HomeMy WebLinkAbout1995/08/09 - Agenda PacketCITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
PLANNING COMMISSION
AGENDA
WEDNESDAY
AUGUST 9, 1995
7:00 P.M.
RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER
COUNCIL CHAMBER
10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
I. Roll Call
Chairman Barker
Vice Chairman McNiel
Commissioner Lumpp
II. Announcements
Conunissioner Melcher
Commissioner Tolstoy
IlL Consent Calendar
IV.
The following 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 anyone has concern over any item, it shouM be removed for discussion.
DESIGN REVIEW 95-16 - LAUREN DEVELOPMENT - The design review
of building elevations and detailed site plans for the remaining 13 single family
houses of recorded Tract Map 12462 consisting of 27 lots in the Very Low
Residential District (less than 2 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda
Specific Plan located at Summit Avenue and Shoshone Place
APN: 225-401-01 through 12 and 225-391-15.
Public Comments
This is the time andplace for the general public to address the Commission. Items to
be discussed here are those which do not already appear on this agenda.
Commission Business
B. DESIGN AWARDS NOMINATIONS
C. DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS
VI.
Adjournment
The Planning Commission has adopted Administrative Regulations that set an
11.'00 P.A/Z adjournment time. If items go beyond that time, they shall be heard only
with the consent of the Commission.
The Planning Commission will adjourn to a workshop immediately following in the
Rains Room regarding Pre-Application Review 95-02 and the Design Review Process
and Philosophy.
I, Gail Sanchez, Planning Commission Secretary of the City of Rancho Cucamonga.
hereby certi~ that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on
August 3, 1995, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section
54954. 2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga.
VICINITY MAP
CITY HALL
CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA '
STAFF REPORT
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
BY:
SUBJECT:
August 9,1995
Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
Brad Buller, City Planner
Alan Warren, AICP, Associate Planner
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 95-16 - LAUREN DEVELOPMENT - The design
review of building elevations and detailed site plans for the remaining 13
single family houses of recorded Tract Map 12462 consisting of 27 lots in
the Very Low Residential District of the Etiwanda Specific Plan located at
Summit Avenue and Shoshone Place - APN: 225--401-01 through 12 and
225-391-15.
PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION:
A. Action Requested: Approval of building elevations, site plans, and landscape plans.
B. Project Density: 1.54 dwelling units per acre for the entire tract.
Surrounding Land Use and Zoning:
North - Vacant/Etiwanda Specific Plan Estate Residential (0-1 dwelling units per
acre)
South - VacantJEtiwanda Specific Plan Very Low Residential (1-2 dwelling units per
acre)
East - Vacant/Etiwanda Specific Plan Very Low Residential (1-2 dwelling units per
acre)
West - Single family neighborhood/Etiwanda Specific Plan Very Low Residential
(1-2 dwelling units per acre)
D,
General Plan Designations:
Project Site - Very Low Residential (less than 2 dwelling units per acre)
North - Very Low Residential (less than 2 dwelling units per acre)
South - Very Low Residential (less than 2 dwelling units per acre)
East Very Low Residential (less than 2 dwelling units per acre)
West - Very Low Residential (less than 2 dwelling units per acre)
IT[~ A
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
DR 95-16-LAUREN DEVELOPMENT
August9,1995
Page 2
Site Characteristics: The project site is currently vacant with the improvement of
Shoshone Street and the northern perimeter tract wall in place. The land slopes
roughly 3 - 5 percent from north to south with Eucalyptus windrows located along the
east project boundary.
ANALYSIS:
General: The proposed residential structures are to be built on the eastern half of
Tract 12462, Lots 15 through 27, which have been recorded. The tract was appreved
in 1989 and Phase I (west) was ~naled in May of 1991. A new developer is going to
build Phase II and has proposed different models from those originally appreved. The
applicant is proposing a Victorian style as the design character for this phase. Five
floor plans with garage extensions and reverse versions are provided. The square
footage for the models ranges from 2,161 to 2,512 for the standard floor plans and
2,887 to 3,405 on the extended versions. Staff believes that the proposed
architectural features satisfy the intent of the Etiwanda Specific Plan.
Design Review Committee: The project was reviewed by the Committee (Lumpp,
McNiel, Fong) on July 5, 1995. The Committee recommended approval subject to the
following conditions:
The siding extensions recommended by staff were appreved. The key to the
acceptance of the elevations (without wrap around siding) was the use of the
very fine grain stucco finish presented on the sample board. Samples of the
stucco and siding are going to be provided at the meeting for approval.
The long, fiat, left side elevations of Plan 3 and Plan 3 Expanded are to be
provided with window/shutter treatments or some form of wall articulation. Plan
4, as referenced in the DRC comments (Exhibit "E"), has articulation and,
therefore, does not need additional window treatment.
An alternative design for the front gable of Plan 1 is to be provided for Planning
Commission consideration. The use of the rounded "scalloped" accent shingle
(without the exposed truss) is to be shown. The applicant has decided to use
the rounded scalloped accent on this Plan.
4. Return picket fences shall be provided between houses and side property lines
to the satisfaction of the City Planner.
The tract wall design on Summit Avenue shall be provided along the rear
property line of Lot 16 and the rear drainage easement line of Lot 27 for a
distance of 35 feet from Summit Avenue.
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
DR 95-16 - LAUREN DEVELOPMENT
August 9, 1995
Page 3
Heavy landscaping along the trails from the front of l. ots 17 and 21 to the end
of the building wall adjacent to the trail is required. This provision was required
in lieu of a 15-foot building setback from the trail easement. Since the DRC
meeting, the applicant has decided to provide the 15-foot setback on Lot 17 and
the extra landscaping on Lot 21.
7. A hammer head driveway is required for Lot 15.
All walls, including retaining walls in rear yards potentially visible from public
streets, shall have a decorative exterior material or finish including a decorative
cap.
Decorative paving in individual driveways shall consist of medium broom finish
with smooth concrete border, as well as the walkway leading to the front door,
to the satisfaction of the City Planner.
9. Chimney cap treatments shall be coordinated with the architecture (i.e., color),
to the satisfaction of the City Planner.
10. Staff is to work with the applicant on a solution to drainage lines' crossing the
trails which does not create a liability problem for use of the trail.
Technical Issues: In addition to the Standard Conditions (attached), the conditions
listed in Section 4 of the accompanying Resolution are recommended.
Neighborhood Meeting: A neighborhood meeting was held on the evening of July 6,
1995, for those residents of Phase I. Three residents attended and the following
comments were offered by the residents:
1. Those in attendance stated that they liked the architectural style.
One resident raised a concem over the size (square footage) of the houses. It
was stated that they might be as much as 25% smaller than those constructed
in Phase I were the resident now lives. The resident was concerned that the
small house might lower the market value of their homes. The applicant
explained that the lower size listed only reflects the fully improved portion of the
models. The larger size reflects the total under roof area which will initially
include an unimproved bonus room area. This resident, Dana McLellan, has
followed up with a letter (Exhibit "H") outlining these concerns. Regarding the
trail fencing issue, the developer is required to install fencing along the private
trails. Another resident felt that the smaller size of the proposed homes was not
a significant issue.
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
DR 95-16-LAUREN DEVELOPMENT
August9,1995
Page 4
3. All of the residents were interested in seeing a development proceed at the site
to complete the tract development.
They requested improvement of the drainage situation both on site and the
temporary retention basin immediately to the south (A condition, No. 8, has been
added to the Resolution of Approval regarding the retention basin).
One resident, who was not in attendance at the community meeting on July 6,
1995, sent a letter (see Exhibit "F") outlining concerns over the smaller house
sizes and the trail system being completed.
FACTS FOR FINDING: The project is consistent with the General Plan and the
Development Code. The project will not be detrimental to the public health or safety or
cause a nuisance or significant adverse environmental impacts. In addition, the proposed
use and site plan, together with the recommended conditions of approval, are in
compliance with applicable provisions of the Etiwanda Specific Plan and City Standards.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the
design review through the adoption of the attached Resolution of Approval with Conditions.
City Planner
BB:AW/jfs
Attachments:
Exhibit "A"
Exhibit "B"
Exhibit "C"
Exhibit "D"
Exhibit "E"
Exhibit "F"
Exhibit "G"
Exhibit "H"
Exhibit "1"
Resolution
- Site Utilization Map
- Site and Grading Plan
o Landscape Plan
- Building Elevations and Floor Plans
- Design Review Committee Action Comments, July 5, 1995
- Letter from Renee Fyfe dated July 8, 1995
- Applicant's Response to Renee Fyfe
- Letter from Dana McLellan dated July 28, 1995
- Applicant's Response to Dana McLellan's Letter
of Approval with Conditions
SITE UTILIZATION MAP
FOR
TRACT NO. 12462
Exhibit 'A"
SITE
o
AVENUE
b
TRACT No. 124G2
I
Exhibit "B'
CONCEPTUAL PLAN LIST
FLOW~RING ACCENTTREES
COLUMNARACCENTTREES
CANOPY SHADE TREES
WINDROW pLANTING
Exhibit 'C"
[] '~
reef
1
Exhibit 'D"
94-50
~j z.
2
4
16195
}4-50
~ z-
5
left
6
7
18195
7/11/95
8
94-50
9
94-50
10
1/6/95
"T
SECOND FLOOR
RRST FLOOR
A
SECOND FLOOR
"1.
RRSTFLOOR
i
TRACT 1246~
2161 I.L
6/21/96
" L
SECOND FLOOR
/
FIRST FLOOR
L^UREN PLAN 3 STANDARD
......................................................:es~2 ~.f. '
.............. ,, ........ , ......... .....
