Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1991/04/10 - Agenda PacketJ Lo rr g 1 o C,�;Cn.yO,�C CITY; OR << A v RANCHO C[1Cr1NKVGA, PLANNING `COMMISSION F > �GE E :3 1977 i` WEDIIESDA` , APRIL 10, 1991 7:00 P.M. RANCHO cucAyoNGA civic 'CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBER.' _ 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, 'CALIFORNIA I. Pledge of Allegiance II. Rcll Ca "I Commissioner Chitiea Commissioner Tolstoy Commissioner McNiel Commissioner Vallette Commissioner Melcher III. Announcements Iv. Approval S,if minutes Adjourned Meeting of March 21, 1991 V. Consent Calendar The follow ng Consent '- Calendar items are expected to be routine and non- controversial. They will be acted on by the Commission at one time without discussion. If anyope, has concern over any item, it should be removed for discussion. A. TIME EXTENSION FOR PARCEL MAP 9326 THE PLIES COMPANI$S - A subdivision of 38.5' acres of land into 28 parcels in the Generml Industrial District (Subarea 8) of the Industrial Area Specific Plan and the Light Industrial District (Subarea 4) of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan, located north of Arrow Route, east of the I -15 Freeway and south of Foothill Boulevard - APN: 229- G21 -59. B. VACATION OF PORTIONS OF AN ALLEY A request to vacate portions of an alley' located east of Ramona Avenue and south of Feron Boulevard APN: 209- 085 -01. VI. Public 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 6-ginions shall be limited to 5 minutes per individual for each project. Please sign in._after speaking. C. MQDIFICATIOI3 mti CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT�89 -08 HUGHES _INVESTMENTS - A request to switch building pad locations of commercial Building No. 10 and shops Building N... 11 for a previously approved neighborhood commercial shopping center consisting of 11 buiijings totaling 122,673 square feel: on 12.9 acres of land within the Neighborhood Commez;'cial J) Development District of the Victoria Planned Community, located, at the southeast corner of Highland and Milliken Avenues APN: 227- 011 -22, D. VARIANCE-91-al - WESTERN PROPERTIES - A request to reduce tb� -^22 foot minimum setback to 19.33 feet from t, ,street for Buildings 57 and 58 within the existing Tract 13273, a 256 unit condominium project on 15.8 acres of land within the Medium Residential District (8 -14 dwelling units per acre) within the Terra Vista Planned C6=unity, located at the southeast corner of Milliken Avenue and Mountain Y,iew Drive - APN: 227-151-13, E. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND INDUSTRIAL SPECIFIC PLANT AMENDMENT 31 -•02 -- CITY OF RANCHG CUCAMONGA - To define and establish development criteria for recycling uses within the Industrial Area specific Plan. Staff recommends issuance of a Negative Declaration.- F. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT CODS: AMENDMENT 91--01 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA'- A request to amend Title 17, Chapter 17.12 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code to eliminate compact parking spaces. Staff recommends issuance of a Negative Declaration. G. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND INDUSTRIAL SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 91-01 -- CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA -� A request to amend Part III of the Industrial Area Specific Plan to eliminate ,. compact parking spaces. Staff' recommends issuance of a Negative Declaration,, i VTI. Now Business H. ?t1ENDMENT TO UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM FOR RANCHO SAN ANTONIO MEDICAL CENTER- An aplalal of staff's decision to deny r sign program amendment, located at the southeast corner of Mil?,iken Avenue and Church Street' - A77T: 2.27- 771 -01. 4 VIII. Director's Reports h\ MODIFICATION TO TOWN CENTER PHASIN(' ,PLAN - 1, WESTERN PROPERTIES - Consideration of - amending the phasing plan for Terra Vista Town Center, located at the northeast corner of Haven Avenue and Foothill Boulevard (Reference Conditional Use Permit 88=12) - APN: 7,1)77- 421 -05, 06, and 18. DISCUSSION OF ALIGNMENT' ALT1`SNATIVES FOR THE _? EXTENSION ' OF DAY 'CREEK BOULEVARD - BETWEEN_ FOOTHILL BOULEVARD' '.AND ROCHESTER AVENUE (ENTRANCE TO SPORTS Cd, JPLEX) IB.. Comm fission Business l K. TRAILS ADVTSORY CON d= v Discussion of mathod ;of appointment "t0 vacancy. B.' Public Comments This is the time and place for the general public to address the Commission. Items to be cziscussed here are those which do not already appear on this agenda. sl.. WJournzent The Planning' Commission has adopted Administrative Regulations that set an 11:00 P.M. adjournment time'..-,,, If items go beyond that time, they shall be heard only with the consent of the Commission. E f vicinity map, Vn l9 B •t •: >�.•:: ::•.:: :.• ....... .......py.4:vr ••e.... -,-- t W.. ••� o �........ =e--, rt i i r �oIM w,. a' Adak CITY OF RANCHO CUCA TONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: April 10, 1991 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Sarrye R. Hanson, Senior... :Civil Engineer BY: ,Jetty A. Miller,;Associate Engineer` SUBJECT: TIME EXTENSION FOR TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 9325 - THE PLIES mm subdivision o , acres o an Into parce s nrthe General Industrial District (Subarea 8) of the Industrial - Specific Plan and the ,Light Industrial District (Subarea 4) of the Foothill Boulevard Specific _Plan, located north of Arrow Route, east of the I -15 Freeway and south of Foothill Boulevard - APN: 229421 -59 BACKGROUND: Tentative Parcel Map 9326 as shown on Exhibit "C" was initially approved by the Planning Commission on March 22, 1989, for an initial two year period until March 22, 1991. The applicant is now requesting the first of a possible three one -year time extensions r The letter of request (Exhibit "A ") is attached for your reference. _REC NDATION• It is recommended that the Planning Commission adopt the attached resolution approving a one -year time extension for Tentative Parcel Map 9326. The new expiration date would be March 22, 1992. Respectfully submitted, 6" Ike Barrye R. Hanson Senior 'Civil Engineer BRH :dlw Attachments: Time Extension Request (Exhibit "A ") Vicinity Map (Exhibit "B ") Tentative Map (Exhibit "C ") Resolution ITEM A ie �"�e,� C�c►m cz2�e.� DEVELOPERS - REALTORS' - INVESTMENTS CITY n- -ANCHO CUC.S "—%NGA 1G not-. , January 29, 1991 FEB ©41991' 1:i ^'.) L City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission 15005 Civic Center Drive P.A. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, California 91729 Attention:: Mr. Brad Buller, City Planner Re; Approved Tentative Parcel Map No. 9326 Dear Planning Commission Members, We respectfully request an extension of time for our approved tentative map. The Comptroller of the Currzncy and the current economic conditions have drastically altered the plans of our existi,ng.lender (one of the largest in the Country) negYessi•cating our return to the institutional lending market during this difficult period. We will appreciate your earnest, favorable consideration of this matter. Yours ruly, E G � j Daniel L lies Propert wner DLP :l M: PAUEL MAP 132 cc:Kenneth N. Linville, Pres Linville Civil Engineers =,i1ME EXTENS)DAI RETEST y�y� e. QQ of "aa St.. Suite 701, Lahr Foa•rst -El To?-o. California 926.10 Telephone (719) 770 -16J.: ! I R _2 :lll. h-3 t s 0 Q h rte' rXrr �� zcs i n (�IIeorearav ;ca• � ca x.\•\\ FYI I g F� . 6 X99 b � sr �' so• � d� 3.2 AC 1 5 Act ask- ! 09AC3 , �s'�'r /�ti \ rates /s!• yam.. 123 07 AC- N / ` C lab• tap txDicarlpM CZ We O:. '-, a7ACd b 2 0 t C4 i° 00AC_ l snec3� rho^ iit11 \ Imo• Ave., LI'R /M' IYpC�T t cc -4 20 $ 17 0.7AC'Q 15 '.v DS7i': /O i✓TC I f�..... a <._ � 22L9Z� i— l =n..� i CITY OF R*RR,oW''RourE rrM: PARCEL MAP 932& RANCHO CUCAMONGA TrrLEs TENTATIVE .MAP OF ENGRUMUNG DIVISION EXTilRIT.- _cf RESOLUTION NO A 7- SOLUTION OF THE PLANNiW, 'COMMIQOION OF THE CITY �_• FOAjo CUCAMONGA, CAL11! RNIA, `APP 6VING A TIME EXTENSION 'TENTATIVE - PARCEL MAP 9316-LOCATED NORTH. OF ARROW ROUTE, THE I -15 FREEWAY AND SOUTH OF FOOTHIL EOULEVADt MD"' SAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APR, 229- 021 -S9 A. Recitals (i) The Plies Compai:ies has,filed an application for the extension of Tentative Parcel Map 9326 as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Time Extension request is referred to as "the application." (ii) On Uak h 22, 1984, tliii Commission adopted its Resolution No. 89 -39, thereby approving, subject to specific conditions and time limits, Tentative Parcel Map 9326 and issued ,a Negative Declaration. (iii) On January;; 29, 1991E the applicant filed a request for a 12 -month Time Extension. (iv) All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. ,r. B. Resolution \ hJ NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga an 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. i 2. Baswl upon substantial evidence presented to this Commission, including writter;'and oral staff reports, this Commission hereby opecifically fiade as follows' (a) The previously approved Tentative Map is in substantial compliance with the City's current General Plan, Specific Plane, Ordinances, Puns, Codes, and Policies; and (b) The extension of the Tentative Map will not cauea significant inconsistencies with the current General Plan, Specific Plans, ordinances, Plans, Codes, and Policies; and (c) The extension of the Tentative Map in not likely to cause public health and safety problems3' and PLANNING COHMIS' N FESOLUITON NO. TENT PM 9326 - hd'.c'PLIES C04ANIES \, APRIL 10, 1991 PAGE 2 j 'f (d)" The extension ' is within thP., time limits prescribed by state law and local ordinance. 3. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, ;:hie Commission hereby grants a Time Extension for: Parcel Man Applicant Expiration 9326 The Plies Companies 3 -22 -93 4. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 10TH DAY OF APRIL 1991. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: , Larry T. McNiel, Chairman ATTEST:— Brad Buller, Secretary NW 1, Brad Buller, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the for --rte- 'Resolution was duly and regularly intr;:duced, passed, and adopted by the P1m.ining Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 10th day of April 1991, by the following vote -to -wit: '`AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: CO,`!MISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: O 10h I _I Wy OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA { S AFF- 'REPORT ; DATE: April 10, 1991 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Shintu Bose, Deputy City Engineer BY: Willie Valbuena, Assistant Engineer SUBJECT: VACATION OF PORTIONS OF AN ALLEY ANGEL SANCHEZ - A request to vacate portions of an a ey, ocdea W's o among Avenue and South of Feron Boulevard h I. BAC'•GROUND /ANALYSIS The City has received a request from a property owneir on the southeast corner of Feron Boulevard and Ramona Avenue, to vacate portions of an alley. The subject all ey is approximately 207--'eet wide of l 100,feet 1 ong and is located east of Ramona - Avenue and south of Nron�Boulerard (see attached Exhibits "A" and "B "j;,.? The portions of the said alley have not been used for vehicular travel for more than five consecutive years. II. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission make the finding that the alley vacation conforms with the General Plan. This finding will be forwarded to the City Council for further processing and final approval.,, Respectfully submitted, �4"7- /O Shintu Bose Deputy City Engineer SB:WV:dlw Attachments: Legal Description (Exhibit "A ") Vicinity Map (Exhibit "B") ITEM B ' EXHIBIT 'A` THAT PORTION OF AN ALLEY AS SHOWN ON TRACT MAP OF THE TOWN OF WEST CUCAMONGA AS PER PLA' `;RECORDED IN BOOK 13 OF MAPS,;, PAGES 1 AND 2, RECORDS OF SAME BERNARDINO EBuNTY, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: ALLEY ALL THAT PORTION OF AN ALLEY 20.00 FEET WIC, BOUNDED AS FOLLOWS: " - ON THE WEST BY THE EASTERLY LINE OF RAMIONA AVENUE;' ON THE EAST BY THE SOUTHERLY PROLONGATION OF THE EASTERLY LINE OF LOT 21, BLOCK 6,; MAP OF THE TOWN OF WEST CUCAMONGA•, AS PER PLAT RECORDED IN BOOK 13 OF MAPS, PAGES 1 AND 2, RECORDS OF SAh BERNARDINO COUNTY. i O .Q A -T.— — U) S. F 13~3 _ AREA TO'EE VACATED FAHIBIT °B'= VICINI_Y MAP EXHIBIT B" 0 F li TRACT MAP OF THE TOWN; OF WEST CUCAMONGA SECTION 11, TIs)R7W S,B.M. M, B. 13/1 & --. m F ERON i 3z' 32 t ti K iii 1 l ` I"= t00' LOT 4 LOT 3 • O T R NO. 5955 �. t° Q M. B. 74/20 1.00' WIDE ROAD EASEMENT _ -MAIN-ST-'2 ul ^. \ti-�_ ARR ROUTE �..•• LY'�.r , W O > y% .'i tit to :71 d FcRON BLVD AIM _4 , O .Q A -T.— — U) S. F 13~3 _ AREA TO'EE VACATED FAHIBIT °B'= VICINI_Y MAP CI'T'Y OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT z tam DATE: April 10, 1991 f T^ - Chairman and Members of the,Pianning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Steve Hayes, Associate Planner SUBJECT MODIFICATION TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 89 -08' - HfIGHES INVESTMENTS - A request to switch building 7,ae-,,locations of commercial Building No. 10 and shops Building No. 11 for a previously approved neighborhood commercial ,shopping center consisting of 11 buildings totaling 122,573 square feet on 12.9 acres of land within the Neighborhood Commercial Development District of the Victoria Planned Community, located at the southeast corner, of Highland ar -', Milliken Avenues - APE: 227 - 011 -22. L. ABSTRACT: The purpose of the proposed mod.Eication is to switch building pad locations for the single tenant pad No. 10 and the potential multi - tenant shops building No. 11. The developer anticipates leaLing building 10 to a single major tenant which, desires visibility from a major street. If approved, the, switch would allow building 10 an unobstructed view from Milliken Avenue. For clarification, the applicant is processing this mod ia`;cation prior to a complete submittal of plans for a specific tenant for building 10. The developers intention is to construct building 11 and adjacent parking areas during the development of Phase I at the location as specified by the action of the Planning Commission at this hearing.' The entire site is currently being graded and construction of Phase I is expected to begin shortly. Ii. BACKGROUND: The Vineyards Marketplace shopping center was conceptually approved by the Planning Commission on November 29, 1989. Approval included Phase I development of buildings 3 through 7, elevations for pads 1, 2, 10, and Il anct conceptual details of the pedestrian plaza area at the southwest corner of the site. Since that time, Mobil Oil has received conceptual approval of a Oonditional Use Permit for building 8, at the northwest corner of the cents1,. III. ANA,YSIS: A. Issues: in reviewing the proposed modification, the primary land use isone is to assure that the pad switch will not be ,'ntrimental: to the anticipated use of the pedestrian pla.ca. Typi ^ally, site planning issues are resolved at the time a SPIT'ciii;; project is brought before the Design Review Committee through proper building ITEM C PLANNING CO.- MISSION STAFF REPORT MODIFICATION TO CUP 89- 08- -'SUGBES:?! ;STr,ENTS April 19. 1991 Page 2 orientation, etc. Ultimately, the intensity of plaza use will primarily depend on the relationship between building orientation, adjoining tenancy, and how individual tenants gear thgi.r businesses towards the plaza. At this point, it is not clear what uses will occupy buildings 10 and 11 (a complete list of permitted and conditionally permitted uses can be found on Exhibit "E ").. Therefore, when zonsidering the modification request, the issue of specific uses within these buildings and their relationship to the i, plaza cannot be considered at this time, the modification can only be currently analyzed as a question of building form, size, and relationship to parking. When considering building form, the lineal frontage; adjacent to the pedestrian plaza is nearly identical for both building0. Building 11 has more vertical movement in its went elevation than that of building 10. However, it should be noted that the pad for building 10 is a generic area in which the actual building could be construq.ed; variations of the building plar_e will most. likely be incorporated into the building design during the development review process. Therefore, staff would not antiai-�ate any negative impacts associated with the difference of building'gorm in considering the Proposed modification. Buildings 10 and 11 share a small parking_ lot betwee!j them which would not be affected by the switch. Patrons of both buildings will also utilize a portion of the large parking area to the north; however, said parking is essentially the same distance from these buildings and should not be affected 41'3ny way by the switch. Building size may make a difference. , -..a building.ts need, but only in terms of single versus multi ;,`r._ StaZf ;assumes that the size of building 10 (4,800 square fed- lends itself more no to single tenancy than that of the largor (8,767 rquare foot) building 11. B. Design Review Committee: On March 7, 1991, the Committee (Chitiea, 4ailette, F.routil) reviewed the proposed modification and forwarded the item to the full Planning Commission with the following considerations: 1. The proposed Wello FaYZo Hank building (Pad 10), which is in the preliminary design stage, wtll require some type of orientation to the '- sdestrian plaza immediately west of the building to enhance its potential visibility. 2. Retaining walla, identical in materials, texture, color, and form should be provided along the east side of the Renyon way drive aisle. 3. T ,Rdestrian connections between the on -site pedestrian and the public sidewalk system should be widened to nroalote its usability. pIJMNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT MODIFICATION TO COP 89 -08- HUGHES IMSTMENTS April 10, 1991 Page 3 4. An additional bicycle ser_urit], rack ohou:d b(�iprov4.ded along the store fronts of builW ngs 10 and 11. - C. Technical Review Committee• On March 6, 1991, the Technical Review G-_,mnittee reviewed the project and determined that with the recommended conditions of approval, the project is consistent with all applicable standards and ordJnances. The Grading Committee conceptually approved the modifif ? ' ?n at ite meeting on March 5, 1990. IV. FACTS FOA FxNDINGS: The proposed modification is in accord with the Victoria Community Plan and the General Plan, the objectives of the Development Code, and the purposes of the district in which the site $ -s � located. The proposed 'modification, together with th.l conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, i safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements if in the vicinity. The proposed modification, together with all 1 recommended conditi)r---,af approval, is in compliance with the applicable II regulations of the/ 81olvient Code and the Victoria Community Plan. V. CORRESPONDENCE: ^ ` teW has been advertised as a Public Hearing in the Inland Valle` ,c_ Bulletin newspaper, the project has been posted, and notices sent;., to all property owners within 300 feet of the project site. VI. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission receive all public testi4;ony on the modification. If after receivin g input t o a the proposed modification the Coimniusion concurs with the findings made by staff, then adoption of the attached Resolution of Approval for the modification to Conditional Use Permit 89 -08 would be appropriate. Rea c sub . f Bzad B ez city BS•SH:je i Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Modified Site Plan Exhibit "B" - Previously Approved Conceptual Site Plan Exhibit "C" Modified Landscape Plan Exhibit "D" - Modified Grading Plan Exhibit "E" - Permitted and Conditionally Permitted Use List Exhibit "F" - Original Resolution of Approval for Conditional Use 'Permit eg -08 (No. 89 -145) {n� Resolution of Approval C -3 ,t f_ RESUME 517E AREA (12.7i ACRES) 557.232 SF SERVICE 5747101/ PARCEL 29,601 SF .iavlc auslm' a s4¢s moppm6. CENTER PARCEL 527.63t SF aes, Ants 4. CND Alyiva•, ai49> -- 4tp141}1 a wmq s qs ruwo /r°r°m a4 sum: �14aop •!D ` �. l -AIX as s MCHIAN'. AVErvUE r,t. if 1 I i i i •� n �gls�ns I .� �eir�. -..al WI J1 I 1 1 �'� ./ ' 'Of s� c.. hw,l'�i_p� ' •` 6 j i I I i i 1 G.J r t.=J' ' __ Vim' 'per- ,�`'�'• O J crAsL J nr= 1 I �• w1. � am.^s ; �B � �QS UGAMONGA P Ivl. —cv►° A vg OF ' .� PI ANM" N' d- SI ®N Trot : .. ° ExxriZ°:f`,¢ " sew E: RESUME 4 STE AREA (1277 ACRES) 556.464 SF SERVICE STA1704 PAMM 29,627. Si Mm a" iWY PMwe aD }e®' - l s4co - Jf7ba +Q CENTER FAA MM SF voo.m.ra.,a,..�.,...,� axiaamau�P Amaac rraoaalcasa'n �m pn .