DRIVE, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF APN:
225- 251 -4T
t
A. Recitals.
(i) The Janes Group has filed an application for the Design Review
of Tract No. "k508 as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter,
the subject G sign Review request is referred to as "the application.'°
(ii) On October 10, 1990, the Planninej Commission of the City r
Rancho Cucamonga held a meeting to consider the application.
(iii) All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution
have occurred.
B. Resolution.
NON, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved iy zhe
Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows:
1. iris Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts
set forth in ti: Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct.
2. Rised upon substantial evidence presented to this Commission
during the above - referenced meeting on October 10, 1990, including written and
oral staff reports, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows:
(a) That the proposed project is consistent with the
objectives of the General Plan; and
(b) That the proposed design is in accord with the objectives
of the Development Code and 0e purposes of the district in which -the site is
located; and
(c) That the proposed design is iq compliance with each of the
applicable provisions of the Development Code; and
(d) That the proposed design, together with the conditicns
applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or
I' welfare or materially injurious to properties or im rovEnnts in the vicinity.
I,
� 1�
PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION N0.
OR FOR TT 14508 - THE JANES GROUP
October 10, 1990
Page 2
3. Based
upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs
. 1 end 2 above, this
Commission hereby approves the application subject to each
and every condition
set forth below and in the attached Standard Conditions,
attached hereto and
incorporated herein by this° reference.
Planning C :vision
1)
The proposed retaining wall along the easement
shall be eliminated witii'in 15 feet of the
street right�iaf -way and replaced with
landscape mounding and shrubbery.
2)
All retaining wads within 15 feet of a front
property line s:iall be eliminated. Instead,
grade differentials between 'lots shall be
taken up gradually in the front yard area with
undulating mounds.
3)
All driveways shall be necked down to a
maximum width of 16 feet, as meilsured at the
driveway approaches:
4)
The retaining wail within the future City
maintained areas, the north side of J-creet
"C ", shadl be faced with natural river rock:
5)
The gable on the garage side elevations of all
plans shall be completed to achieve a more
finished appearance. Details of this
condition shall be reviewed and approved by
the Design F.eview Committee on a Consent
Calendar basis prior to the issuavice of
building permits.
6)
The base element (rock, brick) shal`, wrap
around the side elevations to the return wall
locations on all applicable pr;;1s'.
7)
All chimneys should be treated as to match the
base element of each plan type (example. a
wood sided house with a brick --4r should have
a brick chimney), Since Plan 2B has no base
element, either & rock or brick material could
be used on the chimney.
8)
The existing block • 111 on the south property
line of Lot "A" _hat be stuccoed to match
proposed stucco freeway sound uaI and
existing perimeter walls for adjacent tvacts.
i`
PLANNING. COMMISSION RESOLUTION N0,
DR FOR TT 14508 - THE JANES GROUP
October 10, 1990
AdOL Page 3
kir.q �Aerina Division
1') Ail applicable conditions from the Resolution
for Tentative Tract 14508 shall appiy.
Tha Secretary to this Commission shall certify the adoption of
th;s Resolution::
t
ArPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 10TH BAY OF OCTOBER 1990.
PLANNING COMMISSION G,F THE CITY OF RANCHO CkAMONGA
3Y:
Larry T. MCNiel, Chairman
ATTEST:
Brad Buller, Secretar
I, Brad Buller, Secretary of the Planning Coutission of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the f regoing Resolution was duly and
regularly introduced., passed, and adopted by the Planning Comissitin of the
City of Rancho Cucaminga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held
on the 10th day of October 1990, by the following vote -to- wit.:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMiISSIONERS:
ABSENT:
COMMISSIONERS:
S ONERS•
8 o MB Y V A .SjrOSy � ^yy $w9YY ~ "T YY b%. wO d' +cs� oa! M W or-we S. L
YS
6_ ®
J;ii 11
lit
jib
SIMS Till, 3-1s;
TL jib
IL
0 `• r. u n
is�s "ass ;P� =is tail -�
OPP�e. 3 . .� - U7.
s g '
C"s In
F
n
a �
a F. 8
ITS
r
NG
R
.. jn JS
°� ICI 1
r ®'®
6
u
r
r
`
c
a �
a F. 8
ITS
r
NG
R
.. jn JS
°� ICI 1
`'� VGY• � � TEA
Jill
m% ���s 4b At Y :-
is ��.
:B IC
ilk
b -site
I
u y5 I.A
r
Mal
Y�OmY
l= Pp��s�•�E�
ji :r $B � °-
ss S.
411101$I6 ^f S V El ws
Y
•Y y fr �QV Q lfJ r M Y6
My
ilt
all
s O Y 111 ■ $$y _ i}i
a
Ogg a
„a61� Yed� �L gLtl le�l'ie�!'tl ! ^� ���eY6*
P d ✓ Lg— 1{ �P °.
,all 1613,
e � �� ` Elms
y —p
swgo .wS t - :wC .c.-uE ceSi a� vASfNa:!i 9roa$ii8i`s
C
0
so:b �k 3 6V � ®3kks_a os sfrf F i$fl
_ S
"�BII S tmgi �biiG see 3 Tr
I 41H
yyam- �� : ®� �f
NC�e chi 60 �Op ° 8: (AU![ a 1 'r�l
ill Y C s Y1 ® a C
-cos of Ia aff
xg
}
of » • In alikkiz
�31..13k i
HE E
99%510
�M� 6» iwo F•» 'v
\ O
4.3
a
» $ Y —»
'as Elks ^ -� E� � �� fits � ��� •�����
Fog CCe Ill's •\ f R� F St
•s Y
�— �M � `F si of
1; 1 Hui
a ,I €f »a a € a� �� F eft •
$ - Y u
am
rM
M ALI au °s+i 1%»211; .111 -cI X033a
d
1
& —.a i{
s Y i. v
e ��yy W jr� lugs C i `
/ 6` _ o
¢r,
all Y ^� �� E !`i v f
. C
=g jai s_7�$_ �g
J.
g q'y
pf EVE -w p.
i
s sits as fi!i� Be p Fg#
s
O A
rd iec
51p4
i 0 Y
8
Yp y-
916Y
fl
F
� ss�
lie
_ s-I
t
M
tt `-
a%— Mai
ills S -es
g s 21
2 t
Ta Is
fir=
a p c't
YwL..
t._ let
ss1
TH
� li .21
• M�
G
Is ;s- i 1,15 f ..
r
O
0
O °
r M
$ s�
8�
�r
all
w 31
O Y
a tt
z 9 .
v�
bC
y v
iaPL ads
<i 0
AW A i
a Y g efi
fir
��i
Hi
vSS
0yp
� F A
Bill
jl
H I
<'It
A
Ell
° ii rt
�A y
TL« «
~�u �L
i^V ZG133 w 5 A� y
OO a.. rl AAAw
n �
s� R a
w
is
p w ua
�nfl
U11 VIC
yU'x a
e
t% s,
r �s
K « a
1
r
a
46 1 1
3t zing
Hut id
^i p
Ma cs , 2 1
4 w� �• www"�
�r ' Y
l sr . t.
Ailall
µ �
s lima
� � Y
i
�z
8
��
• M
v
b`
t �
n
r
N
E
M
�
i
!
s� R a
w
is
p w ua
�nfl
U11 VIC
yU'x a
e
t% s,
r �s
K « a
1
r
a
46 1 1
3t zing
Hut id
^i p
Ma cs , 2 1
4 w� �• www"�
�r ' Y
l sr . t.
Ailall
µ �
s lima
� � Y
i
C. r
ills s -a
Y p �
HE IRS .ice .$ 7C�
f » L
OHIO q
Lit
tz
15.x:. u 3 141 sa
'l oil 0)
I
'"A
e�
M
3
a
�2
a
C
ST
Y
gig.
ae
E a$l
t
6 y
lit Y
`s s IOU �a
�! _MI- 111t A, -_
w f�3 .»yam
L M
fig €s �_$J�
Vr r u
=It 0
Wit
E
0
Y
as? • Zrs r s s
ME
�« Vtsi
sa
_i • •�'' �• • S 1
Ms� t
Ili_ -
!� ». ,311 $$ 11 r Z,
1XIS it
11 y ■r V O�'t
N V
l 1 i.�l 1�;
s /
OZZ wins
••III
w•w
ro
f •
0�
M
y
8b!
�sw
V39
e
Y
q
a
Air
q
��x
spa
kidO
�
`
M q
T
Y
as? • Zrs r s s
ME
�« Vtsi
sa
_i • •�'' �• • S 1
Ms� t
Ili_ -
!� ». ,311 $$ 11 r Z,
1XIS it
11 y ■r V O�'t
N V
l 1 i.�l 1�;
s /
OZZ wins
••III
w•w
ro
f •
8b!
�sw
V39
e
Y
q
Air
q
kidO
�
`
M q
T
i
ti
,�ao ��� • �, ors° 5ti J�w3 e
Al �° wr
ti
ado ty et ��e .QA�' �ti Sao e S taa yea �°'
t�� ale Q� O6Pte<aEC� Sad' a,J�e 1e
wo'oe • c a� `��,9 S�5 ��•s •� � r'Q Sao ire aces �za`� as ,� ,
OG tea et • P`' �% ti�.e �� �ti
fete
�+ e v r'� . eS • t0 �e S
tom. 0taa ;�,•� F��PP�'`Oee�S�Pr�aAe�e�ea1+ • ek.4N
ota
`1�, `7���GOay at��`e Off• ataoneCe�' �eaa��ea �lG ee moo, Aia��
FP -Qao� oo h OeQ Q�ti rav �a�a °�� amt °Qo Q1 ec`G �Q Qto ae
�'�° Qt er�c, Jtt
. 0�. Og�Fc'�•• ���,av�,4 °t O�`�,����a} �krs,��4 w'�`�aAet' o °�e,�e� ��'o °ae�be °aoatJa�e
,,o _ ° _ d�a e5 4P. ��_ �.�0G1� ZZoSk
a�'aa
1e a�o�
0
a¢ Qew I
I
ill
I
I
1
z u
i
0741.02 �._ _� 10-10-90 PG Agenda 3 of 5
0 0
�;
Y
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
1990
Members of 'he Planning Commission
City Planner
Moore, Assistant Planner
AS'.ESSME�i7 AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 90 -02A
NCUCAMONG "" - A request to amend the Public
Element of tha General Pion, in conformance
Health and Safety Cade Section 25135.7
by reference the San Bernardino County
Waste Management Plan, as approved by the
Department of Health Services June 15, 1940, -
DESCRIPTION: Citywide; applicable to
siting of ��azardaus waste facilities, as well
s and wastC management activities.
ASSESSMENT: Staff has completed their environmental
found that no significant adverse environmental
as a result of the proposed adoption of San
Hazardous Waste Management Plan (CHWMP).
is Lased on staff's concurrence with the
environmental analyses completed by the County
the environmental review for the CHWMP). The.
consisted of the preparation of a Program
Report (EIR) and a subsequent Addendum to the
in accordance with the. guijelines of the
Quality Act ;CEQA). Both the EIR and the
by the County Board. of Supervisors ate February-
5, basis for CEQA compliance when each of the.
consider approval of the CHWMP.
to be a site- specific action and will not
or unavoidable significant adverse .impacts
The Plan merely establishes programs and
management of hazardous materials and wastes..
protect .public health., safety, and welfare, and
and to assist the public, government, and
the transition away from reliance on land
hazardous wastes, as required by State and
Program EIR and Addendum prepared by the County
the overall impacts of the CHWMP at a broad,
established
guide;':nes for future site- specific.
to the San Bernardino CHWMP,
ITEM E
STAFF REP01tr
DATE: October 10,
TO: Chairman
FROM: Brad Buller,
BYt Lori L. Moor
SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL
- CITY OF RA
Facilities E
with California's
(cl, to incorporate
Hazardous W
California U
I. PROJECT AND SITE
applications for the
as v;itzardous material
11. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESS
assessment and has f
impacts would occur
Bernardino County's
This determination
findings of the env
(the lead agency for
environmental analyses
Environmental Impact
EIR for the Plan,
California Environmental
Addendum, certified
5, 1990, provide tfi
County's 20 cities c
The CHWMP is not meant
have any direct effects
on the environment.
policies for safe m
The Plan aims to pr
the environment, a
businesses in making
disposal of untreated
Federal laws. The P
thoroughly evaluated
policy level, and es
activities pursuant .
guide;':nes for future site- specific.
to the San Bernardino CHWMP,
ITEM E
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
GPA 90 -02A - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
October 10, 1990
Page 2
The future activities in the program, such as facility siting and
construction, will ue addressed through separate environmental
reviess(s), in-order to provide CEQA compliance on a project -
specific basis. These reviews wiT1 most likely take the form of
Project EIRs which examine the enviro;,,ental impacts of a specific
development project and the site- specific impacts. Design
standards int mded to minimize or mitigate impacts would be
established prior to permitting the construction of any hazardous
materials and waste management facilities. Therefore, the
predominant impacts of the CHWMP will be beneficial to public
health and safety.
III. BACKGROUND:
Plan History
In 1986, in response to a push for waste minimization and
alternatives to landfill disposal of untreated hazardous wastes,
as well as a heightened awareness of local and regional hazardous
materials and waste management needs, the Tanner legislation
(AS 2948) was produced. This legislation is designed largely to
be instrumental in the siting of necessary hazardous waste
facilities in the State. It also enables establishment, of a
comprehensive planning process for manager `t of hazardous
materials and wastes at the County level, and A ects the change
in regulatory policies to an emphasis on local control.
In March 1987, pursuant to the Tanner legislation, the County
Board of Supervisors authorized the preparation of the San
Bernardino County Draft Hazardous Waste Management Plan (CHWMP),
The Citizen Advisory Committee, assisted by the County Department
of Environmental gaalth Services (DENS) staff and the interagency
Technical Advisory Committee, prepared the CHWMP.
The City worked closely with the Citizen Advisory Committee and
the County through Councilmeirber Charles J. Suquet's efforts as a
member of the Citizen Advisory Committee and City staff's input
through service on the Technical Advisory Committee throughout the
Plan's development.
On February 16, 1988, the City Council reviewed and commented on
the preliminary draft CHWMP in an informal workshop with County
-staff.
In April 1989, after receiving extensive review and public comment '
on the Plan via public hearings and technical meetings, the County
sent the Revised Draft CHWMP to the cities in the County for
formal review, comment, and approval.
On May 10, 1989, County Referral 89 -02 was presented to the Adak
Planning Commission requesting a review of the Revised Draft CHWMP
and subseluent recommendation to the City Council for approval. mr
tl-,2-
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
GPA 90 -02A - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
October 10, 1990
Page 3
On May 17, 1989, the City Council approved the Revised Draft CHWMP
in conformance with AS 2948 (Tarne") by passing Resolution, No.
89 -234 (see Exhibit "A ").
On February 5, 1990, the County Board of Supervisors' adopted the
Final CHWMP, and certified the EIR and subsequent Addendum.
On February 26, 1990, the State uepartment of Health Services
!DHSi notified the County that the CHWMP was in "subst4ntiai
compliance with the Department's duidelines" and Tanner
legislative provisions, and had therefore been approved.
On June 15, 1990, the State OHS notified the City that the San
Bernardino CHWMP had been apr -oved, and stated that the City must
act within 180 days to implement the Plan according to one of the
fallowing responses required under California Health and Safety
Code (H &SC) Section 25135.7 (c):
1. Adopt a City hazardous waste mc.ragement -plan containing
all of the elements required by subdivision (d) of
Section 25135.', which shall be consistent with the
approved CHWMP;
2. Incorporate the arplicable portions of the approved
County Plan, by reference, into the City's General Plan;
3. Enact an ordinance which requires that all applicable
zoning, subdivision, conditional use permit, anu variance
decisions are consistent with the portions of the
approved County Plan which identifies general -areas or
siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities.,,
Staff recommends response A2, whereby the applicable portions of
the approved CHWMP are incorporated by reference in the City's
General Plan. The 180 -day action period ends in December 1990,
Specifically, implementation action will require City Council
approval of a General Plar Amendment no later than December 5,-
1990.
i
Plan Summary
` The following is a brief overview of the Plan (a copy of the
CHWMP's Executive Summary is included in the., Planning
Commissioners' packets).
The CHWMP provides poiia,.les and proposals to comprehensively
manage the County's hazardous materials and wastes. The Plan
identifies the types and amounts of wastes generated in the
County; establishes programs for managing hazardous waste, sets
forth a framework for facility siting; and identifies goals,
policies, and actions for the long -term management of hazardous
materials and wastes in the County.
1
i
3
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
GPA 90 -12A — CITY OF .RANCHO CUCAMONGA
October `.0, 1990
Page 4
One of the primary objectives of the CHWMP is that of waste
minimization. The Plan indicates that San Bernardino County and
its incorporated cities will encourage source reduction and
recycling activities where feasible. The development of a
comprehensive program for the safe management of hazardous
materials and wastes is intended to support the economic growth of
the County by providing assistance to industry on waste
minimization, as well as allowing for the development of
environmentally sound hazardous waste facilities for proper
treatment, storage, and /or disposal `of wastes which cannot be
reduced.
Additionally, the CHWMP establishes siting criteria which must be
met by any hazardous waste treatment, storar�a, or disposal
facility serving more than one local gererator located in San
Bernardino County. These criteria will ensure that hazardous
waste management facilities "are located only in environmentally
appropriate areas, near generators and far from residential areas
and immobile populations. Potentially significant impacts and
necessary mitigation measures for specif`'c development projects
would be identified with health ri <k dssessments at a site -
specific level.
The basic types of specified hazardous materials and waste
facilities discussed in the CHWMP include residual repositories
and land disposal, transfer, and storage facilities, recycling
facilities, any+ a variety of waste treatment facilities ranging
from transportable treatment units, to incineration or
solidification and stabilization processes.
According to the Plan, the desert region of the County provides
the only potentially suitable sites for residual repositories and
land disposal. The other types of facilities mentioned in the
CHWMP could possibly be sited in heavy industrial use zones in the
County, subject to Tanner legislative provisions. CHWMP siting
criteria, complete site - specific environmental impact analyses, -
conditional use permits, and local performance standards. The
City's only "heavy" industrial use zone is located in Industrial
Specific Plan Subarea 15 (see Exhibit "B ").
z
General Plan Amendment
Cxisting objectives and policies established by the City's General
Plan, with regard to the safe and healthful management, handling,
and treatment of hazardous materials and wastes in Liquid and
Solid Waste Facilities are found in the Public Facilities Section
of the Land Use and Development Element:
(ebiective, pg. III 68);
"Cooperate with the County on plans, policies, and programs to
manage solid wastes and hazardous wastes."
E
PLANNING CO*1ISSION STAFF REPORT
GPA 90 -02A - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
October 10, 1990
Page 5
(Policies, pg. III - 69)
"Encairage and support County municipal waste minimization and
reduction programs, including recycling and resource recovery
programs."
"Adopt a Hazardous Waste Management Plan and implementing
ordinances. "'
"Cooperate with the County and` participating agencies to
achieve hazardous waste management goals, including but not
limited to. particip,_T'ig in a hazardous materials disclosure
program and support of the County Hazardous Materials
Emergency Response program."
Therefore, adoption of the CHWMP will facilitate implementation of
these existing General Plan policies and objectives. Staff
recommends the following amendment to the current language (sC3
Exhibit "0 ") of the Liquid and Solid Waste Facilities portion of
the Public Facilities Section of the Ge,;teral Plan (pg. III - 68,
para. 6)
The State (Health and Safety Code, Section 25135, et. seq.)
has identified hazardous waste as a class of materials
requiring special land use planning, use regulation, and
disposal regulation. Under the 4aw$ the 6eunty of Sap
Br- nard4ne Department of cnv4rsnmenta4 Wea4th Serv3ees #s
prepar#ng a 4eea4 Raeardous Waste Management Phan whieh must
be approved by the State Department of Wea4th Serv3ees and by
69% of the G4t4es w4th 69% of the pepu4at4en 4n the 6eunty by
June 39, 3989, The G$ty skv Ranehe Gceamenga 49 part #e#patang
In the deve4epment of the Seunty Rheardeus Waste Management
Ran: In compliance with these State legislative provisions,
the Sae Bernardino County Hazardous Waste Management Plan, has
been adopted by the County Board of Supervisors (February 5,
1990) and is hereby incorporated by reference.
(Note: Strike - through indicates deleted language; bold type
indicates new language.)
IV. ANALYSIS:
Issues and concerns
Staff has-identified three areas of concern associated with the
CHWMP. These issues include: 1) the permitted uses in heavy
industrial areas according to the City's Industrial Specific Plan
and according to the CHWMP; 2) the health and safety of immobile
populations (e.g. in prisons, medical centers, etc.); and
3) future CHWMP implementation measures. The City's concerns
about these issues are discussed below:
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
GPA 90 -02A - LITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
October 10, 1990
Page 6
1. Permitted Industrial Uses
The CHWMP indicates that only heavy industrial areas would be
appropriate locations for the siting of hazardous waste
facilities. - Although a "heavy" industrial use area is
identified in the City (Subarea 15 of the Industrial Specific
Plan (ISP) -- see Exhibit "B "), the actual uses permitted in
Subarea 15 are of a lesser intensity than those required for
off -site regional treatment facilities.
The City's heavy industrial designation differs from that of
the County's in that certain procedural and performance
standards have been established by the City's ISP to guide the
development of these particular industrial areas. These City
guidelines restrict activities in the "heavy" industrial use
area. The City's project development procedures, in
conjunction with the CHWMP policies, would include
requirements for compliance with the Tanner legislative
provisions, a Conditional Use Permit (CUP), and, because of
the proximity of the West Valley Detention Center (which
houses an immobile population in the "heavy" industrial area),
a risk assessment for any hazardous waste facility proposal
for the area would also be required.
e
i
Staff maintains that, in light of the City's development AML
standards, it is highly unlikely that any of the hazardous qr
waste facilities specified In the CHWMP could - meet the ISP
requirements, with the possible exception of a transfer and
storage facility. Moreover, the health and safety of the
immobile population in the City's "heavy" industrial use area
must be assured before any hazardous waste treatment facility
Gould locate in ISP Subarea 15.
2. Health and Safety of Immobile Populations
The protection of the immobile pop.0 ation at the West Valley -
Detention Center it; ISP Subarea 15 is important to the City.
Originally, the County Plan required a one -mile (puffer between
an immobile population facility and the location of a
hazardous waste treatment facility. Subarea 15 is the only
R potentially "suitable" siting :area in the City. The one - mile
buffer zone would have excluded any hazardous waste facility
from locating in Subarea 15 (see Exhibit "C ").
However, the Final CHWMP was amended to eliminate the one - mile
buffer zone requirement. The Plan now requires a risk
assessment for the proposed location prior to siting a
hazardous waste facility closer than one mile to a facility
housing an immobile population„ in order to determine that no
significant risk is presented to that population. A risk
assessment is a highly detailed and specialized mathematical
analysis used to determine the potential hazards or
consequences of a,* action.
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
GPA 90 -02A - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
October 10, 1990
Page I
The amendment of the. buffer' policy initially raised some
concerns ;,bout whether or not the immobile populations would
still be,4dequately protected. However, the knowledge that
risk assessments provide full disclo3ure of the safety issues,
and are required to be incorporated into the siting
considerations, mitigates the City's concerns. These risk
assessments review the risk of upset, air emissions, potential
ground water pollution, and other key factors, and would
ensure that the health and safety of the immobile population
would be safeguarded.
3. Implementation Measures
The safe management of hazardous materials, as well as
hazardous wastes is ensured by the CHWMP. Implementation of
the programs and policies that are presented in the CHWMP are
designed to have an overall beneficial impact on the
environment and on public health and safety, by both
minimizing existing hazards and by providing for thorough
analyses of public health impacts.
Future implementation measures for the CHWMP eaill be needed,
but are not required during the 180 -day action.period. It Is
anticipated that the City will review and adopt some, or all,
of the implementation measures adopted by the County.
Major implementation of the hazardous waste management efforts
will be accomplished through adoption of County ordinances,
and Staff expects that City review and subsequent adoption of
appropriate ordinances will continue.
Conclusion
Staff indicates that the issues of the health and safety of
immobile populations, adequate performance standar :, and future
implementation measures can be adequately addressed utilizing a
combination of the Tanner legislative provisions, the CHWMP goals
and policies, and the City's applicable standards. The immobile
population issue will be amply safeguarded by the risk assessment
requirements. The permitted development in the heavy industrial .
areas will be effectively guided by the combination of Tanner
legislative requirements, "CHWMP facility siting conditions, and
-the City's procedural and performance standards. Future
implementation actions ;!A.-Ared for the Plan will be accomplished
by continuing the City's cooperative efforts with the County.
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
GPA 90 -02A • CITY OF RANZHO CUCAMONGA
October 10v 1990
Page 8
V. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: Staff has made the following findings:
(a) That the -CHWMP comprehensively and adequately addresses.y
hazardous materials and waste management issues; and
(b) That City adoption of the CHWMP will occur during the 180 -day
::tote mandated action period ending December 5, 1990; and
(c) That the proposed amendment would not have sigpificant impacts
on the environment nor surrounding properties; and
(d') That the proposed amendment is in conformance with the General
Plan.
VI. CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised in the Inland
Valley Daily Du11'etin newspaper as a public hearing.
VII. RECOMMENDATION: Legislation passed in 1987 (S8 477) requires
counties and cities to amend their General Plans within I;iO days
of State approval of the CHWMP to bring local planning documents
into consistency with the CHW14P. The consequence of not takirg
one of the prescribed actions would be that potential hazardous
waste lacility applications submitted in the City would then be
under the purview of the State authorities, and the or�ortunity
for local jurisdictional review and control of the facility siting
AML
(provided by the CHWMP) would be preciuded.
WNW
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the attached
Resolution recommending approval of General Plan Amendment 90 -02A
to the City Council and recommendation of issuance of a Negative
Declaration, thereby allowing the applicable portions of the
State- approved County Hazardous Waste Management. Plan to be
incorporated by reference into the Public facilities Section of
the Land Use Element of the City`s General Plan.
Res p f ly su d, _
Brad r
City Planner
BB :LM /ifs
Attachments: Exhibit "A" - -City Council Resolution No. 89 -234
Exhibit "B" - Industrial Specific Plan Subarea 15
Exhibit "C" - Immobile Population within Buffer Zone
Exhibit "D" - Existing General Plan Text
Resolution Recommending Approval of GPA 90-02A
ITEM: GPA 9"2A
My OF UCAlViONGA TnI. 1 CITY COiJ_NCIL RES. N1.89.234
PLA. 0 . VISION RESOLUTION_ NO. :9 -234
r
A RESOLUTION BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
1.11CAMONGA, CALIFOP.NIA, APPROVING THE SAN BERNARDINO
COUNTY HAZARDOUS. WASTE - MANAGEMENT PLAN IN CONFORMANCE
WITH A82948 (TANKER)
WHEREAS, Assembly Bill 2948 (Tanner Act, Chapter 1504, Statues of
1986) authorizes counties to adopt, as an el ment of the General Plan, a
County Hazardous ''Waste Management Plan pursuardf to guidelines adopted by the
State Department of Health Servires (herein after called State) and specifies
procedures for the preparati4.r, revision, adoption, approval, and amendment of
the Plan; and
WHEREAS, the County of San Bernardino Board of Supervisors
authorized, by re- 3lution, the preparation of the Hazardous Waste Management
Plan (herein of _r called Plan), and a Man has been prepared with the
assistance of *,,e County Hazardous Waste Management Plan Advfsory Committee
and input from the cities, local and regional agencies and the public; and
WHEREAS, the Plan includes comprehensive goals and policies fdr the
effective management of hazardous waste in the county, these goals include:
1. To protect the health and welfare of the public, environment,
and economy of San Bernardino County through a comprehensive
program that ensures safe and responsible management of
hazardous waste /material.
2. To reduce the amount of hazardous waste generated in the County
by providing _improved programs for hazardous waste source
reduction and recycling..
3. To ensure proper management of hazardous waste /material by
identifying and encouraging safe and efficient methods for
managing hazardous waste /material and by providing for ieeded
hazardous waste facilities in San Bernardino County.
4. To prevent hazardous waste from being permanently disposed into
land, or emitted into the air without being processed by an
t econmically and technically feasible alternative technology.
5.' To involve the public, industry, and government in a
comprehensive irocess that develops solutions for the management
and disposal o4 hazardous waste. -
6. To establish a framework for the development of San Bernardino
County's share o'l hazardous waste facilities.
7. To recognize chat consumers contribute- to the generation of
hazardous waste, and therefore, that Umiting indr.,:b,ial growth
would not be an appropriate means of reducing the County's
commitment in hazardous waste'management.
Resolution No, 89 -23.4
Page 2 '
8. To encourage and.develop public education program:, on.the prover
management and disposal of hazardous waste.
WHEREAS, the Plan was submitted to the City for review and approval'
as mandated by tke Tanner Act -which requires, as one of the requirements for
State approval of the Plan, that the County obtain approval from 50 percent of
the cities with 50 percent of the incorporated population; and
WHEREAS, the County must submit the Plan to the State for their
. approval by 3une 1, M9; and
;P
WHEREAS, tf.i City will have an opportunity to adopt soya form of the
Plan at a later da* consistent with the Tanner Act which states that within
100 days after rece, ing notification from the State that the County Plan has
been approved, the City must do one of the fallowing:
1. Mopt a City hazardous waste management plan containing all of
the elements required by the Tanner Act and which .is consistent
with the approved County Plan.
2. incorporate the applicable portions of the approved.Caunty Plan,
by reference, .into the City General Plan.
3. Enact an ordinance which requires that all applicable zoning,
subdivision, Conditional Use Permit, and Variance decisions are
consistent with the portions of the approved County Plan which
identify general areas of siting criteria for hazardous waste
facilities; and
WHEREAS,-the Plan when adopted by the County and Cities grill; serve a;i
the primary planning document for the management of hazardous waste in the
county anO will provide for local involvement it the siting of hazardous waste
facilities,
NOW, THEREFORE, the *City Council of the City of Ranch* Cucamonga,
California, does hereby approve the County Plan, in conformity, with AS2948
(Tanner).
PASSED, APPROVED. and ADOPTED this 17th day of May, 1989.
AYES: Alexander, Brown, Bugaet, Wright
NOES: - bone
ASSENT: Stout l '_
T
L. ennis l.' Stout, Mayor
f
Resolution 39 -234
F„ ge 3
ATTEST:
ever Authelet
Y ,City erCt k
I, BEVERLY A. AUTHELET, CITY CLERK of the City of Rancho Cucamonga,
California, do Hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly passed,
approved, and adopted `� the City Council of" the City of Rancho Cucamonga,
Califc -nia, at a regular wa?,ating of said City Council held on the 17th day of
May, 1989.
Executed this 18th day of Mav, 1989 at Rancho Cucamonga, California.
�2, 17
1ever7 X. Authelet ,�City G_erk
The It h, a Correa
COPY of the Ctidiilal Crt file in ti.is
office.
ATTEST: 19
J
BEVERLY' A. J T HCLET
City Cl k, Ranch ucamon a
: 8 Calii;
BY
J
;i
ANIL
A..II.
i�_i:
!: ► w
�aP.wRE.41=
1 1 = - - -- - �.. - --
►
INI 11
Jul WJL
i
SAN
LEGEND: M ISP SUBAREA 15
�sIM+.A _ � � � X97 .. R•A►a4� �
C
LiIEH i
i' 77�r r . 1 ` .
sum ���
fi FO HILL e!/
rmm: GPA 90-02A
CIS ' OF CAMON� IN®uSTRULSPECIRCPLAN N
pj,1 ION TITLE: SUBAREA 15
y E7t�e rr. "B" SCALE: NONE
�, / I u Oct' 90
��,�� ice: %• /� •• �a:;. �. ':: �� J�.�'!: «�: �.-
� ^ 1 Imo! • .� •`+ • ...
or
x,.!•1.1 ►i ►�F %fi .:.•s.