7/11/95
6/21/95
kitchen
SECOND FLOOR
FIRST FLOOR
TRACT 12462
R,AN 4 STANDARD
1/4°:
6121/~5
SECOND FLOOR
3car~-aoe
FRST FLOOR
~Zo~ ~OU~Z J 'r~^cr ~2462
LAUREN R,ANSSTANOARD
....................................................
SECONDFLOOR
F
FIRST FLOOR
TRACT 12462
R,AN I EXPANDED
6121/95
73'-O'
SECOND FLOOR
FIRST FLOOR
G
TRACT IH62
~ ~ F~t:~AND~_.~
6121195
SECOND FLOOR
H
FIRST FLOOR
PLAN 3 EXPANDED
SECOND FLOOR
FIRST FLOOR
L,..A,,,U.,,R..E..N PLAN 4 EXPAM:ED
7
SECOND FLOOR
FIRST FLOOR
LAUREN
PLAN 5 EXPANDED
3405 &[
8/21/95
DESIGN REVIEW COMbrENTS
4:00 p.m. Alan Warren
July 5, 1995
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 95-16 -~LAURFN DEVELOPMENT - The design review of building elevations
and detailed site plans for previously approved Tract Map 12462 consisting of single family lots on 8 acres of
land in the Very Low Residential district of the Etiwanda Specific Plan at Summit Avenue and Shoshone Place.
APN: 225-401-I 1,225-491-12, and 225-391-15
Design Parameters: The proposed residential structures are to be built on the western half of Tract 12462, lots
15 through 27. The tract was approved in 1989 and Phase I (west) was firmled in May 1991. A new developer
is going to build Phase II and has proposed different models from those originally approved. Except for Lot
15, the lots on Shoshone Place are separate from the homes built on Roberts Place and Shasta Court.
Therefore, strict design continuity between the two phases should not present a critical issue. The applicant
is proposing the Victorian style as the design character for this phase. Generally staff believes the proposed
architectural features satisfy the intent of the Etiwanda Specific Plan.
Of note, staff recommended that the applicant conduct a Neighborhood Meeting with other residents within
the tract and the neighbors on the opposite side of Summit Avenue to obtain their input. As of the drafting
of these comments, the meeting has not be scheduled and it does not appear that the meeting will be held prior
to the DRC meeting.
Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion.
Major Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this
project.
It has been Planning Commission policy that if the homes are wrapped with siding on the front, then the
whole house should be wrapped in siding. The five plans exhibit only a partial wrapping around the
sides. Staff does not have any.inherit objection to the partial wrapping as proposed. This partial
wrapping is consistent with the completed homes in Phase I and the applicant requests that the homes
be approved as proposed. The non-sided elevations in Phase I homes are not significantly visible from
the streets and they do not negatively affect the streetscape. However, staff does feel that the change
of materials locations could be improved as follows:
The wood siding should continue to the chimney on the left Side and to the comer of the dining
room on the right side of Plan 1.
b. The wood siding should continue to the comer of the dining room on the right side of Plan 2.
c. The wood siding should continue to just beyond the windows on the left side of Plan 3.
d. The wood siding should continue to the chimney on the rear side as it wraps around from the left
side of Plan 5.
DRC COMMENTS
DR 95-16 - LAUREN DEVELOPMENT
July 5, 1995
Page 2
On all Plans the vertical wood trim finishing off the end of the siding runs should be incorporated
at all stucco comers to tie the rear elevations in with the front elevations.
All lots should be provided with decorative return wails or fences between houses. The applicant has
requested relief from this requirement desiring to keep and open "estate" feel to the area. Currently all
but three common side lot lines in Phase I have remm walls. Also, Phase I design review action required
rear walls for Lots 16 and 27, to continue the Summit Avenue tract wall around the tract comers. This
feature should also be applied to this proposal.
A minimum 15-foot setback from equestrian trails is recommended on Lots 17 and 21. This may be
achieved by flipping the plotting. The appiicant is requesting relief from this requirement.
Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will
discuss the following secondary design issues.
The design review ofPhase 1 required "hammer head" driveway tum-arounds for the side on garages
off Summit Avenue. Lot 15 has the same garage orientation and should therefore include a nhammer
head" turn around.
Plans 5 and 5R on Lots 20 and 23 "mirror" each other across the street. Flipping plans between Lots
19 and 20 or between Lots 22 and 23 would alleviate the situation. Staff recommends that one of these
alternatives be a condition of approval.
Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated
into the project design without discussion.
All walls, including retaining walls in rear yards potentially visible from public streets, should consist of
a decorative exterior material or finish including a decorative cap.
Decorative paving in individual driveways should consist of various patterns/textures of concrete, as
well as the walkway leading to the front door, to the satisfaction of the City Planner.
Chimney cap treatments should be integrated and treated to be consistent with the chimney, to the
satisfaction of the City Planner.
4. Where drainage lines cross the trails, equestrian bridges should be constructed to C!ty standards.
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval subject to the modifications herein.
DRC COMMENTS
DR 95-16 - LAUREN DEVELOPMENT
July 5, 1995
Page 3
Design Review Committee Action:
Members Present: Heinz Lumpp, Larry McNiel, Nancy Fong
Staff Planner:
Alan Warren
The Committee recommended approval of the application subject to the following conditions:
The siding extensions recommended by staff were approved. Key to the acceptance of the elevations
(without wrap around siding ) was the use of the 16/20 float finish stucco on the homes. Samples of
the stucco and siding are to be provided. The vertical finishing trim was not approved for the stucco
colTiers,
10.
The long fiat left side elevations of Plan 3 (3 extended) and 4 (4 extended) are to be provided with
window/shudder treatments or some form of wall articulation.
11.
An alternative design for the front gable of Plan I is to be provided for Planning Commission
consideration. The use of the rounded "scalloped" accent shingle (without the exposed truss) is to be
shown.
Return picket fences between houses is required, in lieu of walls or solid fences.
Heavy landscaping along the trails from the front of Lots 17 and 21 to the end of the building wall
adjacent to the trail is required instead of the 15-foot setback.
A hammer head driveway is required for Lot 15.
The orientation of the plans of Lots 20 and 23 was approved as proposed by the applicant.
A/I walls, including retaining walls in rear yards potentially visible from public streets, shall consist of
a decorative exterior material or finish including a decorative cap.
Decorative paving in individual driveways shall consist of broom finish with "shiner" border, as well as
the walkway leading to the front door, to the satisfaction of the City Planner.
Chimney cap treatments shall be coordinated with the architecture (i.e., color), to the satisfaction of the
City Planner.
Staff is to work with applicant on solution to drainage lines crossing the trails which does not create a
liability problem in use of the trail.
DESIGN REVIEW COIVllVlENTS
JULY 5, 1995
PUBLIC COMMENTS
There were no public comments at this time.
AF)JO~NT
The meeting adjourned at 6:10 p.m.
Respectfilly submitted,
Dan Coleman
Acting Secretary
RECEIVED
JUL 1 1995
City of Rancho Cucamonga
planning Diwsion
1: 3iZ:7'-) 5;Sast,?, C;c~ :"t
Planr;i]iE l)cpa'tr,,er~t
City of Rancho Cucamonga
105L~0 Civic Cen%er
P.O. Box
Rar~cI-,o C,.tcamonga~ C~ 91729
Re: F-'roposed Development on Shoshone
To Wr;om It May Ooncern:
There are three points. of intereft which a:'e of
cohce~-n to me with regard to the proposed Shoshone tract
that I would like to discuss with yoa.
~irst of all, i would like to inform you that
)Dot beer', notified of the meeting that took place on July S,~
199E, re~arding the above-referrec; Oevelopmer,t. ] hope this
was just an oversight and that I will be included it, any
future discussions due to the fact of my immediat~ proxjmlty
to this development.
Secondly, I am concerned about the size of these
homes. Due to the size of the lots and the surrounding
homes :.n tr~is area, 1 fee! that the square footage of the
;oropc=sed homes should be comparable to existing homes. I
know that yeu are aware that at one time this land was to be
used as a second phase to the Briargate tract. These homes
were to De c~ose to or exceed the 3,000 square foot range.
Zn fact, my home in the existing Briargate tract is
square feet with an added bonus room of approximate].y 680
square feet. If these homes are built to be of considerable
less square footage, then I am concerned that my property
Thir'cz! y, the equestrian easement cont inuat~ or, ~ s of
extrcn, e ~mportaT~ce i:o me. ~ am currently in negotSa'b:;~v~s tc
h rs s wi 1
p,.7.'c~a;se some, 0 e a~c; I endure great hardship i f these
trails are net continued through this new tract. As the.
c~vy is- aware, ] am already b]c:cked from using the
eq.:c,v'Lr'jaT: traf: On the we~t side of my home. The only
a: %or;,~,'t :' ,,e :;P~6,~ ]' T:ow have would be to have a~coss ~:hro,Agh
a pr'oposed sha~e::. easement with this- new development. At.
R , F:yfe
cc: Rex Gu'bie~'rez
Mayor Pro-Tern
A.5'b
LAUREN
DEVELOPMENT INC.
July19,1995
Ms. Renee Fyfe
13079 Shasta Cou~
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739
RECEIVED
JUL 2 0 1995
City o! Rancho Cucamonga
Planning Division
RE: Proposed Development on Shoshone
Dear Ms. Fyfe:
We are the homebuilders who will be constructing thirteen new homes on the lots east of
your subdivision. City staff provided us with a copy of the letter which you wrote to them
expressing your interest in our project. The following are our comments regarding your
letter.