� � a re�crca ava F°°-- Y /gi91GDJ + t O1i� IR II� O - - �_- - - -_-- _— HIGHLAND AVENUE _ - -_. _ _- -- _---- - - i— - - -, _ —_— -_— - 1 1Q$Ti- f� "° � i i 1711 T• `ca °� 1 li --- I I 1 w T J !, I 111 171 t ! lli O' _ u IIi {{nF crry OF UCAMONGA rrEm: -clp 4s� =o /7 -- 4 Alk ]PLAN ION 7'TrLE: �niVt04j��/ s, Pja>7 JN _ EXFiI rr: (18., SCAiE: C -5 i7--- Lf�u--A- w, WCAM n. f cs r :w ITY OF C- V (7) Conditionally ,permitted Camunity Facilities listed on Page 241. rr J TPEM: i ` 00 5-gc:,s OF 't UCAMONGA PLAN�1,�'IIdaCr � %SION MLE: P'_J �I G 4 aP us K SCALE: C VILLAGE C010MRCIAL a. TLe following general categories of use* shall bek permitted: (1) Retail businesses, including but not limited to, INNER o grocery stores q meat markets, delicatessens produce markets drug stores o dry good stores o hardware sales o pet stores • clothing stores • florist shops (2) Service businesses. including but not limited to: • banks. financial institutions • barber shops, beauty parrs • locksmiths • laundry and -dry cleaning establishments • self - service laundry and dry cleaning (3) Admiaistrative and professional offices. (4) Governmental offices. (5) Restaurants (other than fast food). inelucHug inedentasl serving of beer and wine but without a cocktail lounge. bar. ente- Ttaiaaent or dancing. ANIL (6) Accessory structures and uses necessary or customarily incidental to the above as provided for in the Rancho Cucamonga Zoning Ordinance. b. Uses permitted subject to specific approval of a Condi.tione. Use Pezmit: (1) Automotive rervice stations. (2) Convenience markets. (3) Past food restaurants. (4) ,Wine and liquor stares. (5) Restaurants with entertainment and/or serving of alcoholic beverages. (6) Shopping centers subject to provisions: in Section 1 on Page 235. (7) Conditionally ,permitted Camunity Facilities listed on Page 241. rr J TPEM: i ` 00 5-gc:,s OF 't UCAMONGA PLAN�1,�'IIdaCr � %SION MLE: P'_J �I G 4 aP us K SCALE: C RESOLUTION NO. 89 -146 A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING C"ISSION APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT No. 89 -08 FOR THE DEVELUPMENT OF AN INTEGRATED SHOPPING U14TER CONSISTING OF 11 BUILDINGS TOTALING 121,252 SQUARE: FEET ON 12.9 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF HIGHLAND AVENUE AND MILLIKEN AVENUE WITHIN THE VICTORIA COMMUNITY PLAN IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL DISTRICT APN: 227 011 -22, AMO MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF A. Recitals. (i) Hughes Investments has filed an application for the issuance of the Conditional Use Permit No. 84-08 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) Z1i the 24th of Novenher, 1984, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamo r,,ja conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and cc•._r.I,ded said hearing on that date. ( j II) All regal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolutionhave occu rred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined and resolved by the f Planning Commission of the City ef- Rancho., Cucamonga as fol lows: 1. This Commission hereby l ecifically finds that all of the facts set fora} in the 'Recitals, Part A, of ,his Resolution are true and correct.. 2- Based upon substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above - referenced public hearing n November 29 written and oral staff reports, together with esti including public tes *.i Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: ngry, this (a) The application applies to property locatf`> .} the southeast corner of Milliken Avenue and highland Avenue with a Milliken Avenue - street frontage of 1610 feet and lot depth of }1,020 feet and is presently improved with cu_b, gutter, and sidewalk; and (b) The property to the north of the subject site is the future Foothill Preeway right -of -way, the property to the south of that site consists of vacant property zoned for Medium Density Residential, the property to the east is vacant property zoned for Medium Density Residential, and the property, to the west is vacant property zoned for single family homes. // f I x� n C � PLANNING COMMI$ST "' RESOLUTION N0. 89 -146 RE: CUP 89-08 - ZHES INVESTMENT5 November 29, 1959 Page 2 3. Based upon the substantial - evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced public, hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this -Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: (a) That the proposed use is in accord with the General Plan, the objectives of the Oevalopment .Cede and Victoria Community Plan, and the purposes of the district in which the site is located; and (b) That the proposed use, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimentaj to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; and (c) That the propose, use C ies with each of the applicable " provisions of the Development Code and the Victoria Community Plan, 4. This Commission hereby finds'apd certifies that the proj 'act has been reviewed and considered in compliance 4ith the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 and, further, this Commission hereby issues Negative Declaration. a 5. Bused upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1,, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below and a the attached Standard Coccditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. Planning Division 1) A colored exposed aggregate concrete shalt be provided to compliment the red clay paver approved for use outside the storefronts. The City 'Planner shall review and approve the final design,' 2) A separate Conditional Use Permit application . shall be submitted for review and-approval of the proposA service station. 3) A separate Development/Design Review or Conditional Ilse Permit shall be submitted for review and approval of any proposed building on Parcel 9. 4) The final detailed landscape asd irrigation plan shall be subject to City Planner review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. C--1 o PLANNING £GMMISSIOF °SOLUTION NO. 89 -146 RE; CUP 89-08 - HW..ES INVESTMENTS November 29, 1989 _ Page 3 \l 5) If any fieldstone elements are proposed, authentic river rode materials shall be utilized. A 4- foot "by 8 -foot test section shall be completed for inspection and approval by the Planning Division prior to installation, 6) A uniform hardscape and strut furniture treatment, including trash recbptacles„ free- standing potted plants, bike =racks, ,light bollards, benches, etc., shall be utilized for the shoppi,ng center and shall he designed to be compatible`" with the archi't'ectural style. Detailed designs shall `be submitted for Planning Division review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. \\ 7) The lease agreement for all tenants shall have a clause indicating the site is within the City's adopted Red Hill F?u,lt Special Study Zone. The language for clause shall be subject to City Planner review and approval. A copy of the lease agreement with the above ciause shall be filed with the City prior to issuance of building permits. 8) The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the approved site p aich includes architectural elevations, exterior materials and colors, lariscaping, sign programs, and grading on file with the Planning Division, thEi" conditions contained herein and Development Cnoe regulations. Tree mainten&nce- criteria shall "`be developed and submitted for review aril approval by the City Planner for the project to encourage the natural growth characteristics of the selected tree species. 9) A Uniform Sign Program for the shopping center, including the major tenants for Building D and A, shall be designed to be compatible with the architectural style. Variation of sign color shall be minimal. The size of the sign copy shall be visually balanced atd proportionate to the building and the architecture style. The Uniform Sign Program shall be reviewed and approved by the Design Review Committee prior to issuance of building permits. 10) Graffiti shall be removed within 72 hours. C -o PLANNING COMMISSION "ESOLUTION NO. 89 -146 a RE: CUP 89-08 - Hl,, .BS INVESTMENTS Novertber 29, 1939 Page 4 11) The entire site shall be kept free of trash and debris at all times, and in no evc. -it shall trash and debris remain for more than twenty- four (24) hours. 12) The T- plicant shall resolve any Building Code compliance difficulties (with construction of canopies, property lines in relation to walls and other +openings, and roof tile installation to withstand severe winds) with the Building & Safety Department 'prior to issuance of building permits. 13) There shall be provision for the following design features in the trash enclosure to the satisfaction of the City Planner: a) Architecturally integrated into the design of the shnpping center. b) Separate pedestrian access that does not require opening the min doors to include self- closing pedestrian door. c) Large enough to accommodate two trash bins. d) Roll' -up doors. e) Trash bins with counterweighted lids. f) Architecturally treated overhead shade trellis. g) Chain link screen on top to prevent trash from blowing out`,of enclosure and designed to be hidden from view. 14) Trash collection shall occur b;"we'_'n the hours of 9 :00 a.m. and 10 :00 p.m. only. 15) All operation- and businesses shall be conducted t6­ comply with the following standards, which shall be incorporated into the lease agreement of all tenants: a) Noise Levels. All commercial activities 3 shall not create any noise that would exceed an exterior noise level of 60dBA during the hours of 10:00 p.m. to 7 :00 a.m. and 65d8A during the hours of 7 :00 a.m, to 10:00 P.M. PLANNING COMMISSIOP 'ESOLUTION NO. 8944 RE: CUP 89-08 - HW.,ES INVESTMENTS November 29, 1989 Page 5 b) Loading and Unloading. No person shall `cause the loading, unloading, opening, closing, or other handling of boxes, crates, containers, building materials, garbage cans, or similar objects between the hours of '10:00 P.M. and 7 :00 a.m., unless otherwise" specified herein, in a manner which woo Id cause a noise disturbance to a residential area. 16) Lot A (tha future freeway bn -ramp) at the northwest corner of the site shall be landscaped to the satisfaction of the City Planner and City Engineer. 17) All future building pads shall be seeded and irrigated for erosion control. Detailed plan shall be included in -<;the landscar;z and irrigation plans to be submitted for Pl "011 g Division approval prior to issuance of builu ng permits. 18) All future projects within the shoo.0inq center shall be designed to be--- com-pat i(Ae and consistent with the architectural 'program established. 19) Any outdoor vending macaines shall be recessed into building faces and shall not extend out .- ...into the pedest;-San walkways. The design ttails shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planner. 20) Special paving shall be used in the entire crosswalk west of Shops 7. 21) Parking lots shall be screened from public view along perim%tsr streets wit 'u a combination of berming and continuous screen hedges. 22) Provide trees in planters along front of shops S. 23) Provide two pairs of trees in front of Sav -On. 24) The following trees shall be at least 36 -inch box size: l a) In front of Albertsops and Sav -on. C -l3 PLANNING COMMISSION `SSOLUTION NO; 89 -146 RE: CUP 89-08 Hta..,ES INVESVENTS November 29, 1989 Page 6 b) Entry accent trees, ' c) Plaza trees at intersection of Milliken and '' Kenyon Way, 25) A 6 -foot high masonry wall and wruught iron fence shall be provided along Highland Avenue consistent with the approved wall design for major perimeter streets. This wall shall be located along the ultimate right>of -way line for the Foothill Freeway. Engineering Division 1) The common boundary between the site and the future Route 30 Freeway shall continue along Milliken Avenue a minimum of 75 feet, to the satisfaction of Cal Trans, 2) Highland avenue street improvements shall be complete °,..'_3m Deer Credo Channel to the eastern limit of Tract No. 13440 prior to release of occupancy. 3) T,t approved street improvement plans for Woodruff Place and 'Kenyon Wady shall be revised to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and both streets shalr'be reconstructed as follows: a) The cross- sectional "T.1" shall be 6.0 for a collector street and frontage road. b) Kenyon Way shall be widened 4 feet on the north side and a right -turn deceleration lane shall be provided for the driveway, 11 feet aide and 230 feet 'long. c) Woodruff Place shall be widened 4 feet an the east side. A right -turn lane shall be provid6i for the driveway on the west side, 11 feet wide a d 230 feet long. 4) The approved street improvement .plans %or Milliken Avenue Shall be revised to' include a right -turn deceleration lane for the project. driveway, 11 feet wide and 230 feet long. n M" PLANNING COMMISSION' ESOLUTION NN 89 -146 REi CUP 89-08 - HW,iES INVESTMENTS November 29, 1989 Page 7 _ 5) Limited Use Areas shall be designated on the landscape plans within the lines of sight for all project driveways. Walls and landscaping within those areas shall be to the satisfaction of the City Traffic Engineer. 6) Landscring of the parkways and median on Milliken Avenue shall conform to the resu .ts of the Milliken Avenue Parkway and Median Beautification Study. 7) The Milliken Avenue street improvements shall be completed from Base Line Road to Highiand Avenue prior to occupancy.- Also, the traffic signal at the Mi11ikenlHighland intersection shall be operational ,prior to occupancy. 8) Right -of -way shall be preserved for a future northbound right -turn lane to the future eastbound freeway on -rasp to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The right -turn lane shall not be constructed at this time. 9) The right- of-way line for all right -turn lanes shall be 7 'Tat behind and parallel to ache curb face. 10) The Milliken Averse driveway shalt be 50 feet wide and a smooth transition shall be provided to the main on -sit-i east/west drive aisle to the satisfaction of the City Traffic Engineer. 6. The Secretarj to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of thi3 Resolution. apPROVED AND 10OPTED THIS 29TH DAY OF NOVEMBLR, 1989. PLANNING C -SSION OF THE CITY OF ANCHO CUCAMONGA BY j r t' marry Niel, ATTEST: ` ra u ratan ` PLANNING COMMISSION 5(..''4TnN'NO• 89 -146 RE: OUP 84-08 - HLL.,cS INVES',MENTS November 29, 1989 page $ I, Brad Buller, _ Cucamonga, do h4reby tcertify the that Planning the foregoing Commission of Cwas oduly vid regularly intraii0ced, passed, and adopted by the Panning Commission of thee' City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of tne.Plannirq Commission' held on the 29th day of November, 1989, by the follRaing vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BLAKESLEY, CHITIEA, MCNIEL, TOLSTOY,'WEINBERGER' j NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE 9SENT COMISSIONERS; NONE i 0 DIE y$ ova �yas�a�a- ° o q v •~gnga� Qj F. +awa o; Sys E� 9 nr.: ICE, -32 —W f2 •i6L�wQC( &MY ^CVO �+4C jig y co d v t� ff � 3 O e +ors a° vS •c g:oa°... . o a a .2. Sa w v aC ! + Et ZER C.Q Ue u Y 6 GGGCgyp:. a . r P. 0 `w�oY gig y a�wr _ C S SMA ask CY T C N O y. 6 Si w 4 Q + e Q+ o Ct9 r�l IR a a55555l$ mod, �:.� + ^_.�+N..� O�g14� 4Qy�uj +e a� 1 ^z A Sia o I �g bona fill flit u � �3 Y w f. V Pr .w p if i N Xi II I )(i F -q . C,-� 7 s • H CL IlaQA peaeCa� ��pp'�Sr w4Y.0 �Stl. �4..� ^� �t aN q' w�- iOwaC 02= 32.1 Zw^i T « Oaaq OVW' c °w «Y sm '0 D. V bCH N� V iyy .i y_ gp8 'W 3 8, p Y x C {� Nq G i'y t V QQQ$ ` sL�N Z. 1% Y N0 Lr .214 Z., } Y.J� q q =Tp ®. q N ^ S 9 SS 6 C -® �.�Y i _ O � 6 h" CY9O1 .5 40+ .•d.q It = T �11 y Ezz Ci{.t pe �!yy«��1li YP�^C �Y �iyNy bY4E t� O.4 ~L A r U Y O m Yp u P�.,O,. Y. g- I g • ~ L qC +dG C+ p r «gipp® AI CYF 4. 1::6 R • �+r CY�p .� COau.� pp YG2gg m AN�j�;.�Y 6a. Y G SYg bC w Y1- N m Y � � y 9 ` w. ^per ^ 'a .21 m d r L G GtY y® Of^ LA+�tlw. q��a.�p �.CWN w.Ccf, ��888 y^ � C.� Tm CY is- 5 yO =QT x� 4q1~ -tyg yN. yO yvyM umetl+ Sq$' LuH! �Ei ••. QyC Y O juC� f�,� pB+ L _Y y®+ b$�{ ^ r + ®yp (yC� ap py� " qa yy 6V9 ST y`� �yyl ■ III tl < i bpi. w2 U .2 N p M 6�� .i Y y W � i: M � L K I I I I I I , Cl C�Gf tlb �.VC �tle. ' = W< _d A` ■@ �p1. tl`O sp OYY O,� ^ + +YV .'il -.iL Y ^b « m g 'sL a e` «Sar S. No fib � A ® � e e• Nl-'Q eNsOy O� g1jl$�. ��p� as.4�+w® W.Vy �Pm pS$. W �tyl V A6. 16W� 'M �a �V hi-■ 6 ` ®r -r: tp gag N: � eY ! ^r4v.E .1 Ini Mi `" m4ss ^ygg r �' M!r' «m �d -2 b its g r �I :� fi- rr i7 viQyiy ®, i�1rg g g VVV y .g mq eMQ g11 is .2 w i ° d$ A � I Bill! C.- r w �I V AM W 5 G wN�# �°Y`• M =� 4..a 4Y °i CC..iA � °s ay¢ � pCO� °� ` =V�Y. I ��r.Ri AN R O.S Z . >'S b.hp.°. f.�Z MSC YyO.. aL y`.y c y�g1�MMY ^o rYO�°• e� :w o. �.�. q..°p.00a7qIaM ii p YO• °� CL �u�G ~yLl '�V wrelY MC ,Cq qNy �G qw °M �. _ «$ 0Y Cy�• O.uOq.. Ysy Cb9 uy�u C��dy yC7 �.�y CpC� 2 ^«O ° Y 4O 6i._ g °w ey ` a�C.O�. NO as Lg "•�ax2 CH� gLSC p y17+ V O. Y� - d.�YL�O• �.:IM 6P�� «v� F,�j.Cl s�$lYi. �yy� K��yyp!1 ML'q ��L up Y YL•p� &O q�Yi C ML'p g y L NL °6 °7P =. ° =.,:I a �_, L�Vybymy�NCY.� 6gA.e �Lq a Y Y a O °.Y L �ByF>a AY tl �P�O Yy >y •L CEY «�`1P��L��$0.''4�yk$ _y�. YC°��g Y A N b yp pp � L yy {y�11 CC 6N� Cr. 710Ob qt PI > R41g04 pK Y..Y�4 Y 1►090M mar pr af sE °q •pd `pa ppl y�Y� °gaYv $�Y.M �® as 3 OM� So NVIE« p.Q° GY yo -Hgp�° i yffi� `p1� 2 TL of p 6 RR.r 888 1 s L ■ Y It d a> r's pL p� -A 3 r b � Mypy s. Y - ®p °l s 3 �y++r 3s� gm s yI ;b" �'�� ° =aa8� �v� © ci4� wz $Ag a b _ 4 XI }Ci X1 XI f 1 f e N� r �Yh1bT� f`„ 1: grjup fit NI salt _2 Ul 21 sip yp"v lift HZE { Imo•' = 4 y� ° Y p' i yd Y 4 O oe i n e1..S'�yyes..$iw nvs MS4 fi :Sal f as p �yYy � °Lh V6 Y.rtY y =6�i s.. M cif M 2!�tl tee+ }r' YYYA` a1 Sat h b � s W 1 �Awy �• Vl II �6�4 }A�. sb Nei i4 r. tY 1. L Wp*yg Sg 6CS Y y. p li. � NO ®ZNTL V C `!mac( ay W p o e�b V J' Q e� 4� •.� jib ,Y� 4 �.e, �an eyq Ms = aM.� al Id 14 fit Z.9 gy Zvi" .it. N @` .yQ1 �� ®/� " :.4yA Bd W ra{d G HIS ` 6`i Yil K + •� ` +i� r.Md. �a� . 43 X12% � W �9p flat s 213 Irr t 3.15 i at-is 1421 awt Y eNw � Iy o -4 Y 4 C_ Z0 I v Q� J U H ci W Hag MCJ le • UQN ��• »m�. D�O1 �V pS, �I� 06 � s 5s `.. V =YY�NE lrO ■G S I. ... Qy L » I 4 Y C Y 9 Q O t• t V L� Y pOr. 7e VP c°..L1J�Y�•4y 28 L V cz p _ ;, � °�,•• iii � ,� d^ '—"' o « $ A `moo` Y o �s cn fr1 0 o r z a - AIR Y�6 E 9iJ. Ey3 L —os C^ V C C�go Qg +._yy( „/erg �iyyf L�q f O ^_ n.. Y e. .5-41 b i N ° s is 311 Ec �I ^I V� = QOY C8s 66 (`1 V a $Yd t$aY V” CP� ffi s bra& 3 s$ o IN IL i @S� -s- #s Y 4s s a it e» •$` ■Q �^�'� Y °$ate las as si ; $ H. p� ® y G -21 �^ ce 3 y Y Y�6 E 9iJ. Ey3 L —os C^ V C C�go Qg +._yy( „/erg �iyyf L�q f O ^_ n.. Y e. .5-41 b i N ° s is 311 Ec �I ^I V� = QOY C8s 66 (`1 V a $Yd t$aY V” CP� ffi s bra& 3 s$ o IN IL i @S� -s- #s Y 4s s a it e» •$` ■Q �^�'� Y °$ate las as si ; $ H. p� ® y G -21 m a �o °o�La S�e L¢p Wu �'4 ,�i YY �gAY�1 pp �CC O�L O � aYq NYC o � G • O •y �p {�.a V 1 Y f q t6� W y+3cq ,Yrg LoYpE.:� « YrL'�. e� <a$ - �� X3'.0 a s• COLA VqQ J. CG «C �.,,•�,� YLq GYtl qq! � `Y `.$. LLQ V' �yCy Qrf. t `' � p�� YY ��Ya �`y vfOiV Cua �YL aYiJ CNC�'�. Y�Y 4 ^ yp� �w Wp ype�� pp CC Y `[ G CMr� 60 �.u� a uC `q ^dq .E�'•V. �q"�' Y � LV� 4y. {v- ~ �L a� Y O d. aVM C `� °ngo eL°a t°5� -0 pie $: `Z' r s tz_' �w 0 Z2 11 s 1 Y$z. Sib'- Eli su a.°. W� »� =" a� �oL z.°• �''.�''tv. � Div °W <i: a �•Y M d 8L wr »Y� am i w wi ri �l I rl l J :o w�oa R gg E� $g r. 'TIMe tl 2 a °' =zj'pa I nan= -b a 3� 0 w Y ; H �•• •� 7 yF ��• �+°'6�i� b a• O a b N Al � A tl Z•1`$ � w Sv <is a a ��c aY u .o8 LU We a �4� X55 • A yy`f. 4�pp '� �S Y �/ ®_qNN�w• C Sccdy �r1°W° �fO. All 8 $$:o:u�3 i3 L°btg i IL: It �Y � � Ybr p 0yV 91I C 'AF 61 lJ Y • gig 1 Is IN Off 11 3m Is 11 w_ y P v " u2 six M C- 2-3 RESOLUTION NO. 89 -146A A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CEERTAIN MODIFICATIONS TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 89 -08 FOR A REQUEST TO SWITCH BUILDING PAD LOCATIONS OF COMMERCIAL BUILDING NO. 10 AND SHOPS BUILDING NO. 11 FOR A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED SHOPPING CENTER COASISTING OF 11 BUILDINGS TOTALING 122,673 SQUARE FEET ON 12.9 ACRES OF LAND WITHIN THE N=GHHORHOOD COMMERCIAL DEVELOPHEIT DISTRICT OF THE VICTORIA PL MNh D COMMUNIT', LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF HIGHLAND AVENUE AND MILLIKEN AVENUES - APN: 227- 011 -22, AND MAKING:FINDINGS'IN S'U'PPORT THEREOF A. Recitals. (i) Hughes Investments received approval from the Rancho rucamonga Planning Commission for Conditional Use Permit No. 89 -08, with conditions included„ in Resolution No. 89 -146, at a duly noticed public hearing on 'I November 29, 1989. (ii) Hughes Investments filed an application for the approval of modifications to the site plan for Conditional Use Permit 89 -08 as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter, the subject Conditional Use Permit request is referred to as "the application ". (iii) On the 10th of April, 1991, 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. (iv) All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. _ NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, det,p'Fnined, and :,resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamon•^t as followvi 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. i 2. Based urn substantial evidence preeented to this Commission during the above - referenced public hearing on April 10, 1991,' including written ,.nd oral staff reports, together with "tC testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: (a) The applicatioi; applies to property located at the southeast corner of Milliken Avenue and Highland Avenue with a Milliken Avenue street frontage oz i65O feet and lot depth of *lt02O feet and is presently improved with curb, gutter, and sidewalk; and a_ T PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 89 -146A -- COP 89 -08 - HUGHES INVESTMENTS April 10, 1991 Page 2 (b) The property to the north of the subject site is the future Foothill Freeway right-Of-way, the property to the south of that site ;onsiats of vacant property zoned for Medium Residential Development, the ;operty to the east is vacant property zoned for Medium Residential Development and the property to the west is vacant property zoned for single family homes; and (c) The property is zoned Neighborhood Commercial by the Victoria Community Plan; (d) The applicatioZ contwplates the switch of building pad locations for commercial Building 10 and shops Building ii with subsequent f modifications to adjacent parking areas; and (e) The property is currently being graded for the development of Phr a One, which includes the construction of shops Building 11 and adjacent par' ,ng areas; and (f) A separate development review application for Building 10 will be processed at a later date, at which time the issue of its orientation to the adjacent pedestrian plaza will be considered in more detail. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented .- to this Commission during the above- referenced public hearing and tipott the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs i and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: (a) That the proposed modification is in accord with the Victoria Community Plan and the General Plat:, the objectives of the Development Code, and the purposes of the district in which the site is located. (b) That the proposed modification, 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. i (c) That the proposed modification complies with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code and the 'Victoria Community Plsn. 4. This Commission hex :eby finds and certifies that the project has been reviewed and considered in compliance with the California, Environmental Quality Act of 1970 and, further, that a Negative Declaration was issued on November 29, 1989. S. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in p—agYaphs 1, 2, 3, cnd 4 above, this Commission hereby modifies its Resolution No. 89 -146 by adding the fallowing Planning and Engineering Divisiox cond- ttions to read as follows: C -25 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 89 -146A CUP 89 -08 - HUGHES INVESTMENTS April 10, 1991 Page 3 r Planning Division: l) All applicable, Planning Division Conditions from Planning Lommiesion R &solution No. 89 -146 shall apply. 2) An additional bicycle security rack shall be provided along the store frontages of commercial Building 10 and shops Building. 11. The exact location shall be subject to City Planner review and approval. 3) Retaining walls, identical in material, texture, color and form, shall be provided, - along the east side of the drive entrance from Kenyon Way, subject to review and approval of the City Planner. 4) The pedestrian connections between the on -site pedestrian plaza and the public sidewalk system shall be widened to promote its usability. The proposed design of this revision shall be subjecia to revieh, ate-,, approval of the City Planner and CL;,-y- Engineer. 5) Additional undulations in the berming behind th(*, sidewalk along Kenyon Way shall be provided, consistent with the previously approved detailed landscape /irrigation plans for the project. Details indicating this requirement shall be provided on modified grading and !{,etailed landscape /irrigation plans, which shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Division prior to the issuance of building permits for Buildings 10 and 11. Engineering Division: 1) All, conditions of Planning Commission Resolution NO,. 89 -146 shall continue to apply. 2) Six foot wide street tree easements shall be provided paralleling the right turn lanes on Milliken Avenue, Kenyon Way, and Woodruff Place, and behind the sidewi.lk, went of the Kenyon Way drive approach and south of the Woodruff Place drive approach to a projection of the point, where the line -of -sight crosses the curb. l� PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 1:0. 89 -146A CUP 89 -08 - HUGHES INVESTMENTSS April 10, 3991 Page 4 3) The street_ Plano for Milliken Avenue, Kenyon Way, and Woodruff Place shall be revised to show additional street trees within the street tree ease44nts, behind the driveway lines of eight and right turn lanes to the satisfaction of the Engineering '•Division and Planning Division. 4) Public sidewalks crossing drive approaches shall be concrete with interlocking pavers located outside the public sidewalk easement, $) The sidewalk along the Milliken Avenue frantage,,north of the project driveway, shall ):a located to conform with the future right- -turn lane £or the Route 30 Freeway on -ramp. Any portions which will ultimately be curb adjacent shall be 6 feet wide. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 10TH DAY OF APRIL, 1991. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: _ Larry T. McNiel, Chairman ATTEST - H� ,'. Buller, Secretary I, Brad Buller, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passod, 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 April 1991, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: CZ-4MISSIONERS: NOES; CC_WSSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: G -2 Ell El CITY OF RANCHO C ^JCAMONGA STAFF REPORT ' =; DATE: April 10, 1991 L r TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Coam Ission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Anna -Linn Hernandez, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: VARIANCE 91 -02 - WESTERN PROPERTIES - A request to reduce the 22 -foot minimum setback to 19.33 feet from the street for Buildings 57 and 58 within the existing Tentative Tract 13273, a 256 unit condominium prcject on 15.8 acres of land within the Medium LesIdential District (8 -14 dwelling units per acres' within the Terra Vista Planned Community, located at the southeast ; rner of Milliken Avenue and Mountain View Drive - APN: 227- 151 -13. I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action Requested: Approval of a Variance. B. Surrounding Land Use and zoning:. North - Vacant; Low- Medium Residential (4 -8 dwelling units per acre) South - Vacant; Proposed °xMCA recreation facility and Medium -High Residential (14 -24 :,felling units per acre) East - Medium Residential (,8-14 dwelling units per acre) West - Vacant; Low - Medium Residential (4 -8 dwelling units per acre) C General Plan Designations: Project Site - Medium Residential (8 -14 dwelling units per acre) North - Low - Medium Residential (4 =8 dwelling units per acre) South - Medium -High Residential (14 -24 dwelling units Per acre); and park East - Medium Residential (8 -14 dwelling units per acre) West - Low- Medium Residential (4 -8 dwelling units per acre) II. ANALYSIS: A. Background: Tentative Tract 13273, a 256 unit condominium project, received Planning Commission approval ' on May 27, 1987. Since that time, the applicant has completed construction of the project and a final inspection approval from the Planning Department is ,rending at the completion of Milliken Park. in addition, all street imnrovemants re qu±red in conjunction with this project have also SZen completed __ ITEO D PLANNING COMMISSION---sTAFF REPORT VAR 91 -02 - WESTFRN'VROPERTIE3 April 10, 1991 Page 2 B. 'ssneral: 7M the process of clearing the title for Tract 13272, Western Properties had a survey conducted on the property,; The survey indicated that two garage, structures, no. 57 and 58 {3ee attached site plan;,'Exhibit "A'`, encroach; into the required street setback. Within the Terra Vista Planned Community, the garage /carport building setback within the Medium High Residential zone is 22 feet along a collector street. Building 57 encroaches 2..6-'- feet - into the set5'�ck while Building 58 eiemoaches 2.37 feet into the setback. 'St should be noted that, the bu:ldings are plotted at an angle to the - street= hence, the amount of setback decreases at the opposite corner of both buildings. During the review process, the Design Review Committee recommended that the garages along the street frontal-is be ?kewed at an angle to provide greater variety and intc.zst. The developer revised the plans accordingly and :ieived f Planning Commission approval of these locatians t.;r garage i buildings 57 and 58. Not wishing to demoliv!i-`and reainstrucf these buildings, the applicant is now requesting approval of Variance 91 -02 from the Planning CommissioA. Ill. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: The purpose and intent of the variance is to provide flexibri.lity from the strick, applic ^tion of development standards when special circumstances certaining to the property such as size, shape, tcpo;:, phy, or location,- deprive such property of privileges enjoyed by o* - oropertles in the vicinity and in the same district inconsistent wtth the objectives of the Development Code, In order to s.prove Variance 91 -02, the 'Planning Commission must make the following findings: A. That strict or literal interprr. "tion and enforcement of the specified regulation would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the ,. objectives of this Code. B. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property involved or to the intended use of the propert> that do not apply generally to other properties in the same zone. C. That strict or ,Lite=r±?_ - interpretation and enforcement of the specified reguUtion would deprive the applicant of Privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same zone. D. That the granting of the Variance will not constitute .ant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitat „3s on other properties classified in the same zone. PLANNING COMISSION STAFF REPORT 1. VAQ.9S `+ WESTERN PROPERTIES f Aprn13 z ni - Pags - 1, Ip E. That the granting of the Varian,,.'_ will not be detrimental to the public heLlth, safety, or w'lfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. Notwithstanding these requisite findings, the late.i of the Variance Process is , to provide flexibility when special cir^umstanc&-i enist. ,joth buildings were constructed as aynroved and are in use ;The alternative to a Variance ;ouid b• to a ` reconstruct fiche `{euildi.ngs parallel, to the street at the '22 -foot, minimam setback. lineb' However, this would be contrary to the Planning Commission's'2 intent to skew the garages &long Mountain View Drive to provide streetscape variety. Should the Commission be inclined to grant the Variance request, staff would recommend That. additional landscaping be required to mitigate the. decreased set'sAck. Development. Code SecU n 17.0A -'40.B, gives the Planning Commission -the authority to conditional, ppprove a Variance. IV. CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised in the Inland Valley, Daily bulletin newspaper 'us a public hearing, the :property has been pouted, an& nrt ces were sent to all property owners within 300 feet of the subject site. l V. RECON4MATION: T Steff recommends that the Planning Commission grant she Variance through adoption of the attached Resolution of is Approval. j 11, ! Respsgt4u 'lly submitted. �rta'd B? ler. ' i�lanner BB:ALH:mlg i Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Site Plan Exhibit "B" Site Plan- vetail> Buildings 57 & 'a`B Exhibit "C -1" Letters from App?.icants Exhibit "C -2" - Letters frow Lpplicants Resolution of Approval 1 4`3 4 J all ��°�° ,�t((i` �glqiji eat *d a w €i gf., �� :� plil!mill IiiEill ILI NO it ° — anaexv ea>•tnse q f 1 �o �m1 0 T751 jo IN �! x I lu /* XT) @ '0 L jl� It \ C) wo lg �, A, gx ! 0 wRxT'i'EN II &TIFiCFaTIatI REZ VARIANCE APPLICATIOYd TERRA VISTA TRACT 13273 We are `requesting a vari�,�-e to the 22 foot minimum building /garage setback from" the face of the curb along Mountain View Drive so that the setback requirements match the " existing 10as built" condition.' A corner of 'garage building 57 1' s located 19.38 feet from the face of curb and a corner of ,l garage building 58 is located 19.33 feet from the face of =curb. The review, approval, inspection, and completion of these garage building lccations within the setback appears to have been the result of some confusion with the 15 foot rear setback requirements for the "M" zone, which was the original designation for this development area. Also, our records indicate that during the review of the detailed site plan (in February - May 1387), these buildings � xe set at an angle at the direction of Staff and the Planning'Commission. This may have contributed to the inadvertent encroachment. The requested variance is necessary :as this existing "technical" encroachment adversely affects---title to the Property. This deprives the property of the benefits of clean title afforded other properties within the same zone district. I I i I it �m =." MADOLE AND.ASSOCIATES, INC. OF THE INLAND EMPIRE ' Consulting Civil Engineering Land Planning and Surveying 10601 CHURCH STREET RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA 91730 TELEPHONE (714194 &131.'1 SUITE 107 FAX (714) 948.8484 J MEMORANDUM DATE: February 5, 1991 ,t 2'0: Lira Joe Oleson; Lewis Homes FROM: Gary Heely SUBJECT: Tract No. 13273, Garage structures No. 57 and 58. (Our Job No. 126 -7985) .. .. _ F These two garage structures were set at distances of 19.50 feet at one end and 23.00 feet at the other, froj curb face of- Mountain View Drive. Since the detailed site plan. was reviewed four years ago (February to May, 1987) the best that I can recall is that these structures were set at an -angle to curb -face at the direction of the City Staff and planning commission to prevent ahem from being parallel to the street. These plans were reviewed in plan check process by the City. XZ you have any further questions please call. i .0--7 RESOLUTION NO. ANIL A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Or THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAHONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING VARIANCE NO. 91 -02 TO REDUCE THE BUILDING SETBACK FOR GARAGE STRUCTURES NOS. 57 AND 58 FROM 22 FEET TO 19.38 AND 19.33 FEET RESPECTIVELY, ITITHIN THE EXISTING TENTATIVE TRACT 13273, LOCATED AT T10 SOUTHEAST CORNER OF MOUNTAIN VIEW DRIVE A;iD MILLIKEV ',INVENUE IN THE MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (8 -14 DWELLVIG- UNITS PER 'ACRE), AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THE1'EOF - APN: 227- 151 -13. A. Recitals. M Western Properties has filed an application for the issuance of a Variance No. 91 -02 as descri. ,jed in the title of this Resolut.on. 9sreirafter in this Resolution, the subject Variance request is referred to as "the application." (ii) On the 10th of April 1991, 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.) On May 22, 1987, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 87 -62 conditionally approving Tentative Tract Map No. 13273. (iv) All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth ir, the Recitals. Park A, of this ResolutioA are true and r.7or :riot. 2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to this'' ^ommiision during the above- referenced public hearing on April 10, 1992, rincluding written and oral staff reporter together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: (a) The application applies to properly located at the southeast corner of Milliken Avenue and Mountain View', Drive with a street frontage of 634.00 feet along Milliken Avenue, and 654..00 feet along Mountain View Drive; and (b) The property to the north and south of the subject site is currently vacant, High Residential (24 -30 dwelling units per acre), the property to the east is currently Medium Residential (8 -14 dwe111;ng units per acre), and the property to the west is currently vacant.:, Low- Medium Residential (4 -8 dwelling units per acre). Duo PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. VAR 91-02 - WESTERN PROPERTIES April 10, 1991 Page 2 (c) The site is currently developed with 256 condominium units with 30 garage structures and associatf4 garages; and (d) The application allows for a reduction; in the 22 -foot street setback for garage structures no. 57 and 58 within the'existing project to 19.38 and 19.33 feet, respectively; and (e) Special circumstances exist, in that,. the garage struct.ires have been constructed and are used by residents within the project; and (f`? The .existing skewed design is consistent with the Commission's intent to provide strestecape `variety. 3. Hazed upin the substantial evidence presented to this commission during the above- referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of fat`s set forth in paragraphs l &-ld 2 above, this Commiosion hereby finds and con...udes as follows: (a) That strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulations would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of the Devel0p',6ent Code. (b) Thtt there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property involved or to the intended use of AOL the property that do not apply generally to other properties in the same district. (c) That strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same district. (d) That the granting of the Variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same district. (e) That the granting of the Variance will not be detrimental to the put)lir, health, safety or welfare or naterially Injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. 4. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, and 3 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below. 1) Of the seven Canary Island Pine trees located adjacent to these two garages, replace in kind any dead or dying trees, and replace the three 15- gallon size with minimum 24 -inch box size. 2) Replacement planting shall be completed prior AOL to final release of the last building within Tract 13273 or within 60 days, whichever occurs first. D / PLANNING COMMISSION .RESOLUTION NO. VP -q 91 -02 WESTERN PROPERTIES April 10, 1991 Page 3 Awx S. The - cretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 10TH DAY OF APRIL.' 19V1. PL7 VINE COMMISSION OF THE CXTY 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 hereby certify that the for'igoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adl)pted by the Planninc 'Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, Pit a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 10th desi. -of April 1991, by thr 'following votes -to-wit: AYES: COMMIS.gIOYERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: DATE: TO: FQOM: BY: SUBJECT: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT April 10, 1991 Chairman Wild Members p£ the Planning Commission Brad Buller, City Planner Jerry Guarracino, Assistant Planner 5'NVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND INDUSTRIAL SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 91 -02 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA To define and establish development crite_ia' for recycling uses within the Industrial A #Ei Specific Plan. Staff recommends issuance of a Negative Declaration. I. BACKGROUND; On January 9, 1991, the Pla-ming Commission reviewed. a Use Determination Application by George Fox for California Copper Recycling. At that meeting, the Commission upheld staffs determination that the proposod usa was more like a Scrap operation than a. Manufacturing use However, the Commission acknowledged the need to add Recycling operations as a separate use within the Industrial Area Specific Plan and requested this project be added to the work program. The applicant was infoxmed at this meeting that a formal request, from him, for such an amendment would require that priority be given to this issue.` However, to date, no formal request has been made. The following information and proposed Specific plan amendments have d,een prepared for consideratf'a as requested by the Planninr,_ Commission. II• ANALYSIS: A. Recycling, A Brie£ Historv: Recycling is on the rise across the nation, but the trend has really caught on in California, in part because of the success- of the 3 -year old California beverage /container recycling program. The Los Angeles Times newspaper recently reported an announcement by tl.e State Division of Recycling that the return rate for beverage containers of all kinds (aluminum, glasa, plastic, and steel) went from 56 percent in 1989 to 70 percent in 199".. California now leads the nation in the amount of aluminum containers recycled. Today, advances in recycling technology make it possible to recycle a wide 'range of materials. The benefits_ to time environment are only part of the reason for the remarkable growth in this industry. An acute shortage of landfill space ITEM E PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT ISPA 91-02 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA J_pril lo, 1991 Page 2 in urban centers and the increasing cost of disposal and transport of waste materials are making recycling, a profitable industry. Additionally, govar,,nment mandates such as 4AB 939 - "The California Integrated Waste Management Act of "189",,%call for recycling and waste reduction goals of So Pei, 3itt by the year 2000 for the State. B' purPOse- T purpose of establishing appropriate developm standards � &_:1 zoning classifications for this emerging industry are threefold: 1. To reduce the amount of solid waste and promote the conservation of recyclable materials; 2. To establish specific d,,�elqpment criteria for Mat.:rials Recovery Facilities (MRFs) witb-_'n, the Industrial Area Specific Plan. 3, To further distinguish between Collection Facilities, 2rocessing Facilities, and Scrap Operations. C. Proposed Land Use Designations: Currently, the Industrial Area Specific Plan describes Scrap Operations, but does not reference Recycling Operations. To distinguish between Scrap Operations and other recycling Processes, two new land use designations are proposed. These land use designations are generally defined as follows: 1. CO=_.