.L�. « -s•
o) S7I �lVrd r �„
rig► r r; Id _, .• r_
s;9 ® C L - G
a o � 1
�mmIE�a�'4
2 2a
L•.
E�7 =md�moW
a w-
m� m�
°e g
z -s as
.� I
I Zi ig!
$:
�e
�3
° C
�h
'c
O
V
C i
ME
UtiJ
:s'z
f}!
'Lill
uffi
c
C
$n
X330
3a$
d
r
0
PEE
Jul
= v�y3a3�
�.0 DQEd�y,. -cs
U m0.
tx3 mrd. �ml±�gmgam3a
c mE�Eo�+.Ed'3Eo
m
N m m N amp �S
Sn o y.
mrog0
21ga J &.
z., IS .as8
o
Most
ilk
Hil
011i"HeRg 'a
11"A:ia t$a
Z
W F'
4a'
W
Gy
a
o a
a ZQ
zp
�a
W.2
P
O
z
- p �
0
U.
r1
U
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF '
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF
THE Gr'1iiERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 90 -02A, TO AMEND THE GENERAL
PLhl TO INCORPORATE BY REFERENCE THE APPROVED SAN
BERNARDINO COUNTY HAZARUOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN (CHNMP)
INTO THE PUBLIC. FACILITIES SECTION OF THE LAND USE AND
DEVELOPMENT ELEMENT FOR RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA,, AND
MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF
A. Ricitals.
(i) The City of Rancho Cucamonga has filed an application for
General Plan Amendment No. iio -Otn as described in the title of this
Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Genprai P1
Amendment is referred to as 11thz application."
(ii) On October 10, 1990, the Planning Commission of the City of
Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing>�jn the application.
(iii) All le ,,al 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. Th =5 Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts
set forth in tt-- sitars, Part A of this Resolution are true and correct.
2. h. ion substantial evidence presented to this Commission
during the above -._ rerced public hearing on October 10, 1990, includi,ig
written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this
Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: -
(a) The application applies citywide; and
(b) The application proposes to change paragraph 6 of the
Liquid and Solid Haste Facilities portion of the Public Facilities Section of
-,the General Plan to read as follows:
The State (Hearth and Safety Code, Section
25135, et. seq.) has identified hazardous waste
as a class of materials requiring special land
use planning, use regulation, and disposal
regulation. In compliance with these
P
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION q.
GPA 90 -02A - CIT'Y OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
October 10, ' ?90
Page 2
SWIM
legislative provisions, the San Bernardino ,
County N,zardous :Zte Management Plan has been
adopted by thi: County Board of Supervisors
!February 5, 1990) and is hereb, incorporated
by reference.
(c) This amendment does not conflict with the Public Facilities
Policies of '' General Plan and will provide for development, cit'�Wide, in a
manner cons` ! with the C- eneral Plan and wi(h related development; and
(d) This amendment does promote the goals and object,'ves of the
Public Fa-.,ilities Section of the Ladd Use and Development Element; and
(e) This amendment would net be matei,ially 'injurious cr
detrimental to properties within the City and would aot hrve 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
°wring 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 CHWHP comprehensively and adequately addresses
i
hazardous mate-eials and waste - anagement issues; and
(b) That City adoption of the CHWMP will occur during the 180 -
day State - mandated action period ending December 5, 1990;
I
(r) That the proposed amendment would not have significant
impacts on the environment nor surrounding properties; and
(d) That the proposed amendment is in `conformance with the
t General Plan.
4. This Comm ;ssion hereby finds that the project has been reviewed
and considered in compliance with the Califerr•ia Environmental Quality Act of
1970 and, further, this Commission hereby recommends issuance of a Negative
Declaration.
5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs
1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby resoives that pursuant to Section
65850 to 65855 of the California Gov- ^nment Code, that the Planning Commission
of the City of Rancho Cucamoega hereby recommends approval on the 10th day of
October 1990 of General Plan Amendment No. 90 -02A.
6. The Secretary to th13 Commission shall certify to the adoption
of this Resolution.
PLANNING, COMMISSION RESOLUTION N0.
GPA 90 -02A - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMOWGA
October 10, 1990
Page 3
APPROVED AND A OPTED THIS 10711 DAY OF OCTOBER 1990,
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCA4ONGA
BY:
Larry T. McNiel, Chairman
ATTEST:
Brad Buller, Secretary
I, Brad Buller, Secretary v'r the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution: was duly and
regularly introduced, passed,, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the .,
City of Rancho Cucam dgo. Oat a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held
on the 10th day of October 1990, by the fallowing vote -to -wit*
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NO'ES COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS;
t
Ei
5
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY. OF THE
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY
c
HAZARDOUS WASTE NAGEI�IENT PLAN
(Revised Draft)
La
aa.
MARCH 1989
DEPAR'i UM TT OF ENVIRONUMNTAL HEALTH SERVICES
w
i
MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
OF SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
PEBRUARY 5, 1990
i
AGREEMENT 90 -157: MIST PRELIM
TY „}yRY pTNAL DRAFT COUNTY HAZARDOUS
WASTF. MANAGEMENT MiR ADOPT .4. MOD WITH_MA: APPROVED:
,.a'eoaTul considers adoption of the Preliminary Final Draft County
I: azaro,us Waste Management Plan, certification of the Environmental
Y'ylpact Repo ^'t and Addendum and approval of the Memorandum of
Gn3erstandi)g with the Bureau of Land Management re facility
siting. 0 )ntinueid from 1/29/90, item 711.
Paul Ryan. Virector of Environmental Health Services, states that
this item was continued last week to meet with the Cities within
the County because of concerns regarding the final adoption of the
Plan as presented today; Be gays that he gave information to the
Cities naedus in order to make their own decisions. As of now, he
feels all questions have been answered. He indicates that during
conversations with the Cities, they did request a Technical
Advisory CoM -ittee (which will be followed up with the Board's
appro�.^al at a later date) to assist Cities in preparing their own ;
plans and he states that the Cities are also desirous of having a
much closer working relationship with the department in ordsr to j
take care of various eavironmentel L.:faira that they have. 1
On notion by Supervisor Hammock, seconded by Supervisor Mikels, and S•d
carried, the Board:
1) Adopts the Preliminary Final Draft County Hazardous Waste
Management Plan as the Final CHUMP;
Zt Ceftifies the Environmental Impact Report and the Addendum for
the County Hazardous Waste Management Plan whi:, have been pre-
pared In-accordance with CEQA;
3) Directs the Clerk to file a Notice of Determination;
4) Approves Agreement 90 -157 approving the Memorandua of Under-
standing with the Bureau of Land Management regarding facility
siting.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Supervisors, of the County of
San Bernardino, State of California, by the following vote:
AYES: Mikels, Walker, Hammock, Riordan
NOES: None
ABSENT: Turoci
Am it
cc� ",0
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO,
L EARLENE SPROAT, Clark of the 5oerd of Suparviaors of the County of San dinardino, State:of California,.
hereby ^anlfy the f0M901nQ to be a full, true and correct cqW of the record p { 71On taken by said
Board d. Suparoisos, by vote, o�� ma rbarz present. as the some aq li` ?s�j t k,41 � taken by Minutes of .
said Roarrl at its rrNetl of 2 _. 90 ltt 984 �e� 4D Up Lry i
cc: ERS -Ryan w /agr., BEM w /Agr„
CA-^% Co. Comwel, Auditor w/ Z, 6Q &tea �j�
ayr., Risk Mgmt , Purdtasitag�. EARLS E 6 ro �E ` -r , ` w '!�
Cont a std
liance w /agr., Clark B§
By
,f�
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY
HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN
(Revised Draft)
March L989
The information, contained herein is a 'summary of each of the chapters in
the County of San Bt,-t.iardiuo Revised Draft Hazardous Waste bbnagement
Plan (CHY/tAP). The goals and policies /actions are presented in entirety
after each chapter summary. Chapter 2 has raa. recommended g oals or
policies, while Chapter P4 includes a recommended schedule for
implementation of CFAWMP programs.
Adsh CHAPTER 1
INTRODGC7'ION
Proper hazardous waste management - onstitutes one of the state's major
environmental concerns, Statewide recognition of the need far better
methods of hazardous waste management came about by the intense media
attention on improper disposal practices. Hazardous chemicals play an
important role in our modern society. They contribute to the manufacture
of a vast array of consumer products (i.g., televisions, computers,
automobiles, and medicines) and the convenAnce of consumer services
(i.e., dry cleaners, automotive repair). While these goads and services add
to our quality of life, they also cause the generation of hazardous waste.
Reducing our reliance on hazardous materials would reduce the generation
of waste. Hazardous waste will continue to be generated, however, siwze
some materials have no substitutes. For this reason, a comprehensive
plan is necessary to identify and promote programs for the reduction of
hazardous waste and the safe management of wastes that remain after
treatment or recycling.
AB 2948 (Chapter 1304, Statutes of 1986) and amending legislation SD 477
(Chapter 1167, Statutes of 1987), AB 3206 (Chapter 1389, Statutes of 1988),
AB 3209 (Chapter 378, Statutes of 1988). end A$ 34 (pending), recognized
the need to have a comprehensive program for management of wastes by
authorizing counties to develop a local hazardous waste rionaaement plan.
Aft The taw has as its goals:
the safe and responsible management of hazardous waste;
the ef.ective siting of hazardous waste facilities that involves Iocal
anti state governments, the public, and private induRtry; and
th.a prevention of permanent hazardous waste disposal into the land
or emission in the air without first processing the waste by an
mconomically and technically feasible alternative technology.
On. March 31, 1987 the County of San Bernardino Board of Supervisors -
authorized the preparation of the County Hazardous Waste Management
Plan fCHWMP). A resolution was adopted and sent to the State Department
of iiealth Services specifying the County's desire to prepare the CHWMP.
The Plan is consistent with state law and the Guidelines for 'Preparation
of Hazardous Waste Managemei,t Plans prepared by the Department of
Health Services, June 1987.
A final copy of the CHWMP must be submitted to the California Department
of Health Services (DHS) by June 1, 1989. State law specifies that the
CHWMP must bs approved by a majority of the cities within the County
which contain a majority of the population of the incorporated area of
the County. Once the Plan has been approved by DHS, the County has
180 days from the date the DHS approves the CHWMP to incorporate
applicable portions of the Plan by reference into the. County's general
ES -1
plan, or enact an ordinance requiring all applicable zoning, subdivision,
conditional use permit, and variance decisions to be consistent with the `
CHW1%4P. [
The cities are also required by state lase to adopt - some forks of a
Hazardous Waste Management Plan. The law specifics that cities are
required to do one of the following: I) adopt a City Hazardous Waste
Management Plan which is consistent with the CHWW; 2) incorporate
applicable portions of the CHWMP into the city's general plan, or 3)
enact an ordinance which requires that all zppiicable zoning, subdivision,
conditional use permit, and variance decisicns`to be consistent with the
applicable portions of the CHWIr - State law does not limit the city's
.a °Lithority to attach conditions to the issuance of a land use application or
ito establ.'sk, vquirementt or sit sL, criteria different from those identified
in the CHPr',f&% Any such conditions or criteria established by a city
inust be substantiated as nccessaF,y :to protect the public health and safety
since the conditWis :! or e*it?.ria may be Appealed to the State Appeal
iloard (SB 477, Chapter 1167, Statuaes of 1987)
'rhe CHWMP serves ss the primary planning doc iment for the management
of hazardous waste L11 Slin $nrnardino County. It is an element of the
County's General Play and is consistent with other elements of the
General Plan. The CHI- identifies the types and amounts of wastes
generated in the County, e9►a'►,iishaa programs for managing these wastes,
identifies an application re,�irw process for the siting of specified hazardous
waste facilities, identifies mechanisms for reducing the amount of waste
generated in the County, and identifies goals and policies and actions for
ha:mrdous waste management. The CHWMty -wes prepared with full and
meaningful involvement of the public. Information regarding the County's
CHWMP Advisory Committee and public involvement efforts it presented
in the discussion on public participation, Chapter 13.
GOALS ARID POLICEF..S /ACTIONS
The County plan is intended to preserve the local land use process,
protect the local environment, and provide a framework for ensu,' -Ig that
needed facilities are sited. The following overall goals and policies /actions
are the underlying goals used to develop the CHWMP..
Goals
G -1.1 To protect the bealth and welfare of the pubPv, environment,
and economy of San Bernardino County through a comprehensive
program that ensures safe and responsible management of
hazardous waste /material.
G -1 -2 To reduce the amount of hazardous waste generated in the
County by providing improved programs for hazardous waste
source reduction and recycling.
Gs -1 -3 To ensure proper management of hazardous waste /material by
identifying and encouraging safe and efficient methods for
ES -2
{
managing hazardous waste /material and by providing for needed
hazardous waste facilities in San Bernardino County.
G -1 -4
To prevent hazardous waste from being permanently disposed
into land, -or emitted into the air without being processed by
an economically and technically feasible alternative technology.
G -1 -5
To involve the public, industry, and government in a
comprehensive process that develops solutions for the management
and disposal of hazardous waste.
G -I -6
To establish a framework for the devdlopment of San Bernardino
County's share ^ hazardous waste facilities.
G-1 -7
To recognize that consumers contribute to the generation of
hazardous waste, thus, limiting industrial growth is not an
appropriate means of reducing the County's commitment in
hazardous waste mr- -iegement.
G -1 -8
To encourage and develop public education pro8tams on the
proper managemens and disposal of hazardous waste.
Policies /Actions
P /A -1 -1
Because a need exists to augment current programs for the
proper management of hazardous waste and to address recent
legislation, this jurisdiction shall work with industry and the
public in identifying safe and responsible solutions for the
management and disposal of hazardous wastes.
P /A -1 -2
Becausc the CHWMP applies County -wide, the County and tl.e
cities shall work together to prepare and update the CHWMP as
well as its implementing ordinances and to develop and implement
programs which reduce Mi amount and `,mcity of the hazardous
waste generated in the County.
P /A -1 -3
Because the Southern. California Hazardous Waste Management
Authority (Authority) provides an appropriate forum for local
_
input regarding the regional siting of hazardous waste facilities,
this jurisdiction shall continue its participation in the Authority.
P /A -14
Because proper hazardous wa::- management is one of the
stoic's critical environmental concerns, the County and the
cities shall wort-, with the Authority and the state to address
regional and statewide planning issues as necessary to achieve
environmentally and economically effective hazardous waste
management on a local, regional, and statewide basis.
CHAPTER 2
EXISTING PROGRAM FAR DEALING WITH �
HAZARDOUS MATEic1ALS AND HAZARDOUS WASTES
The County has several departments involved in. hazardous material /waste
programs: the Environmental Health Services Department, the Fire
Department, the Land Management Department, the County Agricultrai
Commissioner, the Solid Waste Management Department, the Public Health
Department, the Sheriffs Office, and the Diftriet Attorney. Of these
departments, the Environmental Htalth Services Department has
responsibility for the majpriO, of programs which deal dish hazardous
material and wasto issues. The County E .vironmental health Service:
Department tDEHS) administers over cigh3 programs related to hazardous
waste and material management. Some of these programs include the
generator permit program, the underground storage tank program, the
hazardous materials handier program, the household hazardous waste
collection vrogram, radiological It -alth, water hygiene, and land use and
noise control. In addition, the -DEHS coordinates emergency response
activities and, through its Air Pollution Control District, DEHS is
responsible for regulating and monitoring the air emissions from industry.
Other regencies involved in hazardous materials and wastes management
include: the South Coast Air Quality Management, District, the Regional
Water Quality Control Board, and Publicly Owned Treatment Works.
CHAPTER
WA= GENERATION LEVELS, FACILITY
INVENTORY, AND NEEDS ASSESSMENT
Comprehensive -1nd accurate data or. hazardoa- waste generation levels
and management practices are critical elements of a Hazardous Waste
Management Plan. ,A clear understanding of current waste generation and
management practices provides the basis for identifying program anr;
facility needs. Comprehensive data provide a quantitative understanding
of what types and amount of hazardous waste` ssrc generated; by whom;
why; and how it is treated and /or disposed. Analysis of the data will
identify opportunities for waste minimization. Knowledge of waste
generation levels and management practices also serve as the basis for
developing or fine tuning regulatory compliance programs, as well as
educational and technical assistance programs. This information identifies
areas to emphasize in the training of regulatory compliance inspectors
and emergency responders. Finally, current and projected waste generation
levels, when coupled with data regarding treatment capacity should
identify facility needs.
The primary source of the data presented in this chapter is the California
Department of Health Services (DNS) Hazardous Waste Information System
(HWIS). The HWIS tracks all manifested shipments of hazardous waste in
California. The data regarding hazardous waste shipments into and out
of San Bernardino County during 1986 and 1987 were provided to the
County Department of Environmental Health Services (DENS) by the state.
This data was analyzed and supplemented with information from DEHS
files, Biennial Reports (as available), and telephone interviews; with
individual generators, transporters and facilities (as necessary).
Current Waste Generation Levels
The San Bernardino County hazardous waste generators ship about 65,000
tons of waste offsite (average of data for 1986 and 1987). The primary
industries that contributed to this waste generation include the primary
metal industries, utilities, a *d railroad transportation. These industries
generate a variety of wastes including metal containing liquids, waste oil,
and baghouse wastes. The account of wastes shipped offsite represent 5%
of the total waste generated in the County. About 95% (or 1.2 million
tons) of the wastes are managed onsite at the place where they are
generated.
The County has two comme*_oial facilities currently in operation (Chemwest
Industries and Brwo, Incorporated). Based on a comparison of the
existing capacity of these commercial facilities and the present required
treatment capacity, the County has excess capacity in other recycling, but
may need to have facilities for oil recovery, solvent recovery, incineration,
and stabilization. Further reduction or recycling of these wastes is
possible, which would lessen the demand for these facilities.
ES-5
C
About 67,000 tons of hazardous waste are anticipated to be managed offsite .�
in the year 2000. OP this amount, waste oil, baghouse waste, and oisv `
sludge are the largest categories of waste. The industrial sources of
this projected amount of waste are the same as current sources.
The County will have a projected capacity deficiency for treatment and
recycling facilities. Chemwest Industries, the existing recycling facility,
has filed for closure and, wiii not function as a commercial facility..
}
Discussion
The analysis of the data provides cor:siderabl; insight into hazardous
waste management practices in San Bernardino County and provide the
basis for development of hazardous waste management policies in the
remainder of this Plan.
It is expected that an increasing amount of the hazardous waste now
shipped offsite for treatment and /or disposal will in the future be managed
onsite. For example, one major g,;-;erator of metal containing liquids has
obtained regulatory approval for onsite recyd1in operations, thereby
eliminating a significant waste stream. Although is anticipated,
the projections provided do not include an es *..imate of the extent of
change from offsite to onsite management. While Chapter 5 establishes a
framework for siting specified hazardous waste facilities, clearly the data
establish a need for applying the siting criteria and land use review
procedures for onsite treatment and /or disposal facilities as well. This
issue is addressed in Chapter 8 of this Plan.
GOALS AND POLICIES /ACTIG ?S
Gar's
G -3 -1 To establish a comprehensive and accurate data base to assist
in program development and to assess facility capacity needs.
G -3 -2 To ensure that the data base is maintained and updated regularly
so that program planning is based on current information.
Policies /Actions
P /A -3 -1 Because current data collection and management practices do
not allow easy compilation or interpretation, this jurisdiction
shall develop a comprehensive automated waste tracking system
that integrates data from all hazardous materials and hazardous
waste programs. The system shall be based on geographical,
physical and land use characteristics.
P /A -3 -2 Because DHS in their comments on the Draft Hazardo,-R Waste
Management Plan requiue�s that the County identify def riencies
FS -6 I
and prioritize the manner in which the County will address
these deficiencies, this jurisdiction shall address the following
deficiencies:
1. 'Perform a waste minimization assessment of all major
hazardous waste producing industries 4nd - ,hem
in achieving maximum waste minimization as specified r'
in Chapter 4;
2. Identify industries subject to pretreatment requirements
and assist them in achieving compliance;
C
3. Include estimates of clean up wastes from Expenditure
Plan sites as they becomc-:rvailable.
P /A -3 -3 Because improved data would enable the County to develop
stronger policy on hazardous waste naoaScment and because
local concerns change, this jurisdiction shall update the data on
an annual basis and revise the County Hazardous Waste
Management Plan at least once every three years. The
background information and data shall be made accessible to
other agencies and jurisdictions whenever possible.
�J
I 9 ES -7
CHAPTER 4
WASTE MINIMIZATION
Waste minimization is an umbrella term that refers to s, arce reduction
and recycling. Source Reduction is defined as any process that reduces
or eliminates the amount of waste being generated; it usually includes
processes within M. manufacturing or operating system of a business.
Recycling refers to the use, reuse, or reclamation of a waste either
onsite or offsite after it is generated by a ,particular process. Waste
minimization, as used by the Environmental Protection Agessrt (EPA),
denotes the reduction, to toe extent possible, of hazardous waste that is
generated or subsequently treated, stored, or disposed. It includes source
reduction or recycling efforts that: I) reduce the teal volume e. -quantity
of hazardous waste, or 2) reduce the toxicity of hazardous waste, or
both. Of the two approaches to waste minimization, source reduction is
the preferred method of reducing wastes.
Source reduction and recycling are identified as preferred waste redo ^tion
options under the EPA's use of the term waste minimization. , aatment
technologies should be considered only after acceptable waste minimization
methods have been identified. This priority for waste reduction differs
from the State Department of Health Serviogs (DHS) preferred options;
the DHS includes treatment as a preferred waste reduction method. The
DHS promotes the use of onsite treatment measures as a way of decreasing AMkk
a county's overa?I need for offsite facilities. The EPA priority is used in W I
this Plan because the County considers iiource reductiop- and recycling as
the optimum methods for reducing wastes.
San Bernardino County DEF?S has had an infarmal waste minimization
program since 1963. The program has consisted of providing waste
reduction and management information to generators through 0--, County
h zardous waste generator program, distribution of waste i ^- duction
information through a quarterly newsletter sent to all hazardous waste
generators in the County, and co- sponsorship of a one -day -.,aste reduction
workshop with the University of California Riverside E.ttension Program.
Recycling of waste ;a strongly encouraged through the existing program.
Although present efforts to encourage and promote waste minimization
have been successful, an expanded program is necessary to provide more
comprehensive assistance to all industries, to document quantitatively the
value of these waste minimization mothe ^co maintain personnel with
expertise in waste minimization as a resource for industry, and to ensure
that local industry is taking full advantage of waste minimization
opportunities. -
GOALS AND POLICIES /ACTIONS
In order to seduce the overall amount of waste generated in San Bernardino
County, an expanded waste minimization program should be estat :.;shed,
E5 -6
Thr following goals and policies /actions set forth guidelines for the
recommended waste minimization program for the County.
Goals
G-4 -1 To minimize the generation of hazardous waste in San. Bernardino `
County, to the extent possit e.
Policies /Actions
P /A -4.1 Because reducing the amount of west-, generated in this County
is an effective mechanism for reducihS she potential impact of
these wastes to the public health and safety and the
environment, and because legislation encourages the reductoor:,
to the extent feasible, of hazardous waste, this jurisdiction
shall encourage and ' promote practices that will, in order of
priority: 1) reduce the use of lazardous materials and the
generation of hazardous' waste at thcr source; 2) recycle `e
remaining hazardous wastes for rouse; send 3) treat those wast(
which cannot be reduced nt the source or recycled. On'..
residuals from waste recycling and treatment shall be land
disposed.
PIA-4-2 Because industry often lacks the technical information or in-
house expertise to develop waste minimization programs, and
additional resources are necessary at t:--c local W,31 to 'ASist
industry in developing such programs, the County shall expand
the waste minimization program to include education, technical
assistance, economic incentives, and recognition elements.
Educational materials and technical assistance should be the
first priority of the program. Such information an( assistance
are the cornerstone to industry participation in waste:
minimization efforts. Other measures, like economic incentives
and recognition measures, should also be implemented, but these
are of a tower priority.
The program shall consist of, but not be limited to, the
following components:
EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE:
• Develop an expanded educational program on waste
minimization that includes: 1) brochures, publications, and
posters to alert the public and industry on the importance
of waste minimization as well as describe appropriate
reduction technologies .and 2) audiovisual aids on waste
minimization that can be taken to businciscs, trade
associations and public meetings.
Hold seminars and workshops for industry on waste
minimization techniques anA regulatory' iss-les. Some of
ES -9
these seminars or workshops could be co- sponsored with
Am
local universities, Chambers of Commerce, or the DHS.
- Encourage trade associations and industry to form an
industry task force to promote information exchange.
- Maintain library of technical reference materials and
prepare a waste reduction resource directory..
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE
- Hire a waste minimization spec4alist to coordinate the
program implementation and provide on -going nssistance to
generators on waste minimization techniques.
- Provide training to hazardous waste generator inspectors
on waste minimization techniques. The inspectors will
incorporate waste minimization assessments into routine
inspections and should be knowledgeable about the
effectiveness of these techniques.
Provide waste audits on request and incorporate into
routine inspections.
ECONOMIC INCENTIVES
- Provide information on availability of pooled loan fund
and state grams for developing innovative technology
- Reduce permit fees for firms that achieve waste
minimization.
RECOGNITION OF OUTSTANDING PROGRAMS
Develop a method for recognizing firms that have achieved
notable success in reducing hazardous waste.
Also, the program shall assist industry in preparing state and federal
Waite minimization reports. A copy of the report shall be submitted
to the County DEHS at the time of permit renewal sc that an
annual report can be developed to measure the progress of waste
minimizati -m efforts. The annual waste minimization report prepared
by DENS shall itentify activities undertaken by the department and
provide some irAdication of the amount of J�azurdous wastes reduced
as a result of local efforts.
P /A -4.3 Because having the County conduct a waste minimization audit
is 'a voluntary action by a business and those businesses that
participate may not be in full compliance with regulatory
requirements, the Coup— ^h "It address violations as specified in
state law. The County shalt develop in conjunction with the
District Attorney policies ror deciding on such violations
ES -10
-
AMk pursuant to the requirements set forth in Section 25552 of the
California Health and Safety Code. The policies developed to
address. such violations shall include, but not be limited to, tht
fallowing;
1) Whether the action is a knowing, willful, negligent, or
inadvertnt violation;
2) Whether the violator agrees to the schedule of compliance
specified by the County; end
3) 'Whether the violation was discovered during an onsite
consultation carried out pursuant to this chapter.
y
In addition, the County may take enforcement &ction, or refer
the violation for enforcement action, in accordance with state
law.
i
E3 -11
f
k Y _
CHAPTER S
SITING OF SPECIFiEED H A7ARDOUS WASTE FACILITIES
Development of specified hazardous waste facilities- requires permits from
state and local agencies. The State Department of Health Services is
responsible for issuing hazardous waste facility permits and for ensuring
that operating conditions imposed on the approval of a facility are met.
It is the responsibility of local governments, however, to see that a
facility is sited ,% areas with compatible land uses, to ensure that
conditions of app. �,val on land use permits are implemented and carried
out for the duration of the project and to respond to hazardous
material /waste emergencies. At the local level, both discretionary and
ministerial land use permits would be required. Local land use authority
is derived from police powers which were reserved to the states by the
Federal Constitution and delegated to cities and counties in California by
Article Xl, Section 7 of the State Constitution.
Outline of the Lar it Application Review Process
The types of applications required for local evaluation of a specified
hazardous waste facility are Mited below. The required local land use
permits include:
Application to Apply the Zoning Overlay of "Specified Hazardous
Waste Facility, to the project site and respective buffer (see
Policy P /A -3 -4).
Site approval application (Conditional Use Permit')
- Special. Use Permit (issued by the County Environmental Health
Services Director, required as a condition of approval on the
discretionary permit)
- Ministerial Permits from Building, Grading, Flood Control, etc.
A Site Approval ( Conditional Use Permit), or applicable city application,
is necessary to site specified hazardous waste facilities in San Bernardino
County. Along with the Conditional Use Permit applicati^„ an application
to apply the specified hazardous waste facility zoning overlay is required
for all proposed specified hazardous waste facilities. The overlay applies
to the project site and avzociated buffer. Requiring the overlay restricts
future development to rses that are compatible with specified hazardous
waste facilities. The County of San Bernardino Land Management
Department, Office of Planning, or applicable City department would
process the land use application. Other departments, such as the
The County of San Bernardino refers to its discretionary
land use application as a "Site Approval ". It is equivalent
to a Couditional Use Permit Application.
ES -12
4
S
0
Environmental Health Services Department, will have a significant role in
reviewing and commenting on an application.
The following information outlines the local applications review process
for evaluating a specified hazardous waste facility proposal. The �
requirements added by state law are included in the: information below, s
Refer to t4gure 5 -I for an illustration of the items mentioned. The
Figure includes a description of the state pra:�ss for informational
purposes since it may be a concurrent process.
a) At least 90 days prior to the submittal of a formal application the
applicant must submit a Notice of Inteidt (NOI) to the Office of
Permit Assistance (in the Rate Office of Planning and Research) and
with the applicable city or County jurisdiction, The NOI provides a
complete description o: the nature and scope of the project. The
local agency notifies the public about the proposed project by
publishing notices in a newspaper of general circulation, posting
notices in the location where the project is proposed, and mailing
notices to owners of property contiguous with the proposed project
site.
b) Subsequent to the NOI the Office of Permit Assistance convenes q
public meeting in the affected city or County to inform the public
ou the nature and scc of the proposed project. The meeting also
considers the procedure; necessary for review of a specified hazardous
waste facility application.
c) Within 90 days after recei ^ring the NOI the local agency appoints a
seven member Local Assessment Committee. The Committee sheets
with the applicant to determine the terms and conditions for project
approval. The negotiations must focus on the protection of the
public health and safety and the environment, as well as the fiscal
welfare through special benefits and compensation. The composition
of the Committee consists of three representatives of the community
at large, two representatives of environmental or public interest
groups, and two representatives of affected businesses and industries.
d) The applicant participates in a pre application meeting which is set
up with the local government agency (as required by the Health and
Safety Code, Section 25199.7 (e)). This conference provides an
opportunity for the Co,tnty and any applicable department to advise
the applicant on project consistency with the General Plan and
CHVIW bcfo-e a formal application is submitted as well as to
respond to questions re gziding the permit process. Most cities have
a similar procedure.
o) Formal applications easy be submitted to n city or the County once
these initial stops have been undertakci . Both tEe Site Approval
Application (Conditional Use Permit Application) an, the specified
hazardous waste facility zoning overlay application arc required.
State law requires the permitting agency to decide on the
completeness of the application and to notify the applicant regarding
ES-13'
completeness within 30 Says from the date the applications were
submivpd.
f) Within 10 days from the date the application was deemed complete, ti
and within 60 days from the notice of application completeness, t,c
Office of Permit Assistance holds a post-application meeting among
the lead and Yesponsible agencies, the applicant; the Local Assessment
Committee, f,nd the public. The purpose t f the meeting is to
determine the issues of concern to the public and the permitting
agencies. Once these issues have been heard the applicant and the
Local Assessment Committee meet regarding the terms and conditions
acceptable to the community. The Act includes a provision for the
Local Assessment Committee (LAC) to hire a consultant to review
the project. The applicant would pay a fee established by the local
agency. In addition, if differences tatween the LAC and the
applicant cannot be resolved, the OPA may recommend the use of a
mediator. The applicant would pay half the cost for mediation.
g) When the application has been found complete by the permitting
; gpncy, an initial study of the project will be made to identify the
significant impacts on the environment. If one or more Significant
impacts are identified then an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is
prepared. If no significant impacts are found or if the significant
impacts can be mitigated, a Negative Declaration will be prepared.