First, you stated that you were not notified of the meeting which we held for the benefit of
all the owners in your subdivision on July 6, 1995. The mailing list for this meeting was
based on the latest tax rolls, as furnished by the San Bernardino County Assessors
Office. While the County's records show you as the owner of the property at 13079
Shasta Court, the County's records show you living at 1763 Hayden Avenue in Corona.
This is the address where the City mailed your invitation. You may wish to have the
County update their records if you are now residing in the City.
We had a very productive meeting with several of your neighbors on July 6 at which time
we discussed the floor plans, elevations, size and pricing. Because you did not attend,
however, we would be happy to meet with you individually and show you the same plans
which were discussed with your neighbors.
Second, you expressed concern with the size of these homes. The size of our homes
has been bf paramount concern to us since we firat considered building in this
community. First, we discussed unit size restrictions with city staff and other officials and
reviewed all city codes, ordinances, design guidelines, zoning, the Etiwanda Specific
Plan and all previous conditions of approval to determine if there were any city
restrictions on the size of the homes on these lots. The only city minimum for these lots
is that single family residences must be at least 1,000 square feet in size. Second, we
researched the Covenants, Conditions & Restrictions (CC&Rs) which the previous
builder prepared and recorded for the benefit of these 13 lots as well as for the 14 lots in
your subdivision. These CC&Rs, which by law are required to be provided to you and
Exhibit "G"
LAUREN
DEVELOPMENT INC.
which you were required to review prior to acquiring your home, provide notice that future
homes on all of these lots may be as small as 1,800 square feet in size, which is
substantially smaller than we am proposing. And finally, and most significantly, we
considered the appearance of other homes in the neighborhood with the concern as to
how we could and should build homes which would not detract from the neighborhood.
As a result of the above, we elected to construct semi-custom, expandable homes with
large unfinished interior areas which do not show up in the basic house square footage
calculation which you are concerned with. These unfinished interior areas accomplish
two things, first they allow for the construction of additional useable areas within the walls
of the basic structure and secondly, they cause the exterior of the home to appear much
laFger than would be expected in a house with similar useable square footage. As a
result, the exterior of our homes will be consistent in appearance with the homes in your
subdivision. This expandable concept was designed primarily with your neighborhood in
mind.
It is our hope that many of the buyers of our homes will elect to have our company
construct these interior improvements. Thus, our first two floor plans (of which only five
are plotted), with a stated intedor useable square footage of 2,161, will appear from the
outside to be approximately 2,900 square feet in size, which is larger than five of the
fourteen homes in your tract. Our largest three floor plans (of which eight will be
constructed), with a stated interior useable square footage of 2,512, will appear from the
outside to be over 3,400 square feet in size, which is larger than nine of the fourteen
homes in your tract. Furthermore, we will also be marketing exterior additions such as
added garage spaces which will even further expand the extedor appearance of these
homes. Eleven of our thirteen homes have been carefully plotted in such a way that
buyers may add a fourth or fifth car garage. We believe that these interior and exterior
additions will create the opportunity to add value to our homes which in turn Is a positive
influence on the market in general.
Third, you expressed concern with the continuation of the equestrian trails from your
neighborhood into ours. Please be assured that the trail system proposed on the City's
Trail Implementation Plan will be completed per the approved plans on file at the City.
Like your home, our homes will be situated on equestrian lots and each will have direct
access onto a Local Feeder Trial or Community Trail. As a result of our efforts in
completing this project, you will soon enjoy better trail access than you presently have.
P,O. Box 790 Agoura Hills, CA 91376
818 991-3680 FAX 818 991-3904
Orange Coun~,~ 998-1470
LAUREN
DEVELOPMENT INC.
Again, we regret that the County's records are apparently inaccurate as to where you
reside, and we will be glad to meet with you individually at your convenience to discuss
our development in greater detail. To arrange such a meeting, please call me at 714
996-1470.
Very truly yours,
John L. Allday
cc: Rex Gutierrez, Mayor Pro Tern
v/Alan Warren, AICP. Associate Planner, Planning Department
P.O. Box 790 Agoura Hills, CA 91376
818 991-3680 FAX 818 991-3904
Orange Co/y~y,~714 g96-t470
July 28, 1995
Dana McLellan
13090 Shasta Court
Rancho Cucamonga, CA
91739
Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
City ofRancho Cucamonga
10500 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
RECEIVED
DR 9516
Lauren Development Inc.
Proposed Development
Shoeshone Court, Etiwanda
JUL 3 1 1995
CiTy of Rancho Cucamonga
Planning Division
Dear Sirs, rMadams:
About a month ago I attended a neighborhood meeting for design review of the captioned
project. I trust that h/ft. Allen Warren, of City Staff, related my conunents and concerns
from that meeting to you. In the meantime, however, a couple of other concerns have
come to mind and I would like to take the opportunity now to address those issues.
The developer mentioned during the design meeting that the City did not require Lauren
Development to install a bridle trail fence on the private trails surrounding the proposed
development. This concerns me greatly for several reasons. To begin with, if the
developer does not put up bridle trail fences around these trails, the trails are lef~ virtually
unmarked and undesignated. I do not believe that was the original intent of the bridle trail
easement. Secondly, the developer of Briargate Estates was required not only to install
the bridle trail fencing but also the eucalyptus windrows and sprinkler system for same
along the bridle trail. This City requirement set a standard in the neighborhood which we
believed the City intended to protect. Thirdly, when we purchased our home, we were
told that the land east of us which is now the proposed development, was to be Phase
Two of our development. We were lead to believe that the homes would not only be of
the same size and stature as the homes on our street, but that they would also include
similar amenities and have continuity with the rest of the neighborhood. And, finally,
according to our easement, each homeowner is responsible for keeping their half of the
trail clear of weeds. Without a fence designating where the trail is, we will be over the
fence pulling weeds in what seems to be our neighbor's backyard. Surely you can see how
ridiculous this would be. I urge you to require this developer to install comparable bridle
trail fences that will complete the amenity that the original easement was intended to
design for all of the homeowners in our neighborhood.
Page 2
July 28, 1995
City ofRancho Cucamonga
Planning Commission
I would also like to miterate my concern regarding the square footage of the proposed
homes and the design concept of expandable homes. As you may know from reviewing
the comments made at the neighborhood design meeting, I am not alone in my concern
about the size of the proposed homes. As I previously mentioned, when we bought our
home in Briargate Estates we were told that the subject lots were to be Phase Two of our
development. We were assured that the homes would be similar and compatible, maybe
even larger, than the homes in Phase One of Briargate Estates. The size and elevations of
the lost command nothing less. Even the new developer, Lauren Development,
acknowledged that the size and elevations of the lots in the proposed development
command larger, stately homes. Conversely, however, Laumn Development is actually
proposing smaller homes albeit expandable homes. IfLauren Development sells all of the
homes with all of the expansion options offered, then the homes would be comparable to
the square footage of the lower-end homes in Briargate. If, however, they sell only the
smaller home plans without the expansion options, Lauren Development may still make a
tidy profit while the rest of the neighborhood will suffer a tremendous loss of value. The
City too will lose the additional tax revenue that would be created by the higher assessed
value of the fully built-out homes. I believe for the City to allow a developer to build
anything less-than-comparable to the Briargate Estates or imposing anything less than the
same neighborhood improvement requirements imposed on Briargate Estates, will be
grossly unfair to the surrounding homeowners and the community.
If, however, in spite of these concerns, the City is still compelled to approve the plans for
smaller but expandable homes, I urge you to carefully consider the design plan in order to
preserve the feasibility and. future value of the expandable area. If the homes are to truly
be expandable, as the developer claims, then the initial structural design should anticipate
expansion even if the expansion may occure at a future time. This should include
installation of floor joists for second story expansion areas, and heating, cooling and
electrical systems capable of handling the maximum square footage provided by an
expansion. Otherwise, the opportunity to expand the homes as originally intended may be
lost if it is not exercised at the time of the initial sale.
I would appreciate receiving your acknowledgment of these concerns and an explanation
of the process that these issues may take.
Respectfully,
LAUREN
DEVELOPMENT INC.
Augu~ 1,1995
Ms. Dana S. McLellan
13090 Sham Court
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739
RECEIVED
AUG 0 :~ 1995
City of Rancho Cucamonga
planning Division
RE: Proposed Development on Shoshone
Dear Ms. McLellan:
City staff provided us with · copy of the letter which you wrote to them regarding our
project. We would like to like this opportunity to respond to your comments.
First, you expressed concern with the continuation of the equestrian trail fencing into our
project. If I indicated at the neighborhood meeting that we were not going to install the
bridle trail fences along the trail, I was in error and I apologize for the misunde,~nding.
Please be assure that the trail system will be completed per the previously approved
plans on file at the City. These plans include trail fencing along both sides of the bddle
trails which matches the fencing on your project's side of the trails.
Second, you expressed concem with the size of these homes. The size of our homes
has been of paremount concem to us since we first considered building in this
community. First, we discussed unit size restrictions with city =:.-/f and other officials and
reviewed all city codes, ordinances, design guidelines, zoning, the Etiwanda Specific
Plan and all previous conditions of approval to determine if there were any city
restrictions on the size of the homes on these lots. The only city minimum for the~e lots
builder prepared and recorded for the bonefit of these 13 lots as well as for the 14 lots in
your subdivision. These CC&Rs, which by law are required to be provided to you and
which you were required to review prior to acquiring your home, provide notice that future
homes on all of these lots may be as small as 1,800 square feet in size, which is
substantially smaller than we are proposing. And finally, and most significantly, we
considered the appoarence of other homes in the neighborhood with the concem as to
hew we could and should build homes which would not detract from the neighborhood.