-tion Facili - typically include the acceptance y donation, redemption, or purchase of recyclable materials from the public for sorting. Such a facility may have the capacity for aggregating and stor'ng large amounts of material on-site and compacting or bailing material for shipment. 2. Vrocessing._ME2k3.i1X - Activities typically include collection and Pxocessing of recyclable materials. ProcE...3sing means the preparation of materials for efficient shipment by such means as briquetting, grinding- crushing, mechanical sorting, sr-:eddihg, cleani-go and remanufacturing. D. Location ReTaEements- The intent of the land use categories est,blished in the Industrial Area Specific Plan is to group together uses which are of I ­�ilnr intensities and therefore compatible. A speelfic objb,_tive of the plan is to organize land uses to avoid creating nuisances among adjacent fictivities. At this time, two new uses are being considered: Collection Facilities (centers for the collection and sorting of recyclable *.iaterials), and Processing Facilities (for the collection and vrocessing- of recyclable materials). 1:1 N I� AWL G ELAI PLANNING 07 1MISSION STAFF REPORT ISPA 91 -02 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA April 10, '1991 Page 3 1. Collection Facilities - A collection facility typically has ­outdo or storage of the collected recyclable materials. This use would be similar in intensity to Heavy Manufacturing which permits outdoor storage areas. Hoy) ver, it is also - conceivable thrt a collection fa:. 3i - ty �Y be operate: }completely within an enclosed building, in which case, the use would be of no greater intensity than Light /Medium /Heavy Manufacturing or ,Lig}it/Medium/F -3evy Wholesale, Sto_age and Distribution uses because it does nofi'r; involve any manufacturing processing of materials. Therefore, from the �7iewpoint of land use intensity and effect on surrounding properties, Collection Fac.':lities could be a, permitted use in most General Industrial and Heavy indstrial subareas, except where outdoor storage is involved. 2. Processing Facilities: A processing facility involves Performing eome-•tseatment to the recyclable material. These processes typically would' include cleaning the majority of dirt and debris, crushing or melting the material, treatment to eliminate impurities, and preparation for shipment. For example, plastic bott- may be recycled by being crushed and made into small pellets for shipmeru to the end user. In this sense, the recycled material is in a semi- finished or raw state that must be processed further for manufacturing or assembly. Therefore, processing Facilities wc:uld be most similar to Medium or Heavy Manufacturing which deal with manufacti; ring, compounding or material, processing, and treatment of semi -f_ ished and raw materials, respectively. Heavy Manufacturing is permitted only within Subarea 15. g , Medium Manufacturing uses are. prexrs3£ted b y ri ht to Subareas 5, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14, and 15 of the Industrial Area Specific Plan. However, the Commission should consider requiring a Conditional Use permit for Processing Facilities because of the followings_.,. a. Recycling techniques vary greatly in their methods `? of operation and effect on the local environment. b, The intensity of Processing Facilities may vary ` quite'substeatially and should be reviewed on an individual bases. �' 3 PLANNING COMMPSSION STAFF "REPORT ISPA 91 -02 - CITY OF RANCHO cucAMONGA 1.pril 10. 1991 Page 4 , . ! '-1 C. Spp site consideration should be given to the plL,ament and orientation of loading areas= giving thought to the circulation need of both automobile and commercial truck traffic. III. Development Standards: Collection Facilities should be permitted r in Subareas 1 -5, 8 -11, and 13 -15 and should meet the following ' standards: A. All business operations shall be conducted within an encloevd building unless specifically permitted within the General Industrial and Heavy Industrial categories and adequately screened from public view pursuant to the Section 1, General Provisions, for the Industrial Area. B. All facilities shall be maintained free of litter and vermin and any other undesirable material and shall be cleaned of loose debris on *,,daily basis. C. The facility shalom;, meet the parking requirements Y'.r warehouse uses. Iis addition, stacking space shall be. provided for six vebAcltis or the anticipated, peak customer load, whichever is #,rd If no drive -up facilities are available, than a minimum of six additional spaces for customer drop -off shall be provided. P. The facility shall meet adopted City noise standards. E. Power- driven equipment, ins,.uding aluminum foil and ca:, compacting or bailing, necessary for efficient temporary ., storage and shipment of material shall be be permitted. Processing Facilities should be permitted in Subareas 5, 8, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14, and 15 subject to a Conditional Use Permit and shall Ukeet all of the development standards for Collection Facilities. IV. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: Staff has found no significant impacts on the environment � ^ a result of this proposed text amendment and recommends issuance of a Negative Declaration. V. FACTS FOR 'FINDING: The project is consistent with the Industrial Area Specific Plan and the cener l Flan. The pr03ect will not be detrimental to adjacent prcpersies or cause significant adverse environmental impacts. VI. CORRESPONDENCE: This iuem has been advertised as a public hearing ` in the Inland Valley Daily Bullrtin newspaper, by an eighth page advertisement. !I PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT ISPA_91 -02 - CITr OF gANCHO COCA�NGA April'10, 1991 ^gage 5 C ", VII. RECOMMEND,;TION: Staff recddmends that the Planning Commissiet recommend approval of this amendment and issuance of a Negative Declaration by the 'City Council through adoption of the attached Resolution. Respect y aubmitted, s Bra er� City Planner BH:JG:mlg Attachments: Resolution of Approvua Ordinance l i _ _ 1 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLAM ING COMMISSION OF THE CZ XLISOLUTION NO. TY 05' e RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIe - RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF INDUSTRIAL SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 91 -02 TO DEFr,4e AND STAD:,ISH DEVELOPMENT CRITERIA FOP FVCYCLING USES, AND TO MOND THE LAND' USE REGULP_tious FOR SUBAREAS 1 -5, 8 -11, and 13 -15 TO CONDITIJYALLY PERZHIT COLLECTIOPI AND PROCESSING FACILITIES, AND MAKING y1NDINGS IK SUPPORT THEREOF. I A. ecitale. (i) The City of Rancho Cucamonga has ini?'iated' an application for �dustrial Specific Plan Amendment 91 -02 as described in the title of this ! Resolution. Hereinafter in this Reeolutiei:., the su2jaoG Speofic Plan Amendment request is referred to'._;s "the „application.” (ii) On April 30, 1991, the Planning Commissibl4 of txe City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly ncticed public hear n` on the application and concluded said hearing on that date. (iii) All legal prnrr:guisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. i B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined' end resolved by the Planning Commiesion of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows:, '. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the ftacts .set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are trust vnd correct. 2. Based upon substantial evidEnce pret�nted to this Commission during the abolo - referenced public hearing on April 10, 1991, inrluuing written and oral staff reportb, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds an follows: (a) The proposed amendments will not hava a significant impact on the environment as evidenced by tho conclue3ons and findings of the Initial Study, Part II; and 't ' (b) The applit .on applies to properties located within Subareas 1 -5, 8 -11, and 13 -1S of the Industrial Area Spealfic Plan. (c) The proposeC'amendment would be in the ;Nest interest of the health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of the City of Rancho Cucamonga for the reasons as follows; i (i) That the proposed amendment will distinguish betweer, CollQction Facilities, Processing Facilities, and Scrod Oper•,,Iona. IBM Ij i ox , PLANNING r02124ISSION RESOLUTION No. ISPA 91 -02 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA April In, 19�_' Page (ii)" That the proposed amenftent` will establish specific development for ,criteria Material Recovery Facilities (MRFs) wifzhin -'the r iustrial Area Epecific Plus. (;iii) That the propc93d amendment will reduce the`ancount of solid waste, promote conservation of, %recyclable materials, and le3sen the 2z4gict of solid wade on the environmAnr. 'iv) That the proposed amendment will conserve`,valule mate.:ial resources and energy, thereby, creating greater efficiency, in the regional economy, and promote local employment. (v) The proposed amendment will reduce e, th3 storage, collection, and transportation and dicpotsal costs• for solid ' waste. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presentad �ta� this Commission during the above- referenced public hear xg and upon t.`.e specific findings of facts sc� forth in paragraphs l and 2 above, this mcnissioz, _- hereby finds and concluleL ai follows: (a) That tho grcpose3- amendment is consistence with the objectives of the Industrial Specific Plan and the the purposes of District in which the site is located. (b; That the pxopoeed amendment will not be detrimental to the public health, saf{ty, or welfare oz materially, inj1' i011s to properties or improvements in the vicinity. ;c) TDrat the proposed amendment is in compliance with each of the applicable provisions of the XnSuetrial Spa-3ific Plan. (d) That the pr,apoaad amendmant will net be detrimental to the -Objectives of the General Plan or the Industrial Specific P1-n 4. This Commission ' sereby finds that the project Ai s bee;: reviewGa aAd considered in compliance with the California Environmental _;fry Act of 1970 and, further, this Commission hereby rs < :ommends issuance :;; - Negative Declaration, S. Based upon the findings and conclusions set ,nrth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, thf.s Commission hereby resolved :as follows, (a) That the Planning Commission of tho City oi' I'„ancho Cucamonga herebv Tecommende approval - 7f induw;rial Specific Plan Amendmont 91 -02 per the attached Ordinances , 6. The secretary of this Commie / -wa- r fti + -xo the adoption of this Resolution, ',�_ y PL_AIMING COMMISSION RESOLUTION ITO. SSPA 91 -02 City OF RANCHO CUCTMONGS ' April 10, 1991" Page 3 y, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 10TH DAY OF- .APRIL 1991. PLANNING WO4VISSION OF TRR CITY OF RANCdO CUCAMONGA a Larry T. KcNiel, mairman ATTEST; 'grad Eu),le.; , Secretary it 1, Thad 4Uller, Secretary of the L1anning Counniesion of the City of Rnhc,10, Cucamon.j &, do hereby certify that the foitegoing Resolution was duly and reqularly introduced: passed, and adopted by the Planning COMMiesion of the Cai:y of Rancho Cucamonga, at; a regular' ms-rting of the ;planing Commission held on the 10th day a,- :April 1991, by the fot ' ;;;ling vote-to;-W;t AYE:: COHMISSIOX RS: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: III I f : k '' t ORDINANCE 00. r AN ORDINANCE Of TIM CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO, CUCAMONGA,. CALIFORNIA, APMOVISy3 INDUSTRIAL SPECIFIC P.L&I ANENDMEbT 91-C2, ESTABLISHING REGULATXCNS FOR - nCYCLING COLLECTION AND PROCESSING, AND MAILING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF* `PEE LiTY CDUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO.CUCAMONGA DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SE^ -TION 1, Part III, Table 111 -1 is hereby amended to read, in words and figures, as shown in the attached Exhibit "A." SECTION 2, Part I1I, Table III -2, Section H is hereby added to _read, in words and figures, as follows: Ff7S:;3IALS'RECO1,,TRY FACILITIES (MRFs) Collection Facility: activities typically include the acceptance by donation, redemption, or purchase of recycleable materials from the public for sorting, and storage. Such a :ac lity may invclve aggregating and storing 3.rrge amounts of material on -site, including baiting, compacting,_, or similar packaging operations for shipment. Outdoor storage may be per6 tted when approved by a Conditional Use Permit,. Processing .jicis lity: Activities typically include, but are not limited to: heating, melting; ;rushing, ga-inding, ,riquetting; mechanical sorting, ahrodding, stripping, cleaning, and remanu5¢%:uring. The finished materials are semi -f anished or raw materials to 1- shipped for further manufacture or asa=.7,ey. Such a facility may involve outdoor storage of large amounts of recycleablo or processed materials. Scrap Operation: Activities typically tnclude, but are not limited =o: the storage, and male from the premises and/or' dismantlin ^, of used, recyc ;eable, or waute materials, except when suer: activities are part of a manufacturing oFerat ?.on. I SECTION 3: Par` III, Tabl_ III -2, Subsection D, land use type definition for "Scrap Operation" is hereby deleted in ics ertiretyC SECTION 4s Part III, Section. IV, Development ' Standards, Subsection Z is hereby added to read, in words and figures, as shown in the attached Exhibit, "B.^ SECTION 5: Appendix F i:e hereby added to reed, in words eu figureb, as shown is the attached Exhibit "Cs" SECTION E: part IV is hereby - amended to add "collection Facilities" art a permitted use within.5uhareas 1 -5, B -11, and 13 -15:' PrawmENO'COMMISSION ORDI"Nco -'Ro. - ISPA 91 -92 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA April 10, 1991 Page 2 SE ION Z: Part; IV, is hereby amended to add "Processing l Facilities" as a conditionaiily permitted_iase within Subareas 5, a-11, and 13-15. SECTION B: This Council finds that this amendment will pot adversely ef.ect the environment and hereby issues a Negative Dedi ratien.]I SECTION 9: The City council declares that., should any provisitin,.,, section, paragraph, sentence, or word of this Ordinance be rendered' declared invalid .by any final court action in a court of, compet8 'I`t jurisdiction, or by reason of any preemptive legislation, the xemainir�g covieans, sections, paragraphs, sentences, find words of this Ordinance shah. remain in full foree.and affect. (i l SECTION 10: The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this i ^idiaance and shall cause the same 'to be published within fifteen (15) days after its passage at least once in the Inland Vallev Daily aullyotin, a newspaper of general cirLmlation published in the City of Ontario, California, and circulated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California. it - PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED THIS day of , 19_ �t L TABLE 111 -1 SUMMARY OF LAND USE TYPE EY SUBAREA • PERMITTED USE $ CONDITIONAII v eeemTrc„ USE TYPES Land Use IP I GI GI Subbreas iHO 5 2: "-, at GI !Gl IP 3! 4' 5 6 _. • -•• •••- If, Gt lua Gl { 7' ':9 10 41w, GI , IB iGi f Ui 19'92it3��t4 rarmlrreu { HI l fP lP' 95' IP IP MAN' "CACTURING t Custo'rn e• Light t Mediu ! • e m, Heavy I' l s r• s•• o • e s $ I:$ • ' • : I u 9• • •• i 1 • I o • l • *1* Ole e T a a i • e r o I Minimum Impact Heavy • A rtoarotive Storage + t * ! 0FFICE PROFESSIONAL DES & RESEARCEi � $ $ $) • i Adlnlnlstsatfvo & Ottice • $ Professional /Da sign Serviess { $ {. • ! rR ¢ { t, i $ o • a + Research Services $ $, e • • ✓ $ $ i • • • o WHO, 5 ALE STORAGE & dISTRlS ION • e • • a ® s ° { • • • Put• . urage Light 4T+ a $ $ + + • $ $ $ o $ e • • Madium s e a• o• �. o e o•• P.JtomoUv!+ �:ataQ e• 1 11+ $ $ `' a + $ MATRRTT:c Auto- iotiva Service Station Building Contractor'e Gtticm d. Yer + �' + + Collection Facilit seb 0 0 • i ® t • Processing Facilities �I 9 Scrap operatlo 1 j I { ' ' -i +: -t 1 + •$ 'Tr °t' 't' ....•a. ®•y •i ur.e —aw at 40r:nc•L Animal Care 1 9 4,, e' $ er e • • — • A rtoarotive Storage + 4, $ $ $) $ $ + Auto:n tine Rev,. Rev,. Aviomative /Light Truric Repair -M6;or ry R • ✓ + + I $ e Au!;omotive /Truck Rapalr -Major &3 + + • o 0 �. P.JtomoUv!+ �:ataQ 11+ $ $ `' a + $ Auto- iotiva Service Station Building Contractor'e Gtticm d. Yer + �' + + $ + + $ $ $ $ $ $ @a Building Contractor's Storago Yard + + ® ® O • as Building Maintenance So/vices O 0 • I e e Building & Lighting Equipment S q)pi!;,$ Sales �} • ? • o • % e Business Supply Retail & Services ®a ® • ® .1. $ `�' • Eusiness Support Services • • } • ° • ' • a • • ® ° ° ° ® • COMMAInication Services ° • e + s • a a •1. a • Convenience Sales S Services Eating Drinking F $ $$$$� $$ ® $• $.$$ s e + © • EstablWttrnta e . Ente rtai nment + $ • o a Q a e Z Extensive Impact Commercial + + + + $ Fast Food Sales Financial, insurance Ih Real Estatm S•rv!e•® o l$ e ® + + + + ,+ * + Food & Beverage Saleo Funeral &Crematory $ $ $ !+ . + $ $ $ . .{. 1. + o $ • Rarvlema $ + �_ . $ $ ,1, . Heavy Equipment Sates & Rentals Hotoi /Motal y, ,1 ¢ + $ + • $ Laundry Services ° a $ ° • Mrldioal /Health Car• Serytca> r%ersonal Services a + + $ 4 `�' ° ° $ $ °$ y°+ (• } Petroleum Products Storage $ $ + $ + $ + + $ + + + Recreational Facilities Repair Services $ p �, + + ¢ ® ,d, $ 18 a e ff @ • $ � • . ! 1 • i • ® •� :r � �. ® • A @minletc :UVe Clvlo Services Guttusat rxtenzl" Impact Utility Facilities Flood Control /Utility Corridor Pubilc Assembly PuNic Safety & Utility Services Reilgt4,ua A� sa *-hly IP- lnduslrlal rPark HO -Haven Ave. Overlay District • • • •!• e e • o • a ++1+++,+c • • i4 • • • • D to i e •" s Genaea! Industrial WHI- Minimum Impact Heavy Inau .trial HI -Heavy Industrial 3 ? J. MATERIALS RECOVERY FAC:tLITIES STANDARDS fibs purpose of Materir_ :,.; Recovery Facilities Standards is to establish ni .icium ., standards for screening, parking, noiee,'and emitter control which meet the inte,At of the plan, Unless OT)ecifically modified through the _ !Conditional Use Permit, all other• development standerds of the City of Rancho Cucamonga shall apply, including but not limited to, - grading, drainage, and street iXprovements. T.1. All business a�1erations'jball he conducted within an enclosed building unless °specififally permitted within the General YndustUal and Jieavy -. Industrial categories and adequately screened from pubic view pursuant to the Section A, General Pro^isions, :for the Industrial: Area. J-2. All facilities shall be maintained free of l titer ant vermin and any other undesirCAa material and shall be,, cleaned of loose debris on a daily basis. J.3- The facility shall meet the parking requirements for warehouse use's. In addition, stacking space shall be proviCod for six vehicles or the anticipated peak c=tomer load, w'ich'iver is higher:' It no drive -up facilitjes are available, than -1 _adnimum of six additional spaces "for customer drop-off shall be p- provided. ` J-84 Power -- driven equipment, including aluminum foil ana can compacting or bailing, necessary for efficient temporary storage and shipmant` of material shall be permitted. 