When preparing an EIR the lead agency is required to send out a
notice to all applicable agencies regarding the preparation of the
EIR. A scoping hearing can be performed by the lead agency to
obtain public input. After a Draft MIR has been released the public
and responsible agencies have 45 days in which to comment_ on the
adequacy of the Draft. The Draft is considered by the Environmental
Review Committee in a public meeting. The environmental document
is certified by the decision - making body (in this case the Board of
Supervisors) when a decision is made on a project. Refer to PIA -5-
4 for the issues tLat will be evaluated as part of the environmental
analysis.
h) A noticed public hearing is then scheduled before the Planning
Commission for consideration of the site approval (Conditional Use
Permit) and application of the zoning overlay. A staff report is
prepared by the lead agency which describes the project, any issues
of concern, and a recommendation for approval or denial of the land
use applications. The Local Assessment Committee also prepares a
report that is submitted to both the Planning Commissioi and the
Board of Supervisors or the City Council. It includes the Committee's
recommendations for approval or denial of the project and any terms
and conditions which have been negotiated. The Planning Commission
forwards its recommendations to the Board of Supervisors or City
Council. A decision on the application is made by the Board of
Supervisors or City Council, at a noticed public hearing. Any
interested person or the applicant may file an appeal on the approval
of the project or the conditions of approval with the State Appeal
ES -14
El
L�
2
z
0o
Lt.
smoliazvooz
I
C
T
N
d
v
u
d
L
f7
_C
O
M
C
T
N
d
v
u
d
L
f7
_C
O
R
y
y
•�
i•i,^,.
Lam'
x I
s
all
kin
2
E
o
2
Board, within 30 daye of that decision. A decision on the appeal will be
based on consistency with an ad ted, approved CHWMP.
i) A Special Use Permit is issued as a condition of approval on the
Site Approval (Conditional Use Permit). The purpose of this permit
is to ensure that conditions of approval are carried out.
j) If no appeals are filed on the land uze applications, ministerial
permits may be issued. These permits may include permits from
building and safety, grading, environmental health, flood control, etc.
4
Siting Criteria
State law requires the CHWW � include siting criteria and designate
general areas where the criteria wght apply. Siting criteria set forth a
structure for evaluating proposals for specified hazardous waste facilities
and serve to focus the evaluation of facility proposals on critical issues.
Siting criteria represent a uniform set of standards applied to all
applications, yet they are designed with some flexibility depending on the
type of facility and the propo&J site location. Siting criteria are used
for evaluating a project at a particular site. When used along with
general plan policies, the siting criteris deterr::— She suitability of a site
for a specified hazardous waste facility proposal. The use of the siting
criteria and General Plan policies are part of the full application review
and environmental analysis required of all applications for specified
hazardous waste facilities under state law. The complete siting criteria
follow the policies /actions of this chapter.
GOALS AND POLICIES /ACTIONS
The following goals, policies, and actions shall be implemented to ensure
that specified hazardous waste facilities are reviewed according to the
procedures identified in state law and sited in the most environmentally
preferred locations. Two terms are used to identify the implementing
agency. The term this jurisdiction refers to the applicable city or
county. Where County and `this jurisdiction" are used a policy applies
to both the County of San Bernardino and the applit, - governmental
body.
Coals
G -5 -1 To establish an effective and expeditious application review
process for siting specified hazardous waste facilities that
includes extensive public participation.
G -5 -2 To apply a uniform set of criteria to the siting of specified
hazardous waste facilities in the County for the protection of
the public health and safety and the environment.
i
G-5 -3 To ensure coordination among agencies and County departments
in the review of all specified hazardous waste fat ;city applications
within the County.
ES -16
11 7n
G-54 To protect vital groundwater resources for present and future
beatficial uses.
Policies and Actions 4
bli4les /Actions this Jurisdicti2ll S Aires of The AoniiM,11
P /A -5 -1 Because specified hazardous waste facilities shall only be sited
in areas where land uses have been deemed Compatible with
such facilities by the local jurisdiction, an applicant for a
specified hazardous waste facility must apply fora Site Approval
( Conditionar —=se Permit) and a zoning amendment. Tha zoning
amendment applies the Specified Hazardwss Waste r4cility
overlay (as defined in P /A•5 4) to the project site and buffer
area. The applicant ahail meet all provisions of the specified
hazardous waste facility overlay district (see Po'hiey P /A -5 -4) as
well as other general plan and ordinance provisions.
P /A -5 -2 Because the evaluation of a project application is a costly and
time consuming effort and the public involvement demands a
large expense:
A) The applicant shall fund the public notification effo£ts including
public hearing notices to residents and property owners within
3000 feet of the proposed project boundary, legal and display
advertisements in local newspapers and a paper of general
circulation, and a sign (24 sq. ft.) 2a be displayed on or near the
project site (pursuant to the Government Code, Section 45090).
B) The applicant shall fund activities relating to the review and
evaluation of a specified hazardous waste facility application,
including staff time, consultants hired to assist the Local
Assessment Committae wicth application review, review by any
applicable city, and pre - application assessments.
(Government Code Section 659415 and tl,: F Health and Safety `
Code, Section 25134.7)
Pplicies /Actions Renui k ;: this Inrisdiction
P /A -5 -3 Because the County recognizes its responsibility for siting
needed specified hazardous waste facilities proposed in
environmentally sound locations, this County wilt consider
applications for specified hazardous waste facilities. Proposals
to site such facilities in the County must include applications
for a Site Appro -vol (Conditional Use Permit) and for a specified
Hazardous Waste ity overlay (see P /A -S -4). .R decision on
the applicationt. will ;ad based on tasking the following findings:
a. The proposed project is consistent with the provisions of
the General Ilan, Development Code (zoning ordinance),
BS -17
the CHWMP including the siting criteria, and the public _
resources code (Section 21000, et. seq.).
S
b. The facility location and/or design adequately protect
public health, safety, and the environment.
C. The project is proposed in an area where present and
future surrounding uses are compatible with the specified
hazardous waste far''ity.
P /A -5 -4 Because local land use plans and zoning ordinances are required
b) state law to specifically address the permitting of specified
hL =rdous wa %te facilities and such plans and ordinances do not
adds ss requirements for these facilities, and because applicants
for specified hazardoas waste facilities are required to apply
for a project - specific request to include the hazardous waste
facility overlay on the project site and buffer zone aria existing
ordinances do not define or specify the requirements of such
an overlay, this jurisdiction shall amend the Development Code
(or Zoning Ordivanae? to require all specified hazardous waP'
facilities to be permitted only with an approved Site Appr,,va'
(Conditional Use Permit) in areas with a zoning overlay of
Specified Hazardous Waste Facility.
The overlay shall be applicable to all specified hazardous wr,ste
facility applications. The purpose of the overlay is to ensure
that facilities are sited in art;as that protect public health,
safety, welfare, and the environment; to assign the specified
Hazardous Waste Facility overlay to the project site and buffer
so that incompatible uses cannot be permitted in the future; to
identify permitted uses of the overlay; and to outline the
permit review procedures. The Development Code (or zoning
ordinance) shall define the Specified Hazardous Wasta Facility
overlay as containing the following:
1. A requirement that specified ha"rdous waste facilities
may locate in certain land use districts (or zone) with an _
approved Site Approval (Conditional Use Permit) and
Specified Hazardous Waste Facility Overlay. Land disposal
facilities and incineration facilities shall locate in Resource
Conservation Districts (or zone) and other areas v< *,1'^ a
population of less than 20 people per squste mile with an
approved Specified Hazardous Waste Facility Overlay.
Treatment, incineration, recycling, storage, and transfer
facilities should locate in Regional Industrial districts (heavy
industrial zone or equivalent) with an approved Specified
Hazardous Waste Facility Overlay. Incineration facilities
shall not, however, be located in areas where emissions
from the facility could directly impact food crops or
livestock. (See discussion in Section 5.3.1 of this chapter.)
BS -18
IU
I
IU
2. The siting criteria presented in this chapter (starting on
page 5.28). The criteria shall be adopted as development
standards that shall be met along with other policies of
the General Plan and provisions of the Development Code
(zoning ordinance) before a facility is approved. Compliance
with the siting criteria shall be evaluated as part of the
environmental analysis
3. The application procedum set out In AB 2948 ,Chapter
1504. Statutes of 1996) for the review of specified hazardous
waste facility applizations,
L
4. A requirement t3at all specified hazardous waste facility
applications are subject to a Special 1,rse Permit. The
purpose of the Special Use Permit shall br, to evaluate the
operation and monitoring plan of the fitzility, to ensure
the facility his adequate measures for monitoring on•goirg
impacts to air quality, groundwater, and environmentally
sensitive resources, to evaluate the types and quantities of
wastes that with be treated or disposed of at the facility,
and to require periodic inspections of the facility_ to ensure
conditions of approval are carried out.
5. A requirement that all specified hazardous waste facility
applications includo information about the project
proponent's past business practices.
6. Discretionary application review r ": _ �rements to ensure
developers are aware of the different studies that will be
requiri,., in the environmental analysis when assessing the
merit of facility applications. A reporting and monitoring
prohram shall be adopted to mitigate or avoid significant
environmental impacts as required by AB 3180 (Chapter
1232. Statutes of 1988). The different issues that must be
studied consist of, but are not limited to, t i! Following:
a) An analysis of the project's potential impact to
surface and groundwater resources as well as public
water supplies. The study shall identify monitoring
and mitigation measures that ensure protection of
vital surface and groundwater resources for the life
of the project.
b) An evacuation of the project's impact to air quality
and the consistency of the project with air quality
regulations and the local ait quality playas. The
evaluation must consider toxic air contaminants, wind
patterns, and an assessment of the project's impact to
PSD and non-attainment areas.
c) An analysis of potential miniraS deposits through a
site characterization study.
ES -19
ti
M
d) A review of the adequacy and capacity of the
proposed transportation routes including an
identification of highway accident rates. (Refer to
Chapter 10, P /A -10 -3, for other issues to address in
the study.)
c3 An assessment of risk on the population that evaluates
the physical and chemical characteristics of the
specific types of wastes which will be handled, the
design features of the facility, an evaluation of
potential air emissions from proposed facility, and
any need for buffers from residences, immobile
populations, and environmeptally sensitive resources.
f) If a facility proposes to handle acutely hazardous
waste, an analysis of ttte maximum credible accident
may be Pecesc,ary pursuant to AB 3777 (Chapter 1260,
Statutes of 1986). The study shall take into
consideration the quantity and types of wastes that
could be received at the facility, the design features,
and the planned operational practices at the facility.
Based on the above items, the study shall provide an
estimate of the distance over which any effects
would carry, options for reducing the risk, and
procedures for dealing with the effects, including
recommendation: for an appropriate buffer distance.
Z) An evaluation c1r the project's impact to the
socioeconomic characteristics of the affected
i
jurisdiction and an assessment of the economic
viability of the project.
h) An evaluation of cultural, archaeological, and
paleontological resources on the project site and
surrounding buffer.
P /A -5 -5 Because several agencies (i.e. Air Quality agencies, Regional
Water Quality Control Board, Department of Health Services)
-
and local governments (County, cities and Special Districts) will
be involved in the permitting of specified hazardous waste
facilities, this ,jurisdiction shall request all applicable agencies
and local gvernment det*artrents to participate in a meeting
of a specified hazardous waste facility application at thi pre -
applieation stage (as required by Health and Safety Code,
Srction 25199.7 (e)). The purpose of the meeting is to diasuss
and document issues of concern to all appropriate agencies as
_
well as application review requirements and time frames. This
jurisdiction will assist the applicant in developing a matrix of all
reviewing agencies and agency requirements before a formal
application is accepted.
ES-20
P /A -5 -6 Because specified hazardous waste facilities have a potential for
adverse impacts on the environment, all applications shall
'comply frith the policies of the CHWMP and the siting criteria
and shall be the subject of environmental analysis. The ti
environmental analysis shall be done as a conse idated effort
among applicable County Departments.. Compliance with the
siting criteria shall be evaluated in the environmental analysis.
P /A -5 -7 Because this jurisdiction needs to ensure that wastewater is
appropriately discharged, this jurisdiction shall require specified
hazardous waste, facilities generating treated wastewater to
discharge to the Santa Ana Interceptor (SARI line), to the
Chino Nonreclaimable Waste Line (Brine Line), or tiny future
industrial waste line or an approved new technology that treats
or eliminates the discharge. Watt -water shall meet all applicable
agency requirements for discharge: t.1 these waste lines.
P /A -5 -8 Because a significant portion of Cc =ty land falls under federal
jurisdiction, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), U.S. Forest
Service, and the Department of Defense ('DOD), and the policies
of DOD exclude the dcvelo!)ment of sp:ci:'ied hazardous waste
facilities, and because Indian lands comprise another significant
component and Native America,..t Tribal Councils have expressed
concern over the development of specified hazardous waste
facilities in the County, the County shalt take the following.
actions:
A. Complete a Memorandum of Understanding with the Brrezu
of Lanw Management (BLM) regarding review of specii led
hazardous waste applications for those projects proposed
on land owned b�? the BLM;
B. Notif'J and request invo:+ement of Native American. Tribal
Councils in the review of all specified hazardous waste
facility applications in their region; and
C. Prohibit specified hazardous waste facilities on private
lands in the Death Valley and Joshua Tree National
Monuments, Mitchell Caverns State Park, National Forest
Lands administered by the U.S. Forest Service, the East
Mojave National Scenic Area, and any Wilderness Area
designated by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, or
wilderness study area designated by BLM as suitable for a
Wilderness Area pursuant to the Federal Land Management
Policy Act of 1976. When Congress acts, on Wilderness
Areas this policy shall be amended to be consistent with
those Wilderness Areas.
F /A -5 -9 Because state law authorizes a tax (not exceeding 10% of gross
receipts) on an approved specified hazardous waste facility, and
these facilities have a potential to impact the environment,
public health, and public services, this ;rr sdiction shall set
ES -21
aside a portion of the revenue for programs that :;acourage
safe and responsible management of hazardous waste.
PIA-5-10 Because the siting criteria and the policies of this plan should
be applied uniformly throughout the County in order to ensure
that effective management of hazardous waste and that facilities
are sited only in environmentally sound locations, the County
shall encourage all the cities within the Covinty to adopt the
CHWMP and the siting criteria and eavelopmea. policies.
P/A -11 Because specified hazardous waste; fa�:lity proposals could
impact proposed city or County redevelopment projects This
jurisdiction shall inform the apf 'cable redevelopment age. °/ of
all specified hazardous waste facility app /icatic,ns.
P/A -5 -12 Because the CHWW, sets forth comprehensive criteria for siting
needed specified hazardous waste facilities, the siting criteria
should be used to determine the sui: ability of projects Fn alt
County, city, state, tnd federal lands:
P /A -5 -13 Because the Department of Defense (DOD) contributes
significantly to hazardous waste production in the County as a
result of site remediation efforts, DOD operatiras, and businesses
producing products for DOD, this plan encourages the following.
A) That the DOD implement waste reduction efforts to the
msxin.am —ter— possible.
B) That the DOD obtain appropriate permits f rom local
jurisaictions and allow periodic inspection of _facilities for
with environmental regulctions.
C) That the DOD cow-Ac7 undertaking land exchange or lease
agreements with industry Zeshing to site apacified hazardous
waste facilities in DOD property.'
D) That tie DOD undertake hazardous waste management
ef£ai _ which are consistent with the goals and
policies /actions of this Plan.
PIA-5-14 Because cement kilns can use certain hazardous wastes as a
secondary fuel and the use of such fuel,signiim,2ntly reduces
large amounts of waste and may result in impro.cd air emissions -
this jurisdiction shall encourage facilities is San Bernardino
County with cement kilns to use certain hazardous wastes as
altereative sources of en;.rgy, only where improvements in air
emissions can be achieved. -
P /A -5 -I5 Because Section 55300 of the California Government Code places
a dual mandate on how cities and counties must consider
developmcat within a sphere of influence, the County shall
ensure that all applications for specified .hazardous waste
facilities are reviewed for consistency with the goals and
ES -22
2
policies, at the 1489 County General Plan regarding development
in a sphere of influence (LU -8 and LU -9).
P /A -5 -16 Because TT ?s have tho pot"tiel to impact public health and
safety and the environment, this jurisdiction shall Apply the
:siting procedures to TTU's -on +t case -by -case basis.'' Case by
case determination shall be base i on the characteristics of the
proposed project site, including ids proximity to residential and /or
immobile populations, length of operation in any given area, the
amount and type of baz&rdous waste to be treated, the proposed
method of treatment, and the r,o ;tsntGn► rand land area necessary
to operate the TTU.
In order to exempt a TTU from compliance with the siting
criteria and zoning overlay requirement of policy P /A -5.4, a
demonstration must 'be made that the TTU falls under an
ekistivg land use permit for an sxisting business or facility, or,
the TM1 U is s minor, temporary use approvable by a. ministerial
action. The 4— mination of applicability shall be made by the
directora of ti, city or County Planning Department and the
County .Environmental Health Services department with input
from ather applicable departments. If resolution of the
applicabil "y of the siting criteria or policy P /A -5 -$ cannot be
reached,. :z... decision shall be made by the city or County
Planning Commission at a noticed public hearing.
P /A -5 -1I Becausa San Bernardino County obtains abou. 85% of its
drinking wt.ter from groundwater and a significant percentage
of the population of Southern California also depends on San
Bernardino Coun: - groundwater for its beneficial uses, and
because inappropriately sited development (including specified
hazardous waste facilities`) have the aotedlial to adversely impact
groundwater, this jurisdiction -shall develop a County-wide
groundwater protection strategy. The strategy should cQnSiuler
specile policies and programs for regulatian of potential
sour,es of pollution as well as identify mechanisms to detect
and correct possfNe impact, to the groundwater.
i
ES-23
SITING CRITERIA FAR
SPECIFIED HAZARDOUS WASTE FACILITIES
(Refer to Policies P /A -5-4 AND P /A -5-6)
PRMCT THE RESIDENTS OF SAN AERNARDjiiO COYTNTY
1. PROXIMITY TO RES112ENCES
a. A 2000 foot buffer zone from residences shall be required for
any land disposal facility unless the owner demonstrates to the
satisfaction of the County or city and the State Department of
Health Services that a buffer zone of ' less than 2000 feet is
adequate for the protection of public health and safety. To
c ,termine the appropriate buffer a risk assessment shall be
r squired which considers the physical and chemical characteristics
of the specific type of wastes that will be handled, the design
_ features of the facility, and any need for buffering residential
areas or other sensitive at eas from potential accidents or adverse
emissions from a propose 1 facility.
b. A risk assessment -shall be required for any treatment. recvclinQ,
storage. and transfer_ facilities. The risk assessment should
consider the physical and chemical characteristics of the
specific type of wastes that will be handled, the design of tine
facility, and any need for buffering residential areas or other
sensitive Lreas from potential accidents or adverse emissions
from a proposed facility.
2. PROXD41TY TO MAMBA E POPULATIONS
S®ecifled hazardous waste facilities shall be sited so that no
significant risk is presented to the immobile pop,0ation. An adequate
buffer between the hazardous waste facility and the immobile
population shall be established by a risk assessment. The risk -
assessment shall consider the physical and chemical characteristics
of the specific types of wastes which will be handled and th. design
features of the facility and proximity to immobile populations.
Immobile populations include schools, hospitals, convalescent homes,_
prison facilities, facilities for the mentally ill, etc.
3. PROXIMITY TO PUBLIC FACILITIES -
Snecified hazardous waste facilities should be sited in such a manv-r
as they do not adversely impact the public health and safety of
large numbers of people in public areas or people in public facilities.
An adequate buffer shall be determined by a risk assessment.
e ES -24
4. :PROVISION OF PUBLIC SERVICES
1p Specified hazar gua waste facilities should be located in areas where
emergency response capabilities and public water and sewer services
are available. When ;facilities are located in desert or rural areas `
where public services are not readily available, privately -owned
onsite water, sewer, and emergency services (self- sufficient services)
may be 'used.
ENSURE l YI ..... 7'iiFtAY., aTABIi= 0E THl= AGILITY
c
5. FLOOD PLAIN AREAS
a. Und di poeal facilities may not be located in areas subject to
100 -year events even with protection (CFR, Title 40, Section
264.18 (b) and CCR Title 22, See Section 8b —Llll (a)(11)(b)).
Flood plain areas include areas subject 'to flooding by dam or
levee failure and natural causes such as river .flooding, rainfall
or snowmelt, tsunamis, seiches and coastal flooding.
b. Treatment. rccvclina, storaac. and transfer facilities may be
located in areas subject to 100 -year flooding if designed,
constructed, operated, and maintained to prevent failure due to
such events. ]Flood plain areas include areas subject to flooding
by darn or levee failure and natural causes such as riv -r flooding,
Allikk rainfall or snowmelt, tsunamis, seiches and coastal flooding.
i
6. PROXMITY TO ACTIVE OR RECENTLY ACTIVE FAULTS
No specified hazardous waste facility should be placed within 200 feet
of an active or recently active fault. (California Cade of Regulations
(CCR), Title 22, Section 66391 (a) (11) A (1) and ;2).
7. UNSTABLE SOILS
a. hand disposal facilities shall not be located in areas of potential
rapid geologic change (Title 23, Subchapter 15, Section 2531 (e)
of the CCR). _
b, 'treatment. recycling. stomas, and transfer facilities may be
located in areas of potential rapid geologic change if designed,
constructed, maintained, a -2d operated to prevent failure as a
result of such changes (Title 23, Subchapter 15, Section. 2531
(e) of the CCR).
ES -25
_,
PRMCT GROUNDWATER JML➢TY
S. DEPYH TO GROUNDWATER
o
a. Land-di1&,n%aLJ1aUiUn shall be located where natural geologic
features provide a natural barrier that prevents contamination
of vital groundwater resources by waste' -i!d leachate (Title 23,
Subchapter 15, Section 2531 (a) of the CCR) and whits meet .
the siting requirements of the State Water Resources Control
Board.
b. Treatme t. recycling. storage. and Iran fer 'facilities shall be,
located where natural geologic features prevent the contamination
of groundwater unless the engineering design- and construction
of the facility and containment structures are capable of
preventing significant adverse impacts to groundwater.
9. MAJOR RECHARGE AREAS FOR AQUIFERS
a. Land disposal facilities Should be prohibited within any area
known or suspected to be. supplying principal recharge to a
regional aglifer as defined in state, regional, or general plans.
The County General Plan and Bulletin *118, 1975, of the
California Department of Water Resources identify the following
as regional aquifers.
Ames Valley (7.16)
Antelope Valley (6 -44)
Bear Valley (8 -9)
Bessemer Valley (7 -15)
Big Meadows Valley (8 -7)
Caves Canyon Valley (6.38)
CopperMountai;. Valley (7 -11)
Dale Valley (7 -9)
Deadman Valley (7 -13
El Mirage Valley (6 -43)
Harper Valley (6 -4
Helendale Fault Valley (7 -48)
-
Iron.FUdge Area (7 -50)
Johtason Valley (7 -18)
Kane Wash Area (6-89)
Lavic Valley (7.14)
Lost Horse. Valley ( 7 -51
Lower Mojave River Valley (6 -40)
Lucerne Valley (7.19)
Means Valley (7 -17)
Middle Mojave River Valley (6.41)
Morongo Valley (7 -20)
Needles Valley (7 -44)
Pipes Canyon Fault Valley (7 -49)
Seven Oaks. Valley (8 -8)
Troy Valley (6 -39)
r ES -26
Affikk Twentynine Palm Valley (7 -10)
Upper Mojave River Valley (6 -42)
Marren Valley (7 -12)
Upper. Santa Ana Valley (8-2)
b i, garment recycling atame Q. transfer facilities may be
located in principal recharge areas if facilities are designed,
constructed, maintained, and operated to prevent accidental
releases.
10. PERMEABILITY OF SURFICIAL MA 1'ERI�ALS
a, Land disoosai fac_ilitie$ shall be located in areas where underlying
geology provides impermeability meeting tho requirements of
the SWRCB (pursuant to Title 23, Subchapter 15, Section 2531
(b) (1) of the California Code of Regulations).
b, JEeatment xecvetins ator Q� �nd transrgr facilities may be
sited in areas where soils are permeable if adequate engineered
features such as spill containment, monitoring, and inspection
measures are included in the project design and construction..
PI&OTECIE AI_I2 DMAL
11. NON - ATTAINMENT AIR AREAS
w may be located in non- attainment
areas if the facilities meet the plans and regulations of the air
quality agency of each district. .
12. CRITERIA POLLUTANTS IN ]PREVENTION OF SIGNIFICANT
DETERIORATION WW1)) AREAS
coecified haiardaus_E&U facilities may be located in, PSD areas if
facilities meet the plans and regulations of the sir quality agency af
each district. These facilities, however, may not located near or
within national parks, wilderness and memorial areas, and other
similarly dedicated areas, as specified in the Clean Air Act.
PFtOTF�ENY7RONA +flENTA$tY;'j�i'i'ikE ARi';115
13. WETLANDS
Sperliied hazardous watte faeiliti .s shall be prohibited from impairing
the viability of wetlands such as saltwater, fresh water, and brackish
marshes, swamps, and bogs inundated by surface or groundwater with
a frequency to support, under normal circumsMnees, prcvalencc of
vegetative or aquatic life which requires saturated soil conditions for
growth end reproduction, as 3efined in general, regions;, state, and
ES -27
federal plans. A protective buffer zone shall be established based
11
Adak
on a biological resource study and risk assessment.
14.
HABITATS OF THREATENED, RARE, OR ENDANGERED SPECIES
Specifie waste facilities shall be prohibited from impairing
the viability of habitats of threatened, rare, or endangered' species
as defined in kteneral, regional, state, and federO plans. A protective
buffer zone shall be established based on a biological resource study
and risk assessmwnt:
15.
PRRAE AGRYCULTURAL LANDS
Specified hazardou1 waste 1' cilities may not be sated on prime
agricultural lands a, defined. in California law and adopted local land
use plans unless ":,,overriding public need is served. When siting
hazardous waste management facilities in these areas, overriding
public service needs must be demonstrated.
16.
RECREATIONAL, CULTURAL, OR AESTHETIC RESOURCES
i
-
Specified hazardous waste_ facilities shall not be located in
recreational, cultural, or aesthetic resource areas except low volume
transfer and storage facilities which are necessary to handle hazardous
waste generated by visitors, workers, or residents in these, areas.
Recreational, cultural, and aesthetic resource areas include public
and /or private lands having local, regional, state, or national
significance, value or importance such as: national, state, regional
county and local parks and recreation areas; historic resources; wild
and scenic rivers; scenic highways; ecological preserves; public and
private preservation areas; and other lands of local, regional, state,
or national significance.
17.
AREAS OF POTENTIAL MINERAL DEPOSITS
, Specified hazardous waste facilities should not be located so as to
preclr is extraction of minerals necessary to sustain the.'economy of
the State.
j.AN33
18.
LISE RESTR C 1 YOId
MILITARY LANDS
Public specified hazardous waste facilities shall not be sited. on
military lands pursuant to DOD policy.
ES-28
3£RE SAFE 7RA,6E, QZXATI(K QE HAZARDOUS WASTE
I9. PROY- DdFTY TD AREAS OF WASTE GENERATION
s. Land dis6sal gacaities may be located ii�r; distant from waste
generation sources than other facilities because of their
requirement for larger lard and buffer areas.
b. Treatognt. recvelina storage, and, transfer facilities shall be
close to hazar ous Waste generation sources to minimize the
risks of transportation.
k
20. PROXD IITY TO MAJOR TRANSPORTATION ROUTES
Specified hazardoa+s ryaste f' ililjg shall have good access to and
from major transportation routes (state or interstate divided highways).
21. MINIMIZE TRANSPORT THROUGH MINOR ROUTES
Specified hazsrdoos we-!e [jS ities should' be sited so that road
networks leading to major transportation roukz do sot pass through;
residential neighborhoods, should minimize residential 17ontages, and
should be demonstrated to be safe with regard to rpeid design and
construction, accident rates, excessive traffic, etc.
22. LOCATIONAL REVMICPIONS DUE TO TRANSPORTATION
ROU17ES
a. Specified _hapard us !Easto facilities shall not be located where
highways 58, 62, and 31 are used as major transportation routes
unless a study of transportation routes as specified in PIA -10 -3
identifies mitigation measures which can be implemented o
make the particular route suitable for its use as a major route.
b. Low volume transfer ar_d 1praee faciliti -ya may be located in
these areas if necessary to manage the bnzardous wastes from
that area.
CHAPTER 6
GENERAL REQUIREMENTS FOR HANDLING
AND STORAGE OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
State and federal governments have established programs which require
businesses that handle hazardous substances to prepare an inventory of
the hazardous substances stored and to provide that list to a local agency
designated to administer the program. The purpose of these disclosure
laws is to have information available to first fesponders in the event of
an emergency at the site and to provide information to local residents
regarding the kinds and amounts of chemicals stored in their communities.
The legislation did not include standards for above ground storage of
hazardous substances as part of its mandate.
Assembly Bill 2185 (Chapter 1167, Statutes of 1985) mandates that all
businesses handling hazardous substances provide to the local administering
agency an inventory and location of hazardous substances stored on the
property. This law %pplies to all businesses which handle at any one time
more than 500 pounds, 55 gallons, or 200 cubic feet (compressed gas) of a
hazardous material. The Department of Environmei;tal Health Services
(DEHS) has been designated the administering agency for purposes of the
AB 2185 program for the County of San Bernardi;>a, including the
incorporated cities (!California Health and Safety Code, Division 20,
Chapt .: 6.95).
This choi,ter supports existing efforts in the underground tank program
and recrummends a continued effort in the maintenance of underground
tank records and an annual report on this program. Above ground
storage requirements are recommended for inclusion in County implementing
ordinances.
GOALS AND POLICIES /ACL'IONi
Goals
G -6.1 To reduce the risks posed by the storage of hazardous substances
in above ground tanks and containers.
G -6 -2 To minimize the threat of contamination of groundwater from
leaking underground storage tanks containing hazardous materials.
G-6 -3 To minimize tha threat to residential areas from the use of
hazardous materials.
0
Im
12
Policies /Actions -
P /A -6 -1 Because some waste reduction technologies significantly reduce
or eliminate the amount of hazardous waste generated since
they are a part of the manufacturing process, and because the
equipment far these technologies can rsalfunction causing the IML
ES-30
IE
LI
potential. for a hazardous substance release, the County shall
amend Uniform Envivonmental. Code to require all hazardous
waste generators and hazardous material handlers to report any
such equipment malfunction o upset which may cause hazardous
waste to be ganerated. 4P
P /A -6 -2 Because above ground storage of gzardous materials may pose
a threat to public bcalth and safetp gad the environment and
County ordinances do not include stanalard3 for above ground
storage, and because all hazardous material handlers may not
be easily identified, the County shali do, '.he following:.