As a result of the above, we elected to construct semi-custom, expandable homes with
large unfinished intedor areas which do not show up in the basic house square foolige
calculation which you are concemed with. These unfinished interior areas accomplish
two things, first they allow for the construction of additional useable areas within the wells
P.O. Box 790 Agoura HIBs, CA 91376
818 991-3680 FAX 818 991-3904
Orange County Office 714 896-1470
LAUREN
DEVELOPMENT INC.
of fie basic structure and secondly, they cause the extedor of the home to appear larger
than would be expected in a house with similar useable square footage. As a result, the
exterior of our homes will be consistent in appearance with your subdivision. This
expandable concept was designed primarily with your neighborhood in mind.
It is our hope that many of the buyers of our homes will elect to have our company
const~'uct these interior improvements. Thus, our first two floor plans (of which only five
are plotted), with a sla~:l interior useable square footage of 2,161, will appear from the
outside to be approximately 2,900 square feet in size, which is larger than five of the
fourteen homes in your tract. Our largest three floor plans (of which eight will be
constructed), with a stated interior useable square fcotege of 2,512, will appear from the
outside to be over 3,400 square feet in size, which is larger than nine of the fourteen
homes in your tract. Furthermore, we will also be marketing extedor additions such as
added garage spaces which will even further expand the extedor appearance of these
homes. Eleven of our thirteen homes have been carefully plotted in such a way that
buyers may add a fourth or ;;;'~;, car garage. We believe that these intedor and extedor
additions will create the opportunity to add value to our homes which in turn is a positive
influence on the market in general and your neighborhood in particular.
cc: Alan Warren, AICP, Associate Planner, Planning Department
P.O. Box 790 Agoura Hills, CA 91376
819 991-3680 FAX 818 99t-3904
Orange County Office 714 996-1470
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DESIGN REVIEW NO. 95-16 FOR
THE SECOND PHASE OF TRACT NO. 12462, CONSISTING OF THIRTEEN
SINGLE-FAMILY HOUSES ON 8 ACRES OF LAND IN THE VERy LOW
RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (LESS THAN 2 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) OF
THE ETIWANDA SPECIFIC PLAN, LOCATED AT SUMMIT AVENUE AND
SHOSHOHE AVENUE, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT TREHEOF - APN:
225-391-15 AND 225-401-01 THROUGH 225-401-12
1. Lauren Development, Inc. has filed an application for the approval of
Design Review _No. 95-16 as described in the title of this Resolution.
Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Development Review request is
referred to as "the application."
2. On the 9th day of August 1995, the Planning Commission of the City of
Rancho Cucamonga conducted a meeting on the application and concluded said
meeting on that date.
3. 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. Eased upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during
the above-referenced meeting on August 9, 1995, including written and oral staff
reports, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows:
a. The application applies to Lots 15 through 27 of Tract 12462; and
b. The properties to the north, south, and east of the subject site
are vacant and the property to the west is developed with a single family
residential neighborhood; and
c. The proposed housing development is consistent with the General
Plan and permitted in the Very Low Residential District of the Etiwanda Specific
Plan.
3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during
the above-referenced meeting and upon the specific findings of facts set forth
in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as
follows:
a. That the proposed project is consistent with the objectives of the
General Plan; and
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
DR 95-16 - LAUREN DEVELOPMENT
AuguSt 9, 1995
Page 2
b. That the proposed use is in accord with the objectives of the
Development Code and the Etiwanda Specific Plan and the purposes of the district
in which the site is located; and
c. That the proposed use is in compliance with each of the applicable
provisions of the Development Code and the Etiwanda specific Plan; and
d. That the proposed use, together with the conditions applicable
thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or
materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity.
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 and in the Standard Conditions, attached hereto
and incorporated herein by this reference.
Phnning Division
l)
All conditions of approval for Tentative Tract 12462 as
contained in the Planning Commission Resolution No.
83-140 shall apply.
2)
Construct vehicle gate with side access per Standard
Drawing 1006-C where private equestrian easements
intersect shoshone Place (Lots 17, 18, 21, and 22).
Vehicle gate with side access shall be located outside
public right-of-way. Gates are to be privately
maintained. Gate locks shall be provided by developer
and master key provided to all lot owners within Tract
12462.
3)
The 4R Extended floor plan of Lot 27 must satisfy the
minimum side yard setback requirements before the plan
can be approved for the lot.
4)
Provide drains (4 inch minimum) through the curb from
yard boxes to be located at the low points adjacent to
south property lines to prevent drainage from flowing
along the 5 percent slope inside curb line or direct
drainage to flow to the street from the driveways.
5)
Construction details and materials of the splash walls
shall be consistent with the materials used in the area
to the satisfaction of the City Planner.
6)
Front yard landscaping is required and shall include, at
a minimum, four 15-gallon size trees on interior lots and
eight 15-gallon size trees on corner lots, seeded ground
cover, and a permanent irrigation system to be installed
by the developer prior to building occupancy. This
requirement shall be in addition to required street
trees.
pLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
DR 95-16 - LAUREN DEVELOPMENT
AuguSt 9, 1995
Page 3
7)
S)
9)
10)
n)
12)
13)
14)
17)
Construct a small wooden horse bridge across any "v"
gutters over 3 feet Ln width separating the rear yard
corral area from trails, to the satisfaction of the CLty
Planner.
The stucco material on the houses shall be a very fine
grain finish. Samples of the stucco and wood siding are
to be provided for approval by the City Planner.
Re=urn picket fences
side property lines
Planner.
shall be provided from houses to
to the satisfaction of the City
The tract wall design on Summit Avenue shall be provided
along the rear property line of Lot 16 and the rear
drainage easement line of Lot 27 for a distance Of 35
feet from Summit Avenue property lines.
Heavy landscaping and irrigation along the trails from
the front of Lots 19 and 21 to the end of the building
wall adjacent to the trail is required. If the houses
are located at least 15 feet from trail edge, this
provision is not required.
All walls, including retaining walls in rear yards
potentially visible frcm public streets, shall consist of
a decorative exterior material or finish including a
decorative cap, to the satisfaction of the city Planner.
Decorative paving in individual driveways and walkways
leading to the front doors shall consist of medium broom
finish with smooth concrete border, to the satisfaction
of the City Planner.
Chimney cap treatments shall be coordinated with the
house colors and materials, to the satisfaction of the
City Planner.
Landscaping end irrigation along Su~it Avenue, shall be
cuu~leted in accordance with approved street Lmprovement
plans and with the approved conceptual landscape plan, to
the satisfaction of the City Planner. Completion shall
include repair and replacement of landscape and
irrigation, repair of gates, weed removal, and trail
recurfacing.
Complete community trail improvements along east tract
boundary per Drawing No. 887. Trail fencing should only
be installed on the westerly (lot) side of the trail.
The developer shall submit a construction access plan and
schedule for the develo[ment of all lots for City Planner
and City Engineer approval; including, but not limited
to, public notice requirements, special street posting,
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
DR 95-16 - LAUREN DEVELOPMENT
-August 9, 1995
Page 4
phone ~isting for community concerns, hours of
construction activity, dust control measures, and
security fencing.
Engineering Division
1}
Complete all public improvements, per the original
conditions for Tract 12462, to the satisfaction of the
City Engineer.
2)
Existing street trees within the lines of sight for the
Summit/Shoshone intersection and the driveway for Lot 15
shall be trimmed to provide a "clear zone" in conformance
with City policy. New street trees shall be at least
15-gallon size and installed per city Standards. Spacing
of replacement trees shall be subject to approval of the
City Engineer.
3}
Prior to the issuance of building permits, revise Drawing
NO. 887 as indicated below and complete improvements in
due course of the development:
a)
Install a drive approach on Summit Avenue and
provide a vehicle gate with side access, per
Standard Drawing 1006-A, for the east tract boundary
community trail. Remove existing walls within the
community trail. Step-through posts shall be 18
inches apart. Implementation of this condition need
not comply exactly with Standard Drawing #1006-A to
accommodate the applicant's lack of ownership or
control of the adjacent property.
b)
Install drive approaches wherever private equestrian
easements take access from Shoehone Place, on Lots
17, 18, 21, and 22. Implementation of this
condition need not comply exactly with Standard
Drive Approach Drawings in order to accommodate
existing improvements in the street right-of-way.
The drive approaches are subject to City Engineer
and city Planner approval.
4}
Existing eucalyptus trees within the community Trail
along the east tract boundary shall be removed or pruned
by a licensed arborlet in accordance with the guidelines
of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. The developer shall
process a Tree Removal Permit through the Planning
Division. Tree removal shall be determined by the City
Engineer and City Planner
Install a security fence, with a locked gate, around the
interim retention basin south of Shoehone Place.
Fire Safety Division
1) The single family houses are to be fire sprinklered.
PLANNING COM/{ISSION STAFF REPORT
DR 95-16 - LAUREN DEVELOPMENT
AuguSt 9, 1995
Page 5
2) Public fire hydrants are required per CCWD standards,
spacing not to exceed 500 feet between hydrants.
5. The Secretary to this Commission shall certif9 to the adoption of this
Resolution.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 9TH DAY OF AUGUST 1995.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCANONGA
BY:
E. David Barker, 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 ~camonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the
9th day of August 1995, by the following vote-to-wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
RanC';~gc~?nga
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT
STANDARD CONDITIONS
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DNISION, (909) 989-1861, FOR COMPLIANCE
WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
A. Time LImits
1. Approval shall expire, unless extended by the Planning Commission, if building permits are
not issued or appmved use has not commenced within 24 months from the date of approval
Complc~on Da~
/.__/
2. DevelopmentJDesign Review shall be approved prior to / / __/ /
3. Approval of Tentative Tract No. is granted Subject to the approval of __.J /
sc- ~0/~4
4. The developer shall commence, participate in, and consummate or cause to be commenced, __/ /
participated in, or consummated, a Melio-Roos Community Facilities District (CFD) for the
Ranoho Cucamonga Fire Protection District to finance construction and/or maintenance of
a fire stalion to serve the development. The station shall be located, designed, and built to
all specificalldns of the Rancho Cucarnonga Fire Protection District, and shall become the
Districrs property upon completion. The equipment shall be selected by the District in
accordance with its needs. In any building of a Station, the developer shall COmply with all
applicable laws and regulations. The CFD shall be formed by the Distdct and the developer
by the tim recordatlon of the final map occurs.