1 3 APPENDIX F RECYCLING DEFINITIONS The following definitions are offered to provida clarification to technical terms relative to recyclable materials and recycling qV-' 9tions: 000 tract on Waste - Construction and demolition debris, dredgings, grubbing from land clearing, rubble resulting °. from crostruction, remold :•ng, repair, and demolition operations on housing, commercial buildings and olher structures and pavements. DOSestics - A class for discards that occurs both in the home aad in the work place; i.e.,.beverage' containers and newspapers. _ Heavy Industrial 193stes - Waste derived from industrial or manufacturing operations such as ship building, construction, and demolition Operations. Zig'ht Industrial Waste - 'Waste derived -from research and development facilities and lignt manufacturing operations such as semiconductors and computer Ash manufacturers. Materials Recovery Facilities (KRFs) - The point of i extraction of valuable raw materials, which are then soli ou the commodity and scrap marke^cs or are used as na= Of a manufacturing operation. = Materials targeted € e' ar.paper, plastic, glass, metals, textiles, and other goods deemed similar by the City Plainer. i Recyclables - Recyclables are discards or waste materials, that are collated, separated, or processed, and used as raw materials or products. Typically recyclables would include: domestics such as beverage j containers and newspaper, cardboard, high grade paper, Plastics, textiles, .sight industrial waste, or other:j similar materials. Rclables are not intended to include: r5hemicals,_ toxic water, heavy .industrial waste, petroleum, construction waste, unsorted crarbaV, heavy metals, or other similar materials as determined by the City Plannk, �"ycling - The Lzties c' activities by which materials that would other-wise be disposed o£, are collected, separated, or processed' and used in the fc.rm of rah materi alg. , f3 - Kancho CHAMBER OF COMME ( E 5 April, 1991 To- The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Comrission.,` Larry McNiel, Chairman Suzanne Chitiea, Vice Chairman Peter Tolstoy, Commissioner John Melcher, Commissioner Wendy Vallette, Commissioner and Brad Buller, City Planner From: Rance L. Clouse of Lee & Associates, Chairman Rancho Cucamonga Chamber of Commerce Economic Development Committee Re: Proposed Parking Study scheduled for April 10, Planning Cow, :issior_ - meeting. Dear Commissioners, At the Tuesday, Marcy; 19, Evononic Development Committee meeting, City Planner Brad Bu:,ler informed our members that a staff,report >ti,3 being drafted at the Planning Department which recomri -6nds an %�a;rKoss the board" elimination of compact parking spaces in favor of 9' by 19' standard parking spaces. As Planning staff is still drafting the report, we have 'been uezable to review the document as of this writing, AS such, the Econorn c Development Committee of the Ran -;ho Cucamonga Chamber nf Commerce, with tho approval of the Chamber's Board of Directors, formally requests that the Planning Commission move to create a workshop, or sexies of workshops, involving City officials, Cumber of Ccmmerce Economic Development Committee members an6 representative', of ares building associations. We request this becaus% we feel that this item will pose significant impacts on the City in terms of fuCare revenues as well as on future development a'nd users of that development. Because an h issue of this nature poses sr;ich sweeping a =omit impacts, it warrants further study by all concerned. Initial and informal polling of our membership indicates that there r„ay be support for restructuring our existing parking policy into one which will. be truly worthy of "the City with a Vision ". _ TCrrJS G 8280 UTICA AVENjE� SUITE 160 RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA 91730 • 714 1 987 -1 012 � r -2- As such, we offer all of the resources and facilities- of the Rancho Cucamonga Chamber of Commerce in •ssisting in researchir'g and discussing any and all aspects of this question. Thank ou fox ur consideration in this matter tairman, ce Giouse, Vice President, Lee 6 Associates Rancho Cucamonga Chamber of Commerce Economic Development Committee RLC:kc cc: Michael S. Mitchell, CPA, President Rancho Cucamonga Chamber .of Commerce J i Vr -, Eel TC : The v echo Cucamonga. Planning Corartission Tarry McNiei, Chairman Suzanne Chitiea, Vice Chairman;; Petry Tolstoy, Commissioner John Meirher, Ccttmi.ssioner Wendy,Vallette, Commissioner and Brad Buller, City Planner FROM: Frank L. Will Governmental Affairs Subject:. -' Pz -used Parking S?,idy scheduled for April. 10, Planning Commission meeting > Dear Commissioners: It has been brought to the attention of the BIA that a stv` 'report had been or was., being drafted at the; ,Planning: Department whir` - recommends an elimtinatior,' of compact parking spaces and replaced with 9' x 19' standard parking spaces. B!1% has not been able to review this docstrent and respE,ctfully request a I COPY. BIA would also request t1Qat the'Plannirj Commission initiate a series of workahops involving City offi.ci< s, r,ad)er of-`Commerce, BIA, anti other j interested parties. BIA believes that this proposal has a significant impact on the'City in terms -. of future tax revenues as well as on future development and users of that development. 9227 Haven Avenue, Suite 280 s Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 d (714) 945 -1884 a fRX 4714 648 943` CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: April 10, 1991 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning ComKgisson FROM: Brad Buller, Citiy Planner BY Bruce Buckingham, Planning Technician SUBJECT: T�VIRO NTAL ASSESSMENT AND DE�*OPMENT CODS ne t�nxNT 1 x,-01 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAM NGA p request to amend i `title 17, Chapter 17.12 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code to eliminate compact parking spaces. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND INDUSTRI r SPSCIVIC PLAAt AMENDMENT 91 -01 - CITY OF RANCHO f'UCAMONGA - A rLqudct to amend Part III of the Industrial Area specific Plan tt; eliminate compact parking spaces. I. ABSTRACT: As directed by the Planning Commission, this report presents an amendment to the Developme_t Code and Industrial Specific Plan to eliminate compact parking standards. i II. BRCKuROUND: The City's curre t parking regulations provide for two sizes of parking spaces: 9 feet by 19 feet "standard spaces" and 8- feet by 16 feet "cos +fact spaces." According to the Development Code, all developments (existing or proposal) wl" h have 25 or more parking spaces may devote up to :,5 psL,,' of .cs total parking to compact spaces. Further, the Industrial Specific Plan regitires that 2O r -1nt to 35 percent of all parking spaces shall be compact ai_e. IFI. ANALYSIS: ;,s a result of the "gasoline crisis" of the late';,.1970e, smaller and more fuel iFficient vehi'les became more popular. Likewise, many cities, including Renc. Cucamonga, amenee1 their pocking codes to acknowledge the shifi to these 'smaller !!compact cars. Developers applauded these 'coe act" parking spac'as because it increased the land area available for building; The intent behind compact parking was to pzovide smaller parUiY4 spaces any to encourage the use of compact cars which use less {ug3 an don't require standard size parking spaces. Unfortunately, exrerience has shown that drivers, parking habits did not change._ - The effectiveness of � »mpact apaces assumed driver willingness to park their c;ttomobiles 3 the appropriate aize apace. Based on observations of parking lot activity, it is apparent that drivers' ITEii F, G PLANMFOO CO41ISSION STAFF REPORT DCA 91,•01 & YSPA91 -01 - CITY OF RANMO CLICAMONGR April 10_.1991 Page 2 Parking hsbite are not motivaked by parking Btall size but rather proximity is their dest34nation. This creates the problem of large automobiles parking in undersized compact spaces where circulation :isles are obstructed and here ilk not sufficient space for car Owx opening. Conversely, if compact case nark in standard spaces snit large cars do not h:,ve enough space to park in compact spaces, thin renders the intent of the regulation ineffeutive. From a site planning viewpoint, IM-Pact car, spacAU are an anomaly -- where Ohould you put thsrg2 The most efficient eitR planning layout is to group them in rows to minimiu- trita= king area= however, this has only served to exacerbate tho problem identifl;al above. QP_TJOT s: Thz Planning Coranission may uieh to consider the following options to a complete elimination;, of compact parking spaces citywide• 1. Reduce the maximum percentage of allowable colv'act:spaces, or 2. Allow .- compact spaces only for large employers in the - induatrial area which require over 100 parking spaces. The allocable percentage could remain at up to 35 percent or reduced to a. smaller percentage. This could be considered, since employees coming to work everyday are more familiar with do parking arrangements whereas, customers frequenting a ccMercial center are unfamiliar with the 1 %,catibnt of the ( appropriate parking' stalls. Yrtrthsr, employees wrt parx for 4 the entire day are more likely to take the time to, park in the appropriate size parking apace, or 3. ?tot allow compact �p parking spaces seAGXy minituwd parking regnirT:. nts for the use, In Ot,.c words, compact spaces could 3,y be provided in adCition to those spaces required by Code. The Development Code cu -zently allows compact parking breed upon a percentage of all parking provided. The Industrial Specific Plan requires that compact spacep be provided 1 lied upott a percentage of required parking,. Botd reguisl, <ynr. could be amended to allow "extra" 'compact spaces over -and` .rove the minimum parking requirements, V. PNVIRONti�t ry? , Z art; , Staff has completed Pacts i and 1t cis. the Initial Stsl,.y and did not identify any advsree environr:axtal impacts wh �A could result from this -c. amendee Therefore, the issuance of a Negative Declaration is recommended. 72• 99IiR88 MMECE: These items have been advertiasd as a } ai�lio hearing on 9)ne- a eiahth par.: ad in" the , a d _yallev Bulletin newapaper_ �• Da iv t PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DCA 91 -01 n IsPA91 -01 - CITY OF PANCRO CUCAMONGA % April 10, '1991 Page 3 Ink J, VII. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission should conduct a public hearing on these iteme and consider public comments. Ado ion of the attached Resolutions re'U = ending appv;avai of the Development Code Amendme +pt and Industrial Specific Plan 'Amendment to eliminate compact spaces to the City Council is recommended. Respect y submit 'd� t Brad or City P anner BB:BB:mlg Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Existing Development Code Parking Regulations Exhibit "B" - Existing Industrial Specific Plan Parking Regulations Resolution Recommending Aprri., - -',t of D=A 91 -01 Resolution Recommending Appirou.al„of ISPA 91 -01 i I Section 17.13.030 Section 17.12.030 Design Standards Design Standards are established by this section to set basic minimum dimensions and guidelines for design, constructiolf and maintenance of perking within both the residential and commercial districtsI A. General: The following standards shall apply to both .#- ,�esidential` ani: commercial districts. 1. Standard stall size: Zach standard 'parking space shall consist of a 6, rectangular area not lei than 9.0 feet wide by 19.0 feet long. Ail parking spaces should have a vertical clearance of not less than 7.5 feet. !" N ocx+!ur Rv1R _ r 7 Compact stall size: Stalls designated for use by compact ears may be reduced in size to a minimum of eight (8) feet in width and sixteen (16) feet D in length. e 3. Handicapped stall size: Each parking space designated for use by the handicapped shall consist of a rectangular area not less than 14 feet wide by 19 feet long, and shall be located in an area not exceeding 2 :percent slope. All spaces shall be located near or convenient to a level or ramped entrance, not exceeding a 5 percent slope, to the facility served by the- pa:Iking space. Parking, spaces for the handicapped shall be signed and restricted for use by y ` the handicapped only. 'y r� Section 17.12.080 2. Parking bay widths shall be computed according to the spe ifitfitions set forth in Table 17.12.030 -D. 3. Two -way access driveways with no parking shall be a minimum of Tar -, twenty -four (24) feet. One -way access driveways with no parking shall be a minimum of twelve (12) feet. D. Parking Facility Design. Following are charts and diagrams to which all parking tacWties shall be designed. 1. Parkins Bay Widths. Each parking: facility is designed with parking bay units. The -size or width of this unit -.3 dependent on one or two- way' ,6affic and single or double loaded aisles. Usr "the following chart to determine the overall width of the parking bay design which is being used. The dimensions listed are the amount necessary to contain parking stall depth and aisle width. Parallel parking may be permitted; however, they must not :tie counted as part of the required driveway width and must maititain four `,(1) feet between spaces. ',Table 17.12.030 -D - Overall Parldng Hay Width Panting Angle (in degrees) 30 45 60 90 I. Parking by widths for one -way `double ', traffic and loaded aisles: ` r a. compact stall 40' 44' 49' S6' b. standard Stall 43' 49' 55' 62' 2. Parking bay width for one -way traffic and single loaded aisles: a. compact stall 26' 29' 321 39' b. st&rdard Stall 26' 30' "5" 431- 3. Parking bay widths for two -way traffic and double loaded aisles: a. compact stall 48' 52' 54' 56' b. standard st ill Si' 56' 59' 62' 4. Parking bay widths for two-way ,, traffic and single loaded aisles: a. compact stall 34' 36' 3; f'&1t3 '+ b. standard stall 36' 38' 41' 433' 0 fj tom& ew ttb . a 123 -' G 45- Seczfon 1;.12.43❑ 2. L11. nger Desi�ii. ,A parking lot planters shall be designed to meet the fallowing minimur-, requirements. (a) ,Planters shall be separated from maneuvering a4l.parkcing areas by a 6" raised concrete curb or equivale t. (b) Tree planting wells located at the front of parking stalls shell 2ontain a minim= 'of 25 square feet and the smallest outside dimension shall not be 1'us than 5 feet. CK ,. 1 � 9as¢pr. Miutw�k . �onsp� s ht.cN6i s� o� 'Jt1t.L as STALL FAWi (c) L6,dscape planters along the sides of1parking stalls shall contain a minimum of 90 square feet,and the silailest outside dimension shall not be levt than 6 feet. (d) Pedestrian walks shall bo provided irj landscape planters along the ,a =ides of parking stells`as shown below. It shall consist of a minimum ;: • . 12 inch concrete payer, adjacent to the curb (including curb width). 3. Parking Lot Striping and Markings, Parking stall striping, directional aiTows and parking stall identification shall meet the fallowing standards. (a) All parking stalls shall be painted with s single 4 inch wide. continuous Une. (b) All aisl s, entrances and e;dis shad bs clearly merked with directional arrows painted on the perking surface. c) All compar± parking stalls shall be individually labeled with the words a "compact care' painted on the parking surface of each stall. i ok (d) All handicapped parking stalls shall be individually labeled and signed in accordance with Uniform' Building Code and California Vehicle Code, cindards. 4 i l I r Section 17.12.040 Section 17.12.040: , l'..3kia > airamats The following sections list the required amunt of parking fo* mach category of usesr special requirements and optional requirements. A. Residential I. Single- family detached dwellings (conventional). Mib (2) parking spaces within a garage. 2. Cluster development (condcminium, townhame, etc.) rani- detached single family (zero iot line, patio hares, duplexes, etc.) and mobile home parks (a) Studio: 1.3 off- street parking space per unit of which one space shall be in a garage or carport. (b) One (1) bedroom: 1`5 off- street parking spaces per unit of which one space shall be in a garage or carport. (c) 1W (2) bedroems: 1.5 off- street parking spaces per unit of which one space s(ali be in a ar � carport. e'or g (d) Three (3) or ;,ire bedrooms: Um off- street parking spaces per unit of which two spaces shall be in a garage or carport._ (e) Four (4) or rwre bedroom: 2.5- _ ~aff-street parking spaces per unit of Woich two spaces shall be in a garage or carport. Adak (f) In addition _to the required number of parking .spaces for each tMit, one off- street- uncovered parking space shall be provided for each four units for visitor parking. For single family zero lot litre, patio - homes, and duplexes, on- street parking may be substituted for visitor parking, where ­ sufficient street pavement width and distance between driveways has been provided. (g) Fifty percent (50%) of the total required covered spaces shall be within enclosed garage structures. {h) For developmr_nts containing five or more units, up to thirty - five (35) percent of the required uncovered spaces may be conpact ear size. 0) The use of carports requires approval from the Design Review Committee. B. Commercial /Office 1. Cotmercial retail and service useti: -125 - F, -7 (g) Churches and other places of assembly not specified above: One for each four '(4) fixed seats within the main auditorium or one for each ' thirty- five (35) square feet of seating area within the main auditorium where there are no fixed seats; eighteen (18) linear .inches of bench shall be considered a fixed seat. .7. Other uses: 't (a) Day nurseries, including n .schools and nursery schools: One stall for each staff member, plus one for each five.(5) children. J C. Special Requirements. The "following parking requirements are applicable to all commercial and office land uses. These special stalls shall be closest to the facility for which they are designated in ord2r to encourage their use. 1. Handicapped: Thew facilities with twenty -five (25) or more spaces shall designate two'(2) percent or one (1) space, whichever is greater; of the total number of stalls for use by the handicapped. >The designation and design shall conform to state ;standards. 2. Motorcycle: Facilities with twenty-five (25) or more puking spaces shall provide at least one designated parking area for use by motorcycles. Developments with over one hundred (100) spaces shall provide motorcycle parking at the rate of one percent. Areas delineated for use by motorcycles shall meet standards set forth in subsection 17.12.030 -C -1. Compact carsa Facilities with twenty -five (25) or more parking spaces may provide up Yu thirty -five (35) percent of its parking for use by compact i cars. Spares delineated for compact car use shall meet standards set forth in subsection 17.12.030 -A -2. 4. Bicycles ,.All commercial and office 'areas shall provide adequate locking facilities fur bicycle +)arking at any location convenient to the facility for which they are desig ated. Whenever passible, weatherproofing or facility covering should be used. 5. Gar pools: Off - street parking provided for commercial/office facilities shall provide at least oen (10) percent of the total parking area as designw iiA for use by car pools. 6. Drive Thru Facilities; Drive -thru facilities require special, consideration as their design can significantly impact the vehicular circulation on a site. The following requirements apply to any use with drive -thru facilities. (a) Each drive -thru lane shall be separated from the circulation routes necessary for ingress or egress from the property, or access to any parking space. (b) Each drive -thru lane shall be striped, marked, or otherwise distinctly delineated. i C. Research and Development: 1 space per 350 square feet {research services only }, IRW d. Office and Administration I space per 250 square feet. e. Multi -use tenant buildings where office use does not exceed 35% of building ,;area: 1 space per 400 square feet. f. Following interior building areas can be deducted from the overall parking requirements: electrical /mechanical rooms, elevator shafts, stairwells, and multi Bicycle and Other Two story lobbies. Wheel Vehicular facilities F.4. Bicycle storage facilities shall be provided within all development and relate to planned and existing bicycle routes.; F.S. Required on -site parking; may be reduced at a rate of one automobile parking space per 4 spaces of bicycle or other two wheel vehicular parking up to three automobile parking spates or 'S% of total required on -site parking, whichever is,;less. Compact. Spaces i:.6. 20% to 35% of all required parking stalls shLl1 be devoted to compact car use. Minimum stall dimensi'oa shall be 8' in width and 16 in length and marked for compact cars. F•7. All'Parking areas shall be screened from public view through the use of berms, landscaping> material and low walls. Loading Facilities F-P, All loading facilities and maneuvering areas I' must be on site with the use. F.9. All loading facilities shall be permitted only """"" I •°�'� in the rear and interior side yard areas except within the Heavy Industrial category and rail i served buildings. Kati F.10. Aisle width to loading docks shall be a minimum of 50' width plus additional width for truck parking (typically 40 to 50 feet). F.11. Loading docks shall be set back a minimum of 70' from street property line. F.12. Parking stalls for trailers shall be 50' x 14' As and provided at ratio of 1 stall per truck qW loading dock door. III -43 — RESOLUTION No. A RESOLUTION OF THE 'PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OR RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT 91-01 AMENDING TITLE 17, CHAPTER 17.12 OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA 2a'UNICIFAL CODE TO ELIMINATE COMPACT PARKING SPACES, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF. A. Recitals. (i) The City of Rancho Cucamonga has initiated an application for Development Code Amendment No. 91 -CI as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Development Code Amendment is referred to as "the application." (ii) On this 10th day of April 1991, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said hearing an that date. (iii) All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this-Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW. THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced public hearing on April 10, 1991, including written and oral staff reports, r together Po , g with public testimony, this Commission hereby Specifically finds: Aa follows: the City; and (a) The application applies to all properties located within it (b) The proposed amendments will not have a significant impact on the environment as evidenced by the conclusions and findings of the Initial Study, Part II; and 3. eased upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above -referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs l and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: { (a) This amendment does not conflict with the Land Use Policies of the General Plan and will provide for development within the district in a manner consistent with the general Plan and with related development; and PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. TITLE 17 — CITY OF RWJCH0 CUCAMOINGA April 10, 1991 Page 2 I I .z (b) 'Chat the proposed amendment is consistent with the objectives of the De«- lopment Code; and ( (c) That the proposed amendment will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties o- improvements in the vicinity; and j' (d) That the proposed amendment will not be detrimental to the objectives of the General Plan or the Development Cede,. 