A. Revise Division 3 of the Uniform Environmental Health
Code to establish above ground storage standards for
hazardous materiels. The ordinance shall include, but not
be Iimited to, the following requirements;.
secondary containment of substances;
- segregation of incompatible materials;
- storage of hazardous substances restricted to an area with
a surface impervious to the substance;
methods to prevent run -off of rain water and /or collection
of rain water if area is not covered;
fencing and /or other sec -:rity of the area with adequate
signs present to info:ni of the presence of hazardous
materials;
emergency equipment tt. be stored onsite as appropriate
(eg. proper absorbent to deal with a spill or an appropriate
neutralizing agent); and
minimum storage distances from adjacent land uses.
B. Establish a system for identifying all handlers of hazardous
substances with such measures as:
review �` .11ephone directories and other business listi::gs;
exchange of information with city code errforesment
officers, local fire agencies, and city business license
offices; and
field surveys as necessary.
C. Review periodically each place of business registered in
the hazardous material handler program to verify the
hazardous substance inventory on file and to advise the
handler of safe storage practices.
P /A -6 -3 Because leaking underground storage tanks threaten groundwater
resources, the County shall do the following:
A. Amend the undergroun -' storage tank ordinance to maintain
its consistency with state and federal requirements.
1
B. Continue to 2uforce the Uniform Eavironaiental Health
Code by such measures as plan review and inspection of
new tank installations, inspection of existing tanks a,
`east -once every three years, and inspection at all tank
r 'movals
C. Maintain records of tank performance by reviewing on-
going monitoring programs to evaluate whether current
regr� cements provide adequate protection, or whether
areax ?nth high groundwater (itt 30 feet or lessl require
more stringent protection.
D. Develop a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with each
of the three Regional Water Quality Contiol Boards which
identifies the respective duties of th; Water Board and
the DEHS regarding ova *sight of mitigation etform
E. Prepare an annual F4!port dotailiu. , the number of tanks
under permit with the County, the nature of their contents,
monitoring programs in use, the number of facilities
inspected, and a listing of sites where an unauthorize t
release has occurred and its clean -up status.
P /A -6 -4 Because certain home occupations use and store hazardous
znate¢isls and the use and storage of hazardous materials in
residential areas may pose a threat to the public, this
jurisdiction shall continue to prohibit businesses under a Home
Occupation Permit to store hazardous materials for commercial
use in residential areas. `,violations of this policy shall be
subjec.> to enforcement action by tug local jurisdiction and /or
fire authority.
In addition, the County shall coordinate with cities in developing
a list of home occupations that use hazardous materials or
generate hazardous waste within city jurisdictions. The list
sh; % ?l be distributed to city and county planning departments.
ES -32
I
I
C
AELL
CHAPTER 7
I
REGUI.A:XORY PROGRAM FOR GENERATORS �
(Including Transporters and new TSD Facilities)
The federal law governing hazardous waste management, the Resource
Conservatir:_ and recovery Act (RCRA), original''. exempted hazardous
waste gw;ratora producint, less than 1000 kg (.�—JO ihs) per month of
hazardous waste' from, compliance with that law. The 1984 amendments to
RCRA, (the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984, HSWA),
owero,J the exemption threshold so that businesses producing more than
100 kg (220 ibs) per month of hazardous waste are now subject to RCRA.
California has taken a different approach. California has never had any
threshold value fur determining compliance with the hazardous waste
management requirements. Any business which produces a hazardous
waste musk manage that waste in accordance with state requirements
regardless of the amount produced. Although many of the California laws
have been in effect since the seventies, local enforcement of these laws
began in 1983 with the MOU agreement.
In September of 1983, the DEHS entered into a Memorandum of
Understanding (MOU) with the California Department of Health Services.
`through this MOU, DERS agreed to monitor all businesses who generate
.=
or produce hazardous waste within the County to ensure that they comply
with all state laws and regulations pertaining to the generation afi `
management of hazardous waste.
Approximately 2100 businesses have been identified as generators of
hazardous waste; these businesses are under permit with the DEHS.
Extensive efforts (such as "door to door" sweeps, compiling lists of
businesses likely to generate hazardous. waste . based on Standard
Identification Classificatit.- Codes) were undertaken by DENS to identify
generators Despite these effort the DENZ estimates. that there may be
as many as 500 more hazardous waste generators doing business within the
County which the DENS has yet to i- cntify.
Additional measures are necessary to identify all generators. The business
license and renewal form is recommended in this plan becaum of its
success in many counties and cities when used as a screening tool for
det.rmining whether businesses handle hazardous waste. Educational
assistance, assistance with disposal of waste, and consideratio of the
needs of the limited quantity generator (produce less than 5 gailoAa or 50
pouLds of hazardous waste) must all be addressed in order to eAgure'
generators comply wi''t regulatory programs. -
ES -33
t l`
GOALS k" POLICIES /At "TONS
Goals
G -7 -1 To ensure that all businesses in the County that use hazardous
materials and generate hazardous waste properly manage these
substances.
G-7 -2 To provide hazardous waste generators with the necessary tools
to comply with existing regulations by continuing generator
education and technical assistance efforts.
G -7 -'A To determine the nesd for and feasibility cf providing disposal
assistance to small quantity generators.
Policies /Actions
P /A -7.1 Because hazardous waste generators need a permit from DENS
and such a perm -t requirement ensures on -going compliance
with regulations, a:Nd because not all hazardous waste generators
have been identifir:d in this County, this jurisdiction shall
continue its efforts to identify hazardous waste generators by
using field surveys and instituting cooperative efforts with fire
agencies to exchange information.
P /A -7 -2 Because a consistent method of identifying businesses that use
and generate hazardous substances must be in place, this
jurisdiction shall use a business license (or similar requirement)
and its annual renewal to determine whether businesses handle
hazardous substances. This po..ay shall be implemented by the
following actions:
A. Development of an agreement with all incorporated cities
within she County to ensure that questionA _regarding the
use of hazardous materials and the generation of hazardous
waste are included, on both the city's business license
application form and its business license renewal form,.
The information obtained from these questions shall be
shared with the DENS.
B. Initiation of a business license or similar requirement for
the unincorporated portions of the County to be used for
information retrieval purposes. Questions shall request
information on Vat r:sE of hazardous materials and the
generation of hazardous waste.
LI
PIA-7-3 Because many hazardous waste generators are not aware of
local, state, and federal requirements, and providing information
about these requirements could ensure compliance with
regulations, the DENS hazardout. waste compliance program
shall continue to incIrde a strong emphasis on educational
assistance to hazardous waste generators. Every effort shall be \
ES -3d
made to make ,hest programs accessible to all areas of the
County. The following actions shad be taken to achieve this
policy:
A. DENS shall continue to publish a quarterly newsletter
providing the latest information on new laws and regulations
affecting hazardous waste generatars.
B. DENS shall continue to publish and update the San
Bernardino County Hazardous Waste Generator's Handbook
which includes information on applicable regulations,
contacts at other regulatory agencies, and resources such
as the waste exchange, recaiers and haulers available to
generators.
C OEHS shall continue to sponsar workshops on regulatory
compliance with an adCed ;;ffort to schedule conferences
in the desert portion of tie County.
P /A -7-4 Because hazardous was.c gene °ators have expressed an interest
in having assistat.ce with dfi 1posal of hazardous waste, this
jurisdiction shall perform a detailed needs assessment and
feasibility study for a transfer station and /or County coordination
of hazardous waste pick up in all areas of the County.
The study shall include considers ±ion oV the types of wastes
needing ^ranagemtnt, opportunities for source reduction,
recycling --sd treatment, a.:d the likelihood of private enterprise
meeting this need. U an urmtt n--td is fount, this jurisdiction
shall determine the feasibility providing that unmet need.
ES -35
CHAPTER 8 is
LAND USE REQUIREMENTS FOR HAZARDOUS WASTE
GENERATORS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS HANDLERS
Public concern exists regarding the rztential tbreai to areas surrounding
businesses which use haz o—dous meterieh, and generate hazardous wastes,
particularly with regard to the distsac,a of such businesses to residential
and immobile populations as well as ma.ot drinking water aquifers. Wnild
land use or zLaing regulations provide a inachaGi3m for siting industrial and J
commercial developmt <i =t, the use of hazardous substances by existing 1
businesses may not be considered when changes to land use or zoning are
adopted or residential development :s approved. Consequently, residential
areas may be Qited near these businesses (or vice versa). To address this
concern, information on she amount and type of hazardous materials and
wastes ut d by new or modified ousitiesses should be part of the
discretionary revif w process. Development standards for the review of
mew or modified businesses should also bP:established.
A two stage approach is neccssmy or the proper siting of businesses
that use tazardous materials and generate hazardous waste. The first
consists of :-squiring preliminary information regarding hazardous materh3s
and avast. management practices at thr time of application submission.
The second requires that this prefinary information be documented as
specified in state law €hrcagh a completed business plant waste minimization
Qlan, and, if applicable, a Risk Management Provrntion Program. !'hose i
plans would be conpleted prior to fine, approvel of the Ian use application.
All businesses are subject to tac ro.alrement for these plans .rhether or
not they are filing for a land use application.
GOALS AND POLICIES /ACTIONS
The following goals and polities /notions require the aJopt on of regulations
for the consideration of new or modified businesses using hazardous
materials and generating hazardous waste.
Goals
G-8 -1 To ensure that businesses looa-7g within the County incorporate
available risk .zanagement a._,. waste minimi2ation practices into
their operations.
G -8 -2 To minimize the risk of exposure to hazardous substances by
the residential and immobiie populations.
Policies /Actions -
PIA -8 -1 Because information regarding i:ze amounts and types of
hazardous materials used and hazardous waste g:,neratcd are
important factors to consider when siting new . avclopment or
reviewing existing bu:inesses, this jurisd;ctioa shall:
ES -3d
IU
L•eJ
P /A -8 -2
P /A -8-3
l) Amend th, Development Code ,:on lug ordinance) to:
a) require nxw tushicases t( submit detailed information
regarding the amnuaots Rnd r, -ies of Hazardous materials
used ' and hazardous wastes generated, the business
procedures implemented to manage these hazarrous
substances, and the emergency procedures employed in the
event of an accident. Thr. applicant must demonstrate
that the businew, operations are consistent with hazardous
material /waste legislation.
b) require new or imodifirWbusinesses to complete a
business plan, waste minimization plan, and, if applicable,
a Risk Manafdement end Prevention Program prior to final
approval of a land use permit for - a new business or
modification of an existing lousiness. The regv irements
specific; n AB 3777 (Chapter 1269, Statutes of 1986) and
AB 3205 (Chapter ;.5, Statutes of 188) regarding the
applicability of the • RheP shall be identified in the
amendment. The pla -s shall ha submitted to the County
DENS for resiew and approval.
2) Expand outreach efforts to city and County planning
agencies, city and County building and safety departments,
and the real estate industry regarding new planning and
reportinS requiem -vents as well as the identification of t"
types of businesses which may be affected by ti
requirements. Such a program should includo
d;velopm. -nit of brochures and flyers describi e
requireynants acid an identification of types of b: 'Isar
which are likely to handle acutely hazardous materials. ,
Because certain quantities of activily Hazardous materials could
pose. a threat to the public health and safety and the
environment, this jurisdiction shall amend the Development
Code (toning ordinance) to =gWre a conditional use permit for
all businesses or goveramet4a; far,?avtiss handiing acutely
hazardous materials in excess of 55 n ci';xis, 500 pound., or 200
cubic feet.
$ ma= inappropr iat ly iited • -- ,dvstrial f ai'i es pose a threat
to the public, and because zoning ordinances do not identify
quantity or use limitatio..s for hazardous material /waste, and
identifying restrictions could addrdss future concerns with the
siting of industrial f ^cilities handling hazardous material /waste,
this jurind "ation shall evaluate the feasibility of estublishir :g
siting cis :sic that dentify the types and amounts of materials
allowed within paivicubir zoning d.esiguations. The study shall
identify at Y c4--Is and appropriate thresholds whim
would cuuz Ire subject to specific land use
restrictions, rep s in the Development Code
(zoning ordinanc';} such industries, and identify
CHAR 9
HOUSEHOLD HAZARDOUS WASTE
Household products can be classified into five general groups: household
cleaners, automotive products, home maintenance and improvement products,
lawn and garden products, and miscellaneous items tike batteries or pool
chemicals. These prciucts arc common household items. They tits often
discarded improperly because most individuals do not recognize their
potential danger. Improper disposal of househc di hazardous waste (F HW)
may lead to injury to refuse collectors and egOiprnent damagr,, and when
disposed to land, HHW may contaminate soil or groundwater. Disposal to
landfills, storm drains, sanitary sewer systems, and the ground, as well as
evaporation and storag. of these products, can lead to human health and
environmental concerns.
In 1984 the County of San Bernardino established a comprehensive
-egram for addressing the HHW problem. The program began as a pilot
project under a grant from the California Waste Resources. Control Board.
The study dea% with the feas.bility of separat:ng I.1F£W from the municipal
waste stream and disposing of it properly. The County opened two
permanent collertioa centers in February, 1983 as part of the grant
project, one at the County Agricultural Commirsrioncr's office in San
Bernardino rind the other at the Czntral Valley Fire Station in Fontana.
Based on the success of the pir0t program, the Boarcl of Supervisors
appi ived County funding to continue the program and subscquer.tly
approved funding to expand the progrard.
The County HH management program ;ncludes:
* Five permanent year -round cvit otion centers.
o One -day collection programs -trled "hound- Ups" in areas of the
County not served by the existing collection centers.
One -day publicity and .ollection "events" to publicize and
encourage the use of existing centers. -
o An on -going public eduwation ana information effort to increase
public awareness of VHW issues and also ~xovido educational
materials to schools a:.d interested groups.
With the location of only five permanent collection centers County -
wide, there are vast areas of the County which are net being fully served
by this program. Tice increased popularity of these events has increased
the number of users to a point where storage size of the San Bernardino
site may not be ad.quate. New vermanent collection centers may be
added to the program since the Round -Up events are very labor intensive.
The Round -Up events require trained personnel to accept, sort, and
package large amounu of waste for processing (recycling, treatment, or
AWL disposal) in a fixed amount of time. Alternative mcastires to expand the
ES -39
program should also be considered, however. The program should be
expanded to include collection centers at landfills, enforcement efforts at
landfills to discourage improper disposal, and continued public education
efforts. Participation by the County Solid Waste Management Department
is recommended.
i GOATS AND Pf,DLICEES /AC ON5
Goals
G -9 -1 To ensure the effective management and disposal of Household
hazardous waste County -wide.
G -9 -2 To prohibit unauthorized disposal of household hazardoui waste
4` in facilities that handle wastes.
I' G -9 -3 To inform the ,public about the need for proper disposal of
household hazardous waste and to inform the public of the
availability of the collection centers.
Policies /Actions
P /A -9 -1 Because recent studies at municipal landfills show evidence of
contamination from hazardous wastes, this jurisdiction shall
establish a strong enforcement program to prevent disposal of
household hazardous waste in municipal refuse facilities.
P /A -9 -2 Because household hazardous waste is disposed at local landfills
and because a etrong enforcement pregratn will detect significant
ar_>unts of housenold hazardous waste, this jurisdiction shall
develop household hazardous waste diversion programs at all
facilitie@ where waste is handled, to properly manage these
wastes. Whenever possible, collection .entt s should be
established at appropriate facilities with publb access
P /A -9 -3 Because the capacity at collection centers can not accommodate
the weeds of the entice County and the diversion program will '
add to the amount of hazardous wastes requiring special
management, this jurisdiction shall address the County's needs
in effectively managing household hazardous waste by establishing
a larger transfer and processing facility.
v /A -9 -4 Because public education efforts have alerted the public about .
proper methods for disposal of household hazardous waste as
well as the availability of household collection — centers, and
becausw there is a need to continue these efforts for (county- -
wide public awareness, this jurisdiction shall continue its
comprehensive public education program.
ES -4d
ZRAPTER 10
TRANSPOATATION
Hazardous waste is transported by truck out of the County to treatment,
recycling, and disposal facilities, and into the County from other areas
for treatment. In 3986. San Bernardino County cuporred about 41,000 tons
of hazardous waste; hazardous waste impor I:d into the County comprised
about 5,000 tons. While no curre;nt estimates exist for transport of
(F hazardous materials, national _estimates suggest tha• transportation of
hazardous waste is relatively insignificant compared to the amount of
hazardous materiels transported: These hazardous materials become
hazardous waste when spilled in the c' fironment.
Federal and state agencies are responsible for the development and
enforctwimt of the Transportation regulations throughow the stag,
Federal ant State legislation xequire the proper identification of transported
materials, set minimum ctandardz for cargo containers, and require that
hazardous waste be tracked from - generation to ultimate disposal. The use
!tf the uniform manifest /shipping papers,, piaeardine of transportation
vehicles, vehicle safety inspections and ahe -use of a uniform format for
+reporting incidents which involve a hazardous material release, have
resulted from these regulations.
Although federal rind state agencies are responsible for the development
and enforcement of transportation regulations, the local jurisdiction can
have a role in the transportation of hazardous material /waste in the
County. The local jurisdiction may designate routes, restrict hours of
transportation, institute notification requirements for certain categories of
waste, anl, provide educational and trainir. /; opportunities in the
transportation of hazardous material /waste. In addition, the local
jurisdiction may implement road mitigation measures, such as repair of
roadways, to reduce'.ae risk of transporting hazardous materials /wastes.
Federal law preempts any state or local requirement which is inconsistent
with the requirements of the Hazardous iViaterials Transportation Act
(HMTA). A state or local requirement may not be preempted if the DOT
(or the courts) determines that the state or local requirement provides an
equal or treater lev,l of protection to the public than the federal
requirement. Federal law specifies, however, that the state or local
requirement cannot unreasonably burden c:,mmerce.
GOALS AND POLICIES /ACTIQNS
The following goals And policies /actions address the need to e•.,s,1rc safe
transportation of hazardous waste through the County.
Goals
C-10-1 To ensure the saft transportation of hazardous materials W
waste in and through San Bernardino County.
BS -41
Policies /Actions
P /A -10 -1 Because safe transportation of hazardous waste is an importaa< ti
goal of existing ,state law and local jurisdictions, specified
hazardous waste facilities shall use routes that can sat -!.
accommodate additionfil truck traffic, . do not pass through
residential areas, and use interstate or state divided highways
as major routes.
P/A -10.2 Because local jurisdictions can have a role in the safe
transportation of hazardous wash, this jurisdiction shall'
establish a task fora whose purpose is to develop proposalq
for speciTying routes for hazardous waste transport, identifying
limitations for scheduling times of day and days of the week,
types of wastes that can be transported, and the need fer
notification requirements. Alm. the task free shall further
assess the routes of concern (highways 59, 62, 71, and 1-15),
The task force should be composed of members of the public,
City, County, and regional transportation planners, emergency
response personnel, and indusft;r with exp.,rdsc in transportation
of hazardous w.bstances.
P /A -10 -3 Because specified hazardous waste facilities must have access to
safe transportation routes, this , irisdiction shall require
applicants for specified hazardous waste facilities to fund an
analysis of transportation concerns (see policy action P /A -5-
4(6)(d) Chapter 5). The transportation study shall provide a
description and arzlysis of the projecmd volumes of hazardous
waste transported into and through the County. The
t ransportation task face identified in policy /action. P/A -10.2
shall participate with local government staff in developing the
scope of the study. Tic study shall include, but not be limited
to:
KIt.
An identification of all reasonably availau-ee, highway and
railway routes in the Southern California region and the
development and comparison of the risk associated with
the alternate routes; -
° A comparison of the risk aesociated with transporting
yatardous waste in different truck and rail cargo tanks;
"
A% identMeation of route- specific, risk - reducing measure.%
I'm each route examined; and
1
An identification and evatuatior, of proced -gral (i.e.,
training, routing, curfews), technologioal �Lc., equipment
,nnovation), and externs. risk- reducing measures .e.. road
a.aprovements, enuer$ency response improvements) to
transport hazardous waste by truck end by rail
P/A -10.4 Because planning for safe transportation of hazardous waste is
a regional concern, this jurisdiction shell work with regional
ES -42'
planners in ensuring that local issues are
transportation
Plans-
addressed in regional transportation plans. wastes
Because state highways are used to trsasporz hazardous
t'!R. }0`$ articipate with regional,
through th s i r sdictiaa shallop o maintain highways
good condition,
state, and federal gavl;shwenis in detounining p
fending and repair of hig &waYS in kis. county.
and develop
PlA`10 -6 Because t! ;
this jurisdiction £sh�tl stspoy t of hazardous
angecdt of hazardous waste on A'II �1 roads has net
br;.n consid tans for the
traesptsrtatios: ono, routing p
wastes within urban areas.
federal tran�aortat }on reBxvaste,nsth'is
,.lp -9 Btcausa knowledge about safe transportation io T96 ous weals
Ply as welt as state management of hazardous
_ important for proper, manag ram for hazardous
jurisdiction shall contince its education include shal
waste generators. The program manifest. requ requirements.
as
proper labeling, placards g,
er consideration, and bee
current
1'lA•lq.g klecaus�;
transportation
further of hazardous raiaafihaaardous3matarials
issue that n
plans do not address the transportation
jurisdiction at tall consider transpa tation�rof
are trgnaporte through the
an4 these material'- County force,
regular basis, this j
ideriif}ed. in Policy plA40.2 to those
hazardous materials issues es Well as these of hazardous waste.
CHAIsTER I1
ENFORCEMENT ANY) 7ENIERGENCY RESPONSE
Enforcement and emergency response are two critical elemi ;nts necessary
for the effective management of hazardous waste and materials. The
County's enforcement program ensures compliance with hazardous
material /waste regulations by conducting both investigation and, possibly,
litigation of potential violations, The emergency response program, on
the other hand, consists of an 'emergency response team composed of
active trained personnel and a model emergency response plan (Area Plan)
that identifies the resources and responsible agencies in the event of an
emergency, These programs are critical because they ensue compliance with
hazardous material /waste regulations and tht local ,jurisdiction's
preparedness in the'evtnt of an accidental spill or release. Also, important
to proper management of hazardous material /waste are inspection and
monitoring efforts. These issues are discussed iii Chapters S and 7.
GOALS AND POLICIES /ACTIONS
Goals
G -11 -1 To ensure the safe management. of hazardous substances within
San Eernardlno County.
G -1.1 -2 To continue providing a comprehensive response to emergency
situations in order to protect public hee;th and safety and the
environment.
11A.2 Policies /Actions
P /A -11 -1 $ecausc consistent, periodic inspections of hazardous, waste
generators in the Comity ensures compliance with hazardous
mater al ;waste regulations, the County shall continue to conduct
a hazardous waste generator and hazardous materie" handler
inspection program. The program ihall emphasize education and
technical assistance to hazardous material handlers and hazardous
waste generators regarding regulatory requirements and waste
minimization. Every effort slsall be made to implement this
program in all areas of the County,
P /A -I1 -2 Becrum insF ctior, and enforcement efforts arc conducted by
several different 4gencim and a combined enforcement program
assay ensure contitmed compliance by businesses in the County,
the County shall continue to coordinate enforcement efforts
with the Stale Department of Hektith Services, the Regional
Water Quality Control Boards, the Air Quality Management
Districts, and other federal, state, and local agencies.
P/ A -11 -3 Because enforcement efforts provide a mechgnism for ensuring
compliance with hazardous material /waste regulations, the
ES -o4
I
MI
AOL
County shill continue to fund the enforcement program through
permit fCCS
P/A -11 -4 Because emergency response procedures involve several different
;agencies, the County shall develop an on -going awareness
program that informs the polnce, fire, and other agencies about
tho procedures and responsibilities specified in the Hazardous
Materials Response As("a Plan,
P /A -11 -5 Because the County h significant expertise in Coordinating
r responsae to emergencieb, the County shall continue to be the
,--)rdinating. agency for the luterageAy Response Team.
P/A -11 -5 Because response to an emergency requites trairscd, experienced
personnel, the lnterage:+cy Response Team shall continue its
advanced response capabilky training,
Ask
l
CHAPTER 12
S'1 E A11TIGATION AND LONGTERM REMEDIAL ACTION
The preveience of hazardous materials and products ha6 been widespread
throughout the County and cities, as these products at, commonly used in
our society. The Consumer demand for these materials requires that
businesses handling :hazardous ma teriats atd generating hazardous waste
be located in every jurisdiction. Such materials and vustes have been
produced and bandied for many years, and 4,cident4l releases of theso
materials have crew zd a multitude of contaminated sites. The most
common thmat assn -sted with these sites is the potential movement of
hazardous contaminants through the lantr to vater supplies, particularly
groundwater aquifers. Other problems a3s3ciated with contaminated sites
include, toxic emissions, improper ls.nd use in areas on or surrounding
r,rntsminated sites, and short or long term risk to p0lic health and safety.
Several federal, state, and local programs have been develops::' to identify,
characterize, and ultimately mitigate contamination and potontod negative
impacts at these sites. ` l-,se programs have resulted in se\ -ral lists
which identify sites targeteu by each program. These '—.is often d;?plicate
each other, although considerable differences occur among the lists.
While data are being compiled on these sites, they Grp incomplete because
there are difficulties its tracing boundaries of operation, finding responsibie
parties, znd fully assessing the extent of the ,mfential contamination..
The available data are maintained by many separate agencies, Ind rii�k
determinations and mitigation methodologies are not yet contpirtca -or
most of these sites. In addition, these lists may change as si'• are
discovered, created, or mitigated.
The objett,ves of some of these pr.$rams and their resultant site lists are
to ensure that jurisdictions are aware of these sites, that timely and
complete cleanup occurs, and that proper impact review is conductc3 as a
parr; of the development /land use review process When data on hazardous
waste generation projected from cUanup efforts are made available by the
responsible agency, it will be included in the data analysis section in -
future revisions of this Plan. However, most sites have not yet been
evaluated by the responsibie slgen, -y.
GOALS AND POLICIES /ACT ONS
The following goals and policies /actions address the need to coordinate
activities related to site mitigation and long term remedial action.
Goals,'
G -12 -1 To ensure that all jarisdictons are aware of all identified
contaminated sites within San Bernardino County.
G12-2 To ensure that timely and complete cleanup occurs at
Contaminated sit!,,
BS -4b
f:.
11
II
Alft
0-12 -3 To ensure cart environtmeatc, review is conducted for projects
proposed on sites which have been identified as contaminated.
Policies /Actions '
PJA -:2 -I Het ,kuse current information on the Location and status of
cleanup of contaminated sites is or- vital importance for
development n the County, and because the Office of Planning.
and Rc larch (OPR) List is not frequcatly updated not doss it
Provide details as to the contamination or status of cleanup,
F this jurisdiction shall develop s contaminated sites data base that
provides geographical, physical, and laud tss, characteristics for
use by applicants and industry.. In addition, the County
Department of Environmental Health Services (DEHS) shalt
update the C)PV list on a periodic basis and provide a DEHS
npdated list to eat jurisdiction. The DEHS updated list shall
also be used by this jurisdiction to assist in identifying
contaminated site$ assoclatcd with land use applications.
During DEHS preparation of an updated list; the following may
be incIrded:
a) information on site contamination and its applicability to
different types of development to assist cities and
applicants,
b) information tegarding the current cleanup status of
contaminated sites, and
c) addition of sites to the OPR list,
When DENS proposes to add a site to the OPR list, DEHS shall
first notify the owner in writing. Analytical evidence shalt be
rcqured �sfore a site is listed.. The owner shall have 15 days
from the date of this notice to make a written request for a
Administrative WarlaS regarding the proposed listing. When
requested, a heath g shall be held prior to luting a site as
contaminated.
P /A -I2 -2 Because cleanup of contaminated sites is a romplez task which
involves multiple agencies, DEHS shpit monitor and work
cooperatively with all agenoics involved in site assessment and
remediation. DENS shalt consider developing a ldeu oraaduin of
Understanding with state and regional agencies to provide
assistance and oversight of monitoring, assessment and /or
remediation activities.
P /A. -I2 -3 Because the method of remediation cast cause impacts, the
County and cities in conjunction with the State Department of
Health Services shalt encourage onsite treatment and remediation
to reduce the transport of hazardous waste from contaminated
sites, and should insure appropriate remediations are completed
to provide permanent remedies.
0 ES -47
r _.
P /A• :3 -4 Because site remediation rztivities require coordination and
expertise, DENS shall implement a site assessment and
remediation program and develop a program to enhance training
of persontfet in site assessment and mitigation techniques, and
risk assessment techniques.
P /A -12 -5 Because site assessment an,: remediation creates c:its to the
local agencies, the County should investigate funding tossibiiities
for cleanup activities. TWA should consider how local agencies
can recover full or pArtirA payment from respa�,sibio parties for
cleanup of ccntaminated sites, reduce the duplication of effort
among 411 agencies, and minimize the cost of work, The
County and cities should suppi rt legislation that defines the
responsible party in regard to the assessment and cleanup c_
oontani,i,ited sites, as yell as leginlation that improves access
to state mind federal Superfunds to cleanup orphan sites. DENS
should sock state funding for undergrouud storage t5xk
remediation programs.
P /A -12 -5 Because state law does not specify local actions or procedures
for projects proposed at a location listed by the Office of
Planning and Research (OPR) as a contaminated site, and
impacts may result to the public h,alth and safety - and. because
development on contaminated sites may preclude future
environments` remediation this jurisdiction sba4 amend the
Development Code to implement the following as a part of the
development review and permit issuance ptocc T.
a) require a preapplication meeting for all development /land
use applications at locations listed by OPR or DEHS.
b) require, all development /land use applications at locations
fisted by OPR or DEH'S o be subject to discretionary
conditional us,* review of this jurisdiction. except when
doomed not necessary by this ;jurisdiction. Exemr•ion
from discretional -tview shall be based on the scope of
the project and the natu.a of She contamin„tion.
PjA -12 -7 Because e` Is jurisdiction has a concern with proper cleanup and
funding for cleanup of contaminated sites, this jurisdiction shalt
do the following:.
a) Recommend, by resolution, to federal legisl_t* -
representatives that legislatioa ba developed to require;
DepaTtment of Defense to include bite Cleanup and to set
aside money for cleanup (a ; »resent cost) as parr of base
closure plans, and
b) Require that a clean -up plan which include.! the source of
funding be submitted to DENS for review and approval
baf!ere new or alternative land uses are un.lertaken.
ES -oil
CH"MR 13
PUBLIC EDUCAVON AND PARTICIPATION
An effective public participation program depends on early and continued
planning to -- .1erate input from a broad cross section of the population
and tho r.dulated community. The overall public participation program
for the CHWMP Allowed for public input on concerns and priorities;
suggestions for siternatives and new strategies; ^~ (. review and asseDment
of proposed measures. An effort was mad- inform and cncouragc
participation from the general public, civic, rnvironmentai and business
organizations, the cities and agencies within the Onunty, ant,' the regulated
community. Also, the services of a pubic participation coordins. for were
.-cured to assist department staff in implementing a public inNot«ement
t..ogram. An extra effort was mede to get input by early Noy +ember to .
meet the De ember 31, 1987, Draft Plan headline. Freparrtio .� of the
final CHWMP required additional public involvement efforts. The CHWMP
public participation program consisted of the following elements-
on-going advisory committee input
distribution J newsletters
distribution of an informative brochure
a cries of public workshops
- a speakers bureau and slide presentation
media coverage
distribution of 3000 copies of the draft plan summary and about
130 copies of the Draft CH100
a series of pubic hearings on the Draft CHWMP
Su;cessful implementation of the CHWMP will dcNnd c• continuing publ 'o�
education on the importance of proper hazardous iste management.
Continued efforts in this area will need to focus on public involvement in
the implementation of the programs specified in ti` CHW?..P and on
public participation ir he review of proposals for 5pecified hazardous
waste facilities.