Prior to recordation of the final map or the issuance of building permits, whichever comes
first, the applicant shall consent to, or participate in, the establishment of a Mello-Roos
Community Facilities District for the construntldn and maintenance of necessary SChool
facilities. However, if any school district has previously established such a Community
Facilities District, the applicant shall, in the aifemative, COnsent to the annexation of the
project site into the territory of such existing District prior to the recordation of the final map
or the issuance of building permits. whichever COmes firSt. Further, if the affected SChool
district has not formed a Melio-Roos Community Facilities DiStrict within twelve months from
the date of approval of the project and prior to the reeordalion of the final map or issuance
of building permits for said project, this condition shall be deemed null and void.
__/ /
This condition shall be waived if the City receives notice that the applicant and all affected
school districts have entered into an agreement to privately accommodate any and al school
impacts as a result of this project.
Prior to mcordation of the final map or prior to issuance of building permits when no map is
involved, written certification from the affected water district that adequate sewer and water
facilities are or will be available to serve the proposed project shall be submitted to the
Depadment of Community Development. Such letter must have been issued by the water
district within 90 days prior to final map approval in the case of subdivision or prior to issuance
of permits in the case of all other residential projects.
B. Site Development
1. The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the approved plans which
2.
6.
include site plans, architectural elevations, extedor materials and colors, landscaping, sign
program, and grading on file in the Planning Division. the conditions contained herein,
Development Code regulations, and
Specific Plan and
Planned Community.
__/ /
,__/ /
Prior to any use of the project site or business activity being commenced thereon, all .__/ /
Conditions of Approval shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City Planner.
.__/ /
Occupancy of the fad lity shall not commence until such time as all Uniform Building Code and
State Fire Marshall's regulations have been complied with. Prior to occupancy, plans shall
be submitted to the Rancho Cucamenga Fire Protection District and the Building and Safety
Division to show compliance. The building shall be inspected for compliance pdor to
occupancy.
Revised site plans and building elevations incorporating all Conditions of Approval shall be /.__/
submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to issuance of building permits.
/ /
All site, grading, landscape, irrigation, and street improvement plans shall be coordinated for
consistency pdorto issuance of any permits (such as grading, tree removal, encroachment,
building, etc.), or prior to final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision, or
approved use has commenced, whichever comes first..
Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development
Code, all other applicable City Ordinances, and applicable Community Plans or Specific
Plans in effect at the time of Building Permit issuance.
_J /
sc- 10194
7. A detailed on-site lighting plan shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planner and ---/ /
Sherffrs Department (989-6611) pdor to the issuance of building permits. Such plan shall
indicate style, itlurninatlon, location, height, and method of shielding so as not to adversely
affect adjacent properties.
8. If no centralized trash receptacles are provided, all trash pick-up Shell be for individual units J /
with all receptacles shielded from public view.
__J /
Trash receptacle(s) are required and shell meat City standards. The final design, locations,
and the number of trash receptacles shall be subject to City Planner review and approval
prior to issuance of building permits.
10. All ground-mounted utility appurtenances such as transtormers, AC condensers, etc., shall
be located out of public view and adequately screee~d through the use of a combination of
concrete or masonry wails, betruing, and/or landscaping to the satisfaction of the City
Planner.
/ /.__
11. Street names shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval in accordance with
the adopted Street Naming Policy prior to approval of the final map.
12. All building numbers and individual units shall be identified in a clear and concise manner,
including proper illumination.
13. A detailed plan indicating trail widths, maximum slopes, physical conditions, fencing, and
weed control, in accordance with City Master Trail drawings, shall be submitted for City
Planner review and approval priorto approval and recordation ol the Final Tract Map and prior
to approval of street improvement and grading plans. Developer shall upgrade and construct
all trails, including fencing and drainage devices, in conjunction with street improvements.
14. The Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs) shall not prohibit the keeping of equine
animals where zoning requirements for the keeping of said anima Is have been met. Individual
lot owners in subdivislo ns shall have the option of keeping said animals without the necessity
of appealing to beards of directors or homeowners' associations for amendments to the
CC&RS.
15. The Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs) and Articles of Incorporation of the
Homeowners' Association are subject to the approval of the Planning and Engineering
Divisions and the City Attorney. They shall be recorded concurrently with the Final Map or
prior to the issuance Of building permits, whichever occurs first. A recorded copy shall be
provided to the City Engineer.
16. All parkways, open areas, and landscaping shall be permanently maintained by the properly
owner, homeowners' association, or other means acceptable to the City. Proof of this
landscape maintenance shall be submitted for City Planner and City Engineer review and
approval prior to issuance of building permits.
17. Solar access easements shall be dedicated for the purpose of assuming that each lot or
dwelling unit shall have the right to receive sunlight across adjacent lots or units for use of
a solar energy system. The easements may be contained in a Declaration of Restrictions for
the subdivision which shall be recorded concurrently with the recordation of the final map or
issuance of permits, whichever comes first. The easements shall prohibit the casting of
shadows by vegetation, structures, fixtures or any other object, except tor utility wires and
similar objects, p~.suant to Deyeiopment Code Section 17.08.060-G-2.
18. The project contains a designated Historical Landmark. The site shell be developed and
maintained in accordance with the Historic Landmark Alteration Permit No.
· Any further modifications to the site including, but not limited to, extedor alterations and/or
interior alte rations wh ioh affect the exterior of the buildings or structures, removal of landmark
trees, demolition, relocation, reconstruction of buildings or structures, or changes to the site,
shall require a modification to the Historic Landmark Alteration Permit subject to Historic
Preservation Commission review and approval.
C. Building Design
An alternative energy system is required to provide domestic hot water for all dwelling units
and for heating any swim~ng pool or spa, unless other alternative energy systems are
demonstrated to be of equivalent capacity and efficiency. All swimming pools installed at the
time of initial deveiopmant shall be supplemented with solar heating. Details shall be
included in the building plans and shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval
prior to the issuance of building permits.
All dwellings shall have the front, side and rear elevations up<jreded with architectural
treatment, detailing and increased delineation of surface treatment subject to City Planner
review and approval pdor to issuance of building permits.
sc- 10/~4
__J /
__/ /
__/ /
~ /
~ /
__J /
~ /
_.J /
__/ /
.__/ /
3. Standard patio cover plans for use by the Homeowners' Association shall be submitted for
City Planner and Building Official review and approval prior to issuance of building permits.
4. All roof appurtenances, including air conditioners and other roof mounted equipment and/or
projections, shall be shielded from view and the sound buffe red from adjacent properlies and
streets as required by the Planning Division. Such screening shall be architecturally
integrated with the building design and constructed to the satisfaction of the City Planner.
Details shall be included in building plans.
O. Parking and Vehicular Access (Indicate 'details on bullcling plane)
Completion Date:
___/ /
~ /
1. All parking lot landscape islands shall have a minimum outside dimension of 6 feet and shall ..__J /
contain a 12-inch walk adjacent to the parking stall (including curb).
__J /
Textured pedestrian pathways and lextured pavement across circulation aisles shall be
provided throughout the development to connect dwe Ilings/units/bu lid ings with open spaces/
plazas/recreational uses.
3. All parking spaces shall be double striped per City standards and all driveway aisles, /__..J
entrances, and exits shall be striped per City standards.
4. All units shall be provi0ed with garage door openers if driveways are less than18 feet in /---/
depth from back of sidewalk.
5. The Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions shall restrict the storage of recreational vehicles ---/ /
on this site unless they are the principal source of transportation for the owner and prohibit
parking on interior circulation aisles other than in designated visitor parking areas.
6. Plans for any security g~tes shall be submitted for the City Planner. City Engineer, and .--/ /
Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District review and approval pdorto issuance of building
permits.
E. Landscaping (for publicly malmalned landscape areas, refer to Section N.)
//' 1. A detailed landscape and irrigation plan, including slope planting and model home landscap- ----J /
ing in the case of residential development, shell be prepared by a licensed landscape
architect and submitted for City Planner review and al:~rovat priorto the issuance of building
permits or prior final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision.
'/2. Existingtreesroquiredt~bepreservedinp~acesha~~bepr~tectedwithaoonstructionbarrier J /
in accordance with the Mu nioipal Code Section 19.08.110, and so noted on t he grading plans.
The location of those trees to be preserved in place and new locations for transplanted trees
shall be shown on the detailed landscape plans. The applicant shall follow all of the arborisrs
recommendations regarding preservation, transplanting and trimming methods.
3. Aminimumof__.treespargrossacre,oomprisedofthefoiowngsizes, sha beprovided / /
within the project: % - 48- inch box or larger, % - 36- inch box or larger,
% - 24- inch box or larger, % - 15-gallon, and __ % - 5 gallon.
4. A minimum of % of trees planted within the project shall be specimen size trees -
24-inch box or larger.
5. Within parking lots, trees shall be planted at a rate of one 15-gallon tree for every three
parking stalls, sufficient to shede 50% of the parking area at solar noon on August 21.