4. This Commission hereby finds that the project has,'(een reviewed and considered in compliance with the California Environmental C.iality,Act of 1970 and, further, thie Commission hereby recommends issuance '6k 'a Negative Declaration, S. Based upay the findings 'and c=clueions se° °r)rth in paragraphs 1,, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby resolves as Sops: , (a) That the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga hereby recommends approval of Development code Amendment 91 -01 to modify the Municipal Code per the attached. Ordinance. 6. The Secretary, to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. I APPROVED AND ADOPTED TH'S 10TH DAY OF APRIL 1991. �- PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE 'CITY OF RANCr1O CUCAMONGA BY: Larry T. McNiel, Chairman ATTEST:. Brad Buller, Secretary ' I, Brad Buller, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho I Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, an adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commi6sion held on the 10th day of April 1991, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONEtSs NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: I ORDINANCE AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGAU - ALIFORNIA, APPROVING DEVELOPMENT CODE THENDMPsI3�'.:� 91 U1> AMENDING TITLE 17, CHAPTER 17.12, OF THE RANCHO CUCAM01!GA MUNICIPAL CODE ELIMINATING COMPACT PARKING' SPACES,, AND MAKIN& FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF,. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RAN FOLLOWS: Cnd CUCAHONGA DOES HEREBY OFlDAIN AS SECTION 1: Section 17.12.030.A.1. ,of Chapter 17.12 is hereby amended to modify the graphic to Q3lete all refereACes to compact parking stalls. SECTION 2: Section 17.12.030.A.2. of Chapter 17.12 is hereby deleted in its entirety and all subsequent sections renumbered accordingly. SECTION 3: Table 17 '.12.030.D of Chapter 17.12 is amended to read as follows: Table 17.12.0?Cr.D _ Overall Parkin Bay Width„ Parkiktg Angle (in dafjreae) 30 45 60 90 One-Way Traffic 1. Double- loaded aisles 43 ft. 49 ft. 55 ft. 62 ft. 2. Singe- loaded aisles 28 ft. 30 ft. 35 ft. 43 ;ft. Two -Way Traffic 3. Double - loaded aisles 51 ft. 56 ft. 59 ft. 62 ft. 4. Single- loaded aisles 36 ft. 38 ft. 41 ft. 43 ft. SECTION 4: Section 17.12.030.D.3.(c) of Chapter 17.12 is hereby deleted in its entirety and all subsequent sections renumbered accordingly. SECTION 5: Section 17.12.040.A.2.(h) of Chapter 17.12 is hereby deleted L, its entirety and the subsequent section renumbered accordingly. SECTION 6: Section 17.12.040.0.3. im hereby deleted in its entirety and all subsequent sections renumaered accordingly. Fz F, C, -12 CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. j4 DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT - CrTy OF Rljlq'-flo CUCAMONGA April 10, 1981 Page 2 SECTION -Zz. This Council finds that this amendment will not adversely affect the environment and hereby issues a Negative Declaration. SECTION- 8: The City Council declares that, should any provisior., section, paragraph, sentence, or word of this Ordinance be rendered or declared invalie by any final court action in a court of competent Jurisdiction, ,or by reason of any preemptive legislation, the remaining provisions, sections, paragraphs, sentences, and words of this Ordinance shall remain in full force and effect. SECTION % The Cit_r Clerk shall certify the 'adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same ITo be publiched within 15 days after its passage at least once in the Inlan ° Vallev Daily Bulletin, A newspaper of general circulation published in th;� City of Ontario, California, and circulated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, 'California. r I i\L RESOLUTION NO. AML A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF INDUSTRIAL SPECIFIC PLAN AMEe1DM1_'T 91 -01 TO ELIMINATE COMPACT PARKING SPACES, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF. A. Recitals. (i) The City of Rancho Cucamonga hca initiated an application for Industrial Specific Plan Amendment No. 91 -01 as desnj, bed in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the sribject Industrial Specific Plan Amendment is referred to as "the application. ", (ii) on the 10th day of April 1991, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said hecTing on that date. (iii) All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this'Ree7lution 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. Base.. ''upon substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced public hearing on April 10, 1991, including writte;i and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows:: (a) The application applies to all properties located within' the Industrial Area Specific Plan; and 1b) The proposed amendments will not have a significant impact on the environment as evidenced by the conclusions and findings of the Initial j Study, Part II; and 3. Bases 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 Commissiot, hereby finds and concludes as follows: (a) This amendment does not conflict nfl,.ct with tits Land Use Policies of the General Plan and will provide for development within the district in a manner consistent with the General Plan and with related development; and (b) That the proposed amendment is consistent with the objectives of the Industria.: Area Specific Plan; and �� LT ^/T PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLDTIP °ENO. ISPA 91 -01 - CITY OF RANCBr,CUCAMONGA April 10, 1991 Page :2 (c) That the proposed amendment will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or Improvements in t4a vicinity; and (d) That the proposed amen", nt will not.be detrimental to the objectives . of the General :Plan or the Industrial Area Specific Plan. 4. This Commission hereby finde 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 and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby resolves as follows: (a) That the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga hereby recommends approves: of Industrial Specific Plan Amendment 91 -01 amending Part III, Section F.6 per the attached ordinance. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 10TH DAY OF APRIL 1991. PT- ANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: _ Larry T. MoNiel, Chairman ATTEST, Brad Buller, Secretary I, Brad Buller, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission Of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning commission held on the 10th day of April 1991, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: 6- /`- • ORDINANCE No,`; AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CAI"F MIA, APPROVING INDUSTRIAL SPECIFIC PI+AN AMENDMENT 91 -01, ELIMINATING . COLTACT PARKING SPACES, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREIP. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY 'OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DOSS HEREBY ORDAIN AS j� FOLLOWS. �� SECTION is Part I1I4, Snction F.6 is hereby deleted in Lis entirety and All subsequent Seetior�&,' renumbered accordingly. SECT SA—Zz ;This Council finds that this amendment will not = adversely Affect the environment and hereby iasues a NegativW Declaration. SECTION 3: The City Council declares that, should any provision, section, paragraph, Sentence or word of this ordinance be rendered or declared invalid by any final court action in a court of competent jurisdiction, or b7 s reason of any preemptive legislation, the remaining Peovisions, sections, paragraphs, sentences, and words of this Ordinance shall remain in full force and effect. AMA SECTION 4e The City Clark Shall mortify the adoption,of this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be published within 15 days after its passage at least once in the Irland 4'al1RV Daily Bu7leti ,, A newspaper of general circulation published in the City Of Ontario£ California, and circulated in the City of Pancho Cucamonga, California. April 4, 1991 Planning 'totmnission The City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga. CA 91730 is Rancho San Antonio Medical Center Dear Sirs: Due to scheduling circumstances, Rancho San Antonio Medical Center will be unable ti attend the sign plan am4ndment review at the April 10th , meeting of ,:,;e Planning Commission. Therefore. I am requesting a continuance:, so that,) representatives of r, the medical center can present their viewpoint and answer my questions from the Commission. Thank you for your consideration of this request. Sincerely: r:- Bill Neumann Administrator :kls l I 'J 4 f�F 7777 -A Milliken Ave.. Rancho Cucamonga. California 91730 .17141948-8000 I n DATE: TO- FROM: BY: SUBJECT: CITY OF MtNCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT t April 10, 1991 Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission I Brad Buller, City 3lanner Bruce Buckingham, Planning Technician AMENDMENT TO UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM FOR RANCHO SAN ANTONIO MEDICAL CENTER - An appeal of staff's decision to deny a sign program amendment, located at the southeast cox:ar Of Milliken and Church Street - APN: 227- 771 -01. I. ABSTRACT: The tapplicant, Rancho San Antonio Medical Center (RSAMC), is appealing the decision of Planning staff which ddaied an amendment to the RSAMC Uniform Sign Program to n1low a fourth sign for the business (see Exhibit "$ "). II. BACKGROUND: The eR-01`SC is an ambulatory herlth care facility. As with any hospital, there are a number of services providee% including providing emergency xalk -in care, medical offices, and a pharmacy. Phase I is existing with appxox,matell• 83,000 square feet. Phase II will add an additional 40x000 square feet. The Uniform ,Sign Program was approved in *i jer 1989. The program was originally approved wii'h a monuL s,` Tn at each ?f the two driveway entrances, 4 on -site €3icns i z: Wing building entrances, and 14 directional signs (See Exhibit "„ In October 1990, the sign program was amended to add a well sign identifying RSAN.0 on the south elevation (See Exhibit "B "). On February 20, 1991, the, applicant submitted an amendment to the sign program for a wall sign on the west elevation identifying "Urgent Care ", the emergency wall; -in care (S2e Exbibit "C "). Following a review, Planning staff denied the request to amend the U.aform Sign Program on February 26, 1991 (see Exhibit "D "). III. ANALYSIS: Within commercial and office areas, the Rancho Cucamonga Sign Ordinance establishes two different sets of sicjn reg:lations for: 1) "businesses ,ot within shopping centers, including s?ngle tenant office buildings," and 2) "multiple professional tenants more than three" (see Exhibits "G" and "H "). Staff considers the Rancho San Antonio Medical Center to be a single tenant facility. For single tenant businesses, the Sign Ordinance. alloy. , a. combination of monument and stall sign up to 3 maximum. �;urthe* cha Sign Ordinance is intended to provide for business identi: on and discourages the listing of products or ITEM H t li PLANNING? COMMISSION STAFF REPORT RSAMC SIGN PROGRAM April 10, 1991 Page 2 f' services. Since the business h----s several related ccerations on_, site, the Uniform Sign Program allowed for.four additional on-site- signs idantifying the proper entrances. In addition, 14 directional signs were approved on -site, 10 specifically to direct customers to the Urgent Care entrance. The appellant acknowledges that they .v, single business with multiple services and that their rege..uc exceeds the allowable number of signs for a single tenant. The appellant's letter i' requests a "variance to the sign ord:mance" because they "axe a unique busineez with unique requirements." However, the applicant npver filed a.`vaciance application, hence, their request quest can dY1y be considered as an appeal tonight. 'The appeiluAt' feels that their Urgent Care service needs more visibility from rAlliken Avenue. The sign company representing RSAMC states that the additional wall sign,`.' heeded because patients are having difficulty finding the! Ility (see Exhibit C -1). Consistent with the t' i of the Sign Ordinance; this Uniform Sign Program allows' .dt smum of three signs to identify the business and dram' e'0p,1e- -into the site. Once the customer is within the site, fi.ithez on -site signs direct the person to their destination. Staff contends that the difficulty is not in :finding a 4 -story medical center located at ,a major intersection; rather, the problem seems to be directing patients once they are on -site. one option would be to modify the existing 10 directional signs for better visibility. These signs could be improved by doubling the lettering height from 3 inches to '6 inches, which would- also double the distance froti which they can be read. Also, the internatio,aally recogniza''ie- "red cross" first -aid symbol could be employed to give greatu, recognition. The directional sign located at the end of the Milliken Avenue entrence threat could bte moved or repeated on the south side of the driveway to improve visibility for motorists. IV. CORNER MONUMENT SIGN: The appellant's letter a!so requests consideration to install a third monument sign reading "Rancho San Antonio Medical Center" with a logo en the curved wall at the r corner of Milliken and Church. Staff notes that this issue f constitutes a modification to their original request to change the I` Uniform Sign Program for the Urgent Care signs. Therefore, this issue cannot be considered tonigilt. PLANNINJG COMMISSION STAFF RiSYORT RSAMC SIGN PROGRAM �- April 10, 1991 Page 3 V. RErnmmz=ATxON: If the Planning Ccmmission determines that this is a single tenant business under, the Sign Ordinance, then the applicant should be directed 'to apply for a variance to allow the properly noticed and public hearing. However, if the Planning` Commission determines that the Rancho San Antonio Medical Center should be classified as a multiple profeasional tenant facility,,, than the Commission should review and consider the merits of the apEsaal tonicht. Should; this be your direction, the Commissiol may rak,rove, approve with modifications, or deny the appeal through minute action. L' Re lly itte 1 Brad le City lanner BB:SB:js Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Sign Program Exhibit "S" - lot Amendment Exhibit "C" Rsquest for Uniform Sign Program Amendment Exhibit "D" - Ntaff Appeal Letter Exhibit "E" - ,Applicant Appeal Z:ttter Exhibit "F" - Site Plan Exhibit "G" - Sign Ordinance for Single Tanant Office Buildings Exhibit "H " "- Sign Ordinance for Multiple Professional Tenants i f/ 3 i RANCHO ~� E SAN ANTONIO i RA HO %« . •, 35' MEDICA!_ CENTER N ak SAM ANTONIO s MEDICAL - I CENTER.- .....�. a,e '.: -- II,,„ �� sly Si�a►�S '� Medical, Offices Pharmacy 2 $UiLD�t��j 24• I� Urgent Care l x rx - 4'- b- 7 /l• � p OM 1 Ptrys�cal TOe2py ter« community Educafgn a y' Camel 18• «ri +ntisa. I Aft • 7.10' �(r_arr f W o-- e' UtgentCare ENTER rn ryq° twwsw7- 30• 36- i ww.nv.n grouw fin. ro I ,� ,i una ata 1r j 77 EXIT F 30• u.aa„ 14 7 r If r I I j t I put Is. TV-4. _ 1 nn ONTARIO NEON Co. INCE 303 WEST T.',IN STREET ONTARIO, CALIFORNIA 91762 (714) 986-4632 • FAX (714) 988.6376 State Contractors licens-i = 1268330 ==br.tary 20, 19'31_ City -4f Rancho Cucamonga ^cri,tmunity Development DepartrVent 10500 Civic Center Drive Ran_`o Cucamonga, CA X1;34 whom it may c.::.,-.cern: On behalf of Ranchc, man Antonio Medical Center, we request apps: -oval far the installation of one elevation of >:ct (Jing letters reeding, "llR6EtJT ARE" t the west face of the Urgent `Care building :see sine plant Urgent Care Patients are having difficulty finding the facility. We prc_NOse this sign to identify the facility for those in need of ..sent care. services. 'here are existing directional signs which direct the way to the Urc "nt Care Center, but they are often ineffective in getting the NatY_tis acre in distress to the facility. The directional signs dO n---t Provide the instant recognition which is necessary fc_r these pat. -tints. The directional signs are also small and are often block- ec; by vehicle traffic. This sigm needs to be plainly visible from Miliken Ave, and the intersection cf Church and Miliken.. At a distance »f 5001 the pro- posed letters are the appropriate height for readability (see chart:• This sign is h, -t j pi roIpo,sed for advertis,tng, but;! for identification. The seed for thus' sign is crucial. Yi .�r ��e5t consideration in this matter would be appreciated. - Sincerely, { Paul Edton Desi4n,'Sales PE; ca ELF.CTRICAI. SIGNS AND RELATED PRODUCTS SINCE. 1945 ��TtiDi IWI U E F 1 ��u ashg n s Q A N X11_ H -7 Mil AIMIR w (( A I RM_t < y2 3 Ll'.I,P.,)� L", J-- Y Zz it Z W Q P Q= 5 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA February 26, 1991 10300 Civic Center Drive. PostOmce Box 907 17131969.11�,-1 RanchoCucarronp.Caliromia. 91729 Fax, t71419dsh44�� Paul Eaton Ontario Neon Co. Inc. 303 West Main Street Ontario, CA 91762 Dear W% Eaton: The Planning Division has received your request to amend the Uniform Sign Program for the Rancho San Antonio Medical Center, located at the southeast corner of Milliken Avenue and Church ;Street. Specifically, you have requested the addition of one wall sign for the U11gent Care facility of the Rancho San Antonio Medical Center. Your request has been tenied based upon the following findings: 1. The Rancho San Antonio Medical Center is defined as one business and is entitled to a maximum of three signs which include a combination of monument and wall signs. Currently, the site has one wall and two monument signs. The introductior, of an additional sign would exceed the maximum of three signs. 2. Urgent Care is well identified with �ixisting.on -site < signage. They are identified on both m.inument signs and have a sign in the north parking lot.,' The site also contains ten directional signs identifying Urgent Care. 3. The Sign Ordinance provides for business identification and discourages the listing of products or services. The use of terms such as "urgent care, "pharmacy," and "family practice" goes beyond this intent. This decision is final unless appealed in writing to the Secretary of the Plannin g Commission within ten calandar days from the date of this letter. Any appeal shall be in writing, togeth.r with the $62 :appeal fee, and shall state the reasons for the appeal. Sincerely, NITY EVELOP .NT EPARTMENT P NING D VISI eman Principal Plantar DC :BB :ml g �1 �1 —U cc: Bruce Buckingham Counraw'"Derr Mayor William J Alexander Charles J. Buquet Q an V. - Dennis L. Stout Deborah N, [crown Pamela 1, Wright Ja a. March 8, 1991 Brad Buller Secretary of Planning Commission i 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Rancho San Antonio Medical Center Dean Mr. Buller: - )l We recognize that Rancho Cucamonga has es-cabl7,1ed; guidelines for signage in the community, and that our recent ret�;Uest for an Urgent Care sign abxceeds the limits. However, we are unique business with unique requirements. San Antonio Community Hospital has been Rancho Cucamonga's choice for medical care for many years. Because of our interest in the Rancho Cucamonga community, we built Rancho San Antonio Medical Center to meet' the community's needs. Of primary concern is the availability, of quality medical care to our community. It is vitally important that Rancho San Antonio Medical Center and its services be easily identified, especially when urgent medical care is needed. In addressing the Urgent Care sign, the need is evide: Jr ty the hrgen Care facility needs more visibility from Milliken Avenue. At a distance of 500 feet the proposed 21 inch letters are the appropriate height for readability. Though Urgent Care is on the monument signs 1.ext to the entrance driveways, the copy height is only 3 inches tall a:id 4 feet from the ground, which is difficult to read while driving by the facility. In addition, we also request permission to install one elevation of externally illuminated letters reading "Rancho San Antonio Medical_ Center" with a logo, to the curved wall on the corner of Milliken Avenue and Church Street facing northwest (See Enclosed Sketch). The sign will not be visible from the other sign locations. and is attractively placed on the wall. It will be the only visible identification from the intersection of Milliken Avenue and Church Street. 