GOALS AND POLICIES /ACTIONS
Public participation shful tak* plate throughout the implementation of
the CHWriir' programs w,% w?..1 as when applications for specified hasardo`rs
waste facilities aYe recc.1 ed. The following goals and policies /actions
ensure continued efforts in involving the public
Goals
G,0 -1 To continue public participation nos public education in the
implementation of the programs identified in the County
Hazardous Wasto Management Plan.
G -Is -2 To include public involvement in the review of applications for
spect.: A hazardous waste facilities.
ES -49
0701.02 10 -10-90 PC Agenda 4 of 6
o
P °Lcles/Ac ous
P/A-13.1 Be
cause aubl aar �
COmRrit r A op repla8ti o d uc
an
cores; tee to review N f the °d anon is
ed�cad o new PtoBra tee does s�,ex r�aortarr
p�A.13- Nazardvus Waste j' & dtoect;o11.. to emeht$ io� m ntuAd" Shall
2 13eca menage assist in 9"id� a of the visor
l oini ario`a '�a 9a;se the Plan. r`" rng and tuaaa�rr8 an, to
�l;c
for the n shall ;thin 90 form he of
bo d -he role 6$'sh 5y or�i after rcc a Local
d;es, of the LAC ?in �8a.da a` select. � d aroO). ent.
the
other decis o cl leers
E
CHAPTER. 14
DWLEM ENTTATION OF CHWN P PROGRAM;;
The CHPJMP recom)metids several programs which add:; th , County's
goals regarding effective hazardous waste management. It. order to
achieve these goals, reasonable efforts must be made to tmr CSent
CHWMU? programs. implementation depends on the establiibradoe of
program priorities, %je identification of funding sources, and the
development of a schedule for implementation. {
The programs recommended W this Plan were separated into three
categories for implementation: immediate, first year, and second year
implementation. The categories represent both the priority for
implementation and the proposed implementation schedule. The programs
piacsd in the immediate category reflect those programs that provide the
needed foundation for future County programs; they are the highest
priority programs. Programs` placed in the first end second year
implementation category are also important but can be delayed because of
concerns with funding or because issues related to these ;progrkrns have
been addr -.ssed by programs identified in the immediate category. The
priorities may change, however, based on the availability of funding,
changes in local attitudes, and the recognition of new conditions. Some
programs fake the ordinance amendments may be implemented all at once
if staff aid funding sources - exist.
The attached table sunfmsxizes the information regarding implementation
of the recommended programs. The implementation schedule, responsible
agencies, resource needs, and potential funding sources have all been
identified. The majority of the programs will be funded by permit fees.
Some of the programs are one -time (i.e., ordinance amendments) efforts
that c&n be absorbed into on -going County projects, others like the
transportation ,studies require the identification of funding sources. The
table presents the County's best e; 'mate of potential funding sources,
u
�
.aa u�m
o
+'•?n
tba�roN
M
m
►i
ematacfmEi
�m
$4 (a
to
ab sin « sai
u •0 a.41a
e
N
A�a�u
Aro�am
Ax
meva
a"zaS�WK
xxaa °O�Pt
NH
VWW
ast
r
,$
1p sai a
.�
w mr
141E
WM � L N
2:1
AR°.
-
O
037
MRO IL
6ME4b0
•C.O
il.
_
3i
11
W
1f N
WW
OO 1B CI
is i�
au6
s� to
tyai�.# 0 9 "Jq
W y og�
a
O O ti 41�t U
�(
M rima
y
W
AtiOK tb1�G
�.
PJOmC
thNAA
a
W4.i
m
-
N
•NC
N
ch
a
ea w
ci
a p
M
X114
aii
•a�m+q
i
o
b aY
R7 u
�.
RM
lo lO
M tl
ASS
0.
�g
jqa�
g
yy
N
1@q
R.H
@
- RMM
Am'. tA�
Fm'•MM
i
i
a�i
n �
m
+t10
F8 a
AS
i
op
.rt
O ICOA
M Oaia
O
6C7:C
A aua
v u v ,yay9�w
"0li
x
/off
YN ~
Mt)�
41 .44
a A u to
M��
%44 Or A
da
F�QQ11QJ a
r
44 d1 rt
rs
i
e0 ik . t 61
2
TV
4�A
0
43
A
W
� a�~ia40 o
�C�
.i 1 .G. •iO
M
-is
I
%qm9P �
O�M
"
43z
>G
U
+ C
id
�.A00493
Al7
�
t7Q
M •+
WtlJtu
m
«mM
441 PS
y
•„
Nq
!
a
F4
a
m.4
CAN
e4q MaO6
074
4A
�•:i r+CtanC
'
�t0 .I�.C'A'
�+M •4 i AL A
•+ -u
'1 A 7e
�+x2 r4mo4 .4 A
I
m
6�A
b A
T.
ww+
q O.YN
O Y O m b1C+i
Si c
w+'J�+Nn
�ymsaoeO�
c °ami.
RgiV.oCk
w�gwgaA:ra
vwa°�
o c
to
ey
yy��m
CdJ.'H di.•
C >q
vmm
Or01
a®
x�a°
w o�
C1
yJOmL
Y ®OM
O .
dA
V >67M 01
Aj
a�at°i
o
0
y °o
to ai
am
g `°
x0
Caa�.yR
cs
-
aCmwu
w
D
m
''
w
�m
u
pz
to
yy
+d
43
D
W
C1i
Li
®
u
M 0
to
W 0
14
H
'� awi
e
R! iwe
w as
b U ji
meo
mum
am°fi'e
w m
G
�
aMw
0.�►th�i
�y�
q
q
o
N
q. .�,
ym
C f!
a w° k
A A
-4o
V 0
au
aaa
.+
o ta
+++dos
®
s.
I E
3$O
:
-
�
di Iw
O
f
w
�gw
p y
9c cG.q
ktr U ais�
g4Dee w
a 343
o
oot.,
4maa
a !°lawip
m y
#
ag
N
Sf O
04
O io 14
N . w Ca 0+ ul a I
M
�o
I�dL
aA
W
>®0110
9ilw
'
t
�qw �m
aca
ilk 4
h °uAO
ti
L2
h
y
M
1i
M
W
M
.0
O
O
ra
•
s®
a.
no
em
vw
may°;
cia°
CR
ab'
°�,m
•a
,°,
s 41
V. H u
WW
A °H Ctm C a
M O
moo W
.3 i
mi!f
N 41
1105 01
�Ma.
� o
G A
w o 4+
y
G
� H U
0
ea•emi
vi C
a
-�8
GG'
MOM4
w a
rn m.t aM
90
N t
. v 0.3
A
0.4
0 a.04J
x
93
M
O
V
x
Mm
m�cl
M Cm P•
a
11 f
a N.
CI io8
Ppo� V
0
W m
�+
C;14
S A1i1
yqx
eY
{I�
a�
cam
W
04U
WS
a
11
It
41 °
N
o-
��
X40 Al
Al
b
VsoL
aR
V 041
41
:M
a 0
0+
x
►1
+R
xaM
uwa,
H
uN9,
aaM
r
ee
a
a
°
la
i
�
b tl
.as
m
®
u
1°e u
a
r
ala
a 0 b u
+°+ 'E
1�m4
+i0si
g
o e V
v0
FmN
M a
ty°a
R7.
p�p
y►�3 1
m
a
.410
b
4
4
i .
.
A
y N
ti
m
�
O
Mi ° N +p.N
Off•
M 000
eil
m
Oh rl M.
vl tll
+1q�
tpieC
fl 14 Q-4
.4$4a
MN.Oi��•
M 40
CO.ML
ae.+d
,M,ppOp
mV
'Ne >>11 A+a
�
o 411-00
Ns
ymw
aoN
®w
4+ep@
E+q yn'lo
a
wrl
Hm
w+si
ev pao
wuN
?:
- -�.
�� •�.s
W •iM
.+•�..._A.4
IVA
l'1
l� w.0
�+
24v
14 y.AON
�• —909
A.�
.i.iM
__ -..
1V r1.W
a .441 O
ti
L2
h
y
1i
w
W
HW
m
!
!
!
o
w
w
°a
0 14
uA
-
w
wx
6�
H
7+::
AOL
y!da.
gtlam
WtOi.djQ7,�
E6ti
EW
,C
a a
!
nti
-°+ smi 44
Q
Z, -A
rO+ sOi
a is to NQ
wa�b!'
VA
to
a u ua
4 QUA
0 a
ri+gym
M N O
41
q
A
Cpl
CaGq
yy11
�
a
W
VA 44 '
to
I S 9�Y1
agleQ
+oaaoa
to A3
a
oro3
a
o°
I TO
oa
a
++a
uA�cuw
to 14
K
a
l
e�tl
H
-of
L
lUaJ
Ou4.
ce
I"ii 0pa.
A v
Fj
a
•
94
p
Fi
1!p1 dm w 4
u
' w
o
?
Ot
■ id G
u ! M
U
alC
p
W pelD.
14 a.i
i.°ea
aid
.44
ai tX94
G.
w dA
so a�
i
a 431°i
o sins
a
1•° t5 C?t.4
p
w - it
" H
7. La..4 o6 W
,,on
A ti O N
N O dr�C 9
14 J2 4 Ste Q
!
p M C
O RL Q O d
3Ri tai «!a
! w9 d2
u
M
N Y+IYy°
st rCuaU
° W
_
� Q
i�
q 4A
14 M
1i
w
W
•
p
•e !t
+q4
C
tl
+•
P1
m H
M
k
x d
M
C M
C
O is
DS3 G
O -
401
{O�
{0
�i
H W
H
H
x
m
m
tit
aa4�
maw
a °
,0 1u�u
o.a�
6'a 9
s4
a a p
m ialmmw
011.0 C•N0
xGgYOL
0041
W
yib0Mw
tl m %�A.•m
�.
0 41w1+
- 01MCbO
p
0041100+0'1
41 7w b
MMi1" mYH
cs341 H
iSi
NM • 0 M :y
N
S4i
arye�i+
wa
w
4A m
®a a ma
s� Gee, a
waare o00
"A'.
W e
om
-
°�
Ma am
yR70 >1.0
caauaeq�a
0.14Oa OM
.0
e1
rvi
4gAm"So
maawMO
MW >11 mo
Casa,.0. as
Ma
O
tl1 m6
o. S 1 .0 9 O. Y
+•1. G'm0.��7 � 44y1
WW
F
wE0a l0iWRm
MO► a 0
W WO'aO K1.0
%O
iC
Oa."IX.a
W.Eaa41010
am 0.0
•
tl
�
m oc
141
�
0
C
e
m
Ash
w
1T
.
4411m34
p
y4Ri
Y,
W
W
.si pp
75
V
W
•4 0 41
if
o E D
"
a
W C +4 41
n9 °a.
..4
u�
M
w
M
w
4 p
W 8
I
M
M
MO
h�
m a
+ip 141
na4'
.°a Q41
-
w
oqm
C�1G
CMG
a?m4m
@@0 90.4
ai Al
Kd.M
N
a 4H
R•:WM
.
m
a
.14
O
o'�1 O
W
17
9
VY
RYw
y04
mC
d !4U
MO m
rot W
0if,a7pP�r
.14w
0
es°4
wal
>°
p�
is
i•
s
411>.7oa
at
94I
C
a'
% :
oe 9R
i
p91wMAw1M
w
to
� •N
q
0
1"4
OUNC
�O
O M 0
tl
•Fi
• M M,{
am to
O.
N
TQ
'd4 Aaqs
mM N
>1a
0
p
W
�+40 g C
d
b rm
m•
ao+4
>'ii
a
A
n� ACh
10 '!S
.0
iLAa
q 14 0 is
4�1
i C4.
v®
Mo•
y 0a
4a� n1
u6L:,44
_
z
t—
w
cn
W
i
M A
A0
�n° qo
ar
u
13
O~ at
C.A
%
C
r. .A
F.
�pdaa0q�a'k
O
m
aia
f° ck
Oyu
m0 yO,�y7 m
00+
b
a
o�
°
i m�yg'Mae
ma
d
to
A aM
eO .ia
�
Vd
x w
at
Ka Goa
®9~
°
t
F
l
LT b a
m 5
Lt
N
M•qa vmti
ydgl�
S
°ya•'
O� .q 0
a rs
O tO
b0
MR dv0
M
0.7 i3O 4
3
N'O
yy
®qD
i w
01
y�
as 0.
aq 1640
W0 MPO raa
°i
iMOA
99: Aj PA
y0 c
%.4
b�
q q.4 `g'as
no V.
dO mba
qa 0
Cu
ja
an G�
N
oa 0
awi
a
a y
.,iio
°
WaS
°
as
Si t
i
U
1-4
yy
y
°
afa W
to
O q
as wa @qa
Is 43
O O
i � q
i• i
q 0
R
.0 d aj
to
Mr•
�VaO1K
a
�
M
W
.rHa Rp
Al"'a
iY p� N
•
� O
G
e
i
K
o
i
, °a .4
.a
H
C i
b
46
a
c p
� o
-a to) Q
p�
aZ'+Sya a
o� a0
70�
to c
-
a
i
O GA A 0.
93
aqi�
q% y
%4 PA
:i,.
•. �
d Js - .% .q
µ.
040 0R
O
0
r4"4 V
O ®
Oy.a A
q 'a i
F a . q
PG
^ p
. y H
„
p O R
.
0
�ad
U i
g Nd
OsqO?Cl I'O
°„
.4
.i eO
s
:a :
.
z
t—
w
cn
W
0
1
0
QO
va
V]
w
i
m u
qO
i
>o
Ra C m
N M
q C
i
eSu
"a 4 a�i o
O 7*+g
9
Ck tl
oa�a�
�exy�t
Ao.�sq+ a
9 4 q
O
ay4aw�
i
tnea NOR
r 93
O. WPG
a
G • o
dN Nyi1M�JY
ro++ �u.rN
y
ou
low a
ao
n.0 00.10
o* akC a
aP
oouumo 0
s�
W
ro+t9 Q� C C�
bta
u
cog
U2 at.4
O
CR
ssN N OX.Y
W s: fa 5� 00
a 0
%f
W
•Wi
M
+ay
M
mo=w
u
m
th
N
WW
Q
q
R
MN
14
Cc
N
N
�
.
a.L
..01
a t04ai
V to
�aW
w
�q4
c
�
2A
d"•�q
s k+piM
i boao
w sat a
a 1.40 t c
s o a�i+oi
A �.
!gaOO
b AObgi
�wwt •> M
W 1.. M. Y..
is
0
u
ma.+
°. ®a'lsa�agr
v ro �+
U sae
i ru.a
11
O.� a
M f a iM1 .g is
i1 ii
V
Lg W
0.00
rl Ef pMIO6/
in
¢{
NA!S1
•pop spf Z 4
i
1
QO
va
V]
w
i
m u
qO
i
>o
Ra C m
N M
q C
i
eSu
"a 4 a�i o
O 7*+g
9
Ck tl
oa�a�
�exy�t
Ao.�sq+ a
S�qA>
Aft
ay4aw�
i
tnea NOR
r 93
O. WPG
e
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
STAFF ]REPORT
. Vzo
r'VTE: October 10, 1990
TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner
BY: Jerry Guarracino, Assistant Planner
SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 14486
L.P.C.
R ATION. INC. - A residential subdivision and
design review of 35- condominium units on 3.15 acres of
land in the wedlum Residential District (8 -14 dwelling
units per acre), located at 9874 and 9892 Arrow Highway
just north of Ramona Avenue - AP "k 208- 311 -03, 04, 21, and
24. Associated with the proj!,,ct is Tree Rtnovt °. °armit.
No. 89 -48.
I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION:
A. Action Requested: The approval of the subdivision map and
issuance of a Negative Declaration; also approval of the
conceptual plot plan, grading plan, landscape plan, tree
removal permit, and building elevations for 35 condominium
units.
B. Project Density: 11.1 dwelling units per acre
C. Surrounding Land Use and ZoninqLL
North - Single family homes, Low Residential (2 -4 dwelling -
units per acre).
South - Single family homes, Loin Residential (2.4 dwelling
units per acre).
East - A church facility, Medium Residential (8 -14 dwelling
units per acre).
West - Older single family homes, Medium Residential (8 -14
dwelling units per acre).
D. GLneral Plan Designations:
Project Site - Medium Residential (8 -14 dwelling units per
acre)
Nort;o - Low Residential (2 -4 dwelling units per acre)
Sovch - Low Residential (2 -4 dwelling units per acre)
East Medium Residential (8 -14 dwelling units per acre)
Kest Medium Residential (8 -14 dwelling units per acre)
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
TT 14486 - L.P.C. CORPORATION, INC.
October 10, 1990
Page 2
E. Site Characteristics: The project site is currently developed 1
with two older, single family homes plus several accessory
structures. This sit= has an approximate slope of I percent
from north to south and numerous mature trees. To the east is
the Church of the Nazarene; to the north, existing family
structures; to the south, Arrow Route and single family homes;
to the west, older single family %mes in some disrepair; and
northwest, the Bible Missionary Church property. There are
numerous mature trees on the site.
F. Parking Calculations;
Type Parking Spaces Spaces
of Use Ratio Required Provided
i
9 - Two Bedroom 1.8 /unia 26.2 78
25 . Three Bedroom 2.0 /unit 50.0 50
I - Existing House -- 1.0 l
Guests .25 /unit 8.75 9
Total 76 78
Garage Spaces 60 min. 69
Uncovered Parking 16 max. 9
76
II. ANALYSIS•
A. General: The applicant proposes to develop 34 nest, two and
three bedroom condominiums while preserving an existing
historically significant single family home known as the
Croswell House. Single story units with 30 foot rear setbacks
ire proposed along the northern boundary to provide a
transition from the single family residential neighborhood to
the north. The Arrow Route frontage will consist- of the
existing Croswell pause and two new units. These units were
specially designed to preserve ao existing mature 'Cedar tree.
Also, the bunk of these unit's second story elements have been
reduced to a scale which is more compatible rrith the Croswell
House.
Access to the site is via a single driveway wi._Arrow Route
which tines tap with the center line of Ramona Avenue to the
south. Future reciprocal access to the meditQO residential
properties to the west is proposed from two locations at the
north and south ends of the site.
FA
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
TT 14486 - L.P.C. CORPORATION, INC.
October 10, 1990
Page
B. Design Review Committee: The Design Review Cc-mittee (McNiel,
Wei_nberg_er_,__C_o_1e_m--anT reviewed the proposal on July 19, 1990. The
project was reviewed again on August 2, 1990, and the Committee
recommended approval subject to the following conditions:
1. The entry doors should be furniture finished wood.
4
Inte.locking pavers should be used as enhanced pavement. The
e:cact configuration of the enhanced pavement to to approved by
staff.
3. Enhanced pavement should be used at all pedestrian crossins .
4. A blended roof tile should be used to provioe depth and
richness of arDearance.
5. Brushed aluminum frame windows are not consistent with the
Meditarranean theme. Painted or anodized windows should be
used.
6. Provide a corbel detail under the wir" w boxes, entry door
overhangs, and the large gable element on the front of Building
2. This will give these elements a sense of support they
currently lack and add richness to the elevations.
7. A window should be placed to the right of the front door on
Building i to provide a balanced entry treatment.
B. The Proposed accent the is to drab. The applicant should
provioe an alternative which is more lively but not trendy.
NOTE: Ali but Item 5 of these conditions have been satisfied in
the - -iised plans submitted by the applicant since the Design
Rev' w Committee meeting of August 2, 1990. A condition has been
recc mended to address Item S.
C. Technical Review Committee: The Committee reviewed the project and
determined that with the recommended Conditions of Approval, the
project is consistent with all applicable standards and ordinances.
D. Environmental Assessment: Part I of the Initial Study has been
completed by the applicant. Part II of the Environmental
Checklist, completed by staff, found that aii;hough the project may
have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a
significant effect in this case because the mitigation measurr!s
identified in the Initial Study have been incorporated into project
design. Further, on dune 28, 1989, the Planning Commission
conducted a Public Hearing to provide an opportunity for public
comment on the Environmental Assessment for Design Review 88 -17.
The current proposal is essentiaiTy the same project (less three
units) as Design Revi;.,a 88-17. lloweier, the units are now proposed
F-3
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
TT 14486 - L.P.C. CORPORATION, INC.
October 10, 1990
Page 4
as condominiums rather than apartments, consistent with the
Planning Consnission's finding that there would be no significant
environmental impacts that; could not be mitigated. Therefore,
stare recommends issuance of a Negative Declaration.
1. Noise: The project is subject to significant noise impacts
along Arrow Route. A preliminary acoustical study has been
prepared which identifies mitigation measures needed to bring
the site into conformance with City noise standards. A final
acoustical report will be submitted to identify precise
measures which must be incorporated into the final project
design.
2. On June 7, 1989, the City Council adopted Urgency Ordinance 395
which establishes policy for a condition to be placed on all
pending residential projects to ensure adequate school
capacity. This condition has been added as Planning Division
condition No, i of the Tentative Tract Resolution of Approval.
E. Historic Preservation Commission: The Historic Preservation
Commission reviewed the project on May 3, 1990, and approved
Landmark Alteration Permit 90 -05 to develop 35 condominium units,
while preserving the Croswell House and alterations related
thereto, subject the following conditions contained in Resolution
No. 90 -07, attached.
1. Prior tw the approval of permits to rehabilitate or alter the
Croswell House, beyond the scope of work proposed with this
application, detailed plans shall be submitted to, and approved
by, the Historic Preservation Commission.
2. This approval shall expire unless extended by the Historic
Preservation Commission, if the conditions of approval have not
been completed by May 3, 1992.
3. A 15 -foot deep rear ,yard shall be provided by amending the site
plan and the rear yard shall be defined by a hedge.
F. Tree Removal Permit: The site has several mature trees, some of
which are in conflict with existing and proposed improvements. An
arborist report was prepared for this site to determine the
feasibility of relocating those trees which are in conflict with
the proposed development. As a result, the following
recommendations have been made (refer to Exhibit "F" Tree
Identification Map).
1. Trees No. 5 -11 are mature Queen Palms which are growing into
the existing overhead utilities and should be relocated.
2. Trees ho. i6, 16.1, 22 and 31.1 are healthy and structurally
sound and should bt relocated elsewhere on the site.
F -�/
El
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
TT 14486 - L.P.C< CORPORATION, INC.
October 10, 1990
Page 5
3. The removal of trees No. 4, 31, 32, 36 and 39 is recommended
because of the poor,#eaith and /or structure of these trees.
The project should b0 conditioned to replace these trees with
the largest, nursery grown stock available.
4. Tree No. 37, a very large Cedar tree, is proposed to be
preserved in place.
t
The remainder of the on -site trees are fruit trees and are too
small to be considered Heritage frees as defined by Ordinance No..
276; therefore, they are not subject to preservation or replacement
requirements.
III. FACTS FOR FINDINGS, The project is consistent with the General
Plan and will not be detrimental to adjacent properties or cause
significant environmental impacts. In addition, the proposed use
is in compliance with the applicable provisions of the Development
Code and City Standards.
IV. CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised in the Inland Valley
Daily Bu letin newspaper as a public hoaring. The proper" "ty has
been posted and notices were sent to all property owners within 300
feet of the project site.
V. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission
approve Tentitive Tract 14486, and the related Design Review,
subject to the Conditions of Approval, through adoption of the
attached Resolutions and issuance of a Negative Declaration.
Res p ly 4a�tted
Brad er
City Planner
BB:JG:js .
Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Location Map
Exhibit "B" - Subdivision ,Map
Exhibit "C" - Site Plan
Exhibit "0" r Landscape Plan
Exhibit "E" - Grading Plan
Exhibit "F" - Tree Identification Map
Exhibit "G" Building Elevations
Exhibit "H" - Floor Plans
Historic Proservatic,n CmisAlion Resolution No. 90 -07
Resolution of Approval for TT 14486 with Conditions
Resolution of Approval for Design Review with Conditions.
�5
LJ
�.-
'oo!
r�taits .�
pi Hill I o
Its
t.�tj
I �O.
=ois d�6�
�.
I
1
!! {,II dye { {{i iLL119llil�u {��j
n rALY1I i! �� ey. i n 1 T
1
�tyy F- i� 1
fill
0003
0
�i
d r 1
1
ctd
1 1
Fit;;
�yy CRCtQ2 r.. }4 ��]Y Q
�RIt i� ;Slei` 1 `
t Ifni
ji
oil
—J
M =- w
aiH
Crry OF 1. UCAMONG)
'LAN fi ION
•,:,,rte -,, ,
i
r
i
{
,
11
F"M
11{ �
t i 1
i
r
i
{
,
11
F"M
n
El
0 *000
�g �r
OF r w i CAMONGA
PIS SION
ExHmrry%tj ' SCALE:
F 61
S
N
t
prr
77
rMM: =- 1444sk
MY OF UCAMONAA
itia: �rc�j `�tcrL
PLAN IAN
Fxmrr. t" SCALE:
F-10
r -•
i
4 �
j
rt,+
' 1j
T--J
j
Nt
'L�i���
�
-olC �l
Rc
..
jjjj w,
II
14
M-
■Ili
.�����•�,._
77
rMM: =- 1444sk
MY OF UCAMONAA
itia: �rc�j `�tcrL
PLAN IAN
Fxmrr. t" SCALE:
F-10
r -•
i
4 �
j
rt,+
' 1j
T--J
j
Nt
11
I]
Arbori!A- moRV wae, p vw-i-9 in Ok,,cn
a�.�r +mss removaD
m Tmb rot s"bief f to pratmi en pc, Ord2
CUCAMONGA
]MANNING DIVISION - /%
.t,;td;Nq vu
y� , -j►+ed
ITEM: --F7 I W y 9(a
TffLZ: TREE WENTAFiCATION A
zinviam " IF " grALF? N i
k
T
ft�
EC
IC
R
1i
.j
of
3 - -?-7
mill
Vpl
i
oil
mwwwa
Y
13���� u
.Z.
i.
w
III
71�
'• f
i
CJ
E 11
E
L J
A
N
t •. •,', � Imo; '. ..5=„ ?� �:.� i -
Lil.• 1 x�i ii =ef:.r
O !�`� F 11 • F ��,• r
1!•S
b °j ,101
Oil
go
EFM
Kv
�, "i. � ♦ i ��'s `w I .�� F � �� 7 ate.' ��j � ).
narosm -Nme vLLW
38 Lm ca co6ot"fam=
F F
U
n�n
U
I u
f' 1
9G.
e'
8
r..
A
�•.��1.'l7 ]�T1 fiNT
`''�' IM F, '� F . I
IMINNIM
r
T{1G+ flf1
�.t it
�
QQ
s
i
5
=
I�YJ
CR
G��J/
�y
t' 1
r�
lP
t%
{I 1
MMtMrwgwusl tlM
�.M�+Ni�f1{ Mp�Y�MM«M
"4
t
"I
A
I"
as
Vv
a[�
9
0
Q
F
o • t 35 WP COP
r.
■
r►r� ra
00
Q
r
n�
U
{•
•
(i7
0
Up
51
-T-
MI.
t
pr4pow 9:90M vu" �`� �yYr•ra �MG��Mp'' lly�
uw �� � r
rd'na r�ra
r 0
i ..•
O
Y
(�
'i
t�
1+
`1
UJA
1 2 4r �'±+ I farm
r
;s
es
O ADO
�O
L:J
D
3�
44�
r
r
0
UJA
1 2 4r �'±+ I farm
r
RESOLUTION NO. 90-07
A RESOLUTION OF THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA* CALIFORNIA, APPROVING
LANDMARK ALTERATION PERMIT NO. 90 -05, THE CROSWELL HOUSE
CURRENTLY LOCATED AT 9874 ARROW HIGHWAY, RANCHO
CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA - APN: 208 - 311 -03, 04, 21 AND 24.
WHEREAS, the Historic Preservation Commission has held a duly
advertised public hearing to consider all zomments on the proposed Landmark.
Alteration Permit.
WHEREAS, the Historic Preservation Commission has received and
reviewed all input regarding said Landmark Alteration Permit.
WHEREAS, all legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolutio7n
have occurred.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Historic Preservation Commission herety
specifically finds, determines, and resolves as follows:
SECTION I: The application approval applies to the construction of
36 condominium units and the preservation in place of the Croswell House a't
9874 Arrow Highway and physical alterations related thereto, and as
conditioned hereia by this Resolution.
SECTION II: The proposed Landmark Alteration is approved based upon
the following findings of fact:
a. The proposed action is consistent with the purpose of Chapter
2.24 of the City Municipal Cade; and,
b. The proposed action will not be detrimental to the structure
from a significant aesthetic, cultural, architectural, or un�ineering interest
or value of an historic nature; and,
c. The action proposed is necessary to ensure the continued- and
consistent maintenance and condition of the residence.
SECTION III: This Landmark Alteration Permit is exempt from C.EQA
(Article I0,ecti -on 15301).
SECTION IV: R -P_sd an the substantial evidence received and reviewed
by this Commission and baSrd on the findings set forth above,
1
F-O?t
KI
HPC RESOLUTION NO, 0 -07
LAP 90 -05 — CROSWELL HOUSE
May 3, 1990
Page 2
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Rancho Cucamonga Historic
Preservation, Commission doe,, hereby approve Landmark Alteration Permit 90 -o5
the Croswell House, as described in the May 3,'1990 Staff Report with the
following conditions:
1. Prior to the approval W permits iq rehabilitate or alter the
Croswell House, beyond the scope of work p- oposed with this
application, detailed plans sha?i be submitted to, and approved
by, the Historic Preservation Commission.
2. This approval shall expire unless extended by the Historic
Preservation Commission, if the conditions of approval as
indicated have not been completed within 24 months from the date
of approval.
3. A 15 -foot deep rear yard shall be provided by amending the site
plan and the rear yard shall be defined by a hedge.
APPRO D AND ADOPTED THIS 3RD DAY OF MAY, 1990.
BY: CAU
Bob Scnmiarg Chairms -'
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: A€nR, BANKS, BILLINGS, COOPER, HASKVIT2,
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: PPMTON, SCHMIDT NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ,TONE
F -p 9
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION.OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT
MAP NO. 14486 LOCATED AT 9874 AND 9892 ARROW ROUTE IN THE
MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (8 -14 DWELLING UNITS PER
ACRE), AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF -
APN: 208 - 311 -03, 04, 21, AUD 24.
A. Recitals.
(i) L.P.C. Corporation, Inc. has filed an application for the
approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 14486 as described in the title of this
Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Tentative Tract Map
request is referred to as "the application."
(ii) On the 10th of October 1990, the Planning Commission of the City -
of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application
aad 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, dt: ermined, and resolved by the
Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows:
1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts
set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct.
2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to this Commission
during the above - referenced public hearing on October 10, 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 9874 and
9892 Arrow Route with a stree* frontage of 226 feet and lot depth of 616 feet
and is presently improved with wo single family residences; and
(b) The property to the north of the subject site consisis of
~single family homes,'the property to the south of that site consists of single
family homes, the property to the east is a church, and the property to the
west consists of single family homes.
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:
F '5p
PLANNING COMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
TT 14486 - L.P.C. CORPORATION, INC.
October 10, 1440
Page 2
(a) That tentative tract is consistent with the General Plan,
Development Code, and specific plans; and
(b) The design or improvements of the tentative tract are
consistent with the General Plan, Development God;, and specific plans; and
proposed; and (c) The site is physically suitable for the type of development
F
(d) The design of the subdivisisn is not likely to cause
substantial environmental damage and avoidable injury to humans and wildlife
or their habitat; and
(e) The tentative Bract is not likely to cause serious public
health problems; and
(f) The design of the tentative tract will not conflict with
aRy easement acquired by the public at large., now of record, for access
through or use of the property within the proposed subdivision.