_J /
J /
sc - 1o/~4
/' 7.
8.
9.
Trees shall be planted in areas of public view adjacent to and along structures at a rate of one
tree per 30 linear feet of building.
All p~ivate slope banks 5 feet or less in veMical he ight and of 5:1 or greate~ slope, but less than
2:1 slope, shall be, at minimum, irrigated and landscaped with appropriate ground cover for
erosion control. Slope planting required by this section shall include a permanent irrigation
system to be installed by the developer prior to occupancy.
AII private slopes in excessof5feet. but lessthan8 feet invertical height andof2:l orgreater
slope shall be landscaped and irrigated for erosion control and to soften their appearance as
follows: one 15-gallon or larger size tree per each 150 sq. ft. of slope area, 1 -gallon or larger
size shrub per each 100 sq. It. of slope area, and appropriate ground cover. In addition, slope
banks in excess of 8 feet in veMical height and of 2:1 or greater slope shall also include one
5-gallon or larger size tree per each 250 sq. ft. of slope area. Trees and shrubs shall be
planted in staggered clusters to soften and vary slope plane. Slope planting required by this
section shall include a permanent irrigation system to be installed by the developer prior to
occupancy.
For single family residential development, all slope planting and irrigation shall be continu-
ously maintained in a healthy and thdving condition by the developer until each individual unit
is sold and occupied by the buyer. Prior to releasing occupancy for tbese units, an inspection
shall be conducted by the Planning Division to determine that they are in satisfactory
condition.
10. For multi-family residential and non-residential development, property owners are respon-
sible for the continual maintenance of all landscaped areas on-site, as well as contiguous
planted areas within the public right-of-way. All landscaped areas shell be kept free from
weeds and debris and maintained in a healthy and thriving condition. and shall receive
regular pruning, fertilizing, mowing, and trimming. Any damaged, dead, diseased, or
decaying plant material shall be replaced within 30 days from the date of damage.
11. Front yard landscaping shall be required per the Development Code and/or
· This requirement shall be in addition to the required
street trees and slope planting.
12.
The final design of the perimeter parkways, walls, landscaping, and sidewalks shall be
included in the required landscape plans and shall be subject to City Planner review and
approval and coordinated for consistency with any parkway landscaping plan which may be
required by the Engineering Division.
13. Special landscape features such as mounding, alluvial rock, specimen size trees, meander-
ing sidewalks (with horizontal change), and intensified landscaping, is required along
___/ /
__J /
__/ /
/___/
~ /
~ /
.__/ /
__/ /
14. Landscaping and imigatlon systems required to be installed within the public right-of-way on
the pealmater of this project area shall be continuously maintained by the developer.
15. All walls shall be provided with decorative treatment. If located in pohliC maintenance areas,
the design shall be coordinated with the Engineering Division.
16. Tree maintenance criteria shall be developed and submitted for City Planner review and
approval prior to issuance of building permits. These criteria shall encourage the natural
growth characteristics of the selected tree species.
17. Landscaping and irrigation shall be designed to conserve water through the principles of
Xeriscape as defined in Chapter 19.16 ol the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code.
sc- io/94
F. SIgns
The signs indicated on the submitted plans are conceptual only and not a part of this approval.
Any signs proposed for this development shall comply with the Sign Ordinance and shall
r.equire separate application and approval by the Planning Divisio n prior to installation of any
s~gns.
__/ /
2. AUniformSignProgramforthisdevelopmentshallbesubmittedforCityplanner reviewand __/ /
approval pdor to issuance of building permits.
__/ /
Directory monument sign(s) shall be provided for apartment condominium, or townhomes
pnor to occupancy and shall require separate application and approval by the Planning
Division prior to issuance of building permits.
G. Environmental
The developer shall provide each prospective buyer written nctloe of the Fourth Street Rock
Crusher project in a standard format as determined by the City Planner, prior to accepting a
cash deposit on any property.
The developer shall provide each prospective buyer written notice of the City Adopted
Special Studies Zone for the Red Hill Fault, in a standard format as determined by the City
Planner, prior to accepting a cash deposit on any property.
The developor shell provide each prospective buyer written notice of the Foothill Freeway
project in a standard format as determined by the City Planner, pdor to accepting a cash
deposit on any property.
.A final acoustical report shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to the
~ssuanoe of building permits. The final report shell discuss the level of interior noise
attenuationtobeiow45CNELthebuildingmatedalsand constructiontechniquespmvided,
and ff appropriate, verify the adequacy of the mitigation measures. The building plans will be
checked for conformance with the mitigation measures contained in the final report.
H. Other Agencies
1. EmergencYsecondaryacceseshallbeprovldedinaccordanoewithRanchoCucamongaFire
Protection District S~aedards.
E me rgency access shall be provided, maintenance free and clear, a minitoo m of 26 feet wide
at all times dudng construction in accordance with Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection
District requirements.
Prior to issuance of building permits for combustible construction, evidence shall be
submitted tO the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District that temporan/water supply for
fire protection is available, pending complatlon of required fire proloctlon system.
The applicant shall contact the U. S. Postal Service to determine the appropriate type and
location of mail boxes. Multi-family residential developments shell provide a solid overhead
structure lot mail boxes with adequate lighting. The final location of the mail boxes and the
design of the overhead structure shall be subject to City Planner review and approval prior
to the issuance of building permits.
sc- 1o/94
For projects using septic tank facilities. written certiticatien of acceptability, including all
supportive information, shall be obtained from the San Bernardino County Department of
Environmental Health and submitted to the Building Official prior to the issuance of Septic
Tank Permits, and prier to issuance of building permits.
/.__/
/.__/
._/ /
~ /
~ /
~ /
.__/ /
__/ /
APPLICANTS SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION, (909) 989-1863, FOR
COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
L Site Development
1. The applicant shall comply with the latest adopted Uniform Building Cede, Uniform Mechani-
cal Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, National Electric Code, and all other applicable codes,
ordinances, and regulations in effect at the time of issuance of relative permits. Please
contact the Building and Safety Division for copies of the Code Adoption Ordinance and
applicable handouts.
2. Prior to issuance of building permits for a new residential dwelling unif(s) or major addition
toexistingunif(s),theapplicantshallpaydeveiopmentfeesattheestablishedrate. Such fees
may include, but are not limited to: City Beautification Fee, Park Fee, Drainage Fee, Systems
Development Fee, Permit and Plan Checking Fees, and SChool Fees.
Prior to issuance of building permits for a new commercial or industrial development or
addition to an existing development, the applicant shall pay development fees at the
established rate. Such tees may include, but are not limited to: Systems Development Fee,
Drainage Fee, SChool Fees, Permit and Plan Checking Fees.
4. Street addresses shall be provided bythe Building Official, aftertract/parcel map recordation
and prior to issuance of building permits.
J. Existing Structures
Provide compliance with the Uniform Building Code for the properly line clearances
censidedng use, area, and fire-resistiveness of existing buildings.
2. Existing buildings shall be made to comply with cotred building and zoning regulations for
the intended use or the building shall be demolished.
3. Existing sewage disposalfadlities shaif be removed, filled and/orcabped to complywiththe
Uniform Plumbing Code and Uniform Building Code.
4. Underground on-site utilities are to be located and shown on building plans submitted for
building permit application.
K. Grading
1.
2.
Grading of the subject pmpe~y shall be in accordance with the Uniform Building Cede, City
Grading Standards, and accepted grading practices. The final grading plan shall be in
substantial conformance with the abproved grading plan.
A soils report shall he prepared by a qualified engineer licensed by the State of California to
perform such work.
,3.
The development is located within the soil erosion control boundaries; a SOil Disturbance
Permit is required. Please contact San Bemardino CountyDepartment of Agriculture at (714)
387-2111 for permit application, Documentation of such permit shall he submitted to t he City
prior to the issuance of rough grading permit.
4. A geological reperl shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geclogist and submitted at
the time of application for grading plan check.
5. Thefinalgradingplansshallbecompletedandapprovedphortoissuanceofbuildingpermits.
Completion Date:
./____/
__/,__/
.__/ /
.__/ /
__/ /
J /
/__._/
J /
__/ /
J /
J /
__/ /
J /
10/94
7
6. As a CUstom-lot subdivision, the following requirements shall be met:
a. Surety shall be posted and an agreement executed guaranteeing completion of all on-site
drainage facilities necessary for dewatering all parcels to the sat sfaction of the Building
and Safety Division priorto final map approval and prior to the issuance of grading permits.
b. Appropriate easements for safe disposal of drainage water that are conducted onto
or over adjacent parcels, are to be delineated and recorded to the satisfaction of the
Building and Safely Division prior to issuance of grading and building permits.
c. On-sile drainage improvements, necessary for dewatedng and protecting the subdivided
properties, are to be installed prior to issuance of building permits for construction upon
any parcel that may be subject to drainage flows entering, leaving, or within a parcel
relative to which a building permit is requested.
d. Final grading plans for each parcel are to be submitted to the Building and Safety
.Division for apprOval prior to issuance of bu ilding and grading permits. (This may be on an
~ncremental or corr~H3site basis.)
e. All slope banks in excess of 5 feet in vertical height shall be seeded with native grasses
or planted with grOund COver for erOsion control upon COmpletion of grading or some other
alternative mathod of erosion COntrol shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Building
Official. In addition a permanent irrigation system shall be prOvided. This requirement
does nol release the applicant/developer from COmpliance with the slope planting
requiramantS of Section 17.08.040 1 ol the Development Code.