14 -9 7777 -A Milliken Ave.. Rancho Cucamonga. California 91730 a 17141 948.8000 Although these signs exceed the standards set forth by the Planning Division. both signs are needed to identify the availability of medical services. They are aesthetically appropriate and will have no negative effect on the communtsY. Your reconsideration of our request for variance io the °sign ordinance is appreciated._ Sincerely, �L( Bill Neumann Administrate— EMI tT E- Z �e u>s +' •!1ti � a iQr �� w uj UA I :� 1 I l 7 !.�► ' � cs�j 0 ► 1' I - 1 1 anlaer ►�nt�irn 14.20.100 w r/1 W Gl 0 f'. � N Ql U r1 •1•i CO W O 1� o u N � rl � �I ro E y 9 � i y q Sld 01dv KO 01 ,=Me Nb 9 0.9610 gdg.. 01.T alN d dJJ Y J 0 N q 0p.* :a a d l OOM Cvq �rL O. ■H m W r O U g G GGq 7 2i C ai8 , , YI C A d0 C= U M O!y •�. AMM o. 02 ! v N qXq O 0-0 0 N O N Q C 01 S y N 01 V y �Nq N GNa'0deW d Q AC d7gF�+.0 ppCY esoaaSNNrI Smd• q ri u �F C6= C d C m m .+ O d M R qXq C N W tVW T a i " wnm aam.N N 0-11 Y.amR Y� � Y y i= Q.;='r 6pyJ mu N dCpXi �y e e N S 9 S C �+ C 0.L q.4n N U M=., t adi p KW d 0� U 00 q� o9 m --5 C. 6 2 Ctiw U ..1 ... w. N 0� Y. 1 7aiw U C w p O^"Gr.CW O Cbf nTi� 1 L. M d mpm R 01 YC1 Cp .n q.0 7q 7t m —10 = O C d 4N 7 �C N .0 q Ry7.i 0 gm C610 aY " ri0± 0 'U 41 O mC m W UN C0 a ■Y C 0 0 A 1 0 2 m g 0 ®C N L U. G'O 4 .J. -0.00- .rW SW 0 Tr•1 ♦JCpa+U F'. ,yy d..1 �.l EC1 dv NNd.O N2QIT.NU qOC �-. ai 701 C. 10 0 9 Y C C C C N y •+� O +1 m Is Y. C one N m 01 m Y q +1 «� . a C C. }� C N C 'C C as .n 957: d C ✓N % O Oi N N +1 r1 t Y g qL qY C .+m CM Rq dm.a A- CC. mNW® N+1i3Om�1 ._N q dO.N d dL .dy4N0 yCyW•.C1 OFV R9•g1C 4H NC. C IF'•.0 d`N UU U'O AaI Comd01d0 V •~•1 .T+ON�NCYCmL e9 mae9 dtiN 014 N�4 q < s oaCmas�g a 7 C�+FFL CLC09d dw. +1mmrq s.+N++�1 O � q�1 .+Ut GC C N9 C 4 +o a u c 8 8 2 W o .1Y 4 d O Y- � C61. . . cc r 0- 47 Iq �q AaryW L a1 0 V V 01 O y q =tr O ^ X N o�ao�ami r1..Ow Mw W.. O � O 7 A C Lall O A W 7 Ow Oa Z M NC.Y a v o w U NL- N� 10 N C RW 0 6 � M j= C N L a to M • M--� (Rancho Cucamonga 184 -2 12trS) sf tt V S�I IO � Y q !1 G N N Sy nw0. O R v C J O C yN d r ■ qqII ¢4 O` Oe S2Ir y d O • _. C u�IIIIEEE+++�lll I C pCo q E 14.20.100 N Wv q..a 4 Q 0�9 dL..rN J y�q Y O V v qq g Y y Y�'Ca 0 0 ■A L pp� d Y-.40-0 ..y Oti W O A H Rq C+i y Lw++,C rJ Y pA Gir ^Y Y N q l O q.n �t1+Oq pNN IpOpS�rY .I i'6aMCC ~C yy W.y NO G. uO.. V.N O!'v. +�N� dC1Ray YC DtJv NWq NO'O C me) ZCN Cqqv a, U p O y,,,a Q +Y gas 4..q i yy d N'dO O .r Lt7�.0 7 QO!'d LY.1V 'r�J 4wy JY+Oi NV q L d. �+�C4.0 RY y0 n+WL dti94.CCN N AC - Cgd7 -+a,q UA dWW O\JYy d Qpr161NL'O A.y C�Ny yW OL.=iU OC94 ■g744.15 -)v a«�itl Yp d NDq.w Ri,d L F Y0`1i+JNRrt + qLVt ..1 VV 2- O Yqg Sa 4CN3 q Q C ry CiJ Wz J wi d 98 J �, w b O� m m we V O d N �Y Vy Yid Ccu L y wa�N:C9 pq a v N.UV;n N+/ a W q q ?1-O. 4 C C 06iW t U -C+6 3w J. !r cd �4�I 6TU NVni U w.p .6 a 4.tV CIj q J Wa- O' WO � a O' C Lda d ad Ord AYr 6NY AJYU.y C• �G'V pOpX N9 Q• 'w CA 40 H.7Ldd O.0 g-='C 152 R R N D w w o Y 4 Y Y O dG ti qua yam"$ 3'" q■ gfC9Y 1 WL0 CO C.O +d°1 CC Ci ywa CIOt MU R.yy� yy.qi a'yAy dtLj m � 'GY J - A h . LL W S vtiL q dO. rT pC . .+► W. q a� C A O M 'y TA CL. T 184-3 (Rancho Cucamonga° V, 4121881 tz -l3 fry � q C'C O Jq N Nq 8.Oi4 CO N rzCON NNC N ® ti 8-9 . 08-'s mI R: Ij m y Ga .OA wC.- &. nv .I i : y y m 4R NCT7L yya ~O4F~ ~`.01i i 941 L 7 D•F N .q N k 0� d S�I IO � Y q !1 G N N Sy nw0. O R v C J O C yN d r ■ qqII ¢4 O` Oe S2Ir y d O • _. C u�IIIIEEE+++�lll I C pCo q E 14.20.100 N Wv q..a 4 Q 0�9 dL..rN J y�q Y O V v qq g Y y Y�'Ca 0 0 ■A L pp� d Y-.40-0 ..y Oti W O A H Rq C+i y Lw++,C rJ Y pA Gir ^Y Y N q l O q.n �t1+Oq pNN IpOpS�rY .I i'6aMCC ~C yy W.y NO G. uO.. V.N O!'v. +�N� dC1Ray YC DtJv NWq NO'O C me) ZCN Cqqv a, U p O y,,,a Q +Y gas 4..q i yy d N'dO O .r Lt7�.0 7 QO!'d LY.1V 'r�J 4wy JY+Oi NV q L d. �+�C4.0 RY y0 n+WL dti94.CCN N AC - Cgd7 -+a,q UA dWW O\JYy d Qpr161NL'O A.y C�Ny yW OL.=iU OC94 ■g744.15 -)v a«�itl Yp d NDq.w Ri,d L F Y0`1i+JNRrt + qLVt ..1 VV 2- O Yqg Sa 4CN3 q Q C ry CiJ Wz J wi d 98 J �, w b O� m m we V O d N �Y Vy Yid Ccu L y wa�N:C9 pq a v N.UV;n N+/ a W q q ?1-O. 4 C C 06iW t U -C+6 3w J. !r cd �4�I 6TU NVni U w.p .6 a 4.tV CIj q J Wa- O' WO � a O' C Lda d ad Ord AYr 6NY AJYU.y C• �G'V pOpX N9 Q• 'w CA 40 H.7Ldd O.0 g-='C 152 R R N D w w o Y 4 Y Y O dG ti qua yam"$ 3'" q■ gfC9Y 1 WL0 CO C.O +d°1 CC Ci ywa CIOt MU R.yy� yy.qi a'yAy dtLj m � 'GY J - A h . LL W S vtiL q dO. rT pC . .+► W. q a� C A O M 'y TA CL. T 184-3 (Rancho Cucamonga° V, 4121881 tz -l3 fry � CITY YQF R}�A�"NC��-IK'0 C�UC�/r�j1�MONGA PRT STAF ..V _ DATE: April 10, 1991 TOs Chairman and :aembers of the Planning Cr fission FROM: Brad Buller -- City Planner BY: Scot Murphy, Associate Planner SUBu'_r T: MODIFICAT'ZON To TOWN CENTER PHASING PL'AR - WESTLRN PR02ERTIES - Consideration of amending the phasing plan for Terra Vista Town Center, located at the northwest corner of Haven 'Avenue and Foothill Boulevard (reference Conditional Use Permit 88 -12) APR: 107? - 421- �05 -06, and 18. This item was continued from the March 13, 1991 Planning Commission meeting at:.the request of the applicant. Attached for your reference is ! the staff report prepared for the March 13th meeting. Respe y suh tedr Aft ilrad ,eT City lanner BB:SM:mlg Attachments- Staff Report (Dated March 13, 1S91). i r ITIX I U-] I DATE: TO: j PROM: BY: _'UBJECT: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT March 13 1991 v Chaixman and Members of the Planning Commission Brad Buller, City Planner Scott Murphy, Associate Planner HODIFICATIOF TO TOWN CENTER PHASING PLAN - WESTERN i PROPERTIES Consideration of amending the phasing plan for Terra Vista Town Center, located at the northeast corner of Haven Avenue and Foothill Boulevard (reference Conditional Use Permit 88-121, - APN: 1077 - 421 -05, 06, and 18: L BACKGROUND: On November 30, -1985, the Planning Commission adopted its Resolution 88 -236, approving the original phasing plan For the Terra Vista Town Center subject to specified conditions. On December 14, 1986, the phasing plan was modified by the Commission: at the request of the applicant. Through this modification, three significant pieces of art were added as part of the phasing plan requirement. On March 14, 1990, at the request of the applicant, the phasing was again modified by the Commission. The modification pertained to the switching of buildings between Phase II and Phase III and expanding the Phase II developtuent area. on J:xlv 25, 1990, the Commission approved its latest revision to the phasing plan for Town Center as outlined- in the attached Resolution No. 88 -236C. This modification required that Buildinga E, G, J, R, g, and Pad 1 be under substantial constn-uction prior to the release of the last one -third (33 percent) of the total gross floor area of Buildings A and B for occupancy and be under substantial construction prior to issuance of building permits for Phase III development. I II. ANALYSIS: The applicant is now requesting -lief from Condition 4 of Resolution No. 88 -236C requiring buildings E, G, J, R, and g and Pad 1 be under substantial construction prior to release of the last one -third of the total gross floor area of Buildings A and H for occupancy in order to allow the opening of Big 5 Sporting Goods located within Building A. Tenant improvements are underway for Big 5 Sporting Goods. At this time, Pad 1 (Chili's __ Z-2 PLANNING COMMISSION 311AFr REPORT CUP 88 -12 - WESTERN PF.,, EnTIES March 13, 1991 Page 2 Restaurart) -and Building a (Ross) have been finaled and Buildings G, R, and Q are under substantial construction. Construction of Building E has :.mot begun due to a property lire conflict with Mervyn's. When the Parcel. Map for Town Center was recorded, the parcel line along the east side of Mervyn's was inadvertently shown 4 feet further to the east, thereby running through a portion of Building E. eecau ;le the Uniform Building Code does not permit the construction of 'a building across property lines, Construction of B-1-:1ing- E 'Can not a commence. Lewis -Homes and Mervyn's have been negotiating over the course of the last several months to complete the lot line adjustment. In anticipation of resolving this issue, Lewis Homes has stock piled building materials on the site and has a nlLber of tenants for Balding:. E. At this time, however, a resolution to the lot line ccaflict has net been accepted by Mervyn's and Lewis Homes (see attached letters). In addition to +:he Big 5 Sporting, Goads suite, there are five other suites within Buildings N and B that have not been released l for occupancy. These suites include two in Building A (1,060 and 1,164 square feet in area) and three suites within Building B (1,261, 1,250, 1,313 square feet in area). Should the Commission decide to e<.iminate the condition in its entirety, these suites would become available for occupancy. While the applicant is only requesting modifiv ^ation to one condition at this time, Western Properties (Lewis Homes) will be requesting additional modifications to the phasing plan. As mentioned in their letter ('Exhibit "A" attached), modifications to conditions connected with the occupancy of Major 3, 4 and /or TBA will be requested in the near future. There are design issues related to L ?se conditions that will be addressed prior to the public hearing. ,i It's been the Commission's desire that the Terra Vista 'Town. Center develop as a well planned, well balanced, gU61ity_ shopping center in the City's emerging downtown. In staff's view, the intent of the phasing ply, and its requirements were to ensure that goal. Attached for your consideration is a chart outlining the phasing plan conditions of approval contained in Res6lution 88 -236C and the statue of related items (see Exhibit "E "). The - Commission should consider all pertinent information about the project and determine if, by providing fleibility for the occupancy of buildings A and B, this goal is being maintained. PLANNING'COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CUP 88 -12 - WESTERN PROPERTIES March 13, 1991:;:, Page 3 III.- RECOMMENDiTION1 _ Staff recommends that the. Planning Commission consider aL1 input on the request to amend the phasing: plan for the Terra '4!i,sta Town Center. If after considering' all `input, the Planning C.mmission determines that modification - to the phasing plan is a4 eptable, adoption of• the attached Resolution would be appropriates R,es spec ly submitt d, Bra er City P anner BB:SM:mlg httachments: Exhibit "9" - Letter from Lewis Homes. Exhibit "B" Letter from Mervyn's Exhibit "C" - Eesolution No. 88 -263C Exhibit "D" - Phasing Plan S--Ui�lt "E" Status of Conditions of Approval Resolution of Approval i i T r e r Lewis Homes Management Corp. 1156 North Mountain Avenue / P.O. Box 6701 Upland, California 91785 7141985 -0971 FAX: 7141981 -9799 February 22, 1991 Mr. Scott Murphy City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department 1500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 RE: Amendment to Phasing Plan for CUP 88 - 12 Terra, Vista Tovn Center Rancho Cucamonga, California Dear Scott, As you know from our meeting of February 4th, we are not willing at this time to proceed with the following buildings at the Terra Vista Town Center, due to present economic conditions and our lack of committed tenants: Building I'M" Buildings 'IS" and "Y" "Major 4"' Pad Buildings 'IS" and "P" Restaurant Pads 11211.. 11319, and 11411 It is our intention to complete Montgomery Ward and their TBA building, as well a;; buildings K -i, R -2, and L as quickly as possible. In addition, subject to resolving the encroachment problem with Mervyn's, we intend to complete building E immediately, for which as you know we have had all materials stockpiled at the site since last November. With the completion of these buildings, which is currently scheduled for September of this year, the project will be approximately eighty (80) percent completed. As you will see from the enclosed drawing we are proposing to complete the pedestrian link to connect building L and the Montgomery Ward TBA, as well as enclosing the pad for building X and Major 4 behind an eight (8) foot high wall. Our intention is to paint graphics on the wall to match the center in both style and color. You will also see on the enclosed that we intend to instals the tree wells, and plantings, that are part of the approved Phase ,—/ -S a - Mr. Scott Murphy I February 22, 1991 Page Two III bite work drawings. You should note however that we would, propose that portions of the pedestrian , link be temporary, to h -I replaced with the approved paving when We build Major, 4 ,,knd building X. Scott, the most urgent issue is the resolution by the planning ' commission of the CUP with regards to the opening -.of Big 5 in the "All building at Town Center. You will note from the enclosed letter from Ignacio Gomez at Mervyn's the current status of the S building encroachment problem.: We need the PlannAng Commission to relax the CUP requirement that the E build_inii be under 10substantial construction" prior, to opening Big 5. For your information, we expect to have the Big ''5 tenant improvements done by the end of March. With regards to the balance of the buildings, relative:to the CUP requirement with. regards to the opening of Montgomery Ward, we need your help in explaining the current realities of he situation to *,he Planning Commission so that they will rela2: the conditions relative to the Ward opening. We would very , -,uch like to meet with the Planning Commissioners individually to explain the situation and answer their questions prior to a public , hearing, , so as to avoid a confrontation at a public hearing, as we are unable to build these buildings ;on a speculative basis in..,the current economic environment. -' r' „4 i, OA n 4 Project Manager MLL:cs Enc. cc: Rick Mager, Don Thompson, Ken Corhan, roe Oles:,: t i I "'FEE c1 '31 15:10 FP#-;0 MEF -,h' �car� rr ac.uu� Post•1t` brand fax transmittal -nerno M # -Ia* :`��� ` srr - Mrom 4-6.0 co p.0ru RAJ February 21, 1-991 WI-9 ' �� gK� • ���� �" >$ '27, a 02. VIA FAX #714/949 -6725 Mr. Ken Corhan Lewis Homes li36 N. Mountain Avenue P. o,.3ox 670 Upland, CA 91785 rZ-. Rancho oucamonga, CA Dear Ken.: This letter serves to inform YOu that Iiervyn's does not grant Lewis Homes to,stert construction -of khe proposed building E to the east of our store until such time as the propoeed lot line adjustment is finalized and the 'SEA Amendment reflecting this adjustment and the revised site plan is executed. Sincerely, Ignacio Gc e Senior Si evelopment Administrator IC /ec corhan.Itr cc: Vic Stephens Bob Gonella I t- RESOLUTION NO. 88 -236C A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE REQUIREMSNTS OF THE PHASING PLAN FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 88 -12 FOR TERRA VISTA TOWN CENTER, AN INTEGRATED COMMUNITY SHOPPING CENTER ON 71 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED` AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF, ',AVEN AVENUE AND FOOTHILL BOULEVARD, AND MAKING FINDING,JIN SUPPORT THEREOF APN: 1077 -421 05, 06, AND 18. A. Recitals: (i) On the 30th of November 1988, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga adopted, Resolution No. 88 -236 approving a phasinc plan for the Terra Vista Town Center 'subject to specified conditions. (ii) Western Properties has filed a request t- modify the phasing plan for CUP 88 -12 as described in the title of this Resot,?tion. (iii) On the 25th of J�1ly 1990 'he Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a meeiing on the request and concluded said meeting on that date. (iv) All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined', and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts' set forth in the Recitals, Part A. of Orr ;s Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above - referenced meeting on July 25, 1990, including written and oral staff reports, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows (a) The application applies to property located at the northeast corner of Haven Avenue and Foothill Boulevard with a street frontage of ±2,700 feet and lot depth of ±1,440 feet and is a shopping center presently under construction; and (b) The property to the north of the subject site is vacant land, t`e property to the soul;h of that site consists of an office complex, the property to the east is vacant land, and the property to the west is an entertainment /offic'e complex. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 88 -236C AMEND. OF PHASING PLAN'FOF.,CUP 88 -12 - WESTERN PROPERTIES July 25, 1990 4, „ Page 2 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced meeting and upor the specific findings of f&:ts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commisraon hereby finds and concludes es follows: (a) That the proposed use is in accord with the General Plan, the Terra Vista Planned Community, the objectives of the Development Code, and the purposes of the district in which the site is located. (b) That the proposed use, together, with the conditions ° applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the pu. `c health.:., safety. or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improve-r.& is in tfe'vicinity. (c) That the proposed use complies with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code and the Terra Vista Planned Community. 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 issued 'a — ;egative Declaration on April 27, 1988. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs l 1, 2, 3, and 4 abovs, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition sfX forth below: (a) Perimeter landscaping including sidewalk, shall be provided i along Haven Avenue, Town Center Drive, Foothill Boulevard, and Spruce Avenue at the time of Phase :I improvements. (b) The building pad area for Major 2 and adjacent retail stops shall be temporarily irrigated and planted with groundcover if the building permits for Major 2 and adjacent retail have not been issued prior to the occupancy of Major 1 and adjacent retail shops. (c) All conditions of approval as cor,,,=.ined in Resolutions 88- 75 and 88 -118 shall apply, (d) The existing traffic signal at Haven Avenue and b, .'hill Boulevard shail be modified and upgraded. (e) Construction shall proceed in conformance with the approved ' phasing plan attached hereto as Exhibit "D ", and incorporated by this reference, and described, in part, below: (1) Phase I shall include completion of Haven /Foothill corner treatment, including the fountain and trellis, prior to occupancy of Major 1. ^ '. f AIM PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 88 -23E0 AMEND. OF PHASING PLAN FOR CUP 88 -12 - WESTERN PROPERTIES July ,25. 1950 Page; 3 (2) Buildings A -1, A -2, and B shall be under substantial construction prior to occupancy of Major 1. fj (3) Buildings X and Y shall be submitted for building permits prior to occupancy of Major 1. (4) Buildings E. G, J, R, Q, and Pad 1 shall be under substantial construction prior to the release of V ast 66t -third (33 -ercent) of the total gross floor area of Buildings A & B for occupancy (previously recommended condition). (5) Buildings E, G, J, .R, Q, and Pad 1 shall be under substantial construction prior to issuance of building permits for Phase III development. (6) Major 2 and the westerly plaza shall be completed concurrently as Phase 11. (7) The theatre shall be under substantial construction prior to release of occupancy for Building J (Ross). (8) Buildings X, Y. K -1, K -2, L, a.nd M shall be completed prior to occupancy for Major 3, 4, and/or TBA building, whichever occurs first, (f) Buildings S and P and Pads 2 and 3 shall be under substantial construction prior to occupancy of Majors v and /or 4, whichever occurs first. I (g) Three significant works of ar' "hall be plsced in the three major plaza areas, as follows: (1) One at the Foothill /Haven corner plaza, to be installed prior to occupancy of Major 1. (2) One in the plaza area between Majors 1 and 2, to be installed prior x-upancy of Major 2. L -/° Ir N PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 88-23'6C AMEND., OF PHASING PLAN _FOR CUP 8B -12 - WESTERN PROPERTIES July 25, 1990 Page 4 (3) One in the plaza adjacent to the movie theatt; s, to be installed prior to occupancy of the theatres. (h) Buildings k-1 and K -2 and the Phase YI1 parking area can be included in Phase II. - (i) Buildings K -1 and K -2 shall be reviewed at the same time by the Design Review Committee, 5, The Deputy Secretar,�"to this Comm1`slon shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED `D ADOPTED THIS 25TH DAY OF JULY 1990. PLANNING COMM S ,JN OF TV CITY OF RAt1Cti0 CUCAMONGA BY: ry c 1,. Ch 'rman ATTEST: eputy Se cretary 7oll I, Otto puty Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission ""f the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning`Commi=sion held on the 25th day of July 1990 by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA, MCNIEL, MELCHE "„ TOLSTOY, WEINBERGER NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE El N Lq w Miffill lilt tst MIUM 411 ini ."a cT 01 Cq Cd C at V aR > W ba o 4. .0 � � � � h O F� Fyi L• 2� 42 � �'. a N +^ tlo o t= tz vi 446 C4 tn 06 � � U A .0 a }Goff b en 0 o _y tom„. ZO i] 'O t-4 y o c o .C7 O a O � C .n , �b O Ar o v u t"' 4., d �3 '° �•� V) 7 � �• 7 a � �•° a u N U C. G '� � .