4. This Commission hereby finds anL certM es that`the project has
been reviewed and considered in compliance with the California Ecrvironmentai
Quality Act of 1970 and, further, this Commission hereby issues a Negative
Declaration.
5, Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs
1, 2, 3, and 4 abov^, this Commission hereby ap-:i-oves tho- application subject
to each and every condition set forth below and in the attached Standard
Conditions attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.
Planning Division:
1) Prior to recordation of the final map or the
issuance of building permits, whichever comes -
first, the applicant shall consent to, or
participate in, the establishment of a Mello-
Roos Community Facilities district pertaining
to the project site to provide in conjunction .
with the applicable School District for the
construction and maintenance of necessary
school facilities. However, if any Schoor
District has previously established such a
Community Facilities District, the applicant
snail, in the alternative, consent to the
annexation of the project site into .'the
territory of such existing District priot to
the 'recordation of the final map or 'tit
issuance of building permits, whichever comes
first.
E
E
E
PLANNING COMMISSION B:SOLUTION NO.
TT 14486 - L.P.C. CORPORATION, INC.
October 10, 1990
Page 3
Further, if the affected School District has
not formed a Ma?lo -Roos Community Facilities
Dist:'ct within twelve months of the date of
.approval of the project and prior to the
recordation of the final r,j or issuance of
building permits for said project, this
condition shall be deemed null and void.
This condition -hall be `waived if i = City
receives notice ghat the applicant and the
affected School Districts have entered into an
agreement to prWately accommodate any and all
school impacts as a result of this project.
Enaineeriog Division:
1) An in -lieu fee as contribution to the future
undergrouneing of the existing overhead
utilities (telecommunications and electrical)
on the project side of Arrow Route shall be
paid to the City For to the ssuance of
Building Permits. The fee shall be the full
City aet)pted unit amount times th;i length of
tt= project frontage (222 t feet).
2) -- cements ,or reciprocal and /or emergency
access shall be provided in favor of the
property to the west.
3) The existing drive approaches on ,Arrow Route
shall be removed and replaced with curb,
gutter, and sidewayk.
4) Landscaping and other obstructions within the
"areas of concern" defined by the lines of
sight for the project driveway shall be
approved by the City Traffic Engineer.
5) "No Stopping Any Time" signs shall be installed'
1 along the Arrow Route frontage.
6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption
of th': 'G olution.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS LOTH DAY OF OCTOBER 1990.
PLANNING COMMTSSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
�3a
z
PLANNING COMMISr6 Uri nESOLUTION NO.
TY 14486 Q L,P.Cs CORPORATION, INC.
October 10, 1950
Plow 4
8Y: _ t
Larry T. McNiel, Chairman
ATTEST:
Brad Sutlers Secretary
I, 'drad Buller, Secretary of the Plannf"g CXVI SSwon of the City v Rancho
Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and
reguriarly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the
City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held
on the 10th day of October 1990, by the rollowing vote -to -wit:
AYES.- Ct IMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMISS, .RS:
ASSENT: C11MMISSIONERS:
11
11
b�Y{i`NwY9`Y i Of. pB i`is w_� H-- IS
olo®
Y S•♦ M M$WYY t. r P YO
Jig" 1.•
!flf _ !f V +$S
ayY�YYYo4 w r I =2 ==; P Yq_ ^. r YZ =1
5 a r- „ A Eris.
j¢ «N �gi�y� as MI
r.��
` YCa —t WA Y.. �j . p I�
SIN.; + �• r6 �1 p aC �+
_w �... g` 2; Ogag 3 B r Y R ZZ
—89 SHIN cc
al N • N f N
H
r
3V
y
O
wd
�? T-
r . a AMY �YMO
Pi a }+
8 b a
sit. �Mr
oil
Y rr •
Y
�� M r
a E
..
� � =-
a ^ o
� aae
u a ,Qll�.va -�
In,
s ay 17 -2 r- p ^tom 1=xbzxl t -ffi I salt jr
Pit
TL
Ali
Aria
Bix
JeW
y y M yy� Y
O "'''1111133333 iiii •• S
5is4ig ! •�, y° is as
� LLA Y
N 1t a
u
$is Woe tip
t •Y $= e�cis �c
as �s �= �� gsMs t. ?°
� ¢fix �� .� } �g SX
_ _ ga.- 1
Zis
9 by p M Y -asr du
9 f Is 121. Ell in
f 1 TLY! H iij PA
It 2 v =� I� : s� =gSSA I i
€"c Y _ya* $ 6� prigsc gx�x� _ s®
11 SO r
O as ii a
�o =�
z�ax� "air sg sr.� s;8..
4 . $$�u',ir r 1 On a °� �S': °axe �I.
62 -1 w l °Fx ORION c In �°
F o
El
El
a
Pik
//CC
p rO• yy ^ SZE
g eC
is Ilk 39 .462-3ii
film
SIA
G. € Mvig
mais ga la 11IM]]fl .
-j d 1 9 Y^ •i ^ 19; 1:
9 86.0 �� �� ��� �� ®��p•'y •s � ���y� ��
g
US rig
I�y
Yn w�w < «."- <s aao 19.1 s"I —HUM ti s+_ = i] HRI
I1
•@a
k
y s �
O N
^uo
^ L
Y
s
S€
Ym
2:5!:
$11
a
Y Y
g�SS
+
Y
q i
SHE
^
affi
"a ®ea
�Y
y
J( 61
re�
^m�
_gSg;
+
s�a
�.i
O
o °
s
�I
-m-j�3
jazz's
< + s
sVH r"
` x
a� kX
1311, Z
;sus
NI
TL
g.ss
g:
_
aI
;^
o m
z
N
a
E
ai
ki
y�
Ski �ii
�,ti
�I�
Y
+
TL
y
siq3B
Y
�G
$
ii
r
YYYYYY
ilk)
°
_
$ tell
q
c
=
d
ills
ills
Of
Abe
Y
N w
�.i
O
o °
s
�I
-m-j�3
jazz's
< + s
sVH r"
` x
a� kX
1311, Z
;sus
NI
-' sA
fit c' zq g
C
V�
a ITSw
as gr
a
a
« la.
es� l ®a�:
des �
�d
�,�sHsyA
V L
r MM
9=
fills
3 j
i ^
ja_ss
ju
a.
�IM w f
8
tali
M
m:
"
w
•�� C
sN
L.
kilt
O
�M
411i
w s`
0
Ty S� _ISB HBO 6`��y�
jai
ftw "
el
e �^ S=w s�
'gg� d
N S'
•s Nast 1; ^�
, g" �
� I l aa di _?
. # N Sig S
as
N- Tog 2 . 14 We t s ®U N -1 ST
i
.,
L_ J
Zo 11jiss
SIB -CM,
asa
:o $P
lit .;—.
41 w w 412 V1 3-
hip 1 --il
Ro P! -$1
j
AY! ~M�f
�aZ "
d
11
w a ` 94
K
S
iasp �
all
Q
4i 4
its us j
.� �° S' �Z
11H ,.x �
• 6 e i it I-. p •9 `1 4P es '�° iiii �
H! r r
i X.2 gis
ll 4x St:
is
j° l a rz% 2i Q
�i' lobrB QM y�g �Y� a +�7
AL
lie
a
ti �-
- ---------
•
�
1111
_M
rs
w
�
w a ` 94
K
S
iasp �
all
Q
4i 4
its us j
.� �° S' �Z
11H ,.x �
• 6 e i it I-. p •9 `1 4P es '�° iiii �
H! r r
i X.2 gis
ll 4x St:
is
j° l a rz% 2i Q
�i' lobrB QM y�g �Y� a +�7
AL
lie
a
ti �-
- ---------
n
y
3i
Y
w a ` 94
K
S
iasp �
all
Q
4i 4
its us j
.� �° S' �Z
11H ,.x �
• 6 e i it I-. p •9 `1 4P es '�° iiii �
H! r r
i X.2 gis
ll 4x St:
is
j° l a rz% 2i Q
�i' lobrB QM y�g �Y� a +�7
AL
lie
a
ti �-
- ---------
a" ' a ill a s a`sx s rsr s-
W P
p `
¢ ~� rag a~ 'C is Y .2
p a g
Ai
.i =� 1
Ya _
» m s
Lb
xf
aYa. fag^
SOPS _�r yA
fr YO ~ Y it 4e
Ig
SysJ �
its
' "E3
l yl�
�c t Y
L Al . I
Satj
fD
YM
Ito a
G
-
n
L
8 •
��
rift
3
°
'S n
e'e
j
-
6`
yy
a��r',� �,t i
i
M6
a.t
Ig
SysJ �
its
' "E3
l yl�
�c t Y
L Al . I
Satj
fD
YM
Ito a
G
-
n
s f s
I's
rift
O yy S
Y�11_'
A}$o
1LYi
w.Z
a *A
a��r',� �,t i
E
11
0
s
5 $,
eat
y YMM
ygr
n
t8
$e
�•a
L
!I
if;
eap«
jut
it
�S-
IR "�
ga c •
`» L
OYO
Y
gaff
�I �I
i
o
N:. S3 . v� « u E s:
gr T
� «�
O \ y
�SM y�«
F. Idi I al -i 11-- =2 r. Ila
Iz
a «Da- <9CS
H D
sZ = R s,
i 3
¢ ire
1ge all V
$ay OO q� -9
pc
4
ri
a� «
� ia�Ali
U
RESOLUTION NO,
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY Cr RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING
COMMISSION, APPROVING DESIGN IEVIEW FOR TRACT NO. 14486
FOR 36 CONDOMINIUM UNITS LOCATO AT 9874 AND 9892 ARROW
ROUTE IN THE MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL il!iTRICT (8 -14 DWELLING
UNITS PER ACHE), AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF
- APN: 208- 311 -03, 04, 21 and 24.
k
A. Recitals.
(i) L.P.C. Corporation, im,. has }-sled an application for the Design
Review of Tract No. 14486 as described in the title of this Resolution.
Hereinafter, the subjec Design Review request is referred to as "the
application."
(ii) On October 10, 1990, the Planning Commission of the City of
Rancho Cucamonga held a meeting to consider the application.
(iii) All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution
have occurred.
ti
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 4.7 of the facts
set forth in :.de Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true znd correct.
2. Based P' -n substantial evidence presented to this Commission
during the above - referenced meeting on October 10, 1940, incl *tiding written and
oral staff reports, this Commission hereby specifically find`, as folln.vas:
(a) That the proposed project is consis%'ert with the
objectives of th., General Plait, and
(b) That the proposed design is in accord with the objectives
of the 0evelopnent Code and the purposes of the district in which the site is
-located; and
(c) That the proposed resign is in compliance r°ith each of the
applicable provisions of the Development Code; and -
(d) That the proposed design, 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,
F -�/
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
OR TT 1,485 - L.A.C. CORPORATION, INC.
�Iwtober 14, 1:990
rage 2
3, Based !span the findings and conclusions sot fortis in Paragraphs
1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby approves the application,subject to each
and every condition r;t forth below and in thw attached Standard Conditions,
attached hereto _^rid it °,krporateki herein by this reference.
`t} A final acoustical study shall be rrepared and
submitted for review pr4ar to issuance of k
building permits. The study shall address t'h4
noise generated along Arrow Route and shall
ident 'y mitigation measures to be
incorporated into the final project design.
2) Window frames shall be anodized �r painted
consistent with the mediterranea►, .,heme, not
brushed aluminum_
3) Inter':ccking pavers with concre *e transition
bands shalt be used as enhanced pavement. The
exact configuration of the enhaaced pavement
shalt be reviewed and approved by staff prior
to issuance of building permits.
4) Ail conditions contained in Historic
Preservation Commission Resolution 90 -07
approving landmark Alteration Permit 90 -05
shall apply.
5) All trash enclosures shall be designed with a
wood trellis shade structure and separate
pedestrian access.
Sj Tree Removal Permit No. 89 »48 is approved as
follows:
a) The following trees are to be preserved
and relocated elsewhere on-- site per the
arborist's recommendation: 5 -11, 16,
16.1, 22 and 31.1.
b) The following trees shall be removed and
replaced with the largest nursery grown
stack available as determined by the City
Planner., 4, 3a, 32, 35, 39. .
c# The large Cedar tree no. 37 shall be
preser -4 in place and ad appropriate
constr, . i< barrier provided prior to the
issuance of any grading or building Oerrast
to insure the continued health of the tree
as required by Municipal Code Section
19.08.110.A.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION N0.
DR TT 14486 - L.P.C. CORPORATION, INC.
October 10, 1990
Page 3
d). Trees to be preserved in place or through ,
relocation shall be so noted on all
grading plans.
4 TbO Secretary to this Commission -hall certify the adoption of
this Resolute:-;a.
t
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS IOTH DAY OF OCTOBER 1990.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE C!TY OF RANCHO CUCAM0NGA
BY:
Larry '. Mcyie , Chairman
ATTEST: 3rad Buller, Secretary
I, Brad Buller, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the Citic,_uf Rancho
Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was- duly and
regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the
City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held
on the 10th day of October 1990, by the following vote -to -wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
z
11
E
MMSN�`YaM�tn .5 z 1 5`4-.4i Cp- YMYM
�� N&N Q�` !�.N O ^tJ� 6 ��. pis o YoY Y �' •.r A
C�. i�1 ((r� c O do
O C OQ` a qG O` L `I! O M M `s6 •+ O` �.O `
flm a oo y ttrr c i� y. ` t Y4Y aa 0 •
� t.$VM OY`�
YY Sr NMI `M $ HPI
Y .w. Yom_
Ui°•Y�.Y.i;Y.��o$ �Io�ur ��_ � Rio � iy �'�^ ,,
5Su.". tow • 'r rua « <ie.�
.a,�e a� Mgr ors a ii� ^i
u
s
sn
3gg M
C�
ti
Y
q�
Y
s
U
ru y i
K
� N
aF
o�
r fi
e
u..
r:
V
t�
-Y'Si■ ME Cf Y
�cYY
yr+ $g yD�7" e — M
r
TIM lu s� pa r
4 M y ^ �� >
4Y�sQ `Sw ggy'e0
:Bic »sM p
fit- k ills of $
y g 3c �5.w°. s A 4
Y
dIll -y TL
NoM
�rga g�i
$�� »#
Y^ UN
Y
C■ �iwc a µpest ��Y^ �� + �4p�T ±L�`� f����
L t t e � •1/
�S ■■d :u _ .� B-
ilk is
��,�
Y > X�Z Y� d Pit skiUs has �� s ���a
^
"g '� Ig 'S �� � IsHis f jets„
gowS' JIM11gk#2 .' vistas
e4 HT Ss'
Aan11A
ism »x 1 k
mill- t -21 MR. �- � .1 <s � �Y u
o pk-
r
E
M
y
NO2gp
Ow Y. �ji ••d�..�`�pEw yp J�Mp d +$�$
Mx�
" -;y$!C E E& CNS, � ^� +o o� °. ��s �,� +�tJ3 fs:; 3O� "
�
Oq'q " (1N Yip
� �Y M{d .K-
�yJ� mss: �s�Y
O °o$ $T M�a :" O iue��e^oTL °�nSyp a`UPS
A�py Nd w NM jNMb vMe{�� 1 «8N
- C� N ON La YN �. MF �/O ` ice
C W Y� M.i! of "�� qqQ i �" �O/3 EX. �j Npp�yp > 2069
■NL 2 MN N n C" UKw� v N@ �pL6Y
YYbfy�ge� M`3�ae.�tr RS-- Cg
aS �g a'3wewt + § ' Aall.
N�."N�N KN� K71 TIMO FN.4 .(K y1 U d Hit.
O
IL
r�pp y.�ji a A JR Yd ��
� L.NYC .LL p` C yY «N
N� i! y$� � i Y mom$g .� �� : r$y'►
is ...$,on A Ma
e�a�
un will
"b
ttO u 7 p yYi .yt
g'
E L'
aRyyi d'uuL' YQ 6 V ..yn _ b N Cw�V
"S. iO0.
a$ «$ i.u.o� a •fvN '-aN .sti U Xa_w.
dnw
d�
ar
V
S�
Its,
A L
�f+�mNS
r
wO �� d�
a Bj
cr
M gsu
8
4
.�4�
M,_■��,.vgp
x' w G Yw L
o Ki l Br U•;-.S2
A
Li
.� .s
Z.
lS p� � omits Oww
t``O
�OYl
« LL�._� i�a Y=om $±9�i V y +C
Li rs E
I Ny.S y "y
C�iC iSiE Jih iu,
d
M
gb
�Chi
E -ail
e-4 lir N
.�.3�y.e ��
pA .Y�PYO ��� m` y `�'a� N�N
�.=i��L C. cY4W�I G" • �IUS�C 6 w J�G� N�1 YV ITV E. Hit
c ll i O
os u° ri 5��4"' : t,e T.Y. $Y'bs
a._._ LO.O °VN� Y W4� �Bd 6R�V
v
\` r■
tip
Y6C
\` .ylS�
,yQpQC CCYga::�
g�` lfii
�a
9� p C
six
9,saY«
;-Z
lipig.�
221 a
S
YOQ
it
Bit�O^
V`
-a
sad
oYs 6i�,/��•
�a
r F b
Wys
E--j -
t.- ' 16
Li
.� .s
Z.
lS p� � omits Oww
t``O
�OYl
« LL�._� i�a Y=om $±9�i V y +C
Li rs E
I Ny.S y "y
C�iC iSiE Jih iu,
d
M
gb
�Chi
E -ail
e-4 lir N
.�.3�y.e ��
pA .Y�PYO ��� m` y `�'a� N�N
�.=i��L C. cY4W�I G" • �IUS�C 6 w J�G� N�1 YV ITV E. Hit
c ll i O
os u° ri 5��4"' : t,e T.Y. $Y'bs
a._._ LO.O °VN� Y W4� �Bd 6R�V
v
YYO
saa sN5 $ a• +o
Ali it GI
13 1.6
$
h>�w��$ c
: S 4 a
a Sr .. •-.7 gg $ �$p �9 `o 3y�`+ pap�
+°�++W pQL t•1n L R� 4 —q °M1S
N f( I
Ai
�r
F s =; ° ���5 ids :: �'a of °$, h3u j-4
jets
`wc �{Ny(yG F �V�BY o�� Y �a �Y�� 3• y�q
tl. V•J LBW � a�NM YO � � ���� �' "�� �����
C ■ Y qq Y— {$ M
r
�— ^w ° — Mme$ LL -.� 112
MD
I�iw L9 tSB� °'$ 0 —n ''i.°t yQ15 --b c" BS o$
a8 @l «`� �i f.— eat yea gig —ov81 11gap. gig
�p$ _ yy11y pp »CC + y 1g. Y
C� L N p��Y `— q>
y� w "N �—S u3. �— °��°z�YS as�i HIM � =y�,
�S °ao� ao i.Ys°� $ $ e`a, <$%'� « ..s Y .Y. Sa«''+ 3•
oo uyY�. YY G p
at.? L
. tis . sp. ss
S11.
p
Su 4
sag
N C y Y t.5 r
" baC S� CS Io
sc
�proO 6« guG YY �p ��i L^Yp� ap i`O'
WC ±_d OO �O C� l➢Lpqpq `YL ��MyYY6 SYl v� � Y we`CO �ppe
^Y Y� L� O. � YC M� YY 53.8 Nb : �L �A O L•''J N.0
Wo «C
Yb �sN _M�6 ����,,�,,,T rS�p Ya�Y;� 4U M tpE`�•pR roM
SOS §� NO f9i `Y Ow r:MN•Ly $1 Ll® <. g �� sci i�NYW t�M
Aprp
$o
E
Lp �
� W
3
w5 ��
O N �
� ys
S� _«o
c_ 11
u
Is
�o
Y g N Ly
YSV �Y
`e a
YYy
Y L
M y O
O L
a p N
LYE .YN ■
�r
E3& a$
^t� Y
r L Y
33yy O
Y pU. C M Y
SIT K�
J
y0
pY
MMOY q✓
If vj
9�
yeu•
iN
Ssy$U
Yw�
ct
1LY + r
y�w,4
Y ■
' 'g p
EE
C KH
I
26e
ls� i
ybm
Y.12p
O.xrV�Wr
o6
dip
J-1
mu
O
11
El
L�
4 Ljj its bag y0Y
32M AR w 0
♦pa.�Vy f.
Y9 . q VY_ 4C 6My. C p c
p,
S.Y O rm StL
A.V oo4i'J p��ta {a�N Ytl MrM ~MB yid
F� q+ syyi..Euy{/o a "yw�iv a L�' Big �S
qy ✓YY igOV A �y� �S °TA M� CYYb a $'S
CC 8Y� p�.C. Y y y s
OY LCM.� a LY C �L -4 iq �
xt
Kit i
till
M V Mtf Sq yYNl= >c Y —W v V. YY Oy� 4ggqWpppil C.
�A i�Y����S''.��rM�i�,t4r. GG�•y4 Gr �E .1YYs{.rs� y�L.Y. A L� c`L� L( »cLLL
LJOPV YQp6 LYS�
♦..14A i06� Yno
�O� F�� A^ •. � N t N wi Q bf
w w
_o
M
V\
O.O. GS
F LO
CZ
g
$ a g
win
TV
L a
O Y n
OM
91V '>
OX
r°> •�
ti
Y`M
P
Msy.
O Y
Q L
V L
gO
Y 4 A
' N Y
GY
L�
4 Ljj its bag y0Y
32M AR w 0
♦pa.�Vy f.
Y9 . q VY_ 4C 6My. C p c
p,
S.Y O rm StL
A.V oo4i'J p��ta {a�N Ytl MrM ~MB yid
F� q+ syyi..Euy{/o a "yw�iv a L�' Big �S
qy ✓YY igOV A �y� �S °TA M� CYYb a $'S
CC 8Y� p�.C. Y y y s
OY LCM.� a LY C �L -4 iq �
xt
Kit i
till
M V Mtf Sq yYNl= >c Y —W v V. YY Oy� 4ggqWpppil C.
�A i�Y����S''.��rM�i�,t4r. GG�•y4 Gr �E .1YYs{.rs� y�L.Y. A L� c`L� L( »cLLL
LJOPV YQp6 LYS�
♦..14A i06� Yno
�O� F�� A^ •. � N t N wi Q bf
w w
_o
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMt"ITGA ,
STAFF REPORT
I 1
DATE: October 10, 1990
TO: Chai man and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM• • Brad Buller City Planner
t
,
BY: Steven Rnss, Assistant Plannea
SUBJECT: CONDITIGNAL USE PERMIT 89 -03 - SHOWBIZ PIZZA TIME - A six-
month review of the existing Chuck E. Cheese restaurant
and arcade, located at the southeast corner of Foothill
Boulevard and Hellman Avenue - APN: 208- 261 -25 an;t 26.
I. ABSTRACT: The purpose of :iris report is to review the business
for compliance with the Conditions of Approval and to determine
additional review in the future is warranted.
1I. ANALYSIS:
A. Background: Conditional Use Permit 89.03 was approved by the
Planning Commission: on April 12, 1989. A number of special
;:onditions vere imposed to miWmize the facility's impact on
adjacent residential propertiFS as well as other tenants in
the center. Specifically, Condition No. 16 of Resolution No.
89 -46 (see Exhibit "B ") required that the p -oject be reviewed
by the Planninq Commission within six month %, The rig taurant
and arcade _ begrn operation: in March 1950, after final
inspections were completed by City staff.
B. Review for Comoliance: Staff has contacted the Code
Enforcement, Fire and Police dripartments about the vequest.-
No significant incidents were reported. Each deparm mt stated
that there had beFn no problems_ dith the operation. The
manager of the shopping center stated that Chuck E. r,ti,ese is
a considerate tenant and that they had received no complaints
from other tenants.
A site visit was conducted to verify that 2h,'site was still
in compliance wi a the Conditions of Approval. Some noise
could be heard in the clothing store on the east Brae of the
building but the shopkeepers stated that the noise level was
not significant.. In summary, there appeared to be no problems
with the use which would require the revoe,sion or
modification of the Conditional Use P—mit.
M14
1
PLAN14IMG COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
CUP 39 -03 - SHOWBIZ PIZZA TIME
October 10, 1990
Page 2
III. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recomeends that the Planning Cc— .ission ~
review the Conaitioris of Approval (see Exhibit "B ") and determine
if the project will require anot?:er review.
RA1rad c submitted
1
e Ci ty Pla er
O
BB:SR /jfs
Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Planning Commission Staff Report dated
April 12, 19V!9
Exhibit ''`g" - Resoltition No. 8946
Exhibit -'C" - darning Commissiun Minutes mated
1pril ~1Z, 1989
C
i
`t
>r
Li
DATE:
TO:
FRW:
BY:
SUBJECT:
-- CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
STAFF REPORT
C!JCAM
R
o h
April 12, 1989 u
�n 1
Chairman and Members of She Planning Commission
Brad Buller, City Planner
Cynthia S. Kinser, Assistant Manner
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 69 -03
snuwsia PTZCA Tiii�reques o es s an arcade"
within a restaurant ocated at the southeast corner of
Foothill Boulevard and Hellman Avenue APN: 208.261 -25
and 26.
Y. BACKGROUND: This item was continued from the March 22, 1989
. inn ng o— Wssion meeting in order for the applicant to conduct
a neighborhood meeting.
11. PROJECT ADD SITE DESCRIPTION:
A. Action Re ested. Approval of a nor-•Ionstruction Conditional
Use Fermitpror an arcade within a restaurant.
B. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning:
North - Motel, Nobilf -*me Park, Singly? Family Non"; Mixed -
Use District.
South - Single Family Names; Low Density Residential (2 -4 t
dwelling units per acre ).
East - Comaercial Center, Public Storage; Ccmwunity
Comwrr4al District.
Nest Apartments; Medium -Nigh Residential 14.44 Qselling
units per acre)
C. General Plan Desioations:
ProJeet Site - Cemmenity Commercial
North - Coupunity Cogmercial
South - Lor_- Density Residential (2 -4 fteliing units per
dare)
PLANNING COMrSSIO, iAF"r REPORT
CUP 89 -03 - SHOW6I...IZZA TIME
April 12, 1989
rage 2
•i
East - Community Commercial ~
West - Medium-High Residential (14 -24 dwelling units per
acre)
D. Parking Calculations:
dumber of Umber of
Type Square Parking Spaces aces
Of Use Footage Ratio Recpired Provided
Retail 17,295 1/150 309 312
Restaurent
Chuck E. Cheese
61000 1/7.40 60 60
4;000 1/55 73 73
The IO,(?30 square foot Chuck E. Cheese retaurant will reey_. o 133
parking spaces, with the remaining 77,295 square feet of retail space
requiring 309 parking spaces. A total of 442 parking spaces are
required with 445 spaces being provided. Thi° 'naves 3 extrt spaces
which may rot be sufficient for uses that require mare than 1 space per
250 square feet. In the fpture, restaurant, medical offl.,,es, health
club or any use that requireu a parking ratio gmater than 1 space pew,
250 square feet would nit be permitted due to the large amount of square
footage being Allired Fy- Muck E:`Cfi ese restaurant.
E. A�aldrable Re ulations• lho installation of 4 or more
amus`eae"ni m ces videA, pi...ptl games) within s business is
defined as an arcade tend require's an Conditional Use Permit
per Development Code Sectio;9 17.10.030.
'II. ANXYSIS:
A. General: The applicant proposes to operate the arcade as part
o a uck E. Cheese restaurant facility. The gaN* areas will
be disp€ -sed throughout the 10,WO square foot restaurant (See .
Exhibit 'CO). The applicant proposes a variety of video wid
arcade games, ske-j bell and kiddie rides. There will be
between 40 to 5101 games (See Exhibit `°A'). Tha priwary issues
rela(*d to the establishment of an arcade are availability of
supervisions safety and coeapatibility !4ith surrounding roses.
PLANNING COMMISSIO" -TAFF REPORT
CUP 89 -03 - SHOWBIZ . =A TIME
April 12, 1989
Page 3
The "arcade /skill" games are intented for the entertainment of
dining custmeers, The games are located in the northwest
portion of the building and are fully visible by adult
patrons. Furt'n.r, there will be a manager or technician on
duty at all tires during business Nours (See Fxhib -It "A ").
The Foothill Fire District hasereviewed the proposed use,
They will require the review (if Tenant Improvement plans prior
to occupa my. further, the restaurant will be required to bis
fire sprinklered. iSee Exhibit "G ").
B. Parking: As the games are to be used by dining patrons, the
T-5stallation of the games should not generate additional
parking demand, loittering or noise problems. There are 133
parking spaces rein'.red for the restaurant and arcade and 133
parking spaces are provided, therrtfore there is sufficient
parking. Bicycle facilities are provided throughout tho
shopping center; however there are no facilities directly
adjacent to the proposnd restaurant. The installation of bike
racks adjacent to the restaurant is recur mended.
C. Neighborhood C. atibilit : The applicant indicate, that
persons under IS years or age will not be permitted Wto the
restaurant unless accoWanied by an adult, themfore loitering
should not be a problem. The noise generated from the
arcade /video games and activities within the restaurrnt should
require the construction of adequate noise attenu&Wr #n (See
Conditions y, 9, and 15).
The proposed arcade is an accessory use to the permitted
restaurant use. There are a variety of uses proposed within
this center and the existing center to the east. The
restaurant /arcade's entrance and parking facilities are on the_
north side of the building facing away from the existing
single family residences. Camp &tibility problems with adjacent
.uses are not expected.
There Is one elementary school within a half -exile and two
eleerentary schools and a junior high school within one rile of
the proposed restaurant /arcade (see Exhibit "D "). The
Cucamonga and Central School Districts have reviewed the
proposal. The Districts have no objection to the proposed
arcade within Chuck E. Cheese. They do however recommend that
a condition be, placed on ege Conditional Use Permit which will
prohibit students from entiring the facility during school
hours (See Exhibits "E" and '10' and Condition 11).
& —
i
PLANNING COMMISSIO' TAFF REPORT
CUP 89 -03 - Simon rIZZA TIME
April 12, 1989
Page 4
D. _ Neighborhood Fir' °tin A neighborhood meeti:;g wa!5 conducted on
�T30, 198'9:7 that meeting the neighborhood expressed 4
primary concerns;
1) Loitering (as stated above, persons under 18 will not be
admitted into the restaurant without an adult).
C
2) Noy a (tne construction of adequate noise attenuation
will be required).
3) Wet trash (routine trash pick - -up for a restaurant will by
expected, therefove, pests associated with wet trash is
not expected. Special trash enclosure design was
required. Further, new trash bins are required to have
self- closing ceunter- weighted lids).
4) Service c: alcohol
E. Ervironmental Assessment: The project is catagorically exempt
nom pros s ons of e alifornia fovironmental Quality Act,
Article *.9, Section 15301.
IV. FACTS FOR FINDINGS:
1) That the proposed use is in actor;! with Genera' -1an and the
objectives of the Development Code as ev',wnced by the
Conditional Use Permit provisions for amusement devices.
2) That the proposed use together, with the conditions applicable
thereto, will not1 be detrimental to the public I;,)alth, saf.:ty
and welfare or m; terially injurious to properties or
Improvements in the vicinity.
3) That the proposed use complies with each of tree ,:M ?;cable
conditions of the `levelownt Code.
V. CORREVONDENCE: This iter, nrt bee, advertised as a PuVr, hkiaring
n e a e rt newsn� per, property posted and notices sent to
All properry owners and existing tenants within 300 feet of the
project.