Completion Date:
._J /
._/ /
~ /
.._J /
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE ENGINEERING DIVISION, (909) 989-1862, FOR COMPLIANCE
WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
L. Dedication and Vehicular Access
1. Rights-of-way and easements shall be dedicated to the City for all intedor public streets,
community trails, public paseos, public landscape areas, street trees, and public drainage
facilities as shown on the plans and/or tentative map. Private easements for non-public
facilities (cross-lot. drainage, local feeder trails, etc,) shall be reserved as shown on the plans
and/or tentative map.
2. Dedication shall be made of the following rights-of-way on the perimeter streets
(measured from Street centedine):
total feet on
total feet on
total feet on
total feet on
3. An irrevocableofferofdedicatlonfor
for all private streets or ddves.
-foot wide rOadway easement shall be made
4. Non-vehiCUlar access shall be dedicated to the City for the following Streets:
_.J /
/,__/
~ /
__J /
so- 10/94
5. Reciprocal access easements shall be provided ensudng access to all parcels by CC&RS
or by deeds and shall be reCOrded COncurrently with the map or pdor to the issuance of
building permits, where no map is involved.
6. Private drainage easements for cross*lot drainage shall be provided and shall be delineated
or noted on the final map.
7. The final map shall clearly delineate a 10-foot minimum building restriction area on the
neighboring lot adjoining the zero lot line wall and contain the following language:
"l/we hereby dedicate to the City of Rancho Cucamonga the right to prohibit the
construction of (residential) buildings (or other structures) within those areas designated
on the map as building restriction areas."
A maintenance agreement shall also be granted from each lot to the adjacent lot through the
CC&R's.
8. A~~existingeasements~yingwithinfu~urerights..~f-waysha~~bequitc~aimed~rde~ineated~n
the final map.
9. Easements for public sidewalks and/or street trees placed outside the public right-of-way
shall be dedicated to the City whereve~ they encroach onto pdvate property.
10 Additional street right-of-way shall be dedicated along right turn lanes, to provide a minimum
of 7 feet measured from the face of curbs. ff curb adjacent sidewalk is used along the right
turn lane, a parallel street tree maintenance easement shall be provided.
11. The developer shall make a good faith effort to acquire the required off-site property interests
necessan/to construct the required public improvements, and ff he/she should fail to do so,
the developer shall, at least 120 days prior to submittal of the final map for approval, enter
into an agreement to complete the improvements pursuant to Government Code Section
66462 atsuchtimeastheCityacquiresthepropertyinterestsrequiredfortheimprovements.
Such agreement shall provide for payment by the developer of all costs incurred by the City
to acquire the off-site property interests required in connection with the subdivision. Security
for a pertion of these costs shall be in the form of a cash deposit in the amount given in an
appraisal report obtained by the deveiober, at developers cost. The appraiser shall have
been approved by the City prior to commencement of the appraisal.
M. Street Improvements
1. All public improvements (interior streets, drainage facilities, community trails, paseos,
landscaped areas, etc.) shown on the plans and/or tentative map shall be constructed to
City Standards. Interior street improvements shall include, but are not limited to, curb and
gutter, AC pavement, ddve approaches, sidewalks, street lights, and street trees.
2. A minimum of 26- foot wide pavement, within a 40 -foot wide dedicated right-of-way shall be
constructed for all half-section streets.
3. Construct the following perimeter sireel improvements including, put not limited to:
Completion D3le:
~ /
~ /
.__/ /
__/ /
STREET NAME CURB & A.C. 8DE- 0t~IV!5 STREET STREET COMM MEDIAN BIKI5
GU'I'I~R PVMT WALK API)~I. LIGI.fI'S TREES TRAIL ISLAND TRAIL OTHER
sc - to/st
Notes: (a) Median island includes landscaping and irrigation on meter. (b) Pavement
reconstruction and ovedays will be determined during plan check. (c) If so marked, side-
walk shall be curvilinear per STD. 304. (d) It so marked, an in-lieu of construction fee shall
be provided for this item.
Completion Date:
4. Improvement plans and constructidn:
Street improvement plans including street trees and street lights, prepared by a regis-
tered Civil Engineer, shall be submitted to and appmved by the City Engineer. Security
shall be posted and an agreement executed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and
the City Attorney guaranteeing completion of the public and/or pdvate street improve-
ments. prior to final map approval or the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs
first.
b. Prior to any work being performed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and a
construction permit shall be obtained from the City Engineers Office in addition to any
other permits required.
c. Pavement striping, marking, traffic, street name signing. and interconnect conduit
shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
Signal condu it with pu II boxes shall be installed on any new const ructicn or reconstruct ion
of major, secondat,/or collector streets which intersect with other major, secondary or
collector streets for future traffic signals. Pull boxes shall be placed on beth sides of the
street at 3 feet outside of BC R, EC R or any other locat ions approved by the City Engineer.
Notes:
(1) All pull boxes shall be No. 6 unless otherwise specified by the City Engineer.
(2) Conduit shall be 3-inch galvanized steel with pullrope.
e. Wheel chair ramps shall be installed on all four comers of ir~ersections per City
Standards or as directed by the City Engineer.
Existing City roads rsquidng construction shall remain open to traffic at all times with
adequate detours during construction. A street closure permit may be required. A cash
deposit shall be provided to cover the cost of grading and paving, which shall be
refunded upon completion of the construction to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
g. Concentrated drainage flows shall not cross sidewalks. Under sidewalk drains shall be
installed to City Standards, except for single family lots.
h. Handicap access ramp design shall be as spacifieq by the City Engineer.
i. Street names shall be approved by the City Planner prior to submittal for first plan check.
Street improvement plans par City Standards for all private streets shall be provided for
review and approval by the City Engineer. Prior to any work being pedormed on the pri-
vate streets, fees shall be paid and construction permits shall be obtained from the City
Engineers Office in addition to any other permits required.
6. Street trees, a minimum of 15-gallon size or larger, shall be installed par City Standards in
accordance with the City's street tree program.
___/ /
.__/ /
.__/ /
J /
__/ /.__
.__J /
J /
_..J /
J /
__/ /
/ /
so- ~o/~
7. Intersection line of site designs shall be reviewed by the City Engineer for conformance with
adopted policy.
a. On collector or larger streets, lines of sight shall be plotted for all project intersections,
including driveways. Walls, signs, and slopes shall be located outside the lines of sight.
Landscaping and other obstructions within the lines of sight shall be approved by the City
Engineer.
b. Local residential street intersections shall have their noticeability improved, usually by
moving the 2 +/- closest street trees on each side away from the street and placed in a street
tree 6aserrlent.
Compleuon Date:
__/ /
__/ /
/ /__
8. A permit shall be obtained from CALTRANS for any work within the tollowing right-of-way: -__/ /
9. All public improvements on the following streets shall be operationally complete pdor to the ---/~
issuance of building permits:
N. Public Maintenance Areas
1. A separate set of landscape and irrigation plans per Engineering PubliC Works Standards
shall be submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval pdor to final map approval
or issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. The following landscape parkways,
medians, paseos, easements, trails, or other areas are required to be annexed into the
Landscape Maintenance District:
.._J /
2. A signed consent and waiverform to join and/orform the appropriate Landscape and Lighting
Districts shall be filed with the City Engineer prior to final map approval or issuance of building
permits whichever occurs first. Formation costs shall be borne by the developer.
.__/ /
3. All required public landscaping and irrigation systems shall be continuously maintained by the _._-/ /
developer until accepted by the City.
/~
4. Parkway landscaping on the following street(s) shell conform to the results of the respective
Beautificatlon Master Plan:
O. Drainage and Flood Conlrol
1. The project (or portions thereof) is ioc, ated within a Flood Hazard Zone; therefore, flood -.--/ /
protection measures shall be provided as certified by a registered Civil Engineer and
approved by the City Engineer.
2. It shall be the developers responsibility to have the current FIRM Zone __/ /
designation removed from the project area, The developers engineer shall prepare all
necessary reports, plans, and hydrologic/hydraulic calculations. A Conditional Letter
of Map Revision (CLOMR) shell be obtained from FEMA prior to final map approval or
issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first, A Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) shall
be issued by FEMA prior to occupancy or improvement acceptance, whichever occurs first.
3. A final drainage study shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer prior to final
map approval or the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. All drainage
facilities shall be installed as required by the City Engineer.
__J /
10/94
4. A permit from the County Flood Control District is required for work within its right-of-way.
.5. Trees are prohibited within 5 feet of the outside diameter of any publid storm drain pipe
measured from the outer edge of a mature tree trunk.
6. Public storm drain easements shall be graded to convey overflows in the event of a
blockage in a sump Catch basin on the public street.
P. Utilities
1 .'Provide separate utility sen/ices to each pamel including sanitan/sewerage system, water,
gas, electric power, telephone, and cable 'IV (all underground) in accordance with the Utility
Standards. Easements shall be provided as required.
2. The developer shall be responsible for the relocation of existing utilities as necessary.
3.Water and sewer plans shall be designed and constructed to meet the requirements of the
Cucamonga County Water District (CCWD), Rancho Cucarnonga Fire Protection District,
and the Environmental Health Deportment of the County of San Bemardino. A letter of
compliance from the CCWD is required pdor to final map approval or issuance of permits,
whichever occurs first.
__/ /
/___J
~ /
.__/ /
/.._J
L__/
Q. General Requirements and Approvals
1. The separate porcels contained within the project boundaries shall be legally combined into
one parcel prior to issuance of building permits.
2. An easement for a joint use ddveway shall be prevlded prior to final map approval or
issuance of building potmils, whichever occurs first, for:
3. Prior to approval of the final map a deposit shell be posted with the City covedng the
estimated cost of apportioning the assessments under Assessment District
among the newly created porcels.