� C � .� C. C C � � � a •O� � i�Ll. en •� � u as o pa. , a: cede ai�� "m PVC F+_ *-� w !V U m EL d' .0 O vi lar 'G 6 w I v O C a 78 2 ccs N M O :9 ccl T7 T U N � ��Daa � O � u N � N S � bD �' O�•�� ��,a. N lV qQ n.�wu� �C a Nc U O O •�.V O � ba 'U � �. N N u O w � Q 7 > � o ti ti N v O C a 78 2 ccs N M O :9 ccl T7 T U N � ��Daa � O � u N � N S � bD �' O�•�� ��,a. N lV qQ n.�wu� �C a Nc U O O •�.V O � ba 'U � �. RESOLUTION NO. 88 -2360 A RE.SOLU -T"ON OF "'iiE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMQNGA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE PHASING PLAN FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 88 -12 FOR TEF -rA VISTA TOWN CENTER, AN INTEGRATED- COMIMNITi SHOPPING CENTER ON 71 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF HAVEN AVENUE AND FOOTH °iLL BOULEVARD, AND MAKIN, FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - 4PN: 1077 -421- 05, 06, AND 18. A. Recitals. (i) - On the 30th of November 1988, the Planning Comtission of the City of Rancho Cunamonga adopted Resolution No. 88 -236 approving a,.- phasing plan for the Terra Vista Town Center subject to specified conditions. (ii) Western Properties has filed a request to modify t_.v phasing ,.Ian for Conditional Use Permit 88 -12 as described in the ticla of this Resolution. (iii) On the 10th of April 1991, the Planning C _mmission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said hearing on that date. (iv) All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE it is b. ,' found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Ccammissi.on hereby spacifical,�y finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Phu; iition are true and correct. j 2. Based upon substantial evidence presxnted to this Commission i during the above- referenced meeting on April 10, 1991, including write€ ^.and oral staff reports, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: (a) The application applies to property located at tha northeast corner of Haven Avenue and Foothill Boulevard with a street frontage of *2,700 feet and lot depth of tl,440 feet and is a shopping center presently under construction; and (b) The property to the north of the subject site is vacant land, the property to the south of that site consists of an office complex, the property to the east is vacant land, and the property to the west is an entertainment /office complex. 11 PLANNIATG COM! "RSION RESOLUTION NO. 88 -236D CUP 88 -12 "Z - `7?N PROPERTIES April 10,, Page 2 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this ,Commission during the above - referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facto set forth in paragraphs l and .2 above, this Commission hereb+ finds and - concludes as follow.: (a) That the proposed use is in accord with the 0ener Plan, the Terra vista Planned CommG?aiLy, the objectives of the Development Coo,, and the purposes of the district in which toe site is located; and i (b) That the proposed use, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the Fublic health,' st.fety or welfare, or. matf;rially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity, and i (c) .hat the proposed ase complies 0. -1x each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code and the Terra Vista Planned Community. 4. This Commission hereby finds and certifies that the project has been reviewed and considered in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1470 and, further, this Commission issued a Negative Declaration on April 27, 1988. 5. Based upon the findings andyconclunions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the apr,= ication subject ito each and every conditioon set £orzh below: (a) Perimeter landscaping including sidewalk shall be provided slop? Eaten Avenue, Town Center Drive, Foothill Boulevard, and Spruce Avenue at the time of Phase 2 Improvements. i (b) The building pad area t6r Ma;c.= 2 and adjz.vent retail shops . shall be temporarily irrigated and 'planted with groundcover if the building' parmits for Major 2 and adjacent retail have not been issued prior to the occupancy of Major 1 and adjacent retail shops, (c) All conditions of approval as contained in Resolutions 88 -75 and 88 -118 shall apply. (d) The existing traffic signal at Haven Avenue and Foothill Boulevard shall bR modified and upgraded. i (e) Construction shall proceed in conformance with the reproved phasing plan attached hereto as Exhibit "D ", and incorporated by this reference, and described, in part, below: IIf i (1) Phase I shall include completion of j Haven /Foothill corner treatment, including the fountain and trellis, to occupancy , p y p I `i of Major 1. LJ PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION No. 88 -2360 CUP 88 -12 - WESTERN PROPERTIES April 10, 1991 Page 3 (2) Buildings A -1, A -2, and B s:,all be under substantial construction prior to occupancy of Major 1. (3) Buildings X and Y shall be submitted for building permits prior to occupancy,of Major 1. (4) Buildings E, G, J, R, Q, and Pad 1 shall be under substantial construction prior to issuance of building permits for Phase IL` development. 'r (5) Major 2 :nd the westerly plaza; shall be completed concurrently as Phase iI (6) Tw%, theatre shall be under substantial construction prior, to the; release of occupancy for Building J (RoaW (7) Buildings X, Y, K -1, 3•-2, L, -'and M shall be completed prior to occupancy for Major 3, 4; and /or TBA building, whichever occurs first. (8) Building4' S and P CInd ?ads 2 and 3 shall be under substantial construction prior to occupancy of Majors 3 and /or 4, whichever occurs first. (9) Buildings K -1 and K -2 and the Phase III parking are& can be included in Phase II. Buildings R -1 and K -2 shall be r"iewed'at the saw time by the Design Review Committee. (f) Three significant works of art shall be placed in the three mayor plaza areas, as follows: (1) One at the Foothill /haven corner plaza, to be installed prior to occupancy of Major '1. (2) One in the plaza area between Majors 1 and 2, to be installed prior to occupancy of Major 2. r ; (3) One in the plaza &Ijacent to the;; movie theatres,- to be installed prior to occupancy of the theatres. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. i PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.- Sa -236D CUP 88 -12 - WESTERN, PROPERTIES April 10, 1991 Page 4 APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 10TH DAY OF APRIL 1991. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Larry T. McNiel, Chairman ATTEST: Brad Buller, secretary C I, Brad Buller, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do her3by 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 April 1991, by the following vote-to-wit: 4YES: COMMISSIONERS. NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: , r'. �II — CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: April 10 1991 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FkOM: Wm. Joe O'Neil, City Engineer BY: Paul A. Rougeau, Traffic Engineer SUBJECT: Discussion of alignment alternatives for the extension of Day Creek Boulevard between Foothill Boulevard and Rochester Avenue (entrance to sports complex). I. BACKGROUND: At the time the City sports complex was being considered, an Industrial Area Specific Plan amendment waa also considered and approved. This amendment deleted an arterial street running east -west from Milliken Avenue to Rochester Avenue one -half of the way between Arrow Route and foothill Boulevard. It alsS'; caused the remaining portion of this street,. between Rochester Avenue and Foothill Bop,LLvard to be relocated to a more southerly intersection with Rochester Avenue. This was done to enable a ngle intersection on Rochester Avenue with the new street and the main entrance to the sports complex. A major shopping center is being planned `p` the south, side of Foothill Boulevard at Day Creek Boulevard. This development will require Day Creek Boulevard to be extended south of Foothill Boulevard and to curve west to Rochester Avenue in conformance with the revised Speciflc Plan. Upon reviewing this connection some time ago, theRlanuing Commission directed that an alignment be examined which eplaccs the new street in a position which balances the impact on adjacent properties as much as possible. This would be an alternative to a straight east -west Route which would place the entire street on one property with the "extra" half street being purchased as compensation by the City. II. ANALYSIS: Two alternative alignments are presented for review. As shown in this report and on large displays at your meeting, there are only two feasible alternatives available. These are, (A) placing the :asterly part of the new street on the property line between the Downey and Wang parcels, and (B) placing the entire length of 'the new street on the Downey ;parcel. Any other alignments would' require an unacceptable curvature in the new street. ITEM J CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DAY CREEK BLVD. BETWEFN FOOTHILL AND ROCHESTE,,.`- APRIL 10, 1991 PAGE 2 Alternative A: This option places 3501, or less than half of the new street, ort the property line of the Downey and Wang parcels. The rest- of the street must curve onto the Downey property in; s- order to meet, Rochester Avenue at the main sports complex entrance. These curves must use most of the available length ,to meet minimum standards and even then they cause a "kink" in the street just before a major intersection for westbound traffic. This alternative also necessitates a double cus•vature along Day Creek Boulevard fronting the shopping 'center. These double curves are unpleasant for through drivers and should be avoided. Alternative B: This alternative places the new street almost en re y on the north (Downey) property, giving a straight alignment between the shopping center and Rochester Avenue. This is safer for westbound traffic and for users of future streets or driveways ,into the adjacent industrial property. This alignment also enables a single smooth curve to be used around the shopping center,_ the size of which is larger than those possible for the other alternative. It should also be noted that this alternative uses only 38 feet more of the Downey property along a 350' distance, not a significant difference in impact. Notification: Mr. Downey and Mr. Wang were notified of the proposals ana invited to discuss them. The letter sent to the property owners is attached. No response has been received from either owner. III. RECOMMENDATIONS. ii It is recommended that Alternative B be approved and that staff be directed to, pursue this plan with the developers of the shopping ` center. Respectfully submitted, �(t Wm. Joe O'Neil City Engineer WJO :PAR :Iy Attachments Alhk r.J" i/ J (t ORANGE (ROG)(ESTER AVENUE) AVENUE i t b O V rn 1 R m r .p/ la — Itl9 l: , �9 DAY �:i� 1 0 CtlSCY [NP� WL V tl `Q Cb 4 „Qi �_ cn am-) V R T BLVD C II • � �x J �iw 6 tk'1 � I as n _n N m ff t- ° ° m n o ca yr� tC T ORANGE (ROLRESTER AVENUE) AVENUE t m � , t f �k7 r�x 1 (il R,t. Ni J r 1 f a• I ( i s - ^.:.. (P N sa I^ n - tif BLVD. M-,iC-1 7 C to C u O rn n � O S r a a c / , •ate -yd• , V LM JOHN B. POTTER IiUIQ, .XES INVESTMENTS OEVELOFI -04T &ACQUISITION OF COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES. Certified Mail March 13, 1991 Mr. Charles B. Downey 4751 A State Street I' Ontario, California 91752 RE: Day Creek Blvd /Pioneer Way Extension 'L Assessor's Parcel #229- 021 -54 Rochester Avenue Rancho Cucamonga, California Dear Mr. Downey: As your are aware the City of Ranci 'ti:I Cucamonga's master circulation plan calls for the extension of Day Creek Boulevard south of Foothill Boulevard through our property at the southwest corner of Day Creek Bo-.:levard and Foothill Boulevard turning west with the ultimate termination at Rochester Avenue at the City's proposed Sports Complex facility. As part of our condition of approval for our proposed shopping center, the City has conditioned us to acquire the offsite right -of -Fray for this proposed extension and to construct the road improvements. Enclosed for your information and review are two proposed schemes; Alternates A & B depicting the proposed alignment. for Day Creek Boulevard /Pioneer way which involves your above referenced property and the adjacent property owner Chien -Lu Wang. The City has requested that I contact both you and Mr. Wang and request your presence at a meeting at four office to discuss these proposed alignments. The city t staff is in the process of scheduling a public i. -aring with the Planning Commission to discuss which of these two TWO CORPORATE PLAZA • SUITE 250 NEWPORT BEACH. CA. 92660 -7929 P. O. BOX 0700-NEWPORT BEAC4. CA 92658 -9700 Mr. Charles'Cowney March 13, 1992 Page Two proposed alignments should be adopted..'' By way of this letter, I an requesting your presence: at a' meeting at our office at the address noted below on Wednesday, March 20th at 10:00 AM. Please feel free to being your counsel as well. I would appreciate ha:,-; "ring back from you as quickly as possible as to whether or not you will be at ding this meeting. Very truly y rs HUGHES I ," ST NT5 hn B. 'Potter JBPinyc cc: Phil Rohn, Rutan & Tucker Geoff Reeslund, SGPA Rick Gomez, City of Rancho Cucamonga Linda Daniels, City of Rancho Cucamonga Brad Bnller, City of Pr'.-',ho Cucamonga CITY OF RANCHO CUCA.MONC A STAFF REPORT DATE: ApsiV t0, 1991 T0: ChaLe and Members of the Planning Commission o FROM:: Brad Buller,;rity Planner `� M1 BY: Dan Coleman, Principal Planner 'SUBJECT: TRAILS ADVISORY COMMITTEE Discussion of method of appointment to vacancy. ?ACKGROUND: This item is in response tc the atts�.hed letter from saorge Bowman resigning has position as the bicycling representative to the Trails Advisory committee. Mr. Bowman was appoirced following subcommittee interviews of several qualified caadidates for the position which was created last year (see attached applications). i I RECOMMDATION: Considering the high caliber of the previous candidates, it 14 recommended that staff contact them to determine their', `3.„^'.zrest. Assuming more than one candidate expresses -interest, the Commission should decide ,tonight how to make their selection. Considering the short time since thq interviews were conducted, the subfammittee could simply review' the applications and make a recommendation at your next meeting. Res ly submitt ii i Brad Bt r City Pl nner BB:DCasp ITEM K ENVIRONMENTAL 4 PRODUCTS s DIVISION i Industrial- Commercial Filtration r�1- - w..n a4 MAR March 22, 1991 al Mr. Dan Coleman 4` Principal Planner i City of Rancho Cucamonga 19500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, (ZA 91730 ' Dear Dan; Due to newly developed producC- " nd an increase in new market potentials, I find that my participation as a Trails Advisory Committee member will be severely limited. Z have missed three consecutive Trails Advisory Committee meek'- - ings due to business obligations and, unfortunately, do not see an end to these new obligations. Vith this in mind, I must sub- i, mit my resignation as a member of the Trails Advisory Committee. Best personal regards to you and the other committee members. ENVIRONMENTAL PRODUCTS DIVT'- °a "ON \, Hoff' er Industries, Inc.w orge Bowman I Vice President & General Manager l GB /ps i E i 10955 ,:�drsey:Blvd. 'ancho Cucamonga, GA 91730- 51194 • 714/987 -4741. FAX 714/980 -0700 /// HOFFINOER Industnss, ine, — 2 CiTJrZEN'S APPLICATION TO SERVE ON CITY OF RAN(Fi0 CUCAI JAIGA Pest ofE+ce 8oz sm, Rancho cunmon � RECEWED- s+ ;11At!]OliGc w aiYNiiw IM►rCK1n. TRAILS ADVISORY CO1ilIMIME MAY 29' sg� The Planning Commission of the City of RM1W Cucamonga invites apr loations ford t'� 1121 l4; Advisory Committee meueber -at large to represent the bicyding corrimuniiy, 'This Commttee advises the Planning Commission on bike trail locations and design standards. The Trails Advisory Committee meets once a month and on ,,pecid occasion as needed. NAME: RESIDENCE ADDRESS: 7 8 71. TPn t r u ny 12-e. ZIP CODE: —6173p DAYTIME PHONE: !4 9 i'5 -7 7.4 y ,,it OCCUPATION: 9*- , aPet (UQ -3162- NM. 44.i-G, QITESTIONNAIRE 1. Briefly list your bicycle riding and bike tra."1 experknee (i e. type c riding. miles per week, knowledge of Class I, II and III bike trail type, `'xy commuting, yams ex7mence, etc.): C li _ -- - -- 2• Why W you interested in serving on this corftmitt=? L�_B'.L. t � °_ f c W <.L`� �_ !'.kL"�. `1— $'_'c s.�.s4�_s_'� _a.r- I;cLS,1�i� �,ettcx _E✓_�'L�c`�` ��sC__� >Z,c_- tr�.cs.i_ K_•_,.r T_o s rya= x_�dm,c_.f_'�__3s_E�_ x�. h t lcc pat 3. What do you feel are the eit csl bkyde iseares in Rancho Cucamonga? _sL-S csp rsr,. i4 %_ar"! _£a!__rG J- XI.f6 _�_rcac�__ P, ,avci�. t1La --- - -- -- -- 4. What hours and days of the week would ;gnu be cva(lable for cmnatte,. nreetirtgs? Please return completed application to Dan Coleu: tt, PAndpal11armer, IMM Civic Center Drive, r Rarer;Q Cucamonga, CA 91M 19340 'lase Line RoM if submitted before June 1) by June 11, 1990. %1j.. C „nntrs,�bn, William I. Alexander Charles 1. Buquet if C'tv vit,ay. Dennis L Stout Deborah N. Brown /K-3 Pamela I. Wright Jack Lam, A1CP CITIZEN'S "PLICATION TO SERVE ON CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Post Office Box W. Rancho cu.Ontta, California 91M. (71k) 989 -1851 TRAILS ADVISORY 6.®ALL AI T j EE The Punning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga invites appiications for a Trails Advisory Committee member -at -large to represent the bkya ing community. This Committee advises the Plantying Cwuni."Wn on bike tail locations and design standards. The Trails AdvisAty Committee meets once a month and on special oocaJon as needed. NAME: _ -ILP13R,_`J. KCCIMAN RESIDENCE ADDRESS: I . 6256 '`'J=— - LIP CODE: 91701 DAYTIME PHONE: 987 -1959 ,OCCUPATION: S- F- "MPL0Y?0 I. 9riefly liit your bicycit ,riding and bilge trail e:sperience (ie. - type of ruling; miles per week, knowledge of Clan I, II and ffi bike trail type biryrle comma trge years experience, etc,): _ TO TIiJ B°ACl{�_O1J BIIC TRAI1,i ALTA LGMA__ _I FA7^_{_+1_p►Z G� C_MA_H_TYP" OF`'.9IK TRAIL. 2. Why are you in resCac: it serving on t-92 asumitteeT -- - - - -M_ _ _- _� .__ _---- -__ -_- _ HAVE LIV D IN ALTA LOMA_FCR 25YRS . _Mill '~ MT_BICYCLL-G -?Ms iACRE w.IIX prqURE AND THAT ,AN _CNLY C0M _CRTE THRa= BECOMING IN1 0IF3.rr A - -- - -- -- _�Q3CTEI)FQRT --- ------- -- - - - -- --- _-- - - - - --- _ - -..� -y - - --- - --- 3. What do you feel are cite aiticd bicycle inauea in Rancho t - -- -- __i1Hr^E. iL' POaSIBL$, A TYPE II MARKM PAIHTI;D CH PAVM�AT ABalT 36 IYtOHc"'S. pRom -TIM CURB. AS @;2AR10 Evil F=25 A BIKE SZMj0!i UF' TE>I IigTAt THAT HAT - - -- --- --- - -- -- -- ----- LE HA- - HOLDS THT K s.+�AL . AI30 _THEs ^s TP.AYI3 3$WLDMITlaSi3LINK iiM ADJACENT OITIFS. ------------ ------ --- - -- -- --- -- •- - - ----- -- - - -- 4. What Am= and days of ft we= would you be L6ailnble Im crier - -___ -- I AM A V6;iX ?2?BCIBLE P�iSCN_ YEE2(!+'Y� T� Clh�_�TE'L _:AIf M1".•s� - - r-WRe V.4urn completed �, to if, Ptaww, �I:W Cinic Center Drive, r Rancho Cummonlio, CA ai7M i9 0 Bane Une Rae U before nc* 1) by June 11, 1990. Coauilamelrn Ma+o• William J. Alexander Clurles 1. Buquet U cdy, M—je, Dennis L. Swut Deborah N. Brown 1� -4 Pamela j. Wright Jack Lam, A1CP 7 y, r CtTIZEI45 APPLICATIOX' TO SMVE ON CITY OF RANCl:O CUCAMONGA Pcat Office R xx 807, rLncho Cucamonga, Califor ru, 917-19, 1:141 9$4 -IS51 MAILS ,ADVISORY CONIiVII'ME The Tl-- - dng Com"IlWon of the City of Fancho Cucamcnga invites applications for a Trails Advisory Comm Mee member at-laW to represent the bicycling cominurdly. Thin Committee advises the Plann!ng Commission on bike trail locations aid desi standards. 'he Trails Advisory Committee meets once a month and on special oecaslon as needs NAME: 4 r _ RESIDENCE ADDRESS: goy ;n S3 _ COG:: /7 ~ DAYTIME PHONE: IN 9,2 3 ZL- Z9 OCCUFAT;ym. i t7'c1k o n L*_CCCuit �ey,17 UES3T NNAYRE tcv, 50. C:9 (r'F Edt:--0,1 Co. 1. Briefly list your bicycla riding and bike trail experience (ire. - type of ridir , miles per week, knowledge of C'tass I, H and III bike trait typas, bicycle commuting, years expesrisxvx, etc.). 3. What do you feel are the critical biry+cle Isgues in Rariclio Cuca�tonp? 1 o4 - Wliat hot= and clays of die fired: would you o aiblble for coiivaiti�e meetings? ea Please return eo, `G-vd a icathn to Dalai Co him PPI Coleman, i idpat Planner, l Civic Center live, Rancho Cocairioitga; CA 927'0 (9340 Base Lille Road if submitted hefsre June 1) by tune 11, 1990. Auk pip %"Vd, Vh(lia.n J, Alexander Charles J. Huquet it Cu. I)rnni$ L Stout Cieborah hl. Brown Pamela J, Wright Jack Lam a1LP