E
VI. RECOMMENDATION: In order to approve this Conditional Use Permit,
the -sfon must rake the findings outlined above and in the
attached Resolution of .Approval. If, aftar the hearing, the
necessary findings can be made, adapt'ron of the attached
Resolution, with cnnditions, would be appropriate. Aft
6-6.
K
PLANNING C"ISSIG' 'TAFF REPORT
CUP 89 -03 - SNOWBI...IZZA TINE
April 12, 1989
Page 5
Redpec. submitted,
3rad Buller
City Planner
F
BB:CK :mlg
Attachments: ExhiV, "P" - Letter from Applicant
Exhibit "1" - Sit-3
Exhibit "C"'- moor Plan
Exhibit "D" - School Radius Map `
Exhibit "E," -,Memo - Cucamonga School District
Exhibit "F" - Letter from Central S:hool District
Exhibit "G" - Note from Foothill Fire District
Resolution of Approval
SHowBiz Firm TIME, Iii Cl
sa,oweIZ ft= Place- chuck E. Ch""S
4"1 Weal t ; mewey
P.O. Box 152077. 1M %"M 75015
2f4+2S&350 i
February 23, 1909
City of Rancho Cucamonga
PO Box 807
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91734
M Conditional Use Permit Application
To Whom It YA- Concernt
Enclosed is our application for a Canditional Use Permit for
an arcade, in connection with a proposed Chuck E. Cheese's
reataurant. While orr operation (as further explained in the
attaclmaent to this letter) is not a typi:al arcada, the nuaber
of games ve will hxva in this restaurant does make this Conditional
Use Permit necessary.
In a new restaurant ve voui3 typically have 40 -54 gameos
S -10 Video /Skill. Cause
15 -20 Ar«:nde /Skill'Cames
10 -12 Sksfballs
10 -15 Kiddie Rides
Please feel free to contact so if fur%heT. information is required.
sincerely,
&�&1
Lola Richert
Manager of LicensinS
%rlRo
enclosure
SNONB Z PIZZA TIME, VAC.
TYPE OF OPERATION
ShowBiz Pizza Time, Inc. proposes to operate a Chuck E. Cheese's
restaurant at 9 ?39 Foothill Blvd., Suite F, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730.
This is a pie,.- restaurant and family enterainment center serving lunch
and dinnFr. The menu includes pizza, sandwiches, salad bare soft
drinks beer and wine coolers are offered acct, ding to tonal rules and
regulations. For family entertainment, the .taurant offers kiddie
rides, arcade games, skill games, video -ski „ igames, and computer
controlled animal characters which sing songs and tell jokes and
stories.
PROPOSED HOURS OF OPERATION
Sunday through Thursday from 11:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.
Friday and Saturday from 10:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m.
The peak hours of operation are Friday evenings and weekends.
CLIENTELE
Chuck E. Cheese's !s family oriented. Our operation is geared to
appeal to families with children from 2 to 11 years of age. fhildren
unaer 18 are not allowed into the facility unla,s tney are accompanied
by a narent or guardian. A large part of our i:usirAss is catering
children's birthyay parties.
STAFFING
This restaurant will employ two (2) or three (3) managers and one
(1) techn ;cian, plus approximately thirty -five (35) hourly employees.
During all Boars of operations, at least one manager or the technician
will be an duty. At all t es there will be z manager on duty who is at
least 21 years of ago,;
EQUIPMENT AND SPECIAL Y F . UPES
h ,:u
This facility ail; utilize kitchen and cooking equipment, tables,
boot►:* and dispersing equipment :n connectidn with food bad beverage
service. There will be an area'devoted to children with kiddie rides
and a play area. There will be a family area with arcadejW11 games,
and a dining room with caoputer controll�.0 animated char xters
performing at set intervals from a stage area. There is also a Small
fagift shop area 14 he restaurant.
&.-4?
0701-02 10- 10--90 PC Agenda 5 of 5
UALIFICATIONS OF APPLICANT
Integra-A Hotel and Restaurant Company (formerly Brock Hotel
Corporation) opened the firs:. ShowBiz Pizzl- Place in Furth of 1580.
ShowBiz Pizza Time, Inc. was incorporated in April of 1980, as a =
subsidiary of Integra -R Hotel and Restaurant Company. In December of
1988, ShowBiz Pizza Time, Inc. became a public company, with more than
5,000 shareholders; it is n; longer a subsidiary'of Integra.
ShowBiz Pizza Time, Inc. (ShowBiz) has been developing and
operating ShowBiz Pizza Place and Chuck E. Cheese's Pizza Time, Theatre
restaurants since its Incorporation. Currently Showgiz owns and/or
operates 130 restaurants in 22 states, with a`franthise system of 133
restaurants. Showuiz firat began operating in CaliforniA in April of
1982 and at this time has 28 company restaurants in California.
lJ � �O
a
.,..�,,.�,,,.�,..� ..iarrt�u eoal►evsllo' .� .` ".""'" —
It ,
SUAlAlRttY ( f i °""' / � wiiw �r1 t
fC.Ir .Sl SiT.i/5 re 1 �� , .r "•. •+ uro4i �� i
nVKnMas sxus n t :� ► wale _. {[!
acasa Issnos i
t
I.ts neec +
t
!
r
1
1
t
t
r
—�Z
i
PUTSWJ. Vf44=
irwe"WoftQ
`., FwAzqftlzp .r7M
PLANNING MTY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA
DMSION
NU WW. aq.
aetw..,w
i
!
r
,
t
i
r
t
t
t
ITEM. Cup a 0
Z LE.�. $pre. , ....
PTUTINTa W er lr.V-
wl
Mset "64 ►�.c�awars�
L:3❑ ❑❑❑
❑❑ ❑❑
C1❑ M t�
❑ ❑❑
sun+my ra®o...
❑ ❑❑L0
vawus arm °i I
Li�.
KrDDrb
d+td�
5xru t,
0
7
i
NC` CU CAMONg
TITLE: pus
0
�►j. A NT-M�� '�iZ'VTQTPiT�T �.grnlams�a 10 'MA . re.
{
i
ADMINISTRATION
Frank A. Cosca, Jr. Ed.D.
n i I a l S 5 ho i District District Superintendent
!� Ingrid Vogel.
4!oothill Wvd.I Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 ( (714) 989 -8541 Assistant Superintendent Business Services
t
March 21, 19t:
Cynthia Rinser
Assistant Planner r
City of Rancho Cucamonga
P.O. BOX 807
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 51730
j RE: Conditional Use Permit for Chuck E. Cheese Restaurant
Dear Ms. Rinser;
(I i am writing on behalf of Central School District concerning the conditional
use permit for Chuck E. Cheese Restaurant. We have reviewed the description
of this business. The prince pals of Cucamonga Junior High School, 7611 Hcllman;
Central School, 7955 Archibald; and Bear Gulch school, 8355 Bear Gulch Place
commend the intent of .ehow ni;z Pizza Time, Inc., to insist that "children under
18 are not allowed inta the facility unless they are accompanied by a parent
or guardian ". They art each in support of the permit as long as the facility
specifically enforces this stipulation during normal school hours.
Thank you for including Ce--tral School District in the planning of facilities
that could potentially impact this district.
Sincerely,
JoAnn Johnson'
Administrative Assistant
quainess Services
c: Principals
e l N�a
BOARD OF TRUSTEES
Henry 1.. Stoy Antonia 4 Rogers Debbie Baker Rulh A. Musser Andrew Taylor
Prrridenr - .Clerk - - .Member sfember srember
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA E ---.
MEMORANDUM
tl M
r..
U DATE _• %�I ��
TO: si
SUBJECT-
`''
I"
RESOLUTION NO. 89 -45
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 89-
03 FOR AN ARCADE WITHIN A .10,000 SQUARE FOOT RESTAURANT,
ON 8.21 ACRES OF LAND, LOCATED ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF
FOOTHILL BOULEVARD AND HELLMAN AVENUE IN THE COMMUNITY
COMMERCIAL DISTRICT, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT
THEREOF - APN: 208- 261-25 6 26
r
A. Recitals.
(i) Show Riz Pizza Time has filled an application for the issuance
of the Conditional Use Permit No. 89 -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 March 1989, and continued on April 12, 1989, 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 cccurred.
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 hearings on March 22, and April 12, 1989,
including written and oral staff reports, N: gether with public testimony, this
Commission hereby specifically finds as fol'itus :
(a) The application applies to property located at the
southeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Hellman Avenue with a street
frontage of 672 feet and lot depth of 600 feet and is presently improved with
z
a commercial center; and
(b) The property to the north of the subject site is a motel,
mobile home pare. and single family homes; the property to the south of.that
site consists of single family homes; the property to the east is community
commercial and public storage; and the property to the west is apartments; and
(c) The arcade is located within a 10,000 square foot
restaurant and is fully visible to supervisors and other patrons; and
(d) The entrance to the arcade is on the north side of the
building facing away from the single family residences to the south; and
(747
PLANNING COMISSIC ESOLUTION NO. 89 -46
SHOD! BIZ PIZZA Cum 89 -03
April 12, 1939
Page Z
{e} There is sufficient parking on the north side of the
building to accommodate the arcade use, and
(f) the arcade is only open during the regular business hours
of the restaurant use, which are Sunday through Thursday from 11:00 a.m. to
10:00 p.m., and Friday and Saturday from 10:00 a.m. to AI:oO p.m.
C
3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission
during the above - referenced public hearing and upon the specific findingr of
facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby find and
concludes as follows:
(a) That the proposed use is in accord with the
General Plan and the objectives of the
Development Code as evidenced by the
Conditional Use Permit provisixn for amuseir
devices. 1
(b) That the proposed use, together with the
conditions applicabl;. 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 1
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 Environnntal
Quality Act of 1970 and has determined it to be exempt per Article 15, Section
15301.
5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs
1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission heveby approves the application subject
to each and every condition set forth below:
1. The arcade, and aasement devices therein, shall be limited to
the same hours of operation as the restaurant.
2. The amusement devices shall be placed in a manner that does not
obstruct or crowd entries, exits and aisles.
3. Supervision for the arrrdes shall be provided at all times.
4. A bicycle rack shall be placed adjacent to the restaurant and
shall be located in a manner such that the sidewalk and exits or
entries will not be blocked. The specifications and location ' F%
shall be approved by the City Planner prior is occupancy.
G -18'
PLANNING COFMISSI( ZESOLMON NO. 89 -46
SHOW BIZ PIZZA - L_ 89 -03
April 12, 1989
Page 3
S.
If the 6peration of the Conditional Use Permit causes adverse
effects to neighboring businesses or to the primary restaurant
use, the Conditional Use Permit shall be brought before the
Planning Commission for. their review and possible termination of
the use.
6.
Occupancy of the facility shall not commence until such time as
all Uniform Building Code and, Stake Fire Marshall's regulations
have been .complied with. Prior i.a occupancy, plans shall be
submitted to the Foothill Fire, Protection District and the
Building and Safety Division to show compliance. The building
shall be inspected for complianc_ prior to occupancy.
7.
Approval of this request shall nit waive compliance with all
sections of the Developmeht Code and all other applicable City
Ordinances in effect at the time of occupancy.
8.
Any modification, relocatitn, increase in. the number of
amusement devices, expansion or other chw,tgL In - apera:;o- will
require a revision to this Conditional Use Peri,c.
9.
The operation of the arcade, games, and music shall conforr, with
the performance standards for the district as contained in
Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code Section 17.10.050,
10.
All pertinent conditions of approval as contained in City
Council Resolution No.88 -043 shall apply.
11.
No person under 18 years of age may enter, be in, or remain in
any part of a gAve arcade during the hours school is in regular
session. This limitation snail be prominently posted at the
entrance of the facility, in letters not less than i inch in
height, and shall be enforced by the supervisor.
12.
Change - making or token exchange facilities shall be provided for
patron use inside the premises.
13.
Access to the game area must be from the mair, entrance to the
primary use and not from a separate exterior entrance. The rear
t
exit shall be for "Fire Exit Only ".
14.
Adequate interior clear space shall be provided for safe. and
convenient patron circulation and shall meet the following
minimum standards:
a) Amusement devices shall be located no closer than 12" from
any wail assembly separating the arcade from any adjacent
building or portion of a building.
PLANNING C..CWISSIO'' CSOLUrrTON NO. 89 -46
SIM BIZ PIZZA - CL a9-03
April 12, 1989
Page 4
b) Provide a minimum of 60 inches between amusement devices
and argy entrance or exit.
c) Where amusement devices are located along one side of an
aisle, provide a minimum unobstructed aisle width of 66
inches. Where amusement devices are located along both
sides of any aisle, provide a minimum unobstructed aisle
width of 90 inches. r
d) Additional interior clear space may be required by the
Building Official, Foothill Firs District, or Sheriff's
Department in order to raintain public safety.
16. The walls, ceiling or floor, or arpy combination thereof, of the
building or 'structure, or portion thereof, shall be insulated or
otherwise constructed so that no vibration that is detectable
without the aid of any mechanical device or instrument will be
allowed to be on the outer perimater of the arcade.
16. This Conditional Use Permit shall be monitored and brought back
to the Planning Commission within six (6) months from occupancy
to review compliance with all Conditions of Approval and
applicable City ordinances. Failure to comply with Conditions
of Approval or applicable City Ordinances may cause passible
revocation of the Conditional Use Permit by the Planning
Commission.
17. Approval of this request shall not waioa comliance with all
sections of the Zoning Ordinance and all other applicable City
Ordinances in effect at the time a Certificate of Occupancy is
granted.
19. The parking lot shall be posted "No Loitering" in letters not
less than 1 inch in height on signs to the satisfaction of the
City planner and Sheriff s Department.
6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption
of this Resolution.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 12TH 'JAY OF APRIL 1969.
PLANNING COMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
i
G _a 0
u
IU
E
PLANNING COMI5SIr" RESOLUTION N0, 89 -46
SHPW SIZ PIZZA - < 89-03
April 11, 1989
Page S
I, Brad Buller, Secretary of the Planning Comission of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution vas duly and
regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the
City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held.
an the 12th day of April 1989, by the fallowing vote•to-vit: '
AYES: COWISSIONERS: SLAKESLEY, EMERICK, MCNIEL, TOLSTOY
NOES: C"ISSIONERS: CHiTIEA
ASSENT COMISSIONERS: NOHC
treatment on Helms and 9th and wanted all capital improvem. -s installed
within a maximum of 3 years.
Motion: Mcsed �y Chitiea, seconded by Blakesley, to adopt the Resolution
approving Minor Developmert Review 89• -07, with modifications to provide -tor
Design Review Committee a0,,,7va1 of the landscape plan. Mo Aon carried by the
following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: , SLA.;ESLEY, CHITIEA, EMERICK, MCNIEL, TOLSTOY
NOES: COR41SSIONERS: NONE.
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE - carried
9 :00 P.M. - Planning Commission Recessed
9:15 P.M. - Planning Commission Reconvened
G. ENYIRONMENTJVFA- SESSMENTrAND'CONDi ITIONl4."J'USETPERMIT189= 63-i'-sfS-F OWDIZ'PIZZA
CUM — A request establish an arcade within a restaurant oca at e
!WNeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Heilman Avenue APH: 208-261 -
25 & 26. (Continued from March 22, 1989.)
Cynthia Kinser, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report and distributed
a brochure submitted by ShowBiz Pizza along with a letl.+r from the Rancho
Cucamonga Chanter of Commerce supporting the project.
Commissioner Chitiea asked if the concern raised at the neighborhood meeting
rega Ming servica of alcohol had been addressed.
Ms. Kinser stated that the applicant already had a beer and wine license.
Commissioner Tolstoy asked the maximum decibel level of noise.
Dan Coleman, Senior Planner, responded that the maximum was 60 dB from 10:00
P.M. to 7:00 A.M. and 65 dB from 7 :0W A.M. to 10:00 P.M.
Commissioner Blakesley asked why there Were two separate calculations on the
parking for the restaurant.
t
Mr. Coleman responded that the standards call for higher parking ratio over
6,000 square feet, because the kitchen does not generally have to be expanded,
providing a greater ratio of patrons.
Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing.
Planning Commission Minutes
.g.
April 12, 1989
Richard Huston, ShowBiz pizza, stated they were a wholesome, family oriented
is nderu6nand 90% from families withrchildrennunderr from families didwnot feel the
arcade was typical of arcades %rich normally attract teenagers. He stated
there would be no dedicated video area and the arcade would include a puppet
show a,id games geared- to younger children. He stated the arcade could be seen
from throughout the restaurant.
Comniss -loner Chitiea asked how many video games were being proposed.
Mr. Huston responded they were proposing 10 -12, includir:g 2 stand -up with the
remainder being rides.
r
Sue Tersn, 8248 Onyx Court, Rancho Cucamonga, opposed the project because she
felt it would create a noisy, unsafe environment and attract teenagers, eho
would hang out in the parking lot. She said the requirem.nt for bike racks
indica #rd the City felt teenagers w""id be using the arcade. She was afraid
wet trash would be placed near the residences. She stated the restaurant pad
was an a higher grade than the residences, and she felt children would look
over the fence into adjacent yards. She said the residents had been told
previously that the back area of the development would not be used for
restaurant pads.
Donna Windhurst, 8217 Onyx Court, Rancho Cucamonga, stated she had previously -
been assured that restaurants would not be placed in that portion of the
site. She opposed the arcade. She objected to the proximity to homes and
felt the sale of beer and nine should not be allowed.
Michael Roy, project developer, stated that one of the constraints of locating
the restaurant was its size because ShowBix Pizza wanted 10,000 square feet.
He said they had reviewed ShowBiz. Pizza operations in other locations and
determined that it would be a good operation. He said they were prepared to
mitigate the concerns of residents.
Mr. Huston stated that the bike racks were required by the City as part of the
entire shopping center complex. He sa4l trash would be pict:ed up frequently.
Mr. Coleman stated that daily trash pick up was a condition for the center.
Mr. Huston stated that the restaurant was noisy an the inside, but the
construction people had assured him that the noise would not carry outside.
He said they strictly control carding of those who wish to drink and watch for
signs of intoxication.
Hearing no further testimony, the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner 8lakesley dfd not like the idea that the developer was
restricting future growth at the center because this use would require such a
large number of parking spaces. He did not feel the use would draw an
undesirable clientele and felt they would be a good neighbor. He felt trash
and noise concerns would be properl3 mitigated.
planning Commission minutes -10- April 12, 1985
6- ~�n
Commissioner Chitiea was uncc=:�cartable with the project because paecing
requirements could restrict future leasing of the center. She also was
concerned because both Chuck E. Cheese and Cnampion Pizza had failed in
Upland. She felt the use was more of a family arcade /fun center than a f wily
restaurant and felt a more traditional family restaurant would be b m
suited to the area. She was afraid that extra cars and children outside the
restaurant would cause exterior noise. She'was not comfortable with th:z use
in this particular location.
Commissiorer Tolstoy indicated that his only concern had been noise. He felt
the two n.ontitions regarding noise in the Resolution would mitigate the
noise. He felt other pads within the project were smaller and he didn't feel
the use would generate future parking problems.
Commissioner Emerick felt ShowBiz would be a clean user and they would not ba .
a nuisance to the nearby residents.
Chairman McNiel stated that this particular center has a walking patrol twice
daily. He did not feel there wo+fl d be a lot of activity behind the building
except for employees leaving at the end of their shift in the evening. He
supported the project but suggested that the applicant make their employees'
aware of the sensitivity of the concerns of the nei ^hbors to the south.
Motion: Moved by Emerick, seconded ty Tolstoy, to adopt the Resolution
approving ,'.nvironmental Assessment cnd Condi <tton3l Use Permit 89 -03. Motion,
carried by *he following vote:
AYES: C"ISSIONERS: BLAKESLEY, EMERICK, MCNIEL, TOLSTOY
NOES: CO'iiiISSIONERS: CHITIEA
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE - carried
Commissioner Chitiea stated she oppored the project because or The extensive
parking it would require, the failuve of similar restaurants in Uplar4- , the
desire for a more traditional family restaurant, and tie fear that the use
might be nuisance to the neighbors.
H. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESS14ENT AND FC07HILL BODUVARD SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT
W -uc - `irr or= KMCHD CU(;AMONGA — A requrns,. con sl Her a onar
alternatives or the reallgMent of the north leg of Red Hill Country Club
R Drive by including a raised, curbed gedian an Foothill Boulevard in order
to eliminate left turns into and out of Red Hill Court y Club Drive.
Paul Rougeau, Traffic Engineer, presented the staff report, as well as letters
from the Foothill Fire Protection District and Central School District
opposing the installation of a median.
Planning Commission Minutes -11
IM
E
3
X71
— CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
STAFF REPORT
DATE: October 10, 1990
TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner
BY: Scott Murphy, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: TENTATIVE TRACT 14475 - SAHARA INVESTMENTS - Review of a.
proposed Scope of Services for preparation of a Subsequent
Environmental Impact Report for the subdivision consisting
of 73 single family lots on 113 acres of Land, located
north of Almond, west of Sapphire APN: 200 -051 07, 55,
56, an: 57.
I. BACKGROUND: In October 1988 the !Tanning. Department received an
application for a 16 lot subdivision on a 20.9 acre site located
north of Almon! and west of Sapphire. After reviewing the
application, the Planning Department also required the applicant
to n.ster plan the adjacent- 94 acres of land up to the
northwestern most City limits. Upon completion of the master plan
and review of the entire application, the Planning Department
determined that an Environment Impact Report (EIR, was necessary
to address potential environmental impacts connected with she
development of the site. The EIR addressed landform and
topography, geology and soils, hydrology, biological resources,
c-- ltural resources, land use and planning, traffic and
-elation, public services and utilities, and public safety.
s1R included two alternative subdivision layouts in addition
o►ie being proposed by the applicant.
After reviewing all the information prepared by the Gity's
consultant and responding to comments from the various affected
agencies, the Planning Commission certified the adequacy of final
EIR for the site on January 23, 1985. The Planning Commission,
however, denied the Tentative Tract Map because of problems
associated with the development as described in the EIR.
t
II. DIS4.'U3SION•
A. General: On February 28, 1990, Sahama Development Company -
submitted a Tentative Tract Map application for the entire
area previously covered by Tentative Tract 12376 and the
relayed master plan. The applicant is proposing to develop
73 single family lots, 2 lots for future water , ervoirs
required by the Cucamonga County Water District, ana several
open space lots, including the Cucamonga Wash and a portion of
the Cucamonga earthquake fault system.
ITEM H
PLANNING
COMMISSION STAFF hEPORT
TT 14475
- SAHPMA INVESTMENTS
`CTOBER 10, 1990
Page 2
B.
GEQAe Upon submittal of the new Tentative Tract Mao
pplizatian, staf reviewed the previously certified EIR to
detevai ne if the impacts, together with the proposed
mitigation measures, adeqv -tely 'responded to tas new
proposal'. Under the guidelines of the California
Environmental Quality Act (GEQA), a new EIR shall be required
if one of the following everts occurs:
1. Substantial changes are proposed in the project which
will require major r- -isions to the Environmental Impact
Report; and
c. Substantial changes occur with respect to the
circumstances under which the project is being uadeptaken
which will require major revisions in the Environmental
Impact Report; and
3. New information, which was not known and could not have
been known at the time the Environmental Impact Report
was certified as complete, becomes available.
Staff's opinion is that circumstances exist pertinent to all
three criteria above that warrant the preparation of a
Subsequent EIR. First, the project itself has been expanded
and modified from that which was addressed in tine previous
EIR. Spcond, the City recently adopted the Hillsido Grading
Ordinance which restricts development in areas over eight
percent and slope. This Ordinance was not in effect at the
time the previous EIR was prepared. Third, based on
information provided by the applicant, the location of the
Cucamonga fault has been determined to be different than that
which was previously veviewed. Additionally, while not
specifically identified in CEQA, staff feels that a
significant period of time has elapsed since the previous EIR
was certified and a Subsequent EIR is necessary to update the
1
Information contained in the previous EIR.
C.
Scone of Services: After having determined that a Subsequent
IR is required, the City and the applicant agreed upon using
the sime consultant that prepared •the previous EIR to prepare
the Subsequent EIR; Sandra Bauer$ Bauer Environmental
Services, was the project manager yho prepared the previous
EIR. Through ^eview of the application with staff, Bauer
Environmental Services has prepared a.scope of services which
will be addressed in the Subsequent EIR (see Exhibit "A ").
The City will be the lead agency in processing Vie EIR and
i�,
coordinating the consultants. The cost of the EIR preparation
and processing will be paid for by the applicant.
AWL
PLANNING. COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
TT 14475 - SAHAMA INVESTMENTS
OCTOBER 10, 1980
Page 3
As outlined in the proposed Scope of Services, the Subsequen-V
EIR will- review the previous EIR and extract information
applicable to the current proposal. In addition, the
Subsequent EIR will address, but not be limited to, such
things as:
I. Landform and topography - an analysis of the proposal as
it relates to the-adopted Hillside Development Ordinance;
and F
2. Geology and soils - compare the ,geologic information
previously submitted with the new studies to assess the
impact on development; and
3. Biological resources reevaluate the species invntory
repared for the original EIR to determine its relevance
to the current project in light of the greater focus on
^pecies habitat; and
4. Public services - analyze the ability of police, fire,
water, and school facilities to serve the project; and
5. Alternatives - explore alternatives to the proposal to
try and minimize potential environmental impacts,
particularly grading.
III. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission
review the proposed Scope of Services and determine if the items
identified adegsatPly address potential environmental concerns for
tits area. If thi9 Planning Commmissior: concurs, sta•:f should be
directed to proceed w1th the Subsequent EIR. If the Planing
Commission feels that additional items should be reviewed, staff
should be directed to include those in the Scope of Services.
Res y su ,
Bra er
City tanner
BB :SM:ml g
Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Scope of Work
Exhibit "B" - Project Schedule
Exhibit "C" - Location Map
t
EDIT A
SCOPE C7 WORK
SUBSEQUENT EIR FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 14475 ti
nv� D— UC1ION. ireznca ®c =v AND AUROACH
This scope of work (Exhibit A) contains two seems including the Work Program, and a
description of Project Management and Subcontractor responsibilities. Exhibit presents the
project schedule, and Exhibit C presents the project budget. The details of ibe techn' ical approach
are fully outlined in the work program that follows. In brie4 this program is designed to provide
the City of Rancho Cucamonga with a Subsequent FIR to evaluate the proposed Tentative T°nct
14475 in full compliance with Section 15162 of the State CEOA Guidelines. ThE Subsequent OR
will make maximum utilization of the previous EIR (the Final EIR on Tentative Tract 12376,
certified in January 1455), and will focus attention on subacquent project modificii4ons, changed
environmental conditions, and nevi information that has become available since the Final MR was
certified As before, the work program focusses on the analysis of project compliance with
relevant hillside standards, rmphasizes the assessment of alternatives, and provides fo=
considerable response to comments in anticipation of broad community involvement.
NM EHO ;RAM
The work program is organized into five categories including: (1) Project Organization and
completion of the Notice of EIR Preparation; (2) Preparation of the Screenchcct EIR; (3)
Preparation of the Draft EW% (4) Preparation of the Final EIR-, and (3) Attendance at Public
Hearings and ,Present6ons. A preliminary indication of the exhibits tc be included in the
Subsequent EIR is indicated under each task, where appropriate..
(1) PROJECT ORGANT17AUON AND NQb'YTCIg OF PREPARATION
I;
This initial task provides the opportunity for City stWX Hauer Environmental Sewces (HES, the
environmental consultant), and CharchoMarinisr, & Avociates (CHA, the pm1vt
engineer /planner) to discuss the details of the propsaed project. It also provides the chance to
review the focus and content of the Notice of Preparation, develop a project Distribution List,
and to obtain copies of releamt material that will be used in preparing the EIR. Specific tasks
to be completed during this stage are described below:
M
C
Identification of alternatives to be evaluated in M and development of
conceptual rough drafts for review and concurrence of City Staff prior to
preparation of more detailed layouts (not* that the alternative contests have
been selected to include a cluster alternative, a large-lot alternative, and a
review of the applicant's site plan to determine whether grading requirements
can be reduced);
Receipt of background materials to be used during the project, including
copies of previous stuOks (note that copies of the previous 1963 E1R, are
available through b..,.. -,t City and BES), maps, correspondence anti relevant
City documents;
AM
® Review of CEQAi �3uidelines to be used in preparing an : processing the
Subsequent EM for TT 1447> (Note that it has been agreed that the State
Q - Guidelines Will be used), and procedures and locations for posting of
pub& - imt+ces;
a Discussu .j of cbianges in the proposed land uses for this site, currant
environmental issues, appropriate alternatives for development by CHA,
new interagency agr ements (if any), and an update of responsible agencies
and discretionary action to be taken for the project.
• Refinement of the project schedule including dates for completion of work
tasks, City reviews, public distribution, meetings and hearings.
® Development of a formal Distribution List identifying all individuals, groups, '
agencies and organizations that will ham. mailed a copy of the NOP, including
a notation as to those that will be sent by certified mail.
B. FIoHIM of EMOMM tioa
During this stage, a Notice of Preparation (NOP) of a Subsequent lR will be'prcpared in draft
form. This document will inform concerned citizens and agencies that a e -1,ioquent EIR is to be
prepared, describe the proposed scope and focus of the Subsequent EIP, reference the previous
project and EIR (and scope thereof), and request comments on the range of issues proposed to
be addressed in the Subsequent MEL Mw draft NOP will be provided to the City of Rancho
Cucamonga for review and comment, and revised Appropriately. Once finalized, BES will
distribute the NOP for a 3044 review period to the Hennes included on the project distribution
list. Copies provide3 to responsible agencies will be sent via certified mail, as required by CEQA..
The project budget assumes printing and distribution of a total of 40 Notice of Preparation,
including 10 copies by cerd5W mail.
(2) PREPARATION OF THE SCPvZNCHECCK Else
A,
The introductory statements of the Subsequent E'dt will identify lead agency raponfibilities,
raport authors, and the location and nature of the project. The intended scope and focus of the
'M wilt be describcA along v ith a discussion of the 1984 proposal for Tyntadw Tract 12376 and
the previous for that project and certified in January 1965. Tice Nc*. a of Preparation will be
referenced, sod a copy Muded in the EIR appendiL
The summary sec :on of the EiR will present tb_: major conclusions of the report in a concise and
easily understood format. 111te summa will include a listing of the unavoidable adverse impacts,
impacts subject to mitigation, mwmmendW mitigation memures, and a review of alternatives.
/ /
-- 5
B. Praj d Ding- tlon
The Project iewription will describe the site location within its regional and local context, and
will prw ide a complete description of the current project proposal for Tentative Tract 14475
(T'T1447 ;, including a detailed review of the proposed land uses within the 115 -acre site.
Engineering and circulation features will be described, along with information regarding proposed
project phasing and a statement of the project applicant's goals and objectives. The project
description will also identify all discretionary actions to be considered on the basis oc this
subsequent EIR, and describe any documents to be incorporated by reference (including the 1985
EIR on TT 12376)..
F
F.xbbits: • Regional Vicinity Map
• Local Vicinity Map
• Conceptual Master Plan for TT 14475
G Assescgnent et Eadro mental attissa xety aged Mf finHon Measures
1. I.andform and Topography
Although the City ho..: -established a namber of guidelines for hillsisle development at the time that
the EM for 7T 12376 was certifies) in 1985, the adoption of formal Hillside Developmeat
Regulations did not occur Lntil after that date As a result, the 115 -acre project. site is now
subject to policies, goals and standards that did not exist when the previous EIR was prepared
The Subsequent EIR will include a thorough analysis of whetb&.: uus development proposal meets
these new star lards, including a detailed review of the project grading plan to determine
consistency with the City's requirements.
Exhibits: ® Topographic Base Map
• TI' 1447.5 Grading Plan
2. Geology and Soils
The subsequent EIR will summarize the geotechnical information developed by the project
applicant, and will contrast these findings wcth key geotechnical points raised in the 1985 EIR
(note that there may be a change in the anticipated location of a fault on site). The text will also
describe the findings of the geolohsst hired by the City of Rancho Cucamonga to provide an
independent review a tha applicant's geologic report, including use of stenndard engineering
practices, PAkXJuaq of recommendatio s, and reliability of seismic analyses including the location
of the CIAMMOW fault onsite in relation to Alquist- Priolo requirements.
Fidnbits: 0 Regional Seismicity
0 Site Geotechnical Map
3. Drainag:. and Hydrolog
As with geotechnical issues, the subsequent iR will summarize the applicant's analyses of
hydrological conditions and requirements, along with a summary of the independent review
conducted by the City's hydrological ergitteering consultant. Key findings will be contrasted with
conditions cited in the 1!985 EM particularly with respect to histories
flooding patterns,
11
anticipated flow and debris volumes, and existing and planned drainage facilities loth on site and
in downstream properties. Mitigation measures will be provided for any adverse efxects.
Exhibits: m Existing rt swnag-- 'atterrs
Drainage Impremm(ots
4. Biological Resource
Although the previous EIR for IT 12376 contained a thorough species inventory and assessment
of potential project impacts at that time, it is the opicion of the project biologists, Michael
Brandman Associates (MBA), that a res"arveq should be bonductel in tandem with a reaseeament
of sensitive resources on the site. This recommendation stems both from potential changes in
biotic values associated with fires in the Rancho Cucamonga foothills since the 1985 EIR was
certified, and from the considerably greater emphasis now placed on certain habitats that
characterize this region. Consequently, a site reconnaissance will be conducted as part of the
subsequent EIR, with revisions as appropriate to text discussions of resource values on the site.
Mitigation measures well be provided as appropriate.
Exhbbit: ® Vegetation Cow- wnitiesi on the Project Site
5. On -Site and Surrounding, Land Uses
This section of the EIR well documc at the u;sa currently b.ing , ie of the project site and the
contiguous parcels on all sides. Land use changes tha. would i, vlt from the project whl be
evaluated, and measures proposed as appropriate to mitigate adverse impacts. This discussion will
include, ientification of any private properties that may be "land - locked' as a result of tine project,
as we, as assessment of the interface between private lands and Oe San Bernardino National
Forest (which adjoins the project site along portions of its northern boundary) and the adequacy
of access to surrounding hillside arras.
Ethibiu • Existing Lanai Uses
6. Relevant Planning Programs
All local and regional land use programs that could affect planning on the site will be rvAdwed.
In particelar, ,the project`s consistency with the City of Rancho C ucamongs's recently revised
General Plan, Subdivision C)rdinance, and Zoning Ordinance well be evaluated in light of general
plan policies and City Coto A and community goals and objectives as embodied in those plans and
in response to previous stet,, applications. Consistency with relevant planning prWams continues
to be a cornerstone of the analy* approach to the subject site 'tire scW of work and budget
place special emphasis on the articulation of how the Hillside Development Swmdank apply to
Tf 14475, including a determination as to whether the proposal does comply with this ordinance.
The analysis of relevant planning program will also serve as an underpinning for the alternative
desiga concepts described in more detail in Section E below.
Exhtbie • Existing General Plan and Zoning Designations
,y 7
Public Services and Utilities
The discussion of potential impacts on public services and utilities will focus on water supply, fire
and police protection services, and schools. Existing conditions will be described for each of these
topics, and project impacts za�=., +dad through communication with the appropriate representatives.
Mitigation measures will be set foTth. Mote that this analysis will include a review of the Wfidland
Fire Management Plan, as developed by the City Fttm Departmeat
Exhibits: ® As deemed appropriate
F
Poteniial growth inducing and cumulative effects v7ffl be reviewed, based upon the analyses
contained La the previous EV,./, its modified by changed conditions an site and in the surrounding
environs sincr:; =45.
E Aha=#k,
Hillside developmeel posents unique environmental, planning and engineering com�ftints ar:,t
opportunities. In esthm- ;ng project alternatives, the principal obinctive is to identify p- ,;u
modifications that have eAc potential to eliminate adverse effects. To this end, the analysis of
alternatives will rely heavily on the standards that are reflected in the hillside development
ordinance that has now been formally estiWi shed by the City of Rancho Cucamonga.
Woridng with City staff and BES, Mr. Chuck Hartman of Cham- boMartman & Associates will
prepare three alternative design concepts for inclusion and c vduation in the subsequent EUL
Time first alternative will be a close reassessment of the applimaes land use and grading plans to
identify any modifications that could substantially reduce associated grading quantities. The second
alternative will present a cluster design, with reduced lot sizes in ezehange for increased open
space throughout the property, lire third alternative will incorporate larger lot sizes of from 2-
to-3- acres. Each alternative will be accompanied by appropriate e:=lation system design,-and
will include rough grading estimates. The concepts wffl be articulated in both graphic and written
form, with sufficient engineering analysis to insure the essential practicability of the alternatives.
To the extent feaubk, the analysis will emphum modificadona that recognrze the developer's
objectives without samificing compliance with the CiVs Hillside Standards.
Sufficient envirocimental Assessment will be included in ti0 real discussion to allow a full
comparison with the project. An required by ticc State CEQA felines, the EIR will
also evaluate the 'to Project° alternative; advantages and disadvantages of each alternative will
be discussed and the reason(s) for rejecting or recommending project alternatives will be stated.
A summary will be provided indkatit?g any adverse impacts identified during the environmental
assessment that cannot be mitigated to a level of insigtmificaace. Each of these effects �if any) will
require a statement of overriding considerations E the project is subsequently approved.
1r:
1 G J ��. •
A composite listing of all consultant- recommended mitigation measurer' shall be provided in this
section. The list will include an 'indication of the agency, responsible for implemonting each~
measure, as well as a notation regarding thc; project phase during which "ch *,treasure is to be
completed. M section will be prepared in full compliance with Section 21081.6 of the Public
Resources Code, as amended in response to new CEQA legislation adopted in January of 1989,
and will also be provided under separate cover for incorporation into the Gay's Fmdinga and use
with subsequent project monitoring (if appropriate).
(3) PREPARATION OF THE DRAFT EIR
Upon completion of the Scres acheck Olt, BES will provide the City with three (3) copies for
preliminsay staff review (note %tt a 12-4day review period is estimated in Exhibit B, tt r Project
Schedule). Following receipt ` ,f the City's comments, BES wili make i tl required corrections
and/or, changes, consistent the age -upon scope of work
Once the City's comments a , rd3ressed, the Draft ER will be; printee. wrd distributed according
to the approved Distn'butior, Last. libis will initiate a 454a4 period during which comments
concerning the project and the adequacy, of the Subsequent FIR will be accepted. The pmjeet
budget is based on an estimated 54 document copies. DES will also prepare the Notice of
et Completion (for submittal to the State Clearinghouse), and a Legal Notice; for publication in a
newspaper of local circulaticn.
(4) PREPARATION OF TIM FOAL EIR
BES will prepare responses to all written comments received during the draft EM review, as well
as the oral comments given in ttc pubSG hearir,� As was done far the previous EIR cu TT
12376, comments and responses will be compiled in the form of en addendum document that, in
combination with the Draft EIR, will constitute a complete FaW MR for consideration by the
City's Planning Commission and City Council. A total of 2S copies of the Final EM Addendum
will be printed for internal distribution within the City. BES will also prepare the Notre of
Determination for submittal to the State Clearinghouse. -
(si aiTFF.l+lI2ANCE AT MEETINGS AND PU BUC HEARINGS
This scope of work acacq ates regular communication with City staff during the course of
preparing the 71C 14473 SttbsetZ=t EIR. in addition to on -gaiag telephone contact and written
correspondence, the budget incorporates attet dw= by Sandra Bauer of BES and by Chuck
Hartman of CHA at three staff meetings, and two me a fts each before the Planning Commission
and the City Council (including presentstiow as sppmpriate).
11-9
The project team is comprised c, 3 firma. As environmental consultant to Co City of Rancho
Cucamonga, Bauer Environmental Services (BES) will be responsible for preparing and providing
an objective, full- disclosure subsequent environmental impact report for use by the public and by
decision - makers during theirdeiiberaaions on the project. Overall management of the project, as
well as all analyses not specifically assigned to subconsultants, will be provided by BES. In
addition to maintenance of on-going contact with the City and EIR subconsultants, BES will
attend project meetings, make presentatkos as appropriate, and be responsible ft quality control,
compliance with CEQA, and manageme -stof the schedu* and budget. BES wM *,,rIk closely with
City staff to prepare a thorough and�1- riritten amassment of potential eaeimnrn tal impacts
for consideration b f the Planni g Comn)*ion, the City Coxmci and the public'! Ms. Sandra '
Bauer, sole proprietor of BES, is familiar Ole, the environmental chamcteristi* of this property
having served as the principal- in- charGe and project manger of the previols EIR on Tr 12376
when it was prepared in 1964 -1985. The City will retain responsibility forstaff report preparation,
establishing hearing agenda, and preparation of FuWingt.
Mr. Chuck Hartman of CharcbofiRartman & Associates (CAA) will serve as a project
subconsultant, responsible for the key task of developing and analyzioA project alternatives. CAA
was selected for this role on the bay of their long egedwx with projects in Rancbo
Cucamonga, their familiarity with, he issues that are of concern to the City, and tbair expertise
in hillside planning and engineering. Recognizing the importance of the Ilternath= analysis,
CiIA plans to be present at all staff meetings and hearings before the Planning Commission and
City Council throughout the course of this project.
Finally, subconsultantbiok) gMsetwj ceswiilbepmvidedbirMi chaelBmndmanA �% iates(M[13A).
MBA prepared he biological messment for the 1965 document, and is familiar nor ) €y with this
site but also with the resource values that characterize the region as a whole. W. Keith Babcock
will be responsible for the biological anatysea prepared by MBA
LJ
1! J
`l
ERRt$1T B
PROJ'~.'CT SCHIMULE
Task
Estimated
i Project OrgeAkration and Notice of Preparation
Date of G=pIttfts
Submit draft NOP to City staff' r
10 Octobr -- 1990
Receive staff comments
17 October 1990
Distribute NOP to Public
24 October 1990
2 Screencheck EIR
Submit Screencheck EIR to City staff
9 November 1990
Receive staff comments
21 November 1990
3 Draft EM, Legal Notice and NOC
Distribute Draft EIR and Publish Legal Notice
5 December 1990
Hold Public Hearing
City's Determination
Close of 45 -day Public. Review
21 January 1991
4 Final EIR, Hearings and NOD
Submit draft Response to Comments to City staff
28 January 1991
Receive staff comments
3 February 1991
Submit Final ER to City
20 February 1990
5 Meetings and Pablic Hearings
Project Meetinpp
7bwughout
Public Heap on Final EIR
Match 1991
9
11
Z
•
f1- //
PltOJ= SCMDUM
1 Project Organization and Native of Preparation
Submit draft NOP to Ci p ataif
10 Ootcber 19463
Receive strorncncnts
ifi October 1990
t Distzibuteo NUP to Public
24 October 1990
2 Sereencbeck MR
t
t
t Submit Screencbeck MR to City staff
9 Navembsx 1590
Receive staff comments
21 Novesubc; ;990
3 Draft 1~iR, i:,cgal Notice and NOC
Distribute Draft EM anus Publish i egat Notice
5 December 1990
Hold Public Hearing
CWW Determination
Close ' (45-&y Public Review
21 January 1991
4 Final Elm Hearings and NOD
Submit draft Responw to Comments to City staff
28 January 1991
Receive: staff comments
8'Februin 1991
Submit Final MR to City
20 feb uarg 1990
S Mnetmp and Public $e.arings
Pra3ect Meoda p,
Thv�',OOut
Public Heariap on Fwd EM
Mueh 1991
Z
•
f1- //
ul
CITY OF RAATI)HO CUCAMONGA
STAFF REPORT
d''
DATE: October 10, 1950
TO: Cha.rman and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner
i
BY: Alan Warren, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION TO INITIATE AW INDUSTRIAL SPECIFIC PLAN
AMENDMENT TO ALLOW':SERV111 STATIONS WITHIN SUBAREA 2'
I. BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION: The Planning Commission has !4nc0 ed a
request from 'Larry DeCrona of Southern California Lana Corporation
to amend the lend use regulations of Subarea 2, Industrial: Area
Specific Plan (ISP) to allow service stations as a conditional
use. Mr. DeCrona lists the fact that service stations are
conditionally permitted, in adjacent Subareas 1 and 3 (General
Industrial) as a primary justification for the request.
While each subarea has its cim characteristics which would help
determine appropriate land uses,, Subarea 2 (uenerar Industrial) may
be similar enough to Subareas 1 and 3 to warrant another look
regarding the inclusion of service stations as an authorized use.
Service stations are conditionally permitted in General Industrial
Subareas 1, 3, 4, 8, 11, 13, and 14. Service stations are not
authorized in General Industrial Subareas 2, 5, and 1�a.
II. RECOMMENDATION:: Direct staff to initiate r:.. ISP Amendment -ir
review and recommendation by the Planning Commiission.
Re p ul su e
Brad
City.Pla ner
BB:AW:sp
Attachment: Exhibit "A" - Letter of September 6, 1990 from
Larry DeCrona
Exhibit "B" - Map of ISP Subareas
ITEM I
sOUTNtRIJ CALIFORNIA
LAND CORPORATION
2172 Dupont Drive
Suite 217
Irvi ie, CA 92115
714.252.2970
FAX •232•2974
W
Gentlemen:
The primary reasons for the above ref -arenced request are as follows:
1. Subarea 2 is enclosed on the North, South, least and W,r.;.t by
Subareas 1 and 3 which both allow automotive service stations as
a Conditional Use.
2. Service stations within Subarea 2 would be at least as compatible
with adjacent land uses as they would be in Subareas 1 and 3.
3. The need of the public for these facilities is apparent from the
present and projected future traffic on the major streets in
Subarea 2 and in fact is included as a Conditional Use on the
opposite sides of the very same streets in Subareas 1 and 3.
4. ]Evidence of the need is supported by the fact that major oil
company studies have resulted in those companies being extremely
desirous of locating service station facMides an the major streets
in Subarea 2.
Hopefully, you will agree that adding service stations as a Conditional
Use woulid, be appropriate in Subarea 2.
Respectfully,
SOU r NIA L
AND CORPORATION FN C IF
ry A��e_
ona
President
MY OF UCAN[ONGA
PLAN"T * 'IOP+r
El
`QTY �yi i n!e%ii�rrti��.�r inI
September 6, 1990
Chairman and Menbers of the Planning Commission
rW.. •.7�! Ai�.
�
`
City of Rancho Cucamonga
10500 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
Re: Industrial Specific Plan Subarea 2
Request for Amendment to Add Auto motive Service Stations
as a Conditional Use
Gentlemen:
The primary reasons for the above ref -arenced request are as follows:
1. Subarea 2 is enclosed on the North, South, least and W,r.;.t by
Subareas 1 and 3 which both allow automotive service stations as
a Conditional Use.
2. Service stations within Subarea 2 would be at least as compatible
with adjacent land uses as they would be in Subareas 1 and 3.
3. The need of the public for these facilities is apparent from the
present and projected future traffic on the major streets in
Subarea 2 and in fact is included as a Conditional Use on the
opposite sides of the very same streets in Subareas 1 and 3.
4. ]Evidence of the need is supported by the fact that major oil
company studies have resulted in those companies being extremely
desirous of locating service station facMides an the major streets
in Subarea 2.
Hopefully, you will agree that adding service stations as a Conditional
Use woulid, be appropriate in Subarea 2.
Respectfully,
SOU r NIA L
AND CORPORATION FN C IF
ry A��e_
ona
President
MY OF UCAN[ONGA
PLAN"T * 'IOP+r
El
L .J
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
BY:
SUBJECT
CITY OF RANViYO CUCAMONGA
STAFF REPOWr
October 10, 1990
Chairman and Members o�j the Planning Commission
Bra,,, Buller, City Planner
Stesan Ross, Assistant Planner~
CONSIDERATION TO INITIATE AN INDUSTRIAL SPECIFIC PLAN
AMENDMENT TO ALLOW AUTOMOTIVE AND TRUCK REPAIR�MAJOR
WITHIN SUBAREA 15
I. ABSTRACT: 'she Planning Commission has received a request from V &
L Repair to amend land use regulations of Subarea 15 of the
Industrial Specific Plan to permit or conditionally permit
Automotive /Truck Repair Major within the subarea. Staff is
seeking Commission direction on whether to initiate an
amendment. This report is not intended as a comprehensive
analysis of the issue.
II. BACKGROUND: The applicant's business consists of heavy truck
rebuilding and repairs, servicing, parts manufacturing, chassis
and cab fabrication and painting. These uses clearly fall within
the definition of Automotive and Truck Repair - Major:
Automotive and Truck Repair - Major: Activities typically
include, but are not limited to: heavy automobile and truck
repair such as transmission and engine repair, the painting of
automotive vehicles, automotive body work, and the installation of
major accessories. Disabled vehicles shall be screened from -
public view.
The applicant believes that Automotive and Truck Repair - Major
should be permitted or conditionally permitted in Subarea 15
because 1) the applicant currently operates the same use several
.lots to the ease (also within Subarea 15) as an existing non-
conforming use, and 2) the proposed use is permitted north and
west of the site in Subarea 8.
III. DISCUSSION: Automotive and Truck Repair - Major is a permitted
use in the adjacent Subarea 8, which is designated General
Industrial. This use is either permitted or conditionally
permitted in all General Industrial Subareas with the exception of
Subarea 10, which is primarily intended for distribution
facilities.
J
ITEM J
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
ISPA - AUTOMOTIVE AND TRUCK REPAIR
October 10, 199O
Page 2
Subarea 15 is -zoned "Heavy Industrial" and is intended for the
heaviest /intense industrial users, and i,•, in fact, the only
subarea zoned Heavy Industrial. Typical 'land uses include heavy
manufacturing octivities, such as vehiru1Fr assembly plants, power
plants, foundries, batch plants a,d,r ncrete pr-aducts. It appears
that Major Automotive and Truck Repair may have been excluded from
Subarea 15, because of potential land use conflicts between the
Heavy Industrial uses and the potentially less intense vehicle
repair uses. However, Futomobile and Truck Repair - Major is more
intense than other uses which are conditionally allowed in Subarea;
15, such as, Business Support Services, Repair Services,
Convenience Sales.
IV. OPTIONS: If the Commission believes that the applicant`s request
has merit, the following actions could be taken:
1. Initiate an Industrial Specific Plan Amendment to permit or
conditionally permit Automotive and Truck- Repair = Major in
Subarea la; or
i
2. Adjust the k4undary between' Subarea 8 and 15, in effect
allowing the proposed activity on this site as a permitted
use.
3. Not initiate any amendment.
V. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission should consider these
options and direct staff to proceed with the desired course of
action.
Rsp u° ys ed,
Bra er
City P nner
BB:SR:js
Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Request Letter
Exhibit "B" - Map of Subarea 15
Exhibit "C" - Map of Subareas Allowing Auto and Truck
'.
Repair Major
Exhibit "D" Land Use Summary (Table I11 l
�J
S
COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE
SIRNICRS CORPORATION
V-A FACSWILFJU.S. MAIL
Augus127, 1990
Mr. Stove Ham �
CRY OF RANCHO CUCAMONf3A
9320 Baseline Road
Rancho Cumn0nga, t ia9fom a 91730
ow Mr. HAyes,
I am writing to you and the Ranmo Cucamonga Ptartn M Commission on behalf of Mr. !radio Vafai
Parvxno (applicara). the heard Buyer of the abovIP- rataref'"d plgporty. The subject property oonsists of
(appmxknatay)1.65 acres of land LZr fMft two modem trsaslandalg metal bull fts.
The applicana's use of thr: property will consists of heavy tnht rabulift and repairs, sorvici ,7, parts
manufacturing, C9Taaais and Cab fabriramkn and paWkV. According to table 111.1 of the Summary of
Lars, Use By Subarea. the 2Vi:aWm said business In zoned GI-3 and Us property is zoned HI.15.The
applicant mould appreciate tit the Rancho f ucanarga'PLWWJ g CW W WVN would pmm his business
to operate on his sternly purchased pmwrty. The appecards' business wit Urgrove the property ae
follows:
Applicant will build a modern 6,000 square foot trsa•garWtrp butding.
notes. x, P O demand. odor, sC.
Fx stnNrres currently corkm to
Applicant +vii upgrade structures. pint lrsaa, vegetation and Create an aesthetically
PIG" anvirement.
APPk4rrrs I= Of the propsrtlf Will CWW with the provW= of Section 17.0213002,
subject to a Condtbnal Uoo Psm* as specified In Section 17.04.030 (t necessary.)
In ao ambn, the appteard'a use and the kdXN d upgrade of the properly unit bereft the kmnedate -
acre and the City Of Rantfr0 Cueartranga. The apptea n kiss on his present spoor baled art 13109 `0'
Whb w Avenue will *Vko on September 30. 1900. Theni9ors. the sppkM rasp@W* requests your
Muddlate OaneldwAon of hie Otao fxtfent OMM A wrdmwd (zwtr ftW.)
M CM YOU hear any quertbn or Oo mi*rte. piaarr test free to CM er at (714) *7711 sr the applicant
& (A1e,9Qb -69!0.
Curtis a. sand"
OFF RANC1a®- 'CUCAMONGA
PLANNING ANION
.i
W
A
IV-ae Z/
d.
p
�s
2
� nee
as
w
7
-�< �
<..
[� c v `t J'
�r r i. _y. `�1
`Y.
.i
a^�xxj
\� \a � , + � ib.
� ,� ' ��: �� , � G400
- ��` '��.
4
q � ' \�'
{{Q�ppQyp��p,,� L �
r� 1 .W <]n�`mQaaa
K
TABLE III -1
SUMMARY OF LAND USE TYPE BY SUBAREA
e PERMITTED USE $ CONDITIONALLY PERMITTED USE NOTE: Non - marked Uses Not Permitted
11
• IP- Industrial Park GI- Generat Industrial
HO -Haven Ave. _)verlay District
LII -5
MI/HI- Minimum Impact Heavy Industrial
Hi -Heavy industrial
E,
Land Use-
IP
GI
GI Gt
GI GI
IP
IP
GI
""r' G1 GI 1P GI GI HI IP IPI
USE TA PES
Subareas
HO
1
2131415-161718[9
10 11 12 13 1d 11 5 K6117!
MANUFACTURING,
Custom
a•
e
o
o
r•
- • o e
a. o g a :q
Light
y
•g
•
•
e
e
•
o • •
• • • o
Medium
-
-
Heavy
e
°
°
Minimum Impact Heavy -
OFFICE PROFESSIONAL, DESIGN & RESEARC
AdmlMStrQtive a Office
�
* e
$ • e
.+E
P rolessional/Design Services
+
+
{s.
+ • •
Research $ervlces _
e
•
e
e
•
s s o •
N
DISTRI
B
WHOLESALE, STOR, ZE 8
1 '
Puhic Storage
$ +
•
{
{
.
t
• . �;*
Light
Medium
+
e
• e •
` $
e • I
Heavy
COM9iiErRCIAL
r
Agricultural /Rurs•ry Supplies & Services
•
•
•
•
• • •
} i "F + +
Animal Care
(
$
{'
}
I
i {' +
Automotive Fleet Storage
Automotive Rental /Leasing
!
• I
t
• i
•
}
+
e }
+I
Automotive /Light Truck Repair -Minor
!
: I
'+' �o
(}
• I +
Automotive /Truck Repair -Major
+
+
• (
``♦'
+
+!+l
• ; • '3
! 1+ }
Automotive Sales
+
;
I
}
I
} !
�
#
"} r
;
}
Automotive Service Station
Building Contractor's Office A Yards
(
R
+
•
'p I
`�
(•
! 1 • I • ® s !
Building Contractor's Storage Yard
i
Building Maintenance Services
Building&Lighting Equipment Supplies&Sales
(
w
e
}
•
•
e
}
.}
•
•
• I • • • • °
o e t •} r e {. } s
Business Supply Retell & Services
•
o
0
e
_
s
•
• • • • • • •
a } } • • + s •
Business Support Services
•
o
}
•
•
+
e
•
A
• •
• $ e • o • $ s o l
Communication Services
Convenience Sales & Services
•
}
•
�F
'+'
•
`�
•
+
+
•
e
+
�` $ } } } + + $ } }
Eating Drinking Establishments
O
•
•
•
a
}
.0
¢
r 9 • • O t
i
+ } + 9 11} • e+
Entertainment
}
+
1 +1+1
Extensive impact Commerclal
I }
`
+
}
}
+
} } {
Fast Food Sales
Financial, insurance & Real Estate Services
•
f
o
•
J
+ �' • • o j
Food a Beverage Sales
}
+
}
......
.l + $ } w } } } +:
Funeral & Crematory Services
_
Q
$
+
- +
Heavy Equipment Sales & Rentals
♦
+
+.
} ' '+' °
Hotel /Motel
+
•
•
�'+ e • • i
Laundry Services
Madlcal/He alth Care Service
+
,
+
+
+ + } a ,} 5• , (
}
Personal Sarvices
{
} } }
Storage
+ +
{P•trWProducts
Recreational Facilities
}
{
+
{
+
}
$
e
$ F $ • • • $
i
Repair Services
}
e ` • • e
+
-,crap Operation
civic
e.
o,
e
+
s
+
•
{•
e
o • o •
+ # +
•
}
•
+
AdmWstrativs Civic Services
•
Cultural
Extensive knAlet Utility Facilities
+
Flood Control/U2Aity Corridor
"Public
+
•
•
•
•
"+'
'+'
e
4,
e • •
'+'
• e e
+ + '+' ;
+
+
Assembly
Public Safety & Utility Services
}
+
+
+
+
+
+
y
T1
._
+ $ +
`4' . . + .
}
. �
Ratlolow Assembly
+
I
$
+
416
"+'
$ +
}
#
• IP- Industrial Park GI- Generat Industrial
HO -Haven Ave. _)verlay District
LII -5
MI/HI- Minimum Impact Heavy Industrial
Hi -Heavy industrial
E,
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
STAFF REPORT
DATE: October 10, 1990
TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
S
FROM: Brad Buller, City Plarner
BY: Scott Murphy, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: 'DEVELOPMENT REVIEIA .89 -33 CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT ,- A
c.%urtesy review of a proposed elementary school on
8.6 acres of land within the Terra Vista Planned
Community, located on the north side of Elm Averue,
approximately 600 feet north of Church Street -
AN: 1077- 421 -25.
I. ABSTRACT: Under current State law, normal review and approval of
school facilities is handled through the Office of the Stijte
Architect. The City's involvement in the review process is
usually limited to approval of the street improvement glans,
leading to the issuance of an encroachment permit, and review of
the proposed grading to verify that adjuent properties are not
being adversely impacted as a result of the proposed grading of
the school site. Through an agreement with the Central School
District, however, preliminary plans are submitted to the City for
a courtesy review through the normal Development Review process
(Grading Committee, Technical Review Committee, Design Review
Committee, and Planning Commission).
II. ANALYSIS
A. General: The Central School District is proposing to develop
an elementary school facility to accommodate 600 permanent
students with an expansion capacity of 750 students. The
facility will provide 26 classrooms to handle grades K through
6, district special education, and County special el—ntion
needs. The classrooms will be located around courtyard areas,
each designed with a different theme (see Exhibit "E "). The
northern portion of the site will be devoted to play areas
and, as with most schools in the planned communities, a joint
use agreement has been worked out with Community Services
Division to allow use of the Greenway Park and school fields
for both City and school functions.
ITEM K
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
DR 89 -33 - CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT
OCTOBER 10, 1990
Page 2
B. Design Review Committee: The Design Revie! Committee
(Blakesley, McNiel, Kroutil) reviewed the prrposed elementary
school on January 4, 1490. The Committee exprzssed
appreciation for the opportunity to review the school plans
and made the following recorxmendations:
1. Perimeter fencing should be iavoided if possible.
2. A roof tile should be investigated for use on at least
some of the project, particul,lrly on the tower
elements. Use of a metal roof was riscouraged.
3. The colors indicated on the model were preferred over the
colors depicted on the elevations.
4. Additional detailing on the two tower elements facing Elm
Avenue was suggested to mitigate the flat, uninterrupted
facade.
5. Detailing around the proposed doorways and a base element
were recommended.
6. Street improvements and drive a- roaches should be worked
out with the Engineering Division.
C. Technical Review Committee: The Technical Review Committee
reviewed the school facility on January 2, 1990. The major
area of concern centered around the improvements within the
public right -of -way. The Engineering Division has required
the following:
1. The easterly parking lot driveway shall align with the
park driveway on the south side of Elm Avenue and shall`
be 90 degrees to the street centPrrline.
'2. A separate drop -off lane parallel to Elm Avenue and
related driveways shall be eliminated.
t
3. The bus drop shall be placed at the westerly end of the
site recessed 6 feet with sufficient length for two
buses.
4. The parent drop -off shall be at the standard street curb
to the east of the bus drop-off.
S. The curb shall be painted and signed for the
above- mentioned purposes.
�a
a
[A
E
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
OR 89 -33 - CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT
OCTOBER 10, 1990
Page 3
6. The public sidewalk shall be curb adjacent (6 -foot
minimum width) with walkways extending to the school.
The applicant has been working with City staff to res,:ive
these issues and is close to submitting the final plans to the
Engineering Division for signature.
}
C. Gr3din2 Committee: The Grading Committee reviewed the
proposed p a� ns -and requested verification that adequate
drainage cK- asures are in place at the site boundaries so that
adjacent properties are not adversely affected.
The applicant has prepared revised plans to address the
Grading Committee's comments. The plans have been reviewed
and found to adequately address the Committee's concerns.
ill. RECOMMENDATION: In tnat the application was submitted as a
courtesy review, no formal action is required by the Planning
Commission. The applicant will be present to receive input from
the Commission in regards to the site planning and architectural
issues.
ResptS1149Y submitte
Brad B .O
City Planner
88 :SM:m1g
Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Location Map
Exhibit "8" - Site Plan
Exhibit "C" - Building Elevations
Exhibit "a" - Floor Plan
Exhibi�. "E" - Courtyard Plans
/(-3
w
- N
ZJ
I
L
yIE
�lm
S
0@0you Cgmtlll�w
l�
MY OF 4, ( UCAMONGA
PLANav3i h ION
MIE: � -ten "r
e
%S SCALE:
E
jmhrdse — pl.. A-
0,, ; Off-
T-r
or U AMONGA rMwL.
1) N
L TULE: AZ4V
LANr*ION
EXHIBIT: a SCALE:
0
0
U
r
1�
ou -
�) d
O
V
0
4
I�
J��
aisa
w
•
Ir
r
1�
ou -
�) d
O
V
u
1
ns��►
EVIft
.. •. atiT
" L
.use€
EVllldl!!N VII*W Inn
THEME:1nHEYAR.1
C®uRTYARG i!
z
w
In
f
_ _
Special Education I /// ^''1���Classroom
n n
MENU, WOMAN
COURTYARD
Main Gallery
fy OF S UCAMONOt F,,] EEm: � F
PLANTih iON Cr"LE:r �yJ
". •` EXMr : e 2 SCALE:
.r