4. Etiwanda/San Sevaine Area Regional Mainline, Secondary Regional, and Master Plan
Drainage Fees shall be poid prior to final map approval or prior to building permit issuance if
no map is involved.
5. Permits shall be obtained from the following agencies for work within their right-ol-way:
6. A signed consent and waiver form to join and/or form the Law Entorcernent Community
Facilities District shall be filed with the City Engineer prior to final map approval or the
issuance of building pernits, whichever occurs first. Formation costs shell be berne by the
Developer.
7. Prior to finalization of any development phase, sufficient improvement plans shall be com-
pleted beyond the phase boundaries to assure secondary access and drainage protection to
the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Phase boundaries shall correspond to lot lines shown
on the approved tentative map.
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE FIRE SAFETY DIVISION, (909) 987-6405, FOR COMPLIANCE
WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
sc- 1o/~4
1. Melio Roos Community Facilities Distrial requirements shall apply to this project.
2, Fire flow requirement shall be
gallons per minute.
A previous fire flow, conducted
gpm available at 20 psi.
revealed
B. A fire flow shall be conducted by the builder/developer and witnessed by fire
department personnel prior to water plan approval.
For the purpose of final acceptance, an additional fire flow test of the on-site
hydrants shall be conducted by the builder/developer and witnessed by the fire
department personnel after construction and prior to occupancy.
3. Fire hydrants are required. AJI required public or on-site fire hydrants shall be installed, flushed
and oberable priorto delivery of any combustible building materials on site (i.e., lumber, roofing
materials, etc.). Hydrants flushing shall be witnessed by fire department personnel.
4. Existing fi re hydrant locations shall be provided prior to water plan approval. Required hydrants,
if any, will be determined by this department. Fire District standards require a 6" riser with a
4" and a 2-1/2" outlet. Substandard hydrants shall be upgraded to meet this standard. Contact
the Fire Safety Division for specifications on approved brands and model numbers.
Prior to the issuance of building permits for combustible construction,evidence shall be
submitted tothe Fire Districtthattemporan/watersupplyforfire protection isavailable, pending
completion of required fire protection system.
__/ /
___/ /
__J /
6. Hydrant reflective markers (blue dots) shall be required for all hydrants and installed prior to --.-J /
final inspection.
7. An automatic fire extinguishing system(s) will be required as noted below: .--/ /
Per Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District Ordinance 15.
Other
Note: Special sprinkler densities are required for such hazardous operations as woodworking,
plastics manufacuring, spray painting, flammable liquids storage, high piled stock, etc. Contact
Fire Safely Division to deterrnir~ if sprinkler system is adequate lor proposed operations.
8- Sprinkler system manitodng shall be installed and operational immediately upon completion
of sprinkler system.
9. A fire alarm system(s) shall be required as noted below:
Per Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District Ordinance 15.
Califomia Code Regulations Title 24.
NFPA 101.
Other
/J
/ /
.10. Roadways w th n project shall comply with the Fire District's fire lane standards, as noted:
All roadways.
Other
.__/ !
sc- ]0/94
so- 1o/~.
11. Fire department access shall be amended to facilitate emergency apparatus.
12. Emergency secondary access shall be provided in accordance with Fire District standards.
13. Emergency access shall be provided, maintenance free and clear, a minimum of 26 feet wide
at all times dudng construction in accordance with Fire District requirements.
14. All trees planted in any median shall be kept tdmmed a minimum of 14'6" from ground up so ---/ /
as not to impede fire apparatus.
15. A building directory shall be required, as noted below: ---/ /
Lighted director within 20 feel of main entrance(s).
Standard Directory in main iobl;)y.
Other
16. A Knox rapid entry key vault shall be installed prior to final inspection. Proof of purchase shall~ /
be submitted prior to final building plan approval. Contact the Fire Safety Division for specific
details and ordedng information.
.17. GatecVrestricted entry(s) require installation of a Knox rapid entry key system. Contact the Fire~ /
Safety Division for specific details and ordedng intonnation.
18. A tenant use letter shall be submitted prior to final building plan approval. ---/ /
19. Plan check fees in the amount of $ have been paid. .._/ /
An additional $ shall be paid:
Pdor to water plan approval.
Prior to final plan approval.
Note: Separate plan chect~ fees for fire protection systems (sprinklers, hood systems, alarms,
etc.) and/or any consultant reviews will be assessed upon submittal of plans.
20. Special permits may be required, depending on intended use, as noted below: / /
A. General Use Permit shall be requiro~l for any activity or operation not specifically
described below, which in the judgement ol the Fire Chief is likely to produce conditions
hazardous to life or property.
B. Storage of readily combustible material.
C. Places of assembly (except churches, schools and other non-profit organizations)
D. Bowling alley and pin refinishing.
E. Cellulose Nitrate plastic (Pyroxylin).
F. Cornb~stible fibers storage and handling exceeding 100 cubic feet.
G. Garages
Motor vehicle repair (H-4)
H. Lumber yards (over 100,000 board feet).
~ /
__/ /
__/ /
I. Tire rebuilding plants.
J. Auto wrecking yards.
Junk or waste material handling plants.
K. Flammable finishes.
Spraying or dipping operations, spray booths, dip tanIs, electrostatic apparatus,
automobile undercoating, powder coating and organic peroxides and dual com-
ponent coatings (per spray booth).
L. Magnesium (more tha 10 pounds per day).
M. Oil burning equipment operations.
N. Ovens (industrial baking and dn/ing).
O. Mechanical refrigeration (over 20 pounts of refrigerant).
P. Compressed gases (store, handle or use exceeding 100 cubic feet).
Q. Cryogenic fluids (storage, handling or use).
R. Dust-produCing processes and equipmont.
S. Flammable and combustible liquids (storage, handling or use).
T. High piled combustible stock.
U. Liquified petroleum gas (store, handle, transport or use more than 120 gallons).
V. Matches (more than 60 Matchman's gross).
W. Welding and cutting operations: to conduct welding and/or cutting operations in
any occupancy.
sc- 1o/94
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
STAFF RI ,PORT
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
BY:
SUBJECT:
August 9, 1995
Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
Brad Buller, City Planner
Dan Coleman, Principal Planner
DESIGN AWARDS NOMINATIONS
BACKGROUND: At the Planning Commission Meeting held on July 12, 1995, it was requested
that the Design Awards nominations be placed on this agenda for consideration by the Commission.
Following is a listing of projects which were completed during the 1994 calendar year.
Best Buy (NWC Foothill & Elm)
Discovery Zone (NEC Foothill & Haven)
Men's Wearhouse (NEC Foothill & Haven)
Weinerschnitzel (Foothill Marketplace)
Food 4 Less (Foothill Marketplace)
Petsmart (Foothill Marketplace)
Michaels (Foothill Marketplace)
Office Depot (Foothill Marketplace)
Sports Chalet (Foothill Marketplace)
Circuit City (Foothill Marketplace)
Claimjumper (Foothill Marketplace)
Metrolink Station
Schools:
Summit Middle School (NEC Summit & East)
Ruth Musser Middle School (E/s Term Vista Parkway, N/o Church)
Tetra Vista Elementary School (NEC Term Vista Parkway & Mountain View Drive)
Lighffoot Elementary School (SEC Victoria Park Lane & Kenyon Way)
Tarbell Realty (Central Park Plaza)
Centex Homes Tract 13280 (N/s Base Line, E/o Milliken)
RECOMMENDATION: The Commission should consider the nominations and direct staff on
whether to proceed with the program.
Respect y submitt ,
er
ITBM B
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
BY:
SUBJECT:
August 9, 1995
Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
Brad Buller, City Planner
Gail Sanchez, Planning Commission Secretary
DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAIVIONGA
STAFF REPORT
BACKGROUND: When appointments were made to the Design Review Committee in December
1994, the Commission indicated membership should be reviewed in six months. At the July 12,
1995, meeting, the Commission requested that this item be placed on the August 9 agenda.
The current membership is as follows:
COMMITTEE
ALTERNATES (in order)
Heinz Lumpp
Larry MeNiel
Peter Tolstoy
Dave Barker
John Melcher
A history of Design Review Committee membership since February 1991 is attached as Exhibit "A."
RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission should determine appropriate membership for
the Design Review Committee.
City Planner
BB:GS/gs
Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Design Review Committee Membership History
DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIp
February 1991 to present
February 1991 -Julv 1991:
July 1991 - July 1992:
COMMERCIAL/~INDUSTRIAL
Suzanne Chitiea
Wendy Vallette
Alternate:
Suzanne Chitiea
Larry McNiel
Alternate:
RESID~ENTIAL
Larry McNiel
Peter Tolstoy
John Melcher
Peter Tolstoy
WendyVallette
John Melcher
July 1992 - October f992:
October 1992 - January 1993:
January 1993 - October 1993:
October 1993 - December 1993:
December 1993 - June 1994:
June 1994 - Dece~lber 1994:
December 1994 - Present:
COMMITTEE
Larry McNiel
WendyVallette
Larry McNiel
John Melcher
John Melcher
WendyVallette
Larry McNiel
John Melcher
Larry McNiel
John Melcher
Heinz Lumpp
John Melcher
Heinz Lumpp
Larry McNiel
~LTERNATES (in order)
Peter Tolstoy
Suzanne Chitiea
John Melcher
Peter Tolstoy
WendyVallette
Suzanne Chitiea
Peter Tolstoy
Suzanne Chitiea
Larry McNiel
Peter Tolstoy
Suzanne Chitiea
WendyVallette
Peter Tolstoy
Heinz Lumpp
Dave Barker
Peter Tolstoy
Larry McNiel
Dave Barker
Peter Tolstoy
Dave Barker
John Melcher